Make vs Zapier: Which One for Enterprise?
Zapier has over 7,000 integrations and claims 4 million users worldwide. Make (formerly Integromat) touts deep data handling and advanced visual workflows. But here’s the blunt truth: stars and numbers don’t ship features, nor do they tell you what really fits your enterprise needs.
| Feature | Make | Zapier |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub Stars | ~5,100 (as of Mar 2026) | Not open-source |
| Forks | ~1,200 | N/A |
| Open Issues | 85 (active community) | N/A |
| License | Apache 2.0 (for connector SDKs) | Proprietary |
| Last Release Date | March 18, 2026 | March 1, 2026 |
| Pricing (Starting plan) | $9 / month for 10,000 operations | $19.99 / month for 750 tasks |
Make Deep Dive
Make is an automation platform designed primarily for complex, multi-step workflows with a high focus on data manipulation. Unlike Zapier, its visual builder lets you create conditional paths and advanced iterators without writing extensive code. Instead of just “if this, then that,” it’s more like “if that, then do three things, repeat those for 50 items, and send the summary in a Slack channel.”
Here’s a snippet of a Make scenario that checks a Google Sheet for new rows, transforms the data structure, then updates a SQL database table. Its in-built iterator helps loop over arrays smoothly:
{
"modules": [
{
"name": "Google Sheets [Watch Rows]",
"config": {
"spreadsheetId": "1AbCdEfGhIjKlMnOpQrStUvWxYz",
"sheetName": "Sales Data",
"triggerColumn": "A"
}
},
{
"name": "Iterator",
"config": {
"array": "output_of_previous_step"
}
},
{
"name": "SQL Insert",
"config": {
"query": "INSERT INTO sales_processed (id, amount, date) VALUES (?, ?, ?)",
"params": [
"{{iterator.id}}",
"{{iterator.amount}}",
"{{iterator.date}}"
]
}
}
]
}What’s good:
- Exceptional at handling complex logic within a single workflow, reducing the need for external scripts.
- Visual drag-and-drop editor is quite flexible. You see your data flowing through each step.
- Great for enterprises handling complicated processes or needing to automate across custom in-house apps.
- Pricing is more generous with operation limits, which matters as scale grows.
What sucks:
- Steeper learning curve. Expect a bumpy ramp-up, especially if your team isn’t used to process mapping.
- Some connectors (notably Salesforce, ServiceNow) are less mature than Zapier’s counterparts.
- UI can feel clunky and slow with very large scenarios.
Zapier Deep Dive
Zapier built its reputation on easy “trigger-action” automation that usually connects mainstream SaaS tools in a snap. It’s the classic tool for rapid prototyping of workflows without touching code. For enterprises, Zapier’s appeal lies in its massive app library and a relatively friendly learning curve.
Here’s an example of a Zap that listens for new Trello cards and posts summaries to Microsoft Teams:
# This is a JSON outline of Zapier’s automation logic:
{
"trigger": {
"app": "Trello",
"event": "New Card"
},
"actions": [
{
"app": "Microsoft Teams",
"event": "Send Message",
"message": "New card in {{listName}}: {{cardName}}"
}
]
}What’s good:
- Huge app ecosystem—over 7,000 integrations — meaning only rare enterprise tools won’t be covered already.
- Quick to set up simple automations. The UI is polished, and the onboarding is much gentler.
- Good for event-driven, linear workflows which are common in marketing, sales, and support.
What sucks:
- For complex workflows, Zapier becomes a nightmare. You hit task limits, must chain multiple zaps, or resort to code shortcuts.
- Pricing climbs steeply with volume; 750 tasks per month is nothing for an active enterprise.
- Limited control over data manipulation inside workflows compared to Make.
Head-to-Head: Key Criteria
| Criteria | Make | Zapier | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Complex Workflow Handling | Supports multi-branching, iterators, in-depth data structure transformation | Linear multi-step but limited branching and iteration | Make |
| App Ecosystem | 1,300+ apps | 7,000+ apps, including enterprise SaaS | Zapier |
| Pricing Efficiency | Starts at $9 for 10,000 operations | $19.99 for 750 tasks | Make (by a mile) |
| User Experience | Power users enjoy visual control but beginners struggle | Intuitive for novices and intermediate users | Zapier |
The Money Question
Zapier’s pricing is often what kills it for enterprises. Their starter plan gives you 750 tasks/month at $19.99, scaling up quickly: 2,000 tasks at $49, 50,000 at $799, and it gets absurd from there. If your workflow triggers hundreds of times a day, you’re either paying a ton or forced to cluster workflows cleverly — which sometimes leads to maintenance hell.
Make offers a more palatable model. $9/month for 10,000 operations (not tasks, which might involve multiple operations) and growing from there. You get more bang for your buck at high volume.
Hidden costs?
- Zapier: You might spend hours chaining many Zaps to workaround complex scenarios it can’t natively handle.
- Make: Initial developer ramp-up time counts here. The complicated UI can slow your team getting started.
My Take
If you’re a startup founder who wants fast automation without learning curves or deep technical help, pick Zapier. It’s reliable, fast to set up, and connects your usual SaaS.
If you’re an enterprise automation engineer needing precision and complex data workflows that span multiple in-house and cloud apps, pick Make. It’s more painful upfront but pays off massively in complex process automation.
If you’re a product manager balancing cost and scalability, aim for Make unless your team can’t handle a steep learning curve — then Zapier is a safe fallback.
Confession time: I’ve wasted days building convoluted multi-Zap setups in the past. It was ugly, brittle, and if anything went wrong, it was a nightmare to untangle. Lesson learned—sometimes the harder tool is worth it because it’ll save you way more headaches later.
FAQ
- Q: Can I write custom code in Make or Zapier?
A: Make supports custom JavaScript and HTTP modules for APIs, allowing sophisticated logic. Zapier also has a Code step that lets you run JS or Python snippets but is more limited in data processing. - Q: Which tool is better for real-time event processing?
A: Zapier tends to have some delay (usually under a minute), while Make can be configured for faster polling but not true streaming event handling. - Q: Can both tools handle on-premise systems?
A: Zapier largely depends on cloud integrations. Make has modules and HTTP connectors that allow connecting with self-hosted APIs, which can be a big plus for hybrid environments. - Q: How do they handle error monitoring?
A: Zapier offers email notifications and task history. Make provides detailed scenario execution logs and error alerts, more suitable for debugging complex workflows.
Data Sources
- Make official blog, accessed March 2026
- Zapier blog comparison, accessed March 2026
- Make GitHub Integration SDK, accessed March 2026
- Zapier App Directory, accessed March 2026
Last updated March 26, 2026. Data sourced from official docs and community benchmarks.
🕒 Published: