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

Written & reviewed by Rafal Fila · Last updated:

Related Tools

Related 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, Kissflow 5.8 and ServiceNow 4.8, scored 22 September 2026 on the five weighted criteria. Those criteria cover the step type, the approver's account or licence, the routes available on a rejection, the audit record, and the meter that charges for the decision, and none of them can tell a review from a rubber stamp, so the methodology adds a check readers can run on any product in a few minutes: whether the decision record tells a considered approval from an instant one. Every figure was read from a vendor-owned surface and carries its own date.

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 neighbouring pages on this site answer different questions. Best Process Orchestration Platforms 2026 scores multi-step process control, error handling and state management. Best AI Agent Platforms 2026 scores building and hosting the agent itself. This page scores the layer between them: the connective tissue that lets an agent already built elsewhere reach the applications a business actually runs on. A platform that leads one of those pages can place low here, and two of them do. Scores derive from application and action catalogue counts, the exposure model each platform uses to publish those catalogues to an agent, setup effort, failure handling and cost per agent action. Every figure was retrieved from a vendor-owned surface on 11 August 2026 unless an earlier date is stated against it.

Dive Deeper

comparison

Moxo vs Lindy in 2026: Who Presses Approve When the Agent Asks

Lindy, founded in 2023, sells an AI teammate that lives in Slack and in each person's inbox; Moxo, whose predecessor Moxtra was co-founded in 2012, runs multi-party processes where approvals are steps only a person can close. Moxo wins three rounds to two: who closes the step, work across companies and the record. Lindy wins reach and testing. Vendor pages and docs read 28 September 2026.

comparison

Moxo vs Kissflow in 2026: What an Outside Approver Costs, and What the Record Proves

Moxo and Kissflow both sell approvals to people who do not write code, and each wins one round outright: Moxo's Web and Headless SDKs run the approval inside the buyer's own product, under the buyer's own sign-in. Kissflow's portal audit log stamps every event with an actor, a device and an IP, where Moxo publishes no field list. Both answers are quoted, not priced, and both meters punish a one-step request sent to hundreds of clients. Cost, the decision record, rejection routes, AI metering and governance, verified 14 to 23 September 2026.

comparison

Moxo vs Camunda 8 in 2026: BPMN User Tasks for Staff, Step Types for Outsiders

Camunda 8 can fix a process under cases already running, since active instances migrate onto a corrected definition and, for Camunda user tasks, "a migrated active user task remains assigned to the same user". Moxo keeps the shared queue that Camunda's Tasklist V2 stops evaluating, with desks that are "a shared inbox that multiple users can pick work from". Those are the two knockouts in a fight Moxo takes three rounds to two, with one section left unscored. Portability, AI review gates and a published price decide the rest, verified 14 to 23 September 2026.