Top Zapier Alternatives & Competitors based on 87 Reviews
Reviews collected from
trustpilot.com
trustradius.com
sitejabber.com
capterra.com
softwareadvice.com
.
| Brand | Pricing |
|---|---|
|
☆ ☆ |
Offers a Free plan with limited monthly tasks, plus paid Professional and Team plans that scale with task volume and add features such as multi-step workflows and shared workspaces. Paid plans start at about $19.99/month; Enterprise pricing is custom. Exact prices depend on task limits and billing term. |
|
☆ ☆ |
Offers a Free plan with a monthly credit allowance, and paid Core, Pro, and Teams plans with increasing features and support. Paid plans start at about $9/month for 10,000 credits; Enterprise pricing is custom. Exact prices depend on credit limits and billing term. |
Compare your brand to your competitors
Why should you be looking for a Zapier alternative?
Users may seek Zapier alternatives for more flexible features, an easier workflow builder, lower costs, or support that better suits their needs. Make is a leading option, with visual tools for building customizable automations. The comparison below explores features, pricing, and which users each platform suits best.
Quick Overview of Top Zapier Competitors
- Make — Best Zapier Alternative for Automation Software: Make’s visual scenario builder lets you map multi-step workflows and control how data moves between apps. Routers, filters, iterators, and error-handling tools make it especially useful for complex automations that need branching or data transformation.
Zapier Alternatives: Feature by Feature Comparison
| Make feature | How it works in Make | Comparison with Zapier | Specific benefit for users |
|---|---|---|---|
| Visual scenario builder (Make product page) | Build automations—called scenarios—on a canvas by connecting app modules. The canvas shows the workflow’s sequence, data moving between steps, and the logic that controls what happens next. | Zapier offers visual workflow-building tools too, but Make’s canvas puts branching, data handling, and error paths directly into the scenario diagram. | Makes complex automations easier to inspect and maintain. Users can see how a record moves through the whole workflow rather than piecing the logic together from a mostly linear list of steps. |
| Routers and filters | A router splits a scenario into multiple routes. Filters determine which route a bundle of data can follow—for example, sending high-value orders to one system and routine orders to another. | Zapier offers conditional Paths. Make’s routers and filters are native parts of its visual scenario structure, making multi-route logic particularly easy to see on the canvas. | Useful when one trigger needs to produce different outcomes. Teams can handle several cases in one scenario instead of building and maintaining separate automations. |
| Iterators and aggregators | Iterators can process items in an array one at a time; aggregators can collect processed items back into a combined structure. | Zapier has looping and data-formatting tools, but Make exposes these operations as explicit modules within a scenario. | Gives users more control over line-item data, such as processing each product in an order, then combining the results for a downstream app. |
| Detailed data mapping and transformation | Map fields between modules and manipulate data as it moves through a scenario, including working with structured data and arrays. | Zapier provides Formatter and other data-handling tools. Make’s mapping and transformation are closely integrated with the scenario canvas, which can make complex field-level logic easier to follow. | Reduces the need for extra intermediary steps when data needs to be reshaped, cleaned up, or matched to a destination app’s fields. |
| Error handling and recovery | Add error-handler routes to decide what a scenario should do when a module fails—for example, retry, ignore, or route the error for separate handling. | Zapier provides task history and error-management options. Make lets users place error-handling logic directly into the scenario, alongside the normal workflow. | Helps prevent a single failed step from derailing an entire process and makes recovery rules visible to the people maintaining the automation. |
| Make Grid (Make Grid) | Provides a visual overview of scenarios and connected assets across a Make organization, helping users see how automations relate to one another. | Zapier provides workflow visualization and management features; Make Grid’s distinguishing value is its organization-level map of automations and their connections. | Especially useful as automation grows: teams can discover dependencies, understand what a change might affect, and get a clearer view of their automation landscape. |
| AI tools and agents (Make AI) | Make offers AI-related tools and scenario components for adding tasks such as summarizing, classifying, or extracting information, as well as building AI-driven workflows and agents where available. | Zapier also offers AI features and agents. Make’s advantage is that AI steps can be combined with its visual routing, data mapping, and error-handling controls in the same scenario. | Lets users place AI within a larger, controlled process—for example, classify an incoming request, route it based on the result, and send the output to another app. Availability and model options can vary by feature and plan. |
| Webhooks and HTTP/API connections | Use webhook triggers to receive data from external services and HTTP tools to make API requests, including when a dedicated app integration is unavailable. | Zapier also supports webhooks and API-based connections. Make’s HTTP and webhook tools fit directly into its visual scenario structure, alongside its other modules. | Helps connect less-common apps or custom systems without waiting for a prebuilt integration, giving technical users more flexibility. |
| Broad app integrations (Make integrations) | Connect scenarios to a wide range of apps through Make’s integration catalog, with modules for common actions and triggers. | Zapier generally has a larger app catalog, which can be an advantage when a workflow depends on a niche app. Make’s strength is the depth of control available once connected apps are part of a scenario. | Users can build detailed workflows across many popular services; for an uncommon app, it is worth checking both catalogs before choosing a platform. |
| Usage-based execution model (Make pricing) | Make meters usage in credits; the amount used depends on the modules and features in a scenario. | Zapier measures usage primarily through tasks. The two platforms count usage differently, so a workflow’s cost depends on its design and run volume—not just its number of steps. | Make can be cost-effective for some multi-step or data-heavy workflows, but users should estimate usage with a real example and compare it against Zapier’s task calculation before deciding. |
Compare your brand to your competitors
Integration Capabilities for each Zapier competitor
| Alternative | Supported Integrations | Compatibility Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Make vs. Zapier — CRM and sales | Make: Salesforce, HubSpot, Pipedrive, Zoho CRM, Copper Zapier: Salesforce, HubSpot, Pipedrive, Zoho CRM, Copper |
Strong overlap for common CRM workflows, including creating contacts, updating records, and syncing leads. Available triggers and actions vary by app. |
| Make vs. Zapier — Project and work management | Make: Asana, Trello, Jira, ClickUp, monday.com, Notion, Airtable Zapier: Asana, Trello, Jira, ClickUp, monday.com, Notion, Airtable |
Both support common task, project, and record updates. Check the specific connector for advanced actions or triggers before designing a workflow. |
| Make vs. Zapier — Communication | Make: Slack, Microsoft Teams, Gmail, Outlook, Discord, Telegram Zapier: Slack, Microsoft Teams, Gmail, Outlook, Discord, Telegram |
Both can connect messaging and email tools to other apps. Permissions and available events depend on the connected account and app. |
| Make vs. Zapier — Forms and surveys | Make: Typeform, Jotform, Google Forms, SurveyMonkey Zapier: Typeform, Jotform, Google Forms, SurveyMonkey |
Common use cases include sending submissions to CRMs, spreadsheets, and project tools. Some form products expose different events in each platform. |
| Make vs. Zapier — Cloud storage and documents | Make: Google Drive, Dropbox, OneDrive, Box, Google Docs, Microsoft Office 365 Zapier: Google Drive, Dropbox, OneDrive, Box, Google Docs, Microsoft Office 365 |
Both support file and document workflows. Folder, file-sharing, and document-editing actions may differ by connector. |
| Make vs. Zapier — E-commerce and payments | Make: Shopify, WooCommerce, Stripe, PayPal, BigCommerce Zapier: Shopify, WooCommerce, Stripe, PayPal, BigCommerce |
Both cover common order, customer, and payment workflows. Payment-related triggers and actions may be limited by provider permissions or account setup. |
| Make vs. Zapier — Marketing and email platforms | Make: Mailchimp, ActiveCampaign, Klaviyo, HubSpot, Brevo Zapier: Mailchimp, ActiveCampaign, Klaviyo, HubSpot, Brevo |
Both support list, contact, and campaign-related automations. Confirm the exact events and fields available for the specific marketing account. |
| Make vs. Zapier — Databases and spreadsheets | Make: Google Sheets, Microsoft Excel, Airtable, PostgreSQL, MySQL Zapier: Google Sheets, Microsoft Excel, Airtable, PostgreSQL, MySQL |
Spreadsheet and Airtable workflows are widely supported. Database connections may require credentials, network access, or additional configuration. |
| Make vs. Zapier — Web and automation utilities | Make: Webhooks, HTTP, RSS, JSON, email, and scheduling tools Zapier: Webhooks, RSS, email, and scheduling tools, with HTTP/API options depending on plan and feature |
Both provide ways to connect services beyond their app directories. Make’s scenario builder supports multi-step flows and routing; Zapier offers comparable multi-step workflows, with features varying by plan. |
| Make vs. Zapier — AI tools | Make: OpenAI and other AI-related app connectors Zapier: OpenAI and a broad range of AI-related app connectors |
Availability changes as both directories expand. Check each platform’s listing for the specific AI provider, model-related actions, and plan requirements. |
Integration availability and individual triggers or actions can change. Check the Make integrations directory and Zapier app directory for current connector details.
Pros and Cons of each Zapier Alternative
| Alternative | Pros | Cons |
|---|---|---|
| Make | More control over complex workflows: its visual scenario builder makes branching, routing, filters, and multi-step data transformations easy to inspect. Can be cost-effective for high-volume workflows: its operation-based model may suit scenarios that process many records, depending on how many modules each run uses. Flexible integrations: supports webhooks and HTTP requests for connecting to services without a ready-made app integration. | Steeper learning curve: building and troubleshooting scenarios can take more effort than setting up straightforward Zapier automations. Costs can be harder to estimate: each module execution can use operations, so processing bundles of records or adding steps may increase usage. App coverage may be narrower: a service available in Zapier may lack a native Make integration, requiring an API or webhook workaround. Less suited to quick, simple automations: the extra workflow control can add setup overhead when a basic trigger-and-action is all that’s needed. |
Integration availability and pricing depend on the apps and plans involved; check the specific services and workflow volume before choosing.
Zapier vs Competitors: Traffic & Marketing Comparison
Traffic comparison: Zapier attracts substantially more organic traffic. From November 2025 through October 2026, its monthly estimates total about 325 million, versus Make’s 16.3 million—roughly 20 times more. Zapier peaked at about 37.2 million in March 2026; Make peaked at 1.65 million in December 2025.
Top-performing keywords: Both brands rank #1 for most of their listed keywords, including “best ai tools,” “marketing automation,” and “workflow solutions.” Zapier ranks #1 for “document automation” and “social media marketing automation,” but sits at #2 for “ai marketing automation” and #3 for “email automation” and “best ai software.” Make ranks #1 for all its listed terms, including the additional “company workflow.”
Visibility and reach: Zapier has the stronger overall organic reach by a wide margin, supported by far higher traffic and broad keyword coverage. Make shows standout ranking strength: it holds #1 positions across every listed keyword, including AI and automation categories. In short, Zapier leads on traffic scale, while Make is exceptionally strong in the supplied rankings.
Compare your brand to your competitors
Other “Zapier” Alternatives & Competitors that you can find for free
| Competitor | Key features | Trend | Value proposition |
|---|---|---|---|
| n8n | Visual workflow builder, custom JavaScript, broad integrations, self-hosting | More open-source, self-hosted automation and AI-agent workflows | Flexible automation with greater control over data and hosting |
| Microsoft Power Automate | Microsoft 365 and Dynamics integrations, desktop RPA, approvals, AI Builder | Deeper use of AI and automation across Microsoft’s business tools | A natural fit for organizations already using Microsoft products |
| Workato | Enterprise integrations, workflow orchestration, governance, API management | Unified automation across departments, systems, and AI tools | Robust, centrally governed automation for complex business processes |
| Pipedream | API and event-based workflows, code steps, developer tools, many integrations | Developer-first automation and AI-powered workflows | Fast, flexible automation for teams comfortable working with APIs and code |
| IFTTT | Simple applets, smart-home and IoT integrations, consumer app connections | Connected-device and everyday personal automation | An easy way to link popular apps and devices without technical setup |
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Zapier, and what does it do?
Zapier is a no-code automation platform that connects apps and services. You can create workflows, called Zaps, that automatically perform actions when a specified event occurs—for example, adding a new form response to a spreadsheet and notifying your team.
How does Zapier work?
A Zap typically starts with a trigger, such as receiving a new email or creating a record in an app. It then runs one or more actions in connected apps. Depending on the apps and workflow, you can also add filters, conditions, and data formatting steps.
Is Zapier free?
Zapier offers a free plan, but it has limits on usage and available features. Paid plans generally provide higher limits and additional capabilities. Check Zapier’s current pricing page for the latest plan details, since prices and limits can change.
What are the best alternatives to Zapier?
Popular alternatives include Make, Microsoft Power Automate, IFTTT, and n8n. Make offers a visual workflow builder, Power Automate is a natural option for organizations using Microsoft products, IFTTT is geared toward straightforward automations, and n8n offers flexible workflows with self-hosting options.
Is Make better than Zapier?
Neither is best for everyone. Zapier is often chosen for its broad app integrations and approachable setup, while Make appeals to users who want a visual way to build more complex workflows. Compare the apps you need, workflow requirements, ease of use, and current pricing before choosing.
What is the difference between Zapier and IFTTT?
Both connect apps and automate tasks, but IFTTT is commonly used for simple personal or smart-home automations, while Zapier is often used for business workflows involving work apps and multiple steps. The best choice depends on which services you use and how complex your automations are.
Is n8n a good alternative to Zapier?
n8n can be a good alternative if you need more control over workflow logic or want the option to self-host. It may require more technical setup than Zapier, so consider your team’s skills, hosting preferences, integrations, and maintenance needs.
