Framing
All three platforms solve the same basic task: connecting systems without anyone writing custom code for every connection. Triggers (e.g. a new email, a new record) start a chain of actions (e.g. create an order, send a message, update a spreadsheet). The difference lies in target audience, operating model and pricing structure.
Zapier was the pioneer for simple automations between cloud tools and remains strong today for straightforward single-step connections. Make (formerly Integromat) offers a more visual, somewhat more powerful interface for branching scenarios. n8n is open source, self-hostable, and geared more toward technically capable teams or agencies that build complex, multi-step workflows while keeping control over the infrastructure.
Comparison table
| Criterion | n8n | Zapier | Make |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cost at scale | predictable with self-hosting, otherwise per execution | rises noticeably with the number of “tasks”/month | rises with “operations”/month, often cheaper than Zapier |
| GDPR/data sovereignty | full control with self-hosting, data stays in-house | processing on US provider servers (EU region partly available) | processing on provider servers (EU region available) |
| Maintenance | updates and server operation are your responsibility with self-hosting | no maintenance, fully hosted | no maintenance, fully hosted |
| Connectors | 400+, plus a generic HTTP connection for practically any system | very broad tool coverage, focused on mainstream SaaS | broad coverage, similar to Zapier |
| Complex workflows | strong: conditions, loops, code steps, error handling | designed more for linear, simple chains | good for branching scenarios, visual flow view |
| Entry barrier | higher, basic technical understanding helps | low, designed for non-technical users | medium, somewhat more technical than Zapier |
| Vendor lock-in | low, open source, exportable | high, proprietary platform | high, proprietary platform |
When A, when B
n8n fits once data sovereignty matters, for example in industries with confidentiality obligations or with customers who fundamentally don’t want customer data on third-party SaaS servers. It also fits once workflows become multi-step, connect several systems with conditions, or are meant to keep growing: the initially higher entry barrier pays off at scale and complexity.
Zapier or Make fit if you want to quickly build a single, simple connection yourself without dealing with server operation, for example “new Google Form response lands in Slack”. For individuals or very small teams without technical resources in-house, the lower entry barrier is often the deciding advantage.
For our client projects we build on n8n by default, because most of the SME workflows we implement combine several systems, conditions and often a self-hosting requirement. Where a customer already works successfully with Zapier or Make and only needs simple additions, we say so honestly too: not every automation needs the full weight of n8n.