Overview
JavaScript leads Nonprofit Organizations's secondary barrier stack above the norm
| Value | |
|---|---|
| WAF | 96% |
| Antibot | 18% |
| CAPTCHA | 19% |
| JavaScript | 45% |
| Rate Limiting | 24% |
| TLS | 17% |
WAF at 96% is the dominant barrier. JavaScript (45%) leads secondary coverage. The remaining barriers sit materially lower, giving Nonprofit Organizations a narrow but defined secondary layer.
Barrier Landscape
WAF leads Nonprofit Organizations at 96% — JavaScript is the main secondary layer
| Value | |
|---|---|
| WAF | 96% |
| Antibot | 18% |
| CAPTCHA | 19% |
| JavaScript | 45% |
| Rate Limiting | 24% |
| TLS | 17% |
| Has robots.txt | 83% |
| Blocks AI crawlers | 10% |
WAF dominates at 96%. JavaScript (45%) leads active secondary barriers, followed by Rate Limiting (24%). The remaining three barriers all sit at or below 19% — a concentrated rather than broadly stacked profile.
Two-barrier stacks are Nonprofit Organizations's most common security posture
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| 0 barriers | 3% |
| 1 barrier | 33% |
| 2 barriers | 34% |
| 3 barriers | 13% |
| 4 barriers | 8% |
| 5 barriers | 7% |
| 6 barriers | 2% |
34% of Nonprofit Organizations sites carry exactly 2 barriers. 30% stack three or more. 3% carry none — a low share of unprotected sites for this sector.
Nonprofit Organizations is predominantly Easy to access — with a notable Moderate minority
| Mean recommended tier | |
|---|---|
| All sites | 1.75 |
A mean recommended tier of 1.75 and a median of Easy place Nonprofit Organizations around the middle of the sectors surveyed. 45% of sites are Simple to access; 14% require Moderate or above.
Simple and Easy cover nine in ten Nonprofit Organizations sites
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| 1 - Simple | 45% |
| 2 - Easy | 41% |
| 3 - Moderate | 9% |
| 4 - Complex | 4% |
| 5 - Advanced | 1% |
Simple (45%) is the most common tier. Simple and Easy together account for 86% of sites, while 9% land at Moderate and 5% at Complex or Advanced.
robots.txt
Most Nonprofit Organizations sites publish a robots.txt — coverage above the norm
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| Publish a valid robots.txt | 83% |
83% of Nonprofit Organizations sites publish a valid robots.txt. The 17% without a file leave crawl policy undefined — a lower gap than the cross-sector average of around 24%.
Nonprofit Organizations sites name a handful of agents in robots.txt — few commit to comprehensive policies
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| 0 | 30% |
| 1 | 33% |
| 2–4 | 14% |
| 5–9 | 12% |
| 10–15 | 3% |
| 16+ | 8% |
The mean of 4.3 named agents reflects limited bot-policy investment in Nonprofit Organizations. 30% of sites name no agents; 33% name exactly one. Only 8% maintain a list of 16 or more named bots.
SEO audit tools and AI crawlers draw near-equal attention in Nonprofit Organizations robots.txt
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| AI crawlers | 10% |
| SEO / search indexing | 7% |
| SEO audit tools | 13% |
| Commercial scrapers | 4% |
| Social / content scrapers | 5% |
| Archive / research crawlers | 2% |
| Monitoring / uptime bots | 0% |
SEO audit tools appears in 13% of Nonprofit Organizations sites; AI crawlers in 10%. The near-equal split reflects a sector that treats both categories with comparable priority. Figures are percentages of all 100 sites.
Uniform per-agent rules dominate Nonprofit Organizations robots.txt files
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| Uniform per-agent rules | 45% |
| Path-level mixed rules | 32% |
| Allow-only (no Disallow rules) | 1% |
| Mixed AI posture | 2% |
| Blanket Disallow: / | 3% |
Uniform per-agent rules lead at 45%, with path-level mixed rules at 32%. Mixed AI posture (2%) and blanket Disallow (3%) are minimal.
AI crawlers are among the most-targeted agents in Nonprofit Organizations robots.txt
| Disallowed | Allowed (whitelisted) | |
|---|---|---|
| * | 66% | 32% |
| GPTBot | 9% | 1% |
| AhrefsBot | 8% | — |
| Bytespider | 8% | — |
| CCBot | 8% | — |
| ClaudeBot | 8% | — |
| Amazonbot | 6% | 1% |
| Applebot-Extended | 7% | — |
| Google-Extended | 7% | — |
| Twitterbot | 2% | 4% |
| Baiduspider | 6% | — |
| ChatGPT-User | 6% | — |
| meta-externalagent | 6% | — |
| FacebookBot | 5% | — |
| ImagesiftBot | 5% | — |
| PerplexityBot | 5% | — |
| YouBot | 5% | — |
| anthropic-ai | 5% | — |
| Mediapartners-Google | 2% | 3% |
| MJ12bot | 4% | — |
| YandexBot | 4% | — |
| Claude-Web | 4% | — |
| Diffbot | 4% | — |
| cohere-ai | 4% | — |
| omgili | 4% | — |
Values are percentages of all 100 Nonprofit Organizations sites surveyed. The wildcard (*) leads at 66% Disallow. Among named agents, GPTBot, Bytespider lead the Disallow list — reflecting direct targeting of AI training and indexing bots.
Industry Cohort
Nonprofit Organizations is among the hardest sub-categories to access in Nonprofit
| WAF | Antibot | CAPTCHA | JavaScript | Rate Limit | TLS | robots.txt | Blocks AI | Tier | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Museums | 95% | 27% | 32% | 43% | 22% | 13% | 78% | 13% | Tier 1 |
| Nonprofit Organizations | 96% | 18% | 19% | 45% | 24% | 17% | 83% | 10% | Tier 2 |
| Religion & Belief | 96% | 22% | 26% | 32% | 19% | 13% | 89% | 10% | Tier 1 |
| Social & Charitable Organizations | 94% | 22% | 31% | 38% | 20% | 11% | 79% | 5% | Tier 1 |
A median tier of Easy and mean of 1.63 make Nonprofit Organizations one of the harder sectors within Nonprofit to access programmatically. JavaScript (45%) leads the cohort.