All-in vs. All-or-Nothing: Which Crowdfunding Model Should You Choose?

When launching a crowdfunding campaign on CAMPFIRE, one of the first decisions you'll need to make is choosing between:

All-in
and
All-or-Nothing

The names might sound a little confusing at first, but the difference is actually simple.

Will you carry out the project even if you don't reach your funding goal?

That's the key distinction.

In this article, I'll walk you through the characteristics of each model and help you figure out which one is right for you.

What Is the All-in Model?

With the All-in model, you receive whatever funds have been pledged — even if you don't hit your goal.

For example:

Goal: ¥1,000,000
↓
Final amount raised: ¥600,000

Even in this scenario, the project is considered successful.

However, there's an important catch.

Even if you fall short of your goal, you are still required to carry out the project and deliver the promised rewards to your backers.

On CAMPFIRE, an All-in project is considered successful the moment even a single pledge comes in.

So if your project looks like this:

"We can only make this happen if we raise ¥1,000,000 — ¥300,000 simply won't be enough."

…then you need to be very careful about choosing All-in.

Because even if you only raise ¥300,000, you're still obligated to follow through.

What Is the All-or-Nothing Model?

With the All-or-Nothing model, the project is only considered successful if you reach your funding goal.

For example:

Goal: ¥1,000,000
↓
Final amount raised: ¥800,000

In this case, the project does not succeed.

The funds are not transferred to the project creator — they are refunded to the backers.

You also have no obligation to fulfill any rewards.

On the other hand, if you do reach ¥1,000,000, the project succeeds and you move forward with execution.

In short, this model is suited for projects where:

"This simply cannot happen unless we raise a certain amount of money."

A Quick Comparison of the Two Models

All-in

Project succeeds even if goal isn't met
↓
You receive however much was pledged
↓
You carry out the project
↓
You deliver rewards to backers

All-or-Nothing

If goal is met → Project succeeds
↓
You receive the funds and carry out the project

If goal is not met → Project fails
↓
Backers are refunded
↓
No obligation to carry out the project or deliver rewards

That's the difference.

Which One Should You Choose?

I always start by asking myself this one question:

"Can I carry out this project even if I don't reach my funding goal?"

That's it.

If you can execute even without hitting the goal → All-in

For example:

• The product is already being manufactured.
• The store opening is already confirmed.
• The event is already locked in.

And on top of that, you want to:

• Reach more people through crowdfunding.
• Build an early customer base and community of supporters.
• Use the funds raised to make the experience even better.

If that's your situation, All-in is worth considering.

If You Need a Minimum Amount to Execute → All-or-Nothing

On the other hand, if your situation looks like this:

• You need ¥1,000,000 just to meet the minimum manufacturing order.
• You can't hold the event without ¥2,000,000 to cover the venue and other costs.
• You can't even start the business without raising enough to buy the necessary equipment.

…then All-or-Nothing is the more natural fit.

CAMPFIRE's official guidelines also recommend All-or-Nothing for projects and rewards that cannot be fulfilled unless the funding goal is reached.

"All-in Is Safer" — Not Necessarily

This is a common misconception worth addressing.

You might think:

"If I can receive funds even without hitting my goal, isn't All-in always the better deal?"

Not necessarily.

Say you need ¥1,000,000 for a project and you only raise ¥300,000.

With All-in, you do receive that ¥300,000.

But you still have to carry out the project and honor your commitments to backers — with that ¥300,000.

You may end up needing to cover the remaining ¥700,000 out of your own pocket.

So rather than thinking:

"All-in is better because I'll get something no matter what,"

think of it this way:

"I'm choosing All-in because I can responsibly execute this project even if I fall short."

Consider Your Funding Goal Alongside Your Model

When deciding between All-in and All-or-Nothing, your funding goal matters just as much.

For instance, if you actually need ¥3,000,000 but you set your goal at ¥1,000,000 thinking "it'll be easier to hit" and choose All-or-Nothing — the project will be marked as successful once ¥1,000,000 is pledged.

You need to honestly ask yourself whether you can actually deliver on that amount.

The same goes for All-in — setting a high goal "just in case" doesn't make sense either.

Rather than just choosing a model, you need to think through:

How much do I need at minimum to actually execute this?

What changes depending on how much I raise?

Set your goal with those answers in mind.

More Important Than the Model: A Plan You Can Actually Execute

All-in vs. All-or-Nothing.

This isn't about which model is "better."

What matters is:

Can you follow through on the project you've promised your backers — all the way to the end?

To figure that out, start here:

"Can I execute this even if I don't hit my goal?"

If yes → All-in.

If no → All-or-Nothing.

Use that as your starting point.

Read Next

・How to Set Your Crowdfunding Goal | Why You Shouldn't Base It on Costs Alone

・7 Common Crowdfunding Mistakes | What to Check Before You Go Live

If you'd like to talk through your crowdfunding plans, feel free to visit my profile page.