n8n vs Make: Honest 2026 Comparison
n8n and Make are the two most-asked-about no-code workflow tools for AI agents in 2026. They look similar (visual canvas, drag-and-drop, AI agent nodes), but they make very different trade-offs on price, control, and integration breadth. This page is the practical comparison: who should pick which, by use case.
Quick verdict
- Pick n8n if: you want self-host, full code nodes, or near-zero cost at high run volume
- Pick Make if: you want zero setup, the widest integration list, and a smooth visual editor
- Most Amazon sellers under $1M: Make wins on speed-to-first-result
- Most developers and bootstrapped operators: n8n wins on long-term cost
Who should pick n8n
- Developers who want to write JavaScript or Python inside a workflow node
- Teams handling sensitive data who need to self-host (HIPAA, EU GDPR, internal-only)
- Bootstrapped operators who run 50,000+ workflow steps a month (self-hosted n8n stays free)
- Anyone allergic to monthly subscription growth as workflows scale
Who should pick Make
- Non-technical operators who want to start in 10 minutes
- Teams that need integrations with niche apps (Make has 1500+ vs n8n's 400+)
- Small businesses running under 10,000 operations a month (Make Core at $9 is hard to beat)
- Agencies serving multiple clients with shared scenarios
Pricing side-by-side (checked May 2026)
| Tier | n8n | Make |
|---|---|---|
| Free | Unlimited self-host | 1000 operations/month |
| Starter / Core | $24/month Cloud | $9/month (10k ops) |
| Pro | $60/month | $16/month (10k ops) |
| Team | Enterprise quote | $29/month (10k ops) |
| Enterprise | Custom | Custom |
Sources: n8n pricing and Make pricing, checked May 2026.
Feature comparison
| Feature | n8n | Make |
|---|---|---|
| Self-host option | Yes (free) | No |
| Visual canvas | Yes | Yes |
| Integration count | 400+ | 1500+ |
| Code nodes (JS, Python) | Full | Limited (HTTP / JSONata) |
| Native AI agent nodes | Yes (added 2025) | Yes (added 2026) |
| Branching / loops | Native | Native |
| License model | Sustainable Use License | Proprietary SaaS |
| Pricing per | Self-host free; Cloud per workflow execution | Per operation (one node firing) |
| Marketplace / templates | Community-driven | Official template library |
When to migrate from Make to n8n
The most common trigger: your Make bill crossed $100/month and you noticed n8n self-hosted on a $5 VPS would do the same job. If your workflow is stable, mostly proven, and runs at high volume, the migration is usually worth it. Expect a day or two to rebuild the workflow shape in n8n.
The case where you should not migrate: your workflows touch a long tail of niche apps that Make has native support for but n8n does not. The community-built nodes help, but they are uneven in quality.
When to migrate from n8n to Make
Rare, but it happens. The pattern: you started on n8n self-hosted, but server maintenance kept eating evenings. You did the math on Make Core at $9/month and decided the time saved was worth more than the subscription. For solo operators who undervalue their own time, this is a fair call.
How I think about this trade-off on SellerShorts
I run a marketplace. When SellerShorts tool builders ask me which platform to build on, I give two answers. If you are technical and want maximum control: n8n self-hosted. If you are non-technical and want to ship in a day: Make. Both work. Neither is wrong. The mistake is picking on price alone, then realizing later you needed the other platform's strength.
The 2026 AI agent angle
Both tools added native AI agent nodes in 2025-2026. Functionally they are at parity for simple agents (LLM call, tool call, return). For complex agents that need custom retry logic, structured output validation, or memory persistence, n8n's code nodes pull ahead because you can write the missing logic in Python. Make would require an external service call to do the same.
Try both
Test n8n and Make on a real workflow
Both have free tiers that cover real testing. Spend an hour building the same workflow in each and you will know which one fits your brain.
Built a workflow on either? List your AI agent on SellerShorts.
Selling on Amazon and want to confirm either tool fits the BSA Agent Policy? See our Amazon AI Agent Policy guide.
Frequently asked questions
n8n vs Make: which is cheaper?
n8n is cheaper if you self-host (free forever). Make is cheaper if you want a managed cloud option and run under ~10,000 operations a month, where Make Core is $9/month vs n8n Cloud Starter at $24/month.
Is n8n harder to use than Make?
Slightly. Make is fully managed cloud with a polished visual canvas. n8n is the same shape but you also have the option to self-host, which adds setup work. If you stick with n8n Cloud, the learning curve is comparable to Make.
Which is better for AI agents in 2026?
Both have native AI agent nodes as of 2026. For most use cases they are equivalent. n8n wins for advanced custom logic via JS or Python code nodes. Make wins for sheer integration count and faster onboarding.
Can I migrate from one to the other?
Not directly. Workflows are not portable between platforms. The conceptual model is similar enough that re-building takes hours, not weeks, once you know the pattern.
Which is better for Amazon sellers?
For most Amazon sellers, Make is the faster start because of the wider integration list (including Amazon Ads and Seller Central modules) and zero setup. n8n wins for sellers who run high run volume or want to keep data on their own infrastructure.
Do both support the Amazon BSA Agent Policy?
Both can be configured to comply, but compliance lives at the agent level, not the platform level. The agent has to identify itself as automated, comply with the policy continuously, and cease access on request. See the Amazon AI Agent Policy guide for the full breakdown.
Some links on this page are partner links. SellerShorts may earn a commission when you sign up through them, at no extra cost to you. We only feature tools we'd use ourselves. Recommendations are based on capabilities and fit, not on commission rate.