Best Make Alternatives in 2026: 12 Tools Ranked for Power, Price, and AI

Make (formerly Integromat) is genuinely powerful — its visual canvas, multi-step scenarios, and data transformation capabilities put it well ahead of simpler tools. But it has real limitations: operations-based pricing that scales painfully with volume, a steep learning curve for non-developers, and no native AI agent layer.

If you’ve hit those walls, you’re in the right place. This guide ranks the 12 best Make alternatives in 2026 — from AI-native platforms to open-source self-hosted options — with honest assessments of where each tool wins and where it falls short.

Pro Tip: “Best Make alternative” is the wrong question for most teams. The right question is: what’s the best tool for my specific workflow complexity, budget, and AI ambition? We’ve structured this list to help you answer exactly that.

What is Make?

Make (formerly Integromat) is a visual workflow automation platform founded in 2012 in Prague. It lets users connect apps and services by dragging and dropping modules onto a canvas, with data flowing visually between them — a paradigm that makes complex multi-step workflows far more legible than Zapier’s linear list format. Make is best known for its powerful data transformation functions, its iterator/aggregator modules for processing lists, and its operations-based pricing model that’s often significantly cheaper than Zapier at equivalent volume. It has 1,800+ app integrations and is widely used by marketing agencies, SaaS teams, and operations teams that need more logic than Zapier can handle without paying enterprise prices.

Make Alternatives Compared at a Glance

Ready to grow your business?

Start your free trial today and see results within days.

Request demo Log in

1. FlowHunt — Best Make Alternative for AI-Native Workflows

FlowHunt isn’t trying to replicate Make with a few AI features bolted on. It’s built from the ground up around AI agents — workflows where LLMs reason over context, choose actions dynamically, and handle multi-step tasks that would require dozens of Make modules and conditional branches.

Where Make excels at moving data between apps in predictable, scripted paths, FlowHunt excels when the path isn’t fully known in advance. An AI agent can scrape a competitor’s pricing page, analyze the structure, extract the relevant data, and push a formatted summary to Slack — without you pre-defining every parsing rule as a separate module.

Key strengths:

• AI agents with LLM-driven decision-making at the core (not an add-on)
• 1,400+ integrations including all major SaaS, databases, and APIs
• Visual workflow builder with AI, code, and logic nodes side-by-side
• Built-in content intelligence tools for marketing and SEO teams
• Pricing based on executions, not “operations” — significantly cheaper at scale
• Solutions for content marketing and SEO automation built-in

Where it’s weaker:

• Smaller template library than Make’s mature ecosystem
• Advanced data transformation requires understanding the AI node model
• Newer platform — some niche integrations still in progress

Pricing: Free tier available. Paid plans from $29/month. See the FlowHunt pricing page for full details.

Best for: Marketing, SEO, and content teams that want AI automation — not just app integration. See our AI agents overview for what’s possible.

2. Zapier — Best for Breadth of Integrations

Zapier is the closest thing to a universal standard in no-code automation. With 7,000+ app integrations (nearly 4x Make’s library), it’s the default choice when your stack includes obscure SaaS tools that other platforms haven’t yet integrated.

The tradeoff is cost and depth. Zapier’s pricing scales by tasks per month, and high-volume automations get expensive fast. Its “Zap” model is also fundamentally linear — complex branching scenarios that are natural in Make can require awkward workarounds in Zapier.

Pricing:

• Free — 100 tasks/month, single-step Zaps, 5 Zaps active
• Professional — $19.99/month (billed annually, 750 tasks). Multi-step Zaps, filters, formatter, and unlimited Zaps
• Team — $69/month (billed annually, 2,000 tasks). Shared workspaces, unlimited users, premium apps
• Enterprise — Custom pricing. Advanced admin controls, SSO, SAML, priority support, custom data retention

Key features:

• 7,000+ app integrations — the largest catalog in the automation industry
• Copilot AI assistant that can draft multi-step Zaps from a plain-language description
• Paths feature for conditional branching within a Zap
• Formatter built-in for text, number, date, and currency transformations
• Zapier Tables for storing and processing automation data without a separate database
• Interfaces (beta) for building lightweight automation-connected apps

Pros:

• Largest integration catalog in the industry
• Extremely beginner-friendly editor
• AI-assisted Zap building (Copilot feature)
• Excellent documentation and community

Cons:

• Task-based pricing gets expensive at volume
• Less visual than Make for complex workflows
• Limited native AI agent capabilities
• Free tier is very restrictive (100 tasks/month)

Best for: Teams that need coverage of obscure or niche apps, and don’t run high automation volumes.

Join our newsletter

Get latest tips, trends, and deals for free.

Email address

Subscribe

3. n8n — Best Open-Source Make Alternative

n8n is the open-source platform most similar to Make in visual philosophy — you build workflows on a canvas, connect nodes, and route data through branching paths. But n8n adds what Make lacks: self-hosting, full data sovereignty, native AI/LLM nodes, and no per-operation pricing.

If your team is technical and your workflows involve sensitive data (healthcare, finance, legal), n8n’s self-hosted option is hard to beat. The community template library is also extensive, making common use cases quick to deploy.

Pricing:

• Self-hosted (Community) — Free forever. Unlimited workflows and executions on your own infrastructure
• Starter — $20/month (cloud). 2,500 executions/month, 5 active workflows, community support
• Pro — $50/month (cloud). 10,000 executions/month, unlimited active workflows, debug mode, priority support
• Enterprise — Custom pricing. Unlimited executions, SSO, RBAC, audit logs, dedicated support, SLA

Key features:

• 400+ native integrations plus open HTTP/REST nodes for any custom endpoint
• Native AI/LLM nodes: LLM chains, AI agents, vector store connectors, embeddings, and conversation memory
• Self-hosting via Docker or Kubernetes — full data sovereignty, no external API calls
• JavaScript and Python code nodes for custom data transformations
• 1,000+ community workflow templates covering common use cases
• Sub-workflow execution for modular, reusable workflow components

Pros:

• Free and open-source (self-host forever)
• Visual canvas very similar to Make
• Native AI/LLM nodes built-in
• No operations limit when self-hosted
• Active community, 1,000+ templates

Cons:

• Self-hosting requires DevOps knowledge
• Cloud-hosted version more expensive than Make at scale
• UI has a steeper learning curve than Zapier

Best for: Developer teams and data-sensitive organizations wanting Make’s visual model with full infrastructure control.

See our dedicated n8n alternatives guide for a deeper comparison.

4. Activepieces — Best Open-Source Clone of Make’s UX

Activepieces is the closest 1:1 open-source replacement for Make. It uses the same canvas-based approach, has a familiar interface for Make users migrating away, and is MIT-licensed — meaning you can self-host, white-label, and customize it freely.

The integration catalog is smaller than Make’s (though growing fast), and the enterprise features are still maturing. But for teams that want Make’s workflow style without Make’s pricing, Activepieces is the strongest option.

Pricing:

• Free (Self-hosted) — Free forever. Unlimited flows and tasks on your own infrastructure
• Platform — $99/month (cloud). 50,000 tasks/month, 5 users, unlimited flows, email support
• Enterprise — Custom pricing. SSO, RBAC, audit logs, dedicated support, white-label options, unlimited task limits

Key features:

• Canvas-based builder highly familiar to Make users — minimal relearning for migrations
• MIT-licensed codebase: self-host, fork, white-label, and embed into your own product
• 500+ integrations with an open contribution model for rapid catalog growth
• Branch and loop primitives for conditional and iterative automation logic
• AI piece for OpenAI/Anthropic LLM steps within any workflow
• Docker Compose self-hosting in a single command — straightforward infrastructure setup

Pros:

• Open-source, self-hostable (MIT license)
• UX very familiar to existing Make users
• Actively developed, growing integration catalog
• White-label and embed options

Cons:

• Smaller integration library than Make
• Some enterprise features still in development
• AI features less mature than newer platforms

Best for: Make users who want to migrate to an open-source platform without relearning a new UX paradigm.

5. Pipedream — Best for Developers Who Want Code + Integrations

Pipedream occupies the space between Make’s visual builder and a full custom integration framework. You get 1,000+ pre-built triggers and actions, but any step can be replaced with a custom Node.js or Python block — giving you precision that purely visual tools can’t match.

It’s free for low-volume usage, which makes it popular for indie developers and small teams. The serverless runtime means zero infrastructure management, and event sources can trigger workflows from webhooks, schedules, email, or RSS.

Pricing:

• Free — 10,000 workflow executions/month, unlimited workflows, 30-day execution log
• Basic — $29/month. 100,000 executions/month, extended log retention, email support
• Advanced — $99/month. 1,000,000 executions/month, priority support, longer log retention
• Business — $249/month. 5,000,000 executions/month, team workspaces, SSO
• Enterprise — Custom pricing. Unlimited executions, SLA, dedicated support

Key features:

• 1,000+ pre-built app integrations with the ability to replace any step with custom Node.js, Python, or Go code
• Rich event source library: webhooks, cron schedules, email inboxes, RSS feeds, and database triggers
• Serverless execution — no servers to provision, scale, or maintain
• Step-level debugging with full input/output logs for every execution
• Environment variables and secrets manager built into the platform
• Version control for workflows with diff view and rollback

Pros:

• Mix visual components with custom code (Node.js, Python, Go)
• Generous free tier (10,000 events/month)
• Serverless — no infrastructure to manage
• Strong version control and debugging tools

Cons:

• Less visual than Make for non-developers
• Custom code steps require programming knowledge
• Community templates less polished than Make’s

Best for: Developers who want the integration depth of Make but need custom code for specific data transformation steps.

6. Workato — Best Enterprise Make Alternative

Workato is where you land when Make isn’t enterprise-grade enough. It’s an iPaaS (integration Platform as a Service) built for IT and operations teams at mid-market and enterprise companies — with governance controls, SSO, audit logs, role-based access, and pre-built accelerators for Salesforce, SAP, Workday, and ServiceNow.

The tradeoff is cost and complexity. Workato doesn’t publish pricing publicly, and contracts typically start in the thousands per year. It’s not the right tool for a 10-person startup, but for a 500-person company whose workflows span multiple enterprise systems, it’s often worth it.

Pricing:

• Base — Typically $15,000+/year (contact sales). Set number of recipes and tasks included
• Business — Custom pricing. Expanded recipe count, premium connectors, enhanced support
• Enterprise — Custom pricing. Unlimited recipes, dedicated CSM, SSO, RBAC, audit logs, SLA
• No public self-service tier — sales-led only

Key features:

• 1,200+ enterprise connectors including deep SAP, Oracle, Workday, and ServiceNow integrations
• Workato Copilot: AI-assisted recipe creation from natural language workflow descriptions
• Enterprise governance: RBAC, SSO/SAML, audit logs, and multi-environment deployment (dev/staging/prod)
• Pre-built accelerator packages for common enterprise use cases (Salesforce ↔ SAP sync, HR onboarding, etc.)
• Workbot for Slack and Teams — embedded automation bots for employee-facing internal workflows
• Real-time and batch processing with built-in error handling and retry policies

Pros:

• Enterprise-grade security and compliance controls
• Deep ERP/CRM/HRIS integrations with pre-built accelerators
• Strong IT governance and auditability
• Professional services and support

Cons:

• Custom pricing — typically expensive
• Overkill for small-to-medium teams
• Steeper learning curve than Make

Best for: Enterprise IT and operations teams integrating complex systems like Salesforce, SAP, or Workday at scale.

7. Relay.app — Best for Human-in-the-Loop Workflows

Most automation platforms assume every step should be handled by code. Relay.app disagrees. It’s designed for workflows where humans need to stay in the loop — approval gates, content reviews, manager sign-offs, or collaborative handoffs between team members and automated actions.

Where Make would require a notification step + a wait loop + a conditional branch to replicate a human review, Relay.app makes it a first-class native feature. If your workflows involve people, not just apps, this is worth a close look.

Pricing:

• Free — 5 automations, 1,000 runs/month, 1 user, basic integrations
• Starter — $9/month. 20 automations, 5,000 runs/month, 3 users, human-in-the-loop steps
• Team — $29/month. Unlimited automations, 20,000 runs/month, unlimited users, priority support
• Enterprise — Custom pricing. Unlimited everything, SSO, audit logs, dedicated support

Key features:

• Native human-in-the-loop step type (approval gates, review tasks, collaborative decisions) as a first-class workflow primitive
• Slack and email-based approval notifications with in-context decision buttons
• Conditional branching based on human approval outcomes
• 300+ app integrations focused on business productivity tools (CRM, project management, communication)
• AI-assisted step suggestions and content generation within workflows
• Full audit trail: who approved what, when, and what action was taken

Pros:

• Native human-in-the-loop steps (approvals, reviews, handoffs)
• Clean, modern interface
• AI-enhanced automation steps
• Great for operations and RevOps teams

Cons:

• Smaller integration catalog than Make
• Not ideal for purely automated, high-volume pipelines
• Fewer data transformation capabilities

Best for: Operations and RevOps teams whose workflows require regular human approvals or collaborative decision-making.

8. Integrately — Best Budget Make Alternative

Integrately competes primarily on price and ease. It has over 8 million pre-built automation templates (they call them “1-click automations”) which makes getting started faster than any other platform on this list — no building from scratch. With 1,200+ app integrations, it covers most common SaaS tools.

The depth isn’t as rich as Make for complex multi-step scenarios, but for simple trigger-action workflows at an affordable price point, it’s hard to beat.

Pricing:

• Free — 1 automation, 1,000 tasks/month, basic integrations
• Starter — $19.99/month. 5 automations, 2,000 tasks/month, multi-step automations
• Professional — $39/month. Unlimited automations, 10,000 tasks/month, formatter, router, conditional logic
• Growth — $99/month. 150,000 tasks/month, priority support
• Business — $239/month. 500,000 tasks/month, team collaboration, dedicated account manager

Key features:

• 8 million+ pre-built one-click automation templates for instant activation without manual setup
• 1,200+ app integrations across CRM, email, e-commerce, and productivity categories
• Multi-step automation chains supporting sequences beyond simple two-app connections
• Formatter for text, number, and date transformations between apps
• Router module for conditional branching to multiple paths in one automation
• Team dashboard for managing multiple automations across collaborators

Pros:

• 8M+ pre-built automation templates
• Very affordable (plans from $19.99/mo)
• Clean, beginner-friendly interface
• Unlimited automations on all plans

Cons:

• Less powerful for complex multi-step branching
• Fewer integrations than Zapier or Make
• Limited data transformation capabilities
• Customer support can be slow

Best for: SMBs and solopreneurs who want a cheaper Make with quick-start templates and don’t need deep data transformation.

9. Pabbly Connect — Best for Teams on a Tight Budget

Pabbly Connect’s headline feature is its lifetime pricing: pay once, get unlimited workflows forever. That’s a compelling proposition for freelancers, agencies, and bootstrapped startups with consistent automation needs but unpredictable monthly cashflow.

It covers most mainstream SaaS integrations, supports multi-step workflows, and has basic branching and filters. It won’t replace Make for complex data transformation or AI workflows, but for straightforward automation at zero monthly cost, it’s a standout option.

Pricing:

• Standard — $19/month. 12,000 tasks/month, unlimited workflows, multi-step automation, webhook support
• Pro — $39/month. 24,000 tasks/month, all Standard features plus priority support
• Ultimate — $79/month. 50,000 tasks/month
• Lifetime Deal — From $249 one-time. Unlimited tasks, unlimited workflows, no recurring fees (available periodically via direct/AppSumo)

Key features:

• Unlimited workflows and multi-step automation on all paid plans — no cap on the number of automations
• 1,000+ app integrations covering mainstream CRM, email, e-commerce, and payment platforms
• Webhook triggers for receiving events from any HTTP-capable source
• Workflow scheduler for time-based recurring automations
• Iterator module for processing list and array data in bulk
• Shared team workspace on higher-tier plans

Pros:

• Lifetime deal pricing (pay once)
• Unlimited workflows and connections
• Multi-step automation with basic branching
• Webhook support

Cons:

• No free tier (lifetime deal only, no monthly trial)
• Less polished UI than Make or Zapier
• Smaller integration catalog
• Limited AI features

Best for: Cost-conscious teams running predictable automations who want to eliminate recurring SaaS subscription costs.

10. Albato — Best GDPR-Friendly Make Alternative

Albato is an EU-headquartered automation platform — a meaningful distinction for European businesses with strict data residency requirements. Beyond compliance, it offers 600+ integrations, competitive per-step pricing, and a clean builder that sits comfortably between Zapier’s simplicity and Make’s depth.

It doesn’t have the template library breadth or advanced AI features of some rivals, but for EU-based teams where data sovereignty matters, it’s the most pragmatic choice.

Pricing:

• Free — 100 transactions/month, 2 automations, basic integrations
• Basic — $13/month. 5,000 transactions/month, 10 automations, multi-step workflows
• Standard — $29/month. 15,000 transactions/month, unlimited automations, scheduler, filters
• Pro — $69/month. 50,000 transactions/month, priority support, advanced logic
• White-label — Custom pricing. Embed Albato under your own brand in your SaaS product

Key features:

• 600+ integrations with strong coverage of European and CIS-region apps not commonly found in Zapier or Make
• GDPR-compliant data processing with EU infrastructure and data residency options
• White-label embedding for SaaS companies wanting to offer native automation to their customers
• Multi-step workflows with filters, conditions, and field-level data mapping
• Webhook support for custom HTTP event sources
• Scheduler for time-based and recurring automation triggers

Pros:

• EU-based, GDPR-compliant data processing
• Competitive pricing (from $13/month)
• Clean interface, good integration coverage
• Embedded automation offering for SaaS products

Cons:

• Smaller integration catalog than Make
• Less powerful for complex data transformation
• Fewer AI capabilities

Best for: European teams or any organization with strict GDPR/data residency requirements for their automation infrastructure.

11. Latenode — Best for Developers Who Want AI + Code

Latenode blends Make’s visual canvas with code-first flexibility and native AI node support. You can build a workflow visually, drop in a JavaScript function for a custom transformation, add an LLM reasoning step, and continue visually — all in the same editor.

It’s newer than most tools on this list, which means a smaller integration catalog and less community content, but the core platform is solid and pricing is aggressive.

Pricing:

• Free — Limited executions/month, access to visual builder and basic nodes
• Micro — $17/month. 10,000 workflow credits/month, all integrations, JavaScript nodes
• Start — $47/month. 50,000 credits/month, priority execution, team collaboration
• Grow — $97/month. 200,000 credits/month, advanced AI nodes, enhanced support
• Prime — Custom pricing. Unlimited credits, dedicated infrastructure, SSO

Key features:

• Visual canvas builder with native JavaScript code nodes that can be inserted anywhere in the workflow
• Built-in AI/LLM nodes for GPT-4, Claude, and open-source model integration without external API setup
• 200+ pre-built integrations with the ability to call any HTTP/REST API directly
• Conditional branching, loops, and data transformation in the same visual editor
• AI-assisted node generation: describe what a node should do in natural language and Latenode scaffolds the code
• Serverless execution with automatic scaling — no infrastructure management required

Pros:

• Visual workflow builder + JavaScript code nodes
• Native AI/LLM integration nodes
• Affordable starting price ($17/month)
• Modern, responsive editor

Cons:

• Smaller integration catalog (catching up fast)
• Less mature ecosystem than Make or n8n
• Limited enterprise compliance features

Best for: Developers who want to mix low-code visual workflows with code blocks and AI — without paying enterprise prices.

12. IFTTT — Best for Simple Personal and Consumer Automation

IFTTT invented the trigger-action automation paradigm that Make, Zapier, and every tool on this list is built on. In 2026 it remains the simplest option available — but simplicity is genuinely valuable for personal use cases and lightweight business automations.

Where Make would let you build a 15-step scenario with complex data routing, IFTTT handles “when this happens, do that one thing.” For IoT, smart home, social media monitoring, or basic notifications — it’s still unmatched for speed of setup.

Pricing:

• Free — 3 applets, standard triggers only, community support
• Pro — $2.99/month (or $1.99/month billed annually). Unlimited applets, multi-action applets, AI-powered actions, faster execution
• Pro+ — $12.99/month (or $9.99/month billed annually). Multiple-account service connections, faster polling, priority customer support

Key features:

• 700+ service integrations across IoT devices, smart home platforms, and consumer apps (Google Home, Alexa, Philips Hue, Ring, etc.)
• Dead-simple applet builder: choose a trigger service, pick a trigger event, choose an action service, configure the action — no code ever needed
• Multi-action applets (Pro+) for chaining multiple actions from a single trigger
• AI-powered actions using OpenAI for text generation, summarization, and translation steps
• Webhook/Maker service for triggering applets from any HTTP-capable device or application
• IFTTT for Business for organizations running shared applets and branded customer-facing automations

Pros:

• Completely free for basic use
• Dead-simple interface — minutes to set up
• Strong IoT and smart home integrations
• Very large library of consumer-facing applets

Cons:

• Very limited multi-step logic
• No developer features or custom code
• Not suitable for business-critical automations
• Pro tier needed for multiple actions per trigger

Best for: Personal use, IoT/smart home, and basic consumer automation where setup speed matters more than workflow complexity.

How to Choose the Right Make Alternative

The best Make alternative depends on three factors: your technical profile, your workflow complexity, and your budget trajectory.

Go with FlowHunt if your workflows involve AI decision-making, content generation, or SEO tasks that need reasoning — not just data routing. If you’re building AI-powered content workflows or automating research pipelines, the gap between FlowHunt and Make widens quickly.

Go with n8n or Activepieces if your team is technical, you have data sovereignty requirements, or you want Make’s visual model at zero cost. Both are genuinely strong open-source alternatives.

Go with Zapier if integration coverage is the top priority — especially for obscure apps — and volume is low enough that task-based pricing isn’t a concern.

Go with Workato if you’re at enterprise scale integrating Salesforce, SAP, or Workday with strict compliance requirements.

Go with Pabbly or Integrately if budget is the primary constraint and your workflows are relatively straightforward.

Pro Tip: Before migrating away from Make, export your scenario list and map each one against your top alternative. Most platforms offer a free trial — test with your three most complex scenarios before committing. Migration friction is real.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Make still worth it in 2026?

Make remains a strong choice for teams who love its visual canvas and don’t hit volume limits. But for teams scaling operations, adding AI capabilities, or wanting open-source control, alternatives like FlowHunt, n8n, and Activepieces have closed the gap significantly.

What happened to Integromat?

Integromat rebranded to Make in 2022. All Integromat accounts, features, and workflows migrated to the Make platform. The core product is the same — just under a new name and with continued feature development.

Can I migrate from Make to another platform without losing my automations?

There’s no universal migration tool. Most platforms (n8n, Activepieces) have import features, but they work with their own export formats — not Make’s. Budget time to rebuild your most complex scenarios manually. Simpler trigger-action workflows typically migrate in minutes; complex multi-branch scenarios may take hours.

How does FlowHunt compare to Make for marketing automation?

Make can orchestrate marketing tool integrations (CRM → email → analytics) reliably. FlowHunt adds an AI layer — agents can generate content, analyze performance data, identify gaps, and take action based on reasoning. For teams running content marketing automation , that’s a qualitative difference in what’s possible.

Related Reading

• Best Workflow Automation Tools in 2026 — broader comparison across all automation categories
• Best Zapier Alternatives in 2026 — if you’re evaluating both Make and Zapier replacements
• Best n8n Alternatives in 2026 — if open-source automation is your priority