Make Reviews & Product Details

Make stands out for its visual, no-code approach to automation. Creating complex, multi-step workflows feels genuinely accessible even without a development background, and the drag-and-drop interface keeps the logic easy to understand and maintain over time. It connects reliably with most tools in our stack and supports conditional logic, filters, and data transformation in a way that would otherwise require custom development. Overall, it’s a real productivity lever for operations teams. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The learning curve for the more advanced features (error handling, iterators, aggregators) can feel steep at first. The documentation is generally adequate, but it sometimes lacks concrete examples for edge cases. Still, these are minor friction points once you get through the initial setup and start working with it more regularly. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What I like most about Make is the flexibility to integrate the tools our team already uses. We connected Google Sheets, automated Gmail notifications, and synchronized information with Asana, which is our main project management platform.

It is not always simple at the beginning and requires some time to understand the logic of scenarios, but once the workflow is set up it becomes a very powerful system. It allows us to automate communication between teams and keep project data updated automatically instead of moving information manually. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

One challenge with Make is the learning curve when you first start building scenarios. It can take some time to understand how the logic works between modules and how data flows through the system.

Sometimes even a small configuration detail can break the scenario, and it may take time to find the exact issue. Because of that, you need to be careful when setting up workflows and testing them.

However, once you understand how the platform works, it becomes a very powerful tool for automation. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Make (formerly Integromat) has been a game-changer for automating workflows at ScribaVerse, my Italian digital publishing platform. As founder, I use Make to connect our Supabase database, Telegram notifications, and content management pipelines. The visual, node-based editor makes it incredibly easy to build complex multi-step automations without writing code. I especially appreciate the wide range of native integrations and the ability to handle data transformations directly within scenarios. The execution logs and error handling features have saved us hours of debugging time. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The main downside of Make is its pricing model. At ScribaVerse, as our automation usage grew, the cost per operation started to add up. Once you exceed the free tier (1,000 operations/month), costs escalate quickly — especially for scenarios that run frequently or process large volumes of data. Compared to self-hosted alternatives like n8n, Make becomes expensive at scale. It would be great to see more generous free tier limits or a flat-rate pricing option for small businesses and indie publishers. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I like the many integrations and possibilities with Make, especially that I can now do complex things with an if-else branching. The graphical editor is also a plus, as it allows me to easily drag elements in and design complex processes visually. I particularly like the wide selection of over 3000 integrations. It is really helpful that the integrations are native, so I can use them without complicated API documentation or codes. I can simply select what I want, and Make executes it. This makes everything very simple and effective. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

It took forever for this EFLs branch, so it could have been partly a product 3 years ago, why we only recently managed it is a mystery to me. So you could be faster in the development of new modules and integrations. Yes, and in general, of course, there could also be more deep integration involved. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What I like most about Make.com is the visual workflow builder. It makes automation much easier to understand because you can clearly see how data moves between apps, filters, routers, and other logic steps as the workflow runs. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The main downside is that as workflows become more advanced, they can be harder to maintain if you don’t structure them well from the start. Make is powerful, but that also means beginners may need some time to understand and manage scenarios properly. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I like Make's integration ability, which takes a tedious task and performs it smoothly. It really made folder creation and relabeling files seamless when we were using Coda. The automation of mundane tasks like labeling and folder creation was a significant time-saver. Even though I didn't personally do the setup, once it was fully built out, it was very valuable to our process. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Sometimes it glitched and it was a little complicated to work out the problem and get it working again. I think AI could assist with solving the glitching aspect, maybe a step by step outworking solutions with a human led problem solving. The setup did take a bit of time to build it all out. It was quite complex. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Ease of use and simplicity are great factors. The user interface is friendly, and there are a wide variety of integrations—particularly for the core functionalities I need. I would say that the troubleshooting is pretty decent as well. You can make this product as technical or un-technical as you'd like. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The error reporting is a bit technical... You have to either look up the issues or learn how to read the technical output.

Some credit usage is a little ambiguous (particularly for AI modules). Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I like the flexibility of the tool. The initial setup of Make was really simple and straightforward. It allows you to create scenarios quickly, integrating different systems and automating tasks without complications. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

One aspect that could be improved is the ability to set a delay between one run execution and the next, in order to better manage the API limits of the services. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I find Make incredibly valuable for solving integration problems, as it seamlessly integrates with a wide array of web applications and SaaS tools, including Google Workspace, Microsoft Workspace, Airtable, Monday, Notion, ClickUp, Google Sheets, Google Slides, and many others. The setup process was very straightforward with great sign-in and sign-up methods, allowing me to start using it immediately. The addition of the Make code tool has been really helpful, and I appreciate the inbuilt functions for arrays, maps, and text, which are very useful in my work. Make's easy-to-use interface and extensive library of over 3,000 integrations are standout features that would definitely make me repurchase it. Overall, I rate Make a perfect 10 out of 10 and would highly recommend it to anyone looking for an efficient and versatile integration solution. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I dislike that there cannot be multiple triggers in one scenario. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

This is a fantastic platform that offers a wide range of features for automating your business processes. Its extensive capabilities make setting up automation straightforward and effective. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

It may not be as straightforward to use as advertised if you have no coding experience, but they compensate for this by providing plenty of learning resources, which is quite helpful. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.