All 19 European P2P platforms, ranked
Five criteria, weights fixed before any platform was scored, applied the same way to every name including the one that pays us. Tap a row to see the breakdown.
Read this before the table. Maclear is this site's commercial partner and scores 65%, which puts it tenth. We have not moved it up. The weighting that produces this order is published in full, and we ran four alternative weightings before settling on it. Maclear does not come first under any of them, because it operates without the licensing that the platforms above it hold.
Largest marketplace in the EU at EUR 600M-plus. The EUR 20,000 scheme covers eligible claims against the firm and never covers borrower defaults. Came through the 2022 originator crisis.
| Base | Advertised yield | Minimum | Supervision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Riga, LV | 9-11% | EUR 50 | MiFID II, Latvijas Banka |
First EU platform to operate under an InvestEU EIF guarantee worth EUR 15M. Baltic SME lending, audited, conservative.
| Base | Advertised yield | Minimum | Supervision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Riga, LV | ~10.5% | EUR 200 | ECSP, Latvijas Banka |
The EU's only ECSP-authorised buy-to-let platform. Zero capital losses across five years. No auto-invest and lock-ups of two to four years, which is what costs it on liquidity.
| Base | Advertised yield | Minimum | Supervision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vilnius, LT | ~11.8% | EUR 500 | ECSP, Bank of Lithuania |
Rare combination of a MiFID II licence and a realised return near 15 percent. Every loan comes from the Dyninno group, so the diversification is thinner than the loan count suggests.
| Base | Advertised yield | Minimum | Supervision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Riga, LV | ~14.9% realised 2025 | EUR 10 | MiFID II, scheme EUR 20k |
Discounted Spanish mortgage notes averaging 23 percent across 13 completed deals. Young model and lumpy payouts, so treat it as a specialty position.
| Base | Advertised yield | Minimum | Supervision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Riga, LV | 21-22% realised | EUR 10 | MiFID II, Nasdaq CSD custody |
EUR 273M funded with no reported capital losses. Against that, negative equity in the FY24 accounts, which is a platform-continuity question rather than a loan-quality one.
| Base | Advertised yield | Minimum | Supervision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vilnius, LT | ~10% | EUR 100 | ECSP |
Lithuanian development loans, profitable in 2024. Ownership overlaps with PeerBerry, so holding both concentrates one risk cluster rather than spreading it.
| Base | Advertised yield | Minimum | Supervision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vilnius, LT | 10.6-14% | EUR 100 | ECSP, ISO 27001 |
EUR 1.1B-plus lent since 2015 and a MiFID II licence. A legacy Russian exposure tail and weaker recent investor feedback keep the execution score down.
| Base | Advertised yield | Minimum | Supervision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Riga, LV | 10-13% | EUR 10 | MiFID II since 2021 |
Repaid EUR 51M of war-affected Ukrainian loans in full, which is the strongest execution evidence in the table. Heavy reliance on the Aventus group. Secondary market since 2026.
| Base | Advertised yield | Minimum | Supervision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Zagreb, HR | ~11% | EUR 10 | ECSP pending |
Highest return-honesty score in the table and the lowest protection score. One default since 2022, covered in full by the CEO. No compensation scheme of any kind.
| Base | Advertised yield | Minimum | Supervision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Zurich, CH | 14.5-14.9% | EUR 50 | Swiss SRO, AML only |
Formerly HeavyFinance. Agricultural loans against collateral with a EUR 20M EIF cornerstone. Realised returns have historically run about 4.5 points under the advertised figure.
| Base | Advertised yield | Minimum | Supervision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vilnius, LT | ~13% advertised | EUR 100 | ECSP |
Holds a MiFID II licence. A 2026 independent investigation raised questions about concentration on related networks, and the platform has had five CEOs in three years.
| Base | Advertised yield | Minimum | Supervision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Riga, LV | ~11.4% | EUR 10 | MiFID II |
Irish ECSP licence with a high headline rate. Close to 100 percent of loans come from Creditstar, so the buyback is only as strong as Creditstar's solvency. Investors have reported pending-payment episodes.
| Base | Advertised yield | Minimum | Supervision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dublin, IE | 15.6-18% | EUR 10 | ECSP, Central Bank of Ireland |
Buyback has been honoured since 2017, which is a record rather than a guarantee. Fully automated, short loans, and 100 percent of the loan book comes from its own group.
| Base | Advertised yield | Minimum | Supervision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Zagreb, HR | 9-13% | EUR 10 | No licence |
Once the flagship of European property lending. Around 60 percent of the portfolio now sits in recovery and the business is effectively a workout desk. The licence is intact and the disclosure is good, which is why it does not score lower.
| Base | Advertised yield | Minimum | Supervision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tallinn, EE | ~10.4% advertised | EUR 50 | ECSP, Estonia |
Short consumer and SME loans, concentrated ownership linked to Ruptela. Public statements have diverged from filed accounts. We watch this one, we do not fund it.
| Base | Advertised yield | Minimum | Supervision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Zagreb, HR | 12-14.5% | EUR 10 | No licence |
Working capital for e-commerce brands through a claims-assignment structure that has not been tested by a downturn.
| Base | Advertised yield | Minimum | Supervision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tallinn, EE | 12.4-25% | EUR 10 | No licence |
Consumer loans in South East Asia. Researchers have raised questions about the ownership network. Conflict of interest runs through the structure.
| Base | Advertised yield | Minimum | Supervision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Budapest, HU | 13-14.5% | EUR 10 | No licence |
Multiple regulator alerts, withdrawals frozen since February 2024, skeleton team. In practice this is a wind-down, and it carries the lowest score we give.
| Base | Advertised yield | Minimum | Supervision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tallinn, EE | ~14.6% advertised | EUR 100 | No licence |
How the five criteria are weighted
| Criterion | Weight | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| Investor protection | 30% | Which authority supervises the platform, under which framework, and whether any compensation scheme applies |
| Execution record | 25% | Defaults, recovery outcomes and whether repayments have actually arrived |
| Return honesty | 20% | How closely realised returns track the advertised figure |
| Structural transparency | 15% | Originator concentration, ownership clarity, quality of published data |
| Liquidity and exit | 10% | Secondary market, auto-invest, realistic time to get money out |
Protection carries the most weight because it is the only criterion that changes what happens to your capital when a platform stops operating. That choice is arguable, and it is the reason several high-yield platforms score in the fifties. The full method is here.
Scores are editorial opinion built on published platform disclosures and regulator registers, recorded September 2026. They are not a safety rating and not advice. Capital is at risk on every platform listed, including those in the green band.