Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Make vs Nintex Process Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 11, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Make
Ranking in Process Automation
26th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
AI Software Development (20th)
Nintex Process Platform
Ranking in Process Automation
22nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Management (BPM) (22nd), Workload Automation (21st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Process Automation category, the mindshare of Make is 1.2%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Nintex Process Platform is 2.0%, down from 2.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Process Automation Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Nintex Process Platform2.0%
Make1.2%
Other96.8%
Process Automation
 

Featured Reviews

FA
Chief Executive Officer at Ashtex Solutions
Flexibility and efficiency accelerate business processes
Make needs to put some focus on or clarify the security aspect in its documentation or website. When creating automation through these modules between two different applications, there should be clarity about whether the data is secure while passing through these automations or integrations created within Make. The pricing of Make at this point is through operations consumption, and it becomes really expensive in certain scenarios when iterations are involved. The operation consumption is too high and sometimes becomes a burden on the client. Make needs to review its pricing strategy since they have tough competition from n8n. Make sometimes has issues with user logins and data saving when simultaneously working on two different PCs or when two developers are working on something or some blueprint. It can lose saved data from one interface to the other, and when logging on with the same user on another workstation, it occasionally misbehaves. We were unaware that Make had its own local implementation module. They need to advertise this feature more effectively as we are developing many projects in Make and working with various clients.
Hafiz Muhammad Usama - PeerSpot reviewer
Manager Mobility & Digitalization at Fatima group
Have experienced challenges integrating with other systems but have benefited from improved process automation
There are multiple areas that need improvement. Nintex Process Platform needs integration with other platforms such as Salesforce and other CRM platforms. There should be actions available so we can directly integrate with these systems. Additionally, there is a gap in mathematical actions and logical actions. We need to parse data, and if we receive data in JSON, there is no action available in Nintex Process Platform to parse the data and extract data from that JSON string. Such actions and logical actions must be available in Nintex Process Platform to increase its capability. For us, Nintex Process Platform is configurable with SQL Server, but there is no configuration option available with Oracle. We also use Oracle in multiple processes, but we have found no way to directly configure Nintex Process Platform with Oracle. We have to use SQL Server in between. We have to create a link server within SQL Server as a bypass to retrieve or post data into Oracle. There were multiple improvement points available.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Make's front-end interface, the modular interface that it has, drag-and-drop interface, is very easy to understand, use, and integrate."
"Make has a very good return on investment because although we pay that amount, we secure clients and the client life cycle is kept intact."
"The most valuable features of Make are the additional options when compared to other similar solutions. For example, with Google my business, you can only do certain things with Zapier, whereas with Make, you can do a little bit more."
"Make's front-end interface, the modular interface that it has, drag-and-drop interface, is very easy to understand, use, and integrate."
"The solution has helped us to automate our business processes, our approval systems, and automation for quickly developing on SharePoint on-prem and SharePoint online."
"The setup is easy."
"The technical support is very good."
"It has helped us a lot, especially during the initial phase of a project where most of the things are done on paper."
"It's easy to learn. However, there is very little content available for the Nintex also, but they are providing their own documentation and all. So, it's easy to learn also."
"Our solutions using Nintex has been most successful in automating HR processes because it allows you to easily and rapidly build solutions that conform to the unique business processes for each entity."
"This tool is really helpful in reducing a lot of manual work. Its drag and drop components help to create a workflow faster than SharePoint Workflow Designer."
"It creates workflows to handle business processes. It allows us to route approvals to users without human intervention."
 

Cons

"The pricing of Make at this point is through operations consumption, and it becomes really expensive in certain scenarios when iterations are involved."
"One thing is that the platform is really slow when loading. It takes about three minutes to get to the page of an automation and start changing things."
"Make could improve the ease of use, it can be more complicated than other solutions. There are a lot of elements that are more technical than in other solutions."
"The pricing of Make at this point is through operations consumption, and it becomes really expensive in certain scenarios when iterations are involved."
"I think it was lacking a little bit in its multiple in-house processes and other processes. So there is a little bit of a gap in collaboration."
"Heavy, cumbersome and inflexible."
"Currently, a notable challenge lies in the alignment of user experiences across the eight or nine applications within the suite. Transitioning between applications can be somewhat cumbersome due to varying user interfaces. However, the provider is actively addressing this concern by consistently rolling out updates every four to five months, aimed at harmonizing and streamlining the interfaces. This ongoing effort is expected to enhance the user experience over time. In terms of functionality and features, the platform stands out, offering flexibility with the option for both on-premises and cloud deployment. This flexibility extends to the RPA tool, providing clients with choices tailored to their preferences. An advantage lies in the shared security and data infrastructure across the toolset, facilitating smooth data transfer between applications. This contrasts with experiences with Oracle, where data transfer may involve complexities such as the need for intermediary file formats like TXL or SCZ."
"The solution is a bit too expensive. It could be cheaper."
"The license pricing is too high currently for Nintex Workflow."
"The solution does not integrate with many platforms."
"Converting a document from PDF to MS Word, or vice versa, needs to be improved."
"Hawkeye is emerging as a reporting solution, but as a V1 product it’s not very useful yet."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of Make is approximately $20 per month for the platform."
"It's more suited for enterprise level, not for small or medium-sized businesses (SMBs)."
"Our maintenance costs are reduced."
"Certainly. Notably, in terms of cost, this solution presents a substantial advantage, being approximately forty percent more economical compared to Oracle. It offers flexibility with two deployment options, catering to both cloud and on-premises preferences. Moreover, within each deployment option, there are two variations available. For organizations with limited IT resources and relying on citizen developers—individuals from the business side comfortable with technology—the platform allows for a more hands-on approach. These users can independently implement solutions without extensive coding or custom development. In contrast, the KQ solution at Symantec is adept at addressing the needs of sectors like banking, where extensive custom development is required for seamless integration with existing applications, websites, and ensuring robust security measures."
"For the initial hundred users, the cost is $21,000 per year, which I find too high."
"Nintex products are expensive, but valuable. Licensing in on-premise was historically based on a perpetual model, where you’d license per Web front-end. However, they are switching exclusively to a consumption (subscription) model, where you purchase the number of workflows you think you’ll use in your environment, and can scale up from there."
"The product’s price is competitive compared to other vendors."
"Nintex Workflow is more expensive than Microsoft's native products, but it is still considered moderately priced when compared to higher-end products such as K2."
"Offering a licensing model that allows for multiple small workflows would be a huge improvement to an already great platform."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Automation solutions are best for your needs.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Marketing Services Firm
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise25
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Make?
I find the pricing, setup costs, and licensing costs of Make to be reasonable.
What needs improvement with Make?
One thing is that the platform is really slow when loading. It takes about three minutes to get to the page of an automation and start changing things. That is really slow and frustrating. Another ...
What is your primary use case for Make?
In our current company, we have a funnel workflow for the people who sign up. We do certain things such as creating database entries, creating our CRM entries, and then updating the information. If...
What do you like most about K2?
The latest version of Nintex has many features. We have a clear roadmap and the necessary application to integrate it into our platform.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for K2?
Nintex Process Platform is expensive. Prices relate to both features and the professional services necessary due to our lack of an implementation team.
What needs improvement with K2?
There are multiple areas that need improvement. Nintex Process Platform needs integration with other platforms such as Salesforce and other CRM platforms. There should be actions available so we ca...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Integromat
K2 blackpearl, K2 Five, Nintex Workflow
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Buan Consulting, Armadia
SEA Corp, Omnicom Group, Verizon, STIHL
Find out what your peers are saying about Make vs. Nintex Process Platform and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.