n8n vs. Make: n8n is usually cheaper once you self-host it, Make is easier to set up and ships with more templates. Both are workflow builders made of nodes and connections. Before you pick one of the two, though, there is a question worth asking first: do you actually need a workflow builder for your task, if Claude can already read your mail, your calendar, and your files directly?
I answer both questions here. I run AI agents for my own business and for clients, know both tools from real projects, and ended up deciding against workflow builders as the foundation of my workforce. Why, I show with a concrete example: Susi, my ad-evaluation employee, next to the same task thought of as a workflow.
n8n vs. Make: comparing the pricing model
Make bills in credits: a module action in a scenario costs one credit by default, individual modules such as the AI Content Extractor cost two or ten according to the help pages, and for AI features running on Make's own provider the consumption also depends on the number of tokens (Make help on credits, retrieved 07 September 2026). A scenario with many small steps burns through your allowance faster than one with a few large ones. n8n, by contrast, bills by executions: one full run of a workflow counts once, regardless of how many nodes it contains.
The figures below come from the vendors' own pricing pages, n8n and Make, retrieved on 07 September 2026. Plans and quotas change there regularly, so check the numbers again before you decide.
| Option |
Vendor price, retrieved 07 September 2026 |
Billing unit |
| n8n Community Edition, self-hosted |
no subscription fee, standard version via GitHub |
not metered by the vendor |
| n8n Cloud Starter |
20 euros a month billed annually, 2,500 executions |
workflow executions |
| n8n Cloud Pro |
50 euros a month billed annually, 10,000 executions |
workflow executions |
| n8n Business and Enterprise |
667 euros a month billed annually, Enterprise on request, both also self-hosted |
workflow executions |
| Make Free |
0 dollars, 1,000 credits a month |
credits |
| Make Core, Pro, Teams |
9, 16, and 29 dollars a month for 10,000 credits each |
credits |
Three things matter about that table. n8n charges no subscription fee for the Community Edition, but the server, its operation, and its upkeep still cost money, depending on provider and size, plus your own time for updates, backups, and hardening. With Make the price rises with the credit volume you pick, and the amounts above are for 10,000 credits a month. And if you build many small steps, you feel that directly in your Make allowance, while in n8n the number of nodes stays irrelevant to the cost.
Hosting and data protection: self-host or use the cloud
Make runs exclusively as the provider's own cloud service, you have no option to host it yourself. n8n, on the other hand, comes in two flavors: a hosted cloud version, or self-hosting on your own server. For you, that means: if it matters where your data lives, for example for GDPR-compliant processing on a server in Germany or the EU, the self-hosted n8n option is the only one of the two that gives you that control. In return, you also carry the responsibility for updates, backups, and securing the server yourself.
When neither is enough: Claude as an n8n alternative
Here is the question most comparisons skip: what if your task does not need a workflow builder at all? Claude itself now brings ways to reach your files and systems, through Claude Code and Claude Cowork, without you clicking together nodes and connections beforehand. Which features sit in which plan is in Claude Pricing and Plans Explained. For tasks that need a fixed sequence of steps, say "new form entry, row in the spreadsheet, email out," a workflow builder is still the more honest choice. A flowchart maps that kind of assembly-line task one to one.
For tasks that need context and judgment, say "read these campaign numbers and tell me what I should do next," a workflow builder hits a wall: every new variant of the task has to be anticipated, as an extra condition, a code or AI node, or a branch of its own. You can absolutely build that flexibility in, but always up front and always yourself. Claude reads the numbers, the surrounding context, and your past decisions directly, without you having had to model that as a diagram beforehand. I lay out how I decided this for my own workforce, with all the trade-offs, in Building AI Agents Without Code: My Way, and I will not repeat that here.
Susi's task: as a workflow and as an employee
Take the evaluation of ad campaigns. Thought of as a workflow, it would look like this in n8n or Make: pull the weekly export data from the ads account, enter it into a spreadsheet, and check fixed thresholds, for example whether a campaign has crossed a certain cost figure. On a hit, an email goes out. Anything outside those fixed rules, an unusual combination of clicks and conversions, say, this sequence never sees, because no branch was built for it.
In my setup, Susi does that job, my employee for ads from research through evaluation. On a typical Monday, the weekly report on running campaigns is in front of her. She looks at spend, clicks, and conversions together, not just single values against a threshold, and writes me an assessment in plain language: which campaign is doing well, where something stands out and why, and what she suggests. The decision on whether to shift a budget or pause a campaign is still mine to make, I do not hand that off. The difference from the fixed sequence above is not speed, it is that the result is an assessment instead of an alert.
Decision table: workflow or employee
| Criterion |
Workflow (n8n, Make) |
Employee (Claude) |
| Fits |
fixed, repeating steps |
tasks that need context and judgment |
| Setup |
trigger, modules, connections |
role, personnel file, onboarding conversation |
| For a new variant of the task |
anticipate it as a condition, code, or AI node |
the same employee adapts |
| Ongoing upkeep |
you maintain the flow, fix broken connections |
you give feedback, it lands in the file |
| Cost |
plan or execution fee, plus a server if self-hosted |
already included in your existing Claude plan |
For tasks that really are an assembly line, the left column is the honest answer. For tasks you have hesitated to delegate at all so far, because they need judgment, it is the right one.
Frequently asked questions
Is n8n free?
The Community Edition is the vendor's self-hosted standard version and carries no subscription fee (retrieved 07 September 2026). That still does not make running it free: you need your own server and you carry updates, backups, and hardening yourself. If you would rather not do that work, the cloud version starts at 20 euros a month billed annually.
Can I switch from Make to n8n, or the other way around?
Not directly on a technical level, since both tools store their workflows in their own format. You generally rebuild the logic from scratch, though you can use the existing automation as a blueprint for the steps you want to carry over.
Do I need coding skills for n8n or Make?
Not for the basic functions of either tool, you work with prebuilt modules and mouse-driven connections. For more complex logic, such as custom code steps or handling unusual data formats, coding experience helps noticeably in both tools.
Is Claude enough without an additional automation tool?
For tasks with a fixed sequence and many repetitions per day, a workflow builder is often the faster and cheaper solution. For tasks that need context, research, or judgment, a Claude plan alone gets you far, as the comparison above shows. Many self-employed people end up needing both side by side, not one instead of the other.
What are good AI automation tools besides n8n and Claude?
That depends heavily on the task. A broader overview of examples from my own practice, from bookkeeping to content, is in Automating Processes With AI: 8 Examples.
Where to go from here
If you want to test your first agent for free before committing to a plan, see Build an AI Agent for Free: What Works?. And if you want the full thinking behind "employee instead of workflow," with all the trade-offs, it is in Building AI Agents Without Code: My Way.
All eight ready-made AI employee packages, Susi for ads included, are ready to go in my community, with an onboarding conversation instead of a workflow editor: Claude Practitioners.
