Open source alternatives to Make

What Make does

Make builds automations called scenarios on a visual canvas. Each scenario is a chain of modules: a trigger that watches an app or receives a webhook, then actions, tools and AI steps that process each piece of data, which Make calls a bundle. Scenarios run on a schedule (every 15 minutes by default), on demand through the API, or immediately for triggers that support it. Make adds data stores, error handlers with retries, AI agents and an MCP server, and its pricing page lists more than 3,000 native apps. The make.com footer names Celonis, Inc. as the company behind it.

Why people look for an alternative

• Usage-based billing. Every module run is an operation. Since August 27, 2025, Make bills in credits instead of operations, converting one to one for standard modules, while some AI and advanced apps use a variable number of credits per run. Busy scenarios that process many bundles use up credits quickly.
• Plan-dependent limits. How often scenarios can run and how many days of scenario history are kept both depend on the plan.
• Data residency has exceptions. Organizations can pick US or EU data zones, but Make’s help center states that some AI features always process requests in the US. Using your own AI provider connection removes Make’s EU guarantee.
• Integrations depend on the vendor. Make removed its X (Twitter) app after changes to X’s API policy and pricing, and existing scenarios ran only until May 30, 2025. With an open source tool you can maintain an integration yourself.
• Lock-in. Scenarios exist only in Make’s format and have to be rebuilt elsewhere.

What to compare in an alternative

1. The visual builder. Branching, loops, error handling and data mapping, and whether the people who build in Make today could use it.
2. Integration coverage. Triggers and actions for your apps, plus HTTP and code steps for the gaps.
3. Scheduling and instant triggers. How often polling runs and whether webhooks start runs immediately.
4. Run history and data location. How long execution logs are kept and where they are stored.
5. Cost at your volume. A self-hosted server instead of per-operation billing, including the time spent maintaining it.

Which one to choose

Activepieces is the best general replacement. Its flow builder supports branches, loops, retries, code steps, human approvals and built-in tables, its core is MIT-licensed, and it can be self-hosted or used as a hosted service. Sim offers a visual canvas with hundreds of integrations and triggers and puts AI agents at the center. It is a good fit if your Make scenarios increasingly rely on AI modules, but it needs more server resources. If your scenarios mostly move data between databases, files and cloud services on a schedule, Kestra or Windmill may suit engineers better. See the workflow automation guide for all the options.