# Zapier vs Make (Integromat) for a non-technical team that wants to build workflow automation bots without involving IT or writing custom code?

<p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">For a non-technical team that wants to build automations without IT or code, it usually comes down to Zapier vs Make. Short version: Zapier is the easier on-ramp with the bigger library, and Make is the more visual and cheaper builder with a slightly steeper learning curve.</p><ul>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/zapier/reviews"><strong>Zapier</strong></a> (4.5 stars, 2,083 reviews): The fastest start for non-technical users, with simple trigger-action steps, a first automation in minutes, and the largest app library so almost anything connects. The trade-off is pricing that rises as your task volume grows.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/integromat-by-celonis-make/reviews"><strong>Make</strong></a> (4.6 stars, 332 reviews): A visual, drag-and-drop canvas several reviewers find more intuitive than Zapier for seeing how a workflow connects, and noticeably cheaper at volume. It gets steeper once scenarios grow complex, with branching and data mapping.</li>
</ul><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">Where I'd land: for the least friction and the widest app coverage, start on Zapier. If a clear visual view and lower cost matter more, and you'll invest a little time learning, Make is the stronger pick.</p><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">Which did your non-technical team stick with, and what tipped the decision?</p>

##### Post Metadata
- Posted at: 27 days ago
- Author title: SEO Content Writer
- Net upvotes: 1


## Comments
### Comment 1

&lt;p&gt;Teams that prioritized getting started fast tended to stick with the simpler trigger-action tool, while those that cared more about visual clarity and lower cost at volume gravitated toward the more flexible builder. The decision usually came down to which one the team could maintain confidently without calling in help six months later.&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 15 days ago





## Related discussions
- [How well does Trello scale into a larger team?](https://www.g2.com/discussions/1-how-well-does-trello-scale-into-a-larger-team)
  - Posted at: about 13 years ago
  - Comments: 6
- [Can we please add a new section](https://www.g2.com/discussions/2-can-we-please-add-a-new-section)
  - Posted at: about 13 years ago
  - Comments: 0
- [Quantifiable benefits from implementing your CRM](https://www.g2.com/discussions/quantifiable-benefits-from-implementing-your-crm)
  - Posted at: about 13 years ago
  - Comments: 4