Growth & Strategy
Personas
SaaS & Startup
Time to ROI
Medium-term (3-6 months)
When I started working with a B2B startup on their operations automation, the brief seemed straightforward: automate their HubSpot-to-Slack workflow so every closed deal would automatically create a project Slack group. Simple enough, right?
What followed was a three-platform journey that taught me more about automation tools than any tutorial ever could. I started with Make.com for budget reasons, migrated to N8N thinking I'd found the holy grail, and ended up on Zapier—not because it was the cheapest, but because it actually solved the real problem.
Most guides will tell you that N8N is better than Zapier because it's self-hosted and "more powerful." But here's what they won't tell you: the best automation platform isn't the one with the most features—it's the one that actually works for your team and your use case.
In this playbook, you'll learn:
The hidden costs of self-hosting N8N (beyond server bills)
When Zapier's "expensive" pricing actually saves you money
Why platform choice depends more on your team than your budget
My framework for choosing the right automation tool
Real implementation timelines and maintenance requirements
Let's dive into what actually happened when I tested all three platforms with the same use case.
Platform Battle
What automation "experts" always recommend
If you've researched automation platforms, you've probably heard the same advice everywhere:
"Zapier is overpriced and limited—use N8N instead." The argument goes like this: N8N is open-source, self-hosted, more powerful, and cheaper in the long run. You get unlimited workflows, complete control over your data, and the ability to build complex automations that Zapier can't handle.
The typical recommendation follows this logic:
Budget constraints: Start with Make.com because it's cheaper than Zapier
Power users: Move to N8N for "real" automation needs
Enterprise: Never use Zapier because it's "expensive" and "limited"
Data security: Self-hosting N8N gives you complete control
Customization: N8N's node-based approach is more flexible
This advice sounds logical on paper. Open-source tools are generally better, right? Self-hosting gives you control. More features mean better value. And who doesn't want to save money on subscription costs?
But here's what this conventional wisdom misses: the total cost of ownership isn't just about monthly subscription fees. It's about setup time, maintenance burden, team training, debugging complexity, and most importantly—who becomes responsible when things break.
Most automation guides are written by developers for developers. They assume you have technical expertise, time for setup and maintenance, and that "more control" is always better. But in reality, most businesses just want their automations to work reliably without becoming a technical project.
Consider me as your business complice.
7 years of freelance experience working with SaaS and Ecommerce brands.
When this B2B startup client approached me, they had a simple but crucial need: every time they closed a deal in HubSpot, they wanted a dedicated Slack group created for that project. Their team was growing, deal volume was increasing, and manual Slack group creation was becoming a bottleneck.
The client was a typical growing startup—they had budget constraints but needed reliability. Their team included sales, project managers, and a few developers, but no dedicated DevOps person. Time was crucial because they were scaling fast and manual processes were breaking down.
I decided to approach this systematically, testing all three major platforms with the exact same use case. This wasn't about theoretical comparisons—I wanted to see how each platform performed in the real world, with real users, over several months.
Phase 1: Make.com (The Budget Choice)
I started with Make.com because the pricing was attractive and the interface looked clean. The initial setup was straightforward—I could connect HubSpot and Slack, map the data fields, and create the basic workflow in about an hour.
For the first few weeks, everything worked perfectly. Deals closed, Slack groups appeared, everyone was happy. The client was impressed with the quick turnaround and low cost.
Then the problems started. Make.com has a critical flaw that most tutorials don't mention: when one step in a workflow fails, it stops the entire workflow. Not just that task—everything stops. So when HubSpot had a temporary API hiccup or Slack experienced downtime, our automation didn't just fail that one execution—it stopped processing all subsequent tasks until someone manually restarted it.
This meant I was getting urgent calls from the client asking why deals weren't triggering Slack groups. I'd have to log in, see the error, restart the workflow, and manually create the missed groups. This happened several times per month, turning what should have been "set it and forget it" automation into a maintenance headache.
Here's my playbook
What I ended up doing and the results.
After the Make.com reliability issues, I decided to test N8N. The promise of self-hosting and complete control was appealing, especially since the client had developers who could potentially help with maintenance.
N8N Setup: More Complex Than Expected
Setting up N8N wasn't as straightforward as the tutorials made it seem. Here's what the process actually involved:
Server provisioning: Had to set up a VPS, configure security, manage SSL certificates
Database setup: N8N needs a persistent database for workflow storage and execution history
Environment configuration: Webhook URLs, environment variables, authentication setup
Backup strategy: Unlike SaaS tools, we were responsible for data backup and disaster recovery
The initial setup took about 6 hours—much longer than the 30-minute Zapier setup. But once running, N8N was impressive. The workflow builder was more powerful, I could write custom JavaScript functions, and the execution logs were detailed.
The N8N Reality Check
N8N worked beautifully for about two months. The workflows were more sophisticated than what I could build in Make.com, and having complete control felt empowering. I could debug issues directly, modify the underlying code, and optimize performance.
But then maintenance became the real issue. Every few weeks, something would break:
Server updates would occasionally break Node.js dependencies
Database connections would timeout during high-load periods
API changes from HubSpot or Slack would require manual code updates
SSL certificate renewals needed manual intervention
More importantly, every small tweak the client wanted required my intervention. With Zapier, they could navigate the interface and make simple changes. With N8N, the interface was powerful but complex—they needed technical help for basic modifications.
The Zapier Migration: Expensive but Effective
After three months of N8N maintenance issues, I suggested migrating to Zapier. The client was hesitant about the higher cost, but frustrated with the reliability problems.
The Zapier setup took 30 minutes. The workflow was simpler but more robust. Most importantly, the client's team could actually use the interface. They could see all their Zaps, understand the logic, and make small edits without calling me.
Zapier's error handling was also superior. When something failed, it would retry automatically, show clear error messages, and continue processing other tasks. The client stopped getting emergency calls about broken automations.
Platform Reliability
Make.com: Cheap but brittle—single failures stop everything. N8N: Powerful but maintenance-heavy. Zapier: More expensive but actually reliable for business-critical workflows.
Team Accessibility
N8N requires technical expertise for any changes. Zapier's interface lets non-technical team members understand and modify workflows independently.
Total Cost Reality
N8N's "free" hosting costs include server bills, maintenance time, and technical debt. Zapier's higher subscription often costs less than developer time.
Implementation Speed
Zapier: 30 minutes. N8N: 6+ hours for proper setup. Make.com: 1 hour but breaks regularly. Speed matters when you need automations working yesterday.
After six months of testing all three platforms with the same client, the results were clear—but not what I expected going into this experiment.
Zapier delivered the best business outcome. Yes, it cost more monthly ($49/month vs $15 for Make.com and ~$25 for N8N hosting), but the client stopped having automation emergencies. Their team gained independence to modify workflows. Most importantly, they could focus on growing their business instead of debugging automation issues.
The client's deal volume increased 40% during the Zapier period, partly because their operations were finally reliable. They closed more deals knowing the project setup would happen automatically. Sales confidence improved when they knew the system wouldn't randomly break.
N8N's "superior" features didn't matter when the client couldn't use them without calling me. Make.com's low price wasn't worth the reliability headaches. Zapier's higher cost was offset by reduced maintenance time and increased team productivity.
Six months later, they're still using Zapier and have expanded to automate customer onboarding, invoice generation, and project status updates. The automation system went from being a maintenance burden to a growth enabler.
What I've learned and the mistakes I've made.
Sharing so you don't make them.
This experience taught me that platform choice should be based on your team's reality, not theoretical features or pricing comparisons.
Team autonomy matters more than features: The best automation platform is the one your team can actually use independently
Reliability beats customization for business workflows: A simple automation that always works is better than a complex one that breaks monthly
Total cost includes your time: "Cheaper" platforms often cost more when you factor in setup and maintenance hours
Self-hosting isn't always better: Managing infrastructure takes time away from building your business
Error handling is crucial: How a platform handles failures matters more than how it handles success
Start with user needs, not technical preferences: Your developers might love N8N, but your operations team needs something they can understand
Platform migration costs are real: Factor in the time to rebuild, test, and retrain when switching tools
My current recommendation framework: Choose Make.com for simple, non-critical automations on a tight budget. Choose N8N if you have dedicated DevOps resources and need complex, custom workflows. Choose Zapier when automation reliability directly impacts your business operations and you want your team to have autonomy.
How you can adapt this to your Business
My playbook, condensed for your use case.
For your SaaS / Startup
For SaaS startups, prioritize team independence over technical features. Most startups need reliable automation more than complex workflows. Start with Zapier for critical processes, then evaluate N8N only if you have dedicated technical resources for maintenance.
For your Ecommerce store
E-commerce stores should focus on reliability during peak seasons. Order processing, inventory updates, and customer communications can't afford downtime. Zapier's error handling and uptime make it worth the higher cost for mission-critical workflows.