The Delta logo
Opinions
May 9, 2023

From our experts: Low-code vs. Custom build

Image of author
Written by
Alexandra Matthews
Chief Operating Officer, The Delta
Image of author
Written by
Alexandra Matthews
Chief Operating Officer, The Delta
Book a call
LinkedIn logoTwitter logoFacebook logo

Ringo sat down with Tristan Drummond, our Low-code Team Lead, and Alexia, Head of Engineering, to chat about the pros and cons of using low code, as well as how we strategically leverage both of these to build successful ventures at The Delta. 

Find out what Alexia and Tristan think of drawing a line between low code and high code builds, when it’s best to use one over the other, the cost-factor of each of them and if ventures can ‘outgrow’ low code.

Ringo:
So the first question I have for you, Tristan, in your opinion, when it comes to looking at a custom build [when compared to a low code build], where do you draw the line?

Tristan:
Yeah. Well, I mean, this question changes. I mean, the answer to this question changes almost on a month to month basis these days. 

You've got so many companies that are pushing the edge, pushing the limits, and we try to stay at the cutting edge the whole time. So we monitor hundreds of low code tools. And like when I started the low code team two and a half years ago at [The] Delta, we couldn't do half of the local builds that we've done in the last three months. 

I think where I draw the line is if you have limited resources, so we have limited money, you have limited time, go look at almost everything. If you have unlimited time and unlimited budget, I'm just going to say that this is not where we specialize. Go do something custom, like get the best tech in the world, take all the time you need, get incredible devs to do it over two years. Spend 10 million dollars, that’s great. 

That’s not where we specialize. We specialize in fast and cheap and iterative so you can find your value proposition, get traction. 

Ringo:
Don't you think that if you're going fast and cheap, you're losing out on a lot of finesse, and you could potentially lose out a lot of customers? 
And you're actually going too quickly, you're moving too fast, and you're not actually able to build the product that you want to.

Tristan:
Yes, I think that's where the mindset of how you approach low code comes in. And if you apply an engineering mindset, you ensure that there's still quality in so that you like looking after your customers and building according to their needs. It makes a big difference. 

I think low code has way more potential for abuse than full code because it's really easy to build stuff, which means it's really easy to build low quality, like terrible apps that don't scale on low code.

But if you apply engineering thinking and you make the most of the capabilities that low code offers you, you can build something really top quality these days. But ten times cheaper, ten times faster.

Ringo:
Alexia, Where do you draw the line between low code and is it a definite line for you, or are you still unsure?

Alexia:
No. To me, it's pretty much - they're all talk. I mean, at the end of the day, what Trist said, like it's the mindset that actually matters. I disagree with the fact that it's cheaper to build low code, necessarily because it really depends on your own exposure, your own experience as a founder. You've got an idea, what you've been exposed to is essentially what you're familiar with is going to be the cheapest route most of the time, right?

And it's also going to be the route where you're going to be most confident and you're going to be most comfortable launching fast and launching to market immediately. If you're on a new platform, working with new tools, you're always going to be a little bit nervous, right? So pick the things you're comfortable with. The thing about drawing the line to me is there are very few situations where only low code will work or only full build will work.

It's really up to you and up to the industry that you're going to operate in. If you know from the get-go, if you can answer yes to any of those questions, am I going to be operating in a heavily regulated market where there's a lot of financial data that's going to be flowing through my system? Am I going to be working like processing high volumes of data from the get-go? Am I going to be working with very sensitive data or confidential data that cannot be shared? 

You probably want to ask yourself the question: Do I want to take the risk of using somebody else's code, essentially? Do I want to take the risk of choosing to/let my data transfer through somebody else's platform? Control is a bit of an illusion, though. 

So, the fact that you're going full code also doesn't guarantee that you own the data, that the data will always be in your control, but it will give you a little bit more visibility, right? Then you'll have someone to hold accountable, yourself, because you built it, you know the code. Or the person that you actually contracted to build the code for you to build the app for you, you'd be able to hold them accountable. It's a bit more difficult to hold people accountable when it comes to low code. 

Another thing to bear in mind is, you know, costing. There's always a cost attached, right? And the cost of rebuilding sometimes can actually be quite heavy if you know from the get-go. If your idea is actually quite complex, then you're going to need a lot of custom components.

You're going to look at the library of competence available on Flutter, for example, and you know that the things that you want from the get-go are not available. It takes a little bit more in terms of cost, actually a bit more to build custom in the low code platforms so the rest of your app will be cheaper, but it will take a little bit more expertise to actually get someone that knows the platform well enough to build your custom components that will work. 

In this case, it will be cheaper to build it yourself or to get someone to build it in high code. That’s what I think about costing and the original question. There is no line.

Trist:
One thing I didn't touch on, that I think actually is important besides having unlimited resources versus scarce ones, is how well-defined is the problem and what is the goal of the particular build that you're doing? Because, and the reason why I just sort of forgot about that or assumed is, is because everyone that comes my way doesn't actually know how well to find the problem.

It's like they still need to figure that out. And the goal of the build is to get something in users hands so that to understand the market, it's to find the product market. But it's a very early stage venture. It's guys who, like that much as they don’t have a clear idea in their heads what the process is, there's no real validation of that. It's not like they have an app that's already in 10,000 people's hands. 

My goal as a low code team is normally to get founders through the first 2 to 3 years of their world until they've got sufficient traction. They've got funding, they've got momentum, and then you've got revenue - you can quite easily justify spending a couple of million on it on a full build. 

Deciding when to build in low code OR full/custom/high code

Ringo:
All right. So on that, for example, I’m a founder and been running for ten years and I've got the cash I could create a custom-built, but I'm still opting in for low code, what are the risks that I'm taking where I mean, very clearly I've got the money very clearly. I should have a custom build at this point.  

What are the risks involved here? When I'm going low code? As opposed to custom? 

Alexia:
Look, I mean it really again, depends on how risky the business is, right? If you could stay with low code, there's nothing to say that low code is a tool that you only use as a prototype or for the first few phases of your venture. If the use case is fit for it, then there's no reason to move.


If you can't find a reason, if you're not hitting any limitations or any restrictions, there's no reason to move. Usually you grow out of it, right? That's when you know that you actually need to go full build. And you need to be able to actually kind of know where that line is, right? I need to scale more rapidly.


I'm starting to spend a lot more money on making things custom because, you know, everything that I'm actually churning out is looking a little bit vanilla, now. I'm trying to be more custom. I'm trying to give the customer a little bit more of a personal experience, so I have to put a lot more energy in. That's when you need to draw the line.

That's when you actually start considering rebuilding in full code or actually moving certain parts of your application into a full code, right? You also don't have to rebuild everything. You can actually keep your front end and low code and actually start like building a custom back end for it. That's an option. I just think about the things and think about the reason you want to grow out/ you want to move out of it. 

The reason you want to move out of low code is usually scaling, costing. It's becoming too expensive because it's way too specific and you have to spend too much energy to make things feel a little bit more personal, right? Or you know. Yeah. To simply - because you actually want to know, you want to tap into a completely different market, for example. 

You want to go native on the phone, right? You're not going to be able to do that with all Flutterflow. You're not going to be able to tap into the device itself to take control of the hardware, biometrics, these kinds of things. 

When you get to that level of maturity in your application and you want a little bit more control and you want to actually do a little bit more complex things, that's when you actually start growing out of low code. But for some ideas and some founders, this day might never come. Low code will just be the thing, or it will evolve fast enough to keep up with their needs.

My goal as a low code team is normally to get founders through the first 2 to 3 years of their world until they've got sufficient traction. They've got funding, they've got momentum, and then you've got revenue - you can quite easily justify spending a couple of million on it on a full build. 

Outgrowing low code

Ringo:

And what do you think? Do you think that venture’s grow out of low code? 

Trist:

Yeah, absolutely. And that's effectively my goal. My goal is to get you to a point where your business, and that the app we've built is successful enough, that you don't need to rely on these cheaper, faster ways of building you confident that the system you've designed is solving the customer's needs. You've probably made 10,000 changes over the course of low code because we're so quick to be able to adjust things and make new features.

I mean, for our, one of our founding low code ventures that have been in for the last two years, unbelievably successful. They get a feature request and we deliver it on the same day. Like a customer will ask for something at 10am and by 12pm it's live on their web app. Like you just you just don't get that in traditional low code.

Let’s say we do have this hypothetical situation where you have a founder, he's been doing it for ten years. He's got tons of money, tons of time, and he knows the product. So he's got a product and he knows exactly what's to build, theoretically it's perfectly understood. You don't need iteration, you've got traction, you've got product market fit. If he went low code, the risks and the problems that he'd run into are that you can't get everything perfect.

That's not what low code is designed for, as Alexia was saying, if he's got this perfectionist mindset. We are going to say, we can't do that reasonably. Reasonably, you can't expect us to operate in a low code way. Go to a full build. What we are going to say to him is”let's get a full on back end engineer or front engineer to build this specific part of your app”, in which case you're losing all the benefits of low code, but you're getting the limitations.


So, you've got to make sure you're using the right tool for the right job. But in saying that, there are so many tools appearing all over the place. Like there's one I was looking at yesterday and today called 8Base, which is effectively like the whole slogan is “built for developers by developers”. Even low code tools are launching out of mainstream platforms like Wix. They're building full-on react front-ends. This 8base is full-on back and front-end, but it enables you to have low components but then jump into full code wherever you want. So then the sell is: get the benefits of both. And that's the world we're operating in where they start overlapping more and more. For instance, Flutterflow is back-end. It can scale to billions of people. Flutter front-end can scale to billions of people too. You don't have to lock it anymore. The code gets exported fully and you own it. Yeah, but restructure it too. So that's all the time you're getting the gains of the latest architecture methods and models. So, it is blurry, but you do need to realize that low code is not designed for this hyperscale, hyper-customization builds, out of the box. 

Alexia:
Also, when we talk about low code, we still talk about low code used by engineers, right? So, we take into account that we're engineers. We know how to structure things, how to structure the bases and queries to actually make them efficient. Very few of the low code tools are actually aimed at a completely non-technical audience.


And you can make some very costly mistakes if you don't know what you're doing in low code platforms, in the same way as you can make any mistakes with high code. So that's another consideration. You have the mindset itself, and having someone - having strong technical guidance is never going to beat that. Low code is never going to substitute having someone that you can lean on to actually tell you when to scale your application.


OR tell you well, why is it that things are slow here? Why is that you're losing data here and dropping off messages, here?

And you can make some very costly mistakes if you don't know what you're doing in low code platforms, in the same way as you can make any mistakes with high code. So that's another consideration. You have the mindset itself, and having someone - having strong technical guidance is never going to beat that. Low code is never going to substitute having someone that you can lean on to actually tell you when to scale your application.

Low code and cost efficiency

Ringo:
Low code…Is it super cheap? I mean, should we always opt-in just because of the cost? What do you think?

Trist:
I think if you look five years ago, a lot of these misconceptions were true. And we're calling them misconceptions now because the industry has changed a lot. Low code generally is cheaper, but out of the box you're going to be able to build it faster and cheaper. Low code out the box still is not going to be able to scale as well as building custom and low code out the box, you're not going to be able to customize. 

So in a sense they’re true. Cliché’s normally are, but in a very different sense, [The] Delta is able to build full-scale apps incredibly fast. And I'm representing Alexia here now, but we've invested in doing things like high code, extremely fast. We've also invested in doing low code that is scalable and customizable. So the line's becoming a bit more blurry.

Alexia:
I agree - and it builds on the mindset thing. The fact that we work so closely between high code and low code to build that also gives us the ability to learn from each other. That means we can leverage the engineering mindsets in the low code space,and the low code mindset in the engineering space. Which is very important, because one of the biggest misconceptions with high code builds is that they have to take long and they have to be complex.

That's often because people have a certain expectation when they go into high code or into full builds, right? The reality is if you master the tools, so if you've got a team of engineers that actually know their tools, it doesn't take longer to build. Right? Because we actually know the tools of our trades and we've actually built a library of components that will be usable for authentication.


For example, when you snap your fingers, you can have a couple of permissions with your roles and logins all taken care of. We're actually getting to that point. The same thing applies to the frontend. We have built so many components and libraries for apps that we can pull from to easily put things together, so it doesn't have to take as long.

What typically takes longer is analysis paralysis. When you move into high code, you move away from the mindset of quickly putting something together to show someone, which is what low code is for. With low code, you want to show something immediately to get feedback and start iterating from the beginning. You can do this with high code, but it requires a mindset shift because most engineers are perfectionists.

Most engineers want to know that what they're building is perfect and want to put their name on it. They want to produce something that is an achievement and will be put out into the world. 

However, in high code, we also need to get something out quickly and build a couple of skeleton endpoints, so the frontend has something to integrate with. Working with skeleton endpoints and partial features may go against the engineering mindset of doing things perfectly, but we need to break that misconception. 

Building code quickly may not be as fast as low code, but it could save us from having to rebuild in a month.

What typically takes longer is analysis paralysis. When you move into high code, you move away from the mindset of quickly putting something together to show someone, which is what low code is for. With low code, you want to show something immediately to get feedback and start iterating from the beginning. You can do this with high code, but it requires a mindset shift because most engineers are perfectionists.

Download our free ebook

Get the best of our insights, and more.

Thanks for signing up!

Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Relevant insights

Stories
April 3, 2023
Founder Foundations: The Pillars of a Strong Venture
Read more
Product strategy
October 6, 2022
Why Founders Should Strive For ‘Market-Product Fit’ Instead of ‘Product-Market Fit’
Read more
Press
September 14, 2022
Investing in handly
Read more