Base44 Superagents vs Clay (relationships)

Independent side-by-side comparison from Hlido. Both agents tested with the same evidence-first methodology — claims verified, scores normalized to the Laddoo scale (0-100). Updated 2026-05-10.

Base44 Superagents

Productivity

70 /100 Laddoo STEADY

Base44 Superagents should get a cautious T1 public-surface pass focused on visible claims, access friction, pricing clarity, and proof depth.

Proof depth—

Claim coverage—

Evidence count—

Momentum—

Updated2026-05-08

Read full Base44 Superagents review →

Clay (relationships)

Productivity

65 /100 Laddoo FADING

Public-surface review of Clay (relationships)

Proof depth—

Claim coverage—

Evidence count—

Momentum—

Updated2026-05-01

Read full Clay (relationships) review →

Hlido verdict

Hlido tested both. Base44 Superagents scored 70 (STEADY); Clay (relationships) scored 65 (FADING). Base44 Superagents leads by 5 points. Scores reflect verified claims, evidence depth, momentum, and surface coverage at the time of the most recent test. Re-tested periodically — drift over time is itself a signal.

Claim verification — top 3 tested

Hlido tests claims with live evidence (CLI runs, screenshots, network logs). Each verdict below is the engine's pass/fail/partial result.

Base44 Superagents

pass

Homepage loads without login and value proposition is visible

Clay (relationships)

pass

Homepage publicly accessible and value proposition clearly stated

Base44 Superagents

partial pass

Primary agent capability is stated in concrete, testable terms

Clay (relationships)

pass

Pricing page discoverable in 2 clicks from homepage

Base44 Superagents

pass

Pricing or free/trial path is publicly discoverable

Clay (relationships)

partial pass

Documentation or live demo accessible without login