Make vs n8n
An independent, review-free comparison compiled by the SaaSTracker editorial team. Both products are profiled in full, and neither can pay for placement here.
The short answer
Both sides assessedMake compared with n8n
The two power builders. Make gives you a visual scenario canvas with the category's cheapest entry pricing, but meters every operation, so long waterfalls still accumulate cost per step. n8n meters the run, not the steps, adds real code nodes and self-hosting, and has pulled decisively ahead on AI agent tooling. Make suits visually-minded builders who want power without code; n8n suits builders who will eventually want the code, and whose workflows are long enough for per-execution pricing to pay.
n8n compared with Make
The two power builders. Make gives you a visual scenario canvas with the category's cheapest entry pricing, but meters every operation, so long waterfalls still accumulate cost per step. n8n meters the run, not the steps, adds real code nodes and self-hosting, and has pulled decisively ahead on AI agent tooling. Make suits visually-minded builders who want power without code; n8n suits builders who will eventually want the code, and whose workflows are long enough for per-execution pricing to pay.
Choose Make if
Visually-minded builders and cost-conscious teams who need real workflow logic, branching, iteration, error handling, without writing code, especially agencies and SMBs whose per-month automation budget is closer to $20 than $200.
Choose n8n if
Technical or semi-technical teams building long, multi-step automations, enrichment waterfalls, AI agents, and internal integrations, who want per-execution economics in the cloud or full data control self-hosted, and who are comfortable reading JSON when something breaks.
Side by side
13 attributes| Attribute | Make | n8n |
|---|---|---|
| Category | GTM Engineering | GTM Engineering |
| Starting price | $9/mo (Core, 10,000 operations, annual billing) (free plan available) | About $24/mo (Cloud Starter, 2,500 executions; roughly $20 on annual billing) (free plan available) |
| Pricing model | Freemium with operations-based metering: every module execution consumes one operation from a monthly allowance. Tiers scale the allowance, minimum scheduling interval, and team features; operations can be topped up, and unused allowance policies vary by tier. Prices quoted for annual billing; monthly billing runs higher. | Two paths. Cloud: subscription tiers metered by workflow executions per month (a run is one execution regardless of step count), with unlimited workflows and steps on every tier. Self-hosted: the Community edition is free under the fair-code Sustainable Use License, with paid Business and Enterprise self-hosted tiers adding collaboration, SSO, environments, and support. Prices are quoted in euros; dollar figures shift slightly with exchange rates. |
| Free plan | 1,000 operations/month, two active scenarios, 15-minute minimum interval | Self-hosted Community edition is free and unmetered on your own infrastructure |
| Free trial | Free plan serves as the trial; paid features preview via plan upgrades | Cloud trial, no card required |
| Best for | Visually-minded builders and cost-conscious teams who need real workflow logic, branching, iteration, error handling, without writing code, especially agencies and SMBs whose per-month automation budget is closer to $20 than $200. | Technical or semi-technical teams building long, multi-step automations, enrichment waterfalls, AI agents, and internal integrations, who want per-execution economics in the cloud or full data control self-hosted, and who are comfortable reading JSON when something breaks. |
| Setup time | Under an hour to a first live scenario for anyone who has used any automation tool; the template library shortcuts common patterns. Complex scenarios with error handling are a day of iterative building, made faster by per-module test runs. | Cloud: minutes to sign up, and a first webhook-to-Slack workflow the same hour. Self-hosted: a Docker one-liner for a test instance; a hardened production deployment with backups and HTTPS is a half-day for someone who has run containers before. |
| Learning curve | Moderate: the canvas and mapping panel are intuitive within hours, while iterators, aggregators, and error-handler semantics reward a deliberate afternoon with the docs. Sits clearly between Zapier's near-zero curve and n8n's technical one. | Steeper than task-based tools: expect a few days to internalize items, expressions, and node data mapping, typically via imported templates. Engineers acclimate almost immediately; operators without API experience need the templates and patience. |
| Platforms | Web app, REST API, Developer platform (custom apps) | Web app (cloud), Self-hosted (Docker, npm), Embedded (commercial license), REST API |
| Compliance | SOC 2, GDPR, ISO 27001 | SOC 2, GDPR |
| Founded | 2016 | 2019 |
| Headquarters | Prague, Czech Republic | Berlin, Germany |
| Ownership | Subsidiary of Celonis (acquired 2020) | Venture-backed, founder-led |
Strengths and limitations
Make
Strengths
- The best power-per-dollar in mainstream automation: full logic primitives on a $9 tier, and a genuinely usable free plan.
- The visual canvas makes complex flows legible; routers, iterators, aggregators, and error handlers are native drag-and-drop, not workarounds.
- Operations pricing is transparent while you build: the editor shows what each run costs, making optimization a visible activity.
- Deep per-app modules: integrations typically expose many actions and searches, not token connectors.
Limitations
- Per-operation metering still bills every step, so Make loses the long-pipeline economics contest to n8n's per-execution model at scale.
- The ~2,000-app catalog covers the mainstream but concedes the long tail; niche-tool buyers routinely end up on Zapier anyway.
- The canvas intimidates true beginners relative to Zapier's guided linear editor, and error-handler semantics take study to use well.
- No self-hosted option; EU region processing exists but the platform is cloud-only.
n8n
Strengths
- Per-execution pricing inverts the category's cost model; long, complex workflows, exactly the kind GTM engineering produces, are where it is cheapest relative to rivals.
- Free self-hosted Community edition provides a permanent exit ramp and full data sovereignty, a structural negotiating position no closed rival offers.
- Code nodes and the HTTP Request node remove the capability ceiling; if an API exists, n8n can drive it without leaving the canvas.
- LangChain-based agent nodes made it one of the fastest paths from 'AI idea' to 'AI in production', with approvals, retries, and logging around the model.
Limitations
- The learning curve is real: items, expressions, and JSON structure confront you in week one, and non-technical users often stall where Zapier would have carried them.
- The integration catalog (400+) is an order of magnitude smaller than Zapier's; long-tail SaaS tools frequently mean building against the raw API via the HTTP node.
- Fair-code is not open source by OSI definition, which complicates some corporate policies and community expectations, and the license debate resurfaces periodically.
- Cloud Starter's 2,500 executions can pinch for high-frequency polling triggers; trigger design (webhooks over polling) becomes a cost skill.
Pricing compared
Make
Freemium with operations-based metering: every module execution consumes one operation from a monthly allowance. Tiers scale the allowance, minimum scheduling interval, and team features; operations can be topped up, and unused allowance policies vary by tier. Prices quoted for annual billing; monthly billing runs higher.
- Free$0
- CoreFrom $9
- ProFrom $16
- TeamsFrom $29
- EnterpriseCustom
Make's claim to Best Value is straightforward arithmetic plus real capability: routers, iterators, and error handlers, the features that gate 'serious' automation elsewhere, are included from the free tier up, and the per-operation price at entry undercuts every comparable rival. For most SMB workloads (moderate volume, moderately complex scenarios) it delivers 90% of what either neighbor offers at clearly the lowest bill. The value case weakens at the two edges: long-tail app coverage (Zapier's game) and very long high-volume pipelines, where per-execution n8n beats any per-step meter, Make's included.
n8n
Two paths. Cloud: subscription tiers metered by workflow executions per month (a run is one execution regardless of step count), with unlimited workflows and steps on every tier. Self-hosted: the Community edition is free under the fair-code Sustainable Use License, with paid Business and Enterprise self-hosted tiers adding collaboration, SSO, environments, and support. Prices are quoted in euros; dollar figures shift slightly with exchange rates.
- Community (self-hosted)Free
- Starter (Cloud)~€20 to €24
- Pro (Cloud)~€50 to €60
- Business / EnterpriseCustom
For long workflows, nothing in the category touches n8n's economics: the per-execution meter makes a 40-step enrichment waterfall cost the same as a 2-step alert, and the same pipeline on task or operation pricing can cost ten to fifty times more at identical volume. Against that, the true cost is skill: n8n assumes you can read JSON, debug an HTTP call, and occasionally write a line of code. Teams with that skill get Zapier-class capability at a fraction of the spend, plus a free self-hosted exit ramp that caps vendor risk permanently. Teams without it will burn the savings in time.
Editorial verdict on each
Make
Best ValueMake is the category's honest bargain: the logic primitives that make automation genuinely programmatic, branching, iteration, aggregation, error handling, delivered visually, included at every tier, and priced beneath everyone. For the typical SMB workload it does 90% of what either neighbor does at clearly the lowest bill, with an EU-residency option nobody else offers self-serve. Its concessions are the catalog's long tail (Zapier's) and long-pipeline unit economics plus AI-agent depth (n8n's), which mark the two exits power users eventually take. Between those edges sits most of the market, and for it, Make is the value pick without much argument.
Read the full Make profilen8n
Momentumn8n is what the automation category looks like when it is priced and licensed in the buyer's favor: pay per run instead of per step, read the source, and leave for your own server whenever you like. For the GTM engineer building long enrichment waterfalls and AI-agent workflows, those three facts compound into the category's best deal, and the LangChain-native agent tooling has made it the default engine of the DIY stack. The honest cost is skill: it asks more of you in week one than Zapier ever will, and its integration catalog still leans on the HTTP node for the long tail. Teams with a technical operator should default here; teams without one should pay the Zapier tax knowingly.
Read the full n8n profileMake profile last reviewed 2026-08-22; n8n last reviewed 2026-08-22. Pricing is compiled from public sources and can change without notice. See our methodology.