Like-for-like comparison
Make vs n8n: visual control or technical control?
Compare credits with workflow executions, then compare who will operate the result. Monthly price alone answers a pleasantly small question.
Use the same job, data volume and failure conditions for both products.
THE SHORT ANSWER
Choose Make for visual orchestration with managed operations. Choose n8n when code, APIs, self-hosting or deployment control are genuine requirements. Keep both off the shortlist when the process is still undefined.
DECISION BOUNDARIES
What actually separates the options
Usage
Map one business outcome to credits and workflow executions.
Exceptions
Test retries, partial failures and replay behaviour.
Operations
Compare managed convenience with the actual value of hosting and code control.
Make suits process builders; n8n suits teams prepared to own more technical choices.
Neither solves unclear ownership, unstable requirements or exception-heavy work without human decisions.
COST AND CONSTRAINTS
Price is one operating condition
Model workload rather than entry prices. Add the cost of code review, upgrades and incident handling where n8n is self-hosted.
EVIDENCE
What to test before committing
Build the same awkward workflow in both tools and compare time-to-diagnose, not time-to-confetti.
SIMPLER ALTERNATIVE
Before adding another account
A native integration or scheduled export can beat both when the workflow has few steps.
More freedom is useful only when somebody planned to use it.