ASCAP vs BMI vs SESAC vs GMR: Which PRO Do You Pick?

Four performing rights organizations operate in the United States, but only two will accept you today. The remaining two choose their own members. If you are currently comparing them, those invitation-only organizations have not selected you.

An indie songwriter weighing ASCAP vs BMI is really choosing between those two open societies. Once that is clear, most of the worry falls away, especially because ASCAP and BMI are more alike than message-board fights imply.

The quick answer: writer membership is free at both, so pick on structure, not price — BMI runs for profit, ASCAP is a member-owned non-profit. Both distribute every quarter and license identical streaming services, stations, and venues. Your earnings will not change meaningfully because you chose one over the other.

A quick look at all four

All four do the same basic job: they collect performance royalties when a composition is performed publicly, whether on radio or television, at a stadium or bar, or through a stream. This revenue differs from the mechanical royalty pool, which The MLC collects separately in the US. Recording-side income is unrelated as well; that belongs in SoundExchange's area.

Why GMR and SESAC are not practical choices

BMI represents 1.4 million members, while SESAC has roughly 30,000. SESAC accepts no applications and instead approaches writers it wants. The way in, then, is to create a catalog it wants to recruit and see whether an invitation comes.

With around 100 writers, GMR is even smaller. Irving Azoff founded it in 2013, and its roster consists of recognizable names even to people outside the business. For an independent songwriter, it is not a realistic next tier to pursue.

Learn what both societies are, then stop worrying that you failed to choose them. Should GMR or SESAC become relevant to your career, the first call will come from them.

The meaningful differences between BMI and ASCAP

Joining fees

ASCAP writer membership is free — the old application fee is waived for new writers. At BMI, writers pay nothing to affiliate either.

So price is no reason to pick one over the other. The publisher side of your catalog is not another account you open: your PRO pays the writer share directly to you, untouched, and Davincii registers its own publisher entity on your works to collect the publisher share. A writer account is the only account you ever open.

Organization and ownership

ASCAP operates as a non-profit owned by its members. After operating expenses, collected fees are distributed back to those members.

Since New Mountain Capital acquired BMI in 2022, it has operated for profit. Much of the newer ASCAP versus BMI debate comes from that shift. I do not have the data to claim that writer payments have materially changed as a result. Still, the ownership models truly differ, and that distinction matters if you care who controls the society handling your income.

When royalties arrive

Each society distributes quarterly. ASCAP generally pays about six months after a performance quarter ends. That timing is standard across the business because usage records must be gathered, reconciled, and matched before distribution.

Wherever you affiliate, plays will not generate a payment during that same quarter. The delay is built into the process.

Catalog coverage and licenses

Both organizations license nearly every part of the US market. People used to say BMI was stronger in radio and television while ASCAP favored streaming, but those are old patterns, not exclusive coverage. A membership logo will not prevent either society from collecting at a particular platform or venue.

One easily missed rule: membership is exclusive

A writer cannot hold BMI and ASCAP affiliations simultaneously. You must select one. To move later, you need to let the current term expire, then register the catalog again with the new organization.

Exclusivity can make the commitment seem larger than it is. Although the commitment is real, both organizations perform essentially the same work to essentially the same standard.

What controls whether money reaches you

This has a greater effect than the society you select.

Membership alone does nothing until every work is accurately filed with splits that add up and connected to your IPI number. Each of the four US societies requires that global writer identifier. Without an IPI, a work registration cannot be connected to the royalties coming in.

In my experience, incomplete catalog registration, absent IPIs, and ownership totals that are not 100% lose much more money than the supposedly "wrong" PRO. Fully registering a catalog at ASCAP will always beat registering only half of that same catalog at BMI. Swap the organizations, and the result stays the same.

Works registration covers just one income path. A PRO handles performance money, not mechanicals from US streaming, which are handled by the MLC. Nor does the society directly collect abroad beyond royalties returned under reciprocal deals. Once songs earn across borders, the directory covering all societies makes clear how many organizations enter the picture.

A simple choice

If you would rather use a rule than keep debating:

• Joining only as a writer and unwilling to pay to begin: BMI.
• Creating a publisher entity too: choose ASCAP based on price.
• Member ownership matters to you: ASCAP.
• You already prefer one: select it. The difference is too small to warrant any more research than you have done.

Use the saved time to register every work in every place where it generates royalties.

How Davincii helps

We file your compositions at your PRO, plus the international and mechanical societies responsible for songwriter income, then collect the resulting royalties. You pay no upfront fee and retain 100% of the copyright. Our commission applies only to money actually collected: 15% for performance royalties and 20% for mechanicals.

We neither choose a society on your behalf nor ask you to change affiliations. Pick the one you want, and we can work with your decision.