All three do essentially the same thing: connect apps and run workflows without writing code. The difference isn't in what they can do — it's in how much they'll cost you as you grow, and who's going to keep them running.
Quick comparison
| Make | Zapier | n8n | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ideal profile | Non-technical teams with complex workflows | Teams using mostly US-based SaaS tools | Teams with technical or in-house IT skills |
| Pricing model | Per operation — cheaper at scale | Per task — expensive at scale | Per execution, or self-hosted |
| Entry point | From €9/month | From €19/month | Free self-hosted / from €20/month (cloud) |
| Integrations | Extensive, slightly narrower than Zapier | The largest catalog on the market | Extensive, plus an HTTP node for any API |
| Learning curve | Moderate — powerful visual editor | Low — the easiest to pick up | Steep — built for technical users |
| Data control | Cloud (EU hosting available) | Cloud (US-based) | Full control if self-hosted |
When to choose Make
It's the default choice for most small and medium-sized businesses. The visual editor lets you build workflows with branching, iterations, and error handling without writing code, and its per-operation pricing model makes it considerably cheaper than Zapier once volume goes up.
Choose Make if your team isn't technical, your workflows have some complexity, and you expect volume to grow.
When to choose Zapier
It still has the largest catalog of native integrations on the market. If you work with niche tools — especially ones from the US software ecosystem — Zapier is often the only platform that connects them without custom development.
Choose Zapier if your priority is getting something working today with the tools you already use, your volume is low, and you want the flattest learning curve.
The warning we always give: Zapier is the easiest to start with and the most expensive to scale. Plenty of clients come to us with a bill that has tripled without the business tripling anything.
When to choose n8n
Open source and self-hosted. If you have in-house IT or a technical partner, it's the option with the best cost-to-power ratio: no practical limit on operations, and full control over where your data lives.
Choose n8n if you have technical resources available, your volume is high, or you handle sensitive data that you don't want leaving your infrastructure.
The cost doesn't disappear — it shifts from software fees to the hours of whoever maintains it. At high volume it pays off; at low volume, it doesn't.
The real cost over twelve months
The entry-level price is misleading. What actually matters is the cost once the workflow is in production. Here's the math for a business generating 500 leads a month with three active workflows — lead capture, follow-up, and reporting — consuming around 12,000 operations a month:
| Item | Make | Zapier | n8n (self-hosted) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plan required | Pro (10,000 ops) + overage | Professional (2,000 tasks), scaled up | Own server |
| Software cost/month | ~€35 | ~€120 | ~€15 (VPS) |
| Maintenance hours/month | 1–2 h | 1–2 h | 3–5 h |
| Estimated total annual cost | ~€1,000 | ~€2,100 | ~€1,500 |
The takeaway isn't that n8n is expensive — it's that its cost sits in hours, not in an invoice. If you already have those hours on staff, it's by far the cheapest option. If you have to buy them in from outside, it stops being one.
What to check before deciding
Before signing up for anything, answer these five questions. If you're unsure about three or more, this isn't a tool decision yet:
- How many operations will you use each month? Multiply your number of leads by the steps in your workflow. That's the number that determines the real price.
- Who's going to maintain this six months from now? If the answer is "we'll figure it out," rule out n8n.
- Is any tool in your stack a niche one? Check each platform's integration catalog before deciding, not after.
- Do you handle sensitive personal data? If so, where that data is processed matters more than the price.
- Do you need complex logic — branches, loops, retries? Zapier hits its limits sooner than you'd think.
Switching tools later
Workflows don't export between platforms — migrating means rebuilding them from scratch. For a stack of three or four workflows, that's roughly 15 to 30 hours of work.
That's not a reason to get stuck on your first decision, but it does call for two precautions: document every workflow in plain language — what it does, what it connects to, what happens if it fails — and avoid putting critical business logic inside the automation tool itself. The more logic that lives in your CRM and the less in the tool, the cheaper any future migration will be.
What we choose, and why
At Cupperlab, we build almost everything on Make for clients without a technical team, and on n8n when there's in-house IT or data privacy requirements. We use Zapier occasionally, when it's the only platform that integrates a specific tool.
That said: the tool is the last decision, not the first. Before that comes mapping the process and calculating the return, as we explain in our guide to process automation.
Conclusion
There's no single right answer, but there is a simple rule: decide based on your team's skill set and the cost twelve months out, not on how easy day one feels.
If your team isn't technical, go with Make. If you need an unusual integration and have low volume, go with Zapier. If you have IT resources and volume, go with n8n.
Not sure which one fits your case? Tell us about your process and we'll tell you which one we'd build it on.
