Head-to-head comparison
Make vs n8n
Make is the faster route to a visual, hosted workflow. n8n is the more controllable route for technical teams. Both are cheaper than Zapier at volume; the decision is about hosting, code and who maintains the automation.
The short answer
Make is the better product for a team that wants to see the workflow and stay out of infrastructure. n8n is the better product for a team that treats automation as software. If nobody wants to patch a server, choose Make; if the workflow needs code or data residency, choose n8n.
Choose Make if…
You want a hosted canvas, a large template library and enough logic to model a business process without writing code.
- You want a hosted visual builder with no servers
- Routers, filters and error handlers cover your logic
- You prefer a mature template library
- You do not need custom code or self-hosting
Choose n8n if…
You want to own the runtime, write code where needed, and pay per workflow run rather than per module action.
- You need code nodes, HTTP calls or unlimited steps
- You want to self-host for data control or cost
- You have technical staff to maintain it
- Execution-based billing suits your workflow shape
What each one costs
| Plan | Make | n8n |
|---|---|---|
| Free option | $0 — 1,000 credits/month, 2 active scenarios | Community Edition — free self-hosted; 14-day Cloud trial |
| Entry paid plan | Core — $9/mo billed annually, 10,000 credits | Starter — €20/mo billed annually, 2,500 executions |
| Mid plan | Pro — $16/mo billed annually, 10,000 credits with advanced features | Pro — €50/mo billed annually, 10,000 executions |
| Top self-serve plan | Teams — $29/mo billed annually, 10,000 credits with team roles | Business — €667/mo billed annually, 40,000 executions, self-hosted only |
| Billing unit | Credits per module action | Executions per complete workflow run |
Where they actually differ
| Area | Make | n8n | What it means in practice |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Managed SaaS | Self-hosted or managed Cloud | n8n can run on your own infrastructure; Make cannot. |
| Builder | Visual canvas with routers and iterators | Node canvas with code, branching and loops | Both are visual; n8n exposes more engineering primitives. |
| Code | Custom code app on paid plans, billed by execution time | JavaScript and Python code nodes | n8n is more natural for developers. |
| Pricing unit | Credits per module action | Executions per workflow run | n8n is cheaper for long workflows; Make is predictable for small ones. |
| App coverage | 3,500+ apps | Native nodes plus HTTP and webhooks | Make is easier for non-technical app-to-app work. |
| Templates | Large public template library | Workflow templates plus community examples | Make's templates are more approachable for beginners. |
| Data control | Data processed by Make | Self-hosting keeps data on your infrastructure | n8n is the choice for regulated or internal data. |
| Maintenance | Vendor-managed | You manage self-hosted upgrades and backups | Make removes operational work; n8n adds control and responsibility. |
Which workflow fits you
Make and n8n are closer to each other than either is to Zapier. Both offer a visual canvas, both support branching, and both are materially cheaper than per-task pricing at volume. The split is architectural: Make is a hosted product you rent, while n8n is software you can run yourself.
That architectural difference drives everything else. Make's templates and guided setup make it faster for a marketer to ship a scenario. n8n's code nodes, HTTP requests and self-hosting make it faster for an engineer to integrate internal systems. The same workflow can often be built in both; the question is who will build it and who will fix it at 2am.
Pricing reinforces the split. Make charges per module action, so a large scenario can consume many credits per run. n8n charges per execution, so a large scenario costs the same as a small one. Teams with long workflows tend to prefer n8n; teams with many short workflows often find Make's credit bundles sufficient.
Self-hosting is not a footnote. It means patching n8n, backing up the database, managing credentials and monitoring uptime. If those tasks have no owner, the free Community Edition becomes an expensive liability. n8n Cloud removes that burden but narrows the price gap with Make.
Scenario winners
Make — Templates and a guided canvas get a workflow live quickly.
n8n — Run it inside your own network.
Make — A gentler canvas and more packaged templates.
n8n — Native JavaScript and Python nodes.
n8n — One execution per run regardless of step count.
Make — Fully managed, with support included.
If neither is the right fit
Frequently asked questions
Is Make or n8n cheaper?
It depends on the shape of your workflows. Make charges per module action, so long scenarios consume more credits. n8n charges per execution, so step count does not affect the price. Self-hosted n8n has no licence fee but adds infrastructure and maintenance costs.
Can Make self-host?
No. Make is a managed cloud platform. n8n offers both self-hosted Community Edition and managed n8n Cloud.
Which is easier for beginners?
Make. Its templates and visual canvas are designed for non-developers. n8n is approachable on Cloud but assumes more technical comfort, especially when self-hosting.
Which is better for developers?
n8n, because code nodes, HTTP requests, Git-based version control and self-hosting fit a software workflow more naturally.
Sources and how this page was checked
This page is based on published product information, plan limits and pricing read from the official pages below in November 2026. It is not a hands-on lab test, and we do not claim to have used every feature. Prices and limits change: confirm them on the vendor site before you buy.
How we compared
Both products were assessed on their published plans, feature pages and pricing as read in November 2026. Where a claim depends on plan tier, we say so. We did not run a scored hands-on benchmark, and we do not present vendor marketing as independent testing.
Read our editorial method →