n8n and Make (formerly Integromat) are two of the most popular automation platforms in 2026. Both let you connect apps and build multi-step workflows without writing much code — but they differ sharply on hosting, pricing models, and how much control you get. Here’s the full comparison to help you pick.
Quick Comparison
| Feature | n8n | Make |
|---|---|---|
| Model | Source-available, self-hostable | Cloud-only (SaaS) |
| Best for | Developers & data control | No-code visual builders |
| Self-hosting | Yes (free, unlimited) | No |
| Pricing model | Per execution (workflow runs) | Per operation (each step) |
| Visual editor | Node-based | Scenario-based (visual) |
| Code steps | Native (JS/Python) | Limited |
| AI/LLM nodes | Strong, built-in | Available |
| Integrations | 400+ | 1,500+ |
| Free tier | Self-host free; cloud trial | Yes (limited ops) |
| Starting paid | ~$20-24/mo cloud | ~$9-10/mo |
Pricing: Executions vs Operations
This is the most important difference and the one that surprises people on their first bill.
- n8n charges per workflow execution — one run of a workflow counts as one execution, no matter how many steps it contains. A 20-step workflow and a 2-step workflow cost the same per run. This makes n8n dramatically cheaper for complex, multi-step automations.
- Make charges per operation — each individual module/step that runs consumes an operation. A workflow with 20 steps burns 20 operations per run. This is fine for simple scenarios but adds up fast for complex ones.
If your workflows are long and multi-step, n8n’s execution-based pricing usually wins. If your workflows are short and you run a lot of them, Make’s lower entry price may be fine. See n8n pricing 2026 and Make pricing 2026.
Self-Hosting: n8n’s Big Advantage
n8n is source-available and can be self-hosted for free with unlimited executions. If you run it on your own server, you pay only for infrastructure — no per-run fees at all. For privacy-sensitive teams, high-volume automations, or anyone who wants full data control, this is a decisive advantage.
Make is cloud-only. There’s no self-hosting option, so your data flows through Make’s infrastructure and your costs scale with usage. The trade-off is zero maintenance — Make handles everything.
Ease of Use
Make is generally considered the friendlier tool for non-developers. Its scenario builder is visual and intuitive, with a large library of pre-built app connections (1,500+) and templates. If you want to wire up “when X happens in app A, do Y in app B” without thinking about code, Make is smooth.
n8n is more powerful but has a steeper learning curve. Its node-based editor exposes more control, and it lets you drop into JavaScript or Python whenever you need custom logic. Developers love this flexibility; non-technical users may find it more intimidating.
AI and LLM Workflows
Both platforms have leaned into AI automation. n8n has particularly strong, built-in LLM and agent nodes — you can build AI agents, RAG pipelines, and chained model calls natively, which has made it a favorite for AI workflow builders in 2026. Make also offers AI modules and integrates with major LLM providers, but n8n tends to give developers more low-level control over AI workflows.
Integrations
Make has the larger out-of-the-box library at 1,500+ app integrations. n8n offers 400+ native integrations plus a generic HTTP node and the ability to call any API, so you’re rarely truly blocked — but Make wins on plug-and-play breadth for common SaaS apps.
When to Choose n8n
- You want to self-host for free with unlimited executions
- Your workflows are long and multi-step (execution pricing wins)
- You need custom code (JS/Python) inside workflows
- You’re building AI agents or LLM pipelines
- Data privacy and control are priorities
For more options, see Best n8n Alternatives 2026.
When to Choose Make
- You’re a non-developer who wants a visual, easy builder
- Your workflows are short and simple
- You want the largest library of ready-made integrations
- You prefer zero infrastructure maintenance
- Lower entry pricing matters for light usage
When to Consider Zapier Instead
If your priority is the absolute easiest setup and the broadest app coverage for simple “trigger → action” automations, Zapier is worth a look too. It’s the most beginner-friendly of the three, though it can get expensive at scale. See Zapier pricing 2026.
Bottom Line
Choose n8n if you want control, self-hosting, custom code, and cheap multi-step workflows — especially for AI automations. Its execution-based pricing and free self-hosting make it the best value for complex or high-volume use.
Choose Make if you’re a non-developer who wants a polished visual builder, the widest library of ready integrations, and no infrastructure to manage. For simple scenarios run at moderate volume, it’s hard to beat on convenience.
The deciding question: do you want control and low cost at scale (n8n) or ease and breadth out of the box (Make)?
Compare automation tools side by side → n8n pricing | Make pricing | Best n8n Alternatives 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
Is n8n cheaper than Make?
For complex, multi-step workflows, yes — n8n charges per execution (one run = one charge regardless of steps), while Make charges per operation (each step counts). Self-hosting n8n is free with unlimited executions, which makes it dramatically cheaper at scale. For simple, low-volume workflows, Make’s lower entry price can be competitive.
Can you self-host Make like n8n?
No. Make is cloud-only with no self-hosting option. n8n is source-available and can be self-hosted for free with unlimited executions, which is one of its biggest advantages for privacy-conscious or high-volume users.
Which is better for AI automation, n8n or Make?
Both support AI workflows, but n8n has particularly strong built-in LLM and agent nodes, giving developers more control over AI pipelines, RAG, and chained model calls. Make offers AI modules too but with less low-level flexibility. For serious AI automation, n8n is usually the stronger pick.