Make or n8n? The honest comparison

Comparison

The differences in detail

• Operation: Make runs as a service, n8n can be self-hosted. For privacy-sensitive workflows, self-hosting is a real argument.
• Costs: Make charges per operation, which becomes expensive at high volume. Self-hosted n8n costs server operation instead of volume fees.
• Effort: Make is faster to deploy. n8n requires operational responsibility — updates, backups, availability.
• Recommendation: For getting started and moderate volume, Make. For high volume, sensitive data, or the desire for independence, self-hosted n8n.
• Handling sensitive data: Self-hosted n8n never leaves your own infrastructure, which is often the deciding factor for health or personnel data. Make processes data on the provider's servers, which is unproblematic for most use cases but ruled out for some.
• Community and templates: Make offers a larger selection of ready-made templates for common use cases. n8n scores points for very specific, rarely built workflows through complete control over the code.

Conclusion

What this means for you

The decision between Make and n8n cannot be made generally — it depends on your starting position, your volume, and who will operate the solution later.

If you've never automated before, start with Make — onboarding is faster and there are fewer sources of error. n8n is worth it once either volume exceeds Make's costs or data must not leave your premises on principle.

If you're unsure: describe your situation to us in a few sentences. We'll tell you which of the two directions is more sensible in your case — even when it's the one where we have less to do.