Skip to content
Membership QuestBook a call

The reference · 2026

Membership marketing statistics

The membership benchmarks that actually matter: renewal rates, first-year churn, acquisition cost, lifetime value and non-dues revenue.

Each comes with its source, so you can benchmark your organisation against the sector with confidence.

Benchmarks for renewal, first-year churn, acquisition cost, lifetime value, non-dues revenue

See the benchmarks →Check the sources

A member’s economics

  1. ACQUISITIONAcquire

    cost to win a member

  2. RETENTIONFirst year

    the cohort that lapses most

  3. RETENTIONRenew

    the honest KPI

  4. RETENTIONStay

    tenure, from churn

  5. VALUEWorth

    lifetime value against cost

Every figureattributed below
82%
Median renewal rate across membership organisations
MGI 2026 ↗
75%
Median first-year renewal
MGI 2024 ↗
5–25×
Cross-industry customer cost range
HBR ↗
3:1
Publisher’s suggested LTV:CAC ratio
GlueUp ↗

01/ why benchmarks matter

Numbers you can act on — and defend.

These membership marketing statistics are the reference points we use every day as a membership marketing agency: the renewal and churn medians, the acquisition-cost ratios, and the lifetime-value maths that decide whether a membership model works.

Compare the same measure, period and association type. The median describes the middle reported value; the mean describes the arithmetic average. Neither is automatically the right target for your organisation.

Treat survey results, published planning guidance and model arithmetic as different evidence. Your own results depend on your members, dues and value proposition; a planning ratio is not a measured sector norm.

Every statistic on this page is attributed. Where a topic has a deeper treatment — the membership retention rate, or member lifetime value — we link to it rather than repeat it.

  • All organisations85%Median: 85%. Mean: 83%.
  • Trade associations90%Median: 90%. Mean: 89%.
  • Individual membership82%Median: 82%. Mean: 79%.
  • Combination bodies82%Median: 82%. Mean: 81%.

Renewal rate, median against mean, by organisation type — MGI 2024 Benchmarking Report, p.20 (US survey, n=513). The mean sits below the median in every segment. The all-association mean is 83%; 79% is the individual-membership mean only. The 2026 edition’s overall median is 82% (MGI 2026).

Reconcile the dashboard’s counts before comparing with a survey.

02/ the benchmarks

Membership benchmarks, by category.

82%Median renewal rate
75%Median first-year renewal
~5 yrsAverage member tenure
5–25×Acquisition vs retention cost
50–100%Allowable acquisition cost
3:1Healthy LTV:CAC ratio
40–60%Non-dues revenue share
25%Millennials’ share of members

Sources: MGI 2026 (82%) · MGI 2024 (75%) · Rossell / MGI (tenure) · Harvard Business Review (5–25×) · MembershipCorp (50–100%) · GlueUp (3:1) · ASAE (40–60%) · MGI 2025 (25%). The sources combine mostly US association surveys, published practitioner guidance and model arithmetic. These are different evidence types, not delivered client results.

  • 82% · Median renewal rate. The median renewal rate across membership organisations — the number to benchmark your own against (medians beat averages, which weak performers drag down). Source: MGI 2026 Benchmarking Report
  • 75% · Median first-year renewal. First-year members renew far below the overall median — they churn roughly 1.4× faster, which is why onboarding and the first 90 days matter so much. Source: MGI 2024 Benchmarking Report
  • ~5 yrs · Average member tenure. At an 80% renewal rate the average member stays about five years (tenure ≈ 1 ÷ churn); at 82% it rises to roughly six. New-member cohorts average far less. Source: Rossell / MGI

82% is the median from MGI’s 2026 edition, stated in MGI’s own July 2026 post; 75% and the segment splits are from the 2024 edition, the most recent published in full. Two editions, named separately.

03/ retention benchmarks

The renewal rate is the honest KPI.

Of all the statistics here, the renewal rate is the one that expresses everything else: engagement, satisfaction and value perception all land in a single number.

The median sits at 82%, but the first-year median of 75% is where most churn hides. That is why member onboarding and the first 90 days carry so much weight.

To turn the benchmark into your own number, the membership retention rate page has the formula, the sector breakdown and a live calculator; the member retention guide covers the programme that moves it.

Median renewal rate (MGI 2026)

Median first-year renewal (MGI 2024)

Marketing General Inc. US surveys, two editions named separately. Illustrative sector benchmarks, not guaranteed outcomes.

Members lost each year

Churn is 100% minus renewal: 18% from the MGI 2026 median, 25% from the MGI 2024 first-year median. 25 ÷ 18 ≈ 1.4 — first-year members churn roughly 1.4× faster. Our arithmetic across two editions.

Average tenure at each renewal rate

Tenure ≈ 1 ÷ churn: 1 ÷ 0.20 = 5 years, 1 ÷ 0.18 ≈ 5.6 years — Rossell / MGI’s method, our arithmetic at the 82% median. New-member cohorts average far less.

04/ by organisation type

First-year renewal differs sharply by organisation type.

The headline median hides a wide spread. In MGI’s 2024 edition, trade associations renew first-year members at a median of 85%, while individual membership organisations renew them at 64%. That is the first-year cohort renewing in the sixties a healthy headline rate can hide.

Benchmark against your own segment, not the sector as a whole, and track the first-year cohort separately from the base.

Median first-year renewal, by type

  • Trade associations85%
  • All organisations75%
  • Combination bodies74%
  • Individual membership64%
MGI 2024 Benchmarking Report, p.21 · US survey, n=333 (trade 126, individual 119, combination 88).

05/ acquisition & value benchmarks

Acquire within the maths, keep for the return.

These acquisition figures answer different questions. MembershipCorp’s 50–100% of first-year dues and GlueUp’s 3:1 ratio are published planning guidance. HBR’s 5–25× range is cross-industry commentary. None establishes the acquisition budget or retention return for your membership. Work from your own delivery costs, renewal behaviour and income before choosing a spending limit.

Cost to acquire, as a multiple of cost to retain

  • Retaining a member1×
  • Association studies~5×
  • HBR, upper bound25×
Harvard Business Review puts the gap at 5–25×; association-specific studies land around 5× (IMPACTS Value Study via Sidecar).

Annual cost per member (US$)

$4–5 to retain against $20–25 to acquire — IMPACTS Value Study, via Sidecar. Secondary report of a US study; bars drawn at each range’s midpoint.

Allowable acquisition cost, share of first-year dues

  • Most organisations can afford50%
  • Many can push to100%
MembershipCorp’s published rule of thumb (guidance, not research): budget between half and all of a member’s first-year dues to win them.

Reported member acquisition cost (US$)

Reported CAC ranges span roughly $24 to $500 depending on channel and membership type (MGI). A spread, not a benchmark — which is why the sector works in ratios.

06/ value benchmarks

What a member is worth, beyond the dues.

Put your own figures through the member lifetime value calculator, size the opportunity with the membership acquisition guide, and see what members are worth to you on the membership value page.

Lifetime value against acquisition cost

A 3:1 lifetime-value-to-acquisition-cost planning ratio — GlueUp’s published guidance.

Dues as a share of revenue at trade associations

Dues as a share of revenue at professional bodies

ASAE (US). Non-dues income — events, training, sponsorship, advertising — makes up roughly 40–60% of total revenue for many associations.

Millennials as a share of association members

MGI 2025 Benchmarking Report · US survey. Around a quarter of members, up from 21% in 2020, as boomer membership declines.

08/ the MGI benchmarking report

The MGI benchmarking report, explained.

The Membership Marketing Benchmarking Report is the annual survey most membership statistics trace back to, this page’s included. Here is what it is, and which edition says what.

It is published by Marketing General Inc. (MGI), a membership-marketing firm in Alexandria, Virginia, every year since 2009 (MGI’s report archive); 2025 was its seventeenth consecutive year (MGI 2025), so the 2026 edition is the eighteenth.

It surveys US associations and splits each answer three ways: individual membership organisations, trade associations and combination bodies. The segment matters as much as the headline.

The sample is association executives answering an online survey, not audited data. The 2024 edition, the most recent published in full, invited 48,592 association professionals between 4 January and 12 February 2024; 804 responded, covering 696 associations (MGI 2024, methodology).

Each figure has its own base (513 organisations for the renewal medians, 333 for first-year renewal), so read the n beside the number.

MGI’s benchmarking report, edition by edition

The 2026 report · 18th edition

Open the source →

SampleNot stated in MGI’s posts — see the report

How you can read itFree, behind MGI’s download form; headlines in MGI’s posts

  • 82%median renewal rate
  • 38%associations reporting growth
  • 34%individual bodies reporting growth
  • 51%call their value proposition compelling

Which edition says it?

Sources: MGI report archive · 2024 full PDF · MGI 2025 post · MGI 2026 post · MGI blog, 2026. US surveys.

Editions also differ in how you can read them. The 2024 PDF is public; the 2025 and 2026 reports are free but sit behind MGI’s download form, so their public figures are the ones MGI states in its own posts.

That is why this site cites 82% to the 2026 edition and 75% first-year renewal to the 2024 edition: two editions, never one. It is US data: a UK body should read it as a reference point beside the UK sources in the trends above.

09/ read before comparing

Which membership benchmarks belong together?

A number can be accurately quoted and still be the wrong comparator. Before putting a membership benchmark beside your own result, match the question, population and period. A survey’s reported median, an operator’s observed transactions and a publisher’s planning ratio answer different questions.

MGI’s 2024 report describes an online survey of association professionals, with individual, trade and combination association segments. It also says questions are reviewed each year and may be removed, added or changed. Check the relevant question and its response base in each edition before treating a change as a trend.

Keep respondent counts attached to the particular chart. The report’s overall participating-association count is not automatically the number that answered every renewal or acquisition question. Likewise, a first-year renewal result belongs beside your first-year eligible cohort, rather than a total that mixes new members with long-established ones.

The ONS explanation of survey uncertainty distinguishes sampling error from other errors, including non-response and inaccurate answers. Its statistical methods concern ONS surveys. They are a useful reason to read methodology, not permission to invent confidence intervals for a different publisher’s survey.

CheckQuestion to answer
PopulationWhich organisations or members are represented?
MeasureWhat was counted, and out of which denominator?
PeriodWhich renewal window or survey edition?
Evidence typeSurvey result, observed records or planning guidance?

Our comparison checklist; these are not extra benchmark figures.

Use an external benchmark to frame an investigation, then examine your own cohorts and previous comparable periods. If a different edition, country or organisation type is the only available reference, keep that limitation visible next to the comparison.

An acquisition budget rule or an LTV:CAC ratio can be useful as a scenario assumption. It should be labelled published guidance, with the publisher named, rather than described as a measured norm for membership organisations.

For the calculation and denominator, use membership retention rate. For a consistent internal reporting view, use membership KPIs. This page supplies external reference points and their provenance; the two should meet only when their definitions match.

Methodology guidance, not a new finding about UK membership performance.

Dan Keegan, Founder, Membership Quest and GTM Quest

Written by Dan KeeganFounder, Membership Quest and GTM Quest · GTM Quest ↗

10/ questions

Membership statistics, asked and answered.

What is a good membership retention rate?

The median renewal rate across membership organisations is 82% (MGI 2026), so a realistic target for most is 80–85%. First-year members renew at a median of just 75%, so it is worth tracking the first-year cohort separately — a healthy headline rate can hide a first-year cohort renewing in the sixties. Trade associations report a 90% median (MGI 2024), but steady improvement matters more than any single benchmark.

What is the average member acquisition cost?

There is no single figure, because dues vary enormously, so the sector works in ratios. The common rule of thumb is that allowable member acquisition cost (CAC) is 50–100% of a member’s first-year dues (MembershipCorp), and the lifetime-value-to-CAC ratio should be at least 3:1 (GlueUp). Reported CAC ranges span roughly $24 to $500 depending on channel and membership type (MGI).

How much cheaper is retention than acquisition?

Keeping a member costs a fraction of winning a new one. Harvard Business Review puts the gap at 5–25×, and association-specific studies land around 5× ($4–5 to retain versus $20–25 to acquire, per the IMPACTS Value Study). Either way, a percentage point of retention is almost always the cheapest growth a membership organisation can buy.

What percentage of association revenue comes from non-dues sources?

For many associations, non-dues revenue — events, training, sponsorship, advertising, and other member services — makes up roughly 40–60% of total income (ASAE). Dues typically account for around 45% of revenue at trade associations and closer to 30% at professional bodies, which is why membership value and engagement, not just recruitment, drive the economics.

What is the MGI Membership Marketing Benchmarking Report?

It is an annual survey of US association executives published by Marketing General Inc. since 2009, and the source of most widely quoted membership benchmarks, including the renewal medians on this page. The 2024 edition, the latest published in full, drew 804 responses from 696 associations (MGI 2024). The 2025 and 2026 editions are free behind MGI’s download form; their headline figures appear in MGI’s own posts, which is where this page cites the 82% median renewal rate from (MGI 2026). The 75% first-year median is from the 2024 edition.

What are the membership trends for 2026?

Fewer US associations report growth — 38% in MGI’s 2026 edition, down from 45% (MGI 2026) — while the median renewal rate held at 82%. Recruitment is the top priority again in the UK (MemberWise Digital Excellence 2026), AI use has spread quickly, with 79% of UK charities using it in some way (Charity Digital Skills Report 2026), and UK professional bodies are growing income per member rather than member numbers (PARN and Buzzacott).

Are these membership marketing statistics UK-specific?

We prioritise UK and sector-specific sources where they exist (for example MemberWise and Parliament Hill for UK engagement and trends), but several headline benchmarks — renewal medians, LTV:CAC, acquisition-versus-retention cost — come from the broader membership and association research base, principally Marketing General Inc., ASAE, GlueUp and Harvard Business Review. They are robust reference points for UK membership organisations, and we always treat them as sector benchmarks rather than guarantees.

15 minutes · video or phone

How do your numbers compare?

A complimentary 15-minute conversation: where your membership sits against these benchmarks, and which number to move first.

  1. 0115 minutes, video or phone
  2. 02Your renewal rate against the medians
  3. 03Your first-year cohort, sized
  4. 04The number to move first
Prefer email? hello@membership.quest →

Pick a day that suits · live availability

Book 15 minutes · no obligation

How do your numbers compare?

Where your membership sits against these benchmarks, and which number to move first.

Book your consultation →Membership marketing services

11/ related

Keep exploring

/membership-trends

Membership trends 2026

Eight trends, each with its source.

/membership-retention-rate

Membership retention rate: benchmarks, formula and calculator

Turn the benchmark into your own number.

/membership-acquisition

Membership acquisition: the complete guide

Win members within the maths.

/membership-marketing-for-charities

Membership marketing: the complete guide

The whole discipline, in one place.

/membership-marketing

Membership marketing services & pricing

What the work involves and costs.

12/ sources

Every figure, and where it came from

We cite membership-sector research wherever it exists. Follow any number back to its origin. Vendor, secondary and US sources are labelled as such.

  1. Marketing General Inc. — 2025 Membership Marketing Benchmarking Report (25% millennials)Industry survey, US
  2. Marketing General Inc. — 2026 report: median renewal 82%Industry survey, US · MGI’s own post
  3. Marketing General Inc. — 2024 Membership Marketing Benchmarking Report, full PDF (75% first-year; segment medians and means)Industry survey, US · n=513 / 333
  4. Tony Rossell / MGI — Lifetime value worked example (tenure ≈ 1 ÷ churn)Practitioner method
  5. GlueUp — Member acquisition cost vs lifetime value (3:1)Vendor published guidance
  6. Sidecar / IMPACTS Value Study — Retention vs new-member costVendor blog reporting a study (secondary)
  7. MembershipCorp — Allowable acquisition cost (50–100% of dues)Vendor published guidance
  8. ASAE — Dues vs non-dues revenue shareSector body, US
  9. Harvard Business Review — The value of keeping the right customers (5–25×)Practitioner journal
  10. Marketing General Inc. — The 2025 report is here (45% growing; 47% in 2024, 49% in 2023)Industry survey, US · MGI’s own post, July 2025
  11. Marketing General Inc. — What ASAE Annual 2026 reinforced (IMOs growing 34%; value proposition 51%)Industry survey, US · MGI’s own blog, 2026
  12. iMIS — Top takeaways from the 2026 Membership Performance Benchmark ReportVendor survey, 400+ professionals · January 2026
  13. MemberWise — Digital Excellence (2026/27) research reportUK sector network survey · report behind a form
  14. Intercloud9 — Membership sector briefing, March 2026 (MemberWise figures)Supplier’s summary of MemberWise · secondary
  15. Charity Digital Skills Report — 2026 headline findingsUK survey, 807 charities · 2026
  16. Charity Digital Skills Report — 2026 detailed findings: artificial intelligenceUK survey · 2026
  17. PARN and Buzzacott — Financial benchmarking for professional bodies 2026UK operator dataset, 500 bodies’ filed accounts
  18. Office for National Statistics — Uncertainty and how we measure it for our surveysGovernment statistical methodology guidance