Last updated September 2026
All three connect your apps and automate workflows. The real differences are pricing model, technical complexity, and who's actually going to maintain it -- not which one has the flashiest homepage.
Quick answer: Zapier is the fastest to set up and needs no technical skill, but gets expensive at volume. Make offers more visual flexibility at a lower cost than Zapier, with a moderate learning curve. n8n is the most technical to run, but self-hosted n8n has no per-execution cost at all -- the cheapest option by far once you're running real volume.
| n8n | Zapier | Make | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | Per execution -- self-hosted has no per-execution cost | Per task -- every step billed individually | Per operation -- similar granularity to Zapier, typically cheaper at the same volume |
| Best for | Technical teams, high volume, compliance needs | Non-technical teams, fastest setup | Visual, flexible logic without n8n's technical overhead |
| Setup complexity | Highest -- some engineering capacity expected | Lowest -- built for business users | Medium -- more approachable than n8n, more powerful than basic Zaps |
| Self-hosting | Yes, fully | No | No |
| Cost at high volume | Cheapest once self-hosted | Most expensive -- often 5-8x n8n | Cheaper than Zapier, more than self-hosted n8n |
| Integration catalog | Smaller, but full API access for anything without one | Largest -- 7,000+ apps | Mid-sized -- solid, not as broad as Zapier |
We'd rather tell you honestly than sell you whichever one's easiest for us to pitch.
A 10-step workflow running 1,000 times a month is 1,000 billed units on n8n (or $0 self-hosted), but 10,000 billed tasks on Zapier's per-task model -- Make sits in between with per-operation billing. The gap barely matters at low volume. It becomes the deciding factor the moment you're running workflows with real volume or branching complexity.
Every implementation starts with the same process we use for everything — audit first, then build what the audit actually finds, not the other way around.
Self-hosted n8n is the cheapest by far at real volume -- no per-execution cost at all. Make is typically cheaper than Zapier at similar volume due to its operations-based pricing, while Zapier's per-task billing makes it the most expensive of the three once you're running any real volume.
Zapier is the easiest for non-technical teams -- its linear Zap structure and huge integration catalog make it the fastest path to a working automation. Make is a middle ground, offering more visual flexibility with a moderate learning curve. n8n asks the most upfront, since it's built for teams with some technical capacity.
Yes, and it's a common path -- many teams start on Zapier to prove a workflow quickly, then migrate to Make or n8n once volume or complexity justifies the switch. The workflow logic has to be rebuilt on the new platform, but the underlying business process doesn't change.
Not strictly to use workflows already built for you, but ongoing changes are meaningfully easier with some technical capacity in-house. Zapier and Make are both designed to be maintained by non-technical users; n8n is not.
That's exactly what a Discovery Call is for — an honest look at your real volume and technical capacity before we recommend anything.
Tell us about your business →