Zapier and Make are the two most widely used automation platforms for small businesses in Australia. Both connect your apps and automate repetitive tasks. The question is not which one is better in the abstract. It is which one is right for how your team actually works.
This is an honest comparison based on real client implementations across NDIS providers, allied health practices, accounting firms, and trades businesses. We use both regularly at Fyni and have no affiliate relationship with either platform.
The core difference
Zapier is built for simplicity. You set up automations in a linear sequence: when this happens, do this. It is fast to configure, the interface is accessible to non-technical users, and it connects to almost everything. The trade-off is that complex logic, branching, and data transformation are harder to implement and the pricing scales quickly with task volume.
Make (formerly Integromat) is built for flexibility. Automations are designed as visual flowcharts where you can see every step, branch, and data transformation at once. It handles complex logic more elegantly and costs significantly less at scale. The trade-off is that it takes longer to learn and is harder for non-technical team members to maintain independently.
Zapier: when we recommend it
Zapier is the right choice when the people who will maintain the automations are not technical, when the workflows are straightforward and linear, and when the apps involved are well-supported. For a small NDIS provider or allied health practice where the admin team needs to be able to turn automations on and off, update triggers, or add new steps without help, Zapier is usually the better fit.
Best for
- Simple trigger-action workflows (new form submission sends an email, new booking creates a task)
- Businesses using common Australian apps (Xero, Google Workspace, Cliniko, HubSpot, Calendly)
- Teams where non-technical staff will manage automations day-to-day
- Businesses with lower task volumes (under 5,000 tasks per month)
Zapier pricing context for Australian businesses: The free plan covers 100 tasks per month across 5 Zaps. The Professional plan starts at approximately $50 AUD per month for 750 tasks. Costs scale with task volume and can become significant for high-volume workflows.
Make: when we recommend it
Make is the right choice when the workflows are complex, when data transformation between apps is involved, when cost at scale matters, or when someone technical will own the automations. For a consulting firm or accounting practice with a dedicated operations person who is comfortable with logic-based tools, Make typically delivers more for less.
Best for
- Complex multi-step workflows with branching logic (if client type is X, route to coordinator A; if Y, route to coordinator B)
- Data transformation between apps (reformatting dates, parsing names from fields, aggregating data)
- High-volume workflows where Zapier costs become prohibitive
- Businesses with a technical person on staff or a consultant managing automations
Make pricing context: The free plan covers 1,000 operations per month. The Core plan is approximately $14 AUD per month for 10,000 operations. Because Make counts operations rather than tasks, complex workflows that would be expensive on Zapier are often much more affordable on Make.
Side-by-side comparison for Australian small business
Ease of use: Zapier wins. Its linear editor and step-by-step setup is genuinely accessible to non-technical users. Make's visual canvas is powerful but has a steeper learning curve.
App coverage: Zapier wins. With over 7,000 integrations versus Make's 1,700, Zapier is more likely to support whatever tools you are already using. Both cover the major Australian business apps well (Xero, Google Workspace, Microsoft 365, Cliniko, HubSpot).
Price at scale: Make wins decisively. At equivalent automation complexity and volume, Make typically costs 50 to 70 percent less than Zapier. For businesses running high-volume lead follow-up or onboarding automation, this difference is meaningful.
Complex logic: Make wins. Routers, iterators, aggregators, and data transformation tools in Make are significantly more capable than Zapier's equivalent filters and formatters. For anything involving conditional branching or data manipulation, Make handles it more cleanly.
Support and documentation: Both are strong. Zapier's help content is more accessible to beginners. Make's community and documentation have improved significantly and cover advanced use cases well.
What we use at Fyni
For most NDIS and allied health clients, we use Zapier for the client-facing parts of the automation (intake forms, acknowledgement emails, document collection triggers) because the admin team needs to manage these day-to-day. We use Make for the back-end logic (routing, data transformation between systems, high-volume follow-up sequences) because it handles complexity better and costs less at scale.
For more complex or enterprise-grade workflow systems, we build on n8n — an open-source automation platform that gives us full control over logic, self-hosting options, and AI integration When a client needs automation deeply integrated with AI-powered steps, n8n is usually where we end up.
In most engagements two or three platforms run in parallel, each doing what it does best.
Not sure which tools are right for your business?
We map your process first and recommend only what actually fits.
Frequently asked questions
Can I use both Zapier and Make together?
Yes, and many of our clients do. The two platforms can run independent workflows in parallel or even be chained together in some cases. Using both allows you to match the right tool to each part of your automation stack.
Which is better for Xero integration in Australia?
Both have solid Xero integrations. Zapier covers more Xero triggers and actions out of the box, which makes it easier to set up standard invoicing and contact sync workflows. Make's Xero module is more flexible for custom data handling but requires more configuration time.
Do I need a consultant to set up Zapier or Make?
Simple Zapier workflows (3 to 4 steps, standard apps) can be set up by a non-technical user following documentation. More complex workflows, and most Make implementations, benefit significantly from having someone who has built these systems before. The risk with self-implementation is not getting stuck on setup — it is building something that works initially but is fragile or hard to maintain six months later.