Decagon vs Make.com Agents: 2026 comparison
Conversational support agents that resolve tickets like your best reps.
Visual workflow automation with AI agents — drag-and-drop scenarios across 2,000+ apps.
Decagon vs Make.com Agents — specs
| Spec | Decagon | Make.com Agents |
|---|---|---|
| Agent Rank | 72 / 100 (A) | 83 / 100 (A) |
| Autonomy | Autonomous | Semi-autonomous |
| Pricing | Subscription · Free tier | Freemium · from $9 |
| Open source | No | No |
| Capabilities | Tool use, Memory, RAG | Tool use, Memory, Multi-agent |
| Integrations | 3 apps | 8 apps |
| Verified | Verified | Verified |
| Released | Apr 2025 | Feb 2025 |
Agent Rank breakdown
- Autonomy fit
- 9
- Capabilities
- 6
- Integrations
- 4
- Pricing value
- 9
- Polish & maturity
- 5
- Verifiability
- 10
Auto-computed from autonomy, capabilities, integrations, pricing, maturity and editorial verification. Updated every deploy. How is this computed?
- Autonomy fit
- 8
- Capabilities
- 6
- Integrations
- 10
- Pricing value
- 8
- Polish & maturity
- 8
- Verifiability
- 10
Auto-computed from autonomy, capabilities, integrations, pricing, maturity and editorial verification. Updated every deploy. How is this computed?
Pros & cons
- +Chat-first agent with consistently 65–75% tier-1 deflection in production
- +Deep integration with existing helpdesks (Zendesk / Intercom / Salesforce)
- +Mid-market priced — easier conversation than Sierra
- −Voice support exists but is not the strength
- −Sales-led — no self-serve sign-up
- −Per-resolution pricing can sting if tickets spike unexpectedly
- +Visual scenario builder is the most accessible automation tool besides Zapier
- +Cheapest AI-agent automation tier on the market ($9)
- +Strong on multi-step branching scenarios where Zapier feels limiting
- −Operations math is opaque at first — every step costs ops
- −Smaller AI feature set than Lindy / Relay built-from-scratch agent platforms
- −European data residency only on paid tiers
Pricing
- +Per-resolution pricing
- +Zendesk / Intercom integration
- +Onboarding included
- +Custom integrations
- +SSO + audit log
- +Dedicated CSM
- +1,000 operations/mo
- +No agent features
- +2 active scenarios
- +10,000 ops/mo
- +AI agent nodes
- +Webhooks + schedules
- +10,000 ops base + add-ons
- +Priority queue
- +Custom variables
- +Shared scenarios
- +Roles + admin
- +Higher ops base
Which one should you pick?
Pick Decagon if cost is the main constraint or if you want the highest autonomy and the verification loop is in place.
Try Decagon →Pick Make.com Agents if your stack spans many tools and integration depth is the constraint.
Try Make.com Agents →Affiliate links. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.
Frequently asked
Should I pick Decagon or Make.com Agents in 2026?+
Pick Decagon if cost is the main constraint or if you want the highest autonomy and the verification loop is in place. Pick Make.com Agents if your stack spans many tools and integration depth is the constraint. Most working teams running both can use Decagon for primary work and Make.com Agents for the workflows where its specific strengths matter.
What's the price difference between Decagon and Make.com Agents?+
Decagon starts at Subscription · Free tier; Make.com Agents starts at Freemium · from $9. Decagon is the cheaper entry option. For team deployments the TCO can differ — use the AI Agent Rank TCO calculator for your specific volume.
Which is more autonomous, Decagon or Make.com Agents?+
Decagon is the more autonomous of the two (Autonomous vs Semi-autonomous). Higher autonomy ships throughput faster but requires verification loops in place — see our autonomous-vs-copilot framing for when each tier wins.