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 voordekunst

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.

voordekunst logo
voordekunst
EU · 1 countries

Dutch and Flemish artists, creative makers, and cultural institutions running concrete, project-based campaigns who value sector specialization and hands-on crowdfunding coaching.

No rating yet
Read full review →
The headline

Of every 100 donated, Chuffed delivers 0.67 more per 100 to the recipient than voordekunst.

Each platform is priced in its own currency: Chuffed in GBP, voordekunst in EUR.

Our verdict

What the data says.

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

On the headline numbers, Chuffed and voordekunst are closely matched — the better pick comes down to Credit card availability, language coverage, and where your donors are.

Fees by method · the United Kingdom

Per-method pricing.

Payment method Per transaction Of £100, recipient gets Notes
Credit card 7.8% + £0.00 £92.20 4.9% platform fee
The evidence

Side-by-side.

Metric Chuffed voordekunst
Recipient gets (per 100) £92.20★ winner €91.53
Platform fee 4.9%★ winner 8.47%
Payment processing fee 2.9% + £0.00★ winner 0% + €0.00
Trustpilot 4.8 (668)★ winner — (0)
Country coverage 29 countries★ winner 1 countries
Data residency AU EU★ winner
Languages 4★ winner 1
Payment methods supported 5★ winner 0
Verdict

Winner by category.

Better fees
Chuffed

£92.20 vs €91.53 reaches the recipient.

Higher Trustpilot rating
Chuffed

4.8 vs — on Trustpilot.

Wider country coverage
Chuffed

29 vs 1 countries.

Better for European fundraisers
voordekunst

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 voordekunst if

Dutch and Flemish artists, creative makers, and cultural institutions running concrete, project-based campaigns who value sector specialization and hands-on crowdfunding coaching.

  • Deep specialization in arts and culture with vetted, project-based campaigns.
  • Operated by a CBF-recognized charitable foundation with funds held in trust.
  • Hands-on coaching, workshops, and editorial guidance for campaign makers.
  • Supports iDEAL, credit card, PayPal, plus Bancontact, Maestro, and Sofort.
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 voordekunst?

Of every 100 donated, Chuffed delivers approximately £92.20 to the recipient and voordekunst delivers approximately €91.53. Real costs depend on the payment method donors choose.

Which is better for European nonprofits?

voordekunst 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; voordekunst operates in 1.

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 →