For rule-based flows between SaaS tools, n8n, Make and Zapier are the cheapest way to automate, and the choice is mostly about pricing model and hosting. Zapier bills per task with the widest app catalogue and the least setup. Make bills per operation with a visual builder and the lowest entry price. n8n bills per workflow execution rather than per step, can be self-hosted for free, and is the natural home for AI agent nodes and custom code. Once a flow needs judgement, deterministic checks on money, or data isolation per customer, a custom-coded automation is cheaper to run and safer than any of the three.
This is the comparison we give clients who ask which tool to standardise on. It covers pricing as published on the three vendors’ pages on 10 October 2026, the hosting and security differences, how each handles AI steps, the limits people hit at scale, and the line past which we recommend writing code. Prices change; the structure of the decision does not.
Pricing as of October 2026
The three vendors charge for different units, which makes list prices misleading. Zapier charges per task, meaning each action step that runs. Make charges per credit, one per module action. n8n charges per full workflow execution, so a twelve-step workflow costs the same as a two-step one. For long workflows that difference dominates everything else on the page.
| Tool | Free tier | Entry paid plan | Mid plan | Billing unit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zapier | 100 tasks/month, two-step Zaps only, 15-minute polling | Professional from $19.99/month billed annually ($29.99 monthly) for 750 tasks, multi-step, 2-minute polling | Team from $69/month billed annually ($103.50 monthly) for 2,000 tasks, 1-minute polling | Per task (each action step) |
| Make | 1,000 credits/month, 2 active scenarios, 15-minute minimum interval | Core $9/month for 10,000 credits, unlimited scenarios, 1-minute interval | Pro $16/month and Teams $29/month at the 10,000-credit tier; annual billing saves 15% or more | Per credit (one per module action) |
| n8n | Community Edition: free, self-hosted, open source | Cloud Starter €20/month billed annually for 2,500 executions, unlimited users and active workflows | Cloud Pro €50/month billed annually for 10,000 executions; Business €667/month for 40,000 (self-hosted) | Per workflow execution, not per step |
A worked example: a lead-routing flow with eight steps that runs 3,000 times a month is 24,000 Zapier tasks or 24,000 Make credits, but 3,000 n8n executions, which fits the €20 Starter plan or a free self-hosted instance. A two-step flow at the same volume is cheap everywhere. Count steps before comparing plans.
Hosting, data and security
Zapier and Make are cloud-only, so every record that passes through a flow passes through their infrastructure. For most marketing and operations data that is fine. For customer PII, financial records or anything under a data-residency rule, n8n’s self-hosted option is the practical difference: the workflow engine runs in your own cloud account or on a server you control, and only the API calls you configure leave it. The cost is running it: updates, backups and a database, which is a few hours a month for a small team and a real operations task at scale.
- Zapier: cloud-only; two-factor authentication on all plans; enterprise plans add SSO and audit logs. Risk is concentration: one account holds credentials to every connected system, so scope each connection narrowly and rotate tokens.
- Make: cloud-only with EU and US regions; same credential-concentration risk; scenario-level data stores add another place data lives.
- n8n: cloud or self-hosted; self-hosting keeps data in your network; the Business tier adds SSO, LDAP and Git-based version control for workflows, which matters once more than one person edits them.
AI steps and agents
All three can call a model inside a flow. n8n has gone furthest: native nodes for language models, vector stores and tool-using agents, which is why searches for “n8n AI agent” have grown so sharply. Zapier offers agents, chatbots and model steps across its catalogue, and Make has model modules and its own agent features. The question is not whether a tool can add an AI step but what happens when that step is wrong.
In our experience the no-code agent builders are excellent for drafting and classification inside a flow a person still reviews. They are the wrong place for an agent that takes irreversible actions on customer data, because the evaluation set, the per-customer data isolation and the approval gates that make such an agent safe live more naturally in code. Evoriqa, our customer-support platform, runs its agent in TypeScript against pgvector for exactly that reason: retrieval is filtered by tenant inside the database and autonomy is switched on per tenant from shadow-mode approval numbers.
Limits you hit at scale
| Limit | Zapier | Make | n8n |
|---|---|---|---|
| Long workflows | Every step is a task; cost grows linearly | Every module action is a credit; same | One execution regardless of steps |
| Branching and loops | Paths available; loops limited | Routers and iterators are first-class | Full branching, loops and code nodes |
| Custom logic | Code steps with short runtime limits | Custom functions limited by plan | JavaScript or Python nodes without a step tax |
| Error handling | Retries and alerts, mostly per Zap | Error handlers per module | Error workflows and retries configurable per node |
| Version control | Manual versions | Scenario versions | Git integration on Business and self-hosted |
If the search that brought you here was “free Zapier alternative”, the honest answer in October 2026 is Make’s free tier for short cloud flows at up to 1,000 credits a month, or a self-hosted n8n Community Edition if you can run a small server. Zapier’s own free plan stops at 100 tasks and two-step Zaps, which is enough to test an idea and not enough to run a business process on.
When to write code instead
Every no-code tool has a cliff where the flow becomes a program drawn with boxes. We move a workflow to code when any of the following is true, and we build it so the tool can still trigger it if that is convenient.
- Money moves. Payments, refunds, payouts and ledgers need transactions, idempotency and an audit trail, not a retry button.
- Numbers must be right. The financial-statement reviewer we built for a CPA firm checks arithmetic in deterministic code and only asks the model about wording; that separation is a program, not a flow.
- Data must be isolated per customer. Multi-tenant products need the filter inside the query, not in a scenario someone can edit.
- The flow runs tens of thousands of times a day. Per-step pricing stops being a rounding error and a small service on your own infrastructure costs less than any plan.
- More than one engineer maintains it. Code reviews, tests and deploys beat a shared canvas once the workflow matters to the business.
Recommendation by situation
- Solo operator or small marketing team, standard SaaS tools, short flows: Zapier for speed, Make if cost per run matters more than setup time.
- Operations team with long or branching flows and some technical comfort: Make for the visual builder, n8n if you want to self-host or add code nodes.
- Product or engineering team, customer data, AI steps: self-hosted n8n for internal flows, custom code for anything customer-facing or involving money.
- Regulated data or data residency: self-hosted n8n or code, never a cloud-only tool.
Frequently asked questions
- Is n8n free?
- The n8n Community Edition is free and open source to self-host on your own server or cloud account. n8n Cloud, the hosted version, starts at €20 per month billed annually for 2,500 workflow executions as of October 2026. Self-hosting costs your time and a small server; the software itself has no licence fee.
- What are the main n8n alternatives?
- Zapier and Make are the closest cloud alternatives for connecting SaaS tools. For self-hosting, open-source options exist, and for engineering teams a short custom service in Node.js or Python is often the better alternative once a flow needs tests, transactions or data isolation. The right alternative depends on whether the constraint is price, hosting or complexity.
- Is Zapier secure?
- Zapier offers two-factor authentication on all plans and SSO and audit logging on enterprise plans, and it is widely used by businesses. The practical risk is concentration: one Zapier account can hold credentials for every connected system. Scope each connection to the minimum permissions, rotate tokens, and keep regulated or customer PII out of cloud-only tools unless your contracts permit it.
- Does Zapier have webhooks?
- Yes. Webhooks by Zapier can receive data from any system that can send an HTTP request and can call external URLs as an action, which is how custom services and Zapier flows are usually combined. Make and n8n have equivalent webhook triggers and HTTP request nodes.
- n8n vs Make: which is better?
- Make has the lower entry price and a polished visual builder, and it is cloud-only. n8n charges per execution rather than per operation, can be self-hosted for free, and has stronger code and AI agent nodes. Choose Make for a non-technical team on short flows; choose n8n for long flows, self-hosting, AI steps or any team comfortable with a little code.
About the author
Zoraiz Ejaz
Co-founder, Techparser
Zoraiz Ejaz is a co-founder of Techparser and leads its engineering and product practice. He has spent close to a decade designing, building and scaling mobile, web and AI products for startups and enterprise teams across health, fintech, payments, social and education, from first architecture and release pipelines through to launch and years of production support. He writes about how to scope, cost and ship software that lasts.
