Zapier vs Make (Integromat) vs n8n: Which Wins in 2026?
Photo via Pexels
Zapier, Make, and n8n are the three most popular workflow automation platforms in 2026 — but they target different audiences and pricing models. Zapier is the SaaS leader for non-technical users. Make is the visual workflow tool for power users. n8n is the open-source self-hosted option for technical teams that want control.
At a Glance
| Feature | Zapier | Make | n8n |
|---|---|---|---|
| Best for | Non-technical users | Power users / SMBs | Developers / enterprises |
| Pricing model | Per-task | Per-operation | Self-hosted free / Cloud paid |
| Free plan | 100 tasks/mo | 1,000 ops/mo | Self-hosted unlimited |
| Starting paid | $19.99/mo | $9/mo | $20/mo (cloud) |
| Integrations | 6,000+ | 1,500+ | 400+ (custom HTTP) |
| Visual builder | Linear (step-by-step) | True visual canvas | Visual canvas |
| Code support | Limited | Yes (functions) | Excellent (JavaScript/Python) |
| Self-hostable | No | No | Yes |
| Multi-step complexity | Limited | Excellent | Excellent |
Pricing Math
For a typical SMB running 50,000 tasks/month:
| Platform | Monthly Cost |
|---|---|
| Zapier Professional | $109 (50K tasks) |
| Make Pro | $29 (10K ops) — $99 (40K ops) |
| n8n Cloud Pro | $50 (20K executions) |
| n8n Self-hosted | $5–$20 (server) |
Make and n8n are significantly cheaper at scale.
Strengths and Weaknesses
Zapier
Strengths:
- Easiest to learn (drag-and-drop linear builder)
- Largest integration library (6,000+)
- Best documentation
- Massive community
Weaknesses:
- Most expensive at scale (per-task pricing)
- Limited multi-step / branching logic
- No self-host option
- Slower than competitors on complex workflows
Make
Strengths:
- True visual canvas (better for complex flows)
- Cheaper than Zapier per operation
- Better data transformation features
- Supports loops, conditionals, error handlers
Weaknesses:
- Steeper learning curve than Zapier
- Smaller integration library (1,500 vs 6,000)
- UX more developer-feeling
n8n
Strengths:
- Free self-hosted (full features)
- Code execution in workflows (JavaScript/Python)
- Custom node development possible
- Data control (self-hosted)
Weaknesses:
- Self-hosting requires technical expertise
- Smaller integration library (400+)
- Steeper learning curve than Zapier or Make
- Less polished UX
Use Case Recommendations
| Use Case | Best Pick |
|---|---|
| Marketing team connecting CRM + email | Zapier |
| Operations team with 30+ complex workflows | Make |
| Tech startup wanting data control | n8n self-hosted |
| Agency building client automations | Zapier (familiarity) |
| Enterprise with security requirements | n8n self-hosted or Workato |
| High-volume automations (1M+/mo) | Make or n8n |
| Non-technical SMB owner | Zapier |
| Developer wanting code in workflows | n8n or Make |
Integration Coverage
| Tool | Approximate Integration Count |
|---|---|
| Zapier | 6,000+ |
| Make | 1,500+ |
| n8n | 400+ native + unlimited via HTTP |
Zapier wins on raw count. n8n’s HTTP node lets you connect to any API.
Multi-Step Workflow Examples
Simple (Zapier shines):
“When new email in Gmail with subject containing ‘invoice’, create row in Google Sheets.”
Complex (Make/n8n shine):
“When new lead in HubSpot, check if email domain matches known partner list. If yes, create deal in Salesforce with priority high. If no, send to junior rep queue. If lead score > 80, also notify Slack channel and add to nurture sequence.”
For the complex workflow:
- Zapier: Multiple Zaps + filters; expensive at scale
- Make: Single visual workflow with branches; cheap and clean
- n8n: Same visual workflow + code-based scoring logic; self-hosted = no per-execution cost
Migration Difficulty
| From → To | Difficulty |
|---|---|
| Zapier → Make | Medium (rebuild manually) |
| Make → Zapier | Medium |
| Zapier → n8n | Hard (different paradigms) |
| Make → n8n | Easier (similar visual model) |
Recommended Picks
💡 Best for non-technical users: Zapier — easiest, widest integrations.
💡 Best for complex workflows: Make — visual builder, cheaper at scale.
💡 Best free / self-hosted: n8n — open source, powerful.
When to Use Multiple Tools
Some teams use both Zapier and Make:
- Zapier for simple ad-hoc connectors
- Make for complex business-critical workflows
This is OK but adds management overhead.
FAQ — Zapier vs Make vs n8n
Q: Which is the cheapest? A: n8n self-hosted (free + server costs). Make is cheapest among hosted options.
Q: Which has the most integrations? A: Zapier with 6,000+ apps. Make has 1,500+. n8n has 400+ but supports any HTTP API.
Q: Which is easiest to learn? A: Zapier — drag-and-drop linear builder. Make and n8n require more setup.
Q: Can I migrate from Zapier to Make? A: Yes — workflows must be rebuilt manually. Plan 1–4 hours per workflow.
Q: Is n8n really free? A: Self-hosted version is open source and free. n8n Cloud has paid tiers.
Related Reading on Finerogold
- Best Business Automation Tools of 2026
- How to Automate Repetitive Business Tasks
- Best AI Automation Tools for Business
- Best No-Code Automation Platforms
- Workflow Automation: Beginner’s Guide
Bottom Line
For most SMBs starting out, Zapier is the right choice — easiest to learn, widest integration library. As you scale or build complex multi-step workflows, Make becomes more cost-effective. n8n is the best choice for technical teams wanting full control and free self-hosting.
This article is for informational purposes only.
By Finerogold Editorial · Updated May 9, 2026
- zapier
- make
- n8n
- comparison