n8n vs Zapier vs Make: how to choose a workflow automation tool

Zapier is the quickest to start and has the widest app catalog. Make gives you a visual canvas for branching and routing. n8n is the one you can self-host and extend with code. All three connect apps and now offer AI steps and agents. The right pick depends on who will build and maintain the flows, how many steps each run takes, and where your data must live. We checked each vendor's own pages on 2026-10-15. Prices and limits change, so confirm before you buy.

#The comparison table

Sources: n8n pricing (opens in a new tab), n8n Code node docs (opens in a new tab), n8n home (opens in a new tab), Zapier pricing (opens in a new tab), Zapier home (opens in a new tab), Make pricing (opens in a new tab), Make home (opens in a new tab). Make's pricing page did not show dollar amounts for paid plans when we fetched it, so we left them out. Check it directly.

#n8n

n8n describes itself as a platform for building workflows and AI agents with the option to self-host. Its source code is on GitHub under the Sustainable Use License, which lets you use and modify it for internal business purposes. Commercial redistribution is restricted. If you plan to resell n8n itself to clients, read the license, and ask a lawyer, before you do.

Execution-based billing is the big draw: a 30-step workflow costs the same to run as a 3-step one. You can self-host, which matters for data residency, and Code nodes let an engineer handle whatever the visual blocks can't. The price is that it's the most technical of the three. Self-hosting puts uptime, upgrades, backups and security on you, and per its docs, SSO, Git version control and external secrets sit on paid plans. On n8n Cloud the Code node has restricted imports.

#Zapier workflow automation

Zapier has the largest catalog, the shortest path to a first working automation and a polished interface. Non-technical staff can build and fix their own Zaps, which is worth a lot in a small company. The downsides show up at scale. Per-task billing makes multi-step workflows expensive as volume grows, complex branching and error handling feel cramped next to a canvas tool, and as a hosted service it passes your data through Zapier.

#Make

Make's canvas shows branches, loops and data mapping clearly, and that is why ops teams like it. Billing is in credits, with a free tier of 1,000 a month, and routers and error handlers use none. On the app counts each lists on its home page, Make's catalog is smaller than Zapier's. Credits can drain faster than you expect when an AI module uses more than one, and per its site it is hosted only.

#n8n hosting: cloud or self-hosted

n8n runs as a hosted cloud service or as software you host yourself. Hosting decides who handles uptime, upgrades, backups and security, and it also decides where your data sits. Typical n8n workflow examples are a form lead enriched and written to a CRM, or a supplier email read by an AI step and queued for approval. Plans and limits change, so our guide to n8n pricing and self-hosting covers the current options.

#What the same workflow costs

Take one workflow: a new supplier email arrives, an AI step extracts the invoice fields, a lookup checks the vendor, a record is created and a Slack message is sent. That is a trigger plus four action steps, run 5,000 times a month. These are our assumptions, and the arithmetic uses only the published plan figures above.

Now suppose the workflow grows to 20 steps (19 actions). Zapier then counts 95,000 tasks a month, which lands in the 100,000-task tier at $489 on annual billing. The n8n count stays at 5,000 executions. This is why step count matters more than run count when you choose a billing model. Self-hosting n8n removes the plan fee but adds server and engineering time, which you should price at your own rates.

#Maintenance matters more than the first build

The first workflow is easy on any of the three. The hundredth is where they differ. Who gets alerted when a flow fails? How do you version and roll back a change? How do you find every flow that uses a given credential or field? Hosted tools handle that in their interface, while self-hosted n8n leaves uptime, upgrades and backups with your team. On any tool, give every flow a named owner and a failure alert, and keep a short inventory. Flows without owners fail quietly when a connected app renames a field.

#When to use each

1. Zapier fits when the builders aren't engineers, the flows are short, and the app you need is only available there.
2. Make fits when you want to see and control branching, data transforms and routing on a canvas.
3. n8n fits when data has to stay in your environment, workflows have many steps, or an engineer will maintain them and wants code access.
4. Running more than one is fine. Plenty of companies use Zapier for marketing flows and n8n for back-office ones. Give each tool an owner.

#When to go custom

A workflow tool is the right answer until one of these appears:

• The step that matters is reading messy documents or emails, and you need measured accuracy, confidence thresholds and a review queue.
• The workflow writes to an ERP or touches payments, and you need approvals, idempotent retries and an audit trail you control.
• Volume is high enough that per-task or per-credit costs exceed the cost of maintaining code.
• You need testing, versioning and deployment pipelines for flows that have grown into business-critical systems.
• Dozens of flows built by different people now fail quietly when a field name changes.

You rarely have to rip the tool out. A common design keeps it for triggers and simple routing and moves the risky step into code. For the wider decision, see AI agents vs RPA vs workflow tools, and for how costs add up across build and run, read AI automation cost. Our workflow automation page covers how we approach it.

Key point: Pick the tool by how it bills against your step count and by who will maintain it. Task-based pricing is fine for a short flow. For long flows, execution-based pricing is much cheaper, and self-hosting buys you control at the cost of extra work.

#Before you commit

1. Count the steps per run and the runs per month.
2. Check which billing unit your steps trigger, including AI steps.
3. Decide where data may be processed.
4. Name an owner for each flow, with alerts on failure.
5. Run a two-week trial on one real workflow with live volume.

If you are unsure whether a tool or a custom build fits your workflow, book a strategy call. We will tell you honestly when a tool is enough.

#Frequently asked questions

#Is n8n better than Zapier?

It depends on who builds. n8n suits technical teams, long workflows and self-hosting. Zapier suits non-technical teams that want the widest app choice and the quickest start. On cost, n8n's execution-based billing usually wins for workflows with many steps.

#Is Make cheaper than Zapier?

Make bills in credits, with most actions costing one, and Zapier bills in tasks. Both free plans are small (1,000 credits versus 100 tasks). Compare by counting your real steps, and check Make's current plan prices, since we could not confirm them on its page.

#Can I self-host Zapier or Make?

On the pages we checked, neither describes a self-hosted option. n8n offers a free self-hosted Community edition and a self-hosted Business plan.

#Can these tools run AI agents?

Yes, all three list AI agent features. They suit contained tasks. For high-volume or high-risk work you also need evaluation on real samples, approvals and monitoring, which often means custom code beside the tool.

#When should I stop using a workflow tool and build custom?

When accuracy, audit, volume or reliability requirements outgrow it: for example, reading documents with measured accuracy, writing to an ERP with approvals, or running business-critical flows that need testing and version control.