Softwr

Nonprofits · head to head

OpenGrants vs Wild Apricot

OpenGrants logo

OpenGrants

Nonprofits

Low-cost grant search across federal, state and private funders, with a paid consultant marketplace alongside

From
Free
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

  • Only OpenGrants has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: OpenGrants coverage of private foundations is thinner and less curated than Candid or Instrumentl, so a prospect list built solely from OpenGrants will miss foundations that never post public opportunity notices.; 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: OpenGrants covers Grant search, Wild Apricot covers Member database.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

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

Attributes where OpenGrants and Wild Apricot differ
AttributeOpenGrantsWild Apricot
Starting priceFree$60/month
Pricing modelPer user per monthPer month by contact count
Free tierYesNo
PlatformsWebWeb, iOS, Android

Identical on both: 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 OpenGrants

  • Grant search
  • Saved searches and alerts
  • Funder profiles
  • Opportunity tracking
  • Consultant marketplace
  • Free tier

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.

OpenGrants

  • A small nonprofit with no research budget that needs to know whether relevant grants exist before hiring anyonenot Wild Apricot
  • A startup hunting SBIR, state innovation and economic development funding across multiple agenciesnot Wild Apricot
  • A freelance grant writer covering several clients who cannot pass on a several-hundred-dollar monthly database costnot Wild Apricot
  • An organisation wanting to hire a grant writer for one application without running a procurementnot Wild Apricot

Wild Apricot

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

Where each one falls short

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

OpenGrants

  • Coverage of private foundations is thinner and less curated than Candid or Instrumentl, so a prospect list built solely from OpenGrants will miss foundations that never post public opportunity notices.
  • The index leans on public opportunity feeds, which means it is strongest on government funding and weakest on the relationship-driven private philanthropy that most nonprofits actually rely on.
  • Matching is keyword driven rather than fit-scored, so users receive alerts for opportunities they are ineligible for and must qualify each one by hand.
  • The consultant marketplace is a directory with variable quality rather than a vetted panel, so buyers carry the risk of choosing a weak grant writer themselves.
  • It is a US-focused index, offering little to organisations seeking UK, EU or Canadian funding.

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

OpenGrants

Free
  • FreeFree
    • Core grant search
    • Limited results and saved searches
    • No card required
  • Subscription$9/month
    • Full search access
    • Saved searches and alerts
    • Funder profiles

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 OpenGrants if

  • You need grant search.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You also want saved searches and alerts.
OpenGrants 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 OpenGrants or Wild Apricot better?
Neither clearly leads. OpenGrants starts at Free and Wild Apricot at $60/month, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, OpenGrants or Wild Apricot?
OpenGrants has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for OpenGrants and $60/month for Wild Apricot.
Does OpenGrants or Wild Apricot run on more platforms?
OpenGrants runs on Web. Wild Apricot runs on Web, iOS, Android.
Can I use OpenGrants for free?
Yes. OpenGrants has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Wild Apricot starts at $60/month.
What is OpenGrants best used for?
OpenGrants is most often used for a small nonprofit with no research budget that needs to know whether relevant grants exist before hiring anyone, a startup hunting sbir, state innovation and economic development funding across multiple agencies, a freelance grant writer covering several clients who cannot pass on a several-hundred-dollar monthly database cost, an organisation wanting to hire a grant writer for one application without running a procurement. Of those, a small nonprofit with no research budget that needs to know whether relevant grants exist before hiring anyone and a startup hunting sbir, state innovation and economic development funding across multiple agencies are not what Wild Apricot is typically brought in for.
What can OpenGrants do that Wild Apricot cannot?
OpenGrants covers Grant search, Saved searches and alerts, Funder profiles, Opportunity tracking. Wild Apricot covers Member database, Automated renewals, Event registration, Website builder.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

OpenGrants: How much does it cost?

$9 a month or $99 a year after a seven day trial, with a free tier of core search retained.

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.

OpenGrants: Why is it so much cheaper than Candid?

Because it indexes public and semi-public opportunity feeds with automation rather than employing researchers to code foundation records from tax filings. You trade depth of private foundation intelligence for price.

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.

OpenGrants: Does it cover private foundations?

Partially. It is strongest on federal and state programmes. For systematic private foundation research, Candid remains the reference source.

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.

OpenGrants: Is the consultant marketplace vetted?

It is a directory, not a vetted panel. Check references and past awards yourself.

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 OpenGrants

More on Wild Apricot

Keep looking

Other head to heads