The verdict
n8n and Make are both power-user tools that go well beyond simple two-step automations, so this is a close race between similarly capable platforms. n8n's edge is being open-source and self-hostable with the best AI/agent features of any automation tool. Make's edge is a very polished visual scenario canvas and a low $9/mo entry price, though it's cloud-only and moved to a credit model in August 2025. For most founders who want a managed tool with no server, start with Make; pick n8n only if you need self-hosting or deep AI/agent workflows.
n8n wins for
Teams wanting self-hosting, data control, or AI/agent workflows
Make wins for
Users who want a polished visual cloud builder at a low price
From our builds
When a build needs an actual AI agent with memory, RAG, or a vector store, we reach for n8n — its LangChain-based nodes have pieces Make's growing AI features don't match yet, and self-hosting keeps the LLM keys in-house. Make wins when the job is a polished cloud scenario with no server to run; the one caveat is backing up n8n's encryption key, because losing it wipes every stored credential.
At a glance
The highlighted cell wins each row. Ties show both sides neutral.
| Aspect | n8n | Make |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | AI workflows & self-hosting | Visual cloud automation |
| Self-hosting | Yes, open-source | No, cloud-only |
| AI / agent features | Strongest (LangChain, RAG, agents) | Growing AI, credit-metered |
| Visual builder polish | Capable node canvas | Very polished scenario canvas |
| Entry price | Free self-hosted; Cloud €20/mo | $9/mo (Core) |
| Custom code | Code nodes (JS/Python) | Functions and modules |
| Data control | Data stays in-house | Runs on Make cloud |
| Billing model | Execution-based / self-host | Credit-based (since Aug 2025) |
Swipe the table sideways to see both columns.
Scorecard
How we score: Scores are our 0-10 editorial take for non-technical founders (10 = best-in-class), based on each tool's 2026 capabilities — not vendor benchmarks.
| Dimension | n8n | Make |
|---|---|---|
| Ease for non-developersMake's polished canvas is friendlier out of the box; n8n needs setup | 6.0 | 8.0 |
| AI & agent workflowsn8n's AI Agent node, RAG, and vector stores lead the field | 10.0 | 6.0 |
| Visual builder qualityMake's scenario canvas is exceptionally polished | 8.0 | 9.0 |
| Self-hosting & data controln8n runs on your own server so data and credentials stay in-house; Make is cloud-only with no self-host option | 10.0 | 3.0 |
| Cost at scaleSelf-hosted n8n avoids metered billing entirely | 9.0 | 7.0 |
| Custom logic / flexibilityn8n's Code nodes edge out Make's functions | 9.0 | 8.0 |
| Out-of-the-box readinessMake needs no server; n8n cloud is easy but self-host takes ops | 7.0 | 9.0 |
Swipe the table sideways to see both columns.
Deep dive
Self-hosting & data control
n8n
n8n is open-source and self-hostable, so workflows and credentials stay on your own infrastructure. (Losing the N8N_ENCRYPTION_KEY means losing all stored credentials, so back it up.)
Make
Make is cloud-only; everything runs on Make's servers with no self-host option.
Verdict: n8n wins decisively for privacy-sensitive teams that need data in-house.
AI & agent workflows
n8n
n8n has the strongest AI stack of any automation tool: an AI Agent node, all major LLMs, vector stores, RAG, memory, and parsers via deep LangChain integration.
Make
Make has growing AI capabilities, but they're metered under the new credit model and less agent-focused than n8n.
Verdict: n8n wins clearly for LLM, RAG, and agentic automation.
Visual builder & ease
n8n
n8n's node canvas is capable and flexible, but its polish and onboarding trail Make slightly.
Make
Make's scenario canvas is exceptionally polished, with clear data flow between modules — a joy for visual thinkers.
Verdict: Make wins on visual polish and out-of-the-box friendliness.
Custom logic & flexibility
n8n
n8n's Code nodes run JavaScript or Python, and HTTP Request nodes hit any API, giving deep customization.
Make
Make offers functions and a large module library, powerful but slightly less open-ended than raw code nodes.
Verdict: n8n edges ahead for developers who want to drop into code.
Pricing
n8n
Self-hosted n8n is free (you pay for your server); cloud starts around €20/mo with execution-based tiers.
Make
Make starts at just $9/mo (Core) but switched from operations to a credit model in August 2025, so AI-heavy steps consume credits differently.
Verdict: Make is the cheaper managed entry point; self-hosted n8n is cheapest at high volume.
Pricing face-off
n8n
Self-hosted
$0 (software)
Open-source, unlimited executions, pay only for your server
Cloud Starter
€20/mo
2,500 executions; Pro €50/mo for 10,000 executions
Make
Free
$0
1,000 credits/mo, 2 active scenarios, 15-min minimum scheduling
Core
$9/mo
~10,000 credits, more scenarios, credit-based since Aug 2025
Value verdict
Make wins on managed entry price at $9/mo and is great value for pure cloud use. Self-hosted n8n wins at high volume because there's no metered billing at all. If you'll self-host, n8n is cheapest; if you want a low-cost managed tool with no server, Make's Core plan is hard to beat.
Pros & cons
n8n
- Open-source and self-hostable (data in-house)
- Strongest AI/agent and RAG features
- Code nodes (JS/Python) for deep customization
- Flat cost at scale via self-hosting
- Self-hosting requires ops effort
- Slightly less polished builder than Make
- Losing the encryption key loses all credentials
- Steeper onboarding for non-devs
Make
- Exceptionally polished visual scenario builder
- Low $9/mo entry price
- Strong branching, iterators, and data mapping
- No server to run — fully managed
- Cloud-only, no self-hosting
- Aug 2025 credit model complicates AI-step budgeting
- Less agent/RAG capability than n8n
- Complex scenarios can be hard to debug
Winner by use case
AI agent or RAG workflow
Its AI Agent node, vector stores, and LangChain integration are purpose-built for this.
Data must stay on your own infrastructure
Self-hosting keeps workflows and credentials in-house.
Polished visual automation with no server
Its managed scenario canvas is the most polished and needs no ops.
Lowest-cost managed entry point
Core starts at just $9/mo.
High-volume automation on a budget
Self-hosted runs have no metered billing, so cost stays flat.
Which one to choose
Choose n8n if…
- You want self-hosting and data control
- AI agents, RAG, or LLM workflows are central
- You want to drop into JavaScript or Python
- You expect high volume and want flat costs
Choose Make if…
- You want a polished visual builder with no server
- A low $9/mo entry price matters
- You need routers, iterators, and data mapping
- You're comfortable staying cloud-only
Switching between them
There's no one-click converter. You recreate each Make scenario as an n8n workflow by hand, remapping triggers, modules, and data, then activate workflows for production. Teams often switch to n8n for self-hosting or AI features, but plan to rebuild rather than import.
How we compare: We compared n8n and Make on self-hosting, AI capability, visual builder quality, custom logic, and pricing (including Make's August 2025 credit change), using verified 2026 pricing and each product's documentation. Both are strong; the winner depends on your priorities. If you'd rather have your automations built and hosted for you, RapidDev can set them up.
Frequently asked questions
Which is better for AI and agent workflows?
n8n. It has the strongest AI stack of any automation tool — an AI Agent node, all major LLMs, vector stores, RAG, and memory via deep LangChain integration. Make has growing AI features, but they're credit-metered and less agent-focused.
Can I self-host n8n but not Make?
Correct. n8n is open-source and can run on your own server, keeping workflows and credentials in-house. Make is cloud-only, so everything runs on Make's servers with no self-hosting option.
Is Make cheaper than n8n?
For managed cloud use, Make's $9/mo Core plan is a cheaper entry point than n8n Cloud's ~€20/mo. But self-hosted n8n is free software, so at high volume n8n is cheaper because there's no metered billing — you only pay for your server.
Which has the better visual builder?
Make's scenario canvas is more polished and friendlier out of the box, with very clear data flow between modules. n8n's node canvas is capable and flexible but slightly less refined and needs more setup.
What changed with Make's pricing in 2025?
In August 2025, Make switched from counting 'operations' to a credit-based model. Most automations remain affordable, but AI features and some modules consume credits differently, so you should estimate AI-heavy scenarios carefully rather than assuming a flat per-operation cost.
Can I move my Make scenarios to n8n automatically?
No. There's no automatic converter. You rebuild each scenario as an n8n workflow by hand, remapping triggers, modules, and data. Many teams switch for self-hosting or AI capabilities, but plan for a rebuild rather than an import.
Still weighing your options?
- We build on all of these platforms
- Honest advice on which fits your build
- Fixed price, you own 100% of the code
30-min call. No commitment.
