Figma prototypes are faster for exploring flows and getting feedback on structure. SwiftUI prototypes are better when the feel matters: real scrolling, haptics, Liquid Glass, shaders and gestures that Figma can only imitate. I design in Figma first, then build the moments that need to feel native in SwiftUI, like the water simulation in Pulse Health.
Use Figma prototypes to decide what to build. Use SwiftUI prototypes to decide how it should feel, and to hand engineers something they can run.
| SwiftUI prototype | Figma prototype | |
|---|---|---|
| Speed to first version | Slower, faster with AI help | Fast |
| Realism | Native: real scroll, gestures, haptics | Simulated |
| Motion and shaders | Springs, Metal shaders, Liquid Glass | Smart animate, basic transitions |
| Runs on a device | Yes, through Xcode | In the Figma app or mirror |
| Data | Real or mocked data | Static, variables on paid plans |
| Tools cost | Xcode free on the Mac App Store; $99/yr to publish | Free Starter, Professional Full seat $16/mo |
| Feedback from | Engineers and real users on device | Stakeholders and early tests |
| Handoff | Code engineers can read | Dev Mode and specs |
Early on, the question is structure: what screens exist, in what order, with what content. Figma answers that in hours, and everyone can comment on one link. Do not write Swift to find out whether a flow makes sense.
Some decisions only make sense in your hand. A glass avatar that bends like a lens when pressed in Say More uses a Metal lens shader; a card you tap three times to shatter the ice in Payno depends on timing and physics. Figma can hint at these, but it cannot tell you whether they feel right.
Xcode Previews let you see SwiftUI views change as you edit, and interactive previews behave like the device. Apple also now supports coding agents from Anthropic and others inside Xcode, which makes this route far more reachable for designers.
The tools themselves are cheap. Xcode is a free download from the Mac App Store, and SwiftUI comes with it. You only pay the Apple Developer Program fee of $99 a year when you want to distribute through TestFlight or the App Store. The real cost is time and a Mac.
AI coding agents changed the time part. Xcode now supports coding models and agents from Anthropic, Google and OpenAI, and the Figma MCP lets an agent read your frames. A designer who can describe the interaction precisely can get a working SwiftUI screen far faster than a few years ago.
Figma stays cheaper for breadth. If you need twenty screens reviewed by ten people this week, a Figma prototype wins. Build in SwiftUI only the two or three moments where feel decides whether the design works.
Most of my native experiments start as Figma frames and become SwiftUI with Claude and the Figma MCP: Pulse Health (Liquid Glass and a water simulation), LevelUp (SpriteKit confetti and sound) and Traveme (a scrubbable film onboarding).
I have also taken native apps all the way to the App Store this way. The Figma file is still where the thinking starts.
If you design iOS apps, learning enough SwiftUI to prototype key moments is worth it, especially with AI coding tools doing the heavy typing.
Yes. Xcode is a free download from the Mac App Store. Publishing on the App Store needs the Apple Developer Program at $99 a year.
They can get close for flows and simple transitions, but real scrolling physics, haptics and shaders need native code.
Design the screens in Figma, then build them in SwiftUI. The Figma MCP with an AI coding agent can read your frames and speed this up a lot.
Think in Figma, feel in SwiftUI. Use each for the question it answers best, and your iOS designs will be both well structured and good in the hand.
Need a product designer or design engineer for your product? I work remotely with teams worldwide, from research to shipped code.