Direct comparison
Crossref vs DataCite — DOI registration agencies compared
Crossref and DataCite are the two largest DOI Registration Agencies. They target different output types and use different metadata schemas, though they federate extensively.
Side-by-side comparison
| Dimension | Crossref | DataCite |
|---|---|---|
| Established | 2000 | 2009 |
| Primary output type | Journal articles, books, proceedings | Datasets, software, samples, instruments |
| Member organisations | ~21,000 publishers + societies | ~3,000 data centres + repositories |
| DOIs registered (cumulative) | ~165 million | ~85 million |
| CRediT support | Schema 5.5+ carries CRediT in contributor metadata | DataCite ContributorType — cross-walks to CRediT |
| ORCID integration | Auto-update — pushes citations to ORCID record | Sync via ORCID Member API |
| Metadata schema | Crossref schema (XML) | DataCite Metadata Schema 4.6 (XML + JSON-LD) |
| Membership fee | Tiered annual + per-DOI deposit fee | Tiered annual fee + per-DOI for some allocators |
| Use for software releases | Not primary; use DataCite via Zenodo / Software Heritage | Standard — via Zenodo, Figshare, Software Heritage |
Common questions
FAQ
Can one resource have both?+
Rarely — usually it's one or the other. A dataset attached to a Crossref-DOI'd article might appear in both metadata records but holds a single canonical DOI.
Which should I use for my software?+
DataCite (via Zenodo or Software Heritage). Crossref DOIs for software exist but are rare.
Do they share metadata?+
Yes — both expose metadata via the Public Data API; many tools (OpenAlex, Scholia) aggregate across both.
