givingplatforms.com

Language & region

Pick the language you want the site in, and the country you're fundraising in or from. We use this to default the dominant payment method and currency.

Verified · 2026-06-02 Ownership disclosure
Head-to-head

Chuffed vs iRaiser

Chuffed logo
Chuffed
AU · 29 countries

Nonprofits, social enterprises, and community-cause organisers in 29 supported countries who want a 100%-free, tip-funded platform and are willing to complete identity verification before launching.

iRaiser logo
iRaiser
EEA · 19 countries

Established European nonprofits, foundations, hospitals, and cultural institutions that want branded, self-hosted fundraising tools — forms, peer-to-peer, crowdfunding, and events — under their own identity.

No rating yet
Read full review →
The headline

On a £100 donation, iRaiser delivers £5.65 more to the recipient than Chuffed.

Our verdict

What the data says.

Paying by Credit card, iRaiser delivers about £5.65 more of every £100 donated than Chuffed (£97.85 vs £92.20).

iRaiser stores donor data inside the EEA — a practical advantage for GDPR-sensitive campaigns — while Chuffed does not.

Fees by method · the United Kingdom

Per-method pricing vs iRaiser.

Payment method Per transaction Of £100, recipient gets Notes iRaiser · fee iRaiser gets Delta
Credit card 7.8% + £0.00 £92.20 4.9% platform fee 1.9% + £0.25 £97.85 £-5.65
The evidence

Side-by-side.

Metric Chuffed iRaiser
Recipient gets (£100) £92.20 £97.85★ winner
Platform fee 4.9% 0%★ winner
Payment processing fee 2.9% + £0.00 1.9% + £0.25★ winner
Trustpilot 4.8 (668)★ winner — (0)
Country coverage 29 countries★ winner 19 countries
Data residency AU EEA★ winner
Languages 4 5★ winner
Payment methods supported 5 23★ winner
Verdict

Winner by category.

Better fees
iRaiser

£97.85 vs £92.20 reaches the recipient.

Higher Trustpilot rating
Chuffed

4.8 vs — on Trustpilot.

Wider country coverage
Chuffed

29 vs 19 countries.

Better for European fundraisers
iRaiser

EEA data residency for GDPR-sensitive donor data.

Pick by fit

Choose based on who you are.

Choose Chuffed if

Nonprofits, social enterprises, and community-cause organisers in 29 supported countries who want a 100%-free, tip-funded platform and are willing to complete identity verification before launching.

  • Free to launch — no signup or monthly fees.
  • Optional donor-tip model can make campaigns effectively free to run.
  • Three flexible fee structures (keep-100%, shared, and flat-fee) to suit different campaigns.
  • Mission-aligned: operates as a Social Benefit Company weighing social and community impact.
Read full review →
Choose iRaiser if

Established European nonprofits, foundations, hospitals, and cultural institutions that want branded, self-hosted fundraising tools — forms, peer-to-peer, crowdfunding, and events — under their own identity.

  • Branded, self-hosted fundraising tools (donation forms, peer-to-peer, crowdfunding, events, ticketing) under the nonprofit's own identity.
  • Configurable Flex Editor for tailoring donation journeys.
  • Established European focus, reporting more than 900 charities served across the region.
  • Suited to larger nonprofits, foundations, hospitals, and cultural institutions with dedicated fundraising teams.
Read full review →
Also consider

A third option.

1%Club

Dutch and other social-impact initiators running Global-Goals-aligned campaigns who value personal coaching and community-building over a high-volume, self-serve crowdfunding marketplace.

More head-to-heads

Other comparisons.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

Which is cheaper, Chuffed or iRaiser?

On a £100 donation, Chuffed delivers approximately £92.20 to the recipient and iRaiser delivers approximately £97.85. Real costs depend on the payment method donors choose.

Which is better for European nonprofits?

iRaiser is generally better suited to European nonprofits handling GDPR-sensitive donor data because of its EEA data residency.

Which platform has more country coverage?

Chuffed operates in 29 countries; iRaiser operates in 19.

How we rank

Rankings are produced by a public editorial methodology — open to peer review. We disclose ownership, scoring weights, and every change.

Read methodology →