GILD verdict
If your processes run on Microsoft 365 and Dataverse or need desktop automation, choose Power Automate.
It runs inside the tenant your IT team already governs. Choose Make when the work crosses many non-Microsoft apps and business teams build it, since credits with unlimited users can cost less than licensing every builder. Count users, flows, and monthly module runs before comparing.
Power Automate wins whenever the work fits the cloud flows with standard connectors that Microsoft 365 licenses already include. Beyond them, Microsoft licenses it per user or per flow, with desktop flows for Windows applications. Make bills credits per module run, with unlimited users, on its own cloud in US or EU data zones. Both build multi-step automations and add AI agents.
Choosing between Make and Power Automate
Choose Make if
- Your processes cross many non-Microsoft SaaS apps: Make lists 3,500+ apps, plus HTTP modules and custom apps.
- Business teams outside IT will build the automations, and you want to pay for usage with every builder included, since every Make plan has unlimited users.
- You want assistants such as Claude and ChatGPT to run your automations as tools through the Make MCP server.
Choose Power Automate if
- Your processes live in Microsoft 365, Dynamics 365, and Dataverse, and the people who need flows already hold licenses that include them.
- You need to automate Windows desktop or legacy applications through the user interface.
- IT wants automations governed in the Microsoft tenant, with data policies on connectors and solutions that move flows between environments.
Side by side
| Dimension | Make | Power Automate |
|---|---|---|
| Billing unit | Credits: 1 credit per module operation for apps without AI, once per bundle the module processes, and 1 per trigger check. Routers and error handlers use none, and Make's AI Provider adds credits by input and output tokens | Per user with Premium, or per flow or machine with Process; actions count as Power Platform requests against daily limits per license |
| Entry pricesList prices in US dollars. | Free: 1,000 credits a month and 2 active scenarios. For US buyers, Core, Pro, and Teams start at 10,000 credits a month for US$12, US$21, and US$38 billed annually, or US$16, US$28, and US$51 billed monthly; buyers in some other countries, such as the UK and Germany, see US$11, US$20, and US$36 annually | Premium US$15 per user per month, Process US$150 per bot per month, and Hosted Process US$215 per bot per month, all paid yearly. The Free license builds cloud flows with standard connectors |
| Users | Unlimited users on every plan; teams and team roles from the Teams plan | Licensed per user, or per flow with a Process license; Microsoft 365, Dynamics 365, and Power Platform licenses include a limited set of Power Automate capabilities |
| Volume limits | The plan's credits; scenarios stop when credits run out unless extra credits are bought or auto-purchased at 25% more | 40,000 Power Platform requests per user per 24 hours on paid Power Platform licenses and 6,000 on Microsoft 365 licenses; a Process license gives its flow 250,000 a day |
| Where it runs | Make's hosted cloud on AWS in US or EU data zones; Enterprise in a separate AWS environment, with an on-premise agent for local systems | Microsoft's cloud; the on-premises data gateway connects cloud flows to on-premises data sources |
| Desktop and legacy apps | No desktop automation; on Enterprise the on-premise agent reaches local applications and databases | Desktop flows automate Windows and legacy applications through the user interface, attended under Premium and unattended under Process |
| Governance | Teams and team roles from the Teams plan; audit logs kept 12 months, custom roles, SSO, and 2FA enforcement on Enterprise | Data policies in the Power Platform admin center control which connectors flows may use; solution-aware flows move between environments |
| Run history | Execution logs kept 30 days on Core, Pro, and Teams and 60 on Enterprise; saved scenario versions kept 60 days | Run history kept 30 days; a single run can last up to 30 days |
| AI agents | Make AI Agent (New), in open beta since February 2, 2026, with modules, scenarios, MCP tools, and sub-agents as tools; the Make MCP server serves outside assistants | Agent flows in Copilot Studio run deterministic paths and consume Copilot Studio capacity for each action |
What practitioners report, side by side
Each product's figures come from its own practitioners, for the group you pick.
Overall signal
All users rate Make 0, 14 points above Power Automate at −14. Most of the gap is in complaints, with 34 of Power Automate's 88 sources negative against 14 of Make's 49.
The score counts the authors from all users that take a side, one vote each with their latest view, and is how far positive votes lead negative ones, per 100 votes, so Make's 0 rests on votes split 14 positive, 20 mixed and 14 negative and Power Automate's −14 on 22, 31 and 34.
A lead of a fifth of the votes reads positive and a lead of half strong positive, with the same lines below zero. The dots show each source, positive, mixed, negative. Run a pilot on one live workflow to measure failed runs and the time spent fixing them.
Footprint on the AI Knowledge Work stack
They differ on one of 7 layers. On Data analysis, Make touches it and Power Automate supports it. Coverage is each product's placement on this stack, as its product page shows it. Core is a job the product owns; Supports and Touches are jobs it helps with. Coverage says nothing about how well a product does them.
| Layer | Make | Power Automate |
|---|---|---|
| Analyze | ||
| Data analysis | Touches | Supports |
The 6 layers where they match
| Layer | Make | Power Automate |
|---|---|---|
| Assist | ||
| AI assistant | Touches | Touches |
| Find | ||
| Web research | Touches | Touches |
| Enterprise search | Touches | Touches |
| Create | ||
| Documents | Touches | Touches |
| Meeting notes | Touches | Touches |
| Automate | ||
| Automation | Core | Core |
What practitioners praise
Among all users, Power Automate alone has five praise themes that reach 5 sources from 3 authors. Microsoft 365 Integration and Copilot & AI Steps lead, at 18 of 23 and 11 of 22. Make alone has three praise themes that reach 5 sources from 3 authors. Logic without code and App coverage lead, at 8 of 11 and 3 of 6.
| Praised for | Make | Power Automate |
|---|---|---|
| Logic without code | 8 of 11 | Not a theme in its sources |
| App coverage | 3 of 6 | Not a theme in its sources |
| AI agents & MCP | 1 of 5 | Not a theme in its sources |
| Microsoft 365 Integration | Not a theme in its sources | 18 of 23 |
| Copilot & AI Steps | Not a theme in its sources | 11 of 22 |
| Time Saved | Not a theme in its sources | 7 of 7 |
| Desktop Automation (RPA) | Not a theme in its sources | 5 of 10 |
| Low-Code Reach | Not a theme in its sources | 5 of 12 |
Each count is the sources that praise a theme, or raise it as a concern, out of those that discuss it. A row pairs the two products when both carry a theme under the same or an equivalent name.
A count ending in "so far" has under 5 sources from 3 authors among all users. "Not a theme in its sources" means GILD found no theme of that name in that product's sources.
What practitioners raise as concerns
Among all users, Power Automate alone has four concern themes that reach 5 sources from 3 authors. Maintainability and Licensing & Cost lead, at 20 of 22 and 16 of 21. Make alone has three concern themes that reach 5 sources from 3 authors. Credit metering and Run failures lead, at 14 of 14 and 5 of 7.
| Raised as a concern | Make | Power Automate |
|---|---|---|
| Credit metering | 14 of 14 | Not a theme in its sources |
| Run failures | 5 of 7 | Not a theme in its sources |
| Learning curve | 4 of 8 | Not a theme in its sources |
| Maintainability | Not a theme in its sources | 20 of 22 |
| Licensing & Cost | Not a theme in its sources | 16 of 21 |
| Run Reliability | Not a theme in its sources | 13 of 14 |
| Ownership & Governance | Not a theme in its sources | 11 of 17 |
21 sources
- Make pricing
- Make Help Center: Credits
- Make Help Center: Operations
- Make Help Center: Extra credits
- Make Help Center: AI providers and data zones in Make
- Make Help Center: Audit logs
- Make Help Center: On-premise agent
- Make Help Center: Scenario version control
- Make Help Center: Introduction to Make AI Agent (New)
- Make Help Center: Sub-agents and tool output filtering in Make AI Agent (New)
- Make Help Center: Make MCP server
- Make Help Center: Teams
- Microsoft Power Automate pricing
- Microsoft Learn: Types of Power Automate licenses
- Microsoft Learn: Requests limits and allocations
- Microsoft Learn: Limits of automated, scheduled, and instant flows
- Microsoft Learn: On-premises data gateway
- Microsoft Learn: Introduction to desktop flows
- Microsoft Learn: Overview of solution-aware flows
- Microsoft Learn: Data policies
- Microsoft Learn: Copilot Studio agent flows overview