Gumloop vs Make: pricing, features and which to choose

Gumloop is a hosted agent and workflow builder made by AgentHub Inc., founded in April 2023 by McGill classmates Max Brodeur-Urbas and Rahul Behal under the name AgentHub. The company changed its name to Gumloop in 2024. BetaKit reported a $3.1 million seed round in July 2024, while TechCrunch and BetaKit reported a $17 million Series A in January 2025. The reported funding total reached about $20 million. Gumloop presents its product as a multiplayer AI agent builder for company operations. People create agents that connect to business applications, run from schedules or triggers, and produce reports, documents, dashboards, or web apps. The product is a commercial SaaS service rather than an open-source platform.

A typical Gumloop workflow starts on a visual canvas, where a user combines instructions, connectors, and reusable skills. Agents can read or write in Slack, Gmail, Salesforce, HubSpot, Notion, Linear, GitHub, and Google Sheets, with additional tools available through MCP. Users can run agents interactively, schedule them, call them with a webhook, or invoke them through the REST API. Gumloop also provides an MCP server for compatible clients. Documented use cases include lead enrichment, CRM updates, meeting briefs, support triage, monitoring, data analysis, research, and scheduled reports. Teams share usage through an organization credit pool. Developers can add logic through Python or JavaScript alongside visual workflow steps, while business users can build and revise agents without maintaining a separate orchestration service.

Gumloop fits business teams that want agents to act across existing SaaS tools without running orchestration infrastructure. Its usage pricing requires closer monitoring than fixed per-task plans, especially when agents use expensive models, many connectors, or long compute sessions. Compared with Zapier, Gumloop offers deeper agent behavior and MCP access. Compared with n8n, Gumloop is more managed and business-user oriented, while n8n offers greater deployment control. Compared with Dify, Gumloop focuses more on connected operational work than on building self-hosted RAG applications. Gumloop is less suitable for teams seeking broad self-hosting or predictable task pricing. Choose it for collaborative SaaS automation, API access, and enterprise governance, especially when the intended user is a business or IT team.

Make is a visual workflow automation service operated by Celonis. Formerly Integromat, it was acquired in October 2020 and rebranded in February 2022. Make says it serves more than 400,000 organizations across over 200 countries as a 350-plus-person Celonis business unit. Its central object is the scenario, which connects applications, transforms data, and delivers results. Operations teams, agencies, and technical users can use scenarios for branching processes that require more control than basic trigger-action tools. Workflows may begin with a row, webhook, or schedule, then use modules, routers, filters, and transformations to process records. Make is hosted on AWS in Europe and North America, so customers use its managed service instead of installing an open-source server. Teams should evaluate credit consumption, especially for complex or repeated workflows.

A typical Make workflow starts with a trigger, such as a new row, webhook, or scheduled event, then passes data through modules that read, search, create, update, or delete records. Routers split a scenario into paths, filters apply conditions, and built-in tools transform or aggregate data before a later module writes the result to another service. Make lists more than 3,500 standard apps, custom apps, enterprise apps, an on-premises agent, and more than 300 API endpoints. Users can also issue custom API calls and connect services through OAuth or tokens. The visual canvas exposes each step and its execution history, which makes multi-branch workflows easier to inspect than a chain of opaque actions.

Make's main limitation is metered usage: a workflow with many modules, records, or AI operations can consume credits faster than a short Zapier automation. Zapier offers a more approachable task-based model, while Make exposes deeper routing and data handling at lower entry pricing for the listed 10,000-credit tier. n8n is the stronger choice for teams seeking source-available deployment options, whereas Make keeps hosting under its service. Power Automate is more compelling for organizations standardized on Microsoft's identity and business suite. Pick Make for visual, multi-step orchestration with detailed branching and broad app coverage, especially when a team accepts credit-based billing and hosted execution. Before committing, estimate records, modules, schedules, and AI calls against monthly credits, then select a tier whose controls match the team's operating needs.