VS-08

Cordango vs Lovable

Lovable has real guardrails now. What is left is a difference in what each new app starts with.

This page used to say Lovable had no governance. That was wrong, and it is worth saying so plainly. Lovable’s enterprise product has workspace roles and groups, SSO and SCIM, security and privacy policies that apply across a workspace, login controls on published apps, and searchable audit logs. Workspace Insights, which landed in June 2026, gives an administrator a view across the whole portfolio.

What has not changed is the shape underneath. Lovable’s own launch post describes enterprise workspaces growing to thousands of projects, each with its own database and its own published endpoints. That is a governed portfolio of separate applications, and it is a reasonable thing to want. Cordango is making a different bet: one company model that every capability reads, so the fifteenth app knows who your customers are because the first one did.

Fact-checked25 August 2026

Feature availability and pricing change. Every row is checked against the vendor's own current documentation, linked at the foot of this page.

Default means it is there without anyone setting it up. Available means the vendor supports it, sometimes only on a particular plan. Build or configure means it is possible and it is your work. Not a focus means the product is aimed somewhere else.

FIG.01

The short version.

Where Lovable wins
  • FREE Design freedom. Whatever you can describe, it will look like that.
  • OUT Products you sell, landing pages, anything customer-facing
  • CODE Real code, in your own repository, portable on the way out
  • GOV Workspace roles, SSO, SCIM and audit logs on the enterprise tier
  • FAST Idea to working thing in an afternoon, with nobody to ask first
Where Cordango wins
  • CTX Your organizations, people and teams are in the app before you build it
  • RBAC One rights model, rather than one designed per project
  • LOG One field-level history across everything anyone built
  • EU German data centres, and we name the provider in the sub-processor list
  • KEEP Built to be the thing that outlives whoever made it
FIG.02

Side by side.

Cordango vs Lovable, compared across the dimensions that change the decision. Fact-checked 25 August 2026.
CordangoLovable
Building an app by describing itDefaultthe normal way in, alongside ready-made capabilitiesDefaultthe whole product
Design freedom over the resultNot a focuspurpose-built screens from a shared vocabulary. No blank canvas.Defaultanything you can describe, down to the pixel
Shared company records across every appDefaultorganizations, people and teams are there before the first appBuild or configureprojects can share a backend if you design that. Nothing arranges it for you.
Workspace roles and identityDefaultMicrosoft and Google sign-in on every plan, SAML and SCIM higher upAvailableroles and groups on paid plans, SSO and SCIM on Enterprise
Authorisation inside the appDefaultenforced below the application, per entity, per field and per commandBuild or configureeach project’s authorisation is designed and written for that project
Audit across every appDefaultfield-level history produced by the runtime, nothing to modelAvailablesearchable workspace audit logs on Enterprise
One view across the whole portfolioDefaultthere is one platform to look atAvailableWorkspace Insights, since June 2026
Data architectureDefaultone company model, one schema per tenant, every capability reads itNot a focusa database per project. The right answer for products, an awkward one for operations.
Owned by the company, not the makerDefaultthe workspace is the company’s and the apps sit inside itAvailableworkspace ownership and central administration on paid plans
Managed hostingDefaultbackups, updates and patching are oursDefaultprojects are hosted and published for you
German or EU data residencyDefaultGerman data centres, sub-processors publishedUnclearwe could not find a documented customer-selectable German or EU region. Ask Lovable rather than assuming either way.
Taking the result elsewhereNot a focusyour data exports. The app is a definition on the platform. The compiler and CLI are Apache-2.0, the platform is not.Defaultreal code, syncable to your own GitHub repository
Apps you sell to customersNot a focusCordango is for how a company runs, not for what it sellsDefaultcustomer-facing products are a first-class use case
One contract for the whole platformDefaultapps are not priced separately. The tenth capability does not add a line item.Defaultone Lovable contract, with credits and seats published
FIG.03

The architecture difference.

Lovable’s unit is the project. It gets a database, endpoints and an authorisation model of its own, and the workspace governs the collection of them: who may open which project, who belongs to which group, what the audit log caught. That is a real answer to sprawl and it works.

Cordango’s unit is the capability, and it does not get its own anything. It reads the organizations, the people, the teams and the roles that were on the platform before it existed, and it writes to the same history. Nobody decides who your customers are for the fifteenth time, because that was decided once.

The price of that is the design row above. You are not getting a blank canvas, and you are not getting a repository to walk away with.

Where Lovable winsVS-08

Lovable is the better choice when what you are building is for customers rather than colleagues, when visual freedom matters more than a shared rights model, or when you want the code in your own repository.

FIG.04

Which one should you pick?

Pick Lovable if

  • 01 You are building something for customers, not for colleagues
  • 02 The design matters more than the rights model
  • 03 You want the code in your own repository
  • 04 It is a prototype or a one-off and does not need to outlive itself

Pick Cordango if

  • 01 The app holds real employee and customer records
  • 02 Somebody will ask who can see it, and the answer should already exist
  • 03 You expect a tenth capability, and a twentieth
  • 04 German hosting is on the requirement list rather than the wish list
SRC

Where these facts come from.

What we can show you, and what we cannot. Cordango holds no ISO 27001, SOC 2 or C5 certification today, and has not commissioned an external penetration test yet. We would rather you read that here than find it in procurement. Security and permissions at Cordango, and the data processing agreement in full.

NEXT

Bring one internal app.
See what it inherits.

Bring a process you would otherwise prompt into a new project. We will build it in the demo, on a company platform that already has your people and your permissions in it.