Fundraising software: AI search visibility ranking (2026)
How AI search engines rank fundraising software by visibility and citations. 20 brands measured monthly across Google AI Mode: which brands the AI names in answers, which domains it cites as sources, and how the leaders compare. Fundraising platforms used by nonprofits to run campaigns, manage donors, process donations, and drive online giving growth. Composite score: 70% visibility (% of AI answers naming the brand) + 30% citation rate (% citing the brand's domain). Full methodology →
Refreshed Jun 20, 2026Download this ranking as a PDF
We'll email it to you. One-off send — no list, no follow-up, no surprise marketing.
At a glance
What we observed in this categoryauto-generated
Givebutter holds a commanding lead in this category with a visibility score of 25.0% and a citation rate of 37.5%, both well above the category averages of 4.4% and 6.9% respectively. The next four brands (Fundraise Up, Bloomerang, Zeffy, and Bonterra) each sit at 12.5% visibility, creating a sharp two-tier structure. The gap between Givebutter and the rest is not marginal; its composite score of 28.8 is more than double that of any other brand in the top five.
A notable divergence exists between which brands are named and which are trusted enough to be cited. Bloomerang appears in 12.5% of responses but carries a 0.0% citation rate, meaning Google AI Mode mentions it without anchoring a source link to it. Zeffy and Bonterra show the opposite pattern, each earning a 25.0% citation rate against a 12.5% visibility score, suggesting their content is referenced as evidence even when they are not the primary brand being named. Kindful and Virtuous are cited at 12.5% each despite zero visibility.
All ten tracked brands share Google AI Mode as their top engine, confirming that this category's AI visibility landscape is effectively a single-engine contest at present. The top cited sources include youtube.com, funraise.org, givebutter.com, g2.com, and bonterratech.com, indicating that the AI is drawing on a mix of review platforms, video content, and vendor-owned domains rather than any single authoritative third-party publication. The presence of monkeypod.com and evertrue.com in the cited sources list points to niche or community-level content influencing AI responses in this category.
Movers & shakers since last refresh
Biggest visibility risers
-
Givebutter 0% → 25% · rank #0 → #1+25pp
-
Fundraise Up 0% → 12% · rank #0 → #2+12pp
-
Bloomerang 0% → 12% · rank #0 → #3+12pp
The ranking
| # | Brand | Visibility | Citation | Top engine |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
givebutter.com
|
25% | 38% | Google AI Mode |
Givebutter leads all brands with 25.0% visibility and a 37.5% citation rate, both more than five times the category averages, and its own domain appears in the top cited sources list. |
||||
| 2 |
fundraiseup.com
|
12% | 12% | Google AI Mode |
Fundraise Up sits at 12.5% visibility and 12.5% citation, matching the category's mid-tier cluster but showing a balanced ratio that Bloomerang, ranked one place below, fails to achieve. |
||||
| 3 |
bloomerang.co
|
12% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
Bloomerang reaches 12.5% visibility but records a 0.0% citation rate, the sharpest named-versus-cited gap among any brand in the top five. |
||||
| 4 |
zeffy.com
|
12% | 25% | Google AI Mode |
Zeffy punches above its visibility weight with a 25.0% citation rate against 12.5% visibility, suggesting its content is used as a reference source more often than it is directly named. |
||||
| 5 |
bonterratech.com
|
12% | 25% | Google AI Mode |
Bonterra mirrors Zeffy with 25.0% citations against 12.5% visibility, and its domain (bonterratech.com) also appears independently in the category's top cited sources list. |
||||
| 6 |
kindful.com
|
0% | 12% | Google AI Mode |
| 7 |
virtuous.org
|
0% | 12% | Google AI Mode |
| 8 |
classy.org
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 9 |
donorbox.org
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 10 |
blackbaud.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 11 |
onecause.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 12 |
neonone.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 13 |
qgiv.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 14 |
mightycause.com
|
0% | 12% | Google AI Mode |
| 15 |
givewp.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 16 |
donately.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 17 |
anedot.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 18 |
raisely.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 19 |
givesmart.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 20 |
everyaction.com
|
12% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
Sources AI engines trust in this category
Across the 8 buyer-intent queries we ran on fundraising software, these are the domains Google AI Mode cited most often. If you're not on this list — or if your competitors are — that's a concrete PR / linkbuilding target.
How to read this ranking
Four things worth knowing before you act on the numbers above. These are the same definitions across every industry page — for category-specific observations, see the What we observed section above (where available) and the per-brand insights inline in the ranking.
Visibility = being named
A brand's visibility % is the share of AI answers that mention it by name in the response prose. This is who AI engines actively recommend to the buyer.
Citation rate = being trusted
Citation rate is the share of AI answers that include the brand's domain as a clickable source link. This is what the AI treats as authoritative evidence — different from being named.
Top engine differs by brand
The "top engine" column shows which AI surface each brand performs best on. Big gaps between a brand's score across engines usually points to specific content or schema gaps.
Rankings move month to month
AI engines re-crawl and re-rank on shorter cycles than classical search. We re-audit every brand on this list at least every 30 days and refresh this page automatically.
Get your own fundraising software brand audited
The brands above were curated from public market-leader lists. Want the same measurement against your own brand — including the queries you appear on, which competitors get named instead, and a prioritised fix list? Run a free preview.
Frequently asked about fundraising software AI visibility
Who leads AI visibility in fundraising software?
Givebutter leads with a visibility score of 25.0% and a composite score of 28.8, both more than double those of the next-ranked brands. The four brands immediately behind it (Fundraise Up, Bloomerang, Zeffy, and Bonterra) are clustered at 12.5% visibility each.
What sources does Google AI Mode cite most for fundraising software research?
The top cited sources include youtube.com, funraise.org, givebutter.com, g2.com, bonterratech.com, monkeypod.com, evertrue.com, and donorperfect.com, reflecting a mix of video content, review platforms, and vendor-owned domains.
Which fundraising software brands are cited but not prominently named in AI responses?
Kindful and Virtuous each hold a 12.5% citation rate despite recording 0.0% visibility, meaning the AI references their content without naming them as a primary recommendation.
Is there a meaningful gap between visibility and citation in this category?
Yes. Bloomerang is named in 12.5% of responses but has a 0.0% citation rate, while Zeffy and Bonterra each achieve a 25.0% citation rate on only 12.5% visibility, showing the two metrics diverge significantly across brands.
How concentrated is AI visibility in fundraising software?
It is highly concentrated. The category average visibility is 4.4%, yet Givebutter alone holds 25.0%, and brands ranked 8 through 10 (Classy, Donorbox, and Blackbaud) each record 0.0% visibility and 0.0% citation.
Which engine dominates AI visibility for fundraising software brands?
Google AI Mode is listed as the top engine for every one of the ten tracked brands, making it the sole engine of record in this audit dataset.