Automation

n8n vs Make (Integromat): Honest Comparison for Technical Teams (2026)

May 2026 · 10 min read

Make (formerly Integromat) and n8n are the two serious workflow automation tools for technical teams. Both have visual builders, branching, error handling, and good app ecosystems. They differ on three axes that matter: pricing at scale, custom code support, and whether you can self-host. After 30+ builds across both, here's the honest comparison.

Pricing

The pricing models are not directly comparable. Make charges per operation (each node execution counts as 1 operation). n8n cloud charges per execution (the entire workflow run counts as 1). Self-hosted n8n is essentially free at any volume.

For a workflow with 8 nodes that runs 1,000 times per month:

  • Make: 8,000 operations → needs Pro plan (16 euro for 10k ops)
  • n8n Cloud Starter: 1,000 executions → covered (20 euro for 5k)
  • n8n self-hosted: 6 euro VPS, unlimited

For a workflow that runs 10,000 times per month (80,000 ops on Make):

  • Make: Teams plan, 29 euro for 40k ops, then 80k = 49 euro
  • n8n Cloud Pro: 50 euro for 30k executions
  • n8n self-hosted: 12 euro VPS (2 GB)

Custom code

Both support JavaScript code nodes. n8n also supports Python (in self-hosted, currently beta in cloud). The execution environment differs:

  • Make Custom Apps: JavaScript, sandboxed. Limited to HTTP, no filesystem, no npm packages outside an allowlist.
  • n8n Code node: Full Node.js, access to most npm packages via the n8n-nodes-base modules. Self-hosted lets you install arbitrary npm.

n8n wins for technical teams. If your workflows need anything beyond "transform JSON," n8n's code support is dramatically more capable.

Self-hosting

Make: not available. SaaS only.

n8n: yes, freely. Docker image, docker-compose ready, runs on any VPS. The community edition is the same software as the cloud version (minus the user management UI). For GDPR-sensitive workflows, this is decisive.

Error handling

Both have try/catch via dedicated error-handler nodes. n8n has an "Execute Workflow" pattern where one workflow can call another and handle errors at the caller level — useful for centralizing retry logic. Make has built-in retry counts and exponential backoff configured per scenario.

Tie. Both are competent at error handling, just expressed differently.

App ecosystem

Make: 2,000+ built-in apps. Better coverage for less technical SaaS (Airtable, Notion, ClickUp, smaller CRMs).

n8n: 400+ official nodes plus 800+ community nodes. Better coverage for developer tools (GitHub, GitLab, Postgres, Redis, Kafka, OpenAI). Community nodes need to be reviewed but are installable in self-hosted with one command.

When to pick which

Pick Make if

  • Your workflows are mostly SaaS-to-SaaS (e.g., Typeform → Airtable → Mailchimp)
  • You have under 5,000 operations per month and want zero ops burden
  • You need a managed solution your non-technical team can also edit
  • You need apps that n8n doesn't have

Pick n8n if

  • Your workflows touch developer infrastructure (databases, APIs you wrote, internal services)
  • You want to self-host for data control or unlimited volume
  • You need real code execution beyond JSON transforms
  • You expect to scale to 50,000+ executions per month

Hybrid

Several teams use both. Make for the marketing/ops team's SaaS pipelines (HubSpot, Mailchimp, Typeform). n8n self-hosted for engineering's data pipelines (Postgres, API integrations, OpenAI). The split happens naturally because each team picks the tool that fits their use case.

Comparison

Dimension Make n8n Cloud n8n Self-Hosted
Pricing at 1k workflow runs 16 euro 20 euro 6 euro VPS
Pricing at 10k workflow runs 49 euro 50 euro 12 euro VPS
Self-hosting No No Yes
Custom code JS sandboxed JS + Python beta JS + Python + npm
App count 2,000+ 400 + 800 community 400 + 800 community
Error handling Built-in retry Error workflows Error workflows
GDPR data residency EU option (paid) EU region Your server
Best for Marketing/Ops SaaS Mixed team Engineering/data

FAQ

Is n8n really free?
Self-hosted n8n is free (Apache 2.0 license with a Sustainable Use clause restricting embedded SaaS resale). You pay for the VPS, that's it. Cloud is paid per execution.

Can I migrate workflows between Make and n8n?
Not automatically. Manual rebuild. Plan a half-day per non-trivial workflow.

Which is more reliable in production?
Both run our customer workflows fine. Make has more uptime history. n8n self-hosted reliability depends on your VPS hosting (DigitalOcean SLA: 99.99%).

What about Zapier?
Zapier is more expensive at scale and has weaker custom code support than both. Pick Zapier if non-technical users need to build workflows themselves with zero setup.

Not sure which to pick?

We've built 30+ production workflows on both. 1-hour scoping call to recommend the right tool for your stack.

Book a discovery call

Related Posts

n8n Self-Hosted Setup Zapier for Small Business
← All blog posts

Stop overpaying for SaaS workflow tools

Honest tool selection from someone who builds workflows for a living.

Book a discovery call