n8n vs Make for AI automation — which one should you actually pick?
The honest side-by-side for businesses picking a workflow platform in 2026. Cost, control, extensibility, failure modes, and the teams each one actually fits. Written by someone who ships on both for clients.
The one-line verdict
n8n
Who it fits
Technical teams that want full control, self-hosting, and sensitive-data workflows. Strong fit for SaaS, dev teams, and regulated industries.
Typical cost
Free self-hosted, Cloud from $20/mo USD. Infra ~$10–50/mo if self-hosted.
Make (Integromat)
Who it fits
Non-technical operators and marketing teams on a SaaS-heavy stack who need polish, reliability, and zero infra.
Typical cost
From $10.59/mo USD; scales by operations. Typical business plan $30–100/mo.
Bottom line
For AI-heavy, high-volume, or data-sensitive workflows: n8n. For marketing ops, SaaS-stack integrations, and non-technical operators: Make. The tool matters far less than the workflow design — a well-built Make scenario beats a poorly designed n8n one every time.
Head to head
The axes that actually decide it.
Setup time
n8n
Cloud: 2 minutes. Self-hosted: 30–90 minutes for Docker + domain + SSL.
Make
Sign-up to first live scenario in under 10 minutes. Zero infra.
The takeaway
If you value a clean Monday morning, Make wins by a wide margin. If you will build 50+ workflows, the infra cost of n8n amortises fast.
Pricing model
n8n
Self-hosted is free forever. Cloud priced per executions, predictable at high volume. No per-step billing.
Make
Priced per operation (every step in every scenario counts). Predictable at small scale, punishes complex workflows.
The takeaway
High-volume, multi-step workflows get expensive on Make fast. n8n wins clearly for anything running thousands of executions per month.
Integration catalogue
n8n
500+ built-in nodes plus a thriving community node ecosystem. Gaps are common; fix is usually an HTTP Request node or custom code.
Make
2,000+ polished native apps. Integrations feel carefully built, with good error handling and docs.
The takeaway
Make wins on breadth and polish. n8n wins when you need to go beyond the catalogue with custom code.
AI / LLM support
n8n
First-class LangChain nodes, vector store nodes, agent nodes, and a growing native AI toolkit. Built for LLM workflows from day one.
Make
Solid OpenAI and Anthropic integrations, but the orchestration layer for multi-step agentic workflows is thinner than n8n.
The takeaway
For serious AI automation — vector memory, tool-using agents, multi-model routing — n8n has the clearer lead.
Custom code
n8n
JavaScript and Python code nodes run natively. Self-hosted means you can bring any library, any runtime.
Make
Limited to a JavaScript code node with a restricted API. Workarounds require external services.
The takeaway
If any part of your workflow will ever need real code, n8n is the only sane choice.
Reliability & monitoring
n8n
Depends on how well you host it. Self-hosted means you own uptime. Cloud is solid but newer than Make.
Make
Mature, battle-tested. Error recovery, retries, and history are first-class.
The takeaway
Make wins for teams with no dev ops capacity. n8n with a managed cloud host closes the gap significantly.
Data residency & compliance
n8n
Self-hosted anywhere — EU, US, AU, on-prem. Full control for GDPR, HIPAA-adjacent, or client-sensitive data.
Make
EU or US region selectable, but your data transits Make infrastructure. Not a blocker for most, a blocker for regulated ones.
The takeaway
For healthcare, finance, legal, or enterprise clients with data-residency clauses, n8n self-hosted is the only answer.
Team collaboration
n8n
Workflows live in a repo-friendly JSON format. You can version-control them. Multi-user coming along in Cloud.
Make
Team plans, shared scenarios, role-based access. Built for multi-operator teams from the start.
The takeaway
Make is better out of the box for 5+ person ops teams. n8n shines when your workflows live alongside code.
Where it breaks
n8n
Self-hosted dies if you ignore backups and upgrades. Community nodes can rot.
Make
Operation bills balloon on a complex scenario. Vendor lock-in on some integrations that lack open counterparts.
The takeaway
Match the failure you can afford to recover from. Infra debt or bill shock — pick the one your team can absorb.
Use this, not that
Reach for each when…
n8n
- You have a developer on the team (or you are one) and want full control over the stack.
- Workflows will handle sensitive data — customer records, healthcare, financial, or IP.
- You expect to hit 1,000+ workflow executions per month and need predictable pricing.
- You want deep AI orchestration — agents, vector memory, multi-model routing, tool use.
- You need to connect to internal APIs, legacy systems, or tools without native integrations.
Make
- The team maintaining the workflows is marketing, ops, or non-technical.
- Your stack is mostly mainstream SaaS — HubSpot, Salesforce, Notion, Airtable, Google Workspace.
- You value zero infra overhead and polished UX over maximum flexibility.
- The workflows are straightforward — linear scenarios, not agentic multi-step logic.
- You are shipping your first 5–10 automations and want to move fast without ops burden.
Frequently asked
Questions that come up every engagement.
Is n8n really free?
The self-hosted Community Edition of n8n is free forever for personal and internal business use. You host it yourself (usually on a $5–20/mo VPS), and there are no feature limits or execution caps. The paid Cloud and Enterprise tiers are for teams that want managed hosting, SSO, and enterprise support. Most clients who value full control run n8n self-hosted and spend about $10–50/mo on infrastructure.
Is Make cheaper than n8n?
At small scale — under 10,000 operations per month — Make is often cheaper than self-hosting n8n, because you avoid the infra overhead. At larger scale, the economics flip hard. A complex AI automation workflow that runs 1,000 times per day can rack up 1M+ operations per month on Make, which pushes you into the Enterprise plan. The same workload on n8n self-hosted costs the same as any other load on your server.
Can n8n do everything Make can do?
For workflow orchestration, yes, and usually better. The gap is in the catalogue polish — Make has 2,000+ native integrations, many of which feel more carefully built than the n8n equivalent. If your stack is 100% mainstream SaaS (HubSpot, Salesforce, Slack, Gmail) and you never need custom code, Make will feel smoother. If you ever touch internal APIs, custom logic, or AI agents, n8n pulls ahead.
Which is better for AI automation workflows?
n8n, clearly. It has first-class nodes for LangChain, vector stores, multi-model LLM routing, and agentic tool use. Make has OpenAI and Anthropic integrations but the orchestration layer for multi-step AI agents is thinner. For anything beyond a simple "prompt LLM, store result" pattern, n8n is the right choice in 2026.
Which platform is better for GDPR, HIPAA, or data-sensitive workflows?
n8n self-hosted, without question. When data never leaves your infrastructure, compliance is straightforward — you own the stack, you own the audit trail, you can locate data in the exact region your regulator requires. Make is a managed SaaS with US and EU regions; it works for most businesses but is a hard blocker for regulated industries like healthcare, finance, and legal.
Can I migrate from Make to n8n (or vice versa) later?
Workflow logic transfers conceptually, but there is no automated migration tool. You will rebuild scenarios by hand, mapping Make modules to n8n nodes. For a business with 5–10 workflows, the migration is a weekend of work. For a business with 50+, it is a proper project. Worth planning the choice carefully upfront — though most teams I work with end up happy with whichever they started, as long as the underlying workflow design was sound.
Free download · 6 pages · PDF
10 AI workflows that actually save hours.
Real agentic workflows running in production — not prompt packs. Stacks, costs, and failure modes from projects that shipped.
No spam. You also get the Sunday note — unsubscribe in one click.
Keep reading
David Dacruz
Replies in ~24h
Next step
Still not sure which one fits?
A 30-minute call is usually all it takes to match your team, stack, and workflows to the right platform — and scope the first automation worth shipping. Free to global clients.