Three platforms dominate the no-code automation market: Zapier, Make (formerly Integromat) and n8n. Each has its advocates. None suits everyone. The right choice depends on your budget, your technical capabilities and how you handle data governance.
This comparison evaluates the three tools on measurable criteria. No universal ranking, but a verdict tailored to each business profile.
General Comparison Table
| Criterion | n8n | Make | Zapier |
|---|---|---|---|
| Model | Open source (fair-code) | Proprietary SaaS | Proprietary SaaS |
| Entry price | Free (self-hosted) / 20 EUR/month (cloud) | 9 EUR/month (Core) | 19.99 USD/month (Starter) |
| Free plan | Unlimited self-hosted | 1,000 operations/month | 100 tasks/month |
| Native integrations | ~400 | ~1,700 | ~7,000+ |
| Self-hosted | Yes (Docker, K8s) | No | No |
| Interface | Visual (nodes + canvas) | Visual (scenarios) | Linear (zaps) |
| Custom code | JavaScript, Python | Limited JavaScript | Python, JavaScript (Code by Zapier) |
| Webhooks | Native, unlimited | Native | Paid (Pro+ plans) |
| Error handling | Visual error branches | Error routes | Automatic retry |
| Parallel executions | Yes (self-hosted) | Plan-dependent | Plan-dependent |
| Open API | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| GDPR / EU hosting | Cloud EU + self-hosted | Cloud EU | Cloud US (EU option available) |
Zapier: Simplicity Above All
Zapier popularised no-code automation starting in 2012. Its catalogue of over 7,000 integrations remains unmatched. Connecting Gmail to Slack or Typeform to HubSpot takes less than five minutes.
That simplicity comes at a cost. The pricing model based on "tasks" (each action in a zap counts as one task) becomes expensive once volumes increase. A five-step workflow executed 100 times per day consumes 15,000 tasks per month. On the Starter plan, you exceed the limit within a week.
The linear interface suits simple automations (if A, then B). Workflows with conditional branches, loops or data merges quickly become hard to follow. Zapier has added "Paths" and "Filters," but the ergonomics lag behind Make and n8n on complex scenarios.
Zapier suits you if: you need a specific integration unavailable elsewhere, your workflows are linear and your volumes stay moderate (under 2,000 tasks per month).
Make: Features-to-Price Ratio
Make (formerly Integromat) sits between Zapier and n8n. The visual scenario interface lets you build branching workflows with a clarity Zapier does not provide. The "routes" system handles multiple conditions and parallel processing with ease.
The integration catalogue (around 1,700 applications) covers the majority of marketing, CRM and e-commerce tools. Pricing is more accessible: the Core plan at 9 EUR/month includes 10,000 operations, five to ten times more than Zapier at a lower price point.
Make also offers advanced functions: data aggregation, iterators, JSON manipulation and text parsing. These technical capabilities let you handle complex data flows without writing code.
The primary limitation: Make is 100% SaaS. Your data and scenarios are hosted on Make's servers. Self-hosting is not an option. For businesses subject to data sovereignty constraints (healthcare data, Swiss data under the FADP), this is a barrier.
Make suits you if: you want a solid balance between power and ease of use, your budget is tight and you do not require self-hosting. Our Make vs Zapier comparison explores the nuances between these two platforms.
n8n: Full Control
n8n stands apart through its open-source model and self-hosted option. You install the tool on your own server, you control your data, and you face no software-imposed execution limits.
The canvas interface (similar to a mind-mapping tool) allows you to build non-linear workflows with branches, merges and sub-workflows. The "Code" node accepts full JavaScript or Python, not restricted snippets.
The native integration catalogue (~400) is smaller than Make or Zapier. The difference: the HTTP Request node connects to any REST API. Combined with a Code node to transform responses, n8n can communicate with any service that has a documented API.
The trade-off: the learning curve is steeper. Self-hosted installation requires Docker or sysadmin skills. The community is active (forum, Discord, shared templates) but commercial support only exists on the Cloud plan. For a comprehensive guide on n8n, consult our dedicated SME article.
n8n suits you if: you have data sovereignty requirements, a technical profile on the team and complex workflows with high volumes.
Comparison by Use Case
The right tool depends on the context. Here is a verdict by specific scenario:
| Use Case | Recommended Tool | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| Sync 2 apps (e.g., Typeform to CRM) | Zapier | Setup in 3 minutes, largest catalogue |
| Automated marketing reporting (GA4 + Ads to Slack) | Make | Visual routes, data manipulation, good pricing |
| Complex lead qualification pipeline | n8n | Branches, custom code, no execution limits |
| E-commerce automation (orders, stock, invoicing) | Make | Native Shopify/WooCommerce integrations, iterators |
| Workflow with sensitive data (healthcare, finance) | n8n (self-hosted) | Full control, data on your server |
| Non-technical team, immediate need | Zapier | Intuitive interface, abundant templates |
| Agency managing multiple clients | n8n (self-hosted) | No per-client cost, data isolation |
| Startup with limited budget | Make (free plan) | 1,000 free operations, advanced features |
Verdict by Business Profile
SME owner without a technical profile: start with Make. The features-to-price ratio is favourable, the interface is approachable and the free plan allows testing without commitment. If your needs are limited to two or three simple automations, Zapier remains a valid option.
SME with a developer or data profile: n8n in self-hosted mode offers control and flexibility. The initial investment (installation, configuration) is offset by the absence of recurring costs tied to execution volumes.
Marketing agency or consultant: n8n self-hosted lets you manage multiple client workflows on a single instance. No stacking of subscriptions. Workflows are exportable as JSON, which simplifies versioning and documentation.
E-commerce with complex flows: Make excels at processing structured data (orders, inventories, invoices). Iterators and aggregators handle multi-product carts without effort.
Regardless of your choice, the tool is just a vehicle. The value lies in workflow design and integration into your AI automation strategy. A poorly designed workflow automates chaos. A well-designed workflow frees up time for high-value tasks.
Migrating Between Tools
None of the three tools offers a direct import from the others. Migration means recreating workflows. The good news: the underlying logic (trigger, conditions, actions) is identical. Only the interface changes.
Practical advice for a smooth migration:
- Document your existing workflows before starting (triggers, conditions, actions, data exchanged)
- Prioritise: migrate the 3-5 critical workflows first, not all 30 at once
- Run the old and new tools in parallel for 2 weeks before switching off the original
- Budget 1 to 4 hours per workflow depending on complexity
Frequently Asked Questions
Can n8n replace Zapier for a non-developer?
n8n Cloud offers an experience comparable to Zapier for simple workflows. Advanced features (custom code, self-hosting) exist without being mandatory. A trained marketing professional can use n8n Cloud without coding.
Which tool is cheapest at scale?
n8n self-hosted, without question. No per-execution cost. For 50,000 monthly operations, Make charges around 29 EUR/month, Zapier around 69 USD/month, while n8n self-hosted costs only the server (5-15 EUR/month).
Are all three tools GDPR-compliant?
Make and n8n Cloud offer EU hosting and DPAs (Data Processing Agreements). Zapier primarily hosts in the US, with an EU option on Enterprise plans. n8n self-hosted provides the strictest compliance since you control the infrastructure.
Can I use multiple tools in parallel?
Yes, and it is common. Some businesses use Zapier for quick integrations and n8n for complex workflows. The key is documenting which automation runs where to avoid duplication.
