.svg)
Make is the automation tool we use on most of our projects at Scroll. Clear visual interface, solid data handling, native AI model support: here’s everything you need to know about Make in 2026, with up-to-date pricing and real-world use cases.
Make or Integromat: what’s the difference?
Make and Integromat are the same tool. In 2022, after the acquisition by Celonis, Integromat was renamed Make with a new logo and redesigned interface. The core features stayed the same, with steady additions since.
If you still find “Integromat” tutorials online, they apply to Make. Some labels in the interface changed, but the logic is identical. Discard old Integromat articles for anything pricing- or feature-related.
What is Make, exactly?
Make is a no-code automation tool. You connect applications, define a trigger, and build a sequence of actions: when X happens in app A, Make runs Y in app B, then Z in app C. No code required.
What sets Make apart from Zapier or similar tools is its visual flowchart interface. Each scenario reads like a diagram. When a workflow grows past five steps (conditional branches, loops, data transformations), Make stays readable where Zapier starts to feel opaque.
Make connects to over 1,700 applications: Gmail, Slack, Notion, Airtable, HubSpot, Stripe, Shopify, and most CRM or SaaS tools on the market.
Make in 2026: pricing and what’s new
Make 2026 pricing
Make restructured its billing in 2024. The “scenarios” system (one scenario = one flow) was replaced by credits, which measure the volume of operations executed.
Current plans:
- Free plan: 1,000 credits/month. Enough to test a simple workflow.
- Core: $10.59/month. 10,000 credits, 2 active users, custom webhooks.
- Pro: $18.82/month. Real-time data, execution priority, advanced features.
- Teams: $34.12/month. Unlimited users, priority support, team management.
Annual billing saves 15% on all plans. Additional credits can be purchased on demand without upgrading your plan.
Make and AI models in 2026
Since 2024, Make includes native modules for GPT, Claude, and Gemini directly in scenarios. A workflow can send a document to an AI model, retrieve a structured response, and pass it to the next step. All inside Make.
The MCP (Model Context Protocol) released by Anthropic in 2024 simplified these integrations. Make supports MCP, which lets you connect Claude to any data source in a scenario using a standardized approach.
Three use cases we run in production for our clients:
- Smart email triage: Claude reads each incoming message, classifies it (prospect, invoice, support), and routes it to the right Make workflow.
- Automatic document summaries: a PDF lands in Google Drive, Make passes it to Claude, retrieves a structured summary, and creates a Notion task.
- Assisted replies: a contact form is analyzed by an AI model, which drafts a personalized response for human approval.
Make vs alternatives in 2026
Make vs Zapier
Zapier leads on integration volume (7,000+) and is the easiest to get started with. Its linear interface works well for short workflows. Make becomes more relevant once a flow grows: conditional branches, iterators, aggregators, custom webhooks on the free plan.
On a 10-step workflow running 200 times a day, Zapier burns 60,000 tasks per month. On Make, it’s a fraction depending on the actual operations. At equivalent volume, Make usually costs less on active projects.
See our Make vs Zapier comparison with real workflow examples.
Make vs n8n
n8n is the rising open-source alternative. It self-hosts on your own server (free and unlimited, around $20-40/month for a production VPS) and ships with around twenty native AI nodes. It’s the stronger choice for technical teams that want full control over their data and the ability to script advanced behavior.
Make holds the edge on ergonomics. For a mixed team where technical and non-technical people collaborate on the same scenarios, Make is usually the more practical choice. n8n requires someone who can handle infrastructure and upgrades.
For a full overview of the available tools, see our article on automation tools in 2026.
Who is Make for?
Make works well for mixed teams that need readable workflows without writing code, projects with lots of data to transform (filters, aggregations, format conversions), scenarios with multiple logic branches, and projects that embed AI models inside larger workflows.
Make is less suited if your team is 100% technical and wants full control over hosting: n8n self-hosted will be a better fit. If you’re just starting with automation and have no complex requirements, Zapier will cover your first flows.
Scroll handles your Make projects
At Scroll, we built the Make agency, a team dedicated to automation projects. We design flows that hold up in production: documentation, error handling, alerts, incident recovery. We work with Make, n8n, Zapier, and the integration of AI models (Claude, GPT) into workflows. If you have a back-office to stabilize, an AI flow to build, or a stuck no-code project to rescue, get in touch.
.svg){kind=icon}
Zapier if you're starting out and want to move fast: 7,000+ integrations, simple interface, huge community. Make if your flows are complex or handle a lot of data (filters, iterators, aggregators). Make is more cost-effective on high volumes because it bills by credit, not by task.
Yes if self-hosted: install n8n on your own server (budget $20-40/month for a production VPS), you get unlimited workflows and executions. The managed n8n cloud starts at €24/month for 2,500 executions. The billing counts one execution per full workflow, not per step.
The three majors ship native AI integrations. n8n has around twenty AI nodes (OpenAI, Anthropic, Hugging Face). Zapier rolled out MCP (Model Context Protocol) across every plan in 2025. Make added modules for GPT, Claude, and Gemini. For more advanced agent scripting, Pipedream stays the most flexible thanks to its JavaScript and Python support.
.svg)
.svg)