n8n vs. Make
Two visual workflow canvases with different bets. n8n is self-hostable, bills per workflow run and lets you drop into code; Make is cloud-only, bills per module action and keeps everything visual. Here's how to pick, and when neither fits.
n8n
A node-based workflow automation tool you can run on n8n Cloud or host yourself. It pairs prebuilt nodes with an HTTP Request node and JavaScript or Python code nodes, and counts one execution per workflow run however many steps it has.
Choose n8n if
- You need to self-host, or want the free Community Edition
- Workflows have many steps, so per-run billing is cheaper than per-action
- A developer or technical ops person will own the automations
- You want code-level control inside AI agent workflows
Make
A cloud automation platform (formerly Integromat) with a visual scenario canvas, routers, iterators and aggregators. Make lists 3,000+ apps, offers an HTTP app for any API, and counts one credit per module action.
Choose Make if
- You want a fully visual builder with no code and nothing to host
- Builders are ops or marketing people comfortable with data mapping
- You want a low entry price and a generous free tier
- The apps you need already have Make modules
At a glance
| | n8n | Make |
|---|---|---|
| Build style | Node canvas, with code nodes (JavaScript, Python) | Visual scenario canvas, no code required |
| Hosting | n8n Cloud or self-hosted | Make cloud only |
| Billing unit | One execution per workflow run | One credit per module action |
| App catalog | 2,274 integrations listed, plus HTTP Request | 3,000+ apps listed, plus HTTP app |
| Free option (Sept 2026) | Community Edition, free to self-host (Sustainable Use License) | Free plan: 1,000 credits/mo, 2 active scenarios |
| Entry paid plan (Sept 2026) | Cloud Starter: 20 EUR/mo billed annually, 2,500 executions | Core: $12/mo billed monthly (less annually), 10,000 credits |
| Next tier (Sept 2026) | Cloud Pro: 50 EUR/mo billed annually, 10,000 executions | Pro: $21/mo billed monthly, 10,000 credits |
| Who builds it | Developers and technical ops | Ops and marketing builders |
| Upkeep | You own the instance if self-hosted, plus every workflow | Make runs the platform; you own every scenario |
Sources, as of September 2026: n8n pricing · n8n integrations · n8n Sustainable Use License · n8n Code node · Make pricing · Make integrations · Integromat evolves to Make
When neither fits
n8n and Make are both canvases: they run the flow you draw, step for step. Deciding which work to automate, drawing it, and redrawing it when an app, a field or a document format changes stays with whoever built it. When the builder moves on or the process is full of exceptions, the canvas does not help.
End-to-end AI Process Automation.
- DiscoverFinds the work worth automating in the tools you already use, read only, with the evidence behind each finding.
- AutomateThe person who does the work builds the automation that replaces it. No IT project, no bots to babysit.
- GovernEvery run and every decision is logged and reviewable. No black box.
Help me automate n8n or Make? Neither in Microsoft Outlook and Salesforce. Caddi builds the loop and runs it.
Microsoft Outlook
Salesforce
Discover it. Automate it. Govern it.
Bring a workflow that's outgrowing n8n or Make. Caddi finds it in the tools you already use, the person who does the work builds the automation with no IT project, and every run is on the record, across 150+ tools.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between n8n and Make?
Both are visual workflow builders, but n8n can be self-hosted, supports JavaScript and Python code nodes, and bills per workflow execution. Make is cloud-only, stays fully no-code, and bills a credit per module action. n8n tends to suit developers and technical ops teams; Make tends to suit ops and marketing builders who want a visual tool with nothing to host.
Is n8n cheaper than Make?
It depends on step count. n8n counts one execution per workflow run, so a 20-step workflow costs the same as a 2-step one. Make counts a credit per module action. As of September 2026, n8n Cloud Starter is 20 EUR/mo billed annually for 2,500 executions, and Make Core is $12/mo billed monthly for 10,000 credits. Long workflows favor n8n; short, frequent ones often favor Make.
Can Make be self-hosted like n8n?
No. Make runs only as a cloud service. n8n offers a free, self-hosted Community Edition under its Sustainable Use License, which allows internal business use, plus paid self-hosted Business and Enterprise plans. If data residency or running automations on your own servers is a requirement, n8n is the option of the two that supports it.
Which is easier to learn, n8n or Make?
Make is usually easier for non-developers because everything stays visual, though data mapping takes some practice. n8n's canvas looks similar, but advanced workflows often need expressions, JSON handling and occasionally code. If no one on your team is comfortable reading an API response, Make is the gentler start.
Should I choose n8n or Make for AI agent workflows?
Both offer AI features. n8n gives you node-level and code-level control over each step, which technical teams tend to prefer when building agents. Make keeps AI steps visual and notes that some advanced AI features use more than one credit. Pick based on who will build and maintain the agent, then check each vendor's current AI limits.
When should I use neither n8n nor Make?
When the bottleneck is not the canvas but the builder. If the people who know the work are not the ones who can draw and maintain flows, and the process involves varied documents and exceptions, a builder leaves the gap open. Caddi finds the work, builds it as deterministic code from one walkthrough, and logs every run.