Zapier vs Make: Which Is Better in 2026?

Zapier and Make both connect your apps and automate the work between them, but they optimise for different things. Zapier wins on app breadth, with 8,000+ integrations and the easiest editor in the category. Make wins on cost and control, with cheap per-operation billing and a visual canvas that has routers and iterators. If you'd rather build automations by describing them and keep pricing predictable instead of choosing between per-task and per-operation meters, Stepper beats both.

Quick verdict

• Choose Zapier if ease of use and covering a specific or niche app matter most.
• Choose Make if you want powerful visual logic at the lowest cost per run.
• Consider Stepper if you'd rather describe automations in plain language and pay predictable, flat-rate credits.

Feature comparison

Where Zapier falls short

Zapier bills per task, and every action in every run counts, so a workflow that felt cheap in testing can balloon once real volume hits. At around 1M tasks a month it lands near $2,200–2,500, with overage tasks charged at 1.25x the base rate. The linear editor is easy to learn but caps how much logic you can pack into a single Zap. Complex branching pushes you into Paths and multiple Zaps that get awkward to maintain.

Where Make falls short

Make's flowchart canvas is more capable, but that power comes with a learning curve. Routers, iterators, aggregators, and the credit model all take time to internalise, which trips up non-technical users. The 2025 rename from "operations" to "credits" also muddied cost forecasting, because AI and code modules can consume more than one credit each, so a scenario's real price isn't always obvious until it runs.

The dimensions that decide it

• On pricing, Zapier bills per task (~$2.2–2.5 per 1,000) and Make bills per operation/credit (~$0.9–1 per 1,000), so at high volume Make is meaningfully cheaper.
• On integrations, Zapier has 8,000+ apps against Make's 3,000+. Zapier leads on raw coverage, and Make's generic HTTP module reaches any REST API.
• For logic and control flow, Zapier handles branching with Paths in a linear editor, while Make's routers, iterators, and aggregators go deeper for data-heavy scenarios.
• Both offer in-editor AI help and custom code: Zapier runs JavaScript and Python steps, Make runs JavaScript only. Neither builds a whole workflow from a plain-language description the way Stepper does.
• On deployment, both are cloud-hosted only, and neither is self-hostable.
• On compliance, both carry SOC 2 and ISO 27001, but neither signs a HIPAA BAA.

Pricing comparison

Zapier's paid plans start at $19.99/mo (Professional, annual) and meter by task; Make starts at $9/mo (Core, annual) and meters by credit, so the same automation typically costs less on Make as volume grows. Both offer a free tier to start.

Ratings

The verdict

Pick Zapier when speed to a working automation and the widest possible app catalog matter more than the bill. It's the safest default for connecting almost anything. Pick Make when you're running higher volumes or need real branching logic, and you're willing to invest in the canvas to earn the lower per-run cost. The choice comes down to breadth and ease with Zapier against power and price with Make.

Where Stepper fits

If the trade-off between Zapier's cost and Make's learning curve is the real friction, Stepper sidesteps it. You describe the automation in plain language and it builds the workflow, on a free plan and a flat $19/mo for unlimited steps within fair use, with no per-task or per-operation meter to watch. It's cloud-hosted with a smaller app library, so it won't replace Zapier for exotic integrations, but for the automations most teams actually run it's the fastest to build and the easiest to budget. Compare the wider field in our Make vs n8n vs Zapier breakdown, browse Zapier alternatives, or see the full best workflow automation tools roundup.

Last updated October 7, 2026