Make vs n8n 2026: Pricing, Self-Hosting & Verdict

Make and n8n are the two automation platforms people reach for when Zapier gets expensive. Both use a visual canvas instead of a linear trigger-action list, both handle branching and loops, and both can run thousands of tasks a month for a fraction of Zapier’s price. They differ in who they are built for: Make is a managed product aimed at anyone, while n8n is a source-available tool that rewards technical users.

This comparison is for operations staff, marketers, founders and developers choosing an automation backbone. It is based on the vendors’ public pricing pages and widely known product information, not hands-on benchmarks, and n8n Cloud prices are quoted in euros as published, so confirm current figures before buying.

Make vs n8n at a glance

Criteria	Make	n8n
Hosting	Managed cloud only	Self-hosted (free) or n8n Cloud
Free tier	1,000 operations/month	Unlimited self-hosted; Cloud trial
Entry paid plan	Core, $9/month	Cloud Starter, €20/month billed annually
Billing unit	Operation (each module run)	Workflow execution (one run, any steps)
Native integrations	2,000+ app modules	Several hundred nodes + HTTP Request node
Custom code	Limited (functions, custom apps)	JavaScript and Python nodes
AI features	AI modules and assistants	Native AI agent, LLM and vector-store nodes
Error handling	Routers, error handlers, retries	Error workflows, retries, custom branches
Learning curve	Moderate	Moderate to steep
Source	Proprietary	Source-available (Sustainable Use License)

Ease of use

Make’s canvas is approachable: modules are circles connected by lines, each module opens a form with the API’s fields already mapped, and the scheduler and run history are a click away. Non-developers can build a multi-step scenario in an afternoon, although routers, iterators and aggregators take some practice.

n8n’s editor is similar in spirit but assumes more. Nodes expose raw parameters, expressions use a JavaScript-flavoured syntax, and many real workflows end up with a Code node or an HTTP Request node. Developers tend to find it faster than Make because nothing is hidden; non-developers tend to find it harder for the same reason. Self-hosting adds installation and updates on top.

Core features

Make

Make’s strength is coverage and polish. More than 2,000 native modules cover mainstream SaaS tools with field-level mapping, and features such as data stores, webhooks, scheduling, scenario templates and the Make AI assistant are all managed for you. Everything runs on Make’s infrastructure, so there is nothing to patch.

n8n

n8n’s strength is flexibility. Workflows can call any API with the HTTP Request node, transform data in JavaScript or Python, branch on conditions and run sub-workflows. Its AI tooling is notably deep: native nodes for OpenAI, Anthropic and other models, agent nodes with tools and memory, and vector-store integrations make it a common choice for building AI assistants and RAG pipelines. The source-available licence means the full product can be inspected and self-hosted.

Integrations

For connecting popular business apps, Make is quicker: the module usually exists and the fields are labelled. n8n’s native node library is smaller, and some nodes are maintained by the community, but the HTTP Request node plus credential management means almost any REST API can be reached. Teams integrating internal systems or niche APIs generally prefer n8n; teams integrating a stack of well-known SaaS tools generally prefer Make.

Performance and reliability

Make runs on managed infrastructure with published usage limits per plan, and scenario runs can be scheduled down to one-minute intervals on paid plans. n8n Cloud publishes execution and concurrency limits per plan; self-hosted n8n is limited by the server, and reliability is the operator’s responsibility, including backups and upgrades. Neither vendor publishes head-to-head benchmarks, so this is a difference in operating model rather than measured speed.

Security and privacy

Make is SOC 2 and GDPR compliant with data processed in its cloud regions. n8n Cloud offers similar assurances, and self-hosted n8n keeps all data on infrastructure you control, which is the deciding factor for teams with strict data-residency or privacy requirements. The trade-off is that security patching becomes an internal task.

Pricing and cost-effectiveness

Make bills per operation: every module that runs counts once, so a ten-step scenario uses ten operations per run. n8n bills per execution: one workflow run counts once regardless of steps. That difference matters more than the headline prices.

Solo user (yearly, list prices)

Option	Make	n8n
Free	$0 (1,000 operations/month)	$0 self-hosted, plus server cost
Entry paid	Core: about $108	Cloud Starter: about €240 (2,500 executions/month)
Next tier	Pro: about $192	Cloud Pro: about €600 (10,000 executions/month)

10-person team (yearly)

Both tools price by usage rather than by seat, so a team pays for volume, not people. Make Teams is about $348 per year at its entry operation bundle; n8n Cloud Pro at about €600 per year includes three shared projects and 10,000 executions. A team running many long, multi-step workflows will usually pay less on n8n; a team running many short, high-frequency scenarios may pay less on Make. Self-hosted n8n costs only the server, often $10 to $30 per month for a small VPS.

Who should choose Make

• Marketers, ops teams and agencies who want a managed tool with no server to run.
• Teams connecting mainstream SaaS apps that already have polished Make modules.
• Anyone with mostly short scenarios where per-operation billing stays cheap.
• Users who want templates and an AI assistant to get started quickly.

Who should choose n8n

• Developers and technical teams comfortable with expressions, code nodes and APIs.
• Teams with strict data-residency needs who want to self-host.
• High-volume or many-step workflows where per-execution billing wins.
• Anyone building AI agents, RAG pipelines or LLM-driven automations.

Conclusion

Make and n8n overlap heavily on capability, so the choice comes down to operating model and workflow shape. Make is the lower-friction, fully managed option with broader native coverage and a cheaper entry plan. n8n is the more flexible, more technical option, free when self-hosted and cheaper at scale for complex workflows. Non-technical teams should start with Make. Technical teams, or anyone whose automations are long and frequent, should start with n8n and decide later whether to pay for Cloud or run it themselves.