Businesses waste countless hours moving data between apps manually. This can happen by copying contacts from forms into CRMs, updating spreadsheets from email notifications, and syncing customer information across platforms. Workflow automation platforms eliminate this repetitive work by connecting your tools and handling these tasks automatically.
Make, Zapier, and n8n represent the three leading automation platforms, each designed for different team capabilities and business needs. This comparison breaks down how each platform works, what they cost, and which one fits your specific situation. You will get a clear picture:from ease of use and integration options to data control and scalability considerations.
As mentioned in the introduction, Make, Zapier, and n8n are workflow automation platforms that connect your apps and services to handle repetitive tasks automatically. Think of them as digital assistants that move data between your tools without manual copying and pasting.
Zapier leads with over 7,000 pre-built connections and works best for teams without technical backgrounds. Make (previously called Integromat) sits in the middle with visual workflows that handle more complex scenarios. n8n gives technical teams full control through self-hosting options and the ability to write custom code.
The main differences come down to three factors: how easy each platform is to learn, how much customization you get, and where your data lives during automation.
Zapier follows a simple trigger-action pattern. When something happens in one app (like a new form submission), Zapier automatically does something in another app (like adding that contact to your email list).
The platform connects to practically every business tool you've heard of, from HubSpot to Slack to Google Sheets. You build automations called "Zaps" through a step-by-step interface that asks plain-English questions. No coding required.
Key limitations to know:
The pricing model counts "tasks", meaning each action that runs in your workflow. A simple two-step Zap uses one task per run, but costs add up fast for high-volume automations.
Make displays your automations as visual flowcharts where you can see exactly how data moves between apps. This visual approach makes it easier to spot problems and understand what's happening at each step.
The platform excels when you're connecting multiple apps with conditional logic. Let's say you want to check if a lead's email domain matches your target companies, then route them to different lists based on company size. Make handles scenarios like this naturally through its modular design.
You get over 1,000 app connections plus HTTP modules that let you connect to any web service with an API. The learning curve is steeper than Zapier, but you're not hitting walls when your automations grow more sophisticated.
Make prices by "operations" (similar to Zapier's tasks) but typically gives you more operations per dollar. The free tier includes 1,000 operations monthly, which lets you test substantial workflows before paying anything.
n8n stands apart by offering both cloud-hosted and self-hosted options. You can run n8n on your own servers, which means your data never leaves your infrastructure. This is critical for regulated industries or sensitive information.
The platform provides around 400 native connections, fewer than competitors, but makes up for this through customization. You can write JavaScript or Python directly into your workflows, build custom nodes, and connect to any API. For developers, this openness enables solutions that closed platforms can't support.
Deployment options:
The visual editor looks similar to Make's approach but lets you dig deeper at every step. You can inspect the JSON data passing between nodes, write custom functions, and build reusable workflow components. Technical teams appreciate this transparency and control.
Zapier wins for speed to first automation. You can build your first Zap in minutes, and the interface guides you through each decision. Most people become productive within a few hours.
Make requires more upfront learning. The visual interface helps you grasp workflow logic, but mastering features like iterators and error handlers takes time. Teams with some technical comfort typically adapt within days.
n8n assumes you understand concepts like JSON data structures and HTTP requests. The platform doesn't hide complexity, but exposes it. Technical teams often prefer this directness, while non-technical users find it overwhelming.
Here's a practical benchmark: if your team regularly works with APIs or databases, n8n's learning curve won't slow you down. If "API" sounds like jargon, start with Zapier.
Zapier's 7,000+ pre-built integrations cover virtually every mainstream business tool. You'll rarely encounter a popular app that Zapier doesn't support. The trade-off is that each integration offers basic features, which is enough for common use cases but not deep customization.
Make provides over 1,000 app modules with more configuration options per integration. Each connection typically exposes more fields and actions, giving you finer control over data flow. The HTTP modules let you connect to any web service, though you'll need some technical knowledge for custom API connections.
n8n's smaller library of 400+ native integrations might seem limiting at first glance. However, technical teams bridge this gap by connecting to any service through HTTP requests or by building custom nodes. This approach works well when you have development resources but creates friction otherwise.
All three platforms support webhooks for real-time triggers. The difference lies in how much technical knowledge you need. Zapier minimizes complexity, Make finds middle ground, and n8n exposes full control.
Zapier counts each action as one task. A workflow with a trigger and two actions consumes two tasks per run. This adds up quickly, and a workflow running 100 times daily uses 6,000 tasks monthly, pushing you into higher pricing tiers.
Make operates similarly with "operations" but typically offers better value at scale. The starter plan includes 10,000 operations for about $10 monthly, while Zapier's comparable tier costs almost double.
n8n offers the most flexible pricing. The self-hosted version is free and you only pay for server hosting. Cloud plans start at $20 monthly for 2,500 executions, competitive with other platforms while eliminating infrastructure management.
|
Platform |
Free Tier |
Starting Paid |
Best Value For |
|
Zapier |
100 tasks/month |
$19.99/month |
Low-volume, simple workflows |
|
Make |
1,000 credits/month |
$9/month |
High-volume, complex workflows |
|
n8n |
Unlimited (self-hosted) |
$20/month (cloud) |
Technical teams, high volume |
Zapier and Make operate exclusively as cloud services. Your data passes through their servers during automation, which works fine for most businesses but may conflict with strict compliance requirements.
n8n's self-hosting option gives you complete data sovereignty. Automation workflows and the data they process stay on your infrastructure, meeting even the strictest compliance standards. This capability matters for healthcare, finance, or government contractors.
The trade-off is responsibility. You'll configure servers, implement access controls, maintain updates, and monitor for security threats. Organizations without dedicated IT teams might find this burden outweighs the benefits.
Zapier fits when you're prioritizing speed over customization. Marketing teams, small businesses, and departments within larger organizations often find Zapier delivers immediate value without technical overhead.
The platform works best for workflows connecting two or three apps with straightforward logic. Syncing contacts between your email platform and CRM, posting social media updates across channels, or collecting form submissions into spreadsheets are some of Zapier's strengths.
You might outgrow Zapier when workflows become more complex or task volumes increase significantly. The per-task pricing model becomes expensive at scale, and the platform's limitations around conditional logic and data transformation start to constrain what you can build.
Make suits businesses building sophisticated workflows without wanting to manage technical infrastructure. The visual builder makes complex logic accessible to users with intermediate technical skills, while operations-based pricing stays economical as you scale.
Teams handling data transformation, conditional branching, or iterative processes find Make's capabilities essential. The platform bridges Zapier's simplicity and n8n's technical complexity and offers enough power for intricate workflows while remaining approachable for non-developers.
Make particularly excels when you're processing data across multiple steps before taking action. Pulling data from several sources, transforming it, applying business logic, then distributing results to various systems—these multi-step scenarios represent Make's sweet spot.
n8n becomes the clear choice when data privacy, customization, or cost at scale drive your decision. Businesses with technical teams, strict compliance requirements, or highly specialized workflows find n8n's flexibility indispensable.
Technical teams appreciate n8n's openness. When you're integrating with internal APIs, implementing custom business logic, or building automations that commercial platforms can't support, n8n's code-friendly approach enables otherwise impossible solutions.
The platform also appeals to businesses scaling rapidly where per-task pricing becomes prohibitively expensive. Self-hosting n8n means automation costs stay fixed regardless of volume, though you're investing in infrastructure and technical expertise instead.
The decision between Make, Zapier, and n8n starts with your team's current capabilities. A marketing team without developers will struggle with n8n but thrive with Zapier. A technical operations team might find Zapier limiting from day one.
Budget considerations extend beyond monthly subscription costs. n8n's self-hosted option appears free but factor in infrastructure costs and technical time for setup and maintenance. Zapier might seem expensive per task but eliminates the need for technical resources. Make often provides the best balance of capability and cost for mid-sized businesses.
Quick decision guide:
To see how automation creates tangible value, it’s worth looking at two recent W4 projects.
n8n Automation for just-medical!
The Swiss healthcare platform just-medical! needed to update its medical event and job portals daily. A repetitive, manual process that consumed hours of staff time. W4 implemented a custom n8n automation that checks partner sites nightly and automatically imports new listings into the med-congress and med-jobs platforms. This eliminated manual data entry, reduced errors, and freed the team to focus on content quality and client service.
Payrexx–HubSpot Integration for Die Arche Zürich
For the non-profit Die Arche Zürich, W4 developed a custom integration between Payrexx and HubSpot to streamline donation management. Using APIs and marketing automation tools, W4 built a “private app” that automatically records donations in HubSpot, creates CRM deals, and enables data-driven reporting. As a result, Die Arche reduced transaction fees, improved donor engagement through automated campaigns, and gained full visibility into fundraising performance.
Selecting the right automation platform represents just the first step. At W4, we help businesses implement automation tools as part of comprehensive marketing and IT integration strategies. Our team evaluates your specific workflows, technical capabilities, and business objectives to recommend the automation approach that delivers results.
We've helped B2B companies integrate automation platforms with their existing marketing, sales, and customer service systems. Whether you're starting with simple automations or building complex multi-system workflows, our expertise in both marketing strategy and technical implementation drives real business value. Contact W4 to discuss how we can help you choose and implement the right automation solution.