AI Indexes
IT AI Index
Index › Data platform › Orchestration › Make vs Workato
Workflow orchestration · October 2026 Edition

Make vs Workato

Six of fourteen models named Make first on the direct prompt; three named Workato. Make was named by twelve of the fourteen models and Workato by eleven and Make carries 27 labels and Workato 18, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Make

criticized challenger

Named in five categories this edition.

Workato

criticized challenger

Named in four categories this edition.

First-choice share12%5%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate26%33%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#5#6A position in a field of 14; printed, not drawn.
Labels2718A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Make reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.n8n was named alongside these two in eight of the fourteen direct answers. Prefect vs Make · Prefect vs Workato · Apache Airflow vs Make

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the workflow orchestration page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
MakeFirst choices, of fourteen modelsWorkato
Direct631 against Make · 3 against Workato
Paraphrase00
Comparative00
Budget-constrained101 against Make
Scale-constrained001 against Workato
Negative005 against Make · 2 against Workato
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.

Across every category in the October 2026 Edition, Make and Workato were named in the same answer thirty-three times, of the 118 answers naming Make and the 66 naming Workato. In those answers Workato took the first choice three times and Make eleven.

Every model, every framing

The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Make and Workato stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
Claude Haiku 4.5
GPT-5.4 mini
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Perplexity Sonar
Grok 4.1 Fast
Mistral Small
DeepSeek V4 Flash
Llama 4 Maverick
Qwen 3.7 Flash
Kimi K2
GLM 4.7 FlashX
MiniMax M2.5
GPT-6 Luna
Muse Glimmer 30B
Make Workato first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Make on the left and Workato on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Make and Workato stood in it.

Make first, Workato an alternative

6 of 14 modelsWorkato was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Claude Haiku 4.5Make, Zapier alternatives: Prefect, n8n
Gemini 3.5 FlashMake, Prefect alternatives: Astronomer Astro, Dagster, Workato, n8n
Grok 4.1 FastMake, Zapier alternatives: Apache Airflow, Microsoft Power Automate, Prefect, Tray.io, n8n
Qwen 3.7 FlashMake alternatives: Kissflow, Microsoft Power Automate, Native HubSpot Workflows, Nintex
Kimi K2Make alternatives: Tray.io, Workato, n8n
GLM 4.7 FlashXMake alternatives: Zapier, n8n

Workato first, Make an alternative

3 of 14 modelsMake was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Perplexity SonarWorkato alternatives: HubSpot workflows, Make, SnapLogic, Zapier, n8n
GPT-6 LunaWorkato alternatives: Make, Prefect, Temporal, n8n
Muse Glimmer 30BWorkato alternatives: Make, Microsoft Power Automate, ServiceNow Workflow, Zapier

Neither was named

5 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
GPT-5.4 miniPrefect alternatives: Apache Airflow, Dagster, Temporal
Mistral SmallHubSpot Marketing Hub alternatives: Kissflow, Microsoft Power Automate, Revo, Tray.io
DeepSeek V4 Flashn8n alternatives: Microsoft Power Automate, Zapier
Llama 4 MaverickKissflow alternatives: HubSpot Marketing Hub, Microsoft Power Automate
MiniMax M2.5Microsoft Power Automate, Tray.io alternatives: Zapier

Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.

By buyer segment

The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Make leads by twenty-four points.
Make24%#1 of 12
Workato0%#12 of 12
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Make leads by seven points.
Make12%#5 of 14
Workato5%#6 of 14
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
The order flips: Workato leads at enterprise.
Workato6%#6 of 16
Make0%#– of 16
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Make

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of six in this category shown.

“Avoid No-Code (Zapier/Make) for data infrastructure, ETL, and backend logic.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · hard negative
“If your budget is bleeding from expensive tools like Zapier or Make” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“Good visual builder at a budget price ($9/mo) — but workflows get messy at scale.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · direct prompt · soft negative
“Make is usually the best overall choice if you want a low-cost, user-friendly automation platform with a generous free tier” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · first choice
“Make typically offers the best balance of features, pricing, and ease of use for mid-market B2B companies” GLM 4.7 FlashX · direct prompt · first choice
“Make.com is the most cost-effective and powerful engine for a mid-market B2B budget” Gemini 3.5 Flash · direct prompt · first choice

What the models said about Workato

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.

“Workato specifically gets complaints about overwhelming complexity/pricing, steep onboarding, data limits” Grok 4.1 Fast · negative prompt · soft negative
“typically starts around $15,000+/year, which can be overkill for many mid-market budgets” DeepSeek V4 Flash · direct prompt · soft negative
“Considerations: Higher cost, requires dedicated integration engineers” GLM 4.7 FlashX · direct prompt · soft negative
“I'd put Workato on the shortlist first for a mid-market B2B company that needs reliable integrations plus governance” GPT-6 Luna · direct prompt · first choice
“Choose Workato when you need governed, auditable orchestration across CRM, marketing automation, RevOps and ERP” Muse Glimmer 30B · direct prompt · first choice
“the strongest default choice is usually Workato” Perplexity Sonar · direct prompt · first choice
Also compared

Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.