Reinvest24 Review 2026: Why It Scores 11% Match
- Headquarters
- Tallinn, Estonia
- Supervision
- No licence
- Advertised yield
- ~14.6%
- Minimum
- EUR 100
- Since
- 2017
- Status Jan 2026
- Withdrawals frozen
The 60-second version
Reinvest24 scores 11% match, the lowest of the 19 platforms we track. The Estonian Financial Supervision Authority, Spain's CNMV and Belgium's FSMA all issued alerts stating that Reinvest24 operated without the required licence. Withdrawals have been frozen since February 2024. The platform published a wind-down plan but has not provided regular updates on progress. Multiple regulator alerts, frozen capital and no clarity on recovery rates put Reinvest24 at the bottom of our ranking. This review uses public verifiable facts only and stays neutral on intent. Capital at risk.
Investor protection: 0 out of 30 points
Reinvest24 held no valid authorisation under EU frameworks. The Estonian Financial Supervision Authority published an alert in 2023 stating that Reinvest24 was not registered under the European Crowdfunding Service Providers regulation and lacked a MiFID licence. Spain's CNMV and Belgium's FSMA issued similar warnings. No compensation scheme applies. The platform's base in Tallinn put it within EU jurisdiction, but it did not secure the licence required to offer investment services cross-border. Zero points.
Execution record: 0 out of 25 points
Withdrawals froze in February 2024. The platform published a wind-down plan stating it would attempt to recover funds from underlying property projects and distribute them to investors. No regular progress reports followed. There is no public data on what percentage of capital has been returned, how many projects remain live, or what the final recovery rate might be. The execution record moved from operational to frozen, with no visibility. Zero points.
Return honesty: 0 out of 20 points
Reinvest24 advertised yields around 14.6 percent. Since the freeze in February 2024, no returns have been paid. The gap between advertised and realised is total. Before the freeze, the platform structure - investment via special purpose vehicles that owned property projects - made it difficult to track individual loan performance and compare advertised rates with actual payouts. Once withdrawals stopped, the question became academic. Zero points.
Structural transparency: 5 out of 15 points
The SPV structure placed a corporate layer between investors and the underlying real estate. Each project sat in a separate company, and investors held shares in that company rather than a direct claim on the property. This model is common in property crowdfunding but reduces visibility. Ownership of the platform itself was disclosed in Estonian company records. The wind-down plan confirmed that recovering funds required unwinding multiple SPVs, a process with no fixed timeline. Five points for basic ownership clarity, nothing more.
Liquidity and exit: 6 out of 10 points
Before the freeze, Reinvest24 operated no secondary market. Liquidity came from project exits - sales or refinancing of the underlying property. Typical holding periods ran two to four years. Once the freeze took effect, liquidity dropped to zero. The six points reflect the theoretical exit mechanism that existed before February 2024, not the current reality. Right now, there is no way to retrieve capital ahead of the wind-down queue.
The case against
- Multiple regulator alerts across three EU jurisdictions
- Withdrawals frozen since February 2024
- No regular updates on wind-down progress or recovery rate
- No valid licence under ECSP or MiFID frameworks
- SPV structure complicates asset recovery
- Zero transparency on current project status
Who this platform does not suit
Reinvest24 does not suit anyone. Withdrawals are frozen, the platform is in wind-down, and there is no clarity on when or whether capital will be returned. Investors with money still trapped in the platform are in a queue with no control over timing or outcome. New investment is not possible. The 11% match score reflects a complete breakdown across all five rating criteria. This is a case study in what a failing platform looks like from outside, useful for understanding warning signs but not for allocating capital.
How Reinvest24 compares with licensed property platforms
| Platform | Match | Licence | Yield | Withdrawals | Track record |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| InRento | 80% | ECSP (Bank of Lithuania) | ~11.8% | Open | 0 losses, 5 years |
| Profitus | 71% | ECSP (Bank of Lithuania) | ~10% | Open | EUR 273M funded, 0 reported losses |
| Reinvest24 | 11% | No licence | ~14.6% advertised | Frozen Feb 2024 | Wind-down, recovery rate unknown |
InRento and Profitus both hold ECSP licences, allow withdrawals, and publish verified track records. Reinvest24 operated outside the regulatory framework, froze investor funds, and has not provided clarity on recoveries. The comparison shows the distance between a functioning licensed platform and one in collapse. Read the full InRento review and Profitus review for alternatives that remain operational.
Five questions about Reinvest24
No. Withdrawals have been frozen since February 2024. Multiple European regulators issued alerts warning that Reinvest24 operated without the required licence. The platform published a wind-down plan but has not provided regular updates on progress. Until withdrawals resume and there is clarity on recovery rates, capital remains trapped.
The 11% match is the lowest score in our comparison table of 19 European platforms. It reflects zero points for investor protection (no valid licence, multiple regulator alerts), execution record (frozen withdrawals, no visibility on recoveries), return honesty (no realised returns being paid), structural transparency (SPV structure prevented clarity on underlying assets) and liquidity (complete freeze). The score is editorial opinion, reviewed monthly, based on published facts as of January 2026.
The Estonian Financial Supervision Authority, the Spanish securities regulator CNMV, and the Belgian FSMA all published warnings stating that Reinvest24 was offering investment services without the required authorisation in their jurisdictions. The Estonian alert, published in 2023, noted that Reinvest24 was not registered under the European Crowdfunding Service Providers regulation and lacked a MiFID licence. These are public verifiable facts available on each regulator's website.
Reinvest24 published a wind-down plan in 2024 stating that it would attempt to recover funds from underlying property projects and distribute them to investors. The platform has not published regular progress reports, and there is no public data on what percentage of capital has been returned. Investors remain in a queue with no certainty on timing or final recovery rate. This is a factual description of the situation as of January 2026, not a prediction.
InRento scores 80% match, holds an ECSP licence from the Bank of Lithuania, and has delivered returns without capital losses across five years. Profitus scores 71%, also holds an ECSP licence, and reported EUR 273M funded with zero losses, though its accounts showed negative equity in FY24. Both platforms allow withdrawals. Reinvest24 operated without a licence, froze withdrawals in February 2024, and sits in wind-down. The structural and regulatory gulf is the widest in our comparison table.
The verdict
Reinvest24 scores 11% match because it fails on every criterion that matters. Multiple regulator alerts, no valid licence, frozen withdrawals since February 2024, and no clarity on recovery rates combine to make this the lowest-scoring platform in our comparison. The wind-down is a factual process with an unknown timeline and an unknown outcome. Investors with capital still in the platform have no control and no visibility. This review uses public verifiable facts and stays neutral on intent, but the conclusion is unavoidable: Reinvest24 is not a functioning investment platform. It is a case study in regulatory failure and a reminder that a licence is not decoration. See the full platform comparison for alternatives that remain operational and supervised. Capital at risk.