Sleek alternatives in 2026: honest picks by job

Sleek (sleek.design) is for founders and developers designing iOS and Android app screens. Sleek alternatives depend on the job: Google Stitch for free exploration, UX Pilot for Figma workflows, Banani for lower-cost web and mobile design, Magic Patterns for React prototypes, Figma Make for Figma teams, Claude Design for a general canvas, and TapUI for a similar mobile workflow.

We make Sleek; this comparison uses public vendor pages and documentation checked on 2026-09-28.

Which Sleek alternative fits your project?

Use this table to shortlist tools, then check the export and billing details below. Prices are in USD (September 2026). Annual billing is labeled explicitly, as either a yearly total or a monthly equivalent. A free allowance does not necessarily include exports.

The linked vendor pages in each section are the sources for this table. For a wider shortlist, see our AI tools for mobile app design ranking.

Google Stitch: when you want a free place to explore

Google Stitch is our first pick for exploring an interface idea without a subscription. It covers web and mobile UI, so it fits founders still deciding what their product should look like. For a Material-leaning Android brief, specify that style and its components explicitly rather than assuming any generator will follow platform conventions.

Google documents UI generation, front-end code, and paste-to-Figma. Its 2026 canvas update adds design-system reuse through DESIGN.md, interactive flows, and MCP, SDK, and skill support.

Stitch is available as a free experiment, with usage limits. Check export availability in your current mode before designing a whole flow. Our Google Stitch comparison covers the choice against Sleek in more detail.

UX Pilot: when Figma is central to the work

UX Pilot is worth considering when your team already builds and reviews designs in Figma. Its product page describes importing Figma components, retrieving generated designs in Figma, and syncing code to GitHub. It also lists mobile and web templates.

The UX Pilot 2.0 page documents MCP connections for tools such as Claude Code and Codex. That makes it relevant to developers as well as people working directly on the canvas. The decision is whether you want a Figma-centered workflow spanning multiple product types or Sleek's narrower mobile focus.

UX Pilot offers a small free allowance and one project. Its plans page lists Pro at $29/month, or $19/month billed annually, checked 2026-09-30.

Banani: when you want lower-cost web and mobile design

Banani is the lower-cost paid option here for founders who need both web and mobile screens. Its pricing page lists Plus at $20/month, or $12/month billed annually (September 2026). It supports multi-screen prototypes and editable Figma export, with HTML/CSS export on paid plans.

The free plan includes 12 monthly credits and daily refills, but Figma and HTML/CSS export require a paid plan. The pricing FAQ says MCP access is available on all plans; the paid cards also list agent mode. Those are different capabilities. Compare what your coding agent can retrieve with what the canvas agent can generate before choosing a plan.

Choose Banani if the same project needs an app and a web dashboard. Choose Sleek if your immediate job is mobile screens and you want to test Figma and code exports on the free plan.

Magic Patterns: when you need product UI and React

Magic Patterns fits a founder or product team that wants an interactive web prototype and React code to continue developing. Its published workflow comparison describes React downloads, GitHub sync, Figma export, and MCP handoff to coding agents. These are useful destinations when the prototype will become web product work.

Magic Patterns offers monthly free credits, with paid plans starting at $20/seat/month (September 2026). Its pricing update explains usage-based credits and optional pay-as-you-go usage. Budget for iteration as well as seats if you enable extra usage.

Pick it for testing a dashboard, SaaS feature, or interactive product flow. A React web prototype and a mobile app design solve different parts of development; choose the output your developer needs next.

Figma Make: when your team already works in Figma

Figma Make is the practical shortlist entry when existing Figma designs should become working prototypes. Figma's product page describes code-backed, visually editable work that uses your design context. Staying in the same environment can matter more than switching to a separate generator for a small project.

Figma's pricing page lists limited free Starter access and a Professional Full seat at $16/month billed annually (September 2026). It also lists copying Make previews into editable design layers and Figma's MCP server. The Make documentation confirms code downloads and GitHub export.

Use Make for functional web apps and responsive prototypes. Check the Full seat requirements, AI allowance, and the exact handoff you need before comparing the subscription with Sleek.

Claude Design: when you need a general canvas

Claude Design is a good fit when app screens are only part of the job. A general canvas can cover a product prototype and presentation material within the same workflow. It also makes sense to evaluate it first if you already pay for Claude and prefer to hand development to Claude Code.

Anthropic's getting-started guide lists ZIP, PDF, PPTX, standalone HTML, and Claude Code handoff among its exports. Figma is not in that export list. The guide supports work across mobile, tablet, and desktop sizes, and says Design draws from the same usage pool as the rest of Claude.

Claude Design is included in paid plans, starting with Claude Pro at $20/month on monthly billing (September 2026). The free Claude chat plan does not include Design. See our Claude Design alternatives comparison if its broader canvas is what you want to replace.

TapUI: when you want a similar mobile workflow

TapUI is a close alternative by workflow: describe an app, generate mobile screens, refine them, then export. Its product page lists Figma, HTML, and PNG exports. That is a useful match for someone who likes Sleek's prompt-to-screen approach and wants to compare another mobile-focused tool.

Its pricing page lists Starter with 100 monthly screen generations and Pro with 650. Starter is $17/month billed annually; its machine-readable pricing specifies $204/year or $20 on monthly billing (September 2026).

There is a free-access distinction to check: the pricing cards show only paid plans, while TapUI's pricing summary advertises free generations without an allowance. Check the free allowance at signup. Agent or MCP access is not documented on those pages. Choose TapUI for the mobile screen workflow; verify free usage and any automation requirements before moving a project.

When is Sleek still the better choice?

Keep Sleek on the shortlist when your job is specifically iOS or Android app design, with one design system across the screens in a flow. Sleek is mobile-only. A founder who needs a website or a working web prototype should choose a tool built for that job instead.

Sleek Free includes Figma and React + Tailwind code export, 60 one-time credits, one project, and a three-screen limit. Export access is included on every plan. That lets you check the handoff before paying; the free credits do not refill each month. Code export provides interface code, not a complete native app ready for the stores.

The Sleek pricing page lists Starter at $39/month or $240/year, Pro at $69/month or $360/year, and Team at $99/seat/month or $490/seat/year (September 2026). Starter includes 3,000 monthly credits, Pro 20,000, and Team 30,000 per seat. Those plans fit different usage volumes; do not buy Pro just to get Figma export.

Sleek's agent setup supports an official skill, MCP server, and REST API. Free accounts can try the agent workflow with their one-time credits; sustained API and agent use requires Pro or higher.

Try the same small flow in your two finalists: an onboarding screen, a home screen, and a detail screen. Check whether shared styles stay consistent, whether the Figma layers are editable, and whether the exported code is useful to your developer. That comparison will tell you more than a tool's position in any list, including ours.

Frequently asked questions