Comparison

n8n vs Make vs Zapier

Three leading automation platforms, one detailed breakdown. Compare n8n, Make, and Zapier across pricing, self-hosting, AI capabilities, scalability, and enterprise readiness to find the right fit for your workflows in 2026.

In short: n8n is the developer-friendly, self-hostable powerhouse with unlimited executions and native AI agents. Make strikes a balance between visual ease and workflow complexity. Zapier wins on app breadth and simplicity but costs the most at scale. DSM.promo runs on n8n for its AI agent backbone — here is why, and when Make or Zapier might still be the better choice.

Featuren8nMakeZapier
Pricing ModelFree self-hosted; Cloud from $24/moFree tier (1,000 ops); paid from $10.59/moFree tier (100 tasks); paid from $29.99/mo
Self-HostingFull self-hosting via Docker, Kubernetes, or bare metalCloud-only — no self-hosting optionCloud-only — no self-hosting option
Integration Count400+ native nodes, plus any API via HTTP Request1,800+ app modules with visual configuration7,000+ integrations (many community-maintained)
AI CapabilitiesNative AI agent nodes, LangChain integration, any LLM via API, vector store supportBasic AI modules (OpenAI, Claude); limited agent supportZapier AI actions and AI chatbot; restricted to partner models
Code SupportFull JavaScript and Python in Code nodes; npm packages availableJavaScript code runner with limitations; no external packagesSmall JavaScript/Python snippets only; strict sandbox
Visual BuilderCanvas-based editor with drag-and-drop plus code toggleVisual scenario canvas with data mapping UILinear Zap builder; canvas editor in beta
Data ResidencyFull control when self-hosted; EU cloud option availableEU and US data centers; no self-hostingUS-hosted; limited region options on Enterprise
Error HandlingPer-node error workflows, retry logic, custom error branchesError handlers per module, break/resume, ignoreAuto-replay on errors; limited branching on failure
Sub-WorkflowsNative sub-workflow execution with parameter passingScenarios can call other scenarios via webhooksNo native sub-workflows; must chain via webhooks
Version ControlGit-native — workflows stored as JSON, full diff supportScenario versioning within UI; no native Git integrationVersion history in UI only; no export-to-Git workflow
CommunityOpen-source community; 50K+ GitHub stars; active forumActive community forum; template marketplaceLarge user base; Zapier experts marketplace
Enterprise FeaturesSSO, RBAC, audit log, LDAP, environments (Enterprise tier)SSO, teams, custom roles on Enterprise planSSO, admin console, SCIM on Enterprise; advanced RBAC
Cost at 10K Tasks/mo~$0 self-hosted; $50/mo Cloud~$59/mo (Core plan)~$250/mo (Professional plan)
Cost at 50K Tasks/mo~$0 self-hosted; $120/mo Cloud~$169/mo (Pro plan)~$500/mo (Professional plan)
Cost at 100K Tasks/mo~$0 self-hosted; $200/mo Cloud~$299/mo (Teams plan)~$750+/mo (Team/Enterprise plan)

Choose n8n When

  • Self-hosting is required for data sovereignty, compliance, or air-gapped environments
  • You need full control over data residency and infrastructure security
  • Workflows involve complex branching, loops, sub-workflows, and custom code logic
  • Your team includes developers comfortable with JavaScript, Python, or API integrations
  • Cost sensitivity at scale — self-hosted n8n has zero per-execution fees regardless of volume
  • AI agent workflows are central to your automation strategy (LangChain, vector stores, multi-model orchestration)

Choose Make When

  • Your team prefers a visual-first approach without writing code
  • Workflows involve moderate complexity — branching, routers, iterators, and aggregators
  • You want a solid balance between ease of use, features, and pricing
  • Data mapping and transformation are important and you want a visual mapper
  • The 1,800+ native modules cover your app stack without custom HTTP work

Choose Zapier When

  • Automations are straightforward trigger-action sequences with minimal branching
  • Your team is non-technical and needs the fastest possible setup time
  • Maximum app breadth matters — Zapier's 7,000+ integrations cover niche tools others lack
  • You only need low-volume automations where per-task pricing stays affordable
  • Quick prototyping and one-off automations are more valuable than long-term scalability

The Verdict

All three platforms have earned their place in the automation landscape, and the right choice depends on your team, your technical requirements, and your budget trajectory. Zapier is unmatched for simplicity and app coverage — if you need to connect a niche SaaS tool in five minutes, it is hard to beat. Make occupies the middle ground with a powerful visual builder, reasonable pricing, and enough depth for most business workflows. n8n stands apart for teams that need self-hosting, unlimited executions, deep AI integration, and the freedom to run custom code without restrictions.

At DSM.promo, we chose n8n as the backbone for our AI agent platform. The reasons are concrete: self-hosting gives us and our clients full data sovereignty for HIPAA and SOC 2 compliance, unlimited workflow executions keep costs predictable regardless of scale, native LangChain and AI agent nodes let us build sophisticated multi-model orchestrations, and Git-native version control fits our engineering workflow. For organizations building serious automation infrastructure — especially anything involving AI agents, compliance requirements, or high-volume processing — n8n delivers capabilities that Make and Zapier simply cannot match at any price tier.

Other comparisons:

vs Zapiervs Makevs UiPath