Philosophically, I think rationalists relatively:

• Tend to be more focused on complexity of value; hedonic utilitarianism is rarer among them
  • This is reflected in both differing visions of the future, and being less drawn to animal welfare.
• Tend to have a more continuous + computational view of personal identity
  • This is reflected in e.g., interest in antiaging and cryonics
• Are less likely to be causal decision theorists and/or think on the margin

Sociologically, I think they:

• Tend to be more neurodiverse (particularly on the autism spectrum)
  • Also have a greater incidence of mental health issues
• Have greater class diversity (especially when you look at the current ~20 year olds in EA, I feel like they almost uniformly come from elite colleges, at least in the US)
• Are more male
• Are more white
• Rely more on first-principles thinking and verbal logic, less on empirical data and fast BOTECs
• Are less deferential
• Are less prestige-conscious
• Are more intelligence-conscious 

The Rationality Community has a far lower focus on morality, and has members which are amoral or completely selfish. I'll go out on a limb and claim that they also have a broader set of interests, since there is less of a restriction on what attention can be focused on (EA wants to do good, the rationality community is interested in truth, and truth can be found basically about anything).

Purely from online observation (and I'll admit I'm biased towards the EA side of things here):

1. EA is less reliant on "the sequences" and other pop-science blog posts when supporting their claims
2. EA tends to be more deferential to expert opinion  and academic research when evaluating claims. 
3. rationalists tend to have higher estimates of AI doom chances.
4. EA tends to be more sympathetic to social justice issues. 

Any rationalists around who could answer this question? Crosspost to lesswrong?