Can you use Make for web scraping?
Quick Answer: Yes, within limits. Make supports web scraping through HTTP modules (for simple page fetching and parsing), text parser modules, and integrations with dedicated scraping services like Apify, ScrapingBee, and Browserless. Make is suited for small-scale scraping; large-scale operations benefit from a dedicated scraping platform.
Using Make for Web Scraping
Make offers several paths for web scraping, from direct HTTP requests to integrations with specialized scraping services. The right approach depends on scale, target site complexity, and whether JavaScript rendering is required.
Method 1: HTTP Module
Make's HTTP module sends GET requests and retrieves raw HTML. Best for simple static pages.
- GET request to target URL
- Parse response with Text Parser module (regex)
- Extract fields into variables
- Limit: does not execute JavaScript; only works on server-rendered content
Method 2: Text Parser Module
Text Parser supports regex and "Match pattern" operations to extract data from HTML or text responses.
- Parse HTML with regex capture groups
- Handle multiple matches with iterator
- Limit: breaks easily when page structure changes
Method 3: Apify Integration
Apify is a scraping platform with actors (pre-built scrapers) for common sites. Make's Apify module runs actors and receives results.
- Pre-built actors for Google Maps, LinkedIn, e-commerce sites
- JavaScript rendering support
- Pay-per-compute pricing on Apify
Method 4: ScrapingBee Integration
ScrapingBee offers a scraping API that handles headless browsers, proxies, and CAPTCHA.
- HTTP requests with JavaScript rendering
- Proxy rotation and geo-targeting
- Pricing: starts at $49/month for 100,000 API calls
Method 5: Browserless Integration
Browserless provides a hosted headless Chrome API. Custom scripts run in a browser and return data.
- Full JavaScript rendering
- Custom Puppeteer or Playwright scripts
- Usage-based pricing
When Make Fits Scraping
- Small volume (under 1,000 pages/day)
- Simple, static target sites
- Teams already using Make for other workflows
- Scraping as part of a larger workflow (enrichment, monitoring)
When a Dedicated Scraper Is Better
- Large-scale (100K+ pages/day)
- Sites requiring browser automation and complex interaction
- Anti-bot bypass and CAPTCHA solving at scale
- Teams needing structured data pipelines
Legal and Ethical Notes
Scraping should respect robots.txt, site terms of service, and applicable laws. Some jurisdictions (EU, US) have court rulings on scraping public data; others are more restrictive. Always check target site terms before scraping.
Related Questions
- What are the best workflow automation tools for technical writers in 2026?
- What are the best AI-native automation tools in 2026?
- What are the best automation tools for finance and AP teams in 2026?
- What are the best automation tools for solo founders in 2026?
- What are the best automation tools for nonprofits in 2026?
Related Tools
Activepieces
No-code workflow automation with self-hosting and AI-powered features
Workflow AutomationAutomatisch
Open-source Zapier alternative
Workflow AutomationBardeen
AI-powered browser automation via Chrome extension
Workflow AutomationCalendly
Scheduling automation platform for booking meetings without email back-and-forth, with CRM integrations and routing forms for lead qualification.
Workflow AutomationRelated Rankings
Best Durable Workflow Engines for Production in 2026
A ranked list of the best durable workflow engines for production deployments in 2026. Durable workflow engines persist execution state to a database so that long-running workflows survive process restarts, deployments, and infrastructure failures. The ranking covers Temporal, Prefect, Apache Airflow, Camunda, Windmill, and n8n. Tools were evaluated on production reliability, developer experience, scalability, open-source health, and documentation quality. The shortlist intentionally mixes code-first engines (Temporal, Prefect, Airflow) with hybrid visual platforms (Camunda, Windmill, n8n) to reflect how production teams actually choose workflow engines in 2026.
Best No-Code Automation Platforms in 2026
A ranked list of no-code automation platforms in 2026. The ranking covers visual workflow builders that allow non-engineering teams to connect SaaS apps, route data, and add conditional logic without writing code. Entries cover proprietary cloud platforms (Zapier, Make, Pipedream, IFTTT) and open-source visual builders (n8n, Activepieces). Scoring reflects integration breadth, pricing accessibility, visual editor ease, reliability and error handling, and self-hosting availability.
Dive Deeper
Migrating 23 Make Scenarios to Self-Hosted n8n: a 3-Week Breakdown
Anonymized retrospective of a DTC ecommerce brand migrating 23 Make scenarios to a self-hosted n8n instance over three weeks. Tooling cost dropped from $348/month on Make Teams to roughly $12/month on a Hetzner VPS, but credential and webhook recreation consumed about 40% of total project time.
Trigger.dev vs Inngest 2026: OSS Durable Runners Compared
Trigger.dev (2022, London) is a fully Apache 2.0 durable runner with task-based authoring, machine-size selection, and first-class self-host. Inngest (2021, San Francisco) is a developer-first event-driven step platform with an open-source dev server and a managed cloud (50K step runs/month free, $20/month Hobby). This 2026 comparison covers license, programming model, pricing, observability, and self-host options.
Inngest vs Temporal 2026: Durable Functions vs Durable Workflows
Inngest (2021, San Francisco) is a developer-first durable functions platform with TypeScript and Python SDKs, 50,000 step runs/month free, and Hobby pricing from $20/month. Temporal (2019) is the heavyweight durable workflow engine with seven-language SDK coverage, Cassandra-backed scale, and Cloud pricing from roughly $200/month at low volume or $2.5-4.5K/month self-host. This 2026 comparison covers programming model, pricing, scale ceiling, and operational footprint.