Make vs n8n: Which is Better in 2026?
n8n and Make are the two leading visual workflow automation platforms for teams that have outgrown Zapier's per-task pricing or want more control over complex, multi-step logic. n8n is open source and can be self-hosted for free; Make is fully cloud-hosted with a wider off-the-shelf integration catalog. Both shipped major AI-agent upgrades in the past year, n8n with native LangChain support and Make with its Maia conversational agent builder, making the choice increasingly about how each one bills and architects AI workflows, not just plain automation.
Short on time? Here's the quick answer
We've tested both tools. Here's who should pick what:
Make
Build complex automations with a drag-and-drop visual builder
Best for you if:
- • Advanced automation platform with visual workflow builder
- • Powerful data transformation and conditional logic
n8n
Workflow automation for technical teams
Best for you if:
- • Open-source Zapier alternative
- • Self-host for full control
| At a Glance |  Make |  n8n |
|---|---|---|
Starts at | FreeFree tier available | FreeFree tier available |
Best For | Workflow Automation | Workflow Automation |
Rating | 4.0/5 | 4.7/5 |
Free plan | Yes | Yes |
Choose Make or n8n?
Choose Make if
Build complex automations with a drag-and-drop visual builder
- Visual builder
- More powerful than Zapier
- Better value
Choose n8n if
Workflow automation for technical teams
- Open source
- Self-hostable
- Code flexibility
| Feature | Make | n8n |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing Model | Freemium | Freemium |
| User Rating | ★4.0/5 18 reviews | ★4.7/5 358 reviews |
| Categories | Workflow AutomationNo-Code | Workflow AutomationLow-Code Backend |
In-Depth Analysis
Make
Strengths
- +Visual-first interface with 2,000-plus native app integrations, generally considered more approachable for non-technical builders than n8n's node editor
- +Maia, Make's natural-language AI agent and automation builder, lets users describe a workflow in conversation rather than wiring nodes manually
- +Free tier includes 1,000 operations a month with unlimited scenarios structurally, useful for testing before committing to a paid plan
- +Pro plan at $18.82/month handles a real team workload, roughly 50 workflows running 100 executions a day, at a fraction of Zapier's cost per operation
Weaknesses
- -Bills per module, not per execution, so a workflow with routers, filters, and multiple steps consumes several operations on a single run, unlike n8n's flat per-execution cost
- -Make's AI Agents feature, in beta since April 2025, still lacks native RAG support, has limited memory management, and does not support multi-agent orchestration the way n8n's LangChain integration does
- -No free self-hosting option; every plan runs on Make's cloud, so there is no path to zero ongoing cost the way n8n's Community edition offers
Best For
Non-technical teams that want a fast, visual way to build standard automations and are not trying to build complex autonomous AI agents yet.
Make wins for teams that want the fastest visual builder experience and broad app coverage without touching a server, as long as their workflows are not step-heavy enough to make per-module billing expensive.
n8n
Strengths
- +Free and unlimited when self-hosted, with the Community edition supporting unlimited workflows and 400-plus integrations on your own infrastructure
- +Shipped a 2.0 release in January 2026 with native LangChain integration and roughly 70 AI nodes, giving it a real architecture advantage for autonomous agents, memory systems, and RAG pipelines
- +Billing is per workflow execution regardless of step count, so a 20-step workflow costs the same as a 2-step one, a meaningful advantage for complex automations
- +Cloud Starter plan is $20/month for 2,500 executions, competitive for teams not ready to self-host
Weaknesses
- -Self-hosting demands real DevOps comfort: server setup, updates, and uptime are on you unless you pay for cloud
- -Cloud plans are EUR-denominated and the mid-tier Business plan runs roughly EUR 800/month, a steep jump from Pro
- -Smaller off-the-shelf integration catalog than Make's, so some niche apps need a generic HTTP node instead of a native connector
Best For
Technical teams comfortable self-hosting, or anyone building AI agent workflows that need LangChain-native tooling and memory.
n8n wins when either self-hosting for cost control or building genuinely agentic AI workflows is the priority, since its architecture and per-execution billing both favor complex, multi-step automations.
Head-to-Head Comparison
Pricing
n8n winsn8n is free unlimited when self-hosted, or $20/month cloud Starter for 2,500 executions billed per workflow run regardless of steps. Make's Free tier gives 1,000 operations a month and Pro runs $18.82/month, but bills per module, so multi-step workflows burn through the quota faster; independent 2026 comparisons put n8n at 5 to 10 times cheaper at scale for complex, multi-step automations.
AI agent capability
n8n winsn8n's January 2026 2.0 release added native LangChain integration and around 70 AI nodes, giving it support for autonomous agents, memory, and RAG pipelines out of the box. Make's Maia agent builder is easier to talk to in natural language but its underlying AI Agents feature still lacks native RAG and multi-agent orchestration.
Ease of use
Make winsMake's visual canvas and 2,000-plus native connectors are generally faster to pick up for non-technical builders than n8n's more developer-oriented node interface, especially for standard, non-AI automations.
Integrations
Make winsMake's native app catalog is larger out of the box. n8n covers 400-plus integrations plus generic HTTP and webhook nodes that can reach almost anything, but that sometimes means more manual setup for less common apps.
Self-hosting and control
n8n winsn8n's open source Community edition can run entirely on your own infrastructure at no license cost, appealing to privacy-sensitive teams. Make has no self-hosted option; everything runs on Make's cloud.
Billing model for complex workflows
n8n winsBecause n8n counts one execution as one workflow run no matter how many steps it contains, complex multi-branch automations do not inflate cost the way they do under Make's per-module billing.
Migration Considerations
Moving from Make to n8n means rebuilding scenarios as workflows node by node, since Make's blueprint format does not import directly into n8n; expect the AI-heavy workflows to migrate faster given n8n's LangChain-native nodes. Moving from n8n to Make means consolidating multi-step logic into fewer, more expensive modules and budgeting for the operations-based cost increase on complex automations.
Pricing: Make vs n8n
| Plan | Make | n8n |
|---|---|---|
| Tier 1 | Free Free | N/A |
| Tier 2 | $10.59 Core | N/A |
| Tier 3 | $18.82 Pro | N/A |
| Tier 4 | $29 Teams | N/A |
Pricing verified from each vendor's public pricing page. Compare in detail on Make pricing and n8n pricing.
Who Should Use What?
On a budget?
Both are freemium. Compare plans on their websites.
Go with: Make
Want the highest-rated option?
Make: 4.0/5 (18 reviews). n8n: 4.7/5 (358 reviews).
Go with: n8n
Value user reviews?
Make: 18 reviews (4.0/5). n8n: 358 reviews (4.7/5).
Go with: n8n
3 Questions to Help You Decide
What's your budget?
Both are freemium. Pricing won't help you decide here.
What's your use case?
Both are workflow automation tools. Compare their specific features to decide.
How important are ratings?
n8n is rated higher: 4.7/5 vs 4.0/5.
Key Takeaways
Make
- Free tier available
- Our pick for this comparison
n8n
- Higher user rating: 4.7/5 vs 4.0/5
- Larger review base (358 reviews)
The Bottom Line
Choose n8n if you have any DevOps capacity to self-host, care about cost at scale, or are building genuinely agentic AI workflows that need memory and RAG. Choose Make if your team is non-technical, wants the fastest visual builder, and your workflows are simple enough that per-module billing stays cheap. A five-person ops team running complex multi-step automations saves real money self-hosting n8n; a marketing team automating straightforward lead-routing tasks will likely ship faster on Make.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is n8n really free?
The self-hosted Community edition is free and open source with unlimited workflows and 400-plus integrations, you only pay for the server it runs on. n8n's cloud version, if you skip self-hosting, starts at $20/month for 2,500 executions.
Which is cheaper for complex, multi-step workflows, n8n or Make?
n8n, in most cases. n8n bills per workflow execution regardless of step count, while Make bills per module, so a workflow with many routers and filters burns through Make's operation quota faster. 2026 comparisons put n8n at roughly 5 to 10 times cheaper at scale for step-heavy automations.
Which platform is better for building AI agents?
n8n has the stronger architecture as of its January 2026 2.0 release, with native LangChain integration and around 70 AI nodes supporting memory and RAG. Make's Maia agent builder is easier to describe workflows to in natural language, but its underlying AI Agents feature still lacks native RAG support and multi-agent orchestration.
Do I need technical skills to use n8n or Make?
Make is generally easier for non-technical users thanks to its visual canvas and large native app catalog. n8n is more approachable to technical users, especially if self-hosting, and its node-based interface assumes slightly more comfort with how data flows between steps.
Can I self-host Make like I can with n8n?
No. Make runs only on its own cloud infrastructure across all plans. n8n's open source Community edition is the one built specifically to be self-hosted at no license cost.