Nango.dev alternatives

The race to build integrations faster has reshaped how modern SaaS products compete. What starts as a handful of integration requests from customers quickly snowballs into hundreds of integration requirements, and suddenly your dev roadmap is buried under maintenance work.

That’s where unified integration platforms like Nango.dev market themselves—promising to simplify building integrations with “open source” infrastructure and developer-first tooling. But as many teams have learned, open source doesn’t always mean easy or complete. Hosting, sync logic, and management still create operational drag that slows you down just when you need to scale.

Let’s look at how Nango.dev really stacks up and which modern alternatives—especially Membrane—are redefining how integrations get built in 2025.

A quick look at Nango.dev

While Nango advertises itself as an open-source integration platform, only a small part (the API proxy) is actually open. Other integration vendors go the opposite route: they handle the heavy lifting for you, building integrations in weeks—but with the caveat that you’re often locked into their infrastructure and data models, leaving little room for customization or control.

Users looking to self-host Nango syncs will find that it needs to be supported, with only authorization and proxying being self-hostable. That means for businesses that prioritize data authority and wish to manage their integrations within their infrastructure, this limitation is a critical factor to consider.

Nango.dev lets you build integrations manually and manage each one individually, which can be fine for smaller projects but starts to feel repetitive as you scale. Their custom sync documentation also doesn’t clearly outline how to add new apps that aren’t already included in Nango’s catalogue.  

Which is the best Nango.dev alternative?

Membrane (formerly Integration.app) emerges as a strong contender, especially for businesses seeking deep customization and scalability. Here’s why it stands out:

• Build with AI: Membrane is the only integration platform where AI actually builds integrations for you. Just describe what you need, and the Membrane Agent generates production-ready integrations in minutes — not weeks.
• Complete integration infrastructure for your SaaS: Built from the ground up for integrations—authentication, data mapping, sync logic, and error handling work automatically.
• Unlimited flexibility: Connect to any app with an API, define your own data models and configure via API, CLI, or MCP (no vendor lock-in). 
• Transparent pricing: Membrane’s pricing structure matches your business model with capped pricing that doesn’t grow out of control and offers a free proof of concept before you commit. 

Merge.dev

The choice between Nango.dev and Merge.dev depends on the specific integration needs, desired level of control and customization, and the targeted application domain. Nango offers more flexibility and control for custom integrations, while Merge provides a broad range of pre-built integrations with a unified data model, suited for standardized integration needs. It’s a solid choice for clean, scalable integrations (especially across HR, payroll, and recruiting use cases), but it also has downsides. Merge’s model is based on pre-built connectors and fixed data models. That means it shines for simple, standard integrations, but can hit limits when you need something more flexible or to go beyond their list of provided connectors. 

Nango’s strength over Merge

Nango’s open unified API architecture allows customization of pre-built integrations and development of custom integrations, offering full control while minimizing maintenance overhead. This makes it a better fit for those needing access to data or APIs not included in Merge’s model, or for those who wish to avoid constraints by external providers.

Nango’s weakness over Merge

Merge.dev’s strength lies in its extensive range of pre-built integrations and a unified data model, making it suitable for a wide array of standardized integration requirements, especially in HR, payroll, accounting, CRM, and ticketing.

Tray Embedded

Tray Embedded is known for its extensive connector library and visual workflow builder. However, it struggles with custom connector development, scalability, and API limitations. Its high pricing model can be prohibitive for many businesses.

Nango’s strength over Tray

Nango’s approach might be more cost-effective for startups or businesses with specific integration needs, while Tray’s higher starting price might be a consideration for smaller companies or those with limited budgets.

Nango’s weakness over Tray

Nango emphasizes removing the infrastructural burden from developers, whereas Tray offers a rich visual workflow builder, which is user-friendly but might not scale well for complex integrations.

Apideck

Nango offers more control and flexibility for developers who need to create or customize their integrations deeply, while Apideck is suited for those seeking an integration marketplace and simpler, more managed integration experiences, albeit with some limitations in terms of customization and integration depth.

Nango vs Apideck

Nango seems more suited for developers who need a balance of pre-built and custom integrations, while Apideck may appeal to those looking for a marketplace to showcase integrations and simpler, managed integration experiences

The outcome

While each platform has its strengths, Membrane is a robust choice for businesses looking for a blend of customization, scalability, and developer-friendliness. Its AI-driven approach to integration creation and flexible pricing makes it an attractive option for a range of integration needs, setting it apart from Nango.dev and other competitors.