Up two on reliability votes. Sandboxed execution and a diff to review before anything lands is exactly what the reliability axis rewards, and parallel task runs picked up agent performance votes on top.
Week 2026-W34
Movers: who climbed and who fell
Rank changes are published every Monday, with the reason for each move written out rather than implied by a number. This is the record for the current cycle, including the tools that did not move.
13 rowsBoard updated: 19 Aug 2026
Up
2 climbed
Took the coding agent board on agent performance votes. Long task retention is the axis voters keep citing, and the MCP tooling story widened the gap.
Down
11 fell
The single biggest rank move this week, though not because anything changed about Trickle. Eight of the 34 newly tracked tools, from Durable down to Mixo, scored above it once the board expanded past the original 11 app builders. It still anchors the bottom of C tier on scope rather than on execution.
Softgen and Floot both joined this week's expanded board just ahead of it. Mocha's own reliability votes are still soft, iteration getting harder as a project grows is the recurring complaint, and that is now more visible with more comparable tools sitting right next to it.
Three new entrants, Readdy, Caffeine and Uizard, scored ahead of it once the board expanded to 45 tracked tools this week. Zite's value and onboarding votes are unchanged, there is simply more of the field visible now.
The board added nine new tools this week that scored between Emergent and Rocket.new on the combined weights, Subframe and Genspark chief among them. Reliability votes on later iterations undoing earlier decisions are still the thing to watch here, expansion or not.
Magic Patterns and Manus both entered this week ahead of it on the newly expanded board, Manus specifically on agent performance votes for the same kind of long horizon autonomy Emergent is rated on. A crowded week for A tier, not a falling score.
Two of this week's 34 new entrants, Figma Make and Wix, scored high enough on design and value votes to land ahead of it. Base44 is still the top of the batteries included cluster, it just has new company at the top of A tier now that the board tracks more of the field.
Passed by two new entrants rather than by a falling score: Firebase Studio and Webflow both joined this week's expanded board with community and integrations votes strong enough to slot in ahead of it. Replit's own numbers did not move.
Did not lose a vote. We expanded the app builder board this week from 11 to 45 tracked tools by community request, and Framer's design led site generator slotted straight in at 4th on design and speed votes, one place above where v0 already sat. Code quality votes still lead the board.
Lost the category lead by 147 votes. Editing experience votes are still the best in the category, but context management complaints on large repositories moved reliability against it.
Down one without losing a vote. Nothing went wrong here: the seats, the review workflows and the approval story are all intact, and it still carries more votes than anything else in its band. It simply got passed on raw agent quality by a tool voters rate higher on the axes that carry weight.
Down one on trust. Model availability changing for existing users came up in a third of its vote comments this week, which outweighed a very strong free tier.
How the weekly cycle works
Votes land continuously and the community score on every row reflects them the moment they arrive. Board rank is different: it is snapshotted on Monday morning and held for the week. Without that freeze the trend arrows would be meaningless, because a tool could change position three times in an afternoon and no one could cite a stable ranking.
Each row above records the position before and after, and the reason. Reasons are written from the vote data rather than from vendor announcements. If a tool climbed because a release genuinely improved the first render, that is what the row says. If it climbed because a competitor changed its pricing, the row says that instead.
What movement does not mean
A three place fall on a board this tight can come from a few hundred votes, which is not a collapse. The scores are published next to the ranks precisely so that movement can be read in proportion. When the top four sit inside fifty points of each other, rank order is the least stable thing on the page and the axis breakdown on each tool page is the most useful.
For the reasoning behind a specific week, read the Pulse reports. For the weights that decide how much a given improvement is worth, read the scoring page.
Questions
About weekly movement
How often is the movers page published?
Every Monday. Scores change continuously as votes arrive, but rank changes are frozen and published once a week so the board has a stable reference point people can cite.
What makes a tool move up the board?
Vote volume on the weighted axes, and design and speed carry 43 of the 100 points, so those two produce most of the movement. A release that improves the first render moves a tool faster than one that improves reliability, which is a consequence of the published weights rather than a judgement about what matters.
Can a tool change tier band in a single week?
Rarely. Band changes need sustained voting across several weeks, because a band is a statement about whether the tool completes the board brief rather than about its current score. Rank changes inside a band are common.