Activepieces vs n8n
| Tagline | MIT-licensed no-code automation and AI agents builder, an open Zapier alternative | Fair-code workflow automation with 400+ integrations and native AI nodes |
| Category | Automation & iPaaS | Automation & iPaaS |
| Replaces | Zapier, Make, Tray.io | Zapier, Make, Workato |
| GitHub stars | 24k | 204k |
| Language | TypeScript | TypeScript |
| License | MIT | Sustainable Use License |
| Self-host difficulty | 3/5 Moderate | 2/5 Easy |
| Deploy options | Docker Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual | One-Click Docker Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | yesterday | yesterday |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
Activepieces
- Smaller connector catalog than Zapier/Make; many niche apps still missing.
- Enterprise features (SSO, audit logs, projects/RBAC, embedding) require the paid edition.
- Self-hosting needs Postgres and Redis, so it is not a single-container setup.
- Younger ecosystem means fewer pre-built templates and community examples.
n8n
- Source-available (Sustainable Use License), not true OSI open source; some enterprise features (SSO, log streaming, external secrets) are gated behind paid tiers.
- Self-hosted instances require you to manage your own queue/Redis and Postgres for scaling and reliability.
- Far fewer pre-built app connectors than Zapier's 6,000+ catalog.
- Concurrency and execution throughput on the free self-hosted tier require manual queue-mode tuning.
Bottom line
Choose n8n if you want the lower-effort setup; choose n8n for the larger community and ecosystem. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.
Activepieces
MIT-licensed no-code automation and AI agents builder, an open Zapier alternative