Make vs n8n (2026): which automation wins which job?

Both products will move a form into Slack. That is where the overlap ends, and it is why 'Make vs n8n' is a bad 2026 question if you have not named the runtime. A branching scenario a technical operator will open and a workflow you will version next to the repo are different seats. Mixing them up is how you buy n8n because a blog said free and then live in a box nobody pages — or stay on Make until every payload you promised would stay in-region is in a hosted SaaS.

This page is the two-way, winner by job — canvas versus host. Make pricing is the Make plan math. Make vs Zapier is the linear-zap cousin. n8n vs Zapier is the residency two-way if the other logo is Zapier. Is Make worth it is the Make subscription sibling. The automation ranking is the scored table (Zapier 8.3, Make 8.0, n8n 7.9). Read this one if the only argument in the room is whether the graph lives on a vendor canvas or next to the repo.

The public bills, in one place

Make still publishes Free / Core / Pro / Teams / Enterprise on make.com/en/pricing (checked 19 September 2026 — the same ladder as Make pricing). Free is $0, 1,000 credits, two scenarios, a 15-minute interval. The public lead band we cite is about $9 a month billed yearly for Core at 10,000 credits (about $10.59 month-to-month); Pro about $16 / $18.82; Teams about $29 / $34.12. The dollar figure is a credit slider. Confirm checkout. Credits are the billing unit: most module actions cost one; iterators are how Core feels expensive.

n8n still publishes Community (self-host) and Cloud on n8n.io/pricing (checked the same day — the same rows as n8n vs Zapier). Community is free software on GitHub — you pay the box and the on-call. Cloud is priced in euros, by workflow executions (a full run, not each step), with unlimited users and workflows on every Cloud plan. The public annual rows we fetched: Starter €20/mo billed annually (2,500 executions, 2,300 AI credits, one shared project); Pro €50/mo billed annually (25,000 executions, up to 13,700 AI credits, admin roles, workflow history); Business €667/mo billed annually (SSO/SAML/LDAP, git version control, environments); Enterprise is a quote. Annual advertises about 17% off monthly. Cloud data is hosted in Frankfurt. A Cloud trial is Pro-level features with 1,000 executions and no card. Confirm checkout.

Buy Make if the expensive part is an unreadable zap pile

Make earns the canvas when the leak is routers, iterators, a filter someone named, an error path that does not page Slack at 2 a.m. — and you still wanted a vendor to call. AI is a module on that canvas. That loop still sits second on our automation ranking on purpose. It is not a reason to buy Make if you needed three linear zaps, and it is not a reason to leave if the scenario already has five routers.

Core is the honest builder seat. Free is a 1,000-credit taste. Teams is roles and shared templates — is Make worth it is that climb. Skip Make if the graph has to live next to the repo. Skip it if every payload is a residency meeting. Skip it if the first job is 'Slack me when the form fires' and nobody will maintain a diagram. Those are n8n and Zapier. Make vs Zapier names the linear fork. Make pricing is the credit slider.

• Best for: ops engineers and agencies who think in diagrams, will name the modules, and still wanted someone to page
• Skip if: the leak is three linear zaps, a hosted graph, a GTM table, or coworker theater
• Honest watch-out: every iterator is a credit pile. A sloppy path is how Core feels 'expensive' and n8n felt 'free.'

Buy n8n if the expensive part is a graph you do not own

n8n earns the seat when the workflow has to live next to the repo, in a VPC, or in Frankfurt Cloud you can still treat like software — git, environments, HTTP when the connector is missing. AI nodes are still nodes. That is why it sits third on the automation ranking (7.9) as the self-host graph. It is not a Make-but-free for a marketer who will not SSH.

Community is free software plus the pager. Cloud Starter at €20 a month billed annually is how you get n8n without the box. Skip n8n if nobody will treat workflows like code. Skip it if the first job is three linear zaps. Skip it if you wanted Make's canvas and a vendor to page. n8n vs Zapier is the residency two-way if the other argument is Zapier's task meter. Do not buy Cloud because a thread said the Community edition is $0 and then leave the box unpatched.

• Best for: engineering-adjacent ops teams with a VPC, a git habit, or a residency objection
• Skip if: you needed a zap this week, a visual machine with a vendor on-call, or Clay for a list
• Honest watch-out: 'n8n is free' is a software license, not an ops program. Cloud is still a subscription.

Head-to-head, by job

A branching scenario someone will maintain

Make, if you wanted to see the machine and page a vendor. n8n, if you wanted to version the machine and page yourself. Forcing n8n so the logo feels more engineering is how a marketer bounces off HTTP nodes. Forcing Make so the diagram feels complete is how a residency meeting fails. Name the on-call first.

Residency, a VPC, git

n8n. Self-host if the VPC is the point. Cloud if Frankfurt and a git story on Business (€667/mo billed annually) are enough. Make is hosted. Do not treat a Make scenario as a VPC. n8n vs Zapier already said the same thing about Zapier. We will not invent a Make private-cloud sticker.

Volume and the meter

Make bills credits — usually one per module action, more for some AI providers, two per second of Code. An iterator over a fat list is a credit pile. n8n Cloud bills executions — one run of the whole workflow, regardless of steps. If the job is a chatty path at volume and someone will treat it like code, n8n's meter is the honest one. If the job is a named scenario at modest volume, Make Core at the 10,000-credit band is the honest one. Confirm both carts. We did not run a 50,000-step bake-off.

AI on the graph

Both will classify, extract, draft. Make's AI sits as a module on the canvas. n8n's AI sits as a node, including LangChain-style chains and a BYOK story on self-host. Neither is an autonomous coworker. The agents ranking is that theater. Point either model at fields you still believe, then sample the first hundred runs.

Price, honestly

Make Core at about $9 yearly and n8n Cloud Starter at €20 yearly can look interchangeable in a spreadsheet. They are not. Core is a hosted canvas with a credit slider. Starter is hosted n8n with an execution bucket. Community at $0 is the most expensive option in the room if nobody pages the box. Zapier Professional at about $20 yearly for 750 tasks is cheaper than either if the job is three linear zaps. Is Make worth it is the Make subscription page. Make pricing is the slider.

What neither tool should be

• Your default zap for a marketer who will not open a diagram. That is Zapier. Make vs Zapier.
• Your GTM table. That is Clay. The sales ranking is that desk.
• Your autonomous coworker. That is the agents ranking — not a fatter credit tier or a bigger execution bucket.
• A free Zapier. n8n Community is software. Make Free is two scenarios. Neither is a program.
• A reason to skip the mapping. Empty prompts still invent last quarter's SKU.

Make is what we open when the expensive part is a zap pile that is already a machine and we still wanted a vendor. n8n is what we open when the graph has to live next to the repo. Mixing them up is how you buy a cheaper logo and bounce off the canvas — or page a box you never meant to own.— Aiacent comparison, 2026

Verdict

Visual machine, someone will name modules, vendor to page: Make Core — Make pricing if the fight is the slider, is Make worth it if the fight is the subscription. Graph next to the repo or in a VPC: n8n, Community if you will on-call the box, Cloud Starter if you will not. Three linear zaps: Zapier — Make vs Zapier and n8n vs Zapier. A GTM table: Clay. Then read the automation ranking if you want the three scores in one table.