n8n vs Make vs Zapier: Which Automation Tool Actually Makes Sense?
I moved roughly 40,000 monthly tasks from Zapier to n8n last November. My bill went from $49 to $0. But it cost me two weekends of setup time and a $6/month VPS — and three of my simpler workflows still run on Make because it was faster to rebuild them there.
TL;DR — Pick Your Tool:
- • n8n — Best for developers who want full control. Self-host free (unlimited executions), or cloud from ~$26/mo. 400+ integrations. Requires technical setup.
- • Make — Best visual builder for non-developers. Cheapest cloud option at $9/mo. 1,500+ integrations. No self-hosting available.
- • Zapier — Easiest to use, most integrations (8,000+). But significantly more expensive at $20–70/mo. No self-hosting.
- • Open-source pick: Activepieces if you want MIT-licensed and fully free to self-host.
Quick Comparison: n8n vs Make vs Zapier
| Feature | n8n | Make | Zapier |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entry Cloud Price | ~$26/mo (Starter) | $9/mo (Core) | $19.99/mo (Professional) |
| Free Tier | Unlimited (self-host) | 1,000 ops/mo | 100 tasks/mo |
| Integrations | 400+ | 1,500+ | 8,000+ |
| Open Source | Yes (fair-code) | No | No |
| Self-Hosting | Yes (Docker, free) | No | No |
| Visual Builder | Yes | Yes (best-in-class) | Yes |
| Code / Custom Logic | JS + Python nodes | Limited JS | Limited (Code by Zapier) |
| G2 Rating | 4.9/5 | 4.7/5 | 4.5/5 |
| Capterra Rating | 4.6/5 | 4.8/5 | 4.7/5 |
| Best For | Developers | Non-technical users | Teams with budget |
| Pricing as of February 2026. n8n cloud priced in EUR (shown in USD approximate). G2/Capterra ratings from verified user reviews. | |||
n8n: Built for Developers Who Want Real Control
n8n is a fair-code licensed workflow automation tool. That means the source code is public and free to self-host, but you need a commercial license for certain enterprise use cases (like embedding n8n in a product you sell). For the overwhelming majority of users — individuals, startups, teams automating internal workflows — the Community Edition is genuinely free with no task or execution limits.
The self-hosted setup is a single Docker command:
Run that on a $6/month DigitalOcean droplet and you have a fully functional n8n instance with 400+ integrations, JavaScript and Python code nodes, and unlimited workflow executions. If you were previously paying Zapier $49/month for 2,000 tasks, that migration pays for itself immediately.
What n8n Does Well
- •Code nodes are a genuine differentiator. You can write arbitrary JavaScript or Python inside a workflow step. This is not a hack or workaround — it is a first-class feature. Complex data transformations, custom API calls, string manipulation: all doable without a separate service.
- •AI/LLM integrations are mature. Native nodes for OpenAI, Anthropic, Google Gemini, Hugging Face, and LangChain. You can build multi-step AI workflows — summarize an email, classify it, then route it — without writing a separate backend.
- •Self-hosting means your data stays with you. If you process anything sensitive — customer data, internal documents, financial records — n8n self-hosted keeps that data off third-party servers entirely.
- •Community templates. n8n has a growing library of shareable workflow templates. Not as polished as Zapier's, but more technically sophisticated.
The Honest Downsides of n8n
- • Steeper learning curve — the node graph interface is not immediately intuitive if you have never used a tool like this. Expect a few hours to feel comfortable.
- • 400+ integrations is low compared to Zapier's 8,000+ — if the specific app you need isn't there, you'll be using HTTP Request nodes and writing your own API calls.
- • Self-hosting has operational overhead — you need to handle updates, backups, and uptime yourself. If the VPS goes down, your automations stop. n8n Cloud removes this but costs money.
- • Fair-code license has nuance — some enterprise features (SSO, Git integration, multi-environment) require a paid license even on self-hosted. Read the license if you have complex requirements.
n8n Cloud Pricing (2026)
Unlimited executions, requires your own server
2,500 executions/mo, 5 concurrent workflows
10,000 executions/mo, 20 concurrent workflows
40,000 executions/mo, SSO, Git integration
The cloud pricing is notably more expensive than Zapier when you look at it per-execution — but for most developer use cases, self-hosting at $6–20/month makes the cloud comparison largely irrelevant.
Make: The Visual Builder That Non-Developers Actually Like
Make (formerly Integromat) has the best visual workflow editor of the three. That's not a subjective opinion — the canvas-based interface where you connect modules with lines and branches is genuinely easier to reason about than Zapier's linear step list. When you need a workflow with multiple branches, error handlers, and conditional paths, Make's UI makes the logic visible in a way Zapier's doesn't.
It's also the cheapest entry point on cloud: $9/month for 10,000 operations on an annual plan. The free tier gives 1,000 operations monthly. For someone running lightweight automations — syncing a form to a spreadsheet, forwarding emails, posting to Slack — the free tier might actually cover your needs indefinitely.
What Make Does Well
- •Visual canvas is genuinely the best. The drag-and-connect interface for multi-branch workflows is clearer than anything n8n or Zapier offers. If you think visually, Make's design clicks immediately.
- •1,500+ integrations covers most real-world needs. Not Zapier's 8,000, but enough that most common business tools are there: Google Workspace, Slack, Notion, Airtable, HubSpot, Shopify, and hundreds more.
- •Complex routing without code. Make's conditional routing, iterators, and error handling modules let non-developers build sophisticated logic. You don't need JavaScript to branch a workflow based on data values.
- •Pricing per operation, not per "task." This matters for workflows with many read-only steps. Zapier charges for every action; Make lets filter and router modules run without burning paid operations.
The Honest Downsides of Make
- • No self-hosting. Make is cloud-only. Your workflows and data pass through Make's servers. For regulated industries or privacy-conscious teams, this is a hard stop.
- • Operations-based pricing surprises people. A workflow with 10 modules running 500 times a month uses 5,000 operations — half your $9/mo plan's allowance. The math catches people off-guard.
- • Slower execution than n8n. For time-sensitive workflows (real-time webhooks, instant notifications), Make's polling intervals can introduce delays that n8n self-hosted handles faster.
- • Limited code flexibility. Make has a basic JavaScript transform function, but nothing close to n8n's full code nodes. If you need to run a real algorithm inside a workflow step, you're stuck.
- • Customer support has mixed reviews. On Capterra, several users note that enterprise-tier support is responsive but lower tiers can take days to resolve issues.
Make Pricing (2026)
1,000 ops/mo, 2 active scenarios
10,000 ops/mo, unlimited active scenarios
10,000 ops/mo + custom variables, priority execution
10,000 ops/mo + team features, multiple seats
Zapier: Largest Ecosystem, Highest Price
Zapier is where most people start with automation, and there are good reasons for that. The setup experience is exceptional — you can connect two apps in under five minutes without reading a single documentation page. The integration library has over 8,000 apps, which means nearly any business tool you've heard of has a Zapier connector, often with multiple trigger and action options.
But Zapier's pricing structure is where reality hits. The free tier limits you to 100 tasks per month — that's roughly three automated actions per day before you hit the ceiling. The Professional plan at $19.99/month gives you 750 tasks, which sounds like a lot until you realize a single workflow running hourly burns through 720 tasks monthly on its own. Multi-step workflows compound this quickly.
Zapier's AI features are worth acknowledging. The AI Copilot can generate workflow suggestions from plain English descriptions, and there are native AI action steps built into the editor. For non-technical teams that need AI-enhanced automation without touching code, this is genuinely useful and ahead of what Make and n8n offer for non-developers.
What Zapier Does Well
- •8,000+ integrations. If a SaaS product exists, Zapier probably connects to it. Niche CRMs, obscure project management tools, regional payment processors — Zapier's breadth is unmatched and will remain so for a while.
- •Zero learning curve for simple Zaps. The interface guides you step by step. Non-technical people can set up useful automations on their first day. The documentation is comprehensive and the community is massive.
- •AI Copilot and native AI actions. Type "when I get a new lead in HubSpot, summarize their LinkedIn profile and send me a Slack message" and Zapier builds the draft workflow. It's not perfect, but it accelerates setup significantly.
- •Reliability and uptime. Zapier's infrastructure is mature and well-monitored. For teams where a failed workflow means a missed customer touchpoint, the managed reliability is worth paying for.
The Honest Downsides of Zapier
- • Most expensive of the three, by a significant margin. Once you need more than 750 tasks/month, you're looking at $49–70/mo. At 5,000+ tasks/month, costs can exceed $100/mo for a single account.
- • Task-based pricing adds up unpredictably. Multi-step workflows with paths and filters consume tasks faster than expected. A workflow that runs 100 times and has 8 steps could consume 800 tasks.
- • No self-hosting, no data sovereignty. Everything runs on Zapier's cloud. Not a concern for most teams, but a blocker for healthcare, legal, and government use cases.
- • Limited flexibility for complex logic. Deep branching, iterating over arrays, running custom algorithms — Zapier handles these less elegantly than n8n or Make. "Code by Zapier" exists but feels bolted on.
- • Pricing changes have frustrated long-term users. Zapier has adjusted how tasks are counted multiple times. Users on Reddit and G2 frequently cite surprise bills after workflow updates.
Zapier Pricing (2026)
100 tasks/mo, single-step Zaps only
750 tasks/mo, multi-step Zaps, filters, paths
2,000 tasks/mo, shared workspace
Custom task limits, SSO, advanced admin
Open-Source Alternatives: Activepieces, Automatisch, Huginn
If n8n's fair-code license feels restrictive (it isn't for most use cases, but some teams are cautious), there are fully open-source alternatives worth knowing about.
Activepieces
Activepieces is MIT-licensed, which means fully open source with no commercial restrictions. It launched as a direct Zapier alternative and has moved quickly — now with 500+ integrations, AI Agents, MCP (Model Context Protocol) support, and a flat-rate cloud pricing model ($25/mo with unlimited task executions on paid plans). The self-hosted version is completely free with no execution limits.
The interface is cleaner and more approachable than n8n, closer to Zapier's simplicity. For teams who want open-source without the developer-heavy setup of n8n, Activepieces is the strongest current option. The main limitation is ecosystem maturity — at roughly 500 integrations, it's smaller than n8n's 400+ (roughly comparable) but the community is growing fast.
Automatisch
A smaller project, AGPL-licensed, with fewer integrations but a clean Zapier-like interface. Worth watching but not production-ready for most teams yet. The integration library is limited to a few dozen connectors and development velocity has been slower than Activepieces.
Huginn
The oldest of the self-hosted alternatives, MIT-licensed, built on Ruby. Huginn is powerful for monitoring, scraping, and event-driven workflows, but the UI is dated and the learning curve is steep. Primarily used by developers who need specific capabilities (like complex RSS monitoring or custom agent behaviors) rather than general workflow automation.
Open-source recommendation: Activepieces for approachability + MIT license. n8n for power + largest community.
Real Cost at Different Usage Volumes
The unit pricing comparisons across these platforms are deliberately confusing — "operations" vs "tasks" vs "executions" are not the same thing. This table normalizes across rough usage volumes to show what you'd actually pay. Assumes simple, mostly linear workflows.
| Monthly Volume | n8n (self-host) | n8n Cloud | Make | Zapier |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ~500 actions | $6 (VPS only) | ~$26 | $0 (free tier) | $0 (free, barely) |
| ~2,000 actions | $6 (VPS only) | ~$26 | $9 | $19.99 |
| ~10,000 actions | $6 (VPS only) | ~$26 | $9–16 | $49+ |
| ~50,000 actions | $10–20 (larger VPS) | ~$65 | $29–80+ | $103+ |
| ~200,000 actions | $20 (VPS) | ~$865 | $300–500+ | $500+ |
| Estimates based on standard plan pricing. High-volume usage may require custom enterprise plans for Make and Zapier. n8n self-hosted scales linearly with server cost only. | ||||
The pattern is stark. At any volume above a few hundred actions monthly, n8n self-hosted wins on cost. The gap widens dramatically at scale. This is why developers and technical teams almost universally migrate to n8n once they hit Zapier's $49 or $69 tiers — the migration cost is worth it at that point.
Which Should You Pick?
Rather than a "best overall" ranking, here is a decision framework based on what actually matters for different situations.
Choose n8n if...
- • You're a developer comfortable with Docker and Linux basics
- • You have high automation volume and are paying $30+ on Zapier
- • You need custom code logic inside workflows (JavaScript, Python)
- • Data privacy matters and you want everything on your own infrastructure
- • You're building AI-powered workflows and want flexibility over LLM providers
Choose Make if...
- • You're non-technical and want the best visual editor
- • Budget is tight and you need cloud (not self-hosted)
- • Your workflows have complex branching logic you want to see visually
- • You don't need more than 1,500 integrations
- • You're coming from Integromat and already know the platform
Choose Zapier if...
- • You need an obscure integration that only Zapier has (check first — 8,000 apps is broad)
- • Your team is non-technical and AI Copilot for workflow building matters
- • Volume is low (under 750 tasks/month) and Professional tier is acceptable
- • You need to move fast and have no time for any learning curve
- • You're at an enterprise with existing Zapier contracts and SSO requirements
Choose Activepieces if...
- • You want MIT-licensed open source with no fair-code nuance
- • You want something approachable (Zapier-like UX) but fully self-hostable
- • MCP/AI agent integration is part of your workflow requirements
- • You're building something where the license terms of n8n make legal nervous
Practical migration note: If you're currently on Zapier and considering n8n, start with your highest-volume workflows — those are the ones burning your budget. Recreate the two or three biggest offenders in n8n first, verify they work for a week, then migrate the rest. Don't cancel Zapier until you've run the n8n version in parallel for at least a few days.
UptimeRobot
Free website monitoring — get alerts when your automations or services go down
Third-Party Review Ratings
Across major review platforms, all three tools score well. The differences are small but directionally meaningful.
n8n
Praised for flexibility and value. Criticized for initial learning curve.
Make
Highest Capterra score. Praised for visual builder. Occasional complaints about operations counting.
If you're evaluating automation tools alongside AI coding assistants, our AI coding tools comparison covers the developer tool ecosystem in more depth. For AI model subscriptions like ChatGPT and Claude, see our ChatGPT Plus vs Claude Pro breakdown.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is n8n really free?
The self-hosted Community Edition is free with unlimited workflow executions — but you need a server to run it, which typically costs $5–20/month on a VPS. n8n Cloud (fully managed) starts at €24/month (~$26/mo) with a 14-day free trial. There is no permanent free cloud tier.
Can Make handle complex multi-step workflows?
Yes, Make is actually excellent at complex workflows. Its visual canvas lets you build multi-branch, conditional logic flows that are genuinely difficult to replicate in Zapier. The main caveat is that every module run counts as an operation — so complex workflows with many steps burn through your monthly operations faster than you might expect.
Why is Zapier so much more expensive than Make?
Zapier charges per "task" (a completed action step), while Make charges per "operation" (every module run). These count differently, which makes direct price comparisons tricky. Zapier's premium pricing also reflects its larger integration library (8,000+ apps vs Make's 1,500+), more polished documentation, and AI-native features. You are paying for ecosystem size and ease of setup.
Can I migrate from Zapier to n8n?
Yes, but it is not automatic. n8n does not have a one-click Zapier importer. You will need to recreate your workflows manually using n8n's node-based editor. For simple linear Zaps, this takes 15–30 minutes per workflow. For complex multi-step automations, budget a few hours. The upside: you often end up with a cleaner, more maintainable workflow in n8n.
Which automation tool has the best AI features in 2026?
Zapier has the most polished AI integration — its AI actions and Copilot features are built directly into the workflow editor. n8n has native AI nodes for OpenAI, Anthropic, and Hugging Face, plus code nodes where you can call any API directly. Make has basic AI integrations but lags behind both on native AI workflow support. For pure AI automation, n8n's flexibility wins for developers; Zapier's AI Copilot wins for non-technical users.
A year ago, "Zapier vs everything else" was a lopsided conversation. Zapier's integration library was so far ahead that the price premium felt justified. That gap has narrowed considerably. n8n's community has grown to the point where most common integrations exist. Make's pricing undercuts everyone else on cloud. Activepieces has shipped faster than most open-source projects.
The realistic picture in 2026: if you can tolerate a bit of setup, n8n self-hosted offers the most capability for the least ongoing cost. If you can't (or won't), Make is the honest value leader for cloud users. Zapier's strengths are real — ecosystem breadth and AI Copilot are legitimate — but the pricing requires you to either have low volume or a team that can justify the spend.
Most people who've been on Zapier for a while and notice the bill creeping up know what to do. The question is just whether the migration weekend is worth it. Usually, it is.