Base44’s Bet on Vertical Integration in Vibe Coding
The recent rollout of Base44’s custom large language model (LLM) marks a significant shift in the vibe coding landscape, echoing the industry’s growing concerns over defensibility and the reliance on external AI models. This move mirrors the strategic decisions made by companies like BlackBerry in 2010, which opted to develop its own operating system to maintain control and differentiation. Base44’s decision to train and own its LLM, dubbed Base1, allows for optimizations on latency, cost, and efficiency, setting it apart from competitors like Lovable, which relies on external LLMs.
With the first iteration of Base1 developed and trained on a dataset generated from “tens of millions of real user interactions on the platform,” Base44 aims to outperform frontier models. However, the company’s founder, Maor Shlomo, acknowledges that others will likely follow suit, citing the importance of data, distribution, and tech stack in achieving defensibility. This echoes the sentiments of Jonathan Userovici, a general partner at VC firm Headline, who emphasizes the need for AI startups to own their data and infrastructure to increase their defensibility.
As the competition in the vibe coding space intensifies, Base44’s vertical integration strategy may prove to be a key differentiator. The company’s ability to specialize in app creation, coupled with its control over the model, may give it an edge over frontier AI labs like Cursor and Grok, which are now part of SpaceX. However, Userovici cautions against underestimating frontier models, citing the example of Harvey, a legal tech startup that abandoned plans to train its own model.
Base44’s Decision Logic and Mechanics
Behind Base44’s decision to develop its own LLM lies a complex interplay of factors, including cost reduction, optimization, and control. By owning the model, Base44 gains direct control over compute and inference spend, expected to result in a structurally stronger margin profile over time. This move is likely driven by the growing concerns over the cost of using AI, particularly among enterprise customers, who are starting to express concerns over the cost of using AI.
The development of Base1 required a “huge engineering effort,” which may have been motivated by the need to reduce costs and improve margins. As Base44’s parent company, Wix, recently announced layoffs, the acquisition of Base44 may have been seen as a strategic move to bolster its position in the vibe coding space. With Base44’s growth in headcount and revenue, the company’s decision to develop its own LLM may be seen as a key factor in its positioning as a vertically integrated vibe-coding application.
However, the cost reduction aspect of this move is not as clear-cut. While Base44 expects to benefit from improved margins, the company’s press release notes that the ownership of the model gives Base44 direct control over compute and inference spend, which may not necessarily translate to immediate cost savings. As the company continues to grow, it remains to be seen how this move will impact its bottom line.
Winners, Losers, and Disrupted Parties
The rollout of Base44’s custom LLM is likely to have far-reaching implications for the vibe coding landscape. Winners in this scenario may include Base44 itself, which gains control over its model and may benefit from improved margins. Other vertically integrated vibe-coding applications may also benefit from this trend, as they own their distribution, data, and infrastructure.
Losers in this scenario may include companies that rely heavily on external LLMs, such as Lovable, which may struggle to compete with Base44’s vertically integrated approach. Frontier AI labs like Cursor and Grok, which are now part of SpaceX, may also face increased competition from specialized players like Base44.
Disrupted parties may include enterprise customers, who are starting to express concerns over the cost of using AI. As Base44 and other vertically integrated vibe-coding applications gain traction, these customers may benefit from improved performance and cost savings. However, this may also lead to increased competition among AI startups, as they strive to develop their own models and improve their defensibility.
The Skeptical Case
Despite the potential benefits of Base44’s custom LLM, there are reasons to be skeptical about the company’s decision. One argument against this move is that it may be a case of “not invented here” syndrome, where Base44 is developing its own model simply because it can. This may lead to unnecessary complexity and costs, particularly if the company’s model does not outperform frontier models.
Another argument against this move is that it may be a reaction to the growing concerns over defensibility in the AI startup space. While owning its own model may give Base44 an edge over competitors, it is unclear whether this will be enough to ensure the company’s long-term success. As the competition in the vibe coding space intensifies, Base44’s decision to develop its own LLM may ultimately prove to be a costly mistake.
The Signal to Watch Next
One key indicator to watch in the coming months is the performance of Base44’s custom LLM, particularly in comparison to frontier models. If Base44’s model outperforms frontier models, it may be a sign that the company’s vertically integrated approach is paying off. However, if the model underperforms, it may be a sign that the company’s decision to develop its own LLM was a costly mistake.
Another indicator to watch is the response of other AI startups to Base44’s move. If other companies follow suit and develop their own models, it may be a sign that the industry is shifting towards a more vertically integrated approach. However, if other companies opt to stick with external LLMs, it may be a sign that Base44’s decision is an outlier.
Bookmark this one — it will matter to your business decisions this week.
By Priya Nair, AI & Startup Reporter at TrendFlashy
Ready to launch your own asset?
Check out our guide on Building a Profitable Online Business.
