Comparison
n8n vs Make: Which Automation Platform Should You Use?
n8n vs Make compared — self-hosting, pricing, flexibility, and ease of use. Which automation tool fits your team in 2025?
Last updated · by Shohih Abdul
If you’re choosing between n8n and Make for workflow automation, the core question is the same as n8n vs Zapier: does your team need self-hosting and custom logic, or do you need the clearest visual interface and fastest setup?
Both are powerful. The difference is in the technical tradeoffs.
n8n vs Make: Side by Side
| Criteria | n8n | Make |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | Free self-hosted; cloud from ~$20/mo | Free tier (1,000 ops/mo); paid from $9/mo, scales per operation |
| Self-hosting | Yes — Docker, npm, or cloud | No — cloud only |
| Integrations | 400+ native + unlimited via HTTP | 1,500+ native |
| Code support | Yes — JS and Python nodes | Limited — no native code execution |
| Visual clarity | Node graph — clear for complex flows | Scenario builder — excellent for linear flows |
| Best for | Technical teams, data-sensitive workflows, high-volume at scale | Non-technical users, moderate volume, visual clarity priority |
n8n
Open-source, self-hostable, code-friendly
Pros
- Self-hostable — data stays on your infrastructure
- No per-execution pricing when self-hosted
- JavaScript/Python function nodes for complex logic
- 400+ integrations, unlimited with HTTP Request node
Cons
- Steeper learning curve than Make
- Self-hosting requires server setup and maintenance
- Smaller no-code community than Make
Make
Visual, powerful, cloud-native
Pros
- Very visual — scenarios are easy to read and audit
- Strong built-in data transformation (router, iterator, aggregator)
- No server required — fully cloud-hosted
- Large template library
Cons
- Priced per operation — costs scale with volume
- No self-hosting option
- Complex workflows can become hard to navigate visually
- Less flexible for custom code than n8n
Choose n8n if…
Choose n8n if your team is technical, you handle sensitive data, or you run high-volume workflows where per-operation costs would compound.
Choose Make if…
Choose Make if you want a polished visual experience, need rich built-in data transformation, and your team isn't comfortable managing a self-hosted server.
FAQ
- Is n8n better than Make?
- n8n is better than Make for technical teams that need self-hosting, custom code execution, or high task volumes without per-operation costs. Make is better for non-technical teams who prioritise visual workflow building and don't want to manage server infrastructure. In G2's 2024 comparison, n8n rates higher on value for money; Make rates higher on ease of use.
- Can n8n replace Make?
- Yes, n8n can replace Make for most automation use cases. n8n covers all common integrations and adds self-hosting and code nodes. The main trade-off is Make's superior visual data transformation tools (router, iterator, aggregator) which n8n handles via code nodes — requiring slightly more technical knowledge.
- Is Make free compared to n8n?
- Make has a free tier (1,000 operations/month). n8n is free to self-host with no usage limits. For high-volume automations on a tight budget, n8n self-hosted is significantly cheaper. For low-volume use cases with no technical team to manage hosting, Make's free tier may be sufficient.
Want help setting up n8n?
I run n8n training programs in Indonesia. Book a discovery call and tell me what you're trying to automate.
Book a discovery call