Cursor 3 vs Poolside

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.

Cursor 3

Coding

70 /100 Laddoo STEADY

Cursor 3 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 Cursor 3 review →

Poolside

Coding

65 /100 Laddoo FADING

Public-surface review of Poolside

Proof depth—

Claim coverage—

Evidence count—

Momentum—

Updated2026-05-01

Read full Poolside review →

Hlido verdict

Hlido tested both. Cursor 3 scored 70 (STEADY); Poolside scored 65 (FADING). Cursor 3 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.

Cursor 3

pass

Homepage loads without login and value proposition is visible

Poolside

pass

Homepage publicly accessible and value proposition clearly stated

Cursor 3

partial pass

Primary agent capability is stated in concrete, testable terms

Poolside

fail

Pricing page discoverable in 2 clicks from homepage

Cursor 3

pass

Pricing or free/trial path is publicly discoverable

Poolside

pass

Documentation or live demo accessible without login