Quick Answer
Zapier’s free plan gives 100 tasks a month, and a single 10-step workflow uses 10 of them per run. n8n bills per workflow execution instead, so the same workflow costs 1. That difference in billing unit, not headline price, decides which platform is cheaper for you.
Zapier's free plan gives you 100 tasks a month, and a single 10-step workflow uses 10 of them per run. n8n bills per workflow execution instead, so the same workflow costs 1. That difference in billing unit, not the headline price, is what decides which platform is cheaper for you.
Key takeaways
- Zapier bills per task (one step), Make per credit (one module run), n8n per workflow execution.
- A 10-step workflow run 10 times costs 100 Zapier tasks but 10 n8n executions.
- Zapier has by far the widest coverage: 10,045 apps against Make's 3,000+ and n8n's 2,116.
- Make's free plan is the most generous of the hosted options at 1,000 credits a month.
- n8n self-hosted has no execution cap at all, but its licence forbids reselling it.
The billing difference that decides everything
Most comparisons line up monthly prices. That misses the actual cost driver.
| Platform | Billing unit | 10-step workflow, one run |
|---|---|---|
| Zapier | Task = one step | 10 tasks |
| Make | Credit = one module run | ~10 credits |
| n8n | Workflow execution | 1 execution |
Run that workflow 100 times in a month:
- Zapier: 1,000 tasks, needs a paid plan around $39/month
- Make: ~1,000 credits, exactly the free plan's monthly allowance
- n8n: 100 executions, comfortably inside the €20 Starter plan, or free self-hosted
The more steps your workflows have, the more this favours n8n. For simple two-step automations the difference largely disappears.
What each actually costs
Zapier (annual billing):
| Plan | Price | Tasks |
|---|---|---|
| Free | $0 | 100/mo, two-step Zaps only |
| Professional | $19.99/mo | 750 |
| Professional | $39/mo | 1,500 |
| Professional | $89/mo | 5,000 |
| Team | from $69/mo | 2,000, 25 users |
Monthly billing runs roughly 50% higher: the 750-task plan is $29.99 monthly against $19.99 annually.
Note the free plan restriction beyond the task count: two-step Zaps only. Multi-step automation requires paying.
Make (annual billing):
| Plan | Price | Credits |
|---|---|---|
| Free | $0 | 1,000/mo, 2 active scenarios, 15-min minimum interval |
| Core | $9/mo | 10,000, unlimited scenarios, sub-minute scheduling |
| Pro | $16/mo | 10,000 + priority execution, full-text log search |
| Teams | $29/mo | n/a |
Make renamed its billing unit from "operations" to "credits," so older articles use different terminology for the same thing.
Make's free plan is the most generous hosted option here: 1,000 credits against Zapier's 100 tasks, though capped at 2 active scenarios and a 15-minute minimum interval.
n8n Cloud (annual, euros):
| Plan | Price | Executions |
|---|---|---|
| Starter | €20/mo | 2,500, 5 concurrent |
| Pro | €50/mo | 10,000, 20 concurrent |
| Business | €667/mo | 40,000, SSO, self-hosted option |
n8n self-hosted: free software, unlimited executions, but you pay for a server and your own time.
Integration coverage: Zapier's real advantage
| Platform | Integrations |
|---|---|
| Zapier | 10,045+ apps |
| Make | 3,000+ apps |
| n8n | 2,116 integrations |
| Activepieces | 200+ pieces |
This is Zapier's genuine moat and the strongest reason to pay for it. If you need to connect a niche SaaS tool, Zapier probably supports it and the others probably do not.
Check your specific tools before switching on price alone. Saving $20 a month is irrelevant if the platform cannot reach the service you need.
Where each one wins
Zapier wins on integration breadth, ease of setup, and reliability with zero maintenance. It is the safe default for someone who wants automations working today without thinking about infrastructure.
Make wins on free-tier generosity and visual workflow building. Its 1,000 free credits genuinely let you run real automations at no cost, and its scenario editor is the most visual of the three.
n8n wins on multi-step economics, self-hosting for data control, AI workflow features, and no execution ceiling when self-hosted. If your workflows are long, nothing else is close on cost.
The licence question
Worth knowing if you plan to build on any of these.
n8n is fair-code, not open source. Its Sustainable Use License permits internal business use and client consulting, but forbids reselling n8n or hosting it for paying customers. Full detail in our n8n review.
Zapier and Make are proprietary SaaS, so the question does not arise. You are a customer, not a licensee.
If you need to resell or white-label, look at Activepieces (MIT) or Node-RED (Apache-2.0), covered in our guide to free Zapier alternatives.
Setup difficulty, honestly
Zapier and Make require no setup at all. Sign in, connect accounts, build.
n8n Cloud is similar: no infrastructure, just an account.
n8n self-hosted is a different proposition. n8n's own documentation marks technical expertise as "Required for installation and configuration." You will handle Docker, a database choice, a reverse proxy, TLS, backups and updates.
For a non-technical user, self-hosting to save €20 a month rarely pays back once you count your time and the risk of a broken automation at an inconvenient moment.
Which should you choose?
Choose Zapier if you need niche integrations, your workflows are short, or you want zero maintenance. The 10,045-app library is the reason to pay.
Choose Make if you want the best free tier, prefer visual workflow building, or your automation volume is moderate. Core at $9 a month is the cheapest real paid tier here.
Choose n8n Cloud if your workflows have many steps. The execution-based billing saves real money at €20 a month compared with per-task pricing.
Self-host n8n if you are technical, need unlimited executions, or require data on your own infrastructure.
A practical starting point: count the steps in your typical workflow and how often it runs. Multiply by ten for Zapier tasks. If that number is uncomfortable, n8n's model is the one that fits.
The verdict
These platforms are priced on different units, which makes headline comparisons misleading in both directions.
For short workflows and wide integration needs, Zapier earns its price. For long workflows run frequently, n8n's execution billing is dramatically cheaper and self-hosting removes the ceiling entirely. Make sits in between with the most usable free tier.
Work out your step count first. That single number tells you more than any pricing table.
Related reading: n8n review and pricing and best AI productivity tools.
Pricing verified against each vendor's own pricing page in September 2026. Plans change often, so check the vendor's page before you buy.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is n8n cheaper than Zapier?
For multi-step workflows, substantially. Zapier bills per task where each step is a task, so a 10-step workflow run 100 times costs 1,000 tasks, needing a plan around $39 a month. The same workload is 100 n8n executions, inside the €20 Starter plan or free self-hosted.
What is the difference between Zapier tasks and Make credits?
Both meter individual steps: a Zapier task is one step in a Zap, and a Make credit is one module run. Make renamed its unit from operations to credits, so older articles use different terminology. Functionally they are comparable, and both scale with workflow length.
Which automation tool has the best free plan?
Make, with 1,000 credits a month against Zapier's 100 tasks, though it caps you at 2 active scenarios with a 15-minute minimum interval. Zapier's free plan also restricts you to two-step Zaps. Self-hosted n8n has no execution limit but requires running a server.
How many integrations does each platform have?
Zapier lists 10,045+ apps, Make 3,000+, n8n 2,116 integrations, and Activepieces 200+ pieces. Zapier's breadth is its genuine advantage and the main reason to pay for it if you need a niche service.
Should you self-host n8n to save money?
Only if you are technical. n8n's own docs mark technical expertise as required for self-hosting, covering Docker, databases, reverse proxy, TLS, backups and updates. For non-technical users, saving €20 a month rarely justifies the setup time and maintenance risk.