Summary: Zapier, Make, and n8n differ in workflow building, usage counting, and hosting demands: Zapier offers no-code workflow building, Make has a flowchart-style builder, and n8n Cloud counts a full workflow run as one execution. Zapier vs Make vs n8n isn’t a like-for-like price comparison because tasks, operations, and executions are different units.
Key figures
- Zapier is listed with more than 7,000 app integrations.
- Make is listed with more than 1,500 integrations.
- A five-action Zap uses five tasks per trigger.
- n8n Cloud counts one full multi-step workflow run as one execution.
- The cited self-hosting estimate for n8n is 2–5 hours of monthly maintenance.
How do Zapier vs Make vs n8n differ in how they build and run small-business automations?
Zapier supports no-code workflow building, Make uses a flowchart-style builder, and n8n’s cited distinction is how it counts a workflow run: as one execution. Workflow automation means connecting apps so recurring workflows can run without each step being carried out manually. In this comparison, the usage unit matters as much as the builder.
A task, operation, and execution aren’t interchangeable measures. Zapier counts each successful action as a task, so a Zap with five action steps uses five tasks per trigger. n8n Cloud counts a full multi-step workflow run as one execution. A Make scenario can use many operations in one run; processing a 50-row spreadsheet can take or more. For each platform, estimate usage from your workflow’s actual steps and data volume. Then compare the relevant unit, rather than treating one run as the same amount of work across platforms.
Book business process automation help
How many app integrations and AI features does each platform offer?
Zapier is listed with 7,000+ app integrations and Make with 1,500+; the available claims don’t provide an n8n integration count. For Zapier vs Make vs n8n, that means the listed counts can’t establish which platform connects to every app your business uses. Check your required apps directly before choosing.
Zapier’s AI Copilot is described as building automations from natural-language descriptions. The cited n8n capabilities include built-in AI agent features, with an AI Agent node using LangChain integration for multi-step reasoning, tool use, and memory within workflows. Those descriptions don’t establish comparable AI accuracy or feature coverage. In a three-way comparison, the evidence also doesn’t establish specific model-provider details, AI Zap features, native-integration comparisons, or a count of Make AI features. Don’t treat those points as verified here. For all three tools, match the documented capabilities to the workflow you intend to automate.
What do Zapier, Make, and n8n cost at the same monthly automation volume?
The source-listed plans below show different prices against different usage units, so they don’t establish a like-for-like cost at matched monthly volume. For Zapier vs Make vs n8n, compare the unit alongside the price, and treat every figure here as a listed amount—not a verified current price.
Zapier’s listed plans include £19.99 for 750 tasks and £73 for 2,000 tasks. Make’s listed plans include £9 and £16 for 10,000 operations, plus £29 for 20,000 operations. n8n Cloud is listed at £20 for 5,000 executions. Zapier counts successful actions as tasks, while n8n Cloud counts a full workflow run as one execution.
As an illustration, a workflow running about 5,000 times monthly with 3–4 actions per run is estimated to use 15,000–20,000 Zapier tasks. In Zapier, Make, and n8n, your action count and platform’s billing unit can change the plan you need. The evidence doesn’t establish current prices or a matched-volume comparison.
Browse vetted business process automation gigs
Which platform handles branching, transformations, and high-volume workflows with fewer limits?
Make’s flowchart-style builder is reported to support conditional logic, loops, error handling, and parallel operations, while Zapier is described as using a linear-step approach. In this comparison, that gives Make a reported advantage for expressing branching workflows, but it doesn’t by itself show which platform has fewer plan limits.
n8n uses execution-based counting: a run counts as one execution whether its workflow has two steps or 200. That describes the counting model, not unlimited capacity. Make can also accumulate operations inside one scenario run: a 50-row spreadsheet example can use or more operations. Zapier’s successful actions count as tasks, so more actions can use more of its allowance. For each platform, model a representative workload before drawing a high-volume conclusion. The available evidence doesn’t directly compare data-transformation features or plan limits across all three. Zapier vs Make vs n8n can’t be ranked on those unreported details.
What hosting, skills, and maintenance does n8n require compared with Zapier and Make?
Zapier workflows can be created online without installing software, while n8n self-hosting is described as requiring more technical setup and ongoing server management. For a three-way comparison, the evidence is specific about Zapier and n8n, but doesn’t establish equivalent Make setup or maintenance requirements.
The cited estimate for self-hosting n8n includes VPS infrastructure, Docker expertise, and 2–5 hours of monthly maintenance. The listed technical skills include working with JSON expressions, JavaScript code nodes, and API authentication. Self-hosting also leaves someone responsible for server updates, failure monitoring, and occasional version upgrades.
Hosted n8n has a different stated division of work: Opsily says it handles updates, backups, and security patches for its hosted service. That is a claim about Opsily’s service, not every n8n deployment. In all three tools, consider staff capacity as well as building workflows. The evidence doesn’t support a broader comparison of Make’s setup or ongoing maintenance.
Get business process automation proposals
What security, privacy, reliability, and lock-in trade-offs should a small business consider?
The available claims don’t provide a comparable security, compliance, backup, recovery, or vendor lock-in assessment across Zapier, Make, and n8n. For Zapier, Make, and n8n, that leaves important decision questions unanswered; don’t infer equivalent protections or risks from the limited details available.
Opsily says its servers are in Germany and customer data stays within the EU. That is a statement about Opsily’s service, not a guarantee about every n8n deployment. The cited free self-hosted n8n tier has no official support and relies on a community forum.
Reliability also depends on noticing failures: one source warns that workflows can fail silently for hours or days if nobody monitors them. In Zapier vs Make vs n8n, ask how a chosen setup will be monitored and who will respond when it fails. The available evidence doesn’t compare alerting, retries, recovery, or backup practices across all three. This comparison therefore requires additional platform-specific due diligence for sensitive data and business-critical workflows.
How can a small business test all three platforms with one real workflow?
A controlled pilot is a practical way to compare Zapier, Make, and n8n: run the same business workflow with comparable inputs on each platform, then review the results before committing. For each platform, keep the workflow and test conditions consistent so the comparison reflects the tools rather than different assignments.
This is a recommendation, not a reported test result. BraivIQ says it tested the platforms on identical workflows over three months. In that comparison, Make won eight of the tests on build time, performance reliability, and cost. That result describes those tests; it doesn’t establish that Make will win for every business or workflow.
For business owners and operations leaders planning practical AI adoption, use a pilot to surface build effort and operating requirements before broader implementation. A three-way comparison should be judged against your own workflow, not only another organization’s test. Record what you need to learn, and use the same inputs for each platform. Zapier vs Make vs n8n is a decision your own controlled trial can inform.
How can a business migrate automations, and what needs to be rebuilt?
Migrating an existing Zap to Make or n8n requires rebuilding its logic in the new platform, testing with real data, and cutting over without a coverage gap. In all three tools, don’t assume an automation transfers unchanged or that compatibility is guaranteed.
A reported estimate says most simple Zapier Zaps can be rebuilt in Make fairly quickly. Treat that as an estimate for simple Zaps, not a guaranteed timeline for your migration. Opsily describes its n8n migration procedure as selecting n8n from its catalog, using JSON templates to recreate workflows, and switching over webhooks.
For AI & Data Consulting Desk readers planning an implementation, inventory the automations that matter, identify what must be rebuilt, and plan testing and cutover around business coverage. Zapier, Make, and n8n migration planning should account for the workflow’s logic and real-data checks. The available evidence doesn’t establish migration costs, timelines for all workflows, or platform-specific compatibility guarantees. Use a pilot to clarify the work before planning a broader transition. Zapier vs Make vs n8n choices should fit your implementation plan.
Compare business process automation offers
| Product | Listed plans and prices |
|---|---|
| Zapier | Zapier’s free tier as tasks per month, Starter at £19.99 per month for 750… |
| Make | Make’s Free plan at 1,000 operations per month, Core at £9 for 10,000… |
| n8n | n8n self-hosting as free, n8n Cloud at £20 per month for 5,000 executions, and… |
| Product | Usage counting or cost model |
|---|---|
| Zapier | Zapier counts each successful action as a task, and a Zap with five action steps… |
| Make | A Make scenario processing a 50-row spreadsheet can use or more operations in… |
| n8n | n8n Cloud counts one full multi-step workflow run as one execution. Self-hosted… |
| Platform | Source-listed plans and prices |
|---|---|
| Zapier | Starter: £19.99/month for 750 tasks; Professional: £73/month for 2,000 tasks |
| Make | Core: £9/month for 10,000 operations; Pro: £16/month for 10,000 operations; Business: £29/month for 20,000 operations |
| n8n Cloud | £20/month for 5,000 executions |
Executive summary
- Estimate usage using the platform’s billing unit and your workflow’s number of steps or processed records.
- Verify the integrations and AI capabilities your specific workflows need; the available claims leave several details unknown.
- Include hosting, technical skills, and maintenance in an n8n self-hosting decision.
- Pilot the same real workflow on each platform before committing, and plan migration around rebuilding, testing, and cutover.
- Run one real workflow through Zapier vs Make vs n8n on free plans before you choose, and include upkeep time in your cost.
Common client questions
- How do Zapier, Make, and n8n count automation usage?
Zapier counts each successful action as a task, while n8n Cloud counts a full workflow run as one execution. Make scenarios can consume multiple operations in a run; processing spreadsheet rows can use or more.
- Which platform is cheapest for the same monthly automation volume?
The listed figures include Make plans at £9 for 10,000 operations and Zapier plans at £19.99 for 750 tasks, but those units aren’t directly comparable. The evidence doesn’t establish a like-for-like price at matched volume.
- What does it take to maintain self-hosted n8n?
The cited estimate says self-hosting n8n requires VPS infrastructure, Docker expertise, and 2–5 hours of monthly maintenance. The available evidence doesn’t specify equivalent Make requirements.
- Can you migrate a Zapier automation to Make or n8n?
Migrating a Zap to Make or n8n involves rebuilding its logic, testing with real data, and cutting over without a coverage gap. A reported estimate says most simple Zaps can be rebuilt in Make fairly quickly.
