Make vs Zapier vs n8n: the price is not the price — the meter is different

Comparing automation platforms by entry price is misleading, because each vendor meters a different unit. Make counts credits, Zapier counts tasks, and n8n counts executions. The same workflow can produce three very different bills.

The three meters

Platform	Entry paid plan (annual billing)	What you get	Billing unit
Make	Core, $9–$12/mo	10,000 credits/month	1 credit = 1 module executed in a scenario run
Zapier	Professional, from $19.99/mo	750 tasks/month	1 task = 1 action step (the trigger is free)
n8n Cloud	Starter, €20/mo	2,500 executions/month	1 execution = 1 full workflow run, however many steps
n8n Community	Self-hosted, $0	Unlimited executions	Server cost only (~$5–10/mo VPS); you operate it

Entry tiers only, checked 2026-10-27. Vendors change pricing — verify current terms on each vendor's pricing page before purchase. The Make figure is a range because published figures vary by visitor region.

One worked example

Take a 5-step workflow that runs 1,000 times a month:

• Make: 5,000 credits (every module in every run)
• Zapier: 4,000 tasks (trigger free, 4 action steps × 1,000 runs)
• n8n: 1,000 executions (one per run, regardless of steps)

This is why step count matters more than headline price. A short workflow and a long workflow with the same run count are the same price on n8n, and very different prices on Make and Zapier.

When each platform becomes expensive

• Zapier compounds with volume. The entry Professional tier includes 750 tasks/month; a single two-action Zap firing 20 times a day burns through that in under three weeks, and overage tasks are billed on top.
• Make stays cheap at low volume, but wide scenarios with many modules consume credits faster than the run count suggests.
• n8n Cloud is predictable per run. Self-hosting is cheapest in dollars, but you own patching, backups, and uptime.

The cost check before you migrate or renew

License cost is only one line of the total. Before choosing or renewing, model four things:

1. Run cost — monthly runs × steps per run, mapped to each vendor's unit, including expected growth.
2. Human maintenance — debugging, credential refresh, schema changes, and the time lost when a workflow silently fails.
3. Portability — which workflows would be expensive to rebuild if pricing, limits, or strategy change.
4. Duplicate platforms — teams often pay for two automation systems because different departments started independently.

Buying rule: one automation platform should own a clearly defined class of workflows. If two platforms are both handling general-purpose automations, compare total operating cost and migration friction before renewing both.

Which should you pick?

• Zapier fits when fast setup, broad app connectivity, and non-developer ownership matter most.
• Make is worth comparing when visual workflow design and more granular scenario logic are important.
• n8n is more relevant when technical teams want custom logic, API flexibility, or self-hosting control.

Connect the comparison to a decision

The full comparison, including the decision lenses and source context, is maintained here: Workflow Automation Software Comparison 2026.

For a single renewal, start with the free renewal decision calculator. For multiple platforms, duplicated automations, or unclear AI/API run cost, the fixed-scope $499 spend audit maps each tool to a KEEP / REDUCE / CONSOLIDATE / REVIEW / CANCEL decision. There is also a $39 self-service decision kit if you want the framework without the audit.

---

Disclosure: the Make link in this article is an affiliate link. If you sign up through it, Stratum Praxis may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. Stratum Praxis is not otherwise affiliated with the products named in this article, and the decision lenses above are not paid placements. Market references: G2 — Automation and Workflow Automation in iPaaS, and G2 — Make vs. Zapier.