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 · 2026-06-08 Ownership disclosure
Head-to-head

Alvarum vs Payzone Fundraising

Alvarum logo
Alvarum
France · 0 countries

French and European charities and associations running cause-based or sports-challenge fundraising who want donations paid directly to the beneficiary and support for European local payment methods.

No rating yet
Read full review →
Payzone Fundraising logo
Payzone Fundraising
— · 1 countries

Irish charities, clubs, schools, and community organisations that want simple cashless fundraising, including donation pages, events, and recurring giving, backed by an established Irish payments company.

No rating yet
Read full review →
The headline

Of every 100 donated, Alvarum delivers 1.54 more per 100 to the recipient than Payzone Fundraising.

Each platform is priced in its own currency: Alvarum in EUR, Payzone Fundraising in GBP.

The evidence

Side-by-side.

Metric Alvarum Payzone Fundraising
Recipient gets (per 100) €97.85★ winner £96.31
Platform fee 0%★ winner 3.69%
Payment processing fee 1.9% + €0.25★ winner 0% + £0.00
Trustpilot — (0) — (0)
Country coverage 0 countries 1 countries★ winner
Data residency France
Languages 2★ winner 1
Payment methods supported 1★ winner 0
Verdict

Winner by category.

Better fees
Alvarum

€97.85 vs £96.31 reaches the recipient.

Higher Trustpilot rating
Tied

— vs — on Trustpilot.

Wider country coverage
Payzone Fundraising

1 vs 0 countries.

Better for European fundraisers
Tied

Both share the same residency posture.

Pick by fit

Choose based on who you are.

Choose Alvarum if

French and European charities and associations running cause-based or sports-challenge fundraising who want donations paid directly to the beneficiary and support for European local payment methods.

  • Donations are routed directly to the beneficiary charity and settled on an automated monthly cycle rather than held by the platform.
  • Strong fit for sports-challenge and participatory event fundraising such as marathons and cycling events.
  • European local payment methods - iDEAL, Bancontact, Sofort, and SEPA direct debit - alongside Visa and Mastercard cards.
  • Payments handled by HiPay, a payment institution authorised by France's ACPR; Alvarum registered with ORIAS as a donation crowdfunding intermediary.
Read full review →
Choose Payzone Fundraising if

Irish charities, clubs, schools, and community organisations that want simple cashless fundraising, including donation pages, events, and recurring giving, backed by an established Irish payments company.

  • Backed by Payzone, an established Irish payments company, with familiar payment infrastructure.
  • Transparent transaction fee of 3% + VAT (about 3.69%) with no setup or monthly fees.
  • Option to pass the transaction charge to donors so the cause receives the full amount.
  • Supports campaigns, events, one-off and recurring donations, and merchandise sales.
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, Alvarum or Payzone Fundraising?

Of every 100 donated, Alvarum delivers approximately €97.85 to the recipient and Payzone Fundraising delivers approximately £96.31. Real costs depend on the payment method donors choose.

Which is better for European nonprofits?

Both platforms operate inside the EEA framework. Choose based on local payment-method coverage and language support.

Which platform has more country coverage?

Alvarum operates in 0 countries; Payzone Fundraising 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 →