Skip to content

Make vs Trigger.dev

A side-by-side comparison of Make and Trigger.dev, drawn from Ignaite's continuously-verified listings.

Compared from listings verified as of

Make

Automation

Visual-canvas automation. The Integromat folks went big on AI nodes.

View Make

Trigger.dev

Orchestration

Build and deploy durable AI agents and background workflows in TypeScript.

View Trigger.dev

At a glance

Feature comparison of Make and Trigger.dev
AttributeMakeTrigger.dev
Category (differs)AutomationOrchestration
PricingFREEMIUMFREEMIUM
License (differs)ProprietaryOpen core
Deployment (differs)CloudHybrid
Platforms (differs)Web, APIWeb, CLI, API
Model supportModel-agnosticModel-agnostic
Vendor (differs)MakeTrigger.dev

The honest brief

Make

Visual-canvas builder that handles branching, loops, and conditional routing Zapier's linear steps struggle with.

  • Expressive visual flow editor
  • 2,500+ native integrations
  • Strong branching and routing
  • Cheaper per-operation than Zapier
  • Steeper curve than Zapier
  • Complex scenarios get hard to debug
  • Fewer integrations than Zapier
  • Cloud-only (no self-host)

Trigger.dev

Durable, long-running workflows as plain TypeScript functions, without learning a separate DSL or workflow engine like Temporal.

  • Apache-2.0 open source
  • Self-host or managed cloud
  • No task timeouts
  • Automatic retries + queues
  • Built-in run observability
  • TypeScript/JavaScript only
  • Self-hosting needs Postgres + Redis ops
  • Younger ecosystem than Temporal