That is exactly why no-code and low-code platforms have become so popular. They promise fast applications without programming and without big budgets. In many cases, they do deliver. But as a company grows, these solutions can turn into a source of constraints, risks, and unexpected costs.
Below is a comparison of three approaches: no-code, low-code, and custom applications (especially those using AI), viewed through the lens of a company that cares about scaling, security, and long-term flexibility.
No-code: when it works, and when it starts to limit you
No-code platforms let you build applications visually by dragging blocks and assembling forms, integrations, and simple databases. From a business perspective, it sounds ideal:
- fast start
- low entry barrier
- no need to involve a developer
- a prototype or MVP in a few days
For operational or marketing teams, this is often the first real contact with automation. You can build a mini CRM, a ticket register, a leave request workflow, or an integration between a form and an email marketing tool.
The hidden cost no one talks about
Many companies assume no-code means zero development cost. In practice, the cost just changes its form. Instead of paying an experienced specialist, the business invests the owner’s or the team’s time into:
- learning the tool
- testing its limits
- trying to work around missing functions
- fixing errors caused by an incomplete understanding of the process
From a business standpoint, this is one of the more expensive mistakes. The time of an owner or a key manager is usually worth far more than the cost of an external team.
When does it become a problem?
When the application stops being a gadget and becomes part of a core process. No-code has a built-in ceiling.
Limited customisation
Flexibility ends where the options in the dashboard end. Anything more specific requires complex workarounds or, in the end, a developer anyway.
Scaling issues
More users and more data can expose platform limits: performance, latency, record caps, or API call limits.
Dependency on the vendor
Pricing, limits, features, or terms can change at the worst possible time. You never have full control over infrastructure.
Painful migration
You do not own code. You own configuration inside a closed environment, and moving it is expensive and time-consuming.
No-code works great for simple departmental initiatives. It performs much worse as a foundation that is meant to grow with the business.
Low-code: a step towards professionalisation
Low-code is a compromise. It combines visual no-code components with the option to add custom code. This helps companies build solutions faster while keeping more technical control.
What does low-code give a business?
- faster delivery than classic development
- the ability to build more advanced business logic than no-code
- better control and predictability than most no-code tools, though clear limitations around performance and scaling still apply
- easier integrations with ERP, CRM, or internal databases
Where are the limitations?
- you still need a technical person to implement parts of the logic in code
- enterprise licence costs can grow significantly
- vendor lock-in remains because your application runs on someone else’s platform
Low-code lets you build more, but it does not remove the fundamental issue: dependency on the provider.
The hidden costs of no-code and low-code
In many organisations the story looks similar. You start with a simple no-code solution, you grow, you add more automations, and after a year or two you realise the platform no longer meets your needs. Then one of three things usually happens:
- you pay for more expensive plans and try to keep the existing setup alive
- you move to another platform (migration cost plus learning a new tool)
- you rebuild from scratch and only then discover the full price of the earlier savings
On top of that, subscription fees increase, data storage limits appear, security auditing becomes impossible, and updates on the vendor side can cause outages that are hard to explain internally. From a CFO and COO perspective, total cost of ownership rises while control over the system does not.
Hidden costs: when a cheap start leads to expensive decisions
No-code and low-code are attractive because they feel simple. Fast setup, no need to hire developers, the ability to create a prototype in a few days. The real problems begin when a tool that was meant to support a single process becomes a company-wide system. That is when the costs that no one planned for start to show up.
Subscription costs that grow with the business
In no-code and low-code you pay for almost everything:
- number of users
- number of records
- database operations
- API calls
- security add-ons
- advanced automations
- premium integrations
The start is cheap, but as the organisation grows, platforms introduce higher thresholds and push you into more expensive plans. What began as a simple MVP for a small monthly fee can, after two years, cost as much as an enterprise system, without having enterprise capabilities.
The rising cost of migration
The second part of TCO is migration. Once the application stops being enough, because of performance, platform limits, lack of integration with a strategic system, GDPR or ISO requirements, or the need for AI, the organisation faces a choice:
- keep paying more and more
- or rebuild the system from scratch
Migration from no-code or low-code to your own architecture is often harder than migrating from a classic system, because:
- data may be stored in closed formats
- process logic lives in visual configuration rather than code
- automation flows depend on platform-specific mechanisms
- you cannot take over a backend because there is no backend you own, everything is a SaaS service
Each piece must be recreated manually. That can be more expensive than building from scratch, because it includes analysis, reverse engineering, and rebuilding logic. The longer you wait, the larger the bill.
Vendor lock-in: the most underestimated risk
Dependency on the provider is a hidden cost that appears suddenly, often at the worst moment:
- the vendor changes pricing (common in no-code)
- API limits are introduced
- a key feature is removed
- an update breaks existing automations
- a module your app relies on is discontinued
- the provider is acquired and pricing policy changes
The organisation has no real influence over these decisions. If the application supports sales, onboarding, service requests, or HR workflows, the business becomes a hostage to the vendor.
Vendor lock-in has another dimension: no access to code, logs, or infrastructure for audits. For compliance teams, this is a serious issue. Platforms may claim GDPR, ISO, SOC 2, or HIPAA alignment, but the ability to validate and control it is not always there.
Scaling limits in practice
No-code and many low-code platforms work well at the beginning, when:
- there are few users
- data volumes are small
- process logic is simple
- integrations rely on popular SaaS tools
As the project grows, the pain points show up:
- slower application performance
- request limits
- record caps
- no ability to optimise queries
- limited front-end flexibility
- little or no performance tuning options
Another category is easy to miss: integrations beyond the standard connector set. As long as you connect popular SaaS tools, things are smooth. When legacy systems, your own SQL database, a data warehouse, or an AI model appears, no-code tools often struggle. Low-code can handle more, but custom integrations still require time and programming competence, which increases cost.
Custom applications: when they are more cost-effective than no-code
For years, custom software was associated with high cost, long timelines, and risk. Today you can build in stages, starting with a strategic core.
What does a custom application give you?
- full control over code, data, and infrastructure
- the ability to implement any business logic
- no licence fees that scale with users
- easier alignment with GDPR and other regulations through control over hosting, access, and data handling, including ISO, SOC 2, and HIPAA when needed
What about AI?
Custom applications let you apply AI where it creates real business value:
- automatic document reading
- ticket classification and intelligent queueing
- offer recommendations
- workload prediction for teams
- process assistants for employees
You cannot build these scenarios meaningfully in classic no-code, and in low-code they often cost almost as much as custom development, with the constraints of the platform still attached.
Custom applications in 2026: why the cost gap is shrinking
A few years ago, custom development meant high cost, long delivery, and higher perceived risk. That is why many companies chose no-code or low-code as a cheaper alternative.
This picture is changing in 2026. When AI is used thoughtfully in the software delivery process, the cost difference between custom applications and no-code or low-code has decreased significantly, and in many cases nearly disappeared.
What do you actually gain?
- full control over code, data, and architecture
- business logic that matches your process exactly, without workarounds
- no licence fees that grow with users, records, or automations
- more straightforward compliance because you control data, hosting, and access
- genuine scalability without a platform ceiling
AI and the cost of building software
In WebProfessor, AI is not a product feature, it is a tool used by the development team. Experienced engineers use AI for:
- faster coding and refactoring
- generating repetitive fragments and boilerplate
- accelerating test automation and validation of core user flows
- speeding up integration work and API development
- improving documentation and maintainability
The effect is that the same team can deliver more, faster, and at a lower cost without reducing quality. In practice, this means:
- a custom application built with AI often costs only slightly more than low-code
- and over time it can be cheaper, because it avoids growing platform costs and platform-imposed constraints
In this context, no-code and low-code lose their main argument: that they are cheaper.
Vibecoding: beyond no-code, but not for everyone
A growing trend is vibecoding, meaning building apps directly with AI tools, where a person defines logic and goals and AI generates the code. It is:
- a better option than classic no-code or low-code
- more flexible and less tied to a single platform
- faster for prototyping real applications
But vibecoding requires basic technical knowledge and architectural awareness. Without it, it is easy to generate code that only seems to work, does not scale, and becomes hard to maintain or extend.
That is why the best results usually come from combining AI with an experienced engineer who:
- knows what a good system should look like
- can control the quality of generated code
- understands security, performance, and long-term product evolution
Why no-code and low-code increasingly stop making sense
In the AI era, the key advantages of no-code and low-code are no longer unique:
- speed: an experienced developer with AI can be just as fast or faster
- cost: the gap is consistently shrinking
- simplicity: paid for with very real long-term limitations
At the same time, their drawbacks remain:
- no control over code
- dependence on the platform
- difficult migration
- rising costs as the product grows
That is why a custom application, built intelligently with AI, is increasingly the safer, more future-proof, and more cost-effective choice.
How to decide: simple criteria
Ask yourself a few questions:
- Is the process simple, repetitive, and limited to one department?
- Is the solution meant to be temporary or experimental?
- Are you comfortable depending on an external provider?
- Will the application serve multiple departments, hundreds of users, or legacy systems?
- Do you plan to expand logic significantly, including AI elements?
- How long should the solution last: months or years?
The more complex the processes and the longer the horizon, the more a custom application makes sense.
FAQ: the most common questions
Is no-code safe for company data?
It depends on the platform. No-code gives limited control over infrastructure and logs, so compliance teams may struggle with audits. For sensitive data such as HR, finance, or medical information, more advanced safeguards than standard SaaS typically provides are often required.
When should you choose low-code instead of no-code?
When the process needs more than basic visual components, but the company is not ready for full custom development. Low-code works well for ERP and CRM integrations, more complex workflows, and projects that may require code later.
How much does a no-code application really cost after a year?
Usually much more than expected. Costs grow with users, records, API calls, automations, and integrations. In mid-sized companies, the annual bill often reaches a level where building a custom solution becomes a better alternative.
Can you migrate from no-code to a custom application?
Yes, but it can be difficult and expensive. You often need to recreate logic manually, organise data, and redesign process flows. The later you migrate, the higher the cost.
Can AI be implemented in no-code?
In simple scenarios, yes, but capabilities are limited. More advanced AI use cases typically require your own architecture, or a low-code setup with strong developer support.
Remember this
No-code and low-code are great for quick wins: prototypes, simple task automation, and pilot implementations. Problems begin when you try to turn an ad hoc tool into the foundation of processes that are critical to the company.
Over the long term, custom applications provide more flexibility, more predictable costs, and stronger control over data, especially when built by teams that use AI intelligently.
