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

Betterplace vs iRaiser

Betterplace logo
Betterplace
— · 2 countries

German and Austrian nonprofits and social-cause project owners that want a trusted, charitable, German-run donation platform with low pass-through costs and local data handling.

iRaiser logo
iRaiser
— · 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

Of every 100 donated, iRaiser delivers 0.65 more per 100 to the recipient than Betterplace.

Each platform is priced in its own currency: Betterplace in EUR, iRaiser in GBP.

Fees by method · the United Kingdom

Per-method pricing.

Payment method Per transaction Of €100, recipient gets Notes
SEPA Direct Debit 2.8% + €0.00 €97.20 Flat 2.8% retained across all methods to cover processing.
Credit card 2.8% + €0.00 €97.20 Flat 2.8% retained across all methods to cover processing.
The evidence

Side-by-side.

Metric Betterplace iRaiser
Recipient gets (per 100) €97.20 £97.85★ winner
Platform fee 0% 0%
Payment processing fee 2.8% + €0.00 1.9% + £0.25★ winner
Trustpilot 4.8 (851)★ winner — (0)
Country coverage 2 countries 19 countries★ winner
Data residency
Languages 2 5★ winner
Payment methods supported 6 23★ winner
Verdict

Winner by category.

Better fees
iRaiser

£97.85 vs €97.20 reaches the recipient.

Higher Trustpilot rating
Betterplace

4.8 vs — on Trustpilot.

Wider country coverage
iRaiser

19 vs 2 countries.

Better for European fundraisers
Tied

Both share the same residency posture.

Pick by fit

Choose based on who you are.

Choose Betterplace if

German and Austrian nonprofits and social-cause project owners that want a trusted, charitable, German-run donation platform with low pass-through costs and local data handling.

  • Operated by the charitable betterplace.org gGmbH — a nonprofit, mission-aligned platform.
  • Roughly 2.8% transaction fee, with the large majority of each donation passing to the project.
  • Free for organisations to set up and run campaigns.
  • Supports credit card, PayPal, SEPA Direct Debit, and bank wire transfer.
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, Betterplace or iRaiser?

Of every 100 donated, Betterplace delivers approximately €97.20 to the recipient and iRaiser delivers approximately £97.85. Real costs depend on the payment method donors choose.

Which is better for European nonprofits?

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

Which platform has more country coverage?

Betterplace operates in 2 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 →