Most small businesses that ask me about Zapier vs Make vs n8n have already decided to automate something. Usually it is a lead form, a booking, or a weekly report. What they want to know is which tool will still make sense in a year, when the workflow has grown from two steps to twelve and the bill has started to matter.
My short answer: Zapier is the easiest to get right on day one, Make gives you more control per dollar once workflows branch and loop, and n8n is the one to pick when you have someone technical and you care about owning where the data runs. The real deciding factor is not features. It is how each platform counts usage, because that decides what a busy month costs you. If you are still choosing what to automate in the first place, start with my list of automation ideas for small businesses and come back here when you have a workflow in mind.
The billing unit is the whole comparison
All three tools connect apps, react to triggers and run steps. Where they genuinely differ is what they charge you for.
- Zapier counts tasks. According to Zapier's help center on how task usage is measured, a task is a successful action step. Trigger steps, Filter and Paths steps, and actions that error or halt do not count, and neither do Zapier's own utility steps such as Formatter, Delay and Looping. So a workflow with one trigger and four actions uses four tasks every time it runs.
- Make counts credits. Make's credits documentation says that by default one operation equals one credit, while some AI features use a variable number of credits based on tokens and other usage. Its page on operations defines an operation as "a single module run to process data or check for new data." The trigger runs once per check and costs one operation, and every module after it runs once per bundle of data, so a trigger that returns 10 bundles makes each following module perform 10 operations.
- n8n counts executions. On the n8n pricing page, an execution is a single run of the whole workflow, no matter how many steps it has or how much data it processes.
That difference matters more than any feature list. A per-step model rewards short workflows. A per-run model rewards long ones. If your automations tend to grow (they always do), that is the thing to plan for.
A worked example: one lead form, three bills
Take a workflow I build constantly, the core of most lead follow-up automation: a website form is submitted, a contact is created in the CRM, the team gets a notification, a row is added to a tracking sheet, and the lead gets an acknowledgement email. One trigger, four actions.
| Per run | 300 leads a month | |
|---|---|---|
| Zapier (tasks) | 4 tasks (the trigger is free) | 1,200 tasks |
| Make (credits) | About 5 credits (every module runs once, trigger included) | About 1,500 credits |
| n8n (executions) | 1 execution | 300 executions |
Now add a filter so spam submissions stop early. On Zapier the filter itself costs nothing, and the actions after it never run for spam, so you save tasks. Add a loop that writes each line item of an order to a sheet, and the picture flips. On Zapier the Looping step is free, but every successful action inside the loop is a task. On Make each line item becomes a bundle, and every module after the iterator runs once per bundle. An order with eight line items and two modules after the split costs about 16 extra units on either platform. On n8n it is still one execution. This is why I sketch the workflow on paper and count steps before picking a platform, not after.
Where each plan starts
These are the entry points I saw when I checked each pricing page in October 2026. Prices change often, so treat this as a snapshot and open the pages yourself before you commit.
| Platform | Free option | First paid tier |
|---|---|---|
| Zapier | 100 tasks a month, two-step Zaps only | Professional, from $19.99 a month billed annually ($29.99 monthly) for 750 tasks |
| Make | 1,000 credits a month, 2 active scenarios, 15-minute minimum schedule | Core, listed at $12 a month on monthly billing for 10,000 credits, with a discount for annual billing |
| n8n | Self-hosted Community Edition, free | Starter (hosted by n8n), €20 a month billed annually for 2,500 executions with unlimited steps |
Sources: Zapier pricing, Make pricing, n8n pricing.
Run the lead example through that table. At 300 leads a month, Zapier's 750-task Professional tier is already too small, Make's free 1,000 credits are too small but Core covers it many times over, and n8n Cloud Starter covers it with room to spare. At 30 leads a month, every option is cheap and the decision should come down to who will maintain it.
Zapier: pick it when the person maintaining it is not technical
Zapier is the tool I recommend when the owner or an office manager will be the one opening it after I leave. The editor reads top to bottom like a checklist, and a non-developer can usually understand what a Zap does by reading it.
Where it fits:
- Short, linear workflows: form to CRM, booking to calendar, invoice paid to thank-you email.
- Teams where nobody wants to think about servers, JSON or error logs.
- Workflows with heavy filtering, since filters and paths do not use tasks.
Where it hurts:
- Long workflows or loops at volume, because every successful action is a task.
- Complex branching and data reshaping, which is possible but gets awkward to read.
- Anything with health information. Zapier states plainly that it isn't HIPAA compliant and doesn't sign Business Associate Agreements, so it should not carry protected health information. I go into what that means for agencies in my post on home health CRM vs EMR.
Make: pick it when workflows branch, loop and reshape data
Make draws your workflow as a visual map of connected modules. That looks busier than Zapier at first, but once a process has routers, iterators and error handling, the map is easier to reason about than a long vertical list. Make's pricing page also notes that routers and error handler modules (Rollback, Break, Resume, Commit, Ignore) do not consume credits, which removes some of the penalty for building a workflow properly.
Where it fits:
- Workflows that split by condition (new client vs returning client, English vs Spanish inquiry).
- Processing lists: every line of an order, every row of a sheet, every attachment on an email.
- Owners who are comfortable with a bit more complexity in exchange for a lower bill.
Where it hurts:
- Every module counts, including the one that reads the trigger data, so a scenario that polls and processes a lot of bundles can burn credits quickly. Watch the usage history for the first month.
- The learning curve is real. A client who found Zapier intuitive may find Make's canvas intimidating.
- AI features can use credits dynamically, based on tokens and other usage according to Make's credits documentation, so an AI-heavy scenario is harder to budget than a plain one.
n8n: pick it when you have a developer and care where the data lives
n8n is the most developer-shaped of the three. You can run it on n8n's cloud, or install the free Community Edition on your own server. The per-execution billing on the cloud plans makes long, many-step workflows far cheaper than on the other two.
Before you self-host, read the license. n8n is not released under a classic open source license but under its Sustainable Use License, which says you may use or modify the software "only for your own internal business purposes or for non-commercial or personal use." Running it to automate your own business is the intended use. Reselling it as a hosted service to your clients is a different question, and you should read the license and talk to n8n before you build a business on that.
Where it fits:
- Long workflows with many steps, where per-step billing would punish you.
- Teams that want workflow data to stay on infrastructure they control.
- Developers who want to drop into code for the awkward parts instead of chaining five formatter steps.
Where it hurts:
- Self-hosting means you own the uptime, updates, backups and security of that server. "Free" software on a server nobody patches is not free.
- Error handling needs deliberate setup. n8n's Error Trigger documentation explains that you build a separate error workflow and point your main workflow at it, and notes that the Error Trigger only runs when an automatic workflow errors, not during manual test runs. If you skip that, failures are easy to miss.
- It is the hardest of the three to hand to a non-technical owner.
How I choose for a client
I ask four questions, in this order.
- Who maintains it after launch? If the answer is the owner or an admin, I lean Zapier, even if it costs more. An automation nobody understands gets switched off the first time it misbehaves.
- Does any of the data need special protection? If a workflow touches patient health information, I check whether the platform will sign a BAA before anything else. Zapier says it won't. For Make and n8n, ask the vendor directly for your specific plan and get it in writing. Self-hosting does not remove the obligation either: you are then responsible for that server's security.
- How many steps, how many runs? Count actions per run, multiply by monthly volume, and compare against each billing unit, exactly like the table above.
- Is a no-code tool the right layer at all? Sometimes it isn't.
When not to use any of them
Automation platforms are glue. They are excellent for connecting tools that were never designed to talk to each other. They are a poor place to keep the core logic of your business.
When a workflow becomes the thing your operations depend on, with dozens of steps, business rules that change every quarter, and data that has to be correct, I usually move it into code. On PrintVision, the new Next.js site talks to the client's own ERP directly rather than through a chain of third-party connectors, because the data matters too much to route through a tool nobody on their side would monitor. The same thinking runs through Nuraflow, the home care software I am building, where intake, scheduling, EVV and billing share one record instead of being stitched together with automations.
Signs you have outgrown a connector tool:
- You have the same workflow duplicated across several Zaps or scenarios with small variations.
- Nobody can explain what happens when a step fails.
- The monthly automation bill is approaching what a small custom integration would cost to build and maintain.
- You are using the platform as a database, storing state in sheets because there is nowhere else for it to live.
A checklist before you build anything
- Write the workflow in plain language: trigger, each step, expected result.
- Count the billed units per run on each platform, then multiply by a busy month, not an average one.
- Check whether any field could contain sensitive data (health, financial, ID numbers) and confirm the vendor's position in writing.
- Name one owner who gets the failure alerts.
- Set up error notifications on day one. Zapier has error handler paths (successful steps inside them count as tasks, per its task usage article), Make has error handler modules that cost no credits, and in n8n that means an error workflow.
- Keep a manual fallback the team knows how to use.
- Review usage after the first month and again each quarter.
Frequently asked questions
Which is cheapest: Zapier, Make or n8n?
It depends on the shape of your workflows. For short workflows at low volume, all three are inexpensive. For long workflows or loops at high volume, n8n's per-execution billing is usually cheapest, Make sits in the middle, and Zapier's per-task billing climbs fastest. Count your steps and runs and compare against each pricing page.
Is n8n really free?
The self-hosted Community Edition costs nothing to license for your own internal business use under the Sustainable Use License. You still pay for the server and, more importantly, for someone's time to keep it updated, backed up and secure. n8n Cloud is a paid subscription.
Can I switch platforms later?
Yes, but plan to rebuild by hand. Each platform stores workflows in its own format, and I have never moved a client's automations between them without recreating every step and retesting it. That is one more reason to write each workflow down in plain language first: the document is what you migrate, not the configuration.
Can I use these tools with patient or client health data?
Not without a signed Business Associate Agreement if HIPAA applies to you. The HIPAA Privacy Rule at 45 CFR 164.502(e) lets a covered entity have a business associate create, receive, maintain or transmit protected health information only with satisfactory assurances, documented in a written contract, that the information will be safeguarded. Zapier states that it doesn't sign one. For the others, ask the vendor about your specific plan before any health information flows through. Plenty of non-PHI work, like logging referral source activity, can still be automated safely.
Want help choosing?
If you have a workflow in mind and want a second opinion on which tool fits, or whether it should be a small custom integration instead, get in touch. Send me the steps in plain language and I'll tell you honestly what I would use and what it would cost to run.
