Make vs n8n

At a Glance

Make and n8n represent two distinct philosophies for workflow automation, both built in the EU and both positioning themselves as serious alternatives to Zapier. Make leans into visual power — a polished drag-and-drop builder with thousands of pre-built connectors. n8n leans into developer freedom — an open-source platform where you can self-host, inspect the code, and drop into JavaScript or Python whenever the visual canvas is not enough.

Pricing and Value

Pricing is where these two platforms diverge sharply, because they measure usage differently.

Make uses a credit-based system. The Free tier gives you 1,000 credits per month. Paid plans start at $10.59/month (Core) for 10,000 credits, scaling to $18.82/month (Pro) and $34.12/month (Teams). Each module action in a workflow — trigger, action, search — consumes one credit. Unused credits on paid plans roll over for one month, which softens the per-execution billing model. Annual billing discounts apply.

n8n takes a split approach. The Community Edition is entirely free with unlimited executions — you host it yourself on Docker, Kubernetes, or bare metal and pay only for your own server costs. The cloud service starts at EUR 24/month for 2,500 workflow executions (not individual actions, but full workflow runs), scaling to EUR 60/month for 10,000 executions. A 14-day free trial is available on cloud plans.

The practical comparison depends on your workflow complexity. A Make scenario with 8 modules consumes 8 credits per run, while the same workflow on n8n cloud counts as 1 execution. For simple automations, Make's entry-level pricing is lower. For complex, multi-step workflows running frequently, n8n's execution-based model or free self-hosted option can be dramatically cheaper.

Edge: n8n for teams with technical capacity to self-host (it is genuinely free). Make for non-technical teams wanting a low entry price without managing infrastructure.

Features and Capabilities

Both platforms offer visual workflow builders, conditional branching, error handling, and AI integration. The differences lie in approach and depth.

Make's visual builder is its centrepiece. Scenarios are built on a two-dimensional canvas where you connect modules with paths, routers, filters, and iterators. The builder supports branching logic, error handlers with fallback paths, array aggregation, and data transformation — all configured through a point-and-click interface. Make also offers Maia, an AI assistant that generates automation scenarios from natural language descriptions, and native modules for OpenAI, Claude, and Gemini.

n8n's canvas looks similar at first glance but hides a fundamentally different engine underneath. At any point in a workflow, you can open a Code node and write JavaScript or Python to handle logic that would be clumsy or impossible in a purely visual tool. This "code-when-you-need-it" approach makes n8n uniquely capable for technical teams. n8n also ships a native AI agent builder with human-in-the-loop approval, memory, and tool-use capabilities — it is arguably ahead of Make on agentic AI workflows. Sub-workflows allow modular design, and the full execution history includes step-level debugging.

Make excels at complex automations you can build entirely without code. n8n excels when a workflow inevitably requires custom logic that no pre-built module covers.

Edge: Make for pure visual automation power. n8n for workflows that need custom code or AI agent orchestration.

Ease of Use

Neither platform is as simple as Zapier's linear trigger-action model, but they are both more powerful for it.

Make's learning curve is moderate. The visual builder is intuitive once you understand modules, connections, and routers, but beginners can feel overwhelmed by the sheer number of options. The credit-based pricing also requires some mental overhead — you need to understand how credits map to module executions. Documentation is solid, and a template library helps new users get started.

n8n's learning curve is steeper, particularly for the self-hosted path. Setting up a Docker container, configuring environment variables, and managing upgrades requires comfort with the command line. Once running, the visual builder is clean and capable, but the code-first philosophy means some operations assume developer familiarity. n8n cloud removes the infrastructure complexity, though the builder itself still skews technical. n8n's own documentation acknowledges the tool is designed for "technical people."

For business users and operations teams, Make is more approachable. For developers and DevOps engineers, n8n feels more natural.

Edge: Make for non-technical users. n8n for developers.

EU Compliance and Data Sovereignty

Both platforms are EU-headquartered, both store data in the EU, and both take compliance seriously. This is a strong differentiator against Zapier (US-based, US data hosting).

Make is headquartered in Prague (Czech Republic) and owned by Celonis SE, a German company. It holds ISO 27001 and SOC 2 Type II certifications, uses TLS 1.2/1.3 with AES-256 encryption, and adheres to the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework. Data is hosted in the EU. The compliance posture is enterprise-grade and well-documented.

n8n is a German GmbH headquartered in Berlin. Cloud data is hosted in Frankfurt on Azure Germany West Central, with AES-256 encryption at rest and FIPS 140-2 compliance. A DPA with Standard Contractual Clauses is available. SOC 3 is published, with SOC 2 in progress. Critically, n8n's self-hosted option allows complete data sovereignty — your data never leaves your own infrastructure, making it the strongest possible position for sensitive workloads.

Both are excellent on EU compliance. n8n's self-hosting option gives it a structural advantage for organisations that need absolute data control.

Edge: n8n for data sovereignty (self-hosting). Make for out-of-the-box enterprise certifications (ISO 27001, SOC 2 Type II).

Integrations

This is Make's clearest advantage. With over 3,000 pre-built app integrations covering major SaaS tools, databases, and AI services, Make has a connector library that rivals Zapier's. Google Workspace, Slack, HubSpot, Salesforce, OpenAI, Shopify, Airtable, Notion, Microsoft 365, Stripe — the major platforms are all covered, along with a deep tail of niche and regional tools.

n8n offers 500+ pre-built integration nodes. The major platforms are represented — Google Workspace, Microsoft 365, Slack, OpenAI, Anthropic, PostgreSQL, Salesforce, HubSpot, GitHub, AWS S3 — but the long tail is shorter. n8n compensates with powerful HTTP Request and Code nodes that let you connect to any API, and a community node ecosystem that extends coverage. If you can write a few lines of JavaScript, the 500-node library expands to anything with an API.

For business users who expect to connect tools without writing code, Make's library is significantly more comprehensive. For developers comfortable hitting APIs directly, n8n's smaller library is rarely a bottleneck.

Edge: Make for breadth of pre-built connectors. n8n closes the gap for technical teams.

When to Choose Make

Make is the stronger choice for operations teams, marketing departments, and business users who need to build sophisticated automations without writing code. Its visual builder handles complexity that Zapier cannot match — branching, loops, error handling, data transformation — while remaining accessible to non-developers.

Choose Make if you:

• Want the largest possible library of pre-built app integrations
• Need complex multi-step automations built entirely in a visual interface
• Prefer a managed service with ISO 27001 and SOC 2 Type II compliance out of the box
• Have business users (not just developers) building and maintaining workflows
• Want AI-assisted scenario building through Maia

When to Choose n8n

n8n is the stronger choice for developers, DevOps teams, and organisations that prioritise control over convenience. The ability to self-host, inspect source code, and write custom JavaScript or Python at any point in a workflow gives n8n a flexibility that no closed-source platform can match.

Choose n8n if you:

• Want to self-host for complete data sovereignty and zero per-execution costs
• Need to mix visual automation with custom code in the same workflow
• Are building AI agent workflows with human-in-the-loop approval
• Have a technical team comfortable with Docker, APIs, and scripting
• Want to avoid vendor lock-in with access to the source code

The Verdict

Make and n8n are both excellent European workflow automation platforms, and both outperform Zapier on price, EU compliance, and technical capability. The choice between them hinges on your team's technical profile.

Make is the more polished, more accessible platform. Its visual builder is best-in-class for complex no-code automations, its integration library is six times larger, and its compliance certifications are already enterprise-grade. For teams where business users own the automation workflows, Make delivers power without requiring a developer on standby.

n8n is the more flexible, more developer-oriented platform. Self-hosting eliminates recurring costs entirely. The code-when-you-need-it approach means you never hit a wall where the tool cannot do what you need. And for AI agent workflows, n8n's native builder with human-in-the-loop controls is ahead of the competition.

For business-led automation teams, Make is the better fit. For developer-led teams that value openness and control, n8n is the stronger choice. Both are proudly European, both host data in the EU, and both prove that the best workflow automation tools do not have to come from Silicon Valley.