Macmillan vs Cancer Research UK — charity comparison
In short: Macmillan focuses on support for people living with cancer; Cancer Research UK funds research into prevention, diagnosis and treatment — compare filings and Clarity Scores, then fund the model you want.
Data from Charity Commission register, last updated .
Searches for Macmillan vs Cancer Research UK usually mean a donor is torn between two trusted brands. They are complementary more than interchangeable: one is built around support services, the other around research. Use the filings snapshot below and the four Clarity Score beacons — Accountability & Transparency, Financial Health, Financial Efficiency (cause spend), and Community Support — then decide which job you want your donation to fund. This is information, not donation advice.
Key differences
| What to compare | MACMILLAN CANCER SUPPORT | CANCER RESEARCH UK |
|---|---|---|
| Primary model | Patient information, support services, grants and advocacy | Research funding, labs, trials and cancer information at scale |
| Results timeline | Help for people affected by cancer now | Longer-term scientific and clinical progress |
| What “cause spend” includes | Support programmes and related charitable activities | Research grants and charitable research activity |
| Brand familiarity | Very high — support and fundraising presence | Very high — research and fundraising presence |
| Best if you want | Practical and emotional support for people with cancer | Investment in future treatments and discovery |
What the latest filings show
Figures from the most recent annual accounts on the Charity Commission register. Clarity scores use our methodology.
| Metric | MACMILLAN CANCER SUPPORT | CANCER RESEARCH UK |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 75/100 (4★) | 83/100 (4★) |
| Accountability & Finance | 100/100 | 100/100 |
| Spend on charitable activities | 69% of expenditure | 64% of expenditure |
| Fundraising efficiency | £3.1 raised per £1 fundraising (3-yr avg) | £5.8 raised per £1 fundraising (3-yr avg) |
| Latest income | £246m | £735m |
| Fundraising spend | 31% of expenditure | 18% of expenditure |
| Reserves | 2 months | 6 months |
| Accounts filing | On time | On time |
| Data confidence | high | high |
| Charity number | 261017 | 1089464 |
MACMILLAN CANCER SUPPORT on the register · CANCER RESEARCH UK on the register
MACMILLAN CANCER SUPPORT may suit you if…
- You want donations to fund support for people living with cancer today
- You or someone you know has used Macmillan-style services
- You prefer tangible help lines and practical support over lab research
CANCER RESEARCH UK may suit you if…
- You want to fund research into better treatments
- You are comfortable with longer research timelines
- You want a research-led national cancer charity
Common questions
Macmillan vs Cancer Research UK — which is better to donate to?
Neither is universally better. Macmillan is oriented to patient support; Cancer Research UK to research. Compare Clarity Scores and cause spend on CharityCompare, then give to the model that matches your intention — many donors support both over time.
Are Macmillan and Cancer Research UK both legitimate UK charities?
Yes — both are long-established registered charities. Still verify the charity number on any unfamiliar appeal, because scammers borrow well-known names.
How do I compare their Clarity Scores?
Open both profiles or use the compare tool prefilled from this page. Look at all four beacons, not only Financial Efficiency — lowest overhead is not the same as best fit.
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.