Comparison
n8n vs Make (Integromat)
Which no-code automation platform is better in 2026?
Our verdict
n8n for AI-native workflows and self-hosting; Make for visual clarity and mid-market teams
n8n and Make are the two most powerful no-code automation platforms outside of Zapier. n8n wins on AI-native capabilities and self-hosting flexibility. Make wins on visual scenario design and ease of use for non-engineers. For AI-heavy workflows in 2026, n8n has the edge.
Overview
n8n and Make (formerly Integromat) are both advanced automation platforms aimed at power users who find Zapier too limited. But they have different strengths — this comparison helps you pick the right one for your 2026 automation stack.
Head-to-head comparison
| Category | n8n | Make (Integromat) |
|---|---|---|
| Visual workflow design | Node-graph canvas; functional but less polished than Make's scenario view | Beautiful circular module layout; widely regarded as the most intuitive visual design |
| AI & LLM support | First-class AI nodes (Anthropic, OpenAI, Gemini); native agent patterns with memory | AI modules available but less mature; fewer native LLM integrations |
| Self-hosting | Full open-source self-hosting; deploy on any cloud or on-premise | Cloud-only; no self-hosting option |
| Pricing | Self-hosted: free. Cloud from $24/month. No operation-count billing | Free tier: 1,000 ops/month. Paid from $10.59/month but ops-count billing scales up |
| Error handling & debugging | Robust error handling with retry logic, error branches, and detailed execution logs | Good error handling with scenario history; slightly less granular than n8n |
| Learning curve | Moderate to steep — expressions and data mapping require practice | More accessible for non-technical users; visual design is intuitive |
| Score | 4 wins | 2 wins |
Who should choose what?
Choose n8n if…
- Technical teams who need AI-native agent workflows with memory and LLM reasoning
- Companies requiring data sovereignty through self-hosting
- High-volume automation use cases where per-operation pricing would be expensive
Choose Make (Integromat) if…
- Non-technical operators and marketing teams who prioritise a beautiful visual interface
- Teams doing moderate-volume automations where Make's per-operation pricing is manageable
- Users who find n8n's expression syntax too technical
Frequently asked questions
Is n8n better than Make?
For AI-powered automation and self-hosted deployments in 2026, n8n is generally better. For visual design and beginner accessibility, Make is more polished. Both are significantly more capable than Zapier for power users.
Can I migrate from Make to n8n?
Yes, migration is possible. There is no automated converter, but most Make scenarios can be rebuilt in n8n. The main differences are in how data is mapped and how loops are structured.
Is Make (Integromat) free?
Make has a free tier limited to 1,000 operations per month. Paid plans start at $10.59/month but cost increases with the number of operations you run. n8n self-hosted is free with no operation limits.
Which is better for building AI agents: n8n or Make?
n8n is significantly stronger for AI agents in 2026. It has dedicated AI agent nodes, native LLM integrations (Anthropic, OpenAI, Gemini), and built-in memory patterns for stateful agent design. Make's AI capabilities are less developed.
Want to master Build AI Agents with n8n?
We have a dedicated course that teaches you to use it in real-world workflows — built by practitioners, not academics.
View course →