The Make alternative that builds the scenario for you
Make (formerly Integromat) gives power users a deep visual scenario builder, priced per operation. Trinyx starts from the other end: you describe the job in chat and the workflow assembles itself, AI agents run it under scoped access and hard credit budgets, and the result ships as an app. All in one product, cloud or self-hosted.
Free tier · No credit card · Last updated July 2026
When Make fits
Choose Make if you enjoy assembling detailed scenarios module by module, per-operation pricing fits your volume, and you do not need self-hosting or apps on top of your automations.
When Trinyx fits
Choose Trinyx if you want automations built from a plain-language description, AI agents with scoped tools and budgets they cannot exceed, user-facing apps and data tables included, and a free self-hosted edition.
Trinyx vs Make, feature by feature
| Capability | Trinyx | Make |
|---|---|---|
| Build automations by chat | Yes Describe the job; the workflow builds itself in front of you | Partial AI assistant helps; module wiring stays manual |
| Visual workflow builder | Yes 60+ blocks: branches, loops, parallel fan-out, code, HTTP, files | Yes Deep scenario builder with routers and iterators |
| AI agents in production | Yes Per-agent tool scoping, credit budget and full audit trail | Partial AI agents exist; fine-grained scoping and spend caps are limited |
| Ship workflows as apps | Yes Search pages, dashboards and approval screens on top of the workflow | - No Forms only; a separate front-end is needed |
| Built-in data tables | Yes Spreadsheet-style tables your automations create, find and update | Partial Data stores, with modest limits |
| Browser-use agent | Yes An agent that opens real web pages, clicks and extracts | - No Not built in |
| MCP (Model Context Protocol) | Yes Use Trinyx as an MCP server from Claude, Cursor and other clients | Partial Early options |
| Self-hosting | Yes Free Community Edition, one docker compose up | - No SaaS only |
| Marketplace | Yes Fork the whole stack: workflow, agents, pages and tables together | Partial Scenario templates |
Comparison reflects publicly available information as of July 2026. Products evolve; check both before deciding.
Why teams switch from Make
Describe it instead of assembling it
A Make scenario is built module by module. In Trinyx you type what you want done and the workflow assembles itself; the canvas is for refining, not for starting from zero.
Predictable spend, capped per agent
Per-operation pricing punishes chatty scenarios. Trinyx is credit-based with a free tier, and each agent has a hard budget it cannot exceed.
Apps and tables are part of the product
The screen your team uses and the data your automation reads and writes live in the same platform as the workflow. No separate front-end, no external database for simple operational data.
Self-host when compliance asks for it
Make is SaaS only. The Trinyx Community Edition runs on your own servers for free, with the same builder as the cloud.
Where Make is the better fit
- You like building intricate scenarios by hand and the router/iterator model fits how you think.
- You rely on a specific Make app module that has no Trinyx equivalent.
- Your volumes are small and per-operation pricing stays cheap for you.
Migrating from Make in three steps
- Step 1
Write each scenario as a sentence
For every Make scenario: when X happens, do Y. Routers become branches, iterators become loops or splits.
- Step 2
Rebuild it in chat
Paste the sentence into Trinyx and watch the workflow assemble. Fine-tune branching and error paths on the canvas.
- Step 3
Run both side by side
Keep the Make scenario on while the Trinyx version runs on real data, compare, then switch the trigger.
Frequently asked questions
Is Trinyx a good Make (Integromat) alternative?
Yes, for teams that want AI-native automation. Trinyx builds workflows from a chat message, runs AI agents with scoped tools and hard credit budgets, ships workflows as apps with built-in tables, and offers a free self-hosted edition. Make remains a capable visual builder for hands-on scenario assembly.
Can I self-host Trinyx? Make cannot be self-hosted.
Yes. The Trinyx Community Edition is free and self-hosted: one docker compose up on your own server, with the code public on GitHub (livecontext-ai/livecontext-ce). The cloud edition at trinyx.fr adds managed hosting, SAML SSO, workspaces and platform credits.
Can I import my Make scenarios into Trinyx?
There is no one-click importer. Most teams rebuild by describing each scenario in chat, which typically takes minutes per scenario, then validate side by side before switching triggers.
How does Trinyx pricing compare to Make?
Make charges per operation, so busy scenarios cost more each month. Trinyx has a free tier and credit-based plans where every agent gets a hard budget it cannot exceed; the self-hosted Community Edition is free.
Does Trinyx have enough integrations to replace Make?
Trinyx ships 700+ built-in API integrations with more than 17,000 ready-to-call operations, plus a generic HTTP request node, a code node, and custom API definitions for anything not in the catalog.
Try the Make alternative
One message in. A working automation out. Free tier, no credit card.
Also comparing: Trinyx vs n8n · Trinyx vs Zapier · Documentation