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
24th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
AI Software Development (22nd)
Nintex Process Platform
Ranking in Process Automation
10th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Management (BPM) (13th), Workload Automation (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2025, in the Process Automation category, the mindshare of Make is 1.1%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Nintex Process Platform is 2.1%, down from 2.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Process Automation Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Nintex Process Platform2.1%
Make1.1%
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

"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."
"Make's front-end interface, the modular interface that it has, drag-and-drop interface, is very easy to understand, use, and integrate."
"Provides the ability to automate SharePoint processes (building sites, lists, updating content). You can also automate document and content processes, onboarding and offboarding, and general IT and HR solutions."
"The capacity to integrate with external platforms. It's great to be able to call web services or other external services."
"The support is great; I found the support to be excellent with immediate responses whenever I open a ticket."
"NWC forms could be better. Also, the ability to build workflows that are not dependent on SharePoint is very desirable. The forms feature just isn’t as functional as the forms for SharePoint."
"I think that it adds value to any organization, mainly in terms of business applications where you need workflows."
"The workflow engine of K2 is its main strength. Its workflow engine is probably one of the best, and that's the reason why Nintex bought K2. It can clearly handle any complex process or scenario. K2 is almost low-code. It is a no-code or low-code solution. You don't have to read a whole lot of code. It is pretty much GUI based. Their support is also excellent. The biggest advantage of K2 is SmartObjects, which allow you to separate the data from the application. It is a standalone application that allows you to build a data source from different places, which a lot of other applications also do. It is called SmartObjects technology, which is pretty powerful. If I have data from different applications, such as JD and ServiceNow, I can just create a SmartObject based on a data source and use it. I have some forms that have six, seven, or eight applications in a single form with data from different places."
"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 most valuable features of this solution are that it's no code, it's very flexible, and it's easy to design."
 

Cons

"The pricing of Make at this point is through operations consumption, and it becomes really expensive in certain scenarios when iterations are involved."
"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."
"The tool can be limiting when more complex solutions are required. Improving it to offer greater functionality and less reliance on technical expertise could be beneficial."
"The management server and the admin page where you can manage processes need improvement."
"The solution does not integrate with many platforms."
"​Bring all features available from the on-premise product into the cloud version and the workflow error reporting.​"
"User interface could use some improvement. Perhaps integration with Visual Studio or SharePoint Designer would be useful."
"Because Microsoft announced that they will stop supporting Nintex Process Platform and Nintex Process Platform stopped supporting it as well, I will never recommend Nintex Process Platform Workflows or Forms in the near future, but Nintex K2 can be an option."
"Converting a document from PDF to MS Word, or vice versa, needs to be improved."
"Nintex seems to be very server intensive. It is one of the reasons that we are moving to a different product on the SharePoint 2016 platform."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of Make is approximately $20 per month for the platform."
"The annual support costs are expensive."
"Comparatively, it's expensive."
"Our maintenance costs are reduced."
"The product’s price is competitive compared to other vendors."
"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."
"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."
"Nintex is around INR 200 per license in India, which is much cheaper. Smaller organizations are always looking for cost-effective solutions, and Nintex provides local solutions with very low pricing."
"This solution is affordable and is cheaper than most alternatives on the market. We have a standard cloud license that costs about 20k per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Automation solutions are best for your needs.
879,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Educational Organization
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?
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 cl...
What is your primary use case for Make?
Some of the very simple use cases that people use Make for is AI-powered content creation. That is where we help them out with different kinds of content creation and social media posting, differen...
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: December 2025.
879,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.