Workflow automation tools like Make (formerly Integromat) and n8n are invaluable for streamlining repetitive tasks and connecting disparate applications. But which one is the right fit for you? This post compares their key features, pricing, and ideal use cases.
Make (Integromat): The Visual Powerhouse
Make is known for its highly visual interface where you build scenarios (workflows) by connecting modules (apps and services). It offers a vast library of app integrations.
Key Features of Make:
- Visual Scenario Builder: Intuitive drag-and-drop interface that clearly shows data flow.
- Extensive App Library: Supports hundreds of popular apps and services.
- Advanced Logic: Routers, iterators, aggregators, and error handling provide powerful control over workflows.
- Data Manipulation: Strong tools for transforming and mapping data between modules.
- Templates: A wide range of pre-built scenario templates to get started quickly.
Pricing:
Make offers a free tier with limited operations and scenarios. Paid plans scale based on the number of operations, data transfer, and features like scenario scheduling frequency.
n8n: The Developer-Friendly, Self-Hostable Option
n8n is an open-source, node-based workflow automation tool. It's particularly appealing to developers due to its flexibility, extensibility, and self-hosting capabilities.
Key Features of n8n:
- Node-Based Workflow Editor: Workflows are built by connecting nodes, which can represent apps, logic, or custom code.
- Open Source & Self-Hostable: Offers full control and data privacy if self-hosted. Cloud version also available.
- Extensibility: Easily create custom nodes using JavaScript or TypeScript.
- Fair-Code License: Source code is available, promoting community contributions.
- Growing Integrations: Supports a good number of integrations, with more being added by the community.
Pricing:
n8n's self-hosted version is free (you pay for your server). Their cloud offering has a free tier and paid plans based on workflow executions and premium features.
Core Differences at a Glance
| Feature | Make (Integromat) | n8n |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Appeal | Visual interface, ease of use for non-devs, vast app library | Developer-friendliness, open-source, self-hosting, extensibility |
| Hosting | Cloud-only | Cloud or Self-hosted |
| Customization | Limited to existing modules, some HTTP/JSON capabilities | Highly customizable, create custom nodes with code |
| Learning Curve | Generally lower for basic scenarios | Slightly steeper, especially for complex logic or custom nodes |
| Community | Large user base, good official support | Active open-source community, good for technical users |
When to Choose Make:
- You prefer a highly visual, polished interface.
- You need access to a very broad range of pre-built app integrations out of the box.
- You or your team are less technical and prefer a no-code/low-code approach.
- You're comfortable with a cloud-only solution.
When to Choose n8n:
- You're a developer or have development resources available.
- You need to self-host for data privacy, control, or cost reasons.
- You require deep customization or need to build integrations for niche services.
- You value the open-source model and community support.
- You need to handle complex data transformations that might be easier with code.
Conclusion
Both Make and n8n are powerful automation platforms. The best choice depends on your specific needs, technical skills, and hosting preferences. Make excels in visual ease-of-use and its sheer number of integrations, while n8n offers unparalleled flexibility, control, and developer-centric features, especially for those who prefer or require self-hosting. Consider trying the free tiers of both to see which one feels more intuitive for your typical use cases.