n8n vs Make: which fits your business in 2026?
Executions against operations — why the billing unit, not the feature list, decides which automation platform costs less.
We may earn a commission if you buy through links on this page, at no extra cost to you. Our verdicts are based on the data shown.
Pricing verified 2026-07-01 · updated 2026-07-01→ Run the full cost calculator for your exact volume
At a glance
| Nn8n | MMake | |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 4.33/5 | 4.22/5 |
| Starting price | $26/mo | $9/mo |
| Pricing basis | per month, 2,500 executions (Cloud Starter, billed annually) | per month, 10,000 operations, billed annually |
| Free plan | Yes | Yes |
| Trial | 14 days | 0 days |
| Integrations | 500+ | 2000+ |
| Best for | Technical teams that want unlimited workflow complexity, AI-native nodes and the option to self-host for free | Power users who want complex, branching automations at a fraction of Zapier's cost |
| Try n8n → | Try Make → |
Winner by use case
- Tightest budget: Make — entry plan is $17/mo cheaper ($204/year at entry tier).
- Fastest to learn: n8n (3.8/5 ease of use).
- Most capability: n8n (4.7/5 feature depth).
- Best value overall: n8n (4.8/5 value score).
Feature matrix
| Nn8n | MMake | |
|---|---|---|
| Free plan | ✓ | ✓ |
| Trial days | 14 | 0 |
| AI features | 4 | 3 |
| Integrations | 500+ | 2000+ |
| Ease of use | 3.8/5 | 3.7/5 |
| Feature depth | 4.7/5 | 4.6/5 |
| Value for money | 4.8/5 | 4.8/5 |
| Support | 4.0/5 | 3.8/5 |
Pricing, side by side
Nn8n
| Plan | Price |
|---|---|
| Community (self-hosted) | Free / custom |
| Starter (Cloud) | $26/mo |
| Pro (Cloud) | $65/mo |
Verified 2026-07-01 · Pricing source
Strengths and weaknesses
Nn8n
- Far cheaper than Zapier/Make at high volume - executions not tasks
- AI agent workflows are first-class, not an add-on
- Self-hosted community edition is genuinely free
- Huge and fast-growing template ecosystem
- Steeper learning curve than Zapier
- Cloud plans cap active workflows on lower tiers
- Fewer polished native app integrations than Zapier's 8,000
- Self-hosting means you manage updates and uptime
MMake
- Roughly 5-10x cheaper than Zapier per operation
- Visual canvas shows entire flow at a glance
- Real programming primitives (loops, arrays)
- Generous free plan for testing
- Steeper learning curve than Zapier
- Fewer app integrations (2,000 vs 8,000)
- Operations counting takes getting used to
- Support response can be slow on lower tiers
Our verdict
Feature lists won't settle this one; both platforms can build almost any workflow. The decision comes down to two things: how each one bills, and whether you're willing to self-host.
The billing unit is the whole game
- Make bills per operation — every module that fires in a scenario counts. A 15-step scenario that runs 1,000 times = 15,000 operations.
- n8n bills per execution — one full workflow run counts once, whether it has 5 nodes or 50.
That means the more complex your workflows get, the more n8n's model wins. A heavy AI-agent workflow (fetch → classify → enrich → write → notify, with loops) might consume 30+ operations per run on Make and exactly 1 execution on n8n. At 2,500 runs/month that's the difference between Make's mid tiers and n8n's $26 Starter.
Simple, short scenarios flip it: Make's free and low tiers are generous when workflows are 2–4 modules, and its per-operation price is tiny at small scale.
Self-hosting: n8n's trump card
n8n's Community Edition is source-available and free with unlimited executions on your own server — a $5/month VPS runs serious automation loads. Make has no equivalent. If your team can run Docker, the cost comparison is over. That's also the honest caveat: self-hosting means you own updates, backups and uptime.
AI workflows
n8n treats AI agents as first-class citizens: native LangChain agent nodes, vector stores, RAG pipelines, and a template library where 67% of new templates already use AI nodes. Make has AI modules and an assistant, but agentic patterns (tool-calling loops, multi-agent handoffs) fit n8n's model more naturally. Most of the ready-made AI agent templates you'll find — including ours — ship as n8n JSON.
Hidden costs and limits
- n8n Cloud caps active workflows on lower tiers (5 on Starter) — automation-heavy teams hit that before they hit execution limits.
- Make operations spike unpredictably when scenarios include iterators and error retries; model a worst-case month in the automation cost calculator.
- n8n's learning curve is real: expressions, JSON wrangling and node debugging. Make's UI is friendlier for marketers.
When to choose neither
Two apps, one trigger, no logic — Zapier's free tier or a native integration does it with less friction (see Zapier vs Make). Enterprise governance needs (SSO, audit logs, SOC2 reporting) point to Workato instead.
Choose n8n if workflows are complex or AI-driven, someone on the team is technical, or you want the self-hosted free option in your back pocket. Choose Make if visual simplicity for non-developers matters more and your scenarios stay short.
Pricing sources
- n8n pricing — verified 2026-07-01
- Make pricing — verified 2026-06-12
FAQ
Is Make cheaper than n8n?
Yes. Make starts at $9/mo versus $26/mo for n8n (per month, 10,000 operations, billed annually). Over a year that is a $204 difference at entry tier.
Which is easier to use, n8n or Make?
Based on our scoring, n8n is easier to get started with (ease-of-use 3.8/5 vs 3.7/5).
Which has more features, n8n or Make?
n8n scores higher on feature depth (4.7/5). Key differentiators: Executions-based pricing: one execution = whole workflow run, any number of steps; 500+ integrations plus HTTP request node for anything else; Code nodes (JavaScript/Python) inside visual flows.
Full reviews: n8n review · Make review
Related comparisons
Run the numbers: cost calculator · pricing index