Unito vs. Make: Which Integration Platform Is Right for Your Team?

• Unito home /
• Blog /
• Unito vs. Make: Which Integration Platform Is Right for Your Team?

Published in Apps on 28/08/2026.

Teams often use dozens of tools in their day-to-day work. With no integrations, someone has to copy and paste data back and forth between tools, communicate exclusively through face-to-face meetings and email, or accept that important context will go missing.

That’s where Unito and Make, two of the most popular integration platforms on the market, come in. But which one’s best suited to your needs? How do you choose?

Here’s your guide to doing that.

What is Unito?

Unito is a two-way sync platform with some of the deepest integrations on the market, covering 60+ tools, including project management tools (e.g., Asana, Jira), software development tools (e.g., GitHub, Azure DevOps), ITSM tools (e.g., ServiceNow), and more. Its no-code flow builder allows users to plan and deploy their first integration within minutes. Deep filtering rules give you control over what gets synced by your integrations, while custom field support allows you to tailor integrations to your specific workflow.

What is Make?

Make (formerly Integromat) is a one-way, trigger-based automation platform with integrations for over 3,000 apps, including HubSpot, Google Gemini, Airtable, Slack, and Claude. Its visual, drag-and-drop scenario builder allows branching and conditional logic that supports more complex workflows than other one-way platforms. Make also has built-in features for orchestrating AI agents, allowing you to get more than just integrations.

Unito vs. Make: Summary table

	Make	Unito
Ease of use	Easy	Easy
Sync and automation	1-way	2-way
Customizability	Moderate	Extensive
Historical syncing	No	Yes
Subtasks, Comments, Attachments	No	Yes
Live training	No	Yes
Set up efficiency	Many scenarios per workflow	Simple, no-code
Onboarding time	Hours	Minutes
Integrations	3,000+	60+
Update time	1 minute	1 minute

Two-way sync vs. one-way automation

The key difference between Unito and Make is the logic at the core of their integrations: two-way sync vs. one-way automation.

Make’s scenarios are one-way, meaning that data always flows from point A to point B, never back from point B to point A. Triggers at point A lead to an action at point B, like creating a new work item or updating a field. It’s possible to imitate a two-way sync by building paired scenarios that each move data in one direction, but this introduces potential risks, like infinite loops that create work items until you stop them or conflicts that stop data from moving altogether.

Unito’s integrations are two-way by default. That means Unito integrations build persistent links between work items in both tools, shipping data back and forth between them as you work. Once you build a flow, Unito continuously checks both tools for new work items that you’ve created manually so it can automatically create them in the other tool. Built-in two-way sync protects your tools from infinite loops, conflicts, and other issues you might get from using one-way automations.

Let’s compare these two methods with an example. Imagine a handoff between Jira and Trello, representing development work for new product features and their accompanying marketing campaigns.

A one-way scenario with Make might trigger when a developer in Jira adds a specific label to a Jira issue (e.g., “ready for marketing”). That scenario creates a matching Trello card, automatically populating it with information from that Jira issue, like due dates, comments, and descriptions. That gives marketers everything they need to kickstart their campaigns.

But what if they need more? If they have a question for that developer and add it in Trello, that question won’t reach Jira unless you’ve built a separate scenario for sending data from Trello to Jira. 

In Unito, a single flow handles both sides, with developers and marketers alike able to add updates, questions, and context in their own tools, knowing everything is kept in sync. That means less maintenance, less troubleshooting, and no risk of infinite loops.

Pricing: Usage-based vs. credit-based

Unito and Make have very different pricing models: one is usage-based and the other is credit-based. Here are the differences between them.

Unito’s usage-based pricing

Unito’s plans don’t count the number of actions each flow takes; they’re based on the number of work items you sync. You’re not charged for each bit of data moving back and forth, just for where that data is coming from and where it’s going. Unito offers three plans:

• The Basic plan starts at $65 a month for 750 items in sync and scales up to $139 for 2,000 items in sync. It supports up to 10 active flows across two tools, with six mapped fields per flow and 15-minute updates.
• The Pro plan starts at $299 a month for 2,500 items in sync and scales up to $769 for 10,000 items in sync. It supports unlimited active flows, up to two connected tools, unlimited custom fields, and five-minute updates.
• The Enterprise plan has custom pricing for higher items in sync limits, advanced syncing capabilities, historical data sync, and a dedicated integration consultant.

Make’s credit-based pricing

Every action in a Make scenario (e.g., creating a Jira issue or updating a ServiceNow record) uses up a single credit. But any use of Make’s built-in router or error-handler modules doesn’t. Make plans follow five tiers, with the exact price for each one scaling up based on the number of credits you’re using:

• The Free plan covers up to 1,000 credits a month and gives you access to Make’s no-code visual workflow builder, 3,000+ integrations, and 15-minute intervals between scenario runs.
• The Core plan starts at $9 a month for up to 10,000 credits and scales up to $182.16 a month for up to 300,000 credits. It adds support for unlimited active scenarios, more control over scenarios, increased data transfer limits, and access to Make’s API.
• The Pro plan starts at $16 a month for 10,000 credits and scales up to $4,811.40 a month for 8,000,000 credits. It adds priority scenario execution, custom variables, and full-text execution log search.
• The Teams plan starts at $29 a month for 10,000 credits and scales up to $8,231.05 a month for 8,000,000 credits. It adds teams and team roles, as well as the ability to create and share scenario templates.
• The Enterprise plan has custom pricing that can go beyond 8,000,000 monthly credits. It also adds custom functions support, enterprise app integrations, 24/7 enterprise support, overage protection, and more.

Depth vs. breadth

When it comes to integration solutions, there are three main characteristics to look for: ease of use, depth, and breadth. Ease of use will be covered later, but here’s what the other two mean:

• Depth covers the number of fields an integration supports, the transformations it can perform, and the filtering rules you can use. A deeper integration allows you to sync more of your data and do more with that data. A shallow integration syncs less data and supports few transformations.
• Breadth refers to the number of integrations available with a specific platform and the types of tools these integrations cover. Some integration platforms might have dozens of integrations that only cover software development, for example, while others cover thousands across multiple use cases.

Unito: Integration depth

Unito has some of the deepest two-way integrations for popular project management tools, software development platforms, databases, and more. While its library of 60+ integrations is smaller than Make and other integration platforms, Unito supports custom fields, attachments, comments, and hierarchies, which these platforms usually don’t. Choosing Unito as an integration platform means choosing deeper integrations.

Make: Integration breadth

Make has over 3,000 integrations, covering just about any tool you might need. When you use Make, you can be confident it’ll cover your tools. But will it sync everything you need? Make’s integrations don’t always support all the fields or automations you need. They usually don’t support attachments or comments either. Choosing Make as an integration platform means choosing wide access to any integration you need.

Ease of use and setup time

Make gives you granular control over your scenarios, but that control comes at a cost. You need some level of technical skill to understand modules, routers, iterators, and other elements of building and modifying these scenarios. This is especially the case if you want to approximate a two-way sync with multiple scenarios. The visual scenario builder means you don’t need any code to integrate your tools, but some technical knowledge is still needed.

Unito gives you a similar level of control over your integrations, but without that same level of technical knowledge. Unito flows map most fields for you automatically, allowing you to customize flows to your needs rather than building them completely from scratch. That’s why most Unito users build their first flows in minutes, rather than the weeks or months required to deploy other integrations.

Which one is right for you?

Choosing between Unito and Make comes down to a few decisions that track with your organization’s needs. Find out which platform you should use in five questions.

Do you need a true two-way sync?

• If you need a two-way, persistent sync between tools, Unito is the best fit.
• If you just need one-way triggers, either platform works, but Make is purpose-built for this.

How many niche apps are in your stack?

• If you mostly use best-in-class apps across a few tool categories, either platform covers you.
• If you have a wide mix of specialized, lesser-known apps, then Make is a better choice.

Who is building and maintaining integrations?

• If integrations are mostly built by non-technical staff, Unito’s no-code flow builder is a better fit.
• If you have technical staff or resources dedicated to building integrations, you’ll get more out of Make’s customization.

How deep do your integrations need to be?

• If you need a solution that supports most fields, custom fields, attachments, and more, then Unito is your best bet.
• If you only need a few fields to be supported, then Make’s integrations might be enough.

How predictable does your monthly cost need to be?

• If you want pricing that scales with the number of items you’re syncing rather than every action your integrations automate, Unito’s model is a better fit.
• If you’re comfortable estimating credit consumption per scenario and optimizing for it, Make’s pricing model might work best for you.

FAQ: Unito vs. Make

Is Unito a good alternative to Make?

Unito is a good alternative to Make for teams that need the following:

• A two-way sync instead of one-way automation.
• Integrations that don’t need technical skill to set up.
• Deep integrations that support more fields, attachments, comments, and more.

Does Make support two-way sync?

No, Make doesn’t support two-way sync, since its scenarios only work in one direction. It is possible to pair multiple scenarios for the same integration to replicate a two-way sync, but it’s not a true two-way sync.

Which is cheaper, Make or Unito?

Make plans are generally cheaper than Unito plans, but that largely depends on your usage. Since Make uses a credit-based pricing model that charges you for every action its scenarios take, the cost can quickly ramp up as you use them. Unito’s pricing is more stable, meaning you don’t have to worry about expensive overages.

Can Unito replace Make entirely?

Because Make has 3,000+ integrations and Unito only has 60+, Unito can’t always cover all the tools you need. But where the two overlap, Unito can entirely replace Make.

What happened to Integromat?

Integromat was rebranded to Make in February of 2022. They’re the same platform, just with different names.