Power Automate vs Zapier vs Make: Honest Comparison for 2026
Unbiased comparison of Power Automate, Zapier, and Make (Integromat) for workflow automation — features, pricing, and use cases.
Why This Comparison Exists
Low-Code Kit is a Power Platform resource, so you might expect us to simply recommend Power Automate. We are not going to do that. The right tool depends on your stack, your team, your budget, and what you are trying to automate. This comparison is honest about where each platform excels and where it falls short.
All three platforms — Power Automate, Zapier, and Make (formerly Integromat) — are mature, capable, and actively developed. The differences are in their design philosophy, ecosystem integration, and pricing models.
Feature Comparison at a Glance
| Feature | Power Automate | Zapier | Make |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cloud workflows | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Desktop automation (RPA) | Yes (PAD included) | No | No |
| AI/Copilot features | Copilot, AI Builder | AI actions (ChatGPT, etc.) | AI modules (OpenAI, etc.) |
| Connectors/integrations | 1,000+ (900+ premium) | 7,000+ | 2,000+ |
| Custom connectors | Yes (OpenAPI) | Yes (Developer Platform) | Yes (HTTP module + custom apps) |
| On-premises access | Yes (data gateway) | No (cloud only) | No (cloud only, webhooks possible) |
| Approval workflows | Built-in Approvals action | Via third-party apps | Via third-party apps |
| Error handling | Try/Catch scopes, retry policies | Auto-replay, error paths | Error handlers, break/rollback |
| Branching/logic | Conditions, Switch, Parallel | Paths, Filters | Routers, Filters, Iterators |
| Loops | Apply to Each, Do Until | Looping (limited, paid tier) | Iterators, Repeaters (native) |
| Scheduling | Recurrence trigger, sliding window | Schedule trigger | Scheduling module |
| API access | Full REST API | REST API | REST API |
| Version control | Solutions (ALM) | Versions (limited) | Blueprints, version history |
| Environments | Dev/Test/Prod environments | Folders | Folders, Teams |
| Governance/DLP | DLP policies, tenant controls | Admin controls (Enterprise) | Organisation-level controls |
| Audit logging | Built into Power Platform | Activity logs (Enterprise) | Execution logs |
| Mobile app | Power Automate mobile app | Zapier mobile app | No dedicated mobile app |
Connector Ecosystem
This is where the differences are most stark.
Zapier leads on sheer breadth. With over 7,000 integrations, it covers virtually every SaaS product you have heard of. If you are connecting two cloud apps together — especially outside the Microsoft ecosystem — Zapier almost certainly has a pre-built integration.
Make sits in the middle with around 2,000 integrations, but its HTTP module and JSON parsing tools are excellent. If an app has an API but no official Make module, you can build the integration yourself without needing a custom connector definition.
Power Automate has over 1,000 connectors, but the real advantage is the depth of Microsoft 365 integration. The SharePoint, Dataverse, Teams, Outlook, and Excel connectors in Power Automate are significantly richer than what Zapier or Make offer for the same services. If your organisation lives in Microsoft 365, Power Automate understands your environment at a level the others cannot match.
The Honest Truth About Connectors
- If you need to connect Salesforce to Slack to Airtable to Notion, Zapier wins.
- If you need deep SharePoint automation with complex metadata, Power Automate wins.
- If you need to call obscure APIs with complex request/response transformations, Make wins.
Pricing Comparison
Pricing models differ fundamentally, so direct comparison requires context.
Power Automate Pricing (2026)
| Plan | Price | Includes |
|---|---|---|
| Power Automate Premium | ~£11.70/user/month | Cloud flows + desktop flows (RPA) + AI Builder credits + 40,000 daily requests |
| Power Automate Process | ~£117/bot/month | Unattended RPA per bot |
| Per-flow plan | ~£78/flow/month | 250,000 requests/day, unlimited users |
| Included with M365 | £0 extra | Standard connectors only, 6,000 requests/day |
Zapier Pricing (2026)
| Plan | Price | Includes |
|---|---|---|
| Free | £0 | 100 tasks/month, 5 single-step Zaps |
| Starter | ~£16/month (billed annually) | 750 tasks/month, multi-step Zaps |
| Professional | ~£40/month | 2,000 tasks/month, paths, custom logic |
| Team | ~£55/month per user | Shared workspace, premier support |
| Enterprise | Custom | Advanced admin, SSO, SCIM |
Make Pricing (2026)
| Plan | Price | Includes |
|---|---|---|
| Free | £0 | 1,000 operations/month, 2 active scenarios |
| Core | ~£8/month | 10,000 operations/month |
| Pro | ~£14/month | 10,000 operations/month + priority execution |
| Teams | ~£25/month | 10,000 operations/month + team features |
| Enterprise | Custom | SSO, advanced security |
Pricing Analysis
Power Automate is cost-effective if you are already paying for Microsoft 365 or Dynamics 365. Standard connector flows are included at no extra cost. Premium connectors require the per-user or per-flow licence.
Zapier charges per task (each action execution counts). A flow with 5 steps that runs 100 times uses 500 tasks. High-volume automations get expensive quickly.
Make charges per operation (similar to Zapier’s tasks, but more granular). Its pricing tends to be more affordable at higher volumes than Zapier, but the learning curve is steeper.
Bottom line: For Microsoft-centric organisations, Power Automate’s inclusion with M365 makes it dramatically cheaper. For multi-platform SaaS environments with low volume, Zapier is quick to set up. For high-volume, complex integrations, Make often gives the best cost-per-operation ratio.
Ease of Use
Power Automate
The designer is functional but can feel cluttered, especially for complex flows. The expression editor requires learning a specific syntax (Workflow Definition Language), which is not intuitive for non-technical users. Dynamic content selection is powerful but can be confusing when multiple actions return similar fields.
Learning curve: Moderate. Easy for simple flows, steep for complex expressions and error handling.
Zapier
The simplest interface of the three. The linear, step-by-step setup makes it approachable for anyone who can follow a wizard. The limitation is that this simplicity comes at the cost of flexibility — complex branching and data transformations require workarounds.
Learning curve: Low. Most people can build their first Zap in under 10 minutes.
Make
The visual scenario builder (a node-graph interface) is the most powerful of the three for complex data flows. You can see the entire automation visually, including branches, error handlers, and data transformations. However, the interface is not intuitive at first — it takes time to understand modules, bundles, and data mapping.
Learning curve: Moderate to steep. But once you learn it, you can build more complex automations faster than in the other two.
Enterprise and Governance Features
This is where Power Automate has a clear lead for large organisations.
| Capability | Power Automate | Zapier | Make |
|---|---|---|---|
| Data Loss Prevention (DLP) | Yes — granular connector policies | No | No |
| Environment management | Dev/Test/Prod environments | No | No |
| Solution packaging (ALM) | Yes — managed/unmanaged solutions | No | Blueprints (limited) |
| Tenant-level admin controls | Extensive via Admin Centre | Limited (Enterprise plan) | Limited |
| Azure AD integration | Native | SAML SSO (Enterprise) | SAML SSO (Enterprise) |
| Conditional Access | Yes | No | No |
| Maker analytics | Yes — usage, errors, adoption | Limited | Limited |
If your organisation has compliance requirements, regulated data, or IT governance mandates, Power Automate’s enterprise controls are substantially ahead.
AI and Copilot Capabilities
All three platforms are investing heavily in AI, but the approaches differ.
Power Automate has Copilot built into the designer — you can describe a flow in natural language and it generates the initial structure. AI Builder provides pre-built AI models (document processing, sentiment analysis, entity extraction) that integrate directly into flows. This is tightly coupled with the Microsoft AI ecosystem.
Zapier offers AI actions through its “AI by Zapier” feature and integrates with OpenAI, Anthropic, and other providers. It is practical for simple AI tasks (summarise text, extract data, generate content) within existing Zaps.
Make provides modules for OpenAI, Anthropic, and other AI services. Its strength is the ability to build complex AI pipelines with branching, error handling, and data transformation around the AI calls. If you are building sophisticated AI workflows, Make’s visual builder is well-suited to the task.
Desktop Automation (RPA)
This is a clear differentiator. Power Automate includes Power Automate Desktop (PAD) for robotic process automation — automating legacy Windows applications, web scraping, and desktop tasks. This is included in the Premium licence at no extra cost.
Zapier and Make are cloud-only platforms. They have no desktop automation capability. If you need to automate a legacy Windows application that has no API, Power Automate is the only option among these three.
When to Choose Each
Choose Power Automate When
- Your organisation is on Microsoft 365 or Dynamics 365
- You need deep integration with SharePoint, Teams, Dataverse, or Outlook
- You need desktop automation (RPA) for legacy applications
- IT governance and DLP policies are important
- You want approval workflows without third-party tools
- Budget is a concern and you are already paying for M365
Choose Zapier When
- You are connecting many different SaaS tools (not Microsoft-centric)
- Simplicity matters most — you want non-technical team members building automations
- You need a quick integration and the connector already exists
- Your volumes are low to moderate (cost stays manageable)
- You are a small team or startup without complex governance needs
Choose Make When
- You need complex data transformations between systems
- Volume is high and cost-per-operation matters
- You are comfortable with a steeper learning curve for more power
- Your automations involve complex branching, error handling, and API calls
- You want the most visual/intuitive designer for complex scenarios
Can You Use More Than One?
Yes, and many organisations do. A common pattern:
- Power Automate for everything Microsoft 365: SharePoint approvals, Teams notifications, Dataverse workflows, desktop automation.
- Zapier or Make for non-Microsoft SaaS integrations: connecting your CRM to your marketing platform, syncing project management tools, etc.
The key consideration is governance — if you use multiple platforms, make sure your IT team knows which automations live where. Shadow automation sprawl is a real problem.
Summary
| Criterion | Winner |
|---|---|
| Microsoft 365 integration | Power Automate |
| Broadest connector library | Zapier |
| Complex data transformations | Make |
| Easiest for beginners | Zapier |
| Enterprise governance | Power Automate |
| Desktop/RPA automation | Power Automate |
| Cost at high volume | Make |
| AI workflow building | Make (for flexibility), Power Automate (for Microsoft AI) |
| Quick simple integrations | Zapier |
There is no single “best” platform. There is only the best platform for your specific context. Be honest about what you are actually automating, who will build and maintain it, and what your existing tech stack looks like. That will point you to the right choice.