Prototype, Proof of Concept or MVP?
By CodexierPublished 4 min read
Founders often ask for an MVP when what they need is a prototype, or pay for a prototype when the real risk is technical. The three words get used interchangeably, but each one answers a different question. Define them by that question and the choice becomes much easier: you pay for the answer you need now, not for the most finished-looking thing.
Prototype: will users understand it?
A prototype is a clickable model of the product, usually made in Figma. It looks real enough to test, but there is no working backend: no accounts, no data, no payments. Its job is to put the idea in front of five to eight target users and watch where they hesitate, misunderstand or lose interest.
It is cheap to change, which is the point. Moving a step in a prototype takes minutes; moving it in built software takes days. Our guide on testing a prototype before code shows how to run those sessions.
Proof of concept: can it be built?
A proof of concept is a narrow technical experiment. It has no design polish and often no user interface at all. It exists to test the one thing that might not work: an integration with a system that has a poor API, an AI model that must extract data from messy PDFs, a real-time feature at the required speed.
- Worth doing when one technical unknown could sink the whole project
- Scoped to a single question with a yes or no answer
- Code is usually thrown away or heavily rewritten afterwards
- Not something to show customers
MVP: will people use and pay?
A minimum viable product is real software that real customers use for a real task. It must work reliably, handle their data safely and, for a paid product, take payment. The 'minimum' is about scope, not quality: fewer features, each one done properly.
An MVP is the most expensive of the three because it has to survive contact with users: login, security, GDPR, error handling, hosting and support. Our explainer on what an MVP is and isn't covers the scope trap in detail.
Costs and timelines compared
| Aspect | Prototype | Proof of concept | MVP |
|---|---|---|---|
| Question | Do users understand it? | Can it be built? | Will people use and pay? |
| Typical time | 1–3 weeks | 1–4 weeks | 2–4 months |
| Who is involved | Designer, founder, test users | Developer, founder | Designer, developers, founder, early customers |
| What you keep | Design and test findings | A technical answer | A working product |
| Relative cost | Low | Low to medium | Highest |
Timelines vary with scope; the order of magnitude between the three is what matters.
With us, a product design sprint covers the prototype-and-test route, an MVP planning blueprint scopes the build and flags the technical risks, and MVP development builds it. The current prices are on our pricing page.
Choosing your next step
Rank your risks honestly. If you are not sure people want this, test demand first, sometimes with nothing more than a landing page and conversations. If you are sure of demand but unsure users will understand the solution, prototype. If one technical piece could fail, run a proof of concept. Build the MVP when the remaining risk is mainly whether people will keep using and paying.
| Your biggest doubt | Next step |
|---|---|
| Does anyone want this? | Customer interviews and a simple landing page |
| Will they understand how to use it? | Prototype and user tests |
| Can the hard part work? | Proof of concept |
| Will they pay and come back? | MVP with a small group of early customers |
When you need none of them
If an existing tool already does the job for your first customers, sell the service manually on top of it before building anything. A spreadsheet, a form and a lot of personal attention can validate a business model surprisingly far. We will say so if that is the honest answer. When you are ready to talk about building, book a short call and bring your riskiest assumption.
Frequently asked questions
Can a prototype become the MVP?
The design can carry over, and that saves time. The prototype itself has no working backend, so the MVP is built properly underneath it.
Is a proof of concept the same as a pilot?
No. A proof of concept tests technical feasibility, usually without customers. A pilot runs a working solution with a real customer for a limited period.
Do investors expect an MVP?
Many early investors are happy with a strong prototype, customer evidence and a credible plan. Some Swedish public funding also covers the stages before an MVP. Ask them what evidence they need before choosing what to build.
What if I skip straight to an MVP?
It can work when the idea is well understood and the technology is proven. The risk is spending most of the budget on features nobody uses because nobody tested the concept first.
Not sure which step comes next?
Describe your idea and your biggest doubt on a short call. We will tell you whether a prototype, a proof of concept or an MVP answers it.
Book a free 15-minute call