n8n vs Make (2026): pricing, self-hosting and AI agents compared
Published 2026-10-19 · Facts and prices checked on vendor pages as of 2026-10-19 · Scores update weekly
Quick answer
Choose n8n if you are technical, want to self-host, run complex or high-volume workflows, or build AI agents. Choose Make if you want a no-code visual builder and run simple, low-volume scenarios. On ToolStandings, n8n leads workflow automation at 84.4 (#1 of 5) and Make is 72.4 (#2 of 5).
ToolStandings scores side by side
| n8n | Make | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 84.4 (ranked) | 72.4 (ranked) |
| Overall rank | #3 | #40 |
| Traction / 25 | 21.9 | 12.9 |
| Momentum / 15 | 7.5 (prov.) | 7.5 (prov.) |
| Product quality / 25 | 25 | 25 |
| Value / 15 | 15 | 12 |
| Reliability / 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Editor / community / 10 | 5 (prov.) | 5 (prov.) |
| Pricing type | open-source | freemium |
How the score works: how we rank. "prov." means provisional: a neutral placeholder until the data exists.
At a glance
| n8n | Make | |
|---|---|---|
| Billing unit | Workflow execution (any number of steps) | Credit (most module actions = 1) |
| Free option | Self-hosted Community Edition (no licence fee); cloud trial with 1,000 executions | Free plan: 1,000 credits/month |
| Self-hosting | Yes (Community Edition; Business plan is self-hosted) | No self-hosted edition listed |
| Licence | Sustainable Use License (source-available) | Proprietary SaaS |
| Code steps | JavaScript and Python | Not covered here |
| Integrations | Every integration on all plans | 1,000+ standard apps |
| AI agents | AI Agent node, MCP server/client | AI Provider features (can use more than 1 credit) |
How each one bills: executions vs credits
n8n charges per workflow execution: one full run of a workflow, "regardless of complexity" and with unlimited steps. All plans include unlimited users and workflows.
Make charges in credits. Each module action in a scenario (reading a record, writing a row, transforming data) uses credits. "Most actions consume 1 credit", features that use Make's AI Provider may use more, and router and error-handler modules are free. Make says one run can use "anywhere from two credits to thousands".
Worked example (our arithmetic, assuming 1 credit per module action): a 10-step workflow run 1,000 times a month is 1,000 executions on n8n and about 10,000 credits on Make. The more steps per run, the more per-execution billing favours n8n. Simple two-step flows narrow the gap.
Pricing in October 2026
Checked on the vendor pages on Oct 19, 2026. n8n's listed prices are the annual-billing rates (annual billing saves 17%).
| Plan | n8n (cloud unless noted) | Make |
|---|---|---|
| Free | Community Edition, self-hosted: no licence fee | Free: 1,000 credits/month |
| Starter / entry | Starter €20/mo billed annually: 2,500 executions | Paid plans (Core, Pro, Teams): prices not machine-verifiable on Oct 19, see make.com/pricing |
| Pro | Pro €50/mo billed annually: 10,000 executions | |
| Business | €667/mo billed annually: 40,000 executions, self-hosted, SSO, Git version control | |
| Enterprise | Custom (hosted or self-hosted) | Enterprise: custom |
Prices as shown on vendor pages on 2026-10-19, excluding tax. Check before you buy.
Self-hosting and licence
Only n8n can be self-hosted. The n8n Community Edition is on GitHub under the Sustainable Use License. You may use or modify it "only for your own internal business purposes or for non-commercial or personal use", and you may only give it to others free of charge for non-commercial purposes. That means running it as a paid hosted service for third parties is not allowed. Files marked ".ee" need an Enterprise licence. Self-hosting has no licence fee, but you pay for the server and the upkeep.
Make is a cloud service. Its pricing page lists no self-hosted edition.
Ease of use and integrations
Make's visual scenario builder is aimed at non-developers, and Make lists integrations with more than 1,000 apps plus 300+ REST API endpoints for managing the platform. n8n's editor is visual too, but it also supports JavaScript and Python code steps, custom HTTP and GraphQL requests, custom nodes and a CLI. That gives developers more control, with a steeper learning curve.
AI agents and LLM steps
n8n's plans include an AI Agent node and AI steps, an MCP server trigger and MCP client, human approval for tool calls, and LangSmith tracing on self-hosted installs. Self-hosting also lets you keep models and data on your own infrastructure. On ToolStandings, n8n ranks #1 of 16 in AI agent platforms.
Make offers AI features through its AI Provider. Those actions can use more than one credit each, so AI-heavy scenarios cost more credits per run.
Who should pick which
- Solo no-coder, a few simple automations: Make. The free plan's 1,000 credits a month go a long way on two- or three-step scenarios.
- Agency building flows for clients: it depends. Make is quick for clients to understand. n8n's licence rules out reselling it as a hosted service, so check the licence terms before using self-hosted n8n for client work.
- In-house dev team, high volume or AI agents: n8n. Per-execution billing, code steps and self-hosting fit best.
Alternatives
Also in workflow automation: Zapier (71.5, #3 of 5) and Dify (70.1, #4 of 5). For agent-first platforms, see AI agents.
FAQ
Is n8n free?
The self-hosted Community Edition has no licence fee under the Sustainable Use License, for internal business, personal or non-commercial use. n8n Cloud is paid, starting at €20 a month billed annually. Hosting and upkeep still cost money.
Is Make cheaper than n8n?
Often, for simple, low-volume scenarios, and Make has a free plan with 1,000 credits a month. With many steps per run, or at high volume, n8n's per-execution billing usually costs less, because Make charges per module action.
Can I self-host Make?
No. Make is a cloud service, and its pricing page lists no self-hosted edition. n8n is the one of the two you can self-host.
Which is better for AI agents?
n8n, for most technical teams. It has an AI Agent node, MCP support, code steps and the option to self-host models and data. It ranks #1 of 16 in AI agent platforms on ToolStandings.
Which is easier for beginners?
Make. Its visual scenario builder is designed for non-developers. n8n is also visual, but it rewards technical skills.
How do the ToolStandings scores compare?
n8n scores 84.4 (#1 of 5 in workflow automation) and Make 72.4 (#2 of 5). n8n leads on traction and value (open source). Make has a full 7/7 quality checklist.
How we compared
Scores come from the public ToolStandings formula (how we rank) and refresh automatically, so the numbers on this page always match the current tool pages. Momentum and Editor/community are still provisional for every tool. Vendor facts and prices were checked on the sources below on 2026-10-19. If a fact couldn't be verified on a vendor page, we left it out.
Sources (as of 2026-10-19)
Full profiles: n8n · Make · Divisions: Workflow automation · AI agent platforms · All comparisons
Get new comparisons and the biggest ranking moves every week: The Weekly Standings newsletter.