Make vs n8n: Complete Comparison for 2025 (With Real Cost Analysis)

Make (formerly Integromat) and n8n are the two automation platforms that consistently beat Zapier on value and capability. Both are visual workflow builders. Both connect to hundreds of apps. But they are designed for fundamentally different users — and choosing the wrong one creates a ceiling you will eventually hit.

We have built automation systems on both platforms for over 150 clients. This comparison is based on that operational experience.

---

The Short Answer

• Make is better for teams that prioritise ease of use, visual clarity, and access to 1,500+ pre-built app integrations without any infrastructure management
• n8n is better for technical teams, high-volume automation (over 10,000 operations/month), AI-powered workflows, and businesses that need self-hosted data sovereignty
• Zapier is the right choice only if your team is completely non-technical and needs simple two-step automations with minimal setup

For most growing businesses with a technical person on staff, n8n self-hosted wins on long-term ROI. For teams without any technical capability who want to automate quickly without infrastructure, Make is the right call.

---

Platform Overview

Make (formerly Integromat)

Make launched in 2012 as Integromat and rebranded in 2022. It pioneered the visual, data-flow approach to automation — showing data moving through modules in real time, which makes debugging intuitive.

Key characteristics:

• Cloud-only (no self-hosting)
• Priced per "operation" (each module run counts as one operation)
• 1,500+ native app integrations
• Visual data flow interface — see data moving through your scenario in real time
• Strong data transformation tools built in
• No code required for most scenarios

Who uses Make: Marketing teams, e-commerce operations, agencies that build automations for clients, non-technical business owners who want more power than Zapier.

n8n

n8n launched in 2019 as an open-source project and has grown rapidly to become the automation choice for technical teams and developers. It is the only major automation platform that can be fully self-hosted.

Key characteristics:

• Open source — free to self-host
• Cloud version available ($20–$50/month)
• 400+ native integrations
• Code node (JavaScript and Python) for custom logic
• Native AI/LLM nodes (OpenAI, Anthropic, LangChain)
• Slightly steeper learning curve but more powerful

Who uses n8n: Developers, DevOps teams, agencies building complex automations, businesses with compliance or data sovereignty requirements.

---

Pricing: The Full Picture

This is the most important comparison for most businesses, and it is not straightforward.

Make Pricing (2025)

| Plan | Monthly Price | Operations/Month | Scenarios | |---|---|---|---| | Free | $0 | 1,000 | 2 | | Core | $9 | 10,000 | Active | | Pro | $16 | 10,000 | Advanced features | | Teams | $29 | 10,000 | 3 users | | Enterprise | Custom | Custom | Custom |

The critical detail: Operations are counted per module execution, not per scenario run. A scenario with 5 modules that runs 1,000 times uses 5,000 operations. Complex scenarios with 20+ modules consume operations quickly.

Make pricing at scale:

| Monthly Scenarios | Avg Modules | Operations Used | Make Cost | |---|---|---|---| | 1,000 | 5 | 5,000 | $9/month | | 10,000 | 5 | 50,000 | ~$59/month | | 50,000 | 8 | 400,000 | ~$459/month | | 100,000 | 8 | 800,000 | ~$799/month |

n8n Pricing (2025)

Self-hosted (most cost-effective):

| Server Spec | Provider | Monthly Cost | Executions/Month | |---|---|---|---| | 1 vCPU, 1GB RAM | Hetzner CX11 | €3.79 | Unlimited | | 1 vCPU, 2GB RAM | DigitalOcean | $6 | Unlimited | | 2 vCPU, 4GB RAM | Hetzner CX21 | €6.49 | Unlimited |

n8n Cloud:

| Plan | Monthly Price | Executions/Month | |---|---|---| | Starter | $20 | 2,500 | | Pro | $50 | 10,000 | | Enterprise | Custom | Custom |

n8n at scale (self-hosted):

| Monthly Executions | Server Cost | n8n Total Cost | |---|---|---| | 10,000 | $6 | $6/month | | 100,000 | $6 | $6/month | | 1,000,000 | $20 (larger server) | $20/month |

The cost inflection point: At approximately 15,000–20,000 operations per month, n8n self-hosted becomes significantly cheaper than Make. At 100,000+ operations, n8n is 50–100x cheaper.

---

Feature Comparison

Interface and Ease of Use

| Aspect | Make | n8n | |---|---|---| | Learning curve | Low | Moderate | | Visual data flow | Excellent — see data move in real time | Good — node-based | | Debugging | Excellent — error highlighted in flow | Good — execution history | | Template library | 1,000+ scenario templates | 600+ workflow templates | | Mobile interface | Basic | Basic | | Onboarding | Guided setup with hints | Less hand-holding |

Make's interface is genuinely more polished and intuitive. The real-time data flow visualisation makes it immediately obvious where a scenario breaks and what data looks like at each step. For beginners, this is valuable.

n8n's interface is functional but less visually refined. The node-based layout is logical but requires more mental modelling of data flow. Once you know the platform, it is fast to work in — but the initial learning curve is steeper.

Verdict: Make wins on ease of use and interface polish.

Integration Depth

| Aspect | Make | n8n | |---|---|---| | Total native integrations | 1,500+ | 400+ | | Major apps (Google, Slack, etc.) | Yes | Yes | | Salesforce, HubSpot, SAP | Yes | Limited native — use HTTP Request | | API (HTTP Request) | Yes | Yes | | Webhook support | Yes | Yes | | Custom app integrations | Via HTTP modules | Via HTTP Request + custom nodes |

Make has a significant lead in pre-built integrations. For obscure or niche apps, Make likely has a native integration while n8n requires an HTTP Request node.

However: any app with a REST API can be connected to n8n via HTTP Request. The integration gap is about convenience, not capability. Once you know how to use the HTTP Request node in n8n, you can connect to any API.

Verdict: Make wins on raw integration count. For apps with public APIs, n8n is fully capable.

Code and Custom Logic

| Feature | Make | n8n | |---|---|---| | Custom JavaScript | Limited (transform functions) | Full Code node — any JS | | Python support | No | Yes (Code node) | | Custom functions | Basic expressions | Full programming capability | | File system access | No | Yes (self-hosted) | | Custom node creation | No | Yes | | LLM/AI integration | Basic (HTTP module) | Native OpenAI, Anthropic, LangChain nodes |

n8n's Code node is a complete JavaScript (or Python) execution environment. You can write any logic, import npm modules (in self-hosted), process files, and build complex data transformations. Make's code capabilities are limited to transformation expressions.

For AI-powered workflows, n8n is the clear winner. n8n includes native nodes for:

• OpenAI (GPT-4o, embeddings, vision)
• Anthropic Claude
• LangChain (agents, chains, RAG)
• Pinecone, Qdrant (vector databases)
• HuggingFace

Building AI agent workflows in n8n takes hours. The equivalent in Make requires complex HTTP module chains.

Verdict: n8n wins decisively for code, custom logic, and AI integration.

Error Handling and Reliability

| Feature | Make | n8n | |---|---|---| | Error handling modules | Yes — built into flow | Yes — Error Trigger workflow | | Retry logic | Yes | Yes | | Partial run recovery | Yes — resume from error point | Limited | | Error notifications | Built-in | Via notification node | | Execution history | 30 days | Configurable | | Monitoring dashboard | Yes | Basic |

Make's error handling is arguably more elegant — you can add error handling directly within a scenario's flow, and Make can resume a partial run from the point of failure (useful for long-running scenarios that process many items).

n8n's error handling requires a separate Error Trigger workflow but is more flexible for complex escalation logic.

Verdict: Make wins on error recovery elegance. n8n wins on error workflow flexibility.

Self-Hosting and Data Sovereignty

| Feature | Make | n8n | |---|---|---| | Self-hosted option | No | Yes (open source) | | Data stays on your server | No | Yes (self-hosted) | | GDPR compliance | Via Make's data agreements | Full control (self-hosted) | | HIPAA compliance | Make's BAA required | Achievable self-hosted | | Vendor lock-in | Yes | Minimal (export workflows as JSON) |

For businesses in healthcare, legal, finance, or any regulated industry where customer data cannot leave your infrastructure, n8n self-hosted is the only serious option. Make processes all data on Make's servers.

Verdict: n8n wins completely on data sovereignty.

---

Real-World Performance: Observations from 150+ Clients

Where Make consistently outperforms

• Marketing automation for non-technical teams: Make's visual interface makes it genuinely accessible to marketing managers who want to build their own automations
• Rapid prototyping: Building a new integration scenario in Make is 40–60% faster than n8n for straightforward workflows
• E-commerce operations: Make's native Shopify, WooCommerce, and Stripe integrations are deeply built and reliable
• Client-facing automation builds: When we build automations for clients who will manage them independently, Make is easier to hand off

Where n8n consistently outperforms

• High-volume processing: A client running 200,000 monthly operations saved $580/month switching from Make to n8n self-hosted
• AI agent workflows: n8n's native LangChain integration makes complex AI workflows (RAG, multi-step agents, tool-calling) dramatically simpler
• Complex data transformation: The Code node handles data processing that would require 10+ Make modules in a single node
• Compliance-sensitive workflows: Healthcare and legal clients stay on n8n self-hosted where data never leaves their infrastructure

---

10 Workflows and Which Platform Handles Them Better

| Workflow | Better Platform | Reason | |---|---|---| | Social media scheduling | Make | Better social media native integrations | | AI customer support routing | n8n | Native LLM nodes | | Shopify order to fulfillment | Make | Deep Shopify integration | | CRM lead enrichment with code | n8n | Code node for complex logic | | High-volume invoice processing | n8n | No per-operation cost | | Simple email-to-Slack notification | Make | Faster to build | | HIPAA-compliant patient workflows | n8n (self-hosted) | Data sovereignty | | Multi-step AI content generation | n8n | LangChain + OpenAI native | | WooCommerce abandonment sequence | Make | Native WooCommerce integration | | Custom webhook processing with JS | n8n | Full code execution |

---

Migration: Switching Between Platforms

Both platforms export workflows as JSON. Direct migration between Make and n8n is not possible (different JSON schema), but migration is manageable:

Make to n8n:

1. Export Make scenarios as JSON (documentation reference)
2. Recreate the logic in n8n (typically 70% faster the second time due to familiarity)
3. Map Make modules to n8n nodes — most have direct equivalents
4. Test thoroughly, run both platforms in parallel for 1 week
5. Deactivate Make scenarios and cancel subscription

n8n to Make: Same process in reverse. Less common — most migrations go from Make to n8n when businesses outgrow Make's pricing.

---

The Decision Framework

Answer these questions to find your answer:

1. Does your team have a technical person who can set up a VPS?

• Yes → n8n self-hosted is worth it
• No → Make or n8n Cloud

2. How many operations do you run per month?

• Under 15,000 → Make Core or Pro is cost-competitive
• 15,000–100,000 → n8n self-hosted saves significant money
• 100,000+ → n8n self-hosted is the clear choice

3. Do you need AI-powered workflows (LLM integration, agents, RAG)?

• Yes → n8n (significantly better native AI support)
• No → either platform works

4. Is data sovereignty required (healthcare, legal, finance)?

• Yes → n8n self-hosted only
• No → either platform works

5. Does your team need to build automations independently without developer help?

• Yes → Make (better interface for non-technical users)
• No → either platform works

---

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I use both Make and n8n simultaneously? Yes, and some businesses do. A common pattern: non-technical team members build simple integrations in Make, while developers build complex or AI-powered workflows in n8n. The platforms do not conflict.

How long does it take to learn n8n coming from Make? Most Make users become productive in n8n within 2–5 hours of hands-on practice. The mental model is similar (nodes/modules, triggers, data transformation). The main adjustment is the Code node — if you are comfortable with basic JavaScript, it unlocks n8n's full power.

Is Make being discontinued? No. Make rebranded from Integromat in 2022 and continues to grow. The platform is well-funded and actively developed.

Does n8n work with all the same apps as Make? n8n has 400+ native integrations. For apps not natively supported, the HTTP Request node connects to any REST API. Practically speaking, if an app you need is not natively in n8n, check its API documentation — the integration takes 15–30 minutes via HTTP Request.

What happens to my n8n workflows if I stop paying for the cloud and switch to self-hosted? You can export all workflows as JSON from n8n Cloud and import them to your self-hosted instance. All credentials need to be re-entered, but the workflow logic migrates perfectly.