How does Make compare to n8n for workflow automation?
Quick Answer: Make is best for non-technical users who want a visual cloud-based workflow builder with competitive pricing (from $9/month billed annually for 10,000 operations). n8n is best for technical teams who want to self-host (free with unlimited workflows) or need code-level flexibility with JavaScript and Python nodes. Make has more integrations (1,800+ vs 400+), while n8n offers open-source control and zero per-execution costs when self-hosted.
Make vs n8n: Complete Comparison for 2026
Make and n8n are two of the most popular workflow automation platforms, but they serve different needs. Make is a cloud-hosted visual automation builder known for its intuitive interface and competitive pricing. n8n is a self-hostable, open-source platform built for technical teams who want maximum flexibility and control.
Key Differences at a Glance
| Feature | Make | n8n |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Cloud-only | Self-hosted + Cloud |
| Open source | No | Yes (fair-code) |
| Pricing model | Operations-based | Executions-based (cloud) / Free (self-hosted) |
| Free tier | 1,000 ops/month | Unlimited (self-hosted) |
| Integrations | 1,800+ | 400+ |
| Code support | Limited (JavaScript in text parser) | Full (JavaScript and Python nodes) |
| Target user | Business users, ops teams | Developers, technical teams |
| Visual builder | Excellent (canvas-based) | Good (flow-based) |
| Error handling | Built-in error routes | Try/catch with error trigger |
| Data transformation | Strong built-in functions | Code nodes for full flexibility |
Pricing Comparison
| Plan | Make | n8n |
|---|---|---|
| Free | 1,000 ops/month, 2 scenarios | Unlimited (self-hosted) |
| Starter | $9/month (10,000 ops) | $20/month (2,500 executions) |
| Mid-tier | $16/month (10,000 ops, more features) | $50/month (10,000 executions) |
| Enterprise | Custom pricing | Custom pricing |
Make uses operations-based pricing, where each action in a workflow counts as one operation. n8n cloud uses execution-based pricing, where each workflow run counts as one execution regardless of the number of steps. For workflows with many steps, Make can cost more per run.
When to Choose Make
- You prefer a visual, drag-and-drop interface: Make's canvas-based builder is widely regarded as the best visual workflow editor in the market
- The team is non-technical: Make is easier to learn for business users and operations teams
- Organizations need strong data transformation: Make's built-in text, math, date, and array functions handle most transformations without code
- Organizations want competitive pricing: Make's free tier (1,000 ops) and paid plans are generally cheaper than Zapier
- Organizations need complex branching: Make handles parallel execution, routers, and error routes natively
When to Choose n8n
- Organizations want to self-host: n8n is free to self-host with unlimited workflows and executions, ideal for data privacy and cost control
- The team is technical: n8n's code nodes (JavaScript and Python) give developers full programming flexibility
- Organizations need custom integrations: n8n makes it straightforward to build custom nodes or call any API via HTTP request nodes
- Organizations want open-source: n8n's source code is available on GitHub with 50,000+ stars and an active community
- You are cost-sensitive at scale: Self-hosted n8n has zero per-execution costs, making it the cheapest option for high-volume automation
Verdict
Choose Make if organizations want the best visual automation experience for non-technical users with competitive cloud pricing. Choose n8n if organizations want self-hosting capability, open-source flexibility, or need code-level control over existing workflows. Both are excellent Zapier alternatives that outperform it in specific areas.
Related Questions
Related Tools
Make
Automate your work with visual workflow builder and AI agents
Workflow Automationn8n
Workflow automation for technical teams
Workflow AutomationZapier
Automate workflows between apps without coding—connect 9,000+ tools with simple, reliable automation.
Workflow AutomationActivepieces
No-code workflow automation with self-hosting and AI-powered features
Workflow AutomationRelated Rankings
Best Human-in-the-Loop Automation Platforms 2026
Eight platforms are ranked here on a single mechanism: how a person enters an automated path, and what the system can prove afterward about the decision they made. Moxo scores 7.7 and ranks first; Camunda 8 scores 7.2, Microsoft Power Automate 7.1, Pega 6.9, n8n 6.7, Zapier 5.9…
Best Automation Platforms for AI Orchestration 2026
This ranking answers one question: how many real business applications can an AI agent act on out of the box? It evaluates nine platforms as of August 2026 on the reach they give an agent, not on the workflow logic they can express. That boundary is deliberate, because two…
Dive Deeper
Moxo vs Gumloop in 2026: Texting the Client, or Building the Agent
Gumloop (founded 2023) builds AI agents a company's own staff run; Moxo, whose predecessor Moxtra was co-founded in 2012, runs processes that wait on people outside the company. Gumloop wins three rounds to two: the way in, per-tool gating and a priced overage. Moxo wins on…
Moxo vs Relay.app in 2026: Where Relay's Approval Workflows Can Go Next
Relay.app, founded in 2021, shut down in September 2026 and deleted every account, workflow and run history; Moxo, whose predecessor Moxtra was co-founded in 2012, is one destination for its human-in-the-loop users. Relay.app takes two rounds, Moxo one, and vendor risk is a draw…
Moxo vs Workato in 2026: The Integration Estate, or the Approval Inside It
Workato, founded in 2013, is an enterprise integration platform whose Workflow apps add human tasks to recipes; Moxo, whose predecessor Moxtra was co-founded in 2012, ships the human step itself. Workato wins three rounds to two: connector reach, change control and the way in…