White label n8n development, built to be handed over
We build n8n workflows that other agencies sell under their own name. You scope the outcome with your client; we build, test and document the automation, and keep it running.
The difference between a workflow that survives and one that quietly stops is almost never the build. It is error handling, logging, and whether anybody finds out when a run fails.
Why agencies outsource the n8n layer rather than learn it
n8n is approachable enough that an agency can wire a first workflow in an afternoon, and deceptive enough that the same workflow fails in production for reasons nobody anticipated: an API changing shape, a rate limit, a duplicate record, a credential expiring.
The build is a day. Making it survive contact with a real business is the job, and it is the part a general agency has no reason to be good at.
Where this has actually run. Wobble has run 25 client engagements across six countries, and every one is published with its outcome rather than described in general terms. See the work, with the numbers.
What a workflow we hand you contains
A workflow built here arrives with error branches rather than a single happy path, retries with sensible limits, a dead letter path so nothing is lost silently, logging that a non-technical person can read, and an alert that names a human when something needs attention.
It also arrives with a written runbook: what it does, what it touches, what to check first when it misbehaves, and how to turn it off without breaking anything else.
Hosted where it should be, not where it suits us
Three options, and the right one depends on the client rather than on us. In the client's own n8n instance, which keeps everything inside their boundary. In your agency's instance, if you want one place to manage every client. Or in ours while the engagement is young, with a documented migration path out.
Whichever is chosen, the credentials belong to the client and the export belongs to you. Hosting is not a lock-in mechanism.
Where n8n is the wrong answer
If the task is a single scheduled script, a workflow tool is overhead. If the volume is very high and the logic is simple, code is cheaper to run and easier to test. If the process needs human judgement at every step, automating it produces a faster version of the wrong decision.
We would rather say so at the scoping call than build something your client resents paying to maintain.
Answers to what agencies ask before they book
Do you work in our n8n instance or your own?
Either, and also the client's. The credentials stay with whoever owns the account, and you always get the workflow export, so the hosting choice is reversible.
Can our team maintain what you build?
That is the intent. Every workflow ships with a runbook, readable logging and named error paths, and we will walk your team through it. If you would rather we keep operating it, that is a separate arrangement rather than a dependency we create on purpose.
How fast can a workflow be built?
A single well-scoped workflow is usually days rather than weeks, and the scoping is the part worth slowing down. We would rather spend an extra call on what should happen when the integration fails than ship quickly and debug in your client's account.
Do you do Make or Zapier too?
Yes, and the choice should follow the client's constraints rather than our preference. n8n suits self-hosting, data that cannot leave a boundary, and heavier logic; the hosted tools suit simple, low-volume automations a client's own team will edit.
Bring one workflow and we will show you
Pick the piece of delivery that costs your agency the most hours this month. We will show you what it looks like built, under your brand, before anybody signs anything. The call is free. The diagnosis is not.
Book AI Readiness Call ↗