A detailed comparison of Make (Integromat) and n8n to help you choose the right tool for your needs.
Visual automation platform for designing complex workflows.
| Plan | Make (Integromat) | n8n |
|---|---|---|
| Free Tier | ✓ 1,000 ops/mo | ✓ Free (self-hosted) |
| Lowest Paid | $9/mo | $20/mo (cloud) |
| Enterprise | Custom pricing | Custom pricing |
| Feature | Make (Integromat) | n8n |
|---|---|---|
| Visual builder | ✓ | — |
| Complex workflows | ✓ | — |
| 1,500+ apps | ✓ | — |
| Error handling | ✓ | ✓ |
| Data stores | ✓ | — |
| Webhooks | ✓ | ✓ |
| Scheduling | ✓ | — |
| Templates | ✓ | ✓ |
| API | ✓ | — |
| Custom apps | ✓ | — |
| Visual workflow editor | — | ✓ |
| 350+ integrations | — | ✓ |
| Self-hosting | — | ✓ |
| Custom code | — | ✓ |
| REST API | — | ✓ |
| Credentials sharing | — | ✓ |
| Execution history | — | ✓ |
| Open Source | ✗ | ✓ |
| Rating | ⭐ 4.3 | ⭐ 4.3 |
Choose Make (Integromat) if: You need power users wanting visual, complex automation. Make (Integromat) excels with its visual workflow builder and more powerful than zapier.
Choose n8n if: You need developers wanting self-hosted automation. n8n stands out with its self-hostable and source-available.
Best free option: Both Make (Integromat) and n8n offer free tiers. Make (Integromat) offers "1,000 ops/mo" while n8n offers "Free (self-hosted)".
It depends on your needs. Make (Integromat) is better for power users wanting visual, complex automation, while n8n is better for developers wanting self-hosted automation. Both are excellent tools rated 4.3 and 4.3 respectively.
Make (Integromat) starts at $9/mo while n8n starts at $20/mo (cloud). Both offer free tiers.
Most tools offer import/export features to help you migrate. We recommend trying n8n's free tier before fully committing to a switch.
Join our weekly ToolSwitcher digest for free alternatives, cost-cutting playbooks, and curated tool deals.
Free forever. Unsubscribe anytime. No spam.