Dynamic

Make vs Pipedream

Visual automation meets the glue that holds your saas stack together, letting you automate workflows without drowning in api docs. Here's our take.

🧊Nice Pick

Make

Visual automation. More flexible than Zapier, less nerdy than n8n.

Make

Nice Pick

Visual automation. More flexible than Zapier, less nerdy than n8n.

Pros

  • +Visual builder
  • +Complex logic
  • +Good pricing
  • +Many integrations

Cons

  • -Learning curve
  • -Can get messy
  • -Support varies

Pipedream

The glue that holds your SaaS stack together, letting you automate workflows without drowning in API docs.

Pros

  • +Visual workflow builder with 1,000+ pre-built integrations
  • +Instant HTTP endpoints for webhooks and serverless functions
  • +Built-in observability with logs, triggers, and debugging tools
  • +Free tier generous enough for prototyping and small projects

Cons

  • -Complex workflows can become spaghetti code in the UI
  • -Vendor lock-in risk as workflows are platform-specific

The Verdict

These tools serve different purposes. Make is a automation while Pipedream is a hosting & deployment. We picked Make based on overall popularity, but your choice depends on what you're building.

🧊
The Bottom Line
Make wins

Based on overall popularity. Make is more widely used, but Pipedream excels in its own space.

Disagree with our pick? nice@nicepick.dev