Make.com is a hugely popular no-code automation tool — but its heart is app-to-app integration, with AI added on top, which differs from osFoundry, an AI-first “Hybrid AI Orchestration Platform.” Here’s a factual look for a US business, with sources cited. (dgm implements osFoundry, a separate company’s platform — we are not osFoundry.)
At a glance
| osFoundry | Make.com | |
|---|---|---|
| Core focus | AI-first orchestration + consolidation | No-code app integration (iPaaS) + AI (beta) |
| Models | Bring your own, any provider | Make AI provider or your own LLM key |
| Self-host | Cloud-neutral (confirmed in assessment) | Cloud-only (no self-host) |
| Pricing | Via dgm: $399 / $3,999/mo | Credit-based; Free → ~$29/mo Teams |
| SaaS consolidation | Designed to consolidate | Connects apps (adds integrations) |
What Make.com is
Make.com (formerly Integromat, now owned by process-mining company Celonis) is a no-code visual automation and integration platform — an iPaaS — using a drag-and-drop scenario builder to connect 3,000+ apps and APIs. It has added AI capabilities, including native model modules and “Make AI Agents” (in beta). Its center of gravity is connecting apps and moving data between them, with AI as a newer layer.
osFoundry is AI-first by design: an orchestration layer for agents, automations, and apps with the explicit goal of consolidating overlapping SaaS — not primarily an integration bus.
Models and AI
Make is model-agnostic for AI steps: native modules for OpenAI, Anthropic Claude, Google Gemini, and Stability AI, and you can use Make’s AI provider or your own LLM key. Its AI Agents are in beta. osFoundry is likewise model-agnostic, applied across orchestration rather than as modules bolted into integration scenarios. So both are flexible on models — the difference is whether AI is the core or an add-on.
Security and data
Make is cloud-only, with no self-hosting option (its infrastructure runs on AWS; the specific region isn’t publicly stated). For a business needing self-hosting or strict data-location control, that’s a real consideration. Make’s parent registers under EU-US and Swiss-US Data Privacy Frameworks. With osFoundry, dgm confirms data controls and residency against your requirements during the integration assessment, so the review is explicit to your needs.
Pricing
Make uses credit-based pricing: a free tier plus Core ($9/month), Pro
($16), and Teams (~$29), scaling with credits, and Enterprise custom. It’s affordable to start, but
credit-based billing can become unpredictable at scale — a recurring theme in third-party reviews,
especially as AI actions can cost more credits. dgm’s osFoundry engagement pricing is fixed and public
instead: $399 assessment and $3,999/month integration, with no per-seat fees.
Integration bus vs AI-first orchestration
The core difference is orientation. Make is an integration platform — superb at wiring apps together, with AI added recently. osFoundry is AI-first orchestration — agents and automations at the center, with the explicit aim of consolidating tools rather than just connecting them. If your need is broad no-code app integration your team builds, Make is excellent; if it’s AI-first orchestration and consolidation delivered for you, osFoundry fits better. They can also be complementary, with Make handling integrations beneath an AI orchestration layer.
Who each is best for
Make is the stronger choice if you want broad, affordable no-code app integration and your team is happy to build scenarios. osFoundry is the stronger choice if you want AI-first orchestration and SaaS consolidation delivered for you with fixed cost.
Which should a US company choose?
If app-to-app automation your team builds is the priority, Make is a strong, affordable option. If AI-first orchestration and consolidation matter more, then osFoundry is the more direct fit. dgm assesses your goals, recommends the right path for a US business, and implements it end to end.