- Choose Make.com if: You want the lowest entry price, need 1000+ integrations out-of-the-box, and prefer a visual, no-code interface. Best for small teams and businesses scaling fast.
- Choose n8n if: You need self-hosting, custom code nodes, or want to avoid vendor lock-in. Best for developers and enterprises with strict data residency requirements.
- The tie-breaker: Make.com wins on ease-of-use and affordability; n8n wins on flexibility and control.
Overview: Make.com vs n8n
Make.com (formerly Integromat) is a visual workflow automation platform that connects cloud apps without code. It offers 1000+ pre-built integrations, a drag-and-drop builder, and a generous free tier (1,000 operations/month). Make is optimized for speed-to-value: users can build their first automation in minutes. The platform is cloud-only, meaning workflows run on Make's infrastructure. Pricing scales with operations (API calls), making it predictable for growing teams.
n8n is an open-source workflow automation tool available as self-hosted or cloud-managed. It emphasizes flexibility and data privacy—you control where your workflows run. n8n includes a code editor for custom logic, supports 400+ integrations, and allows you to extend it with JavaScript/Python. The free tier is unlimited self-hosted; cloud pricing starts at $20/month. n8n appeals to technical teams and organizations needing compliance or custom workflows.
Pricing Comparison
| Plan | Make.com | n8n (Cloud) | Operations/Runs |
|---|---|---|---|
| Free | $0 | $0 (self-hosted only) | 1,000 ops / month |
| Starter/Core | $9/mo | $20/mo | 10,000 ops / 2,500 runs |
| Professional/Pro | $16/mo | $50/mo | Unlimited ops / unlimited runs |
| Teams/Enterprise | $29/mo | Custom pricing | Custom limits + support |
Key insight: Make.com's Core plan ($9/mo) offers 10x more operations than n8n's Starter ($20/mo). However, n8n's free self-hosted tier has unlimited runs—a massive advantage for cost-conscious teams. n8n's cloud pricing jumps steeply at the Pro tier ($50/mo), while Make stays affordable at $16/mo for professional use.
Feature Comparison
| Feature | Make.com | n8n |
|---|---|---|
| Self-hosted option | ✗ | ✓ |
| Pre-built integrations | ✓ (1000+) | ✓ (400+) |
| Custom code nodes | ~ | ✓ |
| Drag-and-drop builder | ✓ | ✓ |
| Webhooks | ✓ | ✓ |
| Scheduling/cron | ✓ | ✓ |
| Error handling | ✓ | ✓ |
| Versioning/Git sync | ~ | ✓ |
| Team collaboration | ✓ (Teams plan) | ✓ (Pro+) |
| Audit logs | ✓ | ✓ |
| Data residency control | ✗ | ✓ |
| API rate limits | Depends on operations | Generous on self-hosted |
When to Choose Make.com
- SaaS teams on a budget: You need to connect Shopify, Stripe, Slack, and Google Sheets. Make's 1000+ integrations and $9/mo pricing beat competitors. Build in 10 minutes, no code required.
- Marketing agencies: You manage campaigns for multiple clients. Make's Teams plan ($29/mo) includes permissioning, shared workflows, and white-label options. n8n lacks true multi-tenancy.
- Scaling startups: You're growing fast but want predictable costs. Make's operation-based pricing scales linearly; you only pay for what runs. No surprise infrastructure bills.
- Non-technical founders: You want fast time-to-value. Make's UI is the most intuitive on the market—tutorials work, templates ship with workflows, community is large.
When to Choose n8n
- On-premise/private cloud requirements: Your data must stay inside your infrastructure due to HIPAA, GDPR, or policy. n8n's self-hosted option is your only choice among top-tier tools. Run unlimited workflows free.
- Custom integrations: Your workflow needs to call proprietary APIs or run Python scripts. n8n's code nodes let you write business logic directly; Make forces you into UI constraints.
- Developer teams: You want Git integration, versioning, and CI/CD-style deployment. n8n syncs workflows to GitHub; Make has basic versioning. Your team uses n8n like infrastructure-as-code.
- Enterprise compliance: You need audit logs, SSO, and role-based access. n8n's Pro+ tiers offer these; the self-hosted path gives you full control over authentication and data flows.
Migration: Switching Between Them
Make → n8n (Moderate difficulty): Make workflows are proprietary JSON; there is no direct export. You'll rebuild workflows manually in n8n's node editor. Positive: n8n's 400+ integrations overlap heavily with Make's (Stripe, Slack, PostgreSQL, etc.), so logic maps cleanly. Timeline: expect 2-4 hours per workflow for an experienced user. Cost: zero (n8n's free tier absorbs small migrations).
n8n → Make (Low difficulty): Easier reverse. n8n workflows export as JSON, but Make doesn't import them directly. However, if your n8n workflow uses standard integrations (no custom code), recreating it in Make takes 30-60 minutes per workflow due to Make's superior UX. Custom code nodes must be rewritten as Make's function modules or skipped entirely.
What to watch: Both tools handle errors differently. Make uses "advanced error handling"; n8n uses "Error Workflow" triggers. Test error paths before migrating. Also, n8n's execution model (queue-based) differs from Make's (concurrent)—high-volume workflows may behave differently. Plan a parallel run period (2-4 weeks) before decommissioning the old tool.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Make.com have a free tier?
Yes. Make's free plan includes 1,000 operations per month—enough for 10-20 basic automations (e.g., Slack alerts, form submissions). Operations reset monthly. Paid plans start at $9/mo (10k operations).
Can n8n run offline or air-gapped?
Yes, if self-hosted. Download n8n and run it on your servers with no internet dependency (except when integrations themselves need external APIs). This is a major advantage over Make for sensitive environments.
Which tool integrates with more apps?
Make.com has ~1,000 pre-built integrations vs. n8n's ~400. However, n8n's code nodes let you create custom integrations for anything with an API. For common SaaS (Salesforce, HubSpot, Slack), both are equal. Make wins on breadth; n8n wins on depth and customization.
Final Verdict
Make.com is the faster, easier choice for most teams. The $9/mo Core plan, 1000+ integrations, and intuitive UI make it ideal for non-technical users, small businesses, and agencies. You'll build working automations in your first afternoon.
n8n is the smarter choice for enterprises and developers. Self-hosting eliminates vendor lock-in, custom code nodes unlock complex workflows, and Git integration fits enterprise DevOps. The free self-hosted tier is unbeatable for learning or prototyping.
If budget and speed matter most: Make.com. If control and flexibility matter most: n8n. For most growing teams, start with Make and migrate to n8n only if you hit its UI limits or need on-premise deployment.
Want a deeper comparison? Join our free toolkit for workflow templates, integration checklists, and cost calculators tailored to your team size.
Disclosure: Some links on FlowStack are affiliate links. Our reviews are independent and not sponsored by any tool vendor.