Zapier is the easiest automation tool on the market — a non-technical marketer can publish their first Zap in 10 minutes without reading docs. Make (formerly Integromat) is the power tool: its visual canvas handles branching, iterators, and data aggregation that would require awkward multi-Zap workarounds in Zapier, and it's 5-10x cheaper per operation at equivalent volume. The decision is whether your team needs simplicity or power.
Quick comparison
| Feature | Zapier | Make |
|---|---|---|
| Starting price | Free plan | Free plan |
| Free plan | Yes | Yes |
| Open source | No | No |
| Self-hostable | No | No |
| G2 rating | Not listed | Not listed |
| Best for | non-technical marketers, ops staff, and founders who need to connect SaaS apps quickly without learning workflow logic | ops teams or developers who need conditional branching, data transformation, iterators, or simply want more automation for less money |
| Starting price | Free plan available; paid tiers depend on usage and plan limits. | Free plan available; paid tiers depend on usage and plan limits. |
| Free plan | Yes | Yes |
| Open source | No | No |
| Self-hostable | No | No |
| Deployment model | saas | saas |
| Best for | teams starting with workflow automation on a free plan | teams starting with workflow automation on a free plan |
| Primary risk | Free-tier limits can hide the real cost until workflows reach production. | Free-tier limits can hide the real cost until workflows reach production. |
Automation coverage and connector depth
Zapier has 6,000+ app integrations versus Make's roughly 1,500. In practice that gap matters most in the long tail — niche CRMs, legacy tools, or region-specific SaaS platforms. For mainstream SaaS (Slack, HubSpot, Salesforce, Google Workspace, Notion), both have solid coverage. Zapier's connectors tend to be more polished and updated faster because vendors prioritize Zapier as the default integration target. Make's connectors can lag on new API versions and some trigger options are missing compared to Zapier. If your stack is standard, the difference won't matter. If you rely on an obscure tool, check Make's integration before switching.
Builder experience and learning curve
Zapier's linear step-by-step builder is genuinely the easiest automation interface in the market — a non-technical marketer can publish their first Zap in under 10 minutes. Make's canvas-based interface looks more intimidating but unlocks far more power: you can visually see how data flows, build parallel paths, use iterators and aggregators, and handle errors inline. The tradeoff is that Make takes an hour or two to understand vs minutes for Zapier. For teams where non-technical people own automations, Zapier wins. For teams where an ops person or developer maintains workflows, Make's visual model is actually more maintainable at scale than a list of linear Zaps.
Error handling and observability
Make has a meaningfully better error-handling story. You can set up error routes inline — if a step fails, branch to a Slack notification or retry logic without leaving the scenario. Zapier's error handling is more basic: you get email alerts and can enable auto-replay, but in-workflow error branching isn't available on most plans. Make also shows a full execution history with data at each node, making it easy to debug failures. Zapier's task history shows inputs and outputs but is harder to interrogate for complex multi-step issues. For production workflows where failures have business consequences, Make's observability is noticeably better.
Pricing model and task limits
This is Make's clearest win. Zapier counts each action step as a task — a three-step Zap uses three tasks. Make counts operations the same way but prices them far cheaper. At Zapier's Professional plan ($49/month), you get 2,000 tasks. At Make's equivalent tier, you get 10,000 operations for around $9/month. The gap compounds for workflows with many steps. Zapier's free plan gives 100 tasks/month with single-step Zaps only. Make's free plan gives 1,000 operations with full multi-step scenarios. If your workflows are simple and low-volume, both are fine. At scale, Make is routinely 5-10x cheaper for equivalent workloads.
Enterprise controls and governance
Zapier's Teams and Enterprise plans include shared workspaces, centralized admin, user permissions, SSO via SAML, and audit logs. These features are available at predictable price points. Make has organization-level controls, role-based access, and team accounts, but its enterprise governance features are less mature. Zapier has been enterprise-focused longer and its admin console is more polished. Neither tool competes with Workato or Tray.io for enterprise governance, but if your IT team needs audit trails and SSO as a baseline, Zapier's enterprise plan is easier to satisfy compliance requirements with.
Execution reliability at scale
Both platforms are cloud-hosted SaaS with good uptime track records. Make gives you explicit control over scenario scheduling — you choose run frequency from every minute to monthly. Zapier triggers can have latency issues on lower-tier plans (polling every 15 minutes on Starter). Make's execution model is also more transparent: each run shows exactly what happened, when, and at which step. For high-volume or time-sensitive workflows, Make's execution model is more predictable. Zapier's Premium features include faster polling and priority execution, but they come at higher price points that erode Zapier's simplicity advantage.
Pricing deep-dive
Zapier
- Free: 100 tasks/month, 5 Zaps, single-step only
- Starter: $19.99/month — 750 tasks, multi-step Zaps, filters
- Professional: $49/month — 2,000 tasks, unlimited Zaps, custom logic
- Team/Enterprise: $69+/month — shared workspaces, SSO, audit logs
Make
- Free: 1,000 operations/month, unlimited scenarios, full multi-step support
- Core: $9/month — 10,000 operations/month
- Pro: $16/month — 10,000 operations with priority execution
- Teams/Enterprise: custom pricing with advanced admin and SSO
Pricing verdict: Make wins on price at nearly every tier. Zapier's Starter is $19.99/month for 750 tasks; Professional is $49/month for 2,000 tasks. Make's Core plan is $9/month for 10,000 operations; Pro is $16/month for 10,000 operations with priority execution. For multi-step workflows, a single Zap can consume 3-5 tasks per run — meaning Zapier's real capacity is lower than the headline number. Make's per-operation cost is roughly 5-10x cheaper for the same workload. If budget is the primary concern, Make wins outright. Zapier justifies the premium only if the connector depth or ease-of-use for non-technical users is worth it for your specific team.
How to migrate from Zapier to Make
What real users say
Zapier: Zapier users consistently praise how fast you can go from idea to live automation without reading docs. The app library and pre-built templates are frequently cited as time-savers. Common complaints: task limits eat through plans faster than expected on multi-step workflows, pricing feels expensive compared to Make at scale, and the lack of in-workflow error branching frustrates power users.
Make: Make users praise the visual canvas and the ability to model genuinely complex logic without code. The pricing is frequently cited as a major advantage — users routinely report doing 10x the work at half the Zapier cost. Common complaints: the learning curve for first-timers is real, some connectors are less polished than Zapier's equivalents, and the UI can feel cluttered on large scenarios.
Sources: Pattern synthesized from catalog data, vendor positioning, and public review themes; verify on G2 or Capterra before quoting directly.
Final verdict
Choose Zapier if...
- Your automations are owned by non-technical marketers or ops staff who can't spend time learning a new interface.
- You rely on niche SaaS apps that Make hasn't fully covered — check their connector list before assuming parity.
- You need enterprise SSO, audit logs, and centralized admin that your IT team can approve in a standard security review.
Choose Make if...
- Your workflows involve conditional branching, data transformation, iterators, or loops that would require awkward multi-Zap workarounds in Zapier.
- You're running high task volumes where Zapier's per-task pricing makes the monthly bill painful — Make can be 5-10x cheaper.
- A developer or technical ops person owns your automations and will benefit from Make's more powerful and transparent execution model.
Consider neither if: Consider n8n if you want Make's power with the ability to self-host for data residency. Consider Workato if you need enterprise-grade governance and on-premise connectors. Consider Pipedream if your team writes code and wants a developer-native workflow tool with version control.