I've built automations for paying clients on Zapier, Make, and n8n for the last two years. Not toy examples. Real workflows that route leads, sync CRMs, generate ad creatives, and process invoices.
This is the comparison I wish existed when I started.
TL;DR
| n8n | Zapier | Make | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Best for | Engineering-led teams, custom logic | Non-technical teams, simple chains | Mid-complexity flows on a budget |
| Pricing model | Self-host (free) or $20/mo cloud | Per-task, expensive at scale | Per-operation, cheaper than Zapier |
| Learning curve | Steep | Gentle | Medium |
| Custom code | JS/Python natively | Code by Zapier (limited) | Custom modules (limited) |
| Error handling | Excellent (built-in retries, branches) | Basic | Good |
| Self-hosting | Yes (Docker, one command) | No | No |
If you have an engineer on the team, the answer is almost always n8n self-hosted. If you don't, pay Zapier and stop overthinking it.
Where n8n actually wins
1. Cost at scale
Zapier charges per task. Make charges per operation. At ~10,000 tasks/month they both crack $200/mo. n8n self-hosted on a $5 DigitalOcean droplet runs the same volume for the cost of the droplet.
I had a client running 240K Zapier tasks per month. We migrated them to n8n on a $20 VPS in two weeks. Their bill went from $1,899/mo to $20/mo. The migration paid for itself in 11 days.
2. Real code, not pseudo-code
n8n's Code node runs actual JavaScript or Python. You can npm install packages on self-hosted. You can call any internal API. You can use your own ESLint config.
Zapier's "Code by Zapier" is a sandboxed Node 10 environment with a tiny dependency list. Make's custom modules require you to manage their SDK. Neither feels like real code.
3. Error handling that doesn't suck
In n8n, every node has built-in continueOnFail, retry policies, and error branches. You can route failed executions to Slack, retry with exponential backoff, or quarantine bad data — all in the same canvas.
In Zapier, when a step fails, the whole zap dies. You get an email. You fix it manually. There's no "if this fails, do that instead."
4. Version control & deployments
n8n workflows are JSON. JSON goes in git. Git goes through CI. CI deploys.
I have clients where every workflow change goes through a PR review. You can't do that with Zapier — there's no API to export a zap as code, version it, and re-import it on staging.
Where Zapier still wins
I'm not anti-Zapier. It's the right answer in these cases.
Non-technical owners
If you're a solo founder, a marketing manager, or anyone who doesn't want to think about Docker, DNS, or backups — pay Zapier. The 30-day-cost is worth the not-thinking.
Integrations Zapier has and others don't
Zapier has 7,000+ apps. n8n has ~500 native + community nodes. If your obscure SaaS only has a Zapier integration, you don't have a choice. (You can usually work around it with webhooks, but that's an extra step.)
One-off automations
If you need to "when a new row appears in this Google Sheet, send a Slack message" — Zapier takes 30 seconds. Setting up n8n self-hosted for one zap is overkill.
Where Make hits the sweet spot
Make (formerly Integromat) is the middle ground:
- Cheaper than Zapier per operation
- Visual canvas like n8n
- More native integrations than n8n
- Has scenarios, error handlers, and aggregators
- But: no self-hosting, no real code, scales worse than n8n
If your team can't self-host but Zapier is too expensive, Make is the right call. I have clients on Make for exactly this reason.
My decision tree
I use this with every new client:
- Do you have any engineering on the team? No → Zapier (or Make if budget-constrained). Yes → continue.
- Will you run more than 5,000 tasks/month? No → Zapier is fine. Yes → continue.
- Do you need custom logic, real code, or version control? No → Make is enough. Yes → n8n self-hosted.
- Will you process sensitive data (PII, financial, healthcare)? No → cloud is fine. Yes → n8n self-hosted on your infrastructure.
Common mistakes I see
"We'll start on Zapier and migrate later"
Migration is brutal once you have 50+ live zaps. You'll never do it. Pick the right tool on day one.
"n8n is free, so let's self-host"
n8n is free as in beer. Self-hosting costs your time. If you don't have an engineer who'll respond to "n8n is down" at 11pm, use n8n Cloud ($20/mo). Same product, no ops burden.
"Let's use n8n for everything"
n8n is bad at the things Zapier is great at: simple, two-step flows that a non-technical person needs to edit. If your marketing manager needs to tweak the welcome email trigger, give them Zapier. If your engineers need to orchestrate a 30-node data pipeline, give them n8n.
The honest summary
After two years of running production automations on all three:
- n8n is what I reach for first when there's any custom logic, scale, or compliance involved. It's also what I recommend for every client with an engineering team.
- Zapier is the right answer for non-technical teams running simple flows. The premium price is worth it for the time you save not thinking about infrastructure.
- Make is the underrated middle option. If you're already on Zapier and your bill is climbing, try Make before you try n8n.
The right tool depends on your team, not your taste.
Need help picking between them, or migrating off one? I do that for a living. Book a free 15-minute discovery call — I'll tell you which tool fits your situation and won't try to sell you anything.
Tags
Need something like this built?
Free 15-min discovery call. I'll listen, ask honest questions, and tell you if I can help.