British Heart Foundation vs Stroke Association — charity comparison
In short: British Heart Foundation: Cardiovascular research and public support. Stroke Association: Stroke support, campaigning and research. Match the work to your purpose, then compare dated accounts and evidence.
Data from Charity Commission register, last updated .
This comparison brings together registered purposes, source-checked interpretation and the accounts held by CharityCompare. The organisations may use different reporting periods and definitions. Read the source notes before comparing totals or treating a financial score as an assessment of programme results.
Key differences
| What to compare | BRITISH HEART FOUNDATION | STROKE ASSOCIATION |
|---|---|---|
| Registered work and operating model | Cardiovascular research and public support. | Stroke support, campaigning and research. |
| What to consider | Research funding and information services have different pathways to benefit. Read the research portfolio and evaluations alongside financial disclosures, and avoid attributing population-wide changes to one funder alone. | Its registered work combines support services and research. A useful assessment separates recovery and quality-of-life outcomes from research progress, with the people included and measurement period stated. |
| Access and practical checks | Use the official research and information pages to understand the work. Charity funding and published information do not substitute for access to clinical care. | Check the support service, location and referral requirements on the official website. Information, peer support and commissioned services may be accessed differently. |
| Sourced result or evidence gap | No programme outcome has been source-checked for this profile. This is a gap in our coverage, not evidence of no impact. | No programme outcome has been source-checked for this profile. This is a gap in our coverage, not evidence of no impact. |
What the latest filings show
Figures from the accounts held in our dated dataset; the live register may contain newer filings. Ratios can span multiple years, as labelled. Clarity scores use our methodology.
| Metric | BRITISH HEART FOUNDATION | STROKE ASSOCIATION |
|---|---|---|
| Latest accounts year in our snapshot | 2025 | 2025 |
| Financial snapshot refreshed | 2026-09-06 | 2026-09-06 |
| Ratio reporting window | 3-yr avg | 3-yr avg |
| Overall score | 82/100 (4★) | 86/100 (4★) |
| Accountability & Finance | 100/100 | 100/100 |
| Spend on charitable activities | 36% of expenditure | 79% of expenditure |
| Fundraising efficiency | £10.1 total income per £1 fundraising (2023–2025, disclosed years) | £4.9 total income per £1 fundraising (2023–2025, disclosed years) |
| Latest income | £411m | £44m |
| Fundraising spend | 10% of expenditure | 21% of expenditure |
| Reserves | 3 months | 10 months |
| Accounts filing | On time | On time |
| Data confidence | high | high |
| Charity number | 225971 | 211015 |
BRITISH HEART FOUNDATION on the register · STROKE ASSOCIATION on the register
Considering British Heart Foundation
- Cardiovascular research and public support.
- Use the official research and information pages to understand the work. Charity funding and published information do not substitute for access to clinical care.
Considering Stroke Association
- Stroke support, campaigning and research.
- Check the support service, location and referral requirements on the official website. Information, peer support and commissioned services may be accessed differently.
Common questions
British Heart Foundation or Stroke Association: which should I support?
There is no universal winner. Cardiovascular research and public support. Stroke support, campaigning and research. Check the programme that interests you, the accounts period and the evidence behind any result. A financial rating is not an impact assessment.
Can I compare the headline results directly?
Only if the definitions, population, geography and reporting periods match. Research expenditure, service contacts and lasting outcomes measure different things. The source notes explain any figures included here.
How we score charities +
The Clarity Score is a 100-point rating from UK regulator filings (Charity Commission for England and Wales, OSCR and CCNI). Four pillars — Accountability & Transparency (40), Financial Health (30), Financial Efficiency (20), and Community Support (10) — each scored on a continuous scale, not pass/fail cutoffs. A statutory inquiry sets the score to 0 automatically.
Accountability & Transparency
Scored from filings
40 points — filing history (15), trustee oversight (15, scaling up to a board of three or more), declared policies (10).
Financial Health
Scored from filings
30 points — reserves (15, full marks 3–24 months, tapering on both sides), income stability (10), liabilities to assets (5, scaling down as debt rises).
Financial Efficiency
Scored from filings
20 points — program expense ratio and fundraising cost, each on a graduated scale (not a single cutoff). Kept at 20% of the total: financial-ratio scoring alone is not a reliable effectiveness signal (see "why not just an overhead ratio?" below).
Community Support
Scored from filings
10 points — volunteer-to-staff ratio from Charity Commission workforce data, scaling continuously up to a 2:1 ratio.
Overall score
Sum of all pillar points. Display stars use the same bands as the labels: 90–100 → 5★ Exceptional; 75–89 → 4★ Good; 60–74 → 3★ Needs improvement; 1–59 → 2★ Poor; 0 → not rated.