From Zapier and Make to n8n: The Evolution of Automation Platforms

Zapier was one of the platforms that helped popularize no-code automation. Its value proposition was simple: it allowed users to connect different applications through workflows called "Zaps," without having to build an integration from scratch.

One of its greatest strengths has always been its extensive ecosystem of integrations. For many entrepreneurs, finding a ready-made connection between two applications significantly reduced implementation time.

Zapier also offered capabilities that other alternatives did not provide at the time, including the ability to run custom code. Today, Code by Zapier allows users to execute JavaScript or Python to transform data, connect with external services, or add logic that is not available through a predefined action.

The main problem appeared when automations began to scale. Zapier charges based on the number of tasks performed, so a workflow with multiple actions or a high execution frequency can quickly consume the monthly allowance included in a plan.

For this reason, although Zapier could be easy to implement and offered a large number of integrations, it was not always the most cost-effective option for repetitive processes or businesses handling a high volume of operations.

Make, previously known as Integromat, emerged as a more visual and flexible alternative. Its interface allowed users to see how information moved through a workflow, add filters, create different branches, and design more complex scenarios.

For a long time, the choice between Zapier and Make depended on the specific project.

Zapier could be more convenient when a particular integration or a quick implementation was required. Make, on the other hand, was often more attractive when a workflow needed data transformation, multiple routes, or greater control over each stage of the process.

Make also positioned itself as a generally more affordable alternative. However, its business model still depends on consumption. The platform calculates usage according to the number of operations or credits consumed by the modules within a scenario.

Another important point is that the differences between these platforms have changed over time. In its earlier stages, Make did not provide the same direct code execution capabilities as Zapier, and external solutions were often required. Today, Make allows users to execute JavaScript and Python within its scenarios.

This is a clear example of how automation platforms continue to evolve. Nevertheless, consumption-based pricing remains an important consideration when designing processes that need to run continuously.

With the arrival and growth of n8n, the conversation was no longer limited to Zapier and Make.

n8n combines many of the most valuable features of both platforms. It offers a visual editor, application integrations, API connections, conditional logic, data transformation, and custom code execution.

At the same time, it provides one fundamental advantage: the possibility of installing its Community Edition on a private server.

With a self-hosted installation, a company does not pay for every individual step performed by an automation. The Community Edition can be used without paying a platform fee and includes most of the core features required to build advanced workflows.

This completely changes the cost structure.

An entrepreneur can rent a virtual private server, install n8n, and execute automations using the resources available on that server. Instead of having a commercial limit on tasks or operations, the practical limit is determined by the available infrastructure, including processing power, memory, storage, concurrency, and server configuration.

This does not mean that n8n is literally unlimited.

A small server can become overloaded if it receives too many simultaneous executions or has to process large volumes of information. The company must also manage updates, backups, security, and technical monitoring.

It is also important to distinguish between self-hosted n8n and n8n Cloud. The cloud version has plans based on a monthly number of workflow executions. However, it allows users to include multiple steps within each execution without charging separately for every individual step.

Our recommendation is based on having worked through the different stages of this market.

When Zapier and Make were the main options, we selected one or the other depending on the required integrations, the available budget, and the complexity of the project.

We still recognize that both platforms are useful, especially for businesses that prefer a fully managed solution and do not want to maintain their own infrastructure.

However, for clients who need frequent automations, customized processes, or greater control over their expenses, n8n usually offers a better balance between flexibility and cost efficiency.

Consider a process that runs every minute to check information, synchronize a database, or identify new requests. A workflow running once per minute performs approximately 43,200 executions per month.

When every execution contains several steps, a platform that charges for tasks, operations, or credits can become expensive very quickly.

With a self-hosted n8n installation, the cost does not automatically increase with every step performed. As long as the server has sufficient capacity, these processes can continue running without requiring the company to constantly purchase additional task or operation packages.

There is no single platform that is perfect for every business.

Zapier continues to stand out because of its ease of use and extensive integration ecosystem. Make remains an excellent visual alternative and has significantly expanded its capabilities. n8n, especially when self-hosted, may require more technical knowledge and greater responsibility for infrastructure management.

Even so, based on our experience, n8n currently represents the most complete option for entrepreneurs who want to build flexible and scalable automations while maintaining greater control over their costs.

The evolution of these tools teaches us an important lesson: automation is not only about connecting applications. It is also about choosing an architecture that can grow with the business without turning every new execution into an unsustainable expense.

Because of its combination of customization, technical control, and cost efficiency, we believe that n8n is the present of automation.