n8n vs Make vs Zapier: Our Verdict From Daily Use
If you get into automation, sooner or later you will face the question: which tool? Zapier, Make (formerly Integromat) or n8n?
I have used all three extensively. For our own brands and for Flowhouse clients. Here is my verdict, no affiliate links, no marketing speak.
The short version
For the impatient:
| Tool | Best for | Not ideal for |
|---|---|---|
| Zapier | Simple automations, beginners | Complex logic, budget |
| Make | Medium complexity, visual thinkers | Very complex custom logic |
| n8n | Complex workflows, full control | Pure no-coders |
Reality is more nuanced. Let me explain.
Zapier
What it does well
- Easiest entry. If you have never automated anything, you will have your first workflow in 10 minutes.
- Huge library. 5,000+ apps. Everything you can think of has a Zapier integration.
- Reliability. The things just run. Full stop.
What is less good
- Expensive at scale. 20€/month sounds harmless. At serious usage you are at 200-500€/month quickly.
- Limited complexity. Multi-step workflows with conditions get messy and expensive.
- Vendor lock-in. Your logic sits inside Zapier. Export? Forget it.
When we use it
For clients who want to maintain small automations THEMSELVES. Simple and fast is sometimes more important than optimal.
Make (ex Integromat)
What it does well
- Visual builder. You actually see what is happening. Perfect for more complex logic.
- Much cheaper than Zapier. The same setup often costs 70-80% less.
- Powerful data handling. JSON, arrays, iterators, Make really can work with data.
What is less good
- Steeper learning curve. For beginners it gets overwhelming fast.
- Occasionally unstable. We had cases where webhooks suddenly stopped arriving.
- Cryptic error messages. When something breaks, you have to do detective work.
When we use it
For medium-complexity automations that the client should understand themselves. Good value for money.
n8n
What it does well
- Full control. Self-hosted = your data, your server, your rules.
- Free (self-hosted). Unlimited workflows, unlimited executions.
- Custom code. JavaScript/Python right inside the workflow. For us a game-changer.
- Transparent. Open source. You can literally see what the code does.
What is less good
- You need technical know-how. Self-hosting is not for everyone. Whether it fits you is covered in our comparison n8n self-hosting vs cloud.
- Smaller ecosystem. Not every app has a native integration (although HTTP requests usually solve that).
- Less polished. The UI is functional, and not as pretty as Make.
When we use it
For everything that is serious. Our own brands run on n8n. Complex client setups too.
How we actually use them
Let me show you what this looks like on our side:
nano./mate/MUSTAX (our brands):
- n8n for everything critical: order processing, fulfilment, inventory
- Make for marketing automations (clients are allowed to adjust them themselves)
With exactly this setup we run 3 brands with 2 people.
Flowhouse clients:
- 70% n8n (for complex, reliable setups)
- 25% Make (when clients want to maintain things themselves)
- 5% Zapier (only for very simple use cases)
The cost comparison
Real example: ten workflows, roughly 1,000 executions a month each.
| Tool | Cost/month |
|---|---|
| Zapier | ~200-350€ |
| Make | ~50-80€ |
| n8n (cloud) | ~20-50€ |
| n8n (self-hosted) | ~10€ (server) |
The difference adds up. For us that would be 2,000€+ a year saved through n8n. What else you pay for beyond tool cost is in What automation really costs.
What I recommend
You are a beginner and want fast results:
→ Start with Zapier. Learn the basics. Migrate later if needed.
You have time to learn and watch the budget:
→ Make is the sweet spot. Powerful enough for most use cases.
You are technically inclined or have a dev on the team:
→ n8n. No question. The control and flexibility are unbeatable. To get started: Your first n8n workflow.
You want maximum reliability for critical processes:
→ n8n (self-hosted) or n8n Cloud with pro support.
The limitations
What all three CANNOT do:
- Magic. Bad processes stay bad, even automated.
- Thinking. The tools execute, they do not decide.
- Self-healing. When APIs change, you have to react.
Automation does not replace good process architecture. It only amplifies what is already there.
Conclusion
There is no "best" tool. There is the right tool for YOUR situation.
We use all three, depending on context. That is what I recommend to you as well: try them out (all have free tiers) and decide based on your use case.
If you are unsure what makes sense for your setup: message me on LinkedIn, at benedikt@flowhouse.ai or through the contact form. No sales pitch, just an assessment.