n8n vs Make: The Ultimate Comparison 2025 [Pros & Cons]

n8n and Make (formerly Integromat) are two of the most popular workflow automation tools. Both enable complex automations without programming - but with very different approaches.

In this detailed comparison, we analyze both tools objectively so you can make the right decision for your business.

Quick Overview: n8n vs Make

Criteria	n8n	Make
Price	Free (self-hosted)	From $9/month
Self-Hosting	Yes	No
Integrations	~400	1,500+
Learning Curve	Medium-High	Medium
Data Privacy	Excellent (own servers)	Good (EU servers)
Best For	Tech teams, Privacy	Business teams, Complexity

What is n8n?

n8n is an open-source workflow automation tool that you can self-host. The name stands for "node to node" - workflows consist of connected nodes.

Core Philosophy: Maximum control and transparency. You own your data and your code.

Founded: 2019 in Berlin Funding: $12M (Sequoia, Firstmark) License: Fair-code (not strictly open source)

What is Make?

Make (known as Integromat until 2022) is a cloud-based automation tool. It combines visual workflow creation with advanced logic.

Core Philosophy: Make powerful automation accessible to everyone - without coding.

Founded: 2012 in Prague (Czech Republic) Owner: Celonis (since 2020) Location: Europe (GDPR compliant)

Detailed Comparison: Key Criteria

1. User Interface

n8n:

• Modern, minimalist canvas
• Connect nodes via drag & drop
• Code view for technical users
• Can feel overwhelming initially
• Execution logs directly in editor

Make:

• Visually appealing, colorful canvas
• More intuitive entry for beginners
• Clear module structure
• Better overview for complex scenarios
• Scenario history separate from editor

Winner: Make for beginners, n8n for technical users

---

2. Integrations & Apps

n8n:

• ~400 native integrations
• HTTP Request node for any API
• Custom nodes programmable (JavaScript)
• Community nodes extensible
• Growing quickly through community

Make:

• 1,500+ native integrations
• HTTP module for custom APIs
• Cannot create custom modules
• Largest library on the market
• Premium apps partially paid

Winner: Make (significantly more native apps)

---

3. Workflow Logic & Complexity

n8n:

• If/Else branching
• Switch nodes for multi-path
• Merge node for parallel processing
• Error handling per node
• Code execution (JavaScript)
• Loops and iterations
• Sub-workflows

Make:

• Router for branching
• Filter on every connection
• Aggregators and iterators
• Error handler and break/resume
• Datastore (internal key-value store)
• Scheduler (native scheduling)
• Webhooks with instant response

Winner: Tie - both excellent for complex logic

---

4. Pricing

n8n:

• Self-Hosted: Completely free (only server costs)
• Cloud Starter: $20/month (2,500 workflow runs)
• Cloud Pro: $50/month (10,000 runs)
• Enterprise: On request

Make:

• Free: Free (1,000 ops/month, 2 scenarios)
• Core: $9/month (10,000 ops)
• Pro: $16/month (10,000 ops + premium features)
• Teams: $29/month/user
• Enterprise: On request

Ops vs. Runs:

• n8n counts workflow executions
• Make counts individual operations (each module = 1 op)
• A workflow with 5 modules = 1 run at n8n, 5 ops at Make

Winner: n8n (Self-hosted is unbeatable, cloud comparable)

---

5. Data Privacy & GDPR

n8n:

• Self-hosting: 100% data control
• Data never leaves your servers
• Ideal for sensitive data
• GDPR compliance controllable by you
• Cloud: EU servers available

Make:

• EU servers (Ireland, Frankfurt)
• GDPR compliant
• ISO 27001 certified
• SOC 2 Type II
• Data processing in the cloud

Winner: n8n (self-hosting for maximum control)

---

6. Performance & Reliability

n8n:

• Performance depends on your infrastructure
• No uptime guarantee with self-hosting
• Cloud: 99.9% uptime SLA (Enterprise)
• Efficient at high volume

Make:

• 99.9% uptime (historically good)
• Auto-scaling through cloud
• Real-time execution
• Queuing under high load
• Status page public

Winner: Make (guaranteed reliability)

---

7. Team Features & Collaboration

n8n:

• Credential sharing (Cloud/Enterprise)
• Workflow ownership
• Audit logs (Enterprise)
• SSO (Enterprise)
• Git integration possible

Make:

• Team workspaces
• Roles & permissions
• Audit logs
• Template sharing
• SSO (Teams+)

Winner: Make (better out-of-box features)

When n8n is the Better Choice

n8n is ideal when:

1. Data privacy is top priority

   • Self-hosting = data stays with you
   • No third-party cloud
   • For industries with strict regulations (healthcare, finance)

2. Budget is limited

   • Self-hosted is completely free
   • Server costs often under $10/month (VPS)
   • No workflow limitations

3. Technical team available

   • JavaScript knowledge is helpful
   • Custom nodes programmable
   • DevOps for hosting/maintenance

4. Maximum flexibility needed

   • Custom nodes for special use cases
   • Full control over infrastructure
   • Open-source ethos important

When Make is the Better Choice

Make is ideal when:

1. Many app integrations needed

   • 1,500+ native modules
   • Less custom coding required
   • Faster implementation

2. Business teams should automate

   • More intuitive interface
   • No technical prerequisites needed
   • Better templates to start

3. Guaranteed reliability matters

   • Managed cloud service
   • No hosting overhead
   • Enterprise SLAs available

4. Fast time-to-value counts

   • Quick setup (minutes not hours)
   • No infrastructure planning
   • Ready to use immediately

Practical Comparison: Same Workflow in Both Tools

Use Case: When a new order comes in WooCommerce, create a contact in HubSpot, send a Slack message, and save data to Google Sheets.

In n8n:

1. WooCommerce Trigger Node
2. HubSpot Node (Create Contact)
3. Slack Node (Send Message)
4. Google Sheets Node (Append Row)
5. Connect nodes, test, activate

In Make:

1. WooCommerce Watch Orders Module
2. Router (for parallel processing)
3. HubSpot Create Contact Module
4. Slack Send Message Module
5. Google Sheets Add Row Module
6. Configure filters, test, activate

Result: Both tools solve the use case without problems. Make is slightly faster in setup, n8n offers more control over execution.

Migration: From Make to n8n (or vice versa)

Make → n8n

1. Document workflows
2. Find equivalent nodes in n8n
3. Manually rebuild workflows
4. Set up credentials again
5. Test and activate

Challenges:

• Some Make modules have no n8n equivalent
• Use HTTP Request node as fallback
• Reimplement datastore logic

n8n → Make

1. Document workflows
2. Map modules in Make
3. Create scenarios fresh
4. Authorize apps
5. Test and activate

Challenges:

• Custom nodes cannot be migrated
• Code nodes must be rewritten
• Self-hosting advantages are lost

Our Recommendation

For most businesses, we recommend Make:

• Faster start
• More native integrations
• Less technical overhead
• Fair prices

For tech-savvy teams with privacy focus, we recommend n8n:

• Unbeatable for self-hosting
• Maximum control
• More cost-efficient at high volume
• Active open-source community

Conclusion

n8n and Make are both excellent workflow automation tools. The choice depends on your priorities:

• Privacy & Control → n8n
• Ease of Use & Speed → Make
• Budget Optimization → n8n (Self-Hosted)
• Maximum Integrations → Make

Both tools offer free options - try them out and decide based on your real workflows.

Need help choosing or implementing? We help you find the right tool for your requirements - neutral and independent.