Make vs n8n (2026): Hosted simplicity vs self-hosted control
Make (formerly Integromat) and n8n are two leading visual workflow automation tools for power users. Make delivers a polished hosted experience with granular scenario building, while n8n provides source-available software for those who prioritize control and customization. This comparison is for technical teams, SaaS power users, and automation specialists deciding between convenience and flexibility.
Quick verdict: Make wins for teams needing affordable, reliable automation without infrastructure headaches. n8n dominates for self-hosters who demand unlimited customization, code-level access, and AI agent tooling.
Make vs n8n at a glance
| Make | n8n | |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | Business teams needing hosted automation | Developers who want self-hosted control |
| Starting price | ~$9-10.59/mo (Core) | Free (self-hosted) or ~EUR 20-24/mo (Cloud) |
| Free plan or trial | Free plan available | Self-hosted community edition free |
| Standout strength | Branching logic and data mapping | Code steps and AI agent integrations |
| Biggest weakness | Limited customization options | Requires technical setup for self-hosting |
Where Make wins
Make's hosted platform eliminates infrastructure management entirely. You get instant access to a production-ready automation environment with guaranteed uptime, automatic scaling, and built-in monitoring. This is invaluable for teams without DevOps resources who need to focus on workflow logic rather than server maintenance.
The visual scenario builder excels at complex branching and data transformation. You can create multi-path workflows with conditional logic that rivals scripting, all through drag-and-drop. Data mapping between apps is particularly intuitive, with type detection and previews that reduce configuration errors. For marketing stacks or CRM integrations, this precision saves hours of debugging.
Make's pricing model is transparent and scales predictably. Operations (individual data transformations) are cheaper than Zapier's equivalent, and the Free plan allows meaningful testing. The Core plan's ~$10/month for 10k operations handles most SMB use cases, while Pro's ~$17/month adds priority execution - a cost-effective upgrade for time-sensitive workflows.
Where n8n wins
n8n's self-hosted edition provides complete data sovereignty and customization. You control every aspect of execution, from server location to runtime environment, making it ideal for regulated industries or privacy-conscious teams. The ability to modify the source code (Fair Code license) lets developers add custom nodes or alter core functionality - impossible with closed platforms like Make.
The node-based editor supports JavaScript/Python code steps alongside visual automation. This hybrid approach bridges the gap between no-code and pro-code, allowing gradual complexity escalation. AI tooling is particularly robust, with dedicated nodes for LLM chains, vector databases, and autonomous agent workflows that outpace Make's basic AI integrations.
For high-volume use cases, self-hosted n8n eliminates per-operation costs entirely. Once deployed, you pay only for infrastructure - a game-changer for enterprises running millions of monthly automations. The cloud version's EUR 20-24/month Starter plan includes 10k executions, but self-hosting removes this ceiling while allowing horizontal scaling across your own Kubernetes clusters.
Pricing compared
As of mid-2026, Make is cheaper for typical business automation volumes. The Core plan's ~$10/month covers 10k operations - enough for daily CRM syncs, marketing automations, and basic data pipelines. At ~$0.001 per operation, scaling to 50k/month costs ~$50, still below n8n Cloud's EUR 20 (~$22) Starter plan that includes just 10k executions (EUR 0.002 per op). Make's volume discounts kick in earlier for growing teams.
n8n flips the cost equation at scale or with self-hosting. The Cloud plan becomes competitive around 50k executions/month (EUR 60 vs Make's ~$50), but self-hosted n8n wins outright for heavy usage - a 1M operation/month workload costs ~$500 on Make Pro but just ~$20 in cloud compute via self-hosting. Factor in n8n's waived license fees for the community edition, and the TCO advantage widens for technical teams.
Which should you choose?
- Choose Make if you need reliable automation without server management, especially for business processes under 100k operations/month.
- Choose Make if your team values drag-and-drop simplicity with advanced branching logic for marketing/sales stacks.
- Choose n8n if you require self-hosting for compliance, data residency, or custom modifications to the automation engine.
- Choose n8n if your workflows involve AI agents, code-level transformations, or will exceed 200k operations/month.
- Choose n8n if you have DevOps resources to manage containers and prefer paying for infrastructure over per-operation fees.
Bottom line
Make delivers the best balance of power and simplicity for most business users, with superior pricing under 100k operations. n8n is the undisputed choice for technical teams who prioritize control, customization, and cost-efficiency at scale. Unless you specifically need self-hosting or AI agent tooling, Make's hosted platform will satisfy 80% of automation use cases with less friction.