Skip to content
effecthub

n8n vs Script.it

Two fact sheets from our own research, side by side — pricing, platforms, API access and status re-checked by us rather than quoted from the vendors.

The short answer

Free plan
Both have one
Public API
Both have one
Best fit
n8n: Technical teams that want to self-host automation with Docker, on-prem or air-gapped · Script.it: Non-developers who want automations they can read back and rerun
Platforms
n8n: Web, Linux · Script.it: Web
Trust score
About even — n8n 75, Script.it 72

From our own records as of each tool's last check. Anything we have not confirmed is left out rather than guessed. How we verify

Side by side

Factn8nScript.it
CategoryWorkflow Automation PlatformsAI Workflow Builders
Pricing modelFreemiumFreemium
Starts at—$30/mo
Public APIYesYes
Trust score75 / 10072 / 100
PlatformsWeb, Linux, APIWeb, API
Companyn8n GmbHScript.it
Last verifiedSep 6, 2026Sep 6, 2026

What our research says

n8n

The automation tool to pick when you want agents and integrations on one canvas and the option to run it on your own hardware; self-hosting from GitHub is the escape hatch Zapier and Make do not offer. Cloud pricing is per execution rather than per task, which rewards long workflows, but the monthly figures hide behind a toggle and the Business tier is a self-hosted licence at a very different price point.

Pros

  • Self-hosted Community Edition on GitHub under a fair-code licence, with 207k stars
  • Agent, model, MCP and RAG nodes alongside 500+ app integrations
  • JavaScript or Python at any step, with a canvas that traces agent reasoning
  • Execution-based cloud billing with unlimited steps per execution
  • Public REST API on all self-hosted editions and on cloud Starter and above

Cons

  • Cloud prices were shown only in euros and only as annual-billing figures
  • Business tier (€667 a month) is self-hosted only, with cloud availability on a waitlist
  • Fair-code licence is not OSI open source, which matters for some corporate policies
  • Forum-only support below Enterprise

Script.it

The interesting bit is that the output is a saved, inspectable script rather than an agent that improvises differently each run, so you can verify it once and rerun it. The CLI turning it into a tool your coding agent can call is a genuinely good idea. Credits are the constraint, and 300 a month goes quickly on anything scheduled.

Pros

  • Workflows are saved as inspectable, rerunnable scripts rather than one-off agent runs
  • Around 600 integrations covering the usual business stack
  • Open-source CLI and agent skill give external coding agents access to the workspace
  • Free tier with 50 monthly credits and no card required

Cons

  • Credit metering with $0.10 overage makes cost unpredictable for scheduled jobs
  • No company name, jurisdiction or founding date published on the site
  • Self-hosting and SOC 2 terms sit behind Enterprise quoting only

Which one fits

Choose n8n if you need

  • Technical teams that want to self-host automation with Docker, on-prem or air-gapped
  • Builders combining LLM agents, MCP tools and RAG with ordinary app integrations
  • Workflows with many steps, since billing counts executions rather than individual operations

Choose Script.it if you need

  • Non-developers who want automations they can read back and rerun
  • People driving automations from a coding agent such as Claude Code or Codex
  • Teams with a long tail of small integrations across Slack, Notion and HubSpot

n8n vs Script.it: the questions people ask

Is n8n cheaper than Script.it?

Script.it starts at $30/mo. n8n has a free tier; what its paid plans cost is not confirmed by us yet.

Does n8n or Script.it have a free tier?

Both: n8n has a free tier, and Script.it has a free tier.

Which has a public API, n8n or Script.it?

Both ship a public API, so either can be built on; the fact table above shows the platforms each one runs on.

All n8n alternatives →All Script.it alternatives →Browse all Workflow Automation Platforms →