Swfte vs Make (October 2026)
TL;DR: Make is a visual automation platform with 3,000+ pre-built apps, billed in credits. Swfte Studio is a managed builder for agents and workflows on the same platform as a model gateway, so the choice mostly turns on whether the integrations or the AI are the point.
Spec comparison
| Capability | Swfte | Make | Checked at |
|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Visual builder for agents and workflows (Studio), on the same platform as the gateway | Visual AI automation platform: build automations and AI agents visually, in code or with a prompt, per Make | make.com |
| Pricing unit and plans | Free (10 workflows, 5 agents, 2,000 executions per month); Pro $39; Team $99 (3 users included); Enterprise custom | Credits. Free $0 (1,000 credits per month); Core $9, Pro $16 and Teams $29 per month, each with a 10,000-credit base; Enterprise custom. Pay monthly or annually, with annual billing saving 15% or more per Make | Pricing |
| How usage is counted | Executions per month by plan; see the pricing page for model usage terms | 1 operation equals 1 credit for most apps. With Make’s built-in AI Provider, credits vary with the input and output tokens and the model; with your own OpenAI, Claude or Gemini connection you pay Make for the operation and the provider for tokens | Credits |
| Free plan | Free: 10 workflows, 5 agents and 2,000 executions per month | 1,000 credits per month, 2 active scenarios, a 15-minute minimum interval between runs, a 5-minute maximum execution time, and 7-day execution log storage | Pricing |
| Integrations | 100+ tool integrations, plus an API for custom systems | 3,000+ pre-built apps, per Make | make.com |
| AI agents and models | Any model reachable through the Connect gateway; agents and multi-agent orchestration in Studio | Make AI Agents run inside the scenario canvas, with a Reasoning panel. The help centre labels them open beta. Make’s AI Provider is available on all plans; connecting your own OpenAI or Claude account is listed for paid plans | AI Agents app |
| MCP | Not listed among Studio’s features on this site; see our MCP gateway guide | Make MCP Server connects MCP clients such as ChatGPT, Claude and Cursor to your scenarios as tools, cloud-hosted by Make; Make MCP Server and Client are listed as included in all plans | Make MCP Server |
| Human approval | Role-based access and human-approval steps in workflows; configurable data-retention policies are designed for, not shipped | A Human in the Loop app adds approval steps to scenarios; it is listed as Enterprise only and in closed beta, available to invited customers | Human in the Loop app |
| Evaluation and versioning | Testing and evaluation: A/B experiments between chatflow versions and safety policies on agents are built; golden sets and regression runs are in development. Versions with promote and rollback for chatflows and workflows; release channels and gradual rollouts are in development | Not verified from the pages we reviewed | |
| Hosting | Managed service; customer data at rest in AWS Ireland. Dedicated or private deployment is designed for and scoped as an engagement, not self-serve | Cloud service running on Amazon AWS private instances (VPC), per Make’s security page. A self-hosted edition is not verified from the pages we reviewed | Security |
| SSO and admin controls | SAML SSO and SCIM are in development | Teams and roles, audit logs and Make Grid on Teams and above; SSO with domain claim, custom roles, custom functions and 24/7 support on Enterprise | Pricing |
| Data use | See the trust centre; a no-training statement is pending confirmation and is not made here | Not verified from the pages we reviewed | |
| Compliance | No SOC 2 report or ISO 27001 certificate is held and no HIPAA BAA is signed today; a SOC 2 Type I audit is in preparation (see the trust page). The exact posture depends on your use case, jurisdiction and deployment | Lists SOC 2 Type II, a public SOC 3 summary and ISO 27001, and says it adheres to GDPR. HIPAA is not stated on the page | Security |
| Export and portability | Not verified for Studio on this page | Scenarios export as a JSON blueprint and import from a JSON file; an imported blueprint must be under 2 MB | Blueprints |
Make values were checked against the vendor's own pages on October 6, 2026. Plans, prices and limits change; confirm on the vendor's page before you decide. Where a cell says "not verified", we could not confirm it from a primary source and chose not to guess.
Who should pick which
Pick Make if
- You connect many SaaS apps and want the larger catalogue: Make states 3,000+ pre-built apps against 100+ tool integrations in Studio.
- You want a visual scenario builder where AI is one step among many, billed in credits that follow module actions.
- You want a paid entry plan at a listed $9 per month (Core), with unlimited users on paid plans.
- You need MCP access to your existing automations from Claude, ChatGPT or Cursor, which Make lists on all plans.
Pick Swfte if
- The work is agents and model decisions, and you want the builder and the model gateway on one platform.
- You want testing, versioned releases and rollbacks in the build flow rather than as a separate process.
- You want human-approval steps in workflows and role and tenant controls, and Nexus is available next to Studio for agent governance.
- You are comfortable with Swfte’s current gaps: SAML SSO and SCIM are in development, dedicated or private deployment is scoped as an engagement and is not self-serve, and the integration catalogue is smaller.
Our read
Pick Make when your work is connecting SaaS apps, you want the larger catalogue (3,000+ pre-built apps against 100+ tool integrations plus an API in Studio), and a paid entry plan at a listed $9 per month suits you. Pick Swfte Studio when agents, model routing, evaluation and governance are the point, and you want testing, versioned releases and rollbacks with the Connect gateway on the same platform. Swfte is earlier on enterprise identity, with SAML SSO and SCIM in development, and dedicated deployment is an engagement rather than self-serve. Many teams run both.
For the full write-up, including migration steps, see Make alternatives. Swfte does not offer an import for Make exports, so a move is a rebuild.
Frequently asked questions
Swfte vs Make: which is better?
It depends on the job. Make suits app-to-app automation with a very large catalogue. Swfte Studio suits workflows where an agent or model makes the decisions, with evaluation, versioning and a shared gateway. Run one real workflow through each before you decide.
Is Swfte cheaper than Make?
We do not claim that. Make bills in credits: Free is 1,000 credits per month, and Core $9, Pro $16 and Teams $29 per month each have a 10,000-credit base. Swfte Studio lists Free, Pro $39, Team $99 (3 users included) and Enterprise custom, with execution limits per plan. The units differ, so compare on your own workload, and check the Swfte pricing page for how model usage is billed.
Which is better for AI agents?
Both have agents. Make AI Agents run in the scenario canvas and are labelled open beta, with a Reasoning panel and an MCP server. Studio lists agents and multi-agent orchestration, A/B experiments between chatflow versions and version rollback, with golden sets, regression runs and release channels in development, with Nexus for agent governance. Compare them on the controls you need.
Can I use Swfte and Make together?
Yes. A common split is to leave app-to-app scenarios in Make and move the workflows where a model makes decisions to Studio, calling one from the other where needed.
Which has more integrations?
Make states 3,000+ pre-built apps. Studio lists 100+ tool integrations plus an API for custom systems. If broad SaaS coverage is the main need, Make has the larger catalogue.
Which is better for compliance?
Make lists SOC 2 Type II, a public SOC 3 summary and ISO 27001, and says it adheres to GDPR; HIPAA is not stated on its security page. Swfte does not hold a SOC 2 report or an ISO 27001 certificate and does not sign HIPAA BAAs today; a SOC 2 Type I audit is in preparation, and the trust page has the current status. Ask each vendor for its current documents and confirm scope for your use case.
Trying Swfte against Make?
Pick the scenario where a model makes the decisions, rebuild it on the free plan, and compare results on your own data.
Free plan · Managed service