Make vs. n8n: The Starting Point
Since Zapier raised its prices, many SMEs have been looking for alternatives. Make (formerly Integromat) and n8n are the two strongest contenders. Both offer visual workflow builders, hundreds of integrations and significantly cheaper pricing models than Zapier. But the differences are substantial — and decisive for making the right choice.
Feature Comparison: Make vs. n8n
| Criterion | Make | n8n |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Cloud only | Self-hosted or cloud |
| Pricing model | Per operation (action) | Flat-rate / open-source |
| Visual interface | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ Very intuitive | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ Good, more technical |
| Complex logic | Routers, aggregators, iterators | IF/ELSE, loops, error handling |
| GDPR (self-host) | ❌ Not possible | ✅ Full control |
| Custom code | Limited (HTTP module) | JavaScript & Python nodes |
| Integrations | 1,500+ apps | 400+ apps + HTTP for all APIs |
| Learning curve | Low to medium | Medium (technical understanding needed) |
Pricing Comparison 2026
Make charges in "operations" — every action in a scenario counts as one operation. A workflow with 4 steps that runs 500 times per month consumes 2,000 operations. That sounds like a lot, but it is significantly cheaper with Make than with Zapier.
| Plan | Make | n8n Cloud |
|---|---|---|
| Free | 1,000 ops/month | Not available (self-host is free) |
| Starter | €9/month (10,000 ops) | €20/month |
| Core | €16/month (10,000 ops, more features) | — |
| Pro | €29/month (10,000 ops, priority) | €50/month |
| Enterprise | Custom | Custom |
n8n self-hosted on a Hetzner server (from €4/month) has no operations limits. At high automation volumes, this is more cost-effective in the long run than any Make plan.
When Is Make the Better Choice?
- ▸Your team is non-technical and needs an intuitive interface.
- ▸You are automating standard workflows between common SaaS tools (HubSpot, Slack, Google Sheets).
- ▸Your volume is below 50,000 operations per month.
- ▸You need quick results without server administration.
- ▸Data processing with aggregators and iterators is important (Make is stronger here).
When Is n8n the Better Choice?
- ▸GDPR compliance is business-critical — data must not leave the EU.
- ▸You need complex error handling, retry logic and sub-workflows.
- ▸Automation volume is high (self-hosting makes it cost-neutral).
- ▸You integrate your own APIs, legacy systems or need custom code.
- ▸Long-term scalability without vendor lock-in is a priority.
Real-World Example: Automating Invoice Processing
A tax-advisory firm with 3 employees was processing 200 incoming invoices per month manually. Each invoice: 8 minutes of effort = 26 hours per month. With Make we built the following workflow:
- ▸Trigger: email with attachment in Gmail (subject contains 'invoice')
- ▸Extraction: PDF data via Google Document AI
- ▸Validation: check amount, supplier and due date
- ▸Booking: automatic entry into DATEV-compatible CSV
- ▸Notification: Slack message to accounting team
- ▸Result: 85% time saving, error rate reduced from 12% to 0.3%
This workflow runs with Make for ~€9/month (approx. 1,000 operations). With n8n self-hosted it would be ~€4/month in server costs — without any operations limit.
Our Conclusion
Make and n8n are both excellent Zapier alternatives. Make impresses with its intuitive interface and is ideal for teams without a technical background. n8n is the superior choice for companies that prioritise data sovereignty, complex logic and long-term cost efficiency. At smugo we use both platforms depending on the client's profile.