8 Best Make Alternatives in 2026

The best Make alternative for most small teams is Zapier if you want an easier editor and more apps, n8n or Activepieces if you want to self-host, and Pabbly Connect if credit use is the problem. Pipedream, Power Automate, Gumloop and Workato each fit a narrower case, covered below. We rechecked every price on this page against the vendor's own pricing page on 25 September 2026.

One thing before you switch: Make is already one of the cheaper tools in this category. Its Core plan is $9 a month billed annually ($10.59 billed monthly) for 10,000 credits, and its free plan gives 1,000 credits a month (Make pricing, checked 25 September 2026). So the right move depends on the reason you are leaving, not on a lower sticker price.

You can compare every workflow automation tool in our directory by price, free plan and hosting before you read on.

How we chose these 8

We started from the Automate Basics directory, where each record is built from the vendor's own pages and dated. The pool was the workflow automation category (Zapier, Make, n8n, Power Automate, IFTTT, Pipedream, Activepieces, Pabbly Connect, Workato and Relay.app) plus three AI-agent builders from the AI agents category (Gumloop, StackAI and Flowise). A tool made this list if it:

• is still sold to new customers (Relay.app is out: its site says the service shut down in September 2026; Flowise is out: its team froze development on 29 July 2026),
• can run multi-step workflows across apps with some form of branching or filtering, which is what a Make scenario does,
• publishes its plans on its own site, or clearly says it sells through sales.

IFTTT is in the same category but was left out here: its plans offer multi-action Applets and filter code, nothing that stands in for Make's routers and iterators on business workflows. StackAI was left out because it is an AI-agent platform with no self-serve paid plan, not an app-to-app automation tool.

The order is our editorial judgement on three things a Make user feels first: how close the building model is to a scenario, how clear and self-serve the pricing is, and how much work the move takes. Every price was read on the vendor's pricing page on 25 September 2026.

Make alternatives compared

1. Zapier

Best for: teams that want the most apps and the gentlest learning curve.

Zapier is the tool most people compare Make with, and the difference is mostly the editor. Make lays a scenario out on a canvas of connected modules; Zapier builds a Zap as a vertical list of steps. Many teammates find the list easier to read, which matters when you are not the only person maintaining the automations. Zapier also has the largest catalogue here: its homepage says it connects more than 9,000 apps.

Pricing is the catch. The Professional plan starts at $19.99 a month billed yearly, or $29.99 monthly, for 750 tasks, and every action step in a run draws a task. The free plan gives 100 tasks a month and only two-step Zaps. New accounts get a 14-day Professional trial with no card (Zapier pricing, checked 25 September 2026).

Where it falls short: for less than half the monthly price, Make Core's 10,000 credits go much further than Zapier Professional's 750 tasks for most workflows, so moving here usually costs more.

See Zapier's plans and limits in our directory, or read the Zapier vs Make comparison for a side-by-side.

2. n8n

Best for: technical teams that want to run automations on their own infrastructure.

n8n uses a canvas much like Make's, so the building model carries over, and it adds JavaScript and Python code steps when a module will not do. The big difference is where it runs. The Community Edition is free to self-host from GitHub, which removes per-run charges entirely. n8n describes its licence as fair-code under the Sustainable Use License rather than open source, so read the terms if you plan to resell it (n8n on GitHub, checked 25 September 2026).

The meter also works differently. n8n Cloud charges per whole workflow execution, however many steps it has: Starter is $20 a month billed annually for 2,500 executions and Pro is $50 for 10,000. The cloud trial covers 1,000 executions with no card (n8n pricing, checked 25 September 2026). A long scenario that burns dozens of Make credits per run counts as one execution here.

Where it falls short: there is no free cloud tier, and self-hosting means someone on your team patches, backs up and watches the server.

See n8n's plans in our directory or the Make vs n8n comparison. If you are new to it, start with our n8n basics guide.

3. Activepieces

Best for: teams that want a no-code builder with a genuinely open-source core.

Activepieces sits between Make and n8n. The builder is aimed at non-developers, with optional TypeScript steps, and its Community Edition is released under the MIT licence, with enterprise features under a commercial licence (Activepieces on GitHub, checked 25 September 2026). Its website counts 760 integrations, which it calls pieces.

The hosted plans are simple. Free gives one user 100 credits a day, and runs wait for the next day once they are used. Plus is $20 a month for 10,000 credits and up to five users, and Team is $200 a month for 50,000 credits, 25 users and SSO. Extra usage on paid plans costs $0.007 a credit (Activepieces pricing, checked 25 September 2026).

Where it falls short: the app catalogue is far smaller than Make's, so check every app your scenarios touch before you commit.

See Activepieces' plans in our directory.

4. Pabbly Connect

Best for: high-volume, simple workflows where cost per step is the problem.

Pabbly Connect counts differently from Make. Triggers do not count as tasks, and neither do internal steps such as filters, routers, formatters, iterators and schedules; only actions in external apps do. A scenario that spends most of its Make credits on logic modules can cost far less here.

The Standard plan is $16 a month billed annually for 10,000 tasks, with lower rates on longer prepayment and a higher rate month to month. The free plan gives 100 tasks a month on two-step workflows. Pabbly also sells one-time lifetime plans with a fixed monthly task allowance (Pabbly Connect pricing, checked 25 September 2026). Its site lists more than 2,000 integrated apps.

Where it falls short: the pricing page is built around discounts and comparison claims, so read the billing term carefully, and expect a less polished editor than Make's.

See Pabbly Connect's plans in our directory.

5. Pipedream

Best for: developers who would rather write a few lines of code than chain ten modules.

Pipedream is built for people who code. Workflows start from webhooks, schedules, email or app events, and any step can run code in Node.js, Python, Go or Bash (Pipedream docs). Its pricing page lists more than 3,000 integrated apps. Workday has since acquired Pipedream, according to Workday's February 2026 results release.

Usage is metered in credits based on compute time: one credit covers 30 seconds of compute at the default 256 MB of memory per workflow segment (Pipedream docs). Basic is $29 a month billed annually ($348 a year) for 2,000 credits, 10 active workflows and 5 connected accounts; Advanced is $49 a month billed annually with no workflow limit and GitHub sync. Free gives 100 credits a month, three workflows and three connected accounts (Pipedream pricing, checked 25 September 2026).

Where it falls short: it is not a tool for non-developers, and the account and workflow limits on Basic bite quickly.

See Pipedream's plans in our directory.

6. Microsoft Power Automate

Best for: organisations that already run on Microsoft 365.

Power Automate builds cloud flows between apps and desktop flows that automate Windows software, and Microsoft says it works natively inside Teams, Excel and SharePoint. Its product page claims more than 1,400 prebuilt connectors and Copilot for building flows in plain language.

It is priced per user or per bot rather than per operation. Premium is $15 per user a month paid yearly, covering cloud flows and attended desktop flows; unattended bots cost $150 per bot a month, or $215 hosted by Microsoft. There is a 30-day trial for UI-built cloud flows and standard connectors, and no free plan on the pricing page (Power Automate pricing, checked 25 September 2026).

Where it falls short: outside Microsoft's own apps it is harder to use than Make, and per-user pricing gets expensive for a large team that only needs a few flows. Our Power Automate alternatives guide covers the same trade-off from the other side.

See Power Automate's plans in our directory or the Zapier vs Power Automate comparison.

7. Gumloop

Best for: teams whose Make scenarios are turning into AI agent work.

Gumloop has moved from workflows to agents. Its pricing page now lists unlimited agents, 35 or more AI models with the option to bring your own API keys, and unlimited seats, while its workflow feature is labelled legacy. Pro starts at $37 a month with 20,000 credits and a 14-day free trial, and there is an 8% orchestration fee on the plan (Gumloop pricing, checked 25 September 2026).

Where it falls short: there is no free plan, Pro allows five concurrent workflow runs, and the legacy label on workflows means it is a poor home for classic app-to-app scenarios.

See Gumloop's plans in our directory.

8. Workato

Best for: larger companies where IT wants one governed platform for integrations, APIs and agents.

Workato is an enterprise integration platform. The product covers application integration, APIs and governed AI agents. It publishes no prices; the pricing page offers a demo, a trial request and a sales contact (Workato pricing, checked 25 September 2026).

Where it falls short: no self-serve sign-up or published price, so it is not a realistic move for a small team leaving Make over cost.

See Workato in our directory.

Which one should you move to?

Name the reason you are leaving, then match it:

• "Too hard for my team": Zapier.
• "I want the data on my own server": n8n, or Activepieces for an MIT-licensed core.
• "Credits run out on logic steps": Pabbly Connect, or n8n's per-execution billing.
• "I need real code": Pipedream.
• "We live in Microsoft 365": Power Automate.
• "We are building AI agents now": Gumloop.
• "IT needs governance": Workato.

Whichever you pick, rebuild one expensive scenario first and run it next to the Make version for a week. Our Zapier vs Make vs n8n guide explains how the three main building models differ if you are still unsure.

When you are ready to shortlist, open the workflow automation category to see current prices and free plans for every tool on this page in one place.

Try this now

Open your Make organisation’s usage view and note which three scenarios use the most credits. Rebuild only the largest one in the alternative you are considering, and run both side by side for a week before you move anything else.