Comparison
Make review
Direct answer
Our Make review in short: Make (make.com) is a powerful visual automation builder with 3,000+ app connections, a generous free plan, and low entry prices. It's a strong choice for an operations person or freelancer who enjoys building branching scenarios on a canvas. The trade-offs are a real learning curve, credit costs that grow with every step and every polling check, and ongoing maintenance as your apps change. TeamShift sells an adjacent product (a hosted AI team you hand jobs to, not a builder), so weigh our view with that in mind. We're specific below about when Make is the better pick.
What Make is
Make, formerly Integromat and now part of Celonis, calls itself "the visual AI automation platform." As of October 2026, Make's homepage says it connects to "3,000+ pre-built apps," including more than 400 AI app integrations, and that it's used by over 400,000 organizations. That figure is Make's own claim.
You build automations, which Make calls scenarios, on a visual canvas. Each circle on the canvas is a module: watch for a new Gmail message, search a Google Sheet, create a HubSpot contact, call an AI model. Routers split a scenario into branches, iterators loop over lists, and filters decide which records continue. You can see data move through each module as it runs, which makes debugging easier than in many tools.
Make has added three newer pieces on top of the builder:
- Make AI Agents, which Make describes as "transparent AI agents that take action and orchestrate complex workflows" across its app library.
- Maia by Make, which lets you build automations and agents by describing them in a conversation.
- Make Grid, a map of all your scenarios and how they connect, for teams with a lot of automations to keep track of.
How Make works day to day
Most people start from a template or a blank scenario, connect their accounts, map fields from one module to the next, and run a test. Once it works, you set a schedule or an instant trigger and turn it on.
Make's canvas handles complexity well. A single scenario can branch five ways, loop over hundreds of records, and handle errors on each path. That power is also why reviewers call it hard to learn. Mapping data between modules, handling arrays, and setting up error routes takes practice. Maia can draft a scenario from a description, but you still need to understand what it built well enough to fix it later.
The ongoing work is maintenance. Apps change their fields and APIs, edge cases show up in real data, and a scenario that ran fine for months can start failing quietly. Someone needs to watch the logs.
Make pricing summary (as of October 2026)
From Make's pricing page, billed monthly at 10,000 credits:
| Plan | Price | Credits per month |
|---|---|---|
| Free | $0 | 1,000 |
| Core | $12/month | 10,000 |
| Pro | $21/month | 10,000 |
| Teams | $38/month | 10,000 |
| Enterprise | Custom | Custom |
Annual billing saves 15% or more, and paid plans can raise the credit allowance with a slider. Make's rule is that "each module action in your scenario... counts as one credit," and some AI features use more. Every step of every run counts, and polling triggers use credits even when they find nothing new. Extra credits cost 25% more than plan credits. Our Make pricing page has a worked example and the details on credit creep.
What users say
Make's homepage cites ratings of 4.7 on G2 and 4.8 on Capterra. On Trustpilot, the picture is more split: 171 reviews and a TrustScore of 2.7 out of 5 as of October 2026, with 50% five-star and 35% one-star.
What people praise:
- A generous free tier compared to similar tools.
- A visual drag-and-drop builder that can handle complex workflows.
- Reasonable plan prices, and some reviewers found support responsive.
What people complain about:
- Learning curve. The interface is called complex, even with AI help.
- Bugs and performance. Some reviewers report slowness and things breaking after updates.
- Support and docs. Others found support hard to reach and module documentation thin.
- Cost. A share of reviewers feel it gets expensive for what they use.
We didn't test these claims ourselves. They're patterns in public reviews, and many users are happy.
Strengths and weaknesses
Strengths
- 3,000+ prebuilt app connections, more than most rivals.
- A canvas that makes branching, looping, and error handling visible.
- A useful free plan and cheap paid entry points.
- AI agents, conversational building with Maia, and Grid for keeping track of many scenarios.
- Detailed run logs that show the data at every module.
Weaknesses
- Credits are charged per module action, so long or high-volume scenarios cost more than the entry price suggests.
- Polling triggers burn credits on empty checks unless you use instant triggers.
- The learning curve is steep for anyone new to data mapping.
- No self-hosting option, unlike n8n.
- Someone has to own the scenarios and fix them when apps change.
Make vs a hosted AI team
Make is a tool for building automations. That's the right purchase if you have someone who enjoys building them. Most small businesses don't, and scenarios built during a burst of enthusiasm often go unmaintained.
TeamShift is built for owners who'd rather hand off the job than build the workflow. A business gets nine AI workers led by an Operations lead who routes work and checks it got done. You describe the job in a sentence ("follow up on every quote older than a week") and there's nothing to map or maintain. Support sorts the inbox and drafts replies. Finance chases invoices and cleans up QuickBooks. Jobs that take days survive waits, retries, and approvals. Anything that would send to a customer, move money, publish, delete, or commit your calendar is drafted first and goes out only after you approve it. Every step is recorded. Our TeamShift vs Make page compares the two head to head.
| Make | TeamShift | |
|---|---|---|
| Who builds the automation | You, on a visual canvas | The AI team, from a one-sentence request |
| Pricing | Plan plus credits per module action | Free workspace, usage billed at 3x compute cost, quoted maximum before work starts, spend caps |
| App connections | 3,000+ prebuilt apps | Works in common business apps such as Gmail, Outlook, QuickBooks, HubSpot, and Slack |
| Best for | Ops people and freelancers who like building | Owners who want jobs done with approvals |
| Who maintains it | You | TeamShift |
TeamShift doesn't publish review scores or customer counts. See our pricing page for how billing works.
Who Make is best for
- Operations people, freelancers, and agencies who build automations for a living or enjoy it.
- Businesses with many apps that need connecting, where 3,000+ integrations matter.
- Teams that want visual control over complex branching logic.
- Light users who can stay inside the free plan or the Core plan.
Who should look elsewhere
- Owners with no one to build and maintain scenarios. A hosted team or a done-for-you service will get more done. Our guide on no-code AI agents explains the options.
- Developers who want to self-host or write code freely. n8n fits them better.
- High-volume, many-step workflows where per-step credits add up. Compare against per-execution pricing first.
FAQ
Is Make good for beginners?
Simple scenarios built from templates are approachable. Complex scenarios with routers, iterators, and error handling take practice, and reviewers often mention the learning curve.
Is Make free?
Make has a free plan with 1,000 credits a month as of October 2026. Paid plans start at $12 a month for Core with 10,000 credits, billed monthly.
Is Make better than Zapier?
Make is usually cheaper and handles complex branching better. Zapier is generally easier for beginners. The right choice depends on who will build and maintain the automations.
Does Make have AI agents?
Yes. Make AI Agents can take actions across its app library, and Maia by Make lets you build scenarios and agents by describing them in a conversation.
Is TeamShift a Make alternative?
Only if you don't want to build. TeamShift takes jobs from a sentence and drafts anything outgoing for your approval. If you want to design and control each step yourself, Make is the better tool.