Givebutter vs GiveSmart:Which is more popular?
In September 2026, Givebutter had more branded searches than GiveSmart among charity auction software worldwide. Givebutter had about 60,500 branded searches, while GiveSmart had 8,100. Givebutter made up 54.1% of all charity auction software searches we track, and GiveSmart accounted for 7.2%. When we asked ChatGPT and Google AI Overviews about charity auction software, Givebutter appeared in all five answers and GiveSmart in one. Givebutter was mentioned before GiveSmart in every answer.
Who do people search for more?
Givebutter, about 7 searches for every 1 for GiveSmart
Who does AI mention more?
Givebutter, mentioned in every answer we collected
Who does AI recommend more?
Givebutter, named ahead of GiveSmart in every answer
Follow Givebutter vs GiveSmart and get free monthly updates on what changed
By continuing you'll get index updates and occasional product news from Brandwave. Unsubscribe any time. Privacy
Top charity auction software in ChatGPT and Google AI Overviews
In three ChatGPT questions and two Google AI Overviews, Givebutter appeared in all five answers. GiveSmart was mentioned in one out of five: not in any of the three ChatGPT answers, but in one of the two Google AI Overviews. Givebutter was listed before GiveSmart in every answer.
Most recommended by AI
Brands get a higher ranking if they are mentioned earlier in the answers.
- Givebutter1st
Auctria2nd
OneCause3rd
RallyUp4th
32auctions5th
GalaBid6th
Handbid7th
BiddingOwl8th
GiveSmart9th
Greater Giving–
Mentioned by AI
Each dot is one answer, filled in when that answer mentions the brand.
- Givebutter5 of 5Named in 3 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 2 of 2 Google answers
- 32auctions4 of 5Named in 2 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 2 of 2 Google answers
- Auctria4 of 5Named in 3 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 1 of 2 Google answers
- GalaBid4 of 5Named in 3 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 1 of 2 Google answers
- OneCause3 of 5Named in 3 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 0 of 2 Google answers
- Handbid3 of 5Named in 2 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 1 of 2 Google answers
- RallyUp2 of 5Named in 0 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 2 of 2 Google answers
- BiddingOwl2 of 5Named in 1 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 1 of 2 Google answers
- GiveSmart1 of 5Named in 0 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 1 of 2 Google answers
- Greater Giving0 of 5Named in 0 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 0 of 2 Google answers
See every answer about charity auction software
5 answers
Asked ChatGPT
“Which charity auction software should I use?”
Asked ChatGPT
“What are the best silent auction software options for nonprofits?”
Asked ChatGPT
“What's the best auction software for a school fundraising gala?”
Searched Google, AI Overview
“silent auction software”
Searched Google, AI Overview
“online auction for nonprofits”
Not named in any answer:
Brands are shown in the order each answer named them. The survey took place in the United States on October 22, 2026.
Is Givebutter or GiveSmart more popular in search?
This chart shows how often people search Google for Givebutter and GiveSmart by name. Each line represents a brand's share of searches for all ten charity auction software we track, month by month, from English-language searches worldwide.
Share of searches by month for Givebutter, GiveSmart. The figures are in the table below the chart.
View monthly share of searches table
| Month | Givebutter | OneCause | GiveSmart | 32auctions | Auctria | RallyUp | GalaBid | Greater Giving | BiddingOwl | Handbid |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 2025 | 47.9% | 11.7% | 9.6% | 5.2% | 6.4% | 6.4% | 4.3% | 4.3% | 2.9% | 1.3% |
| Nov 2025 | 46.2% | 9.2% | 9.2% | 9.2% | 6.2% | 6.2% | 5% | 3.4% | 4.1% | 1.2% |
| Dec 2025 | 56.6% | 7.5% | 7.5% | 7.5% | 4.1% | 6.2% | 3.3% | 2.7% | 3.3% | 1.1% |
| Jan 2026 | 50.8% | 10.2% | 10.2% | 5.5% | 6.8% | 5.5% | 3% | 4.5% | 1.9% | 1.6% |
| Feb 2026 | 46.6% | 11.4% | 9.3% | 6.2% | 7.6% | 6.2% | 3.4% | 5.1% | 2.7% | 1.5% |
| Mar 2026 | 46.5% | 11.4% | 9.3% | 6.2% | 7.6% | 6.2% | 3.4% | 5.1% | 2.8% | 1.5% |
| Apr 2026 | 47.5% | 11.6% | 7.8% | 7.8% | 7.8% | 5.2% | 3.5% | 5.2% | 2.3% | 1.5% |
| May 2026 | 51% | 10.2% | 8.3% | 6.8% | 5.6% | 5.6% | 4.5% | 4.5% | 2.5% | 1% |
| Jun 2026 | 58.6% | 9.6% | 6.4% | 5.2% | 4.3% | 5.2% | 4.3% | 3.4% | 2.2% | 0.85% |
| Jul 2026 | 56.4% | 9.2% | 7.5% | 6.1% | 4% | 6.1% | 4% | 3.3% | 2.2% | 1% |
| Aug 2026 | 54.9% | 11% | 7.3% | 6% | 4.9% | 6% | 4% | 3.2% | 1.8% | 0.98% |
| Sep 2026 | 54.1% | 10.8% | 7.2% | 5.9% | 5.9% | 5.9% | 3.9% | 3.9% | 1.4% | 0.89% |
How has the Givebutter and GiveSmart comparison changed over the last 12 months?
3 findings
- Givebutter was ahead of GiveSmart in every measured month of the 12 months ending September 2026.
- Across the 12 months ending September 2026, Givebutter’s share of searches among charity auction software worldwide moved from 47.9% to 54.1%, and its estimated monthly branded searches held steady at 60.5K.
- Across the 12 months ending September 2026, GiveSmart’s share of searches among charity auction software worldwide moved from 9.6% to 7.2%, and its estimated monthly branded searches moved from 12.1K to 8.1K.
How did search popularity change for charity auction software worldwide in September 2026?
2 changes
In September 2026, Givebutter lost share of searches among charity auction software worldwide, from 54.9% to 54.1%.
Estimated monthly branded searches for GiveSmart worldwide fell 33.1% over 12 measured months, from 12.1K to 8.1K in September 2026.
How are branded searches counted?
2 search terms
Brandwave collects information about searches that people make online using Givebutter’s and GiveSmart’s names. When viewed over time, estimated search volumes for these branded terms can be used to understand whether interest in the brands is growing, holding steady, or fading.
Givebutter
1 branded search term
- givebutter
GiveSmart
1 branded search term
- givesmart
Other head-to-heads among charity auction software
Put your own brand in this comparison
Brandwave tracks your branded demand next to the rival you actually watch, with your campaigns, spend and outcomes on the same timeline.