| Feature | Make | n8n |
|---|---|---|
| Free Plan | ✓ Yes | ✓ Yes |
| Pricing | Free / $9–$29/mo | Free (self-host) / $20/mo cloud |
| Rating | ★★★★★ 4.6 | ★★★★★ 4.6 |
| Key Feature 1 | Visual workflow builder | AI agent nodes |
| Key Feature 2 | 1,500+ app connectors | 400+ integrations |
| Key Feature 3 | Error handling | Self-hostable |
Reach buyers comparing Make and n8n. High-intent traffic, direct conversions.
Make and n8n are rated almost identically by users (4.6 vs 4.6), so the right pick comes down to feature fit rather than overall quality. Both Make and n8n offer free plans, so you can test both before committing. Both tools are widely used by startups, agencies, programmers — the deciding factor is usually which specific feature set matches your existing workflow.
Put Make next to n8n and the differences surface fast — both sit in the productivity tools space, but they solve the problem from different angles. Make is best known for visual workflow builder, whereas n8n stands out for ai agent nodes. Both land at 4.6/5 with users, so the right pick comes down to fit rather than raw quality.
Where Make pulls clearly ahead is building complex multi-branch automation with conditional logic. A frequent plus in reviews: More powerful than Zapier — especially for visual workflow builder workflows where Make consistently outperforms manual approaches. n8n, by contrast, is the stronger choice for building complex automation workflows with custom JavaScript logic when needed. In its favour: Free self-hosting option provides cost savings and control over infrastructure, especially for large-scale automation tasks. Picking based on which of those jobs you actually do day to day beats chasing a longer feature list.
Make is the right automation tool for anyone who has hit Zapier's complexity ceiling. N8n is the strongest choice when you need automation with the option to drop into code — the hybrid no-code/code approach covers a wider range of complexity than Make or Zapier. Bottom line: the "better" tool here is the one that fits the work you do most.
Choose Make if you are focused on technical users, developers, and operations teams who need complex automation with branching logic, data transformation, and multi-step processes — and who find Zapier too simple, or if a big part of your week goes to transforming and mapping data between apps with custom formulas. Its free tier also lets you validate the fit before paying.
Choose n8n if your priority is technical teams and developers who want powerful automation with the flexibility of code, the ability to self-host for data privacy, and more capability than no-code-only tools like Zapier, especially for self-hosting the automation platform for complete data control. A free plan is available, so you can trial the workflow at zero cost first.
Real-world output tracks the ratings closely: Make at 4.6/5 and n8n at 4.6/5, with the difference showing up most in building complex multi-branch automation with conditional logic.
Learning curve is worth weighing. Make has a known trade-off — Steeper learning curve — worth evaluating before committing if this is central to your use case. On n8n's side: Self-hosting requires technical expertise, which can be a barrier for non-technical users or those without extensive IT resources. Budget a week or two to get fluent in either before judging the output.
Both tools offer a free plan, so you can trial each side by side before spending anything. Paid plans start at $9/mo for Make (Core) and $20/mo for n8n (Starter (Cloud)), making Make the cheaper entry point at $9/mo versus $20/mo. The extra spend on n8n only pays off if you need what its higher tier unlocks.
🚀 Ready to decide? Try both free and see which fits your workflow.
Make (formerly Integromat) is a visual automation platform connecting 1,800+ apps through a drag-and-drop scenario builder. Unlike Zapier's … Read the full Make review →
n8n is an open-source workflow automation platform that can be self-hosted — combining visual workflow building with the ability to write cu… Read the full n8n review →
• More powerful than Zapier — especially for visual workflow builder workflows where Make consistently outperforms manual approaches
• Practical free tier that lets you validate the tool before committing to paid plans
• Highly customizable and flexible, allowing users to create complex automations tailored to their specific needs
• Cost-effective for high-volume automations, with a pricing model based on operations rather than tasks
• Steeper learning curve — worth evaluating before committing if this is central to your use case
• UI can be complex — worth evaluating before committing if this is central to your use case
• Free self-hosting option provides cost savings and control over infrastructure, especially for large-scale automation tasks.
• Highly customizable and scalable, making it suitable for complex automation tasks and large-scale deployments.
• Supports 400+ integrations, providing extensive connectivity options and enabling seamless interactions between different apps and services.
• AI Agent nodes enable advanced automation capabilities, such as browsing the web, executing code, and querying databases.
• Self-hosting requires technical expertise, which can be a barrier for non-technical users or those without extensive IT resources.
• Cloud plan is pricier than some alternative automation tools, such as Zapier, which may be a concern for budget-conscious users.