The bill that made us switch
In January 2025, our Zapier bill hit $89/month for a 5-person team. That’s over $1,000/year for the privilege of connecting our apps together. We were on the Professional plan ($49/month base) and had already blown through our task allocation by mid-month — twice.
That’s when we started looking at Make seriously. What we found surprised us: Make could do everything Zapier was doing for us, and more, at roughly half the cost. But the switch wasn’t painless.
Here’s the full story — what we gained, what we lost, and what we’d do differently.
Our automation setup (so you can judge for yourself)
Before we compare, here’s what we actually automate:
- Content pipeline: New article idea in Notion → creates a task in ClickUp → assigns to writer → sends Slack notification
- Client onboarding: New client in ClickUp → creates project folders in Google Drive → sends welcome email via Gmail → logs in Notion
- Social promotion: Published article on our site → creates social media drafts in Buffer → notifies team in Slack
- Lead tracking: Form submission on our site → adds to Notion database → sends email notification → creates follow-up task
- Reporting: Weekly — pulls time data from Toggl → formats in Google Sheets → sends summary to Slack
- Invoice reminders: 3 days before invoice due → checks payment status → sends reminder email
That’s 6 active automations running anywhere from 50-300 times per month. Not enterprise scale, but not trivial either. Your mileage will vary depending on complexity.
Zapier: The tool that just works (until you see the bill)
We started with Zapier because it’s the default choice. Everyone knows Zapier. The interface is friendly. The setup wizards hold your hand. And for the first 6 months, it was exactly what we needed.
The setup experience is best-in-class. Creating a Zap takes 2-3 minutes for simple automations. Click trigger → connect account → click action → map fields → test → done. Our content lead — who is decidedly not technical — built our first 3 Zaps without any help. That’s the Zapier promise and it delivers.
7,000+ apps means you rarely hit a wall. We’ve never found an app we needed that Zapier didn’t support. Notion, ClickUp, Slack, Gmail, Google Sheets, Buffer, Stripe, Toggl, Caddy — it’s all there. The long-tail app support is Zapier’s moat and nobody comes close.
Reliability is excellent. In 12 months of using Zapier, we had exactly 2 failed automations. Both were caused by API changes in connected apps (Notion changed a field name), not Zapier itself. The error notifications caught both within minutes. When something breaks in Zapier, you know about it immediately.
The new Tables feature is genuinely useful. Zapier Tables — basically a lightweight database built into Zapier — replaced a Google Sheet we were using as an intermediary in one automation. It’s simpler than Airtable and faster to set up. For simple data storage needs within automations, it’s a nice addition.
But here’s the problem that kept getting worse:
Task pricing is brutal at scale. Zapier charges per task — every action step in a workflow counts as a task. Our 6 automations consumed roughly 800-1,200 tasks per month. The Professional plan ($49/month) gives you 2,000 tasks. We were fine most months, but any spike — a busy content month, a batch of new clients — pushed us over. The overage charges are $0.03-0.05 per task depending on your plan. That’s $30-50 in overages on top of your subscription.
Paths (branching) eat tasks fast. Our client onboarding automation has 4 branches — different welcome emails and folder structures for different service tiers. Each branch execution counts as a separate task. One onboarding could consume 8-10 tasks across all the steps. At scale, that adds up fast.
Make: The tool that’s more powerful (and more confusing)
We switched to Make in March 2025. The immediate draw was cost: Make’s Pro plan at $16/month gives you 10,000 operations — 5x more than Zapier at roughly one-third the price.
The visual builder is genuinely better. Make’s canvas-style interface looks like a flowchart because it is a flowchart. You can see your entire automation at a glance — every branch, every filter, every data transformation. Zapier’s linear step-by-step view works for simple automations, but once you have branching logic, Make’s visual approach is clearer. Our most complex automation (client onboarding with 4 branches) took up 15 steps in Zapier’s linear view. In Make, it’s one visual flow that’s immediately comprehensible.
Routers and iterators are power features. Make’s routers (branching), iterators (looping over arrays), and aggregators (combining data) let you build automations that would require custom code in Zapier. We built a workflow that: receives a webhook → extracts data → checks a database → routes to one of 5 branches → transforms data → creates records in 2 apps → sends conditional notifications. That’s 20+ logical steps in one automation. In Zapier, we’d need 3-4 separate Zaps to accomplish the same thing.
Customer-support routing is a natural version of this workflow: enrich a new ticket, check account status, assign it by priority, notify the right channel, and escalate if its SLA is close to expiring. Our BoldDesk vs Freshdesk comparison shows what each help desk handles natively before Zapier or Make needs to fill the gaps.
That visual-versus-code tradeoff now appears earlier in the stack. Our Lovable vs Bolt.new comparison asks whether founders need a guided full-stack builder or a more flexible coding environment for the app these workflows connect to.
Error handling is actually useful. Make lets you define what happens when a step fails — retry, send a notification, route to a different branch, or ignore and continue. Zapier has basic retry logic but nothing this granular. When our Buffer integration fails (which it does occasionally due to API limits), Make automatically retries 3 times with 5-minute delays, then sends us a Slack notification if it still fails. Zapier would just fail and notify us immediately — no retry, no self-healing.
Data stores are built in. Make includes lightweight data stores (key-value databases) that persist between automation runs. We use one to track which articles have been promoted on social media, preventing duplicate posts. In Zapier, we’d need a Google Sheet or Zapier Tables for this — another tool, another potential failure point.
But Make has real downsides:
The learning curve is steep. Our content lead — who built Zaps independently — needed 2 weeks of hand-holding to build her first Make scenario. The visual interface is powerful but overwhelming at first. There are modules, connections, filters, routers, iterators, error handlers, variables, functions — it’s a lot. Make’s documentation is decent but not as beginner-friendly as Zapier’s.
Fewer apps supported. Make supports 1,800+ apps versus Zapier’s 7,000+. For us, this wasn’t a problem — all our core tools were supported. But if you use niche tools, check Make’s app directory before switching. We lost access to one integration (a specific Buffer feature) and had to use Make’s HTTP module to build a custom connection. It worked, but it took 3 hours instead of 3 minutes. Newsletter platforms like beehiiv, for instance, have very few native integrations and often rely on Zapier or Make as their middleware layer — so this matters more than you’d think.
The interface can be buggy. We’ve experienced occasional issues where the scenario editor freezes, modules don’t render correctly, or test runs fail without clear error messages. Refreshing the page usually fixes it. It’s not a dealbreaker but it’s annoying when you’re trying to debug a complex workflow at midnight.
The cost comparison that actually matters
Here’s what we were paying vs. what we pay now, with real usage numbers:
Zapier (what we paid):
- Professional plan: $49/month
- Average overages: $15/month
- Total: ~$64/month = $768/year
Make (what we pay now):
- Pro plan: $16/month
- No overages (10,000 ops vs our ~3,000 usage)
- Total: $16/month = $192/year
Annual savings: $576. That’s meaningful for a small team. Over 2 years, that’s over $1,100 saved — enough to pay for our entire Toggl subscription with money left over.
But here’s the honest caveat: we spent roughly 20 hours migrating our automations from Zapier to Make. At our blended rate, that’s $1,000-1,500 of time invested to save $576/year. The ROI is positive after ~18 months, but the upfront cost is real.
| Plan | Zapier | Make |
|---|---|---|
| Free | 100 tasks/month, 5 Zaps | 1,000 ops/month, 2 scenarios |
| Entry paid | Starter at $19.99/month (750 tasks) | Core at $9/month (10,000 ops) |
| Mid-tier | Professional at $49/month (2,000 tasks) | Pro at $16/month (10,000 ops) |
| Higher tiers | Team at $69/month (2,000 tasks + features) | Teams at $29/month (10,000 ops + features) |
| Cost per 1,000 operations | ~$25-35 | ~$1.60-3.20 |
Feature comparison: What actually matters
| Feature | Zapier | Make | Our honest take |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ease of setup | Excellent, 2-3 minutes for simple Zaps | Good, 10-15 minutes for simple scenarios | Zapier wins for beginners |
| App count | 7,000+ | 1,800+ | Zapier wins, but check if YOUR apps are covered |
| Complex logic | Paths (basic branching) | Routers, iterators, filters, error handlers | Make wins, not close |
| Visual clarity | Linear steps | Flowchart canvas | Make wins for complex workflows |
| Error handling | Basic retry + notifications | Advanced routing, retry strategies, fallbacks | Make wins |
| Data storage | Tables (lightweight database) | Built-in data stores | Make is more flexible |
| Speed | 1-15 min for triggers | Instant to 15 min | Tie |
| Reliability | Excellent, 2 failures in 12 months | Very good, 5 failures in 9 months | Zapier slightly more reliable |
| Pricing | Expensive, task-based, overages hurt | Affordable, generous allocations | Make wins on value |
| Learning curve | Gentle, anyone can use it | Steep, needs technical thinking | Zapier wins for non-technical teams |
| Free plan | 100 tasks/month (very limited) | 1,000 ops/month (actually usable) | Make wins |
Our real recommendations
Non-technical person, simple automations: Zapier. Don’t even look at Make. Zapier’s setup experience is designed for you. You’ll be productive in 10 minutes and your automations will just work. The extra cost is the price of not having to think about it.
Technical or semi-technical, complex automations: Make. The power difference is enormous. If you’re comfortable with logic, branching, and basic data manipulation, Make will let you build things that would require 3-4 separate Zaps — at a fraction of the cost.
Budget-conscious team: Make. The free plan is genuinely usable (1,000 ops vs Zapier’s 100 tasks), and paid plans start at $9/month vs Zapier’s $19.99/month. If cost is a primary factor, Make wins decisively.
Agency with many client automations: Make. You’ll build complex, multi-step workflows for each client. Make’s visual builder makes these manageable, and the per-operation pricing scales much better than Zapier’s per-task model.
Someone who needs a specific niche app: Zapier. Check Make’s directory first. If your app isn’t there, Zapier’s 7,000+ app count becomes the deciding factor regardless of price or features.
Calendar automation deserves stricter guardrails than most workflows because a bad rule can move a real commitment. Our Reclaim AI vs Motion review shows how the two schedulers handle that tradeoff.
The honest bottom line
We switched from Zapier to Make primarily to save money, and we did — $576/year. But we stayed with Make because it’s actually the better tool for our needs. The visual builder, error handling, and branching logic make our automations easier to understand and maintain.
If Zapier cut their pricing in half tomorrow, we’d still stay on Make. That’s the strongest endorsement we can give.
But we’d be lying if we said the switch was easy. It took 20 hours of migration time, 2 weeks of team adjustment, and one custom HTTP integration that still makes us nervous. If you’re a non-technical team running 2-3 simple automations, the switch probably isn’t worth the hassle. Stay on Zapier and pay the premium for peace of mind.
Start with the free plan of whichever tool calls to you. Build one automation. See how it feels. The right answer will be obvious.
Once your automations are running, tracking where your time goes and choosing the right project tool complete the productivity stack. And if you’re curious about the self-hosted automation route, our n8n vs Zapier comparison covers the open-source alternative we also run.
FAQ
Is Make really cheaper than Zapier?
Yes — and it’s not even close. Make’s Pro plan costs $16/month for 10,000 operations, while Zapier’s Professional plan runs $49/month for just 2,000 tasks. On a cost-per-1,000-operations basis, Make runs roughly $1.60–$3.20 compared to Zapier’s $25–$35. We went from paying ~$64/month (including overages) to $16/month — a savings of $576/year. That said, factor in the ~20 hours we spent migrating, which ate into the ROI for the first year or so.
Can Make do everything Zapier can?
Almost, but not quite. Make supports 1,800+ apps while Zapier boasts 7,000+. All of our core tools (Notion, ClickUp, Slack, Gmail, Google Sheets) worked on both platforms. We did lose one specific Buffer feature and had to rebuild it using Make’s HTTP module — it took 3 hours instead of 3 minutes. Where Make actually pulls ahead is complex logic: routers, iterators, error handlers, and built-in data stores let you build workflows that would need 3–4 separate Zaps to replicate.
Which is easier to learn: Zapier or Make?
Zapier, hands down. Our non-technical content lead built her first three Zaps in under 10 minutes with zero help. The same person needed two weeks of hand-holding to build her first Make scenario. Zapier’s step-by-step wizard is genuinely beginner-friendly. Make’s visual canvas is more powerful, but the learning curve is steep — modules, connections, filters, routers, iterators, functions… it’s a lot to absorb. If your team isn’t comfortable with logic and data concepts, start with Zapier and revisit Make when your automations outgrow it.
How many tasks do I actually need per month?
That depends entirely on how many steps each automation runs and how often it triggers. Our 6 automations consumed 800–1,200 tasks per month on Zapier. A single client onboarding with 4 branches could eat 8–10 tasks per run. Zapier’s free plan (100 tasks/month) is basically a trial — you’ll outgrow it fast. Make’s free plan (1,000 operations/month) is genuinely usable for light workflows. Our advice: track your actual usage for a month before committing to a paid plan, because every action step counts.
Can you use Zapier and Make together?
Absolutely. Some teams run both — Zapier for quick, simple automations and Make for complex, multi-branch workflows. You can even chain them using webhooks: a Zap triggers a webhook that kicks off a Make scenario (or vice versa). We considered this hybrid approach during our migration, but ultimately went all-in on Make to keep our automation stack simple. If you’re already on Zapier and only one or two workflows need Make-level power, there’s no shame in running both.
Prices verified as of February 2026. Both tools adjust pricing frequently — always check their current pricing pages.