We built the same three automations in Zapier, Make, n8n, and Activepieces. Identical triggers, identical logic, identical outputs. Then we compared everything: setup time, reliability, pricing at scale, AI capabilities, and the frustrations you only discover after you've committed.
The short answer: n8n wins overall in 2026.
But "overall" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence. There are specific scenarios where each of the other three is the better choice. Here's the full breakdown.
The Three Test Automations
No toy examples. These are real workflows that real businesses run every day.
Test 1: Form to CRM to Slack. Typeform submission creates a HubSpot contact and sends a Slack notification. Simple, linear, bread-and-butter.
Test 2: RSS to AI Summary to Social. Monitor TechCrunch's RSS, use an LLM to summarize, post to Twitter/X and LinkedIn. Tests AI integration depth.
Test 3: Support Ticket Classification. New email hits support. AI reads it, classifies it (billing/technical/feature request/urgent), assigns priority, routes to the right Slack channel. The complex one.
Platform Overview
| Feature | Zapier | Make | n8n | Activepieces |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Open Source | No | No | Yes (fair-code) | Yes (MIT) |
| Self-Hosting | No | No | Yes | Yes |
| Visual Builder | Linear (step-by-step) | Canvas (flowchart) | Canvas (flowchart) | Canvas (flowchart) |
| Integrations | 7,000+ | 2,000+ | 400+ (community nodes add more) | 200+ |
| AI Agent Support | No | Basic (via chaining) | Yes (native agent nodes) | No |
| Code Support | Python, JavaScript | JavaScript, Python (limited) | JavaScript, Python (full) | JavaScript, Python |
Test 1: Form to CRM to Slack
The simple test. Honestly? This is where Zapier still earns its reputation.
Eight minutes. Select Typeform trigger, map fields to HubSpot (AI field-mapping nailed 4 out of 5 automatically), add Slack step. Done. The linear builder is purpose-built for exactly this. No wasted clicks.
Make took 12 minutes - the canvas builder requires manually dragging connections, which is slower for linear flows but clearer for debugging. n8n took 15 minutes, mostly because of OAuth authentication flows. Activepieces hit 14 minutes with a clean interface but slightly limited Slack formatting.
Winner: Zapier. For simple, linear automations, nothing matches its speed and polish.
Test 2: RSS to AI Summary to Social Post
Where things get interesting. AI integration quality varies wildly between platforms.
Zapier's "AI by Zapier" action runs GPT-4o-mini and... that's it. Can't choose a different model. Can't use Claude. Can't adjust temperature. For simple summarization it works. But the lock-in is deliberate and annoying.
Make surprised us. The dedicated Anthropic module let us use Claude 3.5 Haiku for cost-efficiency with detailed prompt configuration and clear input/output mapping. Both social posts published first try. 18 minutes.
n8n's AI Agent node is more powerful than this task requires - like a sledgehammer for a picture frame - but demonstrated the platform's flexibility beautifully. Switch between OpenAI, Anthropic, and local Ollama from a single dropdown. 22 minutes.
Activepieces took 25 minutes. Twitter/X had an auth hiccup. LinkedIn needed a webhook workaround. The integration library is clearly still catching up.
Winner: Make. Best balance of AI model flexibility and ease of setup. n8n has more raw power but Make got us there faster.
Test 3: Support Ticket AI Classification and Routing
This one separates the contenders from the pretenders. Branching logic, structured AI output, multiple routing paths. Real-world automation.
Zapier's linear builder becomes a genuine liability. "Paths" handle branching but feel bolted on. Parsing structured AI output into variables took 10 minutes of trial and error with a Formatter step. 35 minutes total.
Make's Router module handles branching elegantly. The canvas shows each route clearly. OpenAI module with JSON schema prompt for structured output, then route by category. Clean and readable. 25 minutes.
n8n is where we had our "this is it" moment. The AI Agent node handled classification with structured output natively - no parsing step. The Switch node for routing is visual and intuitive. We added an "if P1, also ping #urgent" branch in literally 2 minutes. The finished workflow reads like a whiteboard flowchart. 20 minutes.
Activepieces handled it but with friction. Multiple Branch pieces chained together instead of a single multi-way router. Messier than it needed to be. 30 minutes.
The Pricing Problem
This section will make some Zapier customers very uncomfortable.
| Usage Level | Zapier | Make | n8n Cloud | Activepieces Cloud |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Free tier | 100 tasks/mo, 5 Zaps | 1,000 ops/mo, 2 scenarios | None | 1,000 tasks/mo |
| ~1,000 tasks/mo | $29.99/mo | $10.59/mo | $24/mo | $0 (free) |
| ~10,000 tasks/mo | $73.50/mo+ | $18.82/mo | $60/mo | $25/mo |
| ~50,000 tasks/mo | $448.50/mo | ~$34/mo | $60/mo or self-host free | $25/mo or self-host free |
| Self-hosted | Not available | Not available | Free forever | Free forever |
At 50,000 tasks/month: Zapier costs $448.50. n8n costs $60 on cloud or $0 self-hosted. That's $388/month going to absolutely nothing except brand premium.
And here's the discovery that made us genuinely frustrated: Zapier counts each step in a multi-step workflow as a separate "task." A 5-step workflow triggered 100 times uses 500 tasks. Make counts the same thing as 100 operations. This means Zapier's per-workflow cost is 3-5x higher than the headline numbers suggest.
AI Features: The New Differentiator
The gap between platforms here is enormous.
Zapier locks you to GPT-4o-mini through "AI by Zapier." Can't bring your own key, choose a model, or adjust parameters. The Copilot natural language builder works about 60% of the time.
Make does it right. Dedicated OpenAI and Anthropic modules. Bring your own API key. Choose your model. Set temperature. You control costs.
n8n is a generation ahead. Native AI Agent nodes with tool-calling. MCP server support. Any LLM provider including local Ollama. AI workflow generator from natural language descriptions (beta). Nothing else comes close.
Activepieces has OpenAI and Anthropic pieces that work for basic tasks. No agent capabilities, no MCP. Serviceable but not where you go if AI is central to your workflows.
The Verdict
| If you are... | Use... | Because... |
|---|---|---|
| Non-technical, under 1K tasks/mo | Zapier | Fastest setup, most integrations, free tier covers it |
| Budget-conscious, 1-10K tasks/mo | Make | Best value cloud platform, powerful visual builder |
| Technical, want AI agents or self-hosting | n8n | Best AI features, free to self-host, most flexible |
| Open-source purist, early-stage startup | Activepieces | MIT license, self-hosted, growing fast, great free tier |
| High volume, 50K+ tasks/mo | n8n or Activepieces (self-hosted) | Free at any scale |
The Recommendation
For most readers of this site, n8n is the best choice in 2026. AI features a generation ahead. Self-hosting means zero cost at any scale. Cloud at $24-60/month for those who don't want to manage infrastructure. The 400+ integrations cover everything most businesses need.
Non-technical and need five Zaps to connect forms to your CRM? Zapier is still the fastest path. Just know the premium compounds aggressively as you scale.
Want the cheapest cloud option without AI agents? Make offers the best value per dollar. Visual builder is excellent, pricing at scale is 10-15x cheaper than Zapier.
Activepieces is the dark horse. MIT license, most generous free tier, impressive development velocity. In 12 months it might be our top pick. Today, smaller integration library and no AI agents keep it fourth.
Browse more automation tools in our directory, or explore all tools.
