Comparison
n8n vs Make vs Zapier: which workflow automation platform should an SME pick?
A practical 2026 comparison of n8n, Make and Zapier for SMEs: billing units, hosting, complexity, governance and the team each platform fits best.
In short
Choose Zapier for a few simple app-to-app automations owned by a non-technical user. Choose Make for visual, multi-branch scenarios a business team will maintain. Choose n8n when workflows are operational infrastructure and you need complex logic, a private deployment or engineering control. Compare your actual workflow at expected monthly volume: n8n Cloud counts complete workflow executions, Make uses credits for module actions, and Zapier counts successful actions while some built-in tools are free. Morsof usually chooses n8n for durable production systems, not for every use case.
At a glance
Six dimensions that decide the answer
Pick on pricing model, hosting, complexity ceiling and team profile, not on logos.
| Dimension | n8n | Make (formerly Integromat) | Zapier |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | Per execution: one complete workflow run, with unlimited steps. Cloud Starter lists 2,500 executions at EUR 20/month billed annually. It can also run on infrastructure you own, where infrastructure, operations and licence constraints still apply. Figures reviewed 7 August 2026 and subject to change by the vendor. | Per credit (renamed from 'operations' in late 2025): a standard module call is 1 credit, AI and code modules cost more. Free tier 1,000/mo. Figures reviewed 7 August 2026 and subject to change by the vendor. | Per task: successful action steps consume tasks, but current built-in tools such as Filter, Formatter and Paths are listed at zero tasks. Free includes 100 tasks/month and two-step Zaps. Figures reviewed 7 August 2026 and subject to change by the vendor. |
| Hosting | Cloud OR deployed on infrastructure you own | Cloud only | Cloud only |
| Visual editor | Node-based canvas, branching, loops, sub-workflows | Scenario canvas, strong on branching and iterators | Linear by default, multi-step paths added later |
| Code escape hatch | Full JavaScript code node, custom functions, env vars, version-controlled | iML expression language, modest scripting | Code by Zapier (JS or Python, sandboxed, limited) |
| Production patterns | Workflow versioning, error workflows, retries, monitoring, queueing | Error handlers, retries, scenario history | Basic retries, task history, no proper versioning |
| Best for | Production-grade workflows, complex logic, data sovereignty, ownership | Visual non-tech glue with branching and iterators | Simple connectors for non-tech users, low workflow volume |
Pricing model
- n8n
- Per execution: one complete workflow run, with unlimited steps. Cloud Starter lists 2,500 executions at EUR 20/month billed annually. It can also run on infrastructure you own, where infrastructure, operations and licence constraints still apply. Figures reviewed 7 August 2026 and subject to change by the vendor.
- Make (formerly Integromat)
- Per credit (renamed from 'operations' in late 2025): a standard module call is 1 credit, AI and code modules cost more. Free tier 1,000/mo. Figures reviewed 7 August 2026 and subject to change by the vendor.
- Zapier
- Per task: successful action steps consume tasks, but current built-in tools such as Filter, Formatter and Paths are listed at zero tasks. Free includes 100 tasks/month and two-step Zaps. Figures reviewed 7 August 2026 and subject to change by the vendor.
Hosting
- n8n
- Cloud OR deployed on infrastructure you own
- Make (formerly Integromat)
- Cloud only
- Zapier
- Cloud only
Visual editor
- n8n
- Node-based canvas, branching, loops, sub-workflows
- Make (formerly Integromat)
- Scenario canvas, strong on branching and iterators
- Zapier
- Linear by default, multi-step paths added later
Code escape hatch
- n8n
- Full JavaScript code node, custom functions, env vars, version-controlled
- Make (formerly Integromat)
- iML expression language, modest scripting
- Zapier
- Code by Zapier (JS or Python, sandboxed, limited)
Production patterns
- n8n
- Workflow versioning, error workflows, retries, monitoring, queueing
- Make (formerly Integromat)
- Error handlers, retries, scenario history
- Zapier
- Basic retries, task history, no proper versioning
Best for
- n8n
- Production-grade workflows, complex logic, data sovereignty, ownership
- Make (formerly Integromat)
- Visual non-tech glue with branching and iterators
- Zapier
- Simple connectors for non-tech users, low workflow volume
How to estimate cost. A workflow run hourly is about 720 runs per month. On n8n Cloud, that is normally about 720 executions regardless of step count. On Make, count each module action and any higher-cost feature credits. On Zapier, count successful action steps, then exclude built-in tools that the current rate card prices at zero tasks. Use this workflow-level estimate rather than comparing headline plan prices; product rules and rates can change.
When to pick each
Three honest recommendations
Each platform is the right answer for someone. Not the same someone.
Zapier
Simplest, fastest start
Best when you have one to five simple connectors, no engineering team, and you are willing to pay per task. Don't expect to scale complex logic or high volume here. Past a few thousand tasks a month, the bill stops making sense.
Make
Visual scenarios with branching
Best for non-tech users who outgrew Zapier but don't need code escape hatches or a private deployment. Strong at multi-branch scenarios, iterators, data transformation. Still cloud-only and per-operation, so very high-volume workflows can get expensive.
n8n
Production-grade, ownership, scale
Best when automation is core to operations, when workflow volume makes per-task pricing brutal, when a private deployment matters (data, compliance, regulated industries), when you need complex transformations, versioning, and proper error workflows. Steeper to set up well, lower ongoing cost.
Our take
Why we default to n8n at Morsof
We build production-grade automation for SMEs, which means our clients are not running five connectors, they're running fifty workflows that touch ERP, CRM, AI, document storage and customer-facing channels. At that volume, per-task pricing on Zapier becomes a tax on growth, and per-operation pricing on Make adds up too. Running n8n on dedicated infrastructure removes that ceiling. The trade-off is that n8n needs proper engineering, monitoring and versioning to run well in production, which is exactly the work we do. For a non-tech founder running visual workflows on the side, Make is a fair recommendation. For someone wiring two SaaS apps together once, Zapier is fine.
Pricing sources and review date
Pricing and usage rules were checked against vendor documentation on 7 August 2026. Verify them again before purchasing; plans and counting rules change.
Frequently asked questions
What clients ask before they pick a platform.
Which one is cheapest?
There is no universal cheapest option. As reviewed 7 August 2026, Zapier Free includes 100 tasks per month, Make Free includes 1,000 credits, and n8n Cloud Starter lists 2,500 workflow executions at EUR 20 per month billed annually. Running n8n on your own infrastructure removes a Cloud execution plan but adds infrastructure and operational cost. Model one representative workflow at today's volume and at your expected volume in 12 months. Every figure here was reviewed on 7 August 2026 and each vendor can change its plans at any time, so check the current rate card before you decide.
Can I migrate from Zapier or Make to n8n later?
Yes, and many clients do. The trigger is usually pricing pain or a feature ceiling, not a technical problem. There's no automatic converter, you rebuild each workflow in n8n. The good news: workflows that were complicated to express in Zapier or Make are often simpler in n8n. We migrate clients in 1 to 3 weeks depending on workflow count.
Is Make easier than n8n for non-technical users?
Yes, Make has the gentler learning curve for non-technical users. The visual scenario builder is more guided. n8n is more powerful but expects more from the user. If your team will own automation maintenance and no one is technical, Make is a fair choice. If you'll have engineering involvement (in-house or agency), n8n's ceiling is much higher.
Can Zapier or Make run on our own infrastructure?
No, both are cloud-only. Only n8n can be deployed on infrastructure you control. This matters if you have data residency requirements, regulated industries (finance, healthcare, public sector), or want to keep credentials and customer data on your own infrastructure.
What's the difference between 'operations' (Make) and 'tasks' (Zapier)?
They are different billing units. Make generally consumes credits when modules perform actions, with some advanced features costing more. Zapier counts successful action steps as tasks, while its current rate card lists several built-in tools at zero tasks. n8n Cloud counts a complete workflow run as one execution regardless of its steps. For a fair comparison, map one real workflow against each vendor's current counting rules.
Where does AI workflow automation fit in?
All three platforms have AI nodes (OpenAI, Anthropic, etc.) and can call AI models inside workflows. n8n has the most flexible AI tooling (LangChain integration, agent nodes, custom code for embeddings and vector stores). Make and Zapier have AI nodes but less depth around RAG and multi-step agents. If AI is core to your automation, n8n is the safer bet.
Not sure which one fits your stack?
Book a 30-minute review. You leave with a 1-page recommendation for your specific workflow volume, team profile and data constraints, even if you don't engage us.