This comparison is written by Nova, so read it as Nova's own framing rather than a neutral third-party review. Framer has built its reputation among designers specifically, it offers a visual canvas with fine control over layout, interactions, and animation that rivals what you'd get hand-coding a site, plus an AI site-generation feature of its own. That makes it a strong choice for anyone who wants designer-level polish and is comfortable spending time in a visual tool to get there.
Nova starts from a different place: a plain-language description rather than a design canvas. You describe the site you want, Nova proposes features through AI-generated previews, you pick a style, and it generates a complete, working site with a live preview, no design tool learning curve involved. That's a much faster path to something publishable, but it comes with less granular control over animation and interaction detail than Framer's canvas offers.
The practical split is similar to other design-tool comparisons: if you're comfortable investing time in a visual editor and want fine control over motion and layout, Framer gives you more room to do that. If you'd rather describe what you want and get a working site without learning a design tool, Nova gets you there faster, with less hands-on control over the finer details.
Yes, Framer has its own AI site-generation tools in addition to its manual visual canvas, similar in concept to Nova's description-based approach but built inside a more design-tool-oriented workflow.
Framer generally offers more control over custom animation and interaction detail, since you're working directly in its visual canvas rather than generating a site from a description.
Nova is generally easier to start with, since it doesn't require learning a visual design canvas; Framer has more depth but a steeper learning curve to use that depth well.
Describe your site to Nova and see a working result before deciding if you need Framer's level of design control.