Zapier vs Make
· By AI Compare
Zapier is simpler with more apps; Make is more powerful and far cheaper per action.
Comparison
Quick verdict
Zapier is simpler and has more integrations. Make is more powerful and much cheaper per action. Most people outgrow Zapier's pricing before they outgrow its features; when that happens, Make is the easiest step up because it stays no-code.
Comparison table
| Zapier | Make | |
|---|---|---|
| Editor | Linear list of steps | Visual canvas |
| Apps | 7,000+ | 2,000+ |
| Billing | Tasks (actions only) | Credits (every module, including triggers) |
| Free plan | 100 tasks, 2-step Zaps, 15-min checks | 1,000 credits, 2 scenarios, 15-min checks |
| Entry paid plan | From $19.99/mo, 750 tasks | About $10–12/mo, 10,000 credits |
| Branching | Paths | Router |
| Loops | Looping by Zapier | Iterator / aggregator |
| Error handling | Autoreplay, notifications | Error handler routes |
| Learning curve | Lowest | Medium |
Price per action
On entry plans, Zapier gives you 750 tasks for about $20; Make gives you 10,000 credits for about $10–12. Even allowing for Make counting triggers and loop iterations, Make is typically several times cheaper for the same workload.
Where Zapier wins
- Fastest setup and easiest for non-technical teams.
- Widest app coverage, including small niche tools.
- Triggers and filtered-out runs do not use tasks.
- Extra building blocks: Tables, Forms, Interfaces, Agents.
Where Make wins
- Cost at any meaningful volume.
- Complex flows on one canvas: routers, iterators, aggregators.
- Better debugging: see every bundle at every step.
- Strong error handling.
When to move from Zapier to Make
- Your Zapier bill is climbing because of multi-step Zaps.
- You keep building several Zaps to work around missing branching or loops.
- You want to see and control data flow visually.
If you also want self-hosting, code or AI agents, compare Zapier vs n8n before you move, and see the Zapier to Make migration guide.
