Make.com, Zapier, and n8n will do the same job, but their cost differs completely at scale. The same workflow can cost ₪240 a year or ₪30,000 a year, depending on which platform you picked and how much you run. Here is the real math, no vanity numbers.
Three different billing models
This is what confuses most businesses: each platform counts differently.
- Zapier charges per task: every action step that completes successfully is one task. A workflow with a trigger plus three steps = three tasks per run. It adds up fast. (Zapier pricing)
- Make.com charges per operation: each module that runs. More granular, but in practice far cheaper for the same work. The Core plan at $9/month gives 10,000 operations. (Make pricing)
- n8n charges per execution on cloud, or is completely flat self-hosted. The community edition is free with unlimited workflows when you run it on your own server. (n8n pricing)
At a glance
| Platform | Billing model | Notable price point | Best at | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Zapier | Per task (each completed step) | Priciest at scale | Integration breadth (9,000+ apps), simplicity | | Make.com | Per operation (each module run) | Core ~$9/mo for 10,000 operations | Price-to-performance, visual data work | | n8n | Per execution (cloud) or flat (self-hosted) | ~$20/mo server, unlimited ops self-hosted; free community edition | High volume, control, compliance |
The math at scale
At low volume the difference is negligible. At high volume it is dramatic.
A concrete example: 100,000 records a month in a five-step workflow. On Zapier this reaches thousands of dollars a year. On n8n self-hosted it is a fixed server cost, around $20/month, regardless of volume. The annual gap easily crosses $8,000.
Make sits in the middle: roughly 10x the operations per dollar versus Zapier, without the self-hosting complexity.
When each one wins
Zapier wins on integration breadth (9,000+ apps) and simplicity. If you are a business with no technical team, want to connect two common tools, and do not mind paying for convenience, it is the fast choice. Until volume grows, and then the bill hurts.
Make.com wins on price-to-performance and visual data work. Our default for most small businesses in Israel: low operational overhead, enough power, and a sane price.
n8n wins at high volume, full infrastructure control, and cases that require self-hosting for compliance or data privacy. It needs someone who can maintain it. The deeper Make-vs-n8n decision (team, data, code) is in our full comparison.
And custom code wins when the workflow is complex enough that any platform would need clumsy workarounds. Sometimes the genuinely cheapest solution is not a platform at all.
What this means for you
Do not pick a platform based on who marketed to you hardest. Pick based on volume, team, and data sensitivity. A business sending 500 operations a month and one sending 500,000 need completely different answers. And if the workflow is a WhatsApp channel, the platform bill is only half the math; the other half is what the bot itself costs.
We build on all three, no agenda. The tool serves the workflow, not the other way around.
Not sure which platform fits your volume? Book a free call and we will do the math together, or see what a full build looks like on the automations page.