n8n vs Make: Comprehensive Comparison Guide (2025)

Introduction

Workflow automation tools have become essential for businesses looking to streamline processes and increase productivity. Among the many options available, n8n and Make (formerly Integromat) stand out as popular choices, each with its own strengths and limitations.

This comprehensive comparison will help you understand the key differences between n8n and Make, enabling you to make an informed decision about which tool better suits your specific needs.

n8n is relatively new to the automation scene, initially called "nodemation," and has quickly gained popularity for its open-source approach and self-hosting capabilities. Make (formerly Integromat) has been around since 2012, giving it more time to refine its product and build a robust library of integrations.

Key Differences at a Glance

The table above highlights some of the fundamental differences between n8n and Make. While n8n offers more flexibility with deployment options and advanced customization through code nodes, Make provides a more intuitive visual interface and a larger library of pre-built integrations. n8n's recent growth has been fueled by its AI agent capabilities, allowing users to build sophisticated AI-powered workflows.

Pricing Comparison

n8n Pricing

• Self-hosted (open-source): Free, with limitations on commercial use
• n8n Cloud: Starts at €24/month for 2,500 executions
• Self-hosted costs: Approximately $5-$10/month for server costs (Render, DigitalOcean, etc.)
• Enterprise: Custom pricing

Make Pricing

• Free: 1,000 operations/month, limited features
• Core: $18.82/month for 20,000 operations
• Pro: $30.82/month for 40,000 operations
• Teams: $83.25/month for 80,000 operations
• Enterprise: Custom pricing

From a pricing perspective, both tools offer free tiers for basic usage. Make's pricing is more granular and scales based on operations, which can be more cost-effective for small to medium-sized businesses with simple workflows. n8n's self-hosted option provides significant cost savings for organizations with high automation needs and technical resources.

It's important to understand that Make counts each module execution as an operation, meaning a single workflow with 5 modules would consume 5 operations each time it runs. In contrast, n8n counts each workflow execution as a single unit regardless of complexity. This makes n8n potentially more cost-effective for complex workflows at scale.

Feature Comparison

n8n Features

• Visual Workflow Editor: Flowchart-style editor for complex workflows
• Code Nodes: JavaScript functions for custom logic
• Data Mapping: Advanced data transformation capabilities
• Error Handling: Sophisticated error workflows and retry mechanisms
• Webhooks: Create and manage webhooks easily
• Self-hosting: Complete control over your data and infrastructure
• AI Agents: Built-in functionality to create AI-powered decision-making workflows
• JSON & Code Integration: Superior handling of JSON data and code execution
• Flow Control: Advanced branching and conditional logic

Make Features

• Visual Scenario Builder: Intuitive interface for creating workflows
• Data Stores: Built-in database for storing and retrieving data
• Iterators: Process collections of data efficiently
• Router: Direct data flow based on conditions
• Error Handling: Configure error responses and notifications
• Custom Modules: Create custom functionality with HTTP requests
• Module Availability: Extensive library of pre-built modules
• Simplified Authorization: Easy connection to third-party services
• Webhooks & Mailhooks: Superior handling of incoming webhook and email triggers

Both n8n and Make offer robust feature sets for workflow automation. n8n excels in flexibility and customization through its code nodes, making it ideal for developers and technical teams. Make provides a more intuitive interface with powerful built-in features like Data Stores and Iterators, making it accessible to users with varying levels of technical expertise.

Ease of Use

n8n User Experience

n8n's interface is designed with technical users in mind. The flowchart-style editor provides a visual representation of complex workflows, but it has a steeper learning curve compared to many alternatives. Users familiar with programming concepts will find n8n's approach intuitive, as it offers more granular control over data flow and transformations.

When you log into n8n, you're greeted by a simple canvas with "nodes" that represent services, triggers, or other workflow logic. You connect these nodes with lines that visualize data flow. The interface is straightforward but not as polished as some competitors. However, n8n excels in testing capabilities, allowing you to execute individual nodes and see real-time logs that reveal exactly what happened at each step.

Make User Experience

Make features a highly visual and intuitive interface that makes it accessible to users with various technical backgrounds. The scenario builder uses a visual approach that clearly shows the flow of data between different services and actions. Make also provides helpful tooltips, documentation, and templates that help users get started quickly.

When creating a scenario in Make, you'll see a flowchart-like interface with colorful, modular blocks. Each module corresponds to a specific service or function. Make's mapping feature is particularly impressive—you can select data fields from one step and map them into the next through a clean drag-and-drop interface. Debugging is also user-friendly, with the platform showing exactly what data is traveling through each connection.

For teams with varying levels of technical expertise, Make generally offers a more accessible entry point with its visual interface and comprehensive documentation. n8n provides more power and flexibility for those willing to invest time in learning the platform and leveraging its code-based customization options.

Integration Capabilities

Make offers over 1,000 pre-built integrations with popular services and applications. Its integration library covers most mainstream business tools and services, making it easy to connect different parts of your tech stack without extensive configuration.

n8n offers fewer pre-built integrations (around 200+), but compensates with its HTTP Request nodes and custom JavaScript functions, allowing you to connect to virtually any API. This approach requires more technical knowledge but provides greater flexibility.

For organizations that primarily use popular services and want quick setup, Make's extensive integration library provides an advantage. For those requiring custom integrations or working with specialized APIs, n8n's flexibility may be more valuable despite requiring more technical configuration.

Best Use Cases

When to Choose n8n

• When data privacy and security are paramount
• For complex workflows requiring advanced logic and data transformations
• When you need complete control over your automation infrastructure
• For organizations with technical resources to manage self-hosted solutions
• When budget constraints make Make's pricing prohibitive for high-volume workflows
• For building AI agent workflows that require decision-making capabilities
• When you need advanced JSON handling and code execution
• For teams that need better collaboration and documentation features

When to Choose Make

• For teams with mixed technical expertise levels
• When you need a balance between power and usability
• For organizations using a wide variety of popular SaaS applications
• When you prefer a managed solution with no infrastructure maintenance
• For workflows that benefit from built-in data storage capabilities
• When you need simpler authorization and connection to third-party services
• For beginners who want to see results quickly with minimal learning curve
• When working with email triggers and webhook handling

Conclusion

Both n8n and Make are powerful workflow automation platforms with distinct advantages. Your choice between them should be guided by your specific requirements, technical capabilities, and budget constraints.

n8n offers greater flexibility, customization, and potential cost savings for high-volume workflows, especially for organizations with technical resources. Its self-hosting option provides enhanced data security and privacy. The platform's recent focus on AI agent capabilities has positioned it as a leader in AI-powered workflow automation.

Make excels in providing a balance between power and usability, with an intuitive interface that makes it accessible to users with varying levels of technical expertise. Its extensive integration library and built-in features like Data Stores make it a versatile choice for many business automation needs.

From a financial perspective, Make is often more cost-effective for simpler workflows with fewer operations, while n8n becomes more economical as workflow complexity and volume increase, especially with the self-hosted option.

If you're just starting your automation journey, Make might be the better choice due to its lower barrier to entry and intuitive interface. As your skills and needs develop, n8n could become a natural progression, offering more advanced capabilities and better scalability for complex, high-volume workflows.