n8n vs Make : Automatisation Cloud ou Self-Hosted ?
n8n and Make are both powerful automation tools for complex workflows. The key difference: n8n is open-source and self-hostable; Make is a managed SaaS.
Comparatif : n8n vs Make
| Critère | n8n | Make |
|---|---|---|
| Open Source | Yes — MIT license, self-hostable | No (proprietary SaaS) |
| Self-Hosting | Full self-host on any server | Cloud only |
| Pricing (cloud) | From $20/mo (or free if self-hosted) | From $9/mo (1k ops) |
| Code in Workflows | Full JS/Python nodes | Limited (no code execution) |
| Visual Builder | Node-based flowchart | Flowchart with modules |
| Integrations | 400+ built-in + any HTTP | 1,500+ apps native |
| Complexity Ceiling | No ceiling (code nodes) | High but no custom code |
| Community | Growing open-source community | Large SaaS community |
Notre verdict
n8n is the choice for technically-capable teams who want maximum control and lowest long-term cost. Self-hosting on a $10/mo VPS means unlimited executions for free. The ability to write real JS/Python inside workflows removes all complexity ceilings.
Make is better for teams that don't want to manage infrastructure, need access to its 1,500+ native app connectors, and are comfortable with a SaaS subscription model.
We use both at App Studio: n8n for self-hosted automations where cost or code flexibility matters, Make for integrations where it has a native connector that n8n lacks.
Besoin d'aide pour choisir ?
Nos experts ont construit 50+ projets avec ces outils. Décrivez votre projet et nous vous recommanderons la meilleure stack.
Parler à un expert →