Zapier vs. Make: Which Automation Platform Should You Build On?
Zapier and Make are the two platforms we build on most. Both work, but they shine in different situations. Here's how we decide which to use for a given workflow.
01Zapier: Breadth and Simplicity
Zapier's biggest strength is its app library — over 7,000 integrations, more than anyone else. If a tool has an API, Zapier probably has a native connection.
It's linear and beginner-friendly, which makes it ideal for simple trigger-action workflows. The downside: complex multi-step branching gets expensive fast, and the visual builder is limited.
02Make: Power and Visual Branching
Make (formerly Integromat) uses a visual scenario builder that handles branching, loops, error routes, and parallel paths beautifully. For complex workflows, it's far more capable.
It's also dramatically cheaper at scale — Make's per-operation pricing beats Zapier's per-task model once you're running high-volume automations. The trade-off is a steeper learning curve.
03Our Rule of Thumb
Simple, single-app, low-volume? Zapier. Complex, multi-branch, high-volume? Make. Need 7,000+ app coverage? Zapier. Need precise control over data routing? Make.
In practice, most of our clients end up with both — Zapier for breadth, Make for the heavy lifting — connected via webhooks where they meet.
Key Takeaways
- Zapier wins on app breadth (7,000+) and simplicity for linear workflows.
- Make wins on complex branching, visual control, and cost at scale.
- Most mature stacks use both, connected via webhooks where they overlap.
Ready to Put This Into Action?
Tell us about your workflow and we'll scope a custom automation within 24 hours.
Start Your Automation Project
