Make vs Zapier for UK small businesses: which automation tool actually costs less?

What do Make and Zapier actually do?

Most small business tools don’t talk to each other by default, which can be inconvenient for a growing UK SME. A lead fills in a web form, but someone still has to create the CRM contact, send the welcome email, and post to Slack. That gap between “a thing happened” and “the right response fired automatically” is exactly what both Make and Zapier are built to close.

Both platforms let you build automations without writing code. Zapier connects triggers in one app to actions in another using a simple linear flow. Make (formerly ‘Integromat’) does the same but through a visual canvas that supports branching, looping, and conditional logic. Make renamed its billing unit from “operations” to “credits” in recent updates, so older comparisons that use “operations” are referring to the same thing.

The headline claim in the Make vs Zapier debate is that Make is 3 to 5 times cheaper than Zapier. That is often true at volume, but the comparison isn’t necessarily true for SMEs. This post works through a real cost example for a UK business receiving around 100 leads a month (we like to be optimistic at SME Software Help!), and gives our candid advice on which tool to choose for which situation.

Contents

• The real difference: how each platform counts your usage
• What is the polling trigger trap?
• A worked cost example
• Ease of use: which is faster to start
• Where does Make earn its place for complex workflows?
• App integrations: will it connect to your stack?
• What compliance and data issues should UK SMEs check?
• AI features in 2026
• Which one we would choose for a client
• Make vs Zapier: comparison table
• TL;DR

The real difference: how each platform counts your usage

Zapier counts tasks. Each successful action step in a Zap costs one task. The trigger that starts the Zap does not count, and if an action fails, it does not count either. On the Professional plan (from $19.99/month billed annually), failed runs never eat into your task allowance.

Make counts credits. Each module in a scenario costs one credit, including the trigger module. One credit is one module action, so a five-module scenario costs five credits per run. This is where the “3 to 5x cheaper” claim comes from: Make Core at $9/month provides 10,000 credits, versus Zapier Professional at $19.99/month, and Make’s credit prices scale more gently at volume.

There are two main things that we see narrowing that price gap in practice. Firstly, the annual plan discount asymmetry: Zapier saves 33% on annual billing, while Make saves ‘15% or more’. Make’s monthly price lead shrinks once both platforms are committed to annual billing. Second, credit expiry: Zapier monthly tasks expire each month with pay-as-you-go overage available on top; Make monthly credits also expire monthly, annual prepaid credits last 12 months, and credit overage protection on Make is Enterprise-only. An SME on Make Core that exhausts its credits mid-month will find scenarios stop running until the next billing cycle, with no simple overage option - not ideal at all if you rely on Make for business automations!

What is the polling trigger trap?

This is the number-one hidden cost in Make’s pricing, and almost no-one we discuss Make with is aware of this.

When a scenario uses a ‘polling trigger’, which is when Make periodically checking a source app for new data, it fires at whatever interval you set. At a 5-minute interval on a paid plan, that is 288 fires per day, or roughly 8,640 fires per month per automation. Each fire costs one credit, and if your scenario finds nothing new on 8,500 of those fires, you still pay 8,500 credits in polling overhead before a single real action runs.

On the Free plan, the minimum polling interval is 15 minutes, around 2,880 fires per month. Paid plans drop the minimum to 1 minute, which is where credit consumption can silently ramp up.

There are three practical workarounds that we have implemented for clients favouring Make. Using webhook triggers wherever possible: when an app pushes data to Make rather than Make checking for it, the need for polling disappears entirely. If polling is unavoidable, extend the interval (moving from 5 minutes to 15 minutes makes a meaningful difference). Additionally, restricting scheduled scenarios to business hours only for low-volume workflows is another credit conservation tactic.

For a practical introduction to webhook-based triggers and how they compare to polling in CRM automation, our plain English guide to using Zapier with your CRM covers the same principle and applies equally to Make.

A worked cost example

Take a common SME workflow: a prospect fills in a web form, the CRM creates a contact, a tag is applied, a welcome email goes out, and a Slack notification fires to the sales owner.

For a business receiving 100 leads per month*:

• Zapier Professional (annual billing): 400 tasks per month, comfortably within the plan. Cost: approximately $16/month at the annual rate. At roughly $1 = £0.79 plus 20% UK VAT, that is around £15 per month. Verify the current rate at sign-up.
• Make Core with webhooks: 500 credits per month, well within the 10,000-credit allowance. Cost: $9/month, around £8.50 plus 20% UK VAT.
• Make Core with 5-minute polling: roughly 9,140 credits per month (8,640 polling fires plus 500 action credits). Still within Core’s 10,000-credit limit, but barely. A second polling scenario, or a month with higher lead volume would push you into the next tier.

The conclusion is not that Make is always cheaper, but rather that Make with webhooks is dramatically cheaper. Make with short-interval polling can consume nearly an entire Core plan’s credit allowance before doing any meaningful work.

*Both platforms price in USD only, so always confirm the VAT treatment and current GBP rate at sign-up.

Ease of use: which is faster to start

Zapier wins for day-one simplicity. The Zap/Automation builder is linear: pick a trigger, pick an action, map the fields. Labels are in plain English, with tooltips to explain every option, and a complete beginner can have a working Zap running within half an hour.

Make’s visual canvas is arguably more powerful but can be harder to use for a beginner. Connecting modules, understanding data flow between branches, and interpreting Make’s error messages all require a bit of study and Googling. Expect to invest an hour or two on your first scenario before it runs reliably.

For a business owner who wants one or two automations working as quickly as possible, Zapier is the right starting point. For someone willing to invest that extra hour upfront in exchange for more flexibility later, Make rewards the effort.

For a broader introduction to what is worth automating and what to build first, our plain English guide to small business automation covers the fundamentals before you open either platform.

Where does Make earn its place for complex workflows?

Once a workflow needs branching logic, conditional paths, or looping over multiple records, Make’s visual canvas earns its keep. Seeing all the branches of a scenario laid out on screen makes complex flows much easier to read and maintain. Zapier’s linear layout becomes cluttered once a workflow passes three or four steps - when working in Zapier, we often find ourselves scrolling up and down a lot when working with multi-step Zaps!

Make also has inline formula functions built into its modules: date arithmetic, text transforms, and array operations are available without adding a separate step. In Zapier, the same transformations require a dedicated ‘Formatter’ step, adding to your task count.

One cost caveat on Make’s Code App: running custom JavaScript or Python charges 2 credits per second of execution time. A script that takes 3 seconds costs 6 credits instead of 1. That is rarely a problem for simple transforms but matters if you are running substantial custom logic. Make’s maximum scenario execution time is 5 minutes on the Free plan and 40 minutes on paid plans, so long multi-branch workflows can time out on Free.

App integrations: will it connect to your stack?

Zapier connects to 9,000+ apps. Make connects to 3,000+ apps but tends to offer deeper control within each integration, with more data fields exposed and more granular trigger conditions.

For the SME stacks we deploy most often (Capsule, Pipedrive, MailerLite, Transpond, HubSpot, Stripe, Notion, Google Workspace, Slack), both platforms cover everything without issue. Zapier wins on breadth: if you use niche or industry-specific software, particularly older tools with smaller user bases, Zapier is more likely to have a native integration.

Make also imposes a monthly data-transfer cap alongside its credit limit: 5GB of transfer per 10,000 monthly credits, with per-file ceilings that scale by plan (Free: 5MB per file; Core: 100MB; Pro: 250MB; Teams: 500MB). For workflows that move documents, invoice PDFs, or image attachments, those per-file limits are worth checking before committing to a plan. For simple CRM field syncs and notification flows, they are unlikely to matter as the volume of data this transmits is very low.

Both platforms publish CRM-specific template libraries that reduce the first build to a configuration exercise rather than starting from a blank canvas. Zapier’s CRM automation hub covers Salesforce, HubSpot, Pipedrive, Zoho, and others across six automation categories. One standout example for client-facing businesses: Zapier has a pre-built template that automatically copies Fireflies AI call transcriptions and summaries into Capsule CRM as activity notes on the relevant contact record, removing the manual step of logging call notes after every meeting. This automation will also create the contact in Capsule if they don’t exist - a huge time saver! This integration is Zapier-only (there is no native Capsule/Fireflies connection), which is a useful illustration of where Zapier’s broader app library earns its price premium. Make’s no-code CRM integration guide lists nine named workflow templates, including a Capsule CRM and Aircall integration, which gives a concrete starting point for firms already on those tools. For standard CRM connections, neither platform requires you to build from scratch as they have prebuilt connectors for all mainstream CRMs.

What compliance and data issues should UK SMEs check?

For UK businesses, the relevant compliance question is UK GDPR and data residency, not the HIPAA compliance commonly cited in US-focused comparison posts (HIPAA is US healthcare law and largely irrelevant to most UK SMEs).

Make hosts on AWS infrastructure with EU-region hosting available. Both Make and Zapier hold SOC 2 Type II and ISO 27001 certifications. Neither platform currently signs a HIPAA Business Associate Agreement; if you have US-facing clients in healthcare, note that limitation as it impacts how healthcare-related data can be handled. For UK SMEs handling standard business data, the key check is confirming EU or UK data residency and reviewing each platform’s data processing agreement against your GDPR obligations.

*If you are handling special-category data, such as health records or financial data under FCA remit, take proper legal advice before routing it through either platform.

AI features in 2026

Both Make and Zapier now offer AI capabilities: an AI co-pilot for building automations, native prompt automation (passing data through OpenAI, Claude, or Gemini as a workflow step), MCP server support, and AI agent products (Zapier Agents and Make AI Agents).

The practical differences that matter for SMEs on a budget are: Zapier charges 1 task per prompt regardless of token count, which makes AI steps predictable to budget. Make charges credits based on token volume, which is harder to forecast. On the infrastructure side, setting up Zapier’s MCP server takes roughly two clicks; Make’s MCP requires building an individual scenario for each action, which is considerably more involved.

For SMEs exploring AI automation for the first time, Zapier is simpler and more cost-predictable. Make is cheaper if you are comfortable with the configuration. For a detailed look at what MCP actually enables in practice, our guide to Zapier MCP for small businesses covers the five use cases worth looking at now and when to hold off.

Which one we would choose for a client

This depends on the client’s experience and requirements. Here is how we approach it in practice:

• New to automation, simple 1 to 3 step flows: Zapier. Get something working quickly, build confidence, then reassess.
• Building 4 or more automations, need conditional logic, watching costs: Make. Learn webhooks on day one and you will rarely hit the polling trap.
• Growing stack with plans to build 10 or more scenarios: Make from the start. The visual canvas pays for itself at that scale, and building webhook-first from the beginning avoids a painful credit audit later.
• Tight budget, willing to invest an hour of setup: Make with webhook triggers. Used this way, the Core plan at $9/month comfortably covers most SME workloads.
• Mixed needs or large existing Zapier library: some teams run both, simple reliable Zaps on Zapier and complex multi-branch logic on Make. It is messier to manage but a legitimate approach when migration cost is high.

For a real-world example of when Zapier was the right call alongside Capsule CRM and Transpond, see how we built the automation system for a B2B HR consultancy. The workflow was linear, the team were not technical, and Zapier’s simplicity justified the higher per-task cost.

For businesses focused specifically on automating client onboarding, the tool choice depends on whether the onboarding flow has branching logic. Linear onboarding: Zapier, but multi-path onboarding with conditional steps: Make.

Make vs Zapier: comparison table

Prices are USD. Add 20% UK VAT at checkout. Verify Zapier’s current tier names at sign-up as they shift periodically.

TL;DR

• Make is cheaper than Zapier in most scenarios, but the margin depends almost entirely on whether you use webhook triggers or polling triggers.
• Polling triggers in Make charge a credit every time they fire, empty or not. At a 5-minute interval, one automation can burn roughly 8,640 credits per month before doing any real work.
• Use webhooks wherever possible in Make. The Core plan at $9/month comfortably covers most SME workloads when built webhook-first.
• Zapier is simpler to start with, has a larger app library (9,000+), and does not penalise polling.
• For complex multi-branch workflows, Make’s visual canvas is significantly better than Zapier’s linear layout.
• Both platforms price in USD. Add 20% UK VAT and account for FX exposure on your monthly bill.