n8n vs Zapier vs Make, which should you choose?
Zapier is the simplest and most expensive at scale. Make has stronger logic and is friendlier for branching workflows. n8n is open-source and self-hostable, the right choice when data residency or per-execution cost matters. Most agencies use all three depending on the constraint, and write code instead when reliability matters more than speed.
Zapier wins on time-to-first-zap. Click together a flow, ship it, move on. The price escalates aggressively past a few thousand tasks per month, and the logic primitives get awkward for anything branching. Right tool for prototypes, marketing automations, and small teams that value setup speed over running cost.
Make (formerly Integromat) sits in the middle. The visual scenario builder handles branching, error handling, and data transformation more elegantly than Zapier; pricing per operation is more forgiving at volume. The tradeoff is a slightly steeper learning curve and a smaller integration catalogue.
n8n is the open-source choice. Self-hosted on your own infrastructure means EU data residency without negotiation, predictable cost (server, not per-task), and the ability to drop into JavaScript when the visual builder runs out of road. The downside is operational overhead, you own the uptime, the upgrades, and the security.
When reliability matters more than build speed, anything customer-facing, anything tied to revenue, the right answer is often none of the above. A typed Node service with a queue and an audit log will outlast all three.
- →Is n8n production-ready?
- →How much do Zapier, Make, and n8n cost at scale?
- →Can I migrate from Zapier to n8n?
- →n8n self-hosted vs n8n cloud