Head to head · Agents & automation · updated Oct 26, 2026
Dify vs Make
Dify scores 90 to Make's 76 on public evidence for AI workflow automation, and they rank #2 and #4 there. Both are free to start. Numbers below are the same public signals the ranking uses, recomputed nightly — nothing here is sponsored.
Dify
Open-source LLMOps platform with a visual builder for agents, RAG pipelines, and workflows.
+ Covers prompt management, knowledge bases, and deployable APIs in one self-hostable app.
− Complex workflows get unwieldy in the visual canvas and version control is weak.
Make
Visual automation platform with branching scenarios, AI agents, and detailed data mapping.
+ Visual scenario canvas handles complex branching and iteration better than Zapier.
− Operations-based billing and error handling confuse newcomers.
Side by side
public evidence| Dify | Make | |
|---|---|---|
| Evidence score / 100 | 90 | 76 |
| GitHub stars | 159,624 | closed source |
| Hacker News stories, 30d | 0 | 14 |
| Release-feed mentions, 30d | 0 | 247 |
| Last activity | 0 days ago | 0 days ago |
| Pricing | Open source · Self-host free; Cloud Professional $59/mo | Free tier · Core from $9/mo |
| Platforms | web, linux | web |
| Maker | LangGenius | Make (Celonis) |
Which one?
Pick Dify if
- you want the stronger public evidence (90 vs 76)
- you want open source — self-host it, read it, fork it
- you need it on linux
- a bigger GitHub community matters (159,624 vs 0 stars)
Best for teams shipping LLM apps without much code.
Pick Make if
Visual scenario canvas handles complex branching and iteration better than Zapier.
Best for power users building complex multi-step automations.