cua vs Make (Integromat)

cua and Make (Integromat) are both workflow automation tracked by AIDiveForge. Below is a side-by-side comparison of pricing, capabilities, platforms, and ownership — sourced from each tool's live website and verified before publishing.

cua

Cua provisions cross-OS fleets from a single API, forks machine state over copy-on-write snapshots so you can reproduce failures without rebuilding from scratch, and serves pre-booted machines from warm pools that claim in milliseconds. The open-source Cua Driver runs background desktop automation on macOS and Windows — agents click, type, scroll, and inspect accessibility trees without stealing your cursor. Linux support in Cua Driver is in pre-release, so teams with Linux-heavy desktop workflows will hit that wall immediately. At scale, you either point your training loop at live warm pools or order verified trajectory datasets that arrive pre-packaged for your ingestion pipeline.

Make (Integromat)

Make lets you build automation sequences by dragging operations onto a canvas—no coding required. You're essentially replacing repetitive work (data entry, email sends, syncing spreadsheets to CRMs) with conditional logic that runs on schedule or trigger. The free tier includes 1,000 operations per month; paid plans start around $10/month for 10,000 operations. The honest catch: the free plan's operation limit exhausts quickly for serious workflows, and the visual builder can feel clunky for genuinely complex logic compared to traditional automation code.

Attribute	cua	Make (Integromat)
Pricing	Paid	Paid
Price	—	$9.99/mo
Free trial	No	No
Open source	Yes	No
Has API	Yes	Yes
Self-hosted option	Yes	No
Platforms	macOS, Windows, Linux (pre-release), Android	Web, API
Languages	—	English
Released	—	2013
Pros	One API boots Linux, Windows, macOS, and Android machines across six local runtimes or the cloud, so you stop maintaining separate provisioning scripts for each OS your agents target. Copy-on-write snapshot forking lets you branch from a known machine state for every parallel episode, which means failures reproduce against the exact environment that produced them — no manual state reconstruction. Warm pools serve pre-booted machines in milliseconds, so large parallel eval batches do not serialize on cold-start latency the way they do with on-demand VM provisioning. Cua Driver runs background desktop automation without capturing focus or the cursor, so an agent can operate continuously on a developer's machine without interrupting their session — the thing that makes persistent eval loops on shared hardware viable. MIT-licensed open-source control and eval layers mean you can audit, fork, and self-host the Driver and Bench components, so vendor lock-in on the core automation interface is not a forcing function.	Easy to use for non-technical users Extensive integration options Automate complex workflows
Cons	Cua Driver's Linux desktop backend is in pre-release. Teams whose agents target Linux native apps cannot ship production automation against it — they run macOS or Windows coverage and maintain a separate path for Linux, or they wait on a release timeline the docs do not commit to. Verified trajectory datasets are produced and scored by Cua's own evaluators running on Cua's environments. Teams with strict data-provenance requirements or proprietary app surfaces that cannot be handed to a third-party fleet will need to run their own rollouts, which folds the full harness-management burden back onto them. The benchmark data the vendor surfaces — the best frontier agent clearing 6 of 25 expert KiCad tasks — scopes to a narrow expert domain. Teams trying to predict how their agent will perform on general enterprise UI workflows have precious little external validation data to anchor against, and will need to author their own Cua Bench evals before the infrastructure investment pays off.	Limited free plan functionality Some advanced features require paid tiers

Bottom line

Cua is open source. Choose based on which difference matters most for your workflow.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between cua and Make (Integromat)?

cua is Paid and open source, while Make (Integromat) is Paid. Compare pricing, free trial, API, platforms, and pros/cons in the table above on AIDiveForge.

Is cua better than Make (Integromat)?

It depends on your workflow. Use the side-by-side attributes (pricing, open source, API, self-hosted, platforms) to decide. AIDiveForge does not rank a universal winner — we publish verified facts so you can choose.