n8n vs Make
Which is better in 2026?
n8n
Veltrix Score
Make
Veltrix Score
Key Differences
| Aspect | n8n | Make |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Self-host or cloud | Cloud only |
| Visual builder | Good | Excellent |
| Open source | Yes (fair-code) | No |
| Pricing | Free self-hosted | Free tier, $9/mo Core |
| Custom code | Full JS/Python support | Limited scripting |
Best for — n8n
- +Self-hosted deployments
- +Custom code in workflows
- +Developer-oriented automation
- +Data privacy requirements
Best for — Make
- +Visual workflow design
- +No-code automation
- +Affordable cloud automation
- +Complex data transformations
Analysis
n8n and Make (formerly Integromat) are both powerful alternatives to Zapier, each with a visual workflow builder and strong automation capabilities. They compete most directly in the mid-market — users who have outgrown simple automations but do not need enterprise-grade tools.
Make's visual builder is arguably the best in the industry. Its scenario editor makes it easy to see exactly how data flows through complex, branching workflows. For non-developers who need to build sophisticated automations, Make offers the most intuitive experience.
n8n's advantage is its open-source nature and self-hosting capability. You can run it on your own server for free, which is a major draw for organisations with data privacy requirements or those running high-volume automations where cloud pricing becomes expensive. Its support for custom JavaScript and Python code also makes it more flexible for developers.
Choose Make if you want the best visual workflow builder in a managed cloud environment. Choose n8n if you need self-hosting, custom code execution, or want to avoid vendor lock-in.
Need help choosing the right tools?
Get a free AI-powered audit of your website, or subscribe to our newsletter for weekly tool updates and recommendations.