The Verdict
Our pick: Make. Make wins on pricing, ease of use, and its sheer number of integrations, making it the more accessible and faster choice for most users and businesses. Its visual, drag-and-drop interface is intuitive, allowing non-technical teams to build powerful automations quickly.
However, n8n is the clear winner for developers or technical teams who need deep customization, the ability to self-host for data control and cost savings at scale, and the power to write custom code directly within workflows. If you value control and extensibility over out-of-the-box simplicity, n8n is the superior choice.
Pricing Comparison
n8n
For 2,500 executions (billed annually)
n8n's pricing is based on workflow executions. One workflow run counts as a single execution, no matter how many steps it contains. This can be very cost-effective for complex, multi-step processes. However, its cloud plans start at a higher price point, and the free tier is limited to self-hosting, which requires technical setup and incurs server costs.
Make More Affordable
For 10,000 operations (billed annually)
Make's pricing is based on operations, where every action or step in a workflow consumes at least one credit. This model can become costly for very complex workflows, but its starting prices are lower and it offers a capable free-forever cloud plan with 1,000 operations per month. For many users, this makes it the more accessible and affordable entry point.
| Plan (Annual Billing) | n8n Cloud | Make Cloud |
|---|---|---|
| Free Tier | Self-hosted only | $0/mo (1,000 ops/mo, 2 active scenarios) |
| Starter / Core | $20/mo (2,500 executions) | $9/mo (10,000 operations) |
| Pro | $50/mo (10,000 executions) | $16/mo (10,000+ operations) |
| Teams / Business | $800/mo (40,000 executions) | $29/mo (10,000+ operations) |
| Billing Metric | Per Workflow Execution | Per Operation (Step) |
Feature Comparison
| Feature | n8n | Make |
|---|---|---|
| Native Integrations | ~400 official, 1,500+ with community nodes | 3,000+ |
| Visual Builder | Node-based canvas, functional but dense | Drag-and-drop canvas, highly polished and intuitive |
| Custom Code | Yes (JavaScript & Python nodes) | Yes (JavaScript via Code app on paid plans) |
| AI Capabilities | Strong native support, LangChain, can self-host models | AI agents, AI toolkit, and over 350 AI app connections |
| Error Handling | Requires manual configuration of error workflows | Intuitive visual error routes, retry, and ignore directives |
| Self-Hosting | Yes, open-source available | No |
| Pre-built Templates | Yes | Yes, extensive library |
Make wins the features and integrations category due to its vast library of over 3,000 pre-built app integrations, which is significantly larger than n8n's catalog. This makes it much easier for non-technical users to connect their tools and start automating without needing to configure APIs manually. Make's visual builder is also more polished and its error-handling is more intuitive for beginners.
However, n8n's feature set is built for technical depth and control. Its standout feature is the ability to run custom JavaScript and Python code within any workflow, offering nearly limitless flexibility. While Make has some custom code capabilities, n8n's implementation is more powerful. n8n also has stronger, more flexible native support for advanced AI use cases, including the ability to use LangChain or even self-hosted language models.
Ease of Use
n8n
- Steeper learning curve: The interface is powerful but can feel dense and assumes some technical knowledge.
- Developer-oriented: Built for users comfortable with concepts like APIs, JSON, and expressions.
- Flexible but complex: Offers deep control over logic and data, which adds complexity.
- Setup required: The most accessible free version requires self-hosting and DevOps knowledge.
Make Easier to Use
- Intuitive visual editor: A clean, drag-and-drop canvas that's easy for visual thinkers to grasp.
- No-code friendly: Designed for business users, marketers, and ops teams to build without code.
- Guided experience: Features like pre-built templates and polished app modules speed up workflow creation.
- Plug-and-play: As a fully managed cloud platform, it requires no setup to get started.
Make is the clear winner in ease of use. Its platform is designed from the ground up for non-technical users, with a highly polished and intuitive visual interface that makes workflow automation accessible to a broader audience. For teams in marketing, operations, or small businesses, Make provides a much faster path from idea to functioning automation.
n8n, while also a visual tool, is developer-first. Its interface is more functional than elegant, and it exposes a level of technical detail that can be overwhelming for beginners. The true power of n8n is unlocked when you're comfortable with concepts like writing custom code or managing your own hosting environment, giving it a steeper learning curve.
Reliability & Ecosystem
| Category | n8n | Make |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting Options | Cloud & Self-Hosted (Open-source) | Cloud-only |
| Uptime Control | User-controlled (self-hosted); provider-managed (cloud) | Provider-managed |
| Support Channels | Community forum for all; dedicated email/SLA for Enterprise | Help center for all; ticketed support for paid plans |
| Scalability | High (horizontal scaling with queue mode on self-hosted) | High (handled by Make's infrastructure) |
| Community | Large, active developer community (45,000+ members) | Large user community and partner network |
Reliability: n8n wins. While Make's cloud platform is reliable, n8n's ability to be self-hosted gives users ultimate control over their automation infrastructure. For business-critical workflows, technical teams can implement high-availability setups, control their own data, manage updates, and ensure uptime according to their specific needs. This level of ownership is impossible with a closed-source, cloud-only platform like Make, where you are dependent on the vendor's infrastructure and uptime.
Ecosystem: Tie. This category is a draw because each platform excels in a different area. Make's ecosystem is defined by its massive library of 3,000+ pre-built app integrations and templates, which is ideal for business users who need to connect a wide array of SaaS tools quickly. n8n's ecosystem is centered around its vibrant open-source and developer community. With over 45,000 members, this community contributes new nodes, shares solutions, and provides a deep well of technical support, making the platform highly extensible for those willing to engage with it.
Who Should Pick What
Choose n8n if...
- You are a developer or have a technical team.
- You need to write custom JavaScript or Python code in your workflows.
- Self-hosting is a priority for data privacy, cost control, or reliability.
- Your workflows are extremely complex and you need granular control.
Choose Make if...
- You or your team are non-technical (e.g., marketing, operations).
- You need to connect to a wide variety of SaaS applications quickly.
- You prioritize ease of use and a polished visual interface.
- You want a generous free plan and affordable starting prices for a cloud-hosted tool.
Also consider: Zapier. If your top priority is an even larger number of integrations (over 7,000) and the absolute simplest user experience for basic, linear automations, Zapier is the industry leader and a strong alternative to both n8n and Make.
Our recommendation: start with Make
Make's combination of a powerful visual builder, extensive integrations, and an accessible free tier makes it the best starting point for the majority of users.
Both platforms offer ways to get started for free—Make with its cloud plan and n8n via self-hosting.