Open-source workflow automation
Hands-onn8n
Visual automation you can host yourself, priced per workflow execution regardless of how many steps it runs, with unlimited users and every integration on every plan.
The short answer
- Best for
- A technically comfortable team that wants automation without sending candidate data to a third party
- Not ideal for
- A recruiter who does not want to meet JSON, APIs or a server
- Price
- Free and open source if self-hosted, or cloud from EUR 20 a month billed annually
- Closest alternative
- MakeFriendlier to build in and quicker to get right, if hosting the data yourself is not the point
At a glance
- Recruitment fitWeak
- Ease of useFair
- ImplementationFair
- Price transparencyStrong
- Value for moneyStrong
- ScalabilityStrong
Why these assessments
- Recruitment fitWeak
- A general automation engine. Nothing in it knows what a candidate or a vacancy is until you model that yourself.
- Ease of useFair
- From our own use it is the more powerful and the more technical of the two we have run. Comfortable with JSON, APIs and basic logic and it is capable; uncomfortable with those words and it is the wrong tool.
- ImplementationFair
- The cloud plans remove the hosting question, but the reason to pick this one is usually self-hosting, and that is a server, updates and backups somebody has to own.
- Price transparencyStrong
- Executions are the unit, complexity does not change the count, and users, workflows and integrations are unlimited on every plan. There is very little left to be surprised by.
- Value for moneyStrong
- EUR 20 a month for 2,500 executions with unlimited steps, unlimited users and every integration is a lot of automation, and the community edition costs nothing at all.
- ScalabilityStrong
- Unlimited users on every tier, so growth costs executions rather than seats, and concurrency rises from 5 to 200-plus as you move up.
Our reading of the evidence on this page. No score, no formula.
Where it sits
- Discover
- Apply
- Screen
- ATS
- Interview
- Hire
The SourcrLab bottom line
Open-source automation with a commercial cloud on top, and a pricing model that is unusually hard to be surprised by: you buy monthly workflow executions, complexity does not change the count, and users, workflows and integrations are unlimited on every plan. Starter is EUR 20 a month for 2,500 executions, Pro EUR 50 for 10,000. The community edition is free and self-hosted, which is where the data-residency argument lives. The honest caveat is not the price but the audience: from our own use this rewards technical comfort and punishes its absence.
Best fit
The workflow that has more than one step and more than one destination. From our own use this is what we reach for when something needs scraping, then enriching, then filtering, then pushing to several places at once, and a linear trigger-action tool starts fighting back. The self-hosted option is the other reason: candidate data that never leaves your own infrastructure is a real answer to a real question in recruitment.
Think twice if
If nobody on the team is comfortable with JSON, APIs and basic logic. This is the more capable tool and the more technical one, and self-hosting adds a server, updates and backups to somebody's job. A recruiter who wants one thing automated is better served elsewhere.
Hands-on experience
Pieter Henderyckx's take
Recruiter and founder of SourcrLab
n8n is the more powerful cousin of Make. It's open-source, self-hostable, and gives you way more control over your automations. I've used it for more complex workflows that Make couldn't handle elegantly. The trade-off is clear though: it's more technical. If you're comfortable with JSON, APIs, and basic logic, n8n is incredibly capable. If those words make you nervous, stick with Make. For me, n8n is what I reach for when I need something custom, like scraping a site, enriching the data, filtering it, and pushing results to multiple destinations. The self-hosted option is great for data privacy too, which matters in recruiting. It's not for everyone, but if you're technically inclined, it's a powerhouse.
Why choose n8n?
Complexity does not change the bill
The vendor prices monthly workflow executions regardless of how many steps each one runs. A twenty-step workflow and a two-step workflow cost the same to run once, which is the opposite of a per-step or per-task meter and rewards putting real logic in one place.
Unlimited users on every plan
Including Starter at EUR 20 a month. In a category where the step from one seat to a team is often the biggest price jump, that removes the question entirely: growth costs executions, not headcount.
The self-hosted community edition is genuinely free
Open source, on GitHub, with no execution meter because you are running it. For a recruitment team that cannot send candidate data through a third-party platform, that is not a cheaper option, it is the only option in this category.
Every integration on every plan
There is no premium-connector tier to discover later. What changes between plans is executions, concurrency and support, so the cheapest plan can talk to the same systems as the most expensive one.
Main trade-offs
It is the technical one
From our own use the trade-off is clear: more control and more capability, in exchange for being comfortable with JSON, APIs and logic. That is a fair trade for a recruiting ops person and a bad one for a recruiter who wants a switch flipped.
Self-hosting is a job, not a checkbox
The community edition costs nothing in licence and something in attention: a server, updates, backups and somebody who notices when it stops. The data-residency benefit is real, and so is the maintenance behind it.
The jump to Business is very large
Pro is EUR 50 a month for 10,000 executions; Business is EUR 667 a month for 40,000. Four times the executions for more than thirteen times the price, because what Business really sells is the self-hosted licence key and what comes with it. Price the tier you need, not the ladder.
Concurrency is the limit nobody models
5 concurrent executions on Starter, 20 on Pro, 30 on Business. A nightly batch that fans out over a candidate list can hit that ceiling long before the monthly execution count runs out, and the symptom is queueing rather than an error.
Pricing and buying reality
Free and open source self-hosted, or cloud from EUR 20 a month billed annually
- Community edition: free and open source, self-hosted, available on GitHub
- Starter: EUR 20 a month billed annually, EUR 240 a year. 2,500 workflow executions a month with unlimited steps, 5 concurrent executions, unlimited users
- Pro: EUR 50 a month billed annually, EUR 600 a year. 10,000 executions a month, 20 concurrent executions, unlimited users
- Business: EUR 667 a month billed annually, EUR 8,004 a year. 40,000 executions a month, 30 concurrent executions, self-hosted deployment via licence key, 14-day trial with a card
- Enterprise: quoted. Custom execution volume, 200-plus concurrent executions, hosted by n8n or self-hosted
- All plans include unlimited users, unlimited workflows and every integration. Pricing is based on monthly workflow executions regardless of complexity
- A free trial gives access to Pro features and 800 AI credits. Prices in EUR
What we do not know
- What an AI credit corresponds to, and what happens when the 800 run out
- The monthly-billing price of each cloud plan
- What happens when the monthly execution allowance is exhausted
- Where the cloud plans run and which transfer safeguards apply
Checked on the vendor's pricing page, August 2026. n8n pricing page, euro prices and execution allowances
How it fits your stack
Works with
- Every integration on every plan, plus HTTP for anything without one
- Your own infrastructure, if you self-host
- Your ATS and CRM, as both source and destination
Likely replaces
- A custom integration script somebody would have to maintain anyway
- Sending candidate data through a third-party automation platform
May overlap with
- Make and Zapier, which do the same job hosted for you
- Native integrations your ATS already ships
Check before buying
- Whether anyone on the team is comfortable with JSON and APIs
- Whether self-hosting is the point, because that is what you are paying for on Business
- Your concurrency needs, which bind sooner than the execution count
- Who owns the server and the updates if you take the community edition
n8n vs alternatives
Products a buyer would genuinely put next to this one, with the reason you would pick each instead.
Choose Make when you want a friendlier builder and hosting you do not think about. From our own use it is more user-friendly and slightly less powerful, and for most recruitment workflows that trade is worth taking.
Choose Zapier when the person building the automation is a recruiter and the workflow is one trigger and one action.
Used n8n?
Tell other recruiters what worked, what did not, and who it suits. Positive, mixed or critical — all useful.
Evidence
- Cloud plan prices and annual totals — checked against a primary source: n8n pricing page, euro prices and execution allowances
- Execution allowances of 2,500 / 10,000 / 40,000 a month — checked against a primary source: n8n pricing page, euro prices and execution allowances
- Concurrent executions: 5 / 20 / 30 / 200-plus — checked against a primary source: n8n pricing page, euro prices and execution allowances
- Unlimited users, workflows and integrations on every plan — checked against a primary source: n8n pricing page, euro prices and execution allowances
- Pricing per execution regardless of complexity — checked against a primary source: n8n pricing page, euro prices and execution allowances
- A free, open-source, self-hosted community edition — checked against a primary source: n8n pricing page, euro prices and execution allowances
- Building complex multi-destination workflows in it — first-hand use: Pieter builds custom scrape, enrich and multi-destination workflows in n8n
- More capable and more technical than the hosted alternatives — first-hand use: Pieter builds custom scrape, enrich and multi-destination workflows in n8n
- What an AI credit corresponds to — not enough evidence
- Monthly-billing prices for the cloud plans — not enough evidence
- Cloud hosting location and transfer safeguards — not enough evidence
Last reviewed: August 2026. How SourcrLab verifies information
Work at n8n?
Email us to verify this profile or suggest a factual update.