Automation

n8n vs Make in 2026: head-to-head on the eight things that matter

Two years of running both across 80+ client projects. The honest comparison: where Make is still simpler, where n8n is cheaper, and the rule we use to pick.

Updated 1 min read

n8n and Make are the two automation platforms we deploy 90% of the time in 2026. Zapier still exists for one-off triggers but neither of these is a “Zapier alternative” anymore, they are their own category.

The eight comparison points#

  1. Self-hosting. n8n: yes (free for fair-use). Make: no. n8n wins for data-residency or cost-sensitive setups.
  2. UX for non-engineers. Make is still simpler for a non-technical operator to maintain. n8n requires more comfort with JSON.
  3. Pricing. Make charges per operation (each step counts). n8n self-hosted is free; cloud charges per workflow execution. For high-volume work, n8n is 5-10x cheaper.
  4. Error handling. Both have try/catch. n8n’s is more flexible; Make’s is more visual.
  5. Built-in integrations. Make: 2,000+. n8n: 500+ but with HTTP node covering anything. Make wins on out-of-the-box; n8n catches up via REST.
  6. AI nodes. Both have OpenAI/Anthropic nodes. n8n added MCP support in Q1 2026; Make has not.
  7. Versioning and Git. n8n: workflows as JSON files, Git-friendly. Make: snapshot-based, harder to code-review.
  8. Reliability. Both 99.9%+. Self-hosted n8n is on you.

How we pick#

Client without engineering team, low-medium volume, fast time-to-ship: Make. Client with engineers, high volume, custom integrations, AI-heavy: n8n. Mix-and-match is fine.

Both are part of every workflow automation engagement we run. Send us your current setup for a fit check.

More from Automation