n8n vs Make vs Zapier: Enterprise Automation Decision Framework for 2026
Definitive comparison of n8n, Make, and Zapier for enterprise automation. Includes real cost data, Australian compliance considerations, and a decision framework to avoid costly platform migrations.
Most enterprises choose automation platforms based on short-term convenience, then face costly migrations 12–24 months later. The decision between Zapier, Make, and n8n determines your scalability, security posture, and total cost of ownership for the next three to five years.
In the Australian market, this choice carries additional weight. The 2025 Privacy Act reforms increased penalties for data breaches substantially. Choosing platforms that keep sensitive customer data within Australian borders - rather than routing through US or EU cloud infrastructure has shifted from optional to essential for regulated industries.
This framework helps you make the right decision in Q1 2026 by comparing platforms across five critical factors: integration depth, customization complexity, data sovereignty, pricing at scale, and team technical capability.
Quick Comparison Matrix
Use this reference matrix to scan key differences across all three platforms:
| Factor | Zapier | Make | n8n (Cloud/Self-Host) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Integration Count | 8,000+ native | 2,000+ native | 450+ native + unlimited via HTTP |
| Primary User Type | Non-technical / business analysts | Power users / operations | Developers / automation engineers |
| Customization Capability | Basic (visual + limited code) | Visual with some advanced logic | Full programmatic + visual |
| Pricing Model | Per task (scales poorly) | Per operation | Per execution (steps free) |
| Data Residency | US cloud only | EU cloud only | Australian sovereign (self-host) |
| AI Capability | Zapier Central (basic prompts) | Visual AI modules | Deep LangChain + Python integration |
| *Estimated 3-Year TCO | $15,600+ | $4,200–6,000 | $4,200–5,000 |
| Skill Required | Low (no code) | Medium (visual + some logic) | High (development experience) |
*Based on typical enterprise usage: 25–50 workflows, 2,500–5,000 monthly executions. Pricing indicative as of late 2025; vendor plans subject to change.
Factor 1: The "Success Tax" - Pricing at Scale
Platform pricing looks reasonable initially. The surprise comes when your automation program succeeds and scales. This is where platform architecture reveals itself.
Zapier's Per-Task Model: Exponential Cost Growth
Zapier charges per task, where a "task" is one step in a workflow. A 10-step workflow running 100 times monthly consumes 1,000 tasks. This model creates a hidden "success tax": the more you automate, the more it costs.
Real scenario: An enterprise with 25 workflows (averaging 15 steps, 100 monthly executions each) consumes approximately 37,500 tasks/month. This requires the Team plan at $103.50 per seat, and typically needs multiple licenses. Cost: $400–600/month.
Add growth: By year two, you've added 25 more workflows. You're now approaching $900–1,200/month. By year three, costs can exceed $1,500/month for what started as a "low-cost" solution.
Three-year Zapier TCO for moderate enterprise: $15,600 (plus hidden implementation costs).
Make's Operation Model: Linear but Still Climbing
Make charges per "operation" (similar to tasks but with finer granularity). The same 25 workflows at 37,500 operations/month falls comfortably within the Pro plan ($16/month) or Teams plan ($29/month).
Real scenario TCO: $50–100/month for 25 workflows. Even with significant growth to 100 workflows by year three, costs remain $150–250/month.
Three-year Make TCO for moderate enterprise: $4,200–6,000.
The tradeoff: Make's integration count is lower than Zapier (2,000+ vs 8,000+). For non-standard apps or legacy systems, you may need workarounds. For typical SaaS stacks, integration coverage is sufficient.
n8n's Execution Model: Economical at Scale
n8n charges per workflow execution, regardless of how many steps the workflow contains. A 10-step workflow costs the same as a 100-step workflow.
Cloud pricing: $50/month (Cloud Pro) covers 10,000 executions. For 25 workflows at 100 monthly executions (2,500 total), you're comfortably under the limit. Cost remains $50/month even as you grow to 50 workflows (5,000 executions).
Self-hosted n8n eliminates platform fees entirely. You pay only for infrastructure: typically $50–150/month for a small-to-medium deployment on AWS Sydney or Azure Australia.
Three-year n8n TCO:
- Cloud: $4,200 (consistent)
- Self-hosted: $5,000–6,000 (includes migration and onboarding)
Real-world case study: A financial services firm migrated from Zapier ($500/month) to n8n self-hosted, reducing monthly costs to $120/month (infrastructure + managed support) while gaining unlimited workflows and Australian data residency.
Decision Point: For 10–25 workflows, all three are acceptable. For 50+ workflows or rapid growth, n8n delivers superior long-term economics. For data-sensitive industries, n8n self-hosted becomes the only option that balances cost and compliance.
Factor 2: Data Sovereignty and Australian Compliance
The 2025 Privacy Act reforms dramatically strengthened Australia's data protection requirements. The Australian Privacy Principles (APP 11 – Security of Personal Information) now impose substantial penalties for data breaches and unauthorised offshore processing.
For enterprises in regulated industries (financial services, government, healthcare), this makes platform choice a compliance decision, not just a technology one.
Zapier: US-Based Infrastructure
Zapier routes data through US cloud infrastructure. For most use cases, this is acceptable. For enterprises handling Australian customer PII, government contracts, or regulated financial data, routing sensitive information to US servers creates compliance friction.
Zapier complies with standard security certifications (SOC 2, ISO 27001), but your data residency obligations remain your responsibility. Many Australian regulated entities conclude that Zapier doesn't meet their APP 11 requirements without additional controls (encryption, anonymisation, etc.).
Make: EU-Based Infrastructure
Make (formerly Integromat) operates from EU infrastructure, adding regulatory coverage under GDPR. However, Make remains cloud-only. Your data passes through external infrastructure, creating the same fundamental compliance challenge as Zapier for Australian data sovereignty requirements.
n8n: Sovereign Deployment - Australian Data Stays in Australia
n8n stands apart: it's open-source and self-hostable. You deploy n8n on your own infrastructure - either on-premises or on Australian cloud providers (AWS Sydney, Azure Australia East).
Concrete example: Hrishi Digital can deploy n8n on your AWS Sydney account. Your workflows run in Australian data centres. Credentials and sensitive customer data never leave your controlled network. Audit trails are fully visible to your compliance team.
This isn't a nice-to-have for regulated organisations. It's mandatory for:
- APRA-regulated financial services (APP 11 compliance)
- Australian Government agencies (ISM Essential Eight requirements)
- Healthcare providers (My Health Records and TGA regulations)
- Any enterprise handling sensitive Australian customer data
Decision Point: If data residency is mandated or data sensitivity is high, n8n self-hosted is your only viable option. This decision makes the other factors secondary. Otherwise, proceed to the next factors.
Factor 3: Integration Depth
Automation's core promise is connecting your entire tech stack without custom code. Integration breadth determines whether you stay within the platform's guardrails or resort to workarounds.
Zapier: Breadth Leader (8,000+ Native Integrations)
Zapier's integration library is comprehensive. If your SaaS tool has an API, it's almost certainly available on Zapier. The platform's 15-year history means every mainstream business application has a mature, well-tested connector.
Advantage: Quick setup for standard applications. Your non-technical team can build workflows using pre-built integrations without IT involvement.
Limitation: Niche, emerging, or legacy systems often lack native connectors. Building workarounds requires custom code (Zapier Code) or external middleware, which demands technical skill and adds complexity.
For enterprises with diverse or custom technology stacks, Zapier's limitations accumulate quickly.
Make: Integration Depth Over Breadth (2,000+ Native)
Make positions itself with balanced coverage: 2,000+ integrations cover most common business applications while offering deeper control than Zapier's equivalents.
Example: Make's Google Sheets integration provides cell-level manipulation. Zapier's equivalent works at row level. For complex data transformation workflows, Make's depth matters.
Make is particularly strong for mid-market enterprises that need more control than Zapier provides but don't need n8n's full programmatic flexibility.
n8n: Native Plus Unlimited (450+ Native + API Connectivity)
n8n's lower native integration count appears limiting until you understand the architecture. n8n includes HTTP request nodes that connect to any REST API plus native Python support (v2.0+) for handling virtually any data format or integration pattern.
For legacy systems, proprietary APIs, or emerging tools, you're not blocked by platform limitations. Your automation framework adapts to your technology landscape rather than constraining it.
Tradeoff: Integration development requires technical skill. You can't ask a non-technical analyst to build an HTTP integration. This is deliberate: n8n trades accessibility for adaptability.
Decision Point: Entirely SaaS-based stack with popular apps = Zapier sufficient. Mixed standard/niche tools = Make. Legacy systems, custom APIs, or rapid tooling changes = n8n essential.
Factor 4: Customization Complexity
Real workflows rarely follow simple trigger-action patterns. They involve conditional logic, data transformation, error handling, and multi-step orchestration. How platforms handle complexity determines whether automation stays manageable or becomes technical debt.
Zapier: Simple by Design, Complex Workarounds
Zapier excels at straightforward automation: when Event A happens, do Action B. Its interface is deliberately simplified, making it accessible to non-technical users.
Advanced customization requires workarounds. Complex data transformation needs Zapier Code (JavaScript). Conditional routing requires multi-zap architectures with webhooks. Error handling is clumsy compared to native programming constructs.
For 5–10 workflows, this is manageable. For 50+ workflows with increasing complexity, Zapier's constraints create friction.
Make: Visual Complexity Without Code
Make's visual canvas makes complex workflows visible and maintainable. Multi-step processes with branching logic are easier to understand than equivalent Zapier constructs.
Data transformation is more powerful than Zapier. Make's mapper handles sophisticated data reshaping without custom code. This matters when moving data between systems with different schemas.
Make scales complexity better than Zapier but still hits ceilings with advanced algorithms or specialised business logic. These scenarios ultimately require external tools or enterprise-level configurations.
n8n: Programmatic Complexity as Native
n8n's architecture treats code as a first-class citizen. You mix visual nodes with JavaScript or Python functions strategically. Your workflow remains visually comprehensible while handling sophisticated logic within code blocks.
Conditional routing, loops, complex data transformation, error recovery - all native capabilities without workarounds.
Tradeoff: n8n requires developers. Non-technical users operate pre-built workflows but struggle to extend them.
Decision Point: Non-technical teams = Zapier or Make. Mixed technical/non-technical = Make with technical support. Technical teams = n8n.
Factor 5: AI and Agentic Automation
By 2026, enterprise automation has evolved beyond "moving data between systems." The frontier is agentic automation: workflows that use AI models to make decisions, interact with databases with precision, and adapt to new situations. As we explored in our analysis of autonomous AI agents and agentic intelligence, this shift represents a fundamental transformation in how enterprises operate.
Zapier: AI Assistance (Zapier Central)
Zapier offers Zapier Central, allowing basic AI prompt integration. Your workflows can call GPT models for simple tasks: summarise text, classify data, generate responses.
Limitation: Limited customisation. You're restricted to what Zapier's pre-built AI modules provide. Building sophisticated AI agents isn't feasible within Zapier's constraints.
Best for: Simple AI-assisted workflows (email classification, content summarisation).
Make: Visual AI Orchestration
Make provides visual AI modules and webhook-based integration with external AI services. You can route workflows based on AI classification or trigger external AI agents.
Better than Zapier for complex AI routing, but still limited by Make's execution model. Building custom AI agents that interact deeply with your internal databases remains challenging.
n8n: Deep AI Integration (LangChain + Native Python v2.0)
n8n's v2.0 release made Python the default for Code nodes. Combined with native LangChain nodes and OpenAI/Anthropic integration, this creates a platform for building sophisticated AI agents.
Example capability: Build an AI agent that retrieves customer data from your CRM, interacts with your knowledge base using vector search, generates a response using an LLM, and routes based on confidence thresholds - all within a single n8n workflow. Our complete guide to building AI agents with n8n walks through this architecture step by step.
This level of AI orchestration is impossible in Zapier and difficult in Make. For enterprises deploying AI agents into production, n8n is the only viable platform among the three.
Implementation Reality: Why Most Automation Projects Underdeliver
Platform selection is just 20–30% of your total investment. The rest includes:
- Process mapping and workflow design: 5–8 hours per workflow
- Workflow development and testing: 3–5 hours per workflow
- Integration troubleshooting: 2–4 hours per connected app
- Team training and adoption: 10–15 hours per team member
- Ongoing maintenance and optimisation: 2–3 hours monthly
For 25 workflows, expect 125+ hours of implementation effort. At $150–200/hour, that's $18,750–25,000 in professional services (or equivalent internal staff opportunity cost).
This investment only pays off if platform choice aligns with your three-to-five-year automation strategy. Picking the wrong platform means repeating these costs with migration later - plus the disruption of transitioning live workflows.
Critical Insight: Your platform choice locks in team capability, compliance posture, and cost trajectory for years. Choose strategically, not conveniently.
Decision Framework: Choose Your Path
If your priority is speed to market with non-technical adoption:
→ Zapier - Best for simple workflows, rapid onboarding, zero-code teams. Accept higher long-term costs and limited customisation.
If you need balance between capability and pricing:
→ Make - Optimal for mid-market enterprises with moderate workflow complexity. Good cost trajectory, sufficient integrations, visual complexity handling. Requires some technical input.
If data sovereignty, AI capability, or scalability is paramount:
→ n8n - Essential for regulated industries, enterprises with legacy systems, or organisations deploying AI agents. Best long-term economics for 50+ workflows. Requires technical team ownership.
Real Enterprise Scenarios
Scenario 1: Mid-Market SaaS (50 employees)
Stack: Salesforce, HubSpot, Slack, Google Workspace, Stripe, custom APIs
Planned workflows: 15–20 year one
Assessment: Moderate data sensitivity, moderate workflow volume, mixed team capability
→ Recommendation: Make
Rationale: Make's integration depth covers your SaaS stack. Visual workflow builder allows business users to own simple automations. Your developer can handle complex scenarios. Cost remains $50–100/month even with growth. No data sovereignty concerns.
Scenario 2: Financial Services Enterprise (200+ employees)
Stack: Complex: SAP ERP, Salesforce, legacy banking systems, regulated data warehouses, Australian data residency mandate
Planned workflows: 50+ year one, growing to 150+
Assessment: Critical data sensitivity, high workflow volume, dedicated automation team available
→ Recommendation: n8n Self-Hosted (AWS Sydney)
Rationale: Data sovereignty non-negotiable under APRA and APP 11. Integration depth needed for legacy systems. Workflow volume justifies infrastructure investment. Three-year TCO: $15K (n8n) vs $50K+ (Zapier). n8n on AWS Sydney meets compliance requirements while maintaining cost discipline.
Scenario 3: Government Agency
Stack: Legacy systems, Microsoft 365, custom databases, strict data residency and security mandates
Planned workflows: Variable, many one-off integrations
Assessment: Critical data sensitivity, security mandates (ISM Essential Eight), limited internal automation expertise
→ Recommendation: n8n with Implementation Partner
Rationale: Data sovereignty and security requirements eliminate Zapier and Make. Internal team capacity insufficient for self-hosted management. Partner with Hrishi Digital to handle: infrastructure deployment on Australian cloud, workflow development, team training, ongoing support. Your agency owns data and maintains control while outsourcing operational complexity.
Australian Compliance Context
The Australian Privacy Act 2025 reforms carry significant implications:
- APP 11 (Security of Personal Information): Enterprises must implement appropriate security measures. Routing customer data to offshore cloud infrastructure may violate this principle.
- Regulatory Penalties: Breaches now incur up to $50 million or 10% of turnover (whichever is higher) for large businesses.
- APRA Requirements (for financial services): CPS 230 compliance requirements expect data to be managed within Australian jurisdiction unless explicitly authorised.
These requirements position n8n's self-hosting capability from optional feature to compliance necessity for regulated sectors.
Hrishi Digital Implementation Partnership
At Hrishi Digital Solutions, we implement automation solutions across all three platforms. Our approach depends on your requirements, not vendor preference.
Platform Assessment: We evaluate your technology stack, compliance requirements, workflow volume, and team capability to recommend the optimal platform.
Implementation Services:
- Zapier: Quick setup, team training, workflow ownership transfer
- Make: Visual workflow design, integration troubleshooting, power-user enablement
- n8n: Infrastructure deployment (AWS Sydney or self-hosted), workflow development, data sovereignty setup, team upskilling
Ongoing Support: Managed services, workflow optimisation, compliance monitoring, team augmentation.
For Northern Territory enterprises or Australian organisations requiring data sovereignty, we specialise in n8n deployments on Australian cloud infrastructure (AWS Sydney, Azure Australia East).
Key Takeaways
Platform choice locks in costs and capabilities for 3–5 years. This is a strategic decision, not a tactical one.
Data sovereignty is now mandatory, not optional, for regulated industries. n8n's self-hosting capability addresses this requirement; Zapier and Make cannot.
Calculate three-year total cost of ownership carefully. Real TCO is 5–10x platform subscription costs, not just the subscription itself.
Team capability determines success more than platform features. Mismatch between platform and team leads to underutilisation and frustration.
Implementation costs dwarf platform costs. Budget accordingly for process mapping, workflow development, integration troubleshooting, and team training.
AI capability is increasingly important. By 2026, enterprises deploying AI agents require n8n's depth. Zapier and Make are insufficient for agentic automation.
Ready to Select Your Platform?
The decision framework above positions you to choose correctly. If you're evaluating automation platforms for your enterprise, start here:
What triggers your decision?
- Data must stay within Australia? → n8n self-hosted
- Growth beyond 50 workflows expected? → n8n
- Need quick non-technical adoption? → Zapier or Make
- Balanced capability and cost? → Make
Book Your Free 30-Minute Automation Platform Assessment
We'll evaluate your specific requirements, technology stack, compliance obligations, and team capability. You'll receive a platform recommendation backed by technical and financial analysis - no obligation, just honest guidance.
Contact Hrishi Digital Solutions to schedule your assessment. Our AI integration and automation services help Northern Territory and Australian enterprises implement the right platform for their needs.
Additional Resources
- n8n Official Documentation – Deployment, workflow building, and best practices
- Make Integration Directory – Browse available integrations
- Zapier App Marketplace – Integration catalog
Hrishi Digital Solutions
Enterprise automation and digital solutions specialist, Darwin NT. We help Australian enterprises select and implement automation platforms that scale without migration costs.
Contact Us →
