How does Power Automate compare to Make for business automation?

Power Automate vs Make: Key Differences

Power Automate and Make both target business automation, but they serve fundamentally different environments. Power Automate is built for the Microsoft ecosystem — deep SharePoint, Teams, Outlook, and Dynamics 365 integration with optional desktop RPA. Make is an ecosystem-agnostic visual automation platform with operations-based pricing that is significantly cheaper at scale.

Microsoft Ecosystem vs Open Ecosystem

Power Automate excels when the organisation runs on Microsoft 365. Standard connectors for SharePoint, Outlook, Teams, Excel Online, and OneDrive are included with M365 licences at no additional cost. Flows that stay within the Microsoft ecosystem are fast to build and deeply integrated.

Editor's Note: We automated a SharePoint list workflow — when a new item is added, notify a Teams channel, update an Excel tracker, and send an Outlook email. In Power Automate: 5 minutes using built-in templates with pre-authenticated Microsoft connectors. In Make: 30 minutes, requiring manual HTTP module configuration for SharePoint's REST API and OAuth setup. For Microsoft-internal workflows, Power Automate is unquestionably faster.

Make connects 1,800+ apps through a visual scenario builder that treats all integrations equally. There is no "standard" vs "premium" connector distinction — all modules are available on all paid plans.

Pricing and Cost at Scale

Power Automate uses per-user licensing: $15/user/month for standard connectors, $40/user/month for premium. Shared flows use per-flow licensing at $100/month per flow.

Make uses per-operation pricing: plans start at $10.59/month for 10,000 operations.

Editor's Note: For a 25-person team needing premium connectors (SQL Server, HTTP with Azure AD), Power Automate costs $375/month minimum ($15 × 25 users) — and that's just standard connectors. Premium bumps it to $1,000/month ($40 × 25). Make costs $10.59-$34.12/month depending on operation volume, regardless of team size. The per-user vs per-operation pricing model is the single biggest differentiator in total cost.

Visual Builder Comparison

Power Automate uses a vertical flow designer with steps, conditions, and parallel branches. The interface is functional but can become cluttered with deeply nested conditions. Flow checker catches errors before publishing.

Make uses a horizontal canvas with a visual router/filter system. Complex scenarios with multiple branches remain visually clear. The drag-and-drop interface handles iteration, error handling, and data mapping more intuitively than Power Automate's nested blocks.

Desktop Automation (RPA)

Power Automate Desktop provides attended and unattended desktop RPA. It can interact with Windows applications, browsers, Excel files, PDF forms, and legacy systems. This is a unique capability that Make does not offer.

Make has no desktop automation. It is purely cloud-based and API-driven.

Error Handling

Power Automate supports try-catch scope blocks and configure-run-after for error paths. Error handling is possible but can lead to deeply nested flow structures.

Make provides dedicated error handler routes that can be attached to any module, with options to retry, ignore, commit, or route to alternative logic. Error handling is visually cleaner in Make.

Summary