Zapier and Make vs Power Automate

Concept · 10 minLast checked against the live product: 13 July 2026

30-second recall from earlier lessons

You have a fixed set of documents (a project brief, notes and a policy) and you need answers you can trace back to the exact passage to quote in a meeting. Which tool fits best?An ordinary Gemini chat, because it knows more than your documents.A NotebookLM notebook, because it answers only from your sources and links each claim to the passage it came from.Deep Research, because it browses the open web thoroughly.Image generation, to make the meeting slides.

Gemini in Chrome can summarise the page you're on. You're viewing a page that shows a customer's account details. Is it fine to ask it to summarise?Yes, it's just reading a page that's already open, so nothing is shared.No, to summarise the page it works from that page's content, so pointing it at confidential data is like pasting that data into a chat.Yes, as long as you delete the summary afterwards.No, because Gemini in Chrome can never read any page.

By the end, you'll be able to…

Compare the three main automation platforms on pricing model, connector breadth and fit
Choose an automation tool from where your work already lives, not from marketing
Describe an automation in plain English for a natural-language builder

Why it matters

You learned automation through Power Automate because it fits the Microsoft world. But plenty of people don't live there, and Zapier and Make do the same job for Gmail, Sheets, Slack and thousands of other apps. Knowing how the three differ (on how they charge, what they connect to, and where each wins) means you pick on fit rather than habit, and you're never locked into one ecosystem.

Same idea, three platforms

You already know the core pattern from Power Automate: a trigger (the thing that starts it) and an action (what happens as a result), wired together so a task runs itself. Zapier and Make do exactly this job (they connect your apps and pass information between them) for people who don't live in Microsoft. They just use their own words for a saved automation: Power Automate calls it a flow, Zapier calls it a Zap, Make calls it a scenario (Make was previously Integromat). The concept transfers wholesale; only the labels and the fit change.

A plain example is identical across all three: when a new email with an attachment arrives, save the attachment to a folder. You set it up once, from a list, without writing code, and it runs on its own. What differs is which apps they reach most comfortably, how they charge you, and how they feel to build in.

How they charge: the real difference

This is where people get caught out, because the three count usage in different units, and a plan that looks cheap can run out fast on a busy automation.

Power Automate is billed through the Microsoft world. Some Microsoft 365 plans include a limited version, so if your employer already pays for Microsoft 365, you may have basic automation without buying anything. Always check before paying for something new. Standalone and premium capabilities (like certain connectors) cost extra.
Zapier counts tasks: roughly, each action an automation completes. A Zap that files ten attachments uses ten tasks. Free and lower tiers cap the monthly task count and check for new triggers less often.
Make counts operations: each individual step a scenario runs, which is a finer-grained unit than Zapier's tasks. A scenario with several steps burns several operations per run. Make's pricing is often more generous per pound for high-volume, multi-step automations, which is part of its appeal.

Because these units and allowances change regularly, never trust a figure you read once. Check the live Zapier pricing, Make pricing and Power Automate pricing pages when it matters. The durable point is the shape: Zapier per-task, Make per-operation, Power Automate bundled into Microsoft licensing.

Connector breadth and where each wins

Zapier is known for the sheer breadth of apps it connects to, commonly cited as the widest catalogue, in the thousands. If you use a niche or newer app, Zapier is most likely to support it. It leans towards a simple, step-by-step builder that beginners find approachable.
Make shows your automation as a visual map of connected nodes, which many people find clearer for anything with branches or several steps. It tends to win on complex, multi-step logic and on value for high-volume work.
Power Automate wins decisively when your work lives in Microsoft 365: Outlook, SharePoint, Teams, Excel. It connects to those in place, keeps data inside your work environment, and fits your organisation's existing security and licensing. It also reaches beyond Microsoft, but that's where it's least differentiated.

Here is the honest summary: there is no overall winner, only a best fit for a situation.

Describe a Zap to Zapier's AI builderZapier

When a new row is added to my Google Sheet 'Feedback log', post a message to the Slack channel #ops with the feedback text and who logged it. If the 'priority' column says High, also send me an email.

Why this works: All three platforms now offer natural-language builders: describe the automation in plain English and it drafts the trigger and actions. A clear trigger-and-action sentence with the exact apps named is what makes the draft usable, the same clarity a good prompt needs.

The same automation, described for MakeMake

Scenario: watch the Google Sheet 'Feedback log' for new rows. For each new row, post the feedback and logger's name to Slack #ops. Add a filter: only if priority = High, branch to also send an email to the ops lead.

Why this works: Make thinks in operations and visual nodes, so spelling out each distinct step and its condition maps cleanly onto how it builds, and helps you see how many operations each run will cost.

The Microsoft-world versionPower Automate

When a new item is added to the SharePoint list 'Feedback log', post an adaptive card to the Teams channel 'Operations' with the feedback and owner. If priority is High, also email the ops lead.

Why this works: Named against the Microsoft apps it fits, the same idea stays inside your work environment: no data leaves Microsoft 365, which is the whole reason to prefer it here.

Run the same request through the three builders and you'll feel the difference: Zapier's linear simplicity, Make's visual branching, Power Automate's native Microsoft fit. The automation is identical; the platform is the choice.

Try it now

Common mistakes

Choosing on the free tier alone. The generous-looking entry plan can run out fast once an automation is busy. Judge on the cost at your real volume, in that platform's unit.
Defaulting to what you know. Reaching for Power Automate out of habit when your work lives in Google (or vice versa) fights the tool. Pick on where the data is.
Connecting more than you need. Each platform asks for access to your accounts. Grant only what the automation uses, and read the permissions; an over-broad connection is a standing risk.
Building it and trusting it blindly. This is the over-trust trap for automation: a flow that failed quietly (because an app changed its login, or a sheet column was renamed) can stop working without telling you, and you keep assuming it ran. Check important automations periodically, and don't put a task you can't afford to have silently fail onto a set-and-forget flow without a monitoring step.

Keeping current

Pricing units, connector counts and the AI builders all move regularly across the three platforms. The durable comparison (Zapier for breadth and simplicity, Make for visual multi-step logic and value, Power Automate for the Microsoft world) holds even as the numbers shift. Check the live Zapier pricing, Make pricing and Power Automate pricing pages rather than a figure you memorised. Accurate as of 13 July 2026.