Make and Zapier are two leading automation platforms, but they approach workflow design in different ways. Make emphasizes flexibility through its visual editor, giving teams more control over how multi-step processes are built and managed. Zapier focuses on simplicity, offering quick setup and one of the largest app libraries available.
The choice often comes down to priorities like pricing, integrations, ease of use, customization, and scalability.
What is Make?
Make is built around a visual editor that lets teams connect apps and design workflows step by step. It is cloud-based, so there is no need to manage infrastructure, and it offers a mix of simple templates and advanced options for multi-app processes. This balance makes it approachable for new users while still supporting more complex automation needs.
Strengths
- Visual workflow builder designed for accessibility.
- Library of 2,500+ app connections and templates.
- Handles both simple automations and complex processes.
- Cloud-based with no setup or hosting required.
Drawbacks
- Usage costs increase as workflows run more frequently.
- Customization is limited compared to open-source platforms.
- Fewer options for advanced error handling and data control.
Read our review: Make Review (2025): Is It the Best Workflow Automation Tool for Your Business?
What is Zapier?
Zapier is one of the most widely used automation platforms, recognized for its simple interface and extensive library of app connections. It enables teams to link thousands of tools quickly by setting up “Zaps,” which are workflows built from triggers and actions. This approach makes it accessible to non-technical users who want to automate tasks without writing code.
Strengths
- Connects with more than 8,000 applications across different categories.
- Straightforward setup with pre-configured triggers and actions.
- Easy to use for both individuals and teams with limited technical background.
- Large user community and support resources to guide troubleshooting.
Drawbacks
- Pricing increases as task volume grows, which can make scaling expensive.
- Advanced workflows are harder to design due to limited branching and customization.
- Performance and cost are tied directly to task frequency, which may be restrictive for high-volume processes.
Read our review: Zapier Review (2025): A Strong Option, but Watch Out for Task Limits and Costs
Make vs Zapier: Feature Comparison
| Factor | Make | Zapier |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | Subscription model tied to workflow operations (credits). Costs increase as workflows run more frequently. | Subscription tiers based on the number of tasks each month. Higher usage increases overall cost. |
| Integrations | 2,500+ pre-built app connections with strong multi-step support. | 8,000+ app connections across categories with wide coverage. |
| Ease of use | Visual drag-and-drop editor with templates for faster setup. | Simple point-and-click builder designed for quick workflows. |
| Customization | Allows more complex configurations but within platform limits. | Limited options for advanced customization beyond triggers and actions. |
| Scalability | Cloud-based service that can handle complex workflows but adds cost as usage increases. | Task-based scaling, simple to grow but potentially costly at high volume. |
Pricing comparison
Pricing is a key factor when weighing Make against Zapier. Make uses a credit-based model where each operation in a workflow counts toward monthly limits, with costs rising as automations run more frequently. Zapier prices by task volume, offering predictable tiers that can become expensive for teams running large numbers of workflows.
Make pricing tiers
| Plan | Monthly Pricing | Annual (per month) | Credits included |
|---|---|---|---|
| Free | $0 | $0 | 1,000 |
| Core | $10.59 | $9 | 10,000 |
| Pro | $18.82 | $16 | 10,000 |
| Teams | $34.12 | $29 | 10,000 |
| Enterprise | Custom | Custom | Custom |
Make plans start at 10,000 credits and scale up to 2 million, with pricing increasing by usage.
Zapier pricing tiers
| Plan | Monthly pricing | Annual (per month) | Tasks |
|---|---|---|---|
| Free | $0 | $0 | 100/mo |
| Professional | $29.99 | $19.99 | 750/mo |
| Team | $103.50 | $69 | 2000/mo |
| Enterprise | Contact sales | Contact sales | Varies |
Prices scale by task, these are “Starting from” amounts.
Credits vs tasks: What’s the difference?
Make uses credits, while Zapier uses tasks, and the way each platform measures usage has a direct impact on pricing. The distinction becomes more noticeable as workflows add steps or run more frequently.
Make counts credits. Every step in a workflow is treated as an operation, and most operations consume one credit. For example, a sales workflow that pulls a lead from Facebook Ads, enriches it with LinkedIn data, scores it, adds it to HubSpot, and sends a Slack notification would count as five operations. If that workflow runs 100 times in a month, it would use 500 credits.
Zapier counts tasks. A task is logged only when an action is completed in a connected app. Using the same example, adding the lead to HubSpot and sending the Slack notification would count as two tasks. Pulling the lead, enriching the data, and scoring it happen within the workflow but do not each create a separate task charge. If the workflow runs 100 times in a month, it would consume 200 tasks.
| Example workflow: Facebook Ads -> Hubspot -> Slack | Make (credits) | Zapier (tasks) |
|---|---|---|
| Steps in workflow | 5 | 2 |
| Runs per month | 100 | 100 |
| Total usage | 500 credits | 200 tasks |
Workflows with lots of behind-the-scenes steps usually consume more credits in Make than tasks in Zapier, so teams with complex processes may see costs diverge faster between the two.
Integrations: Side-by-side comparison
Integrations determine how many apps can be connected without custom work. Zapier is recognized for its wide coverage, offering more than 8,000 pre-built connections across major SaaS categories. Make includes fewer ready-made integrations but balances that with stronger tools for linking multiple apps in more complex workflows.
| Category | Make | Zapier |
|---|---|---|
| Number of integrations | 2,500+ pre-built connectors across common SaaS tools. | 8,000+ app integrations across business categories. |
| Custom connections | Visual modules and API calls within the workflow editor. | Limited to pre-built triggers and actions, less API flexibility. |
| Ease of setup | Drag-and-drop builder with a consistent module-based system. | Point-and-click setup with templates for quick start. |
| Community support | Large user base with documentation and workflow templates. | Larger user community with extensive guides and shared Zaps. |
| Best fit | Teams that need structured, multi-step processes. | Teams that value wide app coverage and simplicity. |
Ease of use: Side-by-side comparison
Ease of use affects how quickly teams can design, launch, and manage automations. Zapier emphasizes speed and simplicity, while Make provides a visual editor with more detailed control, which can help teams troubleshoot and refine multi-step processes.
| Category | Make | Zapier |
|---|---|---|
| Interface | Visual editor with clear mapping of steps and logic. | Clean point-and-click interface for straightforward workflows. |
| Learning curve | Moderate, requires some adjustment as workflows grow. | Low, accessible to non-technical users. |
| Templates | Ready-made templates to assist with setup. | Extensive template library for common use cases. |
| Workflow management | Detailed view of each step, useful for troubleshooting. | Easy to manage for smaller workflows, less flexible for complex logic. |
| Best fit | Teams that value control and visibility over workflows. | Teams that value speed and simplicity. |
Customization and flexibility: Side-by-side comparison
As workflows grow more advanced, teams often look for options beyond pre-built templates. Make supports flexibility through its module system, enabling branching logic, API connections, and custom workflow design. Zapier offers customization mainly through its large set of pre-built triggers, actions, and simple filters that cover most everyday needs.
| Category | Make | Zapier |
|---|---|---|
| Logic | Branching, loops, and multi-step paths. | Mostly linear workflows with filters and conditions. |
| APIs & webhooks | Direct API connections and custom calls within the editor. | Limited API support beyond pre-built triggers and actions. |
| Extensibility | Flexible design with modules and advanced workflow logic. | Primarily limited to app library and built-in options. |
| Data handling | More detailed control over how data flows between steps. | Basic data formatting and transfer between apps. |
| Best fit | Teams that need advanced customization and workflow flexibility. | Teams that need simple, ready-made customization options. |
Scalability and reliability: Side-by-side comparison
Scalability and reliability determine whether an automation platform can support growth without constant adjustments. Make is built to handle complex, multi-step workflows in its managed cloud environment, though costs rise as usage expands. Zapier scales by task volume, keeping the setup simple but potentially becoming expensive for high-frequency processes.
| Category | Make | Zapier |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Fully managed SaaS platform with no infrastructure setup required. | Fully managed SaaS platform with no infrastructure setup required. |
| Reliability | Handles multi-step workflows consistently within its credit system. | Designed for predictable task execution across a wide range of apps. |
| Performance | Scales with workflow complexity, though usage costs increase at higher volumes. | Scales with task volume, but higher usage can raise costs significantly. |
| Maintenance | Updates and monitoring handled by Make. | Updates and monitoring handled by Zapier. |
| Best fit | Teams managing detailed, multi-step processes at scale. | Teams prioritizing simple scaling for frequent, task-based workflows. |
Bottom line: Which platform is right for you?
Make is a strong choice for teams that value a visual builder with branching logic, detailed workflow design, and the ability to manage complex processes. It suits groups that want more control over how automations run and can handle added complexity as usage expands.
Zapier is a strong choice for teams that prioritize fast setup, straightforward task automation, and the widest app coverage. It works well for groups that want simple, reliable workflows without technical overhead.
Your decision comes down to what you value more: Make offers flexibility for complex workflows, while Zapier emphasizes simplicity and speed.
