Softwr

Nonprofits · head to head

Candid vs Wild Apricot

Candid logo

Candid

Nonprofits

Funder and nonprofit data subscriptions from the organisation formed by Foundation Center and GuideStar

From
$219/month
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Wild Apricot logo

Wild Apricot

Nonprofits

Membership management for small associations and clubs

From
$60/month
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Candid grant records derive largely from Form 990 filings, which are published with a lag, so the database describes what a funder did up to eighteen months ago rather than what it intends to fund now.; Wild Apricot the website builder is dated and constrained, and organisations that care about their public site usually end up running a separate site alongside it
  • They diverge on capability: Candid covers Foundation Directory, Wild Apricot covers Member database.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Candid and Wild Apricot actually diverge.

Attributes where Candid and Wild Apricot differ
AttributeCandidWild Apricot
Starting price$219/month$60/month
Pricing modelPer user per month by tierPer month by contact count
PlatformsWeb, APIWeb, iOS, Android

Identical on both: free tier (No), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Nonprofits).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Candid

  • Foundation Directory
  • 990 based grant records
  • Nonprofit Profiles
  • Charity check
  • Data APIs and bulk feeds
  • Candid Learning
  • Funding Information Network

Only in Wild Apricot

  • Member database
  • Automated renewals
  • Event registration
  • Website builder
  • Online payments
  • Email and newsletters

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Candid

  • A development director building a list of foundations that have actually funded organisations of your size, sector and geography in the past three yearsnot Wild Apricot
  • A funder verifying US tax exempt status before releasing a grant paymentnot Wild Apricot
  • A software vendor embedding nonprofit organisation data and charity verification into its own productnot Wild Apricot
  • A nonprofit maintaining a transparency seal on its public profile because institutional funders check it before givingnot Wild Apricot

Wild Apricot

  • Small associations and clubs replacing a spreadsheet and a separate websitenot Candid
  • Volunteer-run organisations needing unlimited administrators without per-seat costnot Candid
  • Professional bodies handling dues renewals and a member directorynot Candid
  • Groups running paid events for members alongside membership subscriptionsnot Candid

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Candid

  • Grant records derive largely from Form 990 filings, which are published with a lag, so the database describes what a funder did up to eighteen months ago rather than what it intends to fund now.
  • Foundation Directory is a research database, not a pipeline tool: there is no proposal tracking, deadline management or task assignment, so most teams pay for a grants tracker alongside it.
  • Monthly pricing is high relative to the budget of a small nonprofit, and the same database is available free in person through partner libraries in the Funding Information Network, which makes the subscription hard to justify for occasional research.
  • Coverage is US-centric and built on the US tax filing system, so it is of limited use to organisations seeking funding from UK, EU or Commonwealth foundations.
  • Many funders do not accept unsolicited proposals at all, and the database cannot reliably tell you which, so prospect lists built from it still require manual qualification before outreach.

Wild Apricot

  • The website builder is dated and constrained, and organisations that care about their public site usually end up running a separate site alongside it
  • Pricing by contact count means lapsed members and non-member contacts push you into a higher tier unless the database is actively pruned
  • Every module is adequate rather than good, so any organisation with a serious need in one area will outgrow that part first
  • Reporting is basic, and detailed membership analysis generally means exporting to a spreadsheet
  • Migration away is painful once the website, database and event history all live inside it

Pricing, plan by plan

Candid

$219/month
  • Foundation Directory Essential$219/month
    • Search US grantmakers and grant records
    • Saved searches and prospect lists
    • Single user
  • Foundation Directory Professional$1499/month
    • Full grantmaker, grant and recipient search
    • Trustee and key staff search
    • Advanced filters and larger exports
  • Data licensing$undefined/year
    • API and bulk data feeds
    • Charity check and organisation verification
    • Priced by volume and use case, quoted

Wild Apricot

$60/month
  • Group$60/month
    • Up to 100 contacts
    • Member database
    • Website
  • Community$150/month
    • Up to 500 contacts
    • All Group features
    • More storage
  • Association$290/month
    • Up to 2,000 contacts
    • All Community features
    • Priority support
  • Enterprise$undefined/month
    • 5,000 contacts and above
    • Dedicated support
    • Custom arrangements

Which should you pick?

Choose Candid if

  • You need foundation directory.
  • You work on Web, API.
  • You also want 990 based grant records.
Candid review

Choose Wild Apricot if

  • You need member database.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android.
  • You also want automated renewals.
Wild Apricot review

Questions people ask

Is Candid or Wild Apricot better?
Neither clearly leads. Candid starts at $219/month and Wild Apricot at $60/month, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Candid or Wild Apricot?
Candid starts at $219/month and Wild Apricot at $60/month.
Does Candid or Wild Apricot run on more platforms?
Candid runs on Web, API. Wild Apricot runs on Web, iOS, Android.
What is Candid best used for?
Candid is most often used for a development director building a list of foundations that have actually funded organisations of your size, sector and geography in the past three years, a funder verifying us tax exempt status before releasing a grant payment, a software vendor embedding nonprofit organisation data and charity verification into its own product, a nonprofit maintaining a transparency seal on its public profile because institutional funders check it before giving. Of those, a development director building a list of foundations that have actually funded organisations of your size, sector and geography in the past three years and a funder verifying us tax exempt status before releasing a grant payment are not what Wild Apricot is typically brought in for.
What can Candid do that Wild Apricot cannot?
Candid covers Foundation Directory, 990 based grant records, Nonprofit Profiles, Charity check. Wild Apricot covers Member database, Automated renewals, Event registration, Website builder.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Candid: Is Candid the same as GuideStar?

GuideStar is now part of Candid, merged with Foundation Center in 2019. GuideStar nonprofit profiles continue under the Candid brand.

Wild Apricot: How is Wild Apricot priced?

By contact count, not by staff seat, starting at 60 USD a month for up to 100 contacts. Unlimited administrators is the practical benefit for volunteer-run organisations.

Candid: Can I use Foundation Directory for free?

Yes, in person. Hundreds of partner libraries and nonprofit resource centres in the Funding Information Network provide free access, which is a genuine alternative to a subscription for occasional research.

Wild Apricot: Do lapsed members count toward the limit?

Contacts count, which includes records beyond current paying members. Pruning the database matters, because tier boundaries are the main cause of unexpected cost increases.

Candid: How current is the grant data?

It is drawn largely from Form 990 filings and lags real time by roughly a year to eighteen months. Treat it as evidence of past funding behaviour, not current priorities.

Wild Apricot: Is the website builder any good?

It is functional and dated. Organisations that care about their public web presence commonly run a separate site and use Wild Apricot for the member-only area.

Candid: Does Candid help outside the United States?

Only marginally. The data model is built on US tax filings and US registered organisations.

Wild Apricot: Can it handle fundraising?

Basic donation collection, yes. Organisations whose main activity is fundraising rather than membership are better served by a donor management platform.

Wild Apricot: When do organisations outgrow it?

Usually at a few thousand members, or earlier if one area — events, fundraising or the website — becomes central to the organisation rather than incidental.

Share

Related pages

More on Candid

More on Wild Apricot

Keep looking

Other head to heads