Flowable vs n8n
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted automation & workflows options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Flowable
Lightweight business process engine with BPMN and DMN
VS
n8n
Workflow automation with a node-based editor
| Feature | Flowable | n8n |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Automation & Workflows | Automation & Workflows |
| License | Apache-2.0 | Sustainable Use License |
| Language | Java | TypeScript |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 1,024 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | docker, kubernetes, bare-metal | docker, bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 9,447 | ★ 199,764 |
| First released | 2016 | 2019 |
| Replaces | Microsoft Power Automate, Camunda | Zapier, Make |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Flowable or n8n better?
n8n is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler medium setup. Consider Flowable if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Flowable and n8n free and open-source?
Yes. Flowable is licensed under Apache-2.0 and n8n under Sustainable Use License. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Flowable and n8n with Docker?
Flowable: yes. n8n: yes.