n8n or Power Automate: compare the same small business workflows

Choose processes the team understands and where an error has an identifiable consequence. Describe the inputs, expected result, exceptions and person who will accept the outcome. Give both implementations the same fictional data, access conditions and success criteria. Record constraints discovered during scoping instead of hiding them behind a simplified demonstration path.

The proposed comparison covers a purchase approval, document extraction and CRM synchronization. These are scenarios to build and measure; no benchmark has been executed for this article. If customer or order records differ across applications, first decide which system owns each field in your custom CRM and ERP. Unclear data ownership will undermine either prototype, regardless of its interface or connector catalogue.

For approval, start with a fictional purchase request containing an amount, requester and attachment. An authorized person accepts or rejects it; an absence follows an agreed delegation rule. Check that a late reply cannot reverse a completed decision. The expected evidence includes the decision, decision maker, time and status shown to the requester. A successful notification alone does not establish that the process works.

For document extraction, use the same simulated invoices, including an unreadable document and an unknown supplier reference. Define required fields and the handling of uncertain values before selecting a model or connector. Count records accepted automatically separately from records sent for human review. Record extraction service or model charges in addition to orchestration costs, so that the comparison uses the same scope.

For CRM synchronization, send an address change, replay the event and introduce a concurrent edit in the other system. Agree on the conflict rule before running the scenario. The record should retain the correct identifier and an understandable explanation of the decision. Completing an initial transfer does not establish whether recovery after an outage will preserve the intended data.

The official price record checked on November 7, 2026 lists n8n Starter at EUR 20 per month for 2,500 executions and Pro at EUR 50 for 10,000, billed annually. An execution is a workflow run rather than each individual operation. Those plans do not describe the full cost of a self-hosted installation. Check n8n's plan terms and capacity when preparing the budget.

The Canadian Power Automate pricing page lists Premium at CAD 20.40 per user per month, Process at CAD 203.50 per bot per month and Hosted Process at CAD 291.70 per bot per month. These prices require an annual commitment and exclude tax. Entitlements depend on the trigger, connectors and usage context, among other conditions. Have the licensing arrangement confirmed for each proposed scenario.

Simply converting those figures into a common currency would leave important differences unresolved. Record the billed unit, affected users, environments, external service calls and actual capacity required. The Microsoft licensing FAQ distinguishes several execution contexts. An existing Microsoft 365 subscription does not establish that every planned flow is covered. Include the review outcome in the cost sheet.

Ask each prototype owner to recover a record after a simulated interruption. Time diagnosis and recovery when the exercise is actually performed. Note who receives the alert, which evidence identifies the affected record and whether retrying could repeat a write. Recovery that depends on the original builder creates a staffing dependency that belongs in the decision record.

Next, change an approval threshold or a mandatory field. Keep a record of the steps required to adapt the workflow, repeat relevant checks and release the change. Initial build time does not measure maintenance. Backups, updates and support availability also belong in the CRM and ERP automation budget. An inexpensive prototype may still need a substantial operating commitment from a small team.

n8n uses a source-available, fair-code licence rather than an OSI open source licence. Review the intended use against the official n8n licence FAQ, especially when customers can create or configure workflows. Internal business use and embedding an editor in a product offered to customers raise different licensing questions. Resolve that boundary before selecting an architecture or promising customer access.

Consider a fictional company that approves purchases in Microsoft 365 and connects a specialist business application through an API. A hybrid design could keep approvals in Power Automate while n8n performs a particular transformation. That option still needs validation against the actual connectors, permissions and requirements. It adds a boundary to monitor and an operational responsibility to assign.

Specify which system creates the operation identifier, which determines the final business status and who handles incidents between them. Prevent two flows from repeatedly triggering each other whenever a record changes. A custom web application can expose exceptions to operations staff when the tool interfaces do not support the required process. Include that interface's maintenance in the comparison, alongside the integration work.

Give every scenario an observed result, known limitation, documented cost and owner. Failure to obtain required access can rule out an option despite an attractive demonstration. A straightforward need that the team can operate and maintain may justify a choice without another architectural layer. Set acceptance criteria before the final review so that the preferred tool does not determine which measurements are considered important.