n8n vs Make: Which One for Production

📖 7 min read•1,363 words•Updated Mar 21, 2026

n8n vs Make: Which One for Production?

n8n-io/n8n has a staggering 180,218 stars and 55,981 forks on GitHub, while Make (formerly Integromat) does not have a public open-source repo to compare directly. However, stars and forks don’t send you alerts or automate business-critical workflows. So, when it comes to deploying automation on your production environment, which one really shakes out? Let’s get into the nitty-gritty of n8n vs Make and figure out which one is better suited for real-world usage.

Metric	n8n	Make
GitHub Stars	180,218	N/A (proprietary)
GitHub Forks	55,981	N/A
Open Issues (GitHub)	1,447	N/A
License	NOASSERTION (Open Source)	Proprietary
Last Update	2026-03-21	Continuously updated (closed source)
Pricing Starter	Free Self-Hosting / Paid Cloud Plans	Starting at $9/month

n8n Deep Dive: The Open Source Powerhouse

n8n is an open-source workflow automation platform that lets you build node-based workflows integrating APIs, databases, and various services. Unlike Make, n8n gives you full access to code, so you can self-host, customize, and extend without asking permission or hoping your use case isn’t blocked by a closed architecture.

Here’s a simple example of n8n code for a workflow that fetches issues from a GitHub repo and posts new ones to a Slack channel. This snippet uses their JavaScript-like node syntax:

// n8n GitHub Issues to Slack example
{
 "nodes": [
 {
 "parameters": {
 "repository": "n8n-io/n8n",
 "owner": "n8n-io"
 },
 "name": "GitHub",
 "type": "n8n-nodes-base.github",
 "typeVersion": 1,
 "position": [250, 300]
 },
 {
 "parameters": {
 "channel": "#alerts",
 "text": "New GitHub issue: {{$json[\"title\"]}}"
 },
 "name": "Slack",
 "type": "n8n-nodes-base.slack",
 "typeVersion": 1,
 "position": [450, 300]
 }
 ],
 "connections": {
 "GitHub": {
 "main": [
 [
 {
 "node": "Slack",
 "type": "main",
 "index": 0
 }
 ]
 ]
 }
 }
}

What’s great about n8n? It’s flexible and developer-friendly. You get full control over your workflows, including the ability to add custom JavaScript code. The community is massive (180k+ stars say a lot) and it’s battle-tested. You can self-host on your own infrastructure, which means no vendor lock-in, no hidden API throttling, and complete GDPR compliance control. Plus, there’s no absurd pricing hurdles just to access basic functionality.

What sucks about n8n? The interface isn’t the slickest compared to Make. It’s functional but not pretty. The built-in node library, while growing, doesn’t match Make’s extensive selection of pre-built integrations. Performance can drag for very complex workflows, especially when self-hosting on underpowered servers. And sometimes the open-source nature means bugs are fixed slower than you’d like, despite an impressive number of contributors.

Make in Brief: The SaaS Automation Contender

Make (formerly Integromat) is a commercial workflow automation SaaS heavily focused on non-developers but also useful for devs who want no-hassle integrations. Its visual scenario builder is intuitive, with a drag and drop mentality, hundreds of pre-built app connectors, and built-in scheduling and error monitoring.

Unlike n8n, Make is not open source and you cannot self-host. This means you rely fully on their cloud infrastructure and are subject to their pricing tiers and API rate limits.


// Example Make JSON scenario (exported)
{
 "name": "GitHub to Slack",
 "steps": [
 {
 "app": "GitHub",
 "action": "Watch Issues",
 "parameters": {"repo": "n8n-io/n8n"}
 },
 {
 "app": "Slack",
 "action": "Send Message",
 "parameters": {
 "channel": "#alerts",
 "text": "New GitHub issue: {{issue.title}}"
 }
 }
 ]
}

What’s good about Make? If you want an out-of-the-box solution with polished UX, quick onboarding, and a big library of connectors, Make does those well. The error handling is thoughtful, with automatic retries and visual debugging that’s friendlier than n8n. Scheduling recurring or triggered workflows is straightforward. Also, no devops headache here.

What’s bad? You’re locked into their cloud. Large volumes of runs get expensive fast. Customizing beyond their UI isn’t possible, so if your flow needs custom code or tweaking, you’re stuck. It can get clunky if you try to build complex or nested scenarios. Also, their pricing can be misleading—some complex operations count as multiple “actions” which blow your monthly quota quicker than you’d expect.

Head-to-Head: Where n8n Beats Make (and Vice Versa)

Criteria	n8n	Make	Winner
Open Source & Customizability	Full access to source allows deep customization and self-hosting	Closed SaaS, no source access	n8n
Ease of Use	Steeper learning curve, less polished interface	Intuitive drag-drop builder, friendly UI	Make
Performance at Scale	Depends on self-hosting infra; can handle high workload if tuned	Cloud managed, but throttled by pricing tiers; limited concurrency	n8n (for scale) / Make (for small-medium)
Pricing Transparency	Free self-hosting, clear paid tiers for cloud	Locked pricing tiers with hidden action costs	n8n

You want control and the ability to tweak down to the last line of code? n8n is where you go. Need quick wins and minimal fuss? Make makes it easy. But if your workflows grow beyond a dozen scenarios or you hit concurrency limits? n8n self-hosted wins hands down.

The Money Question: What Does It Cost?

n8n offers a free self-hosted model. You pay only for your own infra—if you’ve got a spare server or cloud instance, this might cost just pocket change. For cloud hosting, n8n’s paid plans start around $20/month for basic needs, scaling with usage.

Make’s pricing starts at $9/month but beware: their “operations” (think node executions) quickly stack up. Complex workflows with passing data between many modules can drain your included quota within hours or days, forcing costly upgrades.

Plan	n8n Cloud	Make
Free	Available for self-hosted	Yes, but limited to 1,000 operations
Starter	$20/month – 5,000 executions	$9/month – 10,000 operations
Professional	$80/month – 40,000 executions	$29/month – 40,000 operations
Enterprise	Custom pricing, self-hosting supported	Custom pricing

Real talk though—you might get sticker shock after your workflows run 100 nodes per execution and suddenly your actions triple. n8n’s self-hosting means you avoid those hidden costs, only paying for servers and bandwidth.

My Take: Which One Should You Pick?

Alright, so here’s the lowdown from someone who’s been building apps and automations for years:

If you’re a developer or DevOps engineer: Pick n8n. You want maximum control, the ability to hack code, and avoid vendor lock-in. Self-hosting gives you flexibility—and given n8n’s huge community backing, you’re not flying solo. Plus, if you’ve got compliance or data control requirements, n8n lets you keep data where you want.
If you’re a small business owner or no-code enthusiast: Go with Make. It’s easier to get started, has a friendlier UI, and tons of pre-built connectors with great UX polish. Your workflows probably won’t get huge or complex, so the price won’t balloon too fast.
If you’re an enterprise team looking for scale plus control: I recommend starting with n8n self-hosted or hybrid. Make might work for pockets of the company, but as you scale across departments, n8n’s open source and customizable architecture will save you serious cash and headaches in the long run.

FAQs

Q: Can I run n8n and Make side-by-side?

Yes. Some teams use Make for quick, simple flows and n8n for complex or custom workflows. It’s by no means an either-or situation.

Q: Does n8n support error handling like Make?

n8n has error workflow nodes and retry options, but you need to build your own logic. Make offers more out-of-the-box retry and error visualization features.

Q: What about community and support?

n8n benefits from a huge open-source community on GitHub, forums, and Slack. Make has paid professional support but no public repo or community contribution.

Q: Is Make faster for small workflows?

Generally, yes. Since Make manages your infrastructure and optimizes execution, simple workflows execute reliably and fast. n8n depends heavily on your hosting resources.

Q: Can I run n8n completely on-premises?

Absolutely, that’s one of n8n’s killer features. Make doesn’t allow self-hosting.

Data Sources

Data as of March 21, 2026. Sources: https://github.com/n8n-io/n8n, https://www.make.com/en/pricing, https://n8n.io/pricing

🕒 Published: March 21, 2026

✍️

Written by Jake Chen

AI technology writer and researcher.

Learn more →

n8n vs Make: Which One for Production