GrantTrove and Candid, side by side
How GrantTrove and Candid differ on price, coverage and what each one shows about a record. Every Candid figure was checked on 2026-09-02.
What Candid is genuinely good at
This section is not a formality. Candid is a real product with real advantages, and a reader deciding between the two is better served by knowing them than by a page that pretends they do not exist.
- The deepest philanthropic dataset in this comparison by a wide margin: 1.9 million organisations searchable by name, EIN or keyword.
- A genuinely free tier exists, and it searches the same corpus rather than a sample of it.
- Verified nonprofits pay roughly half the standard rate, which is a real subsidy rather than a launch discount.
- Grants data and peer benchmarking come with the paid tiers, so a funder can be read against comparable funders rather than alone.
- As a nonprofit itself, Candid publishes the 990 data this sector runs on rather than only reselling it.
Where GrantTrove is different
Where the two products actually diverge, point by point.
- Every record shows when it was last checked, against which source domain, and by which method.
- Programme pool and per-award ceiling are separate fields that are never shown under one label.
- Core fields — amounts, deadlines, eligibility, source link, verification stamp — are free without an account, permanently.
- A field the source did not state reads Not stated rather than being filled with a plausible value.
And the honest cost of that. Coverage is early. The data sources page publishes exactly which feeds are connected and which are not. If your search depends on breadth today rather than on traceability, Candid has more records than we do and we are not going to pretend otherwise.
Price
What each side charges, and what the free tier holds back.
GrantTrove pricing checked 2026-09-02 against our own pricing page.
Candid pricing checked 2026-09-02 against Candid’s own pricing page.
Field by field
Field by field, with the ones neither side publishes marked as such.
| Field | GrantTrove | Candid |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | A grant database where every field is traceable to one official page and carries the date we last confirmed it. | The oldest and deepest philanthropic data source, sold at a discount to verified nonprofits and at roughly double that to everyone else. |
| Cheapest paid entry | $19/mo · read from the price config at render | $0 · checked 2026-09-02 |
| Readable without paying | Every field of every record, permanently | Not measured |
| Coverage the product publishes | Records linked 1,734 · Verified inside the freshness window 1,160 of 1,160 | Organisations searchable 1.9 million |
| Shows when a record was last checked | Yes — date, source domain and method on every record | Not measured |
| Separates programme pool from award ceiling | Yes, always two fields under two labels | Not measured |
| What an empty field shows | Not stated, Not confirmed or Not linked yet — three different sentences | Not measured |
| Eligibility restrictions on who may subscribe | None stated | None stated |
“Not measured” means we have not audited that property of Candid and will not guess at it. Every Candid figure above comes from a page Candid publishes about itself, checked 2026-09-02.
What this page does not claim
What this page does not claim, and how it was written.
We do not publish a record count of our own counting for another product, a freshness figure we have not sampled, or an accuracy rate for anyone. Doing so would require an audit with a stated method and a date, and we have not run one. Where a comparison would need such a number, the row above reads Not measured.
Choose Candid if what it publishes about its own coverage is what your search needs today. Choose GrantTrove if you need to know when each field was last confirmed, against which source, and to see the programme pool and the per-award ceiling as two separate numbers.