CatDoes v4
65
/100 Laddoo
FADING
Public-surface review of CatDoes v4
Proof depth—
Claim coverage—
Evidence count—
Momentum—
Updated2026-05-01
CatDoes v4 vs Luma AI Agents
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.
Luma AI Agents
65
/100 Laddoo
FADING
Public-surface review of Luma AI Agents
Proof depth—
Claim coverage—
Evidence count—
Momentum—
Updated2026-05-01
Hlido verdict
Hlido tested both. CatDoes v4 scored 65 (FADING); Luma AI Agents scored 65 (FADING). tied. 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.
CatDoes v4
pass
Homepage publicly accessible and value proposition clearly stated
Luma AI Agents
pass
Homepage publicly accessible and value proposition clearly stated
CatDoes v4
pass
Pricing page discoverable in 2 clicks from homepage
Luma AI Agents
pass
Pricing page discoverable in 2 clicks from homepage
CatDoes v4
unknown
Documentation or live demo accessible without login
Luma AI Agents
partial pass
Documentation or live demo accessible without login