Pipedream vs Activepieces vs n8n

Activepieces vs n8n is the open-source shortlist most Pipedream users end up with: both are visual builders with code steps, both can be self-hosted for free, and both bill by runs rather than steps. The differences are in the code languages, npm on the hosted plans, licensing, and how much of a Pipedream workflow you have to rebuild by hand.

Side by side

	Pipedream Workflows	Activepieces	n8n
Status	Shuts down March 31, 2027	Active	Active
License	Proprietary	MIT core + commercial EE folders	Sustainable Use License (fair-code)
Self-host	No	Free Community Edition	Free Community Edition
Code languages	Node.js, Python, Go, Bash	TypeScript	JavaScript, Python
npm on hosted plan	Yes	Yes, per the vendor	No (crypto, moment only on n8n Cloud)
npm self-hosted	n/a	Yes	Yes, allow-listed
Webhook trigger	Yes	Yes	Yes
Billing unit	Credits (compute time)	Credits: 1 per run, more for AI steps	Executions
Import from Pipedream	n/a	No	No native import; third-party converters

Sources: Pipedream; Activepieces license, pricing, code steps, flows; n8n Code node, license, pricing.

Code

Activepieces code steps are TypeScript. The vendor says each step runs in its own sandboxed isolate and that npm packages are allowed. There are no Python code steps, so Pipedream Python steps need a rewrite.

n8n runs JavaScript and Python in the Code node. On n8n Cloud, only crypto and moment can be loaded and Python can't import anything. On self-hosted n8n, you install packages in the task runner image and allow-list them (npm guide).

If your Pipedream steps are npm-heavy JavaScript and you don't want to run servers, Activepieces' hosted plan is worth a test. If they include Python, or you will self-host anyway, n8n covers more.

Licensing

Activepieces' core is MIT, a permissive open-source license; enterprise features sit in separately licensed folders. n8n's Sustainable Use License is fair-code: free for internal business use and consulting, but not for offering n8n to customers as a product. For a company automating its own processes, both work.

Pricing

Activepieces counts one credit per run however many steps it has, with extra credits for AI steps (pricing). n8n Cloud counts one execution per run regardless of steps (pricing). Both are friendlier to multi-step workflows than per-task billing. Compare the current plan limits against your monthly event volume from Pipedream.

Migration effort

This is where the two differ most for Pipedream users today. Neither platform imports Pipedream workflows. For n8n, the Pipedream export can be converted: code steps wrapped in Code nodes, HTTP triggers mapped to Webhook nodes, schedules to Schedule Triggers. Our converter does this in your browser and tries to rebuild branches as If and Switch nodes, but branch conditions must be checked by hand after import. The free report shows what converts for each workflow. The report and 1 workflow are free. Full export: $3 per workflow, $19 minimum — coming soon. See pricing. For Activepieces, we know of no converter, so the move is a rebuild.

Credentials and webhook senders are manual on both, because Pipedream doesn't export secrets and its URLs stop working.

Verdict

• Pick n8n if you have Python steps, many workflows to move, or want a converter instead of a rebuild.
• Pick Activepieces if you need npm on a hosted plan and an MIT-licensed core, and the number of workflows is small enough to rebuild.

More options: Pipedream alternatives. Head-to-head with n8n: Pipedream vs n8n.

Not affiliated with Pipedream, Activepieces or n8n.