Beehive vs n8n
| Tagline | Self-hosted event and agent automation system inspired by IFTTT | Fair-code workflow automation with 400+ integrations and native AI nodes |
| Category | Automation & iPaaS | Automation & iPaaS |
| Replaces | Zapier, Make | Zapier, Make, Workato |
| GitHub stars | 6.3k | 194k |
| Language | Go | TypeScript |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | Sustainable Use License |
| Self-host difficulty | 2/5 Easy | 2/5 Easy |
| Deploy options | Docker Manual | One-Click Docker Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | 1 month ago | 5 days ago |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
Beehive
- Much smaller connector library than Zapier or Make; many popular SaaS integrations are missing
- Web UI is basic with minimal workflow visualization and no scheduling UI
- Project maintenance has slowed; some connector implementations may be stale
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
Both are a similar lift to self-host; choose n8n for the larger community and ecosystem. n8n has seen more recent development. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.