Comparing US and Australian Fundraising by Revenue Area
Charitable fundraising is a critical pillar of nonprofit sustainability, yet the way funds are raised—and the volume—varies dramatically between the United States and Australia. Both countries share similar motivations for giving, but differ in scale, maturity, structure, and public policy. In our last post, we created a comparison of overall fundraising between the US and Australia. In this post, we break down fundraising performance by revenue stream, comparing and contrasting these two markets with an eye to both totals and donor behaviour.
Comparing Overall Giving: Size & Scale
| Metric | United States | Australia |
|---|---|---|
| Total Annual Giving (2023) | USD $499 billion | AUD $13 billion |
| Giving as % of GDP | ~2.1% | ~0.8% |
| Individual Giving | 67% of total (est. $330 billion) | 75% of total (est. $9.75 billion) |
| Number of Registered Charities | 1.5 million | 60,000+ |
| Tax Deductibility Threshold | USD $300+ (standard deduction) | AUD $2+ (DGR registered charities only) |
The US sector dwarfs Australia’s in both size and percentage of GDP, supported by deeper philanthropic traditions and larger foundations. However, Australians are generous per capita, and the giving culture is growing.
Comparing Direct Marketing
Direct marketing remains a fundraising workhorse—especially in donor acquisition and renewal.
| Metric | United States | Australia |
|---|---|---|
| Annual Revenue (Direct Mail & Online Combined) | ~$85 billion (est.) | ~$1.5–2 billion (est.) |
| Donor File Size (Active) | 100+ million households | ~6 million households |
| Response Rates (Mail) | 5–9% avg. | 3–6% avg. |
| Channels Used | Direct mail, email, DRTV, SMS, social | Direct mail, email, SMS, telemarketing |
Australia relies heavily on direct mail and digital, often outsourced to third-party agencies. Comparing Australia fundraising to the US market, the US market is more mature, using increased multichannel strategies and investing more in donor journey optimisation.
Comparing Regular Giving (Recurring Donations)
| Metric | United States | Australia |
|---|---|---|
| Total Revenue | $45–60 billion (est.) | $1.5–2 billion AUD |
| Avg. Monthly Gift | $35 USD | $30–35 AUD |
| % of Donors on Regular Gifts | 35% (est.) | 50–60% of active donors |
| Acquisition Channels | Digital, DRTV, F2F, email | F2F, digital, telemarketing |
Australia punches well above its weight in regular giving, particularly due to its high penetration of face-to-face (F2F) acquired donors. Comparing US nonprofits to Australia, the US charities are still more focused on annual giving or major gifts, but are rapidly increasing investment in digital recurring donor programs.
Major Gifts
| Metric | United States | Australia |
|---|---|---|
| Total Revenue | $100–120 billion+ | ~$2–3 billion AUD |
| Typical Gift Size (Major) | $10,000+ | $5,000+ |
| % of Total Giving | ~25% | ~20–25% |
| Infrastructure | Advanced donor pipelines, prospect research, wealth screening | Developing—often ad hoc in small orgs |
The US major gift market is highly developed, with planned cultivation pipelines and robust prospect research teams. Australian charities, while growing in this space, often struggle with staff capacity and high-value donor pipeline management.
Comparing Bequests (Planned Giving)
| Metric | United States | Australia |
|---|---|---|
| Total Bequest Revenue | $43 billion (2023) | $1.1–1.4 billion AUD |
| Avg. Bequest Size | $78,000 USD | ~$55,000 AUD |
| Tax Advantage | Estate tax benefits | No inheritance tax; less structured |
| Bequest Penetration | ~9% of deceased adults leave a bequest | ~8% of Australians (growing slowly) |
Bequests are critical in both countries, but the US benefits from estate tax deductions, driving strategic legacy marketing. In Australia, despite no death duties, bequests are growing thanks to greater public awareness and investment in gifts-in-wills programs.
Trusts & Foundations
| Metric | United States | Australia |
|---|---|---|
| Total Revenue from Foundations | $105 billion (2023) | ~$1.4 billion AUD |
| Total Number of Foundations | 140,000+ | ~5,000 |
| Donor-Advised Funds (DAFs) | $230B under management | ~400 Public Ancillary Funds |
| Compliance | Highly structured and regulated | Moderate regulation (ACNC) |
The US market has thousands of independent foundations and over 1,000 community foundations managing donor funds. DAFs are growing rapidly. Australia is behind in DAF adoption but catching up via PAFs and PuAFs.
Corporate Partnerships
| Metric | United States | Australia |
|---|---|---|
| Total Corporate Giving | $29 billion (2023) | ~$1 billion AUD |
| Typical Models | Sponsorship, cause-marketing, grants | Partnerships, events, workplace giving |
| Level of Formalisation | High, often strategic CSR alignment | Emerging, often transactional |
The US sector treats corporate giving as strategic philanthropy, often linking to ESG and shared value. Australian partnerships tend to be more tactical or campaign-based, with fewer long-term integrations.
Workplace Giving
| Metric | United States | Australia |
|---|---|---|
| Total Raised via Workplace | ~$4–5 billion annually | ~$300–350 million AUD |
| Typical Participation Rates | 10–15% (corporate programs) | <5% of eligible employees |
| Intermediaries | United Way, Benevity, YourCause | Good2Give, Benevity, Givar, others |
Workplace giving is still underutilised in both markets. However, US employers are more likely to match donations or run large-scale internal campaigns. Australia has strong platforms but low employer engagement.
Comparing Events
| Metric | United States | Australia |
|---|---|---|
| Peer-to-Peer Fundraising | $1.05 billion (2023) | ~$200–250 million AUD |
| Galas/Charity Events | ~$1.5 billion | ~$150 million AUD |
| Platforms Used | Classy, JustGiving, Facebook, Eventbrite | Funraisin, Grassrootz, Humanitix |
Australia punches above its weight in peer-to-peer and challenge events like City2Surf, but still has a less saturated event calendar than the US, which boasts tens of thousands of charity runs, cycles, and walkathons.
While the US fundraising market is more mature and diversified, comparing it to Australia, Australia is agile, tech-driven, and donor-loyal. Australian charities excel in regular giving and events, while the US dominates major gifts, bequests, and foundation giving due to its infrastructure and culture of philanthropy.
Charities on both sides of the Pacific can learn from one another. For Australians, that means increasing investment in high-value giving and bequests. For Americans, there’s value in adopting Australia’s recurring giving and digital efficiency models.
As both countries adapt to economic, social, and political changes, fundraising success will come down to building trust, stewarding donors effectively, and adapting infrastructure to support long-term growth.
You must be logged in to post a comment.