AI Indexes
GTM AI Index
Index › GTM data and infrastructure › Automation & iPaaS › Workato vs Make
Workflow automation and iPaaS · October 2026 Edition

Workato vs Make

Eight of fourteen models named Workato first on the direct prompt; three named Make. Both were named by all fourteen models and Workato carries 56 labels and Make 55, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Workato

accepted challenger

Named in two categories this edition.

Make

accepted challenger

Named in seven categories this edition.

First-choice share28%21%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate14%11%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#2A position in a field of 11; printed, not drawn.
Labels5655A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Workato reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Workato vs Celigo · Workato vs n8n · Workato vs Boomi

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the workflow automation and ipaas page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
WorkatoFirst choices, of fourteen modelsMake
Direct832 against Workato
Paraphrase401 against Make
Comparative11
Budget-constrained091 against Workato
Scale-constrained40
Negative005 against Workato · 5 against Make
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.

Across every category in the October 2026 Edition, Workato and Make were named in the same answer eighty-three times, of the 162 answers naming Workato and the 172 naming Make. In those answers Make took the first choice seventeen times and Workato twenty-three.

Every model, every framing

The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Workato and Make stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
Claude Haiku 4.5
GPT-5.4 mini
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Perplexity Sonar
Grok 4.20
Mistral Small
DeepSeek V4 Flash
Llama 4 Maverick
Qwen 3.7 Flash
Kimi K2
GLM 4.7 FlashX
MiniMax M2.5
GPT-6 Luna
Muse Glimmer 30B
Workato Make first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Workato on the left and Make on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Workato and Make stood in it.

Workato first, Make an alternative

8 of 14 modelsMake was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
GPT-5.4 miniWorkato alternatives: Boomi, Microsoft Power Automate, MuleSoft Anypoint Platform, Zapier
Perplexity SonarWorkato alternatives: HubSpot Operations Hub, Make, Zapier
Grok 4.20Workato alternatives: Boomi, Celigo, Make, Tray.ai, Zapier
Mistral SmallWorkato alternatives: HubSpot Marketing Hub, Jitterbit Harmony, Microsoft Power Automate
DeepSeek V4 FlashCeligo, Workato alternatives: Make, Microsoft Power Automate
Qwen 3.7 FlashWorkato alternatives: Jitterbit Harmony, Make, Microsoft Power Automate
GPT-6 LunaWorkato alternatives: Boomi, Make, Microsoft Power Automate
Muse Glimmer 30BCeligo integrator.io, Workato

Make first, Workato an alternative

3 of 14 modelsWorkato was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Kimi K2Make alternatives: Microsoft Power Automate, Zapier
GLM 4.7 FlashXMake alternatives: Zapier, n8n
MiniMax M2.5Make, Zapier alternatives: Workato

Neither was the first choice, one was named

1 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Gemini 3.5 FlashCeligo alternatives: Make, Tray.ai, Workato, Zapier

Neither was named

2 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Claude Haiku 4.5no first choice
Llama 4 MaverickAdRoll ABM alternatives: Boomi, Celigo's integrator.io

Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.

By buyer segment

The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Make leads by forty-four points.
Make44%#1 of 9
Workato0%#9 of 9
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
The order flips: Workato leads at mid-market.
Workato28%#1 of 11
Make21%#2 of 11
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Workato leads by forty-two points.
Workato42%#1 of 14
Make0%#14 of 14
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Workato

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of seven in this category shown.

“Caution points are cost and complexity... Overkill for small teams; licensing and implementation costs can be high relative to simpler needs.” Muse Glimmer 30B · negative prompt · soft negative
“often enterprise-first and can require significant IT involvement ... may be overkill for simple team automation” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“Powerful but expensive (~$2,500+/month...). Better for enterprises with dedicated integration budgets.” Kimi K2 · direct prompt · soft negative
“For most mid-market B2B companies, Workato is the best overall choice due to its scalability, depth, and B2B-focused integrations.” Mistral Small · direct prompt · first choice
“Workato is most often named as the overall "best for mid-market and enterprise IT teams running governed integrations"” Muse Glimmer 30B · direct prompt · first choice
“Workato is the safest and most flexible first choice if you want business teams to automate across apps” DeepSeek V4 Flash · direct prompt · first choice

What the models said about Make

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of six in this category shown.

“Make.com given reliability decline and support issues” Kimi K2 · negative prompt · hard negative
“Examples: Complex setups on Make (formerly Integromator) or Retool ... they encourage bad architecture if not strictly governed.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“platforms like Make or n8n can be powerful, but they become harder to maintain as flows grow more branched” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“For most budget-conscious companies, Make offers the best balance of affordability, capability, and ease of use” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · first choice
“For most mid-market B2B companies, Make offers the best balance of capability, visual ease-of-use, and cost.” Kimi K2 · direct prompt · first choice
“Best Overall for Non-Developers: Make.com ... Make is the industry-standard budget choice.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
Also compared

Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.