Head to head · Agents & automation · updated Oct 15, 2026
Make vs Langflow
Make scores 46 to Langflow's 15 on public evidence for AI workflow automation, and they rank #1 and #3 there. Both are free to start. Numbers below are the same public signals the ranking uses, recomputed nightly — nothing here is sponsored.
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.
Langflow
Visual low-code builder for RAG and multi-agent flows, acquired by DataStax and now part of IBM.
+ Python-native components can be edited inline, so flows are not limited to built-in nodes.
− Several critical security vulnerabilities in 2025 made exposed instances risky.
Side by side
public evidence| Make | Langflow | |
|---|---|---|
| Evidence score / 100 | 46 | 15 |
| GitHub stars | closed source | 0 |
| Hacker News stories, 30d | 7 | 0 |
| Release-feed mentions, 30d | 6 | 0 |
| Last activity | 0 days ago | – |
| Pricing | Free tier · Core from $9/mo | Open source · Free self-hosted |
| Platforms | web | web, linux, mac, windows |
| Maker | Make (Celonis) | Langflow (IBM/DataStax) |
Which one?
Pick Make if
- you want the stronger public evidence (46 vs 15)
Best for power users building complex multi-step automations.
Pick Langflow if
- you want open source — self-host it, read it, fork it
- you need it on linux, mac, windows
Best for Python developers who want a visual canvas.