n8n vs Activepieces head-to-head comparison. Features, pricing, integrations, self-hosting difficulty, and which automation tool wins for different use cases.
n8n wins for developers who want code-level control, branching logic, and 400+ integrations. Activepieces wins for teams who want a simpler, no-code builder with a cleaner UI and faster setup.
| Feature | n8n | Activepieces |
|---|---|---|
| Open Source | Fair-code (Sustainable Use) | MIT (community) |
| Self-Hosted | ✓ | ✓ |
| Docker Deploy | ✓ | ✓ |
| Integrations | 400+ | 200+ |
| Visual Builder | Node-based | Flow-based |
| Code Nodes | JavaScript/Python | JavaScript |
| Branching Logic | ✓ | Limited |
| Error Handling | Advanced retry/fallback | Basic retry |
| Webhook Support | ✓ | ✓ |
| Scheduling | Cron + intervals | Intervals only |
| Team Management | ✓ | ✓ |
| Execution History | Full (up to plan) | Full |
| AI/LLM Nodes | ✓ | Limited |
Winner: n8n — For self-hosted automation, n8n wins on raw power: 400+ integrations, code nodes, advanced branching, and AI nodes. Choose Activepieces if you want MIT licensing, a simpler UI, and your workflows are straightforward.
n8n uses a "Sustainable Use" license (fair-code). You can self-host for free and use it commercially, but you cannot offer it as a managed service to others. Activepieces uses MIT for its community edition.
Both have Docker images and deploy in minutes. Activepieces is slightly easier — fewer environment variables, lighter on resources. n8n needs more RAM for large workflow counts.
There is no direct migration tool. You would need to rebuild workflows manually. Export your n8n workflows as JSON for reference before migrating.
n8n handles complex workflows better with its code nodes, branching logic, error handling, and sub-workflow support. Activepieces is designed for simpler linear flows.