Loading…
Migration
Zapier was the right tool when you needed automations fast without engineering resources. At scale, the per-task pricing becomes material, the polling delays become product issues, and the code steps hiding real logic become a maintenance problem.
We replace your Zap workflows with a custom Node.js or Python backend, webhooks instead of polling, queued jobs with proper retry logic, and the same automations running at a fraction of the cost on infrastructure you own.
Tell us what you’re automating.
Four signals that Zapier has become the constraint, not the solution.
Zapier charges per task execution. At low volume (a few thousand tasks per month) the cost is negligible. At 100,000+ tasks per month, you're paying $500–$2,000 per month for the same operations that would cost $20–$50 on your own infrastructure. The break-even point is usually between 30,000 and 60,000 tasks per month depending on your Zapier plan.
Zapier's free and lower tiers poll for new data every 15 minutes. Even on higher tiers, webhook latency adds seconds to every trigger. If your workflows need to respond to events in near real-time (a payment arrives, a form is submitted, a status changes) polling-based execution is the wrong architecture. Webhooks on your own backend respond in milliseconds.
You've hit the point where every Zap includes a Code step, a JavaScript or Python block that contains actual logic. When the logic lives in Zap code steps rather than in a real codebase, it's untestable, unversioned, and invisible to your engineering team. At that point, Zapier is just expensive glue holding together logic that belongs in code.
Zapier's reliability is good but not excellent. Failed Zap runs are retried, but error visibility is limited, replay is manual, and there's no way to build idempotency guarantees into the execution layer. For workflows where every execution must complete exactly once (financial transactions, inventory updates, CRM records) Zapier's execution model is a liability.
A custom backend with webhooks, queues, and the same automations, but owned, tested, and monitored.
Replace Zapier's polling triggers with direct webhooks. Events from your systems call your backend directly, no polling delay, no per-trigger cost, and full control over retry and failure handling.
Zap-equivalent workflows implemented as queued jobs with retries, dead-letter queues, and idempotency keys. If a downstream API is temporarily unavailable, the job retries automatically without intervention.
Every Zap in your account mapped to an equivalent function in the custom backend. The logic is in code, tested, version-controlled, and deployed alongside the rest of your engineering infrastructure.
Structured logging for every workflow execution, error alerting when jobs fail beyond retry limits, and a dashboard showing execution counts, latency, and failure rate per workflow.
Not every Zapier workflow needs to be migrated. We'll tell you which ones make sense and which ones don't.
Teams spending under $100/month on Zapier
At low task volumes, the cost of a custom backend exceeds the savings. The migration makes financial sense when you're spending $300/month or more on tasks, or when reliability and latency requirements are constraints regardless of cost.
Teams with entirely simple linear Zaps
If your Zaps are straightforward trigger-action pairs with no logic, no branching, and no code steps, Zapier may be the right tool. We'll tell you this during discovery rather than migrating something that doesn't need to be migrated.