Make vs Skyvern
Skyvern is a focused alternative rather than a drop-in Make replacement. Choose Skyvern when browser interaction—especially with portals lacking adequate APIs—is the main workflow and you want self-hosting plus Python, TypeScript, Playwright, REST, or visual-builder access. Choose Make when you need broad cross-application orchestration and its 3,000+ pre-built integrations; the supplied evidence does not establish a
Decision guide
The practical reasons to choose either option, based on documented capabilities.
Choose Skyvern if
- Developers embedding AI-assisted browser automation through Python, TypeScript, Playwright, REST, or MCP
- Operations teams automating authenticated portals, forms, file downloads, and structured data extraction
- Organizations requiring an AGPL-3.0 self-hosted deployment with their own infrastructure and LLM provider
Stay with Make if
- Workflows depend on Make’s 3,000+ pre-built app integrations rather than browser interfaces
- Teams need documented enterprise controls such as Make’s encryption, SSO, GDPR support, SOC 3, and SOC 2 Type II coverage; equivalent self-hosted Skyvern controls are not established by the supplied evidence
- A large existing Make scenario estate would require migration tooling; no Make scenario importer or compatibility path is documented here
Deployment and operations
Skyvern is AGPL-3.0 and can run as a managed cloud service or be self-hosted. Documented local options are pip with Python 3.11–3.13 or Docker Compose; pip defaults to SQLite, while Docker Compose bundles PostgreSQL. Self-hosters must configure an LLM provider and maintain the application, database, browser infrastructure, dependencies, and upgrades. The README records version-specific SQLite and dependency-resolution problems in 1.0.31 and recommends upgrading to 1.0.32+ or using uv. No
Feature fit
What Skyvern covers
- Visual multi-step workflows
- Prompt-driven automation
- Custom code blocks
- HTTP/API integration
- AI-agent task execution
- MCP integration
- Workflow run visibility
What’s different or missing
- No documented Make scenario importer
- No documented 3,000+ native app catalog
- No documented Make template compatibility
- No documented parity with Make’s SSO and compliance controls
Project snapshot
- GitHub stars
- 22,757
- Contributors
- 95
- Language
- Python
- Last commit
- Aug 15, 2026
- Latest release
- Aug 5, 2026
Categories: Workflow Automation
Sources and editorial review10 linked sources
Public documentation supports this comparison. Automation assists collection and classification; editorial standards and corrections remain the responsibility of Kris.
Automate browser based workflows with AI
repository description · github.comSkyvern automates browser-based workflows using LLMs and computer vision.
readme · github.comIt provides ... a no-code workflow builder to help both technical and non-technical users automate manual workflows on any website.
readme · github.comSupported workflow features include ... Sending emails ... HTTP Request Block ... Custom Code Block
readme · github.comOpen http://localhost:8080
readme · github.comInteract with systems that have no API
best for · skyvern.comUse this option if you want everything containerized (Postgres, API, UI) and don't want to install Python/Node locally.
deployment · github.comFull source code access (AGPL-3.0)
deployment · skyvern.comSupported workflow features include: 1. Browser Task 1. Browser Action 1. Data Extraction 1. Validation 1. For Loops 1. File parsing 1. Sending emails 1. Text Prompts 1. HTTP Request Block 1. Custom Code Block 1. Uploading files to block storage
shared feature · github.comYou hit a dependency-resolution conflict in 1.0.31. Either upgrade to 1.0.32+ or use uv: `uv pip install skyvern`.
deployment · github.com
