Zapier vs Make — Migration Analysis
System4 IPS | March 2026
Timing Note
Zapier annual plan renews 20th April. Recommendation: don't rush this. Keep Zapier running for now, build Make scenarios at a comfortable pace, and aim to switch before the next renewal. No need to migrate under pressure.
Recommendation: Migrate to Make
~$461/yr saved
Current usage is light (457 tasks/month on Zapier). Make Core covers this comfortably with room to grow. Migration is straightforward — no blockers identified.
Cost Comparison
| Zapier (Current) | Make (Proposed) | |
|---|---|---|
| Plan | Professional | Core |
| Annual cost | ~$588/yr | ~$127/yr |
| Included | 2,000 tasks/month | 10,000 ops/month |
| Current usage | 457 tasks/month | ~900-1,800 ops/month* |
| Headroom | 77% unused | 82-91% unused |
*Make counts operations per module step, not per workflow run. A 3-step Zap = ~3 Make operations. Still well within limits.
Current Zapier Setup (9 Active Zaps)
| Type | Count | What they do |
|---|---|---|
| PandaDoc → HubSpot | 6 | Move deals through stages on sent/viewed/completed (Recurring + Special Services) |
| Email Parser → HubSpot | 7 | Parse lead emails from BuyerZone, Thumbtack, Bark, HomeAdvisor, Prospectr, Cohesive AI, etc. |
Migration Assessment
Email Parser Zaps
No blockers Still needs rebuilding
- Emails already go to Gmail
inquiries@inbox - Make watches Gmail natively — same inbox, nothing changes on the sending side
- Make AI extraction is arguably better than Zapier's template-based parser
- No changes needed on the email source side — but all paid lead source automations still need to be rebuilt in Make
PandaDoc → HubSpot Zaps
Clean rebuild
- 6 near-identical Zaps → consolidate to 2-3 Make scenarios using Router
- One place to fix things instead of six
- 2-minute delays — no issue in Make
- Formatter steps are free in Make (saves ops)
Why Make Wins Here
| Factor | Zapier | Make |
|---|---|---|
| PandaDoc workflow maintenance | 6 separate Zaps to maintain | 2-3 scenarios with Router — one place to update |
| Email parsing | Template-based regex (90% reliable per community) | AI extraction — handles inconsistent formats gracefully |
| AI data extraction | Has it ("AI by Zapier") but fiddly setup | Cleaner UI, structured data output, already proven with another GNG client |
| Formatter steps | Counts as tasks | Free — doesn't count toward ops |
| Cost | ~$588/yr | ~$127/yr |
Consolidation Opportunity
The 6 PandaDoc Zaps are a maintenance headache. Every time something changes (new service type, different deal stage name), 6 Zaps need updating. In Make:
Zapier (now)
- RS: PD sent → deal stage
- RS: PD viewed → deal stage
- RS: PD completed → Closed Won
- SS: PD sent → deal stage
- SS: PD viewed → deal stage
- SS: PD completed → Closed Won
6 Zaps to maintain
Make (proposed)
- 1 scenario: PD sent/viewed → Router splits by RS/SS → update deal stage
- 1 scenario: PD completed → Router splits by RS/SS → Closed Won + update close date & amount
2 scenarios to maintain
Risks & Considerations
- Migration time: Rebuilding 13 Zaps into ~5-6 Make scenarios. Estimated 8 hours including testing.
- HubSpot integration: Verify Make's HubSpot module covers the exact triggers/actions used (deal stage updates, task creation, contact creation).
- Testing: Run Make scenarios in parallel with Zapier for 2-3 days before switching off.
Next Steps
- Verify Make's HubSpot module covers all current Zapier triggers/actions
- Set up Make account (Core plan)
- Rebuild PandaDoc automations
- Rebuild all paid lead source automations (BuyerZone, Thumbtack, Bark, HomeAdvisor, Prospectr, Cohesive AI) with AI extraction
- Run in parallel for 2-3 days
- Switch off Zapier (keep account inactive, not deleted)