If you've searched for a way to automatically add new form submissions to a spreadsheet, sync new customers into your CRM, or post a Slack message when an invoice is paid, you've probably run into both Zapier and Make (formerly Integromat). Both let you connect apps without writing code, but they take different approaches — and picking the wrong one can mean paying for far more (or less) power than you need.

What Zapier and Make Actually Do

Both tools work on the same basic principle: a trigger in one app (a new email, a new row, a form submission) sets off an action in another app (send a message, create a record, update a spreadsheet). The difference is in how those workflows ("Zaps" in Zapier, "Scenarios" in Make) are built and how much control you have over the logic in between.

Ease of Use

Zapier's interface is a linear, step-by-step builder: trigger, then action, then another action, in a simple vertical list. It's genuinely easy for a non-technical person to build a working automation in ten minutes. Make uses a visual canvas where you drag and connect nodes, which is more powerful for branching logic but has a noticeably steeper learning curve — expect to spend real time in tutorials before building anything beyond a simple two-step automation.

Pricing Compared

This is where the two products diverge most. Zapier prices by the number of "tasks" (each action counts as one task) and its free and entry-level paid tiers get expensive quickly once you're running more than a handful of active automations. Make prices by "operations" rather than full task counts and generally delivers noticeably more automation runs per dollar at the same price point, particularly once workflows involve multiple steps. For a cash-conscious small business running several automations, Make's pricing model is usually the more economical choice at scale.

App Integrations and Ecosystem

Zapier has the larger integration library and tends to add support for new, smaller apps faster — if you use a niche tool that just launched, Zapier is more likely to have already built a connector for it. Make covers all the major platforms (Google Workspace, Slack, HubSpot, Shopify, QuickBooks, and hundreds more) but occasionally lags behind on very new or very niche software.

Complex Workflow Capability

For simple, linear automations — "when X happens, do Y" — both tools handle the job equally well. Where Make pulls ahead is in multi-branch logic, conditional filtering, and error handling within a single workflow; its visual canvas makes it far easier to build and debug a workflow with several conditional paths. Zapier can technically build similarly complex logic using "Paths" and "Filters," but the linear interface makes complex workflows harder to read and maintain over time.

Which One Should You Choose?

If you want the fastest possible setup for a handful of simple automations and don't mind paying a premium for that simplicity, Zapier's ease of use is hard to beat, especially if you're not going to run high automation volume. If you're comfortable with a slightly steeper learning curve, run more automations, or need workflows with real branching logic, Make will very likely save you money and give you more control once you're past the first week of learning the interface. Many small businesses that scale their automation usage end up migrating from Zapier to Make specifically to cut costs once volume grows.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I use both Zapier and Make together?

Yes — some businesses use Zapier for quick, simple automations and Make for complex multi-step workflows. There's no conflict running both.

Which is better for e-commerce automation?

Both integrate well with Shopify and WooCommerce; Make's branching logic is particularly useful for order-routing workflows with multiple conditions (e.g., different fulfillment paths by product type or order value).

Is there a genuinely free plan?

Both offer free tiers with limited monthly task/operation volume, sufficient for testing a single simple automation but not for running a business's core workflows long-term.