Who are the most solid lenders on Mintos? Our Mintos lender ratings

Last updated - 2 October 2019

Mintos lenders can default or close down - it has happened before

In 2017, Mintos lender Eurocent failed, and defaulted on its Mintos ‘buyback guarantee’ commitments. This is likely to lead to signifcant losses for Mintos investors as a high proportion of Eurocent customers defaulted on their loans. Other lenders have been quietly removed from Mintos recently, with the lenders closing down their operations – including Dindin and BIG Microfinance. We had raised concerns about both of these companies – thankfully Mintos lenders were repaid in full in these cases. 

These events have inevitably led investors to pay more attention to the quality of the other lenders on the Mintos platform. That led us to create this page – our Mintos lender ratings. Our goal is to provide investors with key information on each lender, and a rating score to help highlight those that are lowest and highest risk. 

New potential default - Aforti

On 7th August 2019 Mintos announced that it was suspending primary and secondary market loan purchases relating to Aforti Holdings of Poland. You can read the statement here. On 16th August 2019 Mintos announced that the issues at Aforti were on their way to being resolved, as they had started remitting funds again. However the situation still remains unclear. The Mintos statistics page shows that there is currently around €2.2 million of loans still outstanding, nearly all of which are in arrears. Some loans are shown to be beyond 60+ in arrears, which indicates that there is potentially an ongoing issue. 

The outstanding amount of Aforti loans is fairly small as a percentage of the total loans on the marketplace, but the unexpected issues at Aforti will have impacted investor confidence. 


Key financial information of each Mintos lender

The table below captures the key financial information for each lender. This can be useful to quickly lookup the profile of each lender, and compare the strengths and weaknesses of each one.

All Figures in EUR million (profits annualised where appropriate):

Mintos Lender Reporting period Loans Equity Profit - latest Profit - prior year Audited
Mogo Jun 2019 161.2 21.1 7.4 2.6 Yes
ID Finance Holding (Kazakhstan) Dec 2018 86.3 9.5 7.9 3.7 Yes
Creditstar Mar 2019 88.5 20.0 2.8 2.2 No
Capital Service Mar 2019 27.6 3.3 -0.5 -1.4 Yes
Kredit Pintar Dec 2018 4.8 8.6 5.9 No
Credissimo Dec 2018 17.2 16.3 3.2 5.0 Yes
IuteCredit Jun 2019 64.7 14.8 7.4 7.3 Yes
ExpressCredit Mar 2019 12.7 -3.4 -2.6 -1.6 No
Vizia / Banknote Jun 2019 26.5 6.5 4.0 4.6 Yes
Simbo Dec 2018 6.9 -0.1 0.8 -1.0 Yes
SOS Credit Jul 2019 1.2 1.2 0.2 0.2 No
Monego Dec 2018 4.1 0.4 -0.6 0 Yes
Tengo Sep 2018 4.1 -0.4 No
Cashwagon Dec 2018 20.9 5.3 -5.1 -6.3 Yes
Placet Group Dec 2018 32 15.9 3.5 3 No
Akulaku Nov 2018 67.4 48.4 -23.5 No
AgroCredit Dec 2018 5.2 1.8 0.2 0.1 No
Acema Mar 2017 38.6 14.7 2.0 2.4 Yes
BB Finance Group Dec 2018 14.2 4.9 -1.1 0.8 Yes
Creamfinance Dec 2018 51.2 12.4 1.6 -0.4 Yes
Extra Finance Dec 2018 4.6 2.0 0.1 2.0 No
Mozipo Group Dec 2018 11.1 -4.8 -2.5 -1.7 No
Aasa Dec 2018 73.2 -2000 -2000 -2000 No
Kredo.al Dec 2018 2.8 0.1 -0.8 -0.2 No
Aforti Dec 2018 27.1 1.7 0.1 0.3 Yes
Dinero Dec 2018 4.1 2.0 -1.6 -0.2 Yes
Dozarplati Dec 2018 6.2 2.7 1.0 0.1 No
Capitalia Dec 2018 1.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 Yes
Credilikeme Dec 2018 0.4 1.1 0.1 -0.7 No
Lendo Mar 2018 21.3 2.1 -2.2 No
EcoFinance Dec 2018 4.9 1.7 0.1 0.4 Yes
ITF Group Dec 2018 2.5 1.2 0.2 0.2 Yes
EBV Finance Dec 2018 18.3 3 0.3 0.1 Yes
Hipocredit Dec 2018 5.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 No
Debifo Dec 2018 7.8 0.1 -0.1 0.2 No
Kviku Dec 2018 8.8 1.8 0.7 0.1 Yes
Rapido Finance Dec 2018 1.8 -1.7 -1.7 -1.9 Yes
Tigo Dec 2018 2.1 -0.7 -0.8 -0.3 Yes
Peachy Oct 2018 4 -1.2 -0.7 -1.6 No
GetBucks Dec 2018 111 -2.6 -14.7 -12 Yes
Varks Dec 2018 16.6 3.7 6.8 -0.9 Yes
LF TECH Dec 2017 20.8 16 10 5.1 No
Credius Dec 2018 9.7 7.8 0.4 1.8 Yes
Rapicredit Dec 2018 2.8 0.1 -0.7 -0.4 Yes
Sebo Dec 2018 9.5 -0.2 1.8 -0.6 Yes
Kredit24 Dec 2018 2.4 -0.7 -0.7 0.7 Yes
Watu Credit Dec 2018 8.3 1.8 1.6 0.2 Yes
Bino Dec 2017 5.7 -1.7 -2 -0.1 No
Everest Finanse Dec 2018 102.6 31.6 -8.3 -6.6 Yes
Kuki.pl Dec 2018 72.7 5.2 -6.9 No
Stikcredit Jun 2019 3 2.7 0.8 0.5 No
E-Cash Dec 2018 0.6 0.2 -0.6 0.0 No
1pm Nov 2018 141.6 57.3 7.1 7.2 Yes
Esto Jul 2019 5.7 3.0 -0.1 No
Metrokredit May 2018 5.5 -4.9 -11.8 No
Zenka Aug 2019 1 1.3 -1.7 No
AlfaKredyt Dec 2018 4.9 1.3 0.3 0.2 No
Mikro Kapital Dec 2018 21.3 5.5 0.1 0 No
Fireof Dec 2018 3.8 0.9 0.0 No
ID Finance Spain Dec 2018 11.6 -0.9 0.1 -0.4 Yes
ID Finance Mexico Dec 2018 1.7 -1.0 -0.6 -0.4 No
Lime Zaine Dec 2018 10.3 3.3 0.6 0.6 Yes
Dineo Credito Dec 2018 8.6 1.3 2.2 2.8 No
Dineria Mar 2019 1.6 -1.4 -1000 No
Lendrock Dec 2018 0.5 1.1 -0.3 -0.2 No
Dziesiątka Finanse Dec 2018 4.4 2.0 0.2 0.0 Yes
Novaloans Mar 2019 1.2 1.3 0.9 0.5 No
Alex Credit Mar 2019 3.1 1.3 0.6 -0.3 No
CashCredit Dec 2018 8.5 2.2 0.7 0.1 Yes

Our Mintos lender ratings

Our Mintos lender ratings are based on 5 characteristics – profitability, capitalisation, size, track record and the quality of their reporting. We have allocated marks out of 20 for each metric, giving a total score out of 100. Mintos have recently introduced their own ratings – from A (best) to D (default), which we have included as a comparison.

Latest rating changes - October 2019

New: E-Cash

E-Cash is yet another new and extremely small lender with no real track record. It is based in Ukraine. The entire company is worth less than what many Mintos investors would expect to make as their annual bonus this year. We really don't understand how or why a company with only €200k of equity is able to access the Mintos platform. However that's not really your problem, unless you accidentally purchase their loans. Initial score of 26.

New: Stikcredit

Stikcredit is a much better addition to the Mintos platform than E-Cash. It is larger, has a longer and better track record, and is profitable. It also currently has strong capital ratios. The main downside is that it is still quite small, with a loan book of only €3m. Our initial score is 53.

Latest rating changes - September 2019

New: Zenka

Zenka is an app-based lender that has recently started in Kenya. It is very small, with only €1 million of loans outstanding. The small size and limited track record means that it is currently at the higher risk spectrum. One positive is that the company says it has its first monthly profit in August 2019, and Kenya is a market that is one of the world leaders when it comes to use of app based banking and mobile phone payment transfers. Our initial score is 41.

New: Esto

Esto is a new point-of-sale finance provider from Estonia. We like the business, even though it is very new and still proving itself. It claims to have reached profitability in August 2019, and generated remarkably small losses during its start-up phase. Lending performance so far has been very good, and the company appears to have a loan product with impressive technology behind it. The quality of Esto's reporting and presentation is amongst the best we have seen from the new start-up lenders to have come onto Mintos. Our initial score is 60.

New: Everest Finanse

In some ways Everest Finanse is exactly the type of new lender on the Mintos platform investors have been waiting for. It operates in Poland, which is a strong economy with a reliable jurisidiction. Everest has a very large loan book, and strong capital ratios. If only it wasn't deeply loss making. This is not made clear at all in the glossy management presentation uploaded by Mintos, but peer into the (Polish language) financial statements and you will see they have lost around €15m over the last 2 years. It's hard to understand why the financial results are poor now that they have reached scale. That's why, despite everything else, their initial score is only 51.


Mozipo has finally published their overdue results for 2018 and they not good, with a loss of €2.5m. Mozipo Group now has a significant negative equity position. The only positive to come from the results is the €0.4m profit made by their Lithuanian subsidiary Moment Credit, which provides guarantees to some loans listed on Mintos. Our score is now 36, down from 39.

Ratings re-affirmed:

The following companies had no changes to their scores following their latest financial disclosures: Hipocredit, Vizia/Banknote


Metrokredit had an initial rating score of only 13. This was because of small size, lack of track record and very poor disclosures. Following their results for 1H 2019 their score has fallen even lower to 11. Why? The lending group made a huge loss of €6m. For every €100 it owes to creditors (including Mintos investors) there is only around €57 of assets. It is not clear why or how the business generated such a large loss but for now investors can presume the situation has very high risk.

Failures to report

We have assigned disclosures scores of 0 to the following companies, who have not reported any results since December 2017 - LF Tech, Lendo, Bino. In our view Mintos lenders should be providing financial updates every 6 months at a minimum. It is not acceptable for lenders to operate for over 20 months without providing a financial update. This should be considered a 'red flag'. We will revise these scores if and when new financial information is provided.

Latest rating changes - July/August 2019


Mogo released its 1H 2019 results (click the arrow above for link). We had been cutting the Mogo rating due to its growing leverage and default rates. However leverage is now stable, and Mogo recorded a strong profit in 1H19 on the back of lower bad debt costs. Score increased from 71 to 76.


Rating has been suspended pending further information from Mintos and/or Aforti (see comments above)

New: SOS Credit

SOS Credit is a very small lender from Ukraine, with a €1.2m loan portfolio. However it has been profitable in the last 2 years and is currently mainly funded with shareholder equity. However these positive factors are offset by low scores for small size and poor disclosure quality, leading to a score of 46.

ITF Group

ITF Group received a slight increase in rating from 45 to 50. It is a tiny Bulgarian lender but is stable, has good leverage ratios and it makes a small profit each year. If it was 20 times larger we would like it a lot more.

Ratings re-affirmed:

The following companies had no changes to their scores following their latest financial disclosures: Iute Credit, Dineo, Rapido


Kazakhstan lender Kredit24 has had its score fall from 50 to 32 following release of 2018 results. It fell to a loss in 2018 and now has a negative equity position.

Cash Credit

Cash Credit has received an upgrade from 35 to 53 following a big increase in profit in 2018 and improved disclosures.


Polish lender Alfakredyt was upgraded from 33 to 45 based on its higher profit in 2018 and increased capital levels.

BB Finance

BB Finance now operates in just Finland and Estonia. It has had to close down its Georgia and Czech Republic operations in 2019 as they were loss making. Losses in these countries were the main reason why the business fell to a loss of €1.1m in 2018. Their score fell from 62 to 55, but it will likely recover in future if it can recover in its core markets.

Capital Service

Polish lender Capital Service has had its score fall from 65 to 57 following release of 2018 results. In the last two years it has generated pre-tax profits but it has incurred huge (unexplained) corporation tax bills that has pushed it into a loss. This, as well as an increase in leverage has led to a fall in score.


Small lender Dozarplati had been break-even in 2016 and 2017 but it achieved a €1m profit in 2018. It has also grown its capital base and these factors led to a score increase from 56 to 61.

Watu Credit

Big score lift from 39 to 61, driven by a very strong result for 2018. Profit increased from €0.2m to €1.6m. The business also grew its equity and loan portfolio considerably, and has reasonable capital ratios.


Russian lender Kviku had a successful 2018, increasing profits considerably, from €0.1m to €0.7m. Balance sheet ratios also improved, leading to a score increase from 45 to 57.


Columbian lender Rapicredit's losses continue to grow, with a €0.7m loss in 2018. Quite frankly we think their balance sheet looks very strange to us too. Our score has fallen from 40 to 28.


Slight downgrade from 34 to 32 due to the company moving from a profit in 2017 to a small loss in 2018.

ID Finance

ID Finance finally released their audited 2018 financial statements. Our overall score fell slightly from 81 to 78. Their score fell slightly due to higher leverage and slightly lower profits than their previous presentations had disclosed. Overall though ID Finance is still performing well.

Express Credit

Express Credit has operations in 2 countries. We have combined the results of both for our tables above. Both countries made substantial losses in 2018 and now have negative equity positions. We have cut rating from 53 down to 22.

Extra Finance

Extra Finance experienced a sharp fall in profits in 2018 - from €9.1m to €0.3m. This has been the main reason for the fall in score from 60 to 52.

Credit Star

Slight upgrade from 77 to 79 on the basis of record profits for Q1 2019 and stable balance sheet structure.


The last time Danish lender Simbo reported results it disclosed a loss of €1m. In 2018 it managed to achieve a profit of €0.8m. It continues to have a weak balance sheet, but the improved profit situation has led to a score increase from 24 to 43.


Minor downgrade of score from 70 to 68 due to a fall in profits in the most recent report. However the business continues to be strongly capitalised.

Ratings re-affirmed:

The following companies had no changes to their scores following their latest financial disclosures: Agrocredit, Credissimo, Credilikeme, Placet Group, Kredo, Efaktor, Cashwagon


Slight upgrade from 39 to 43 following publication of first year results.


Most loans on Mintos are from the Polish subsidiary of the 'Supernova JV'. However no results have been provided for this business since 2016. The latest group presentation for Supernova suggests the group is performing very poorly due to problems with their Finland subsidiary and is experiencing funding issues. There is insufficient information to support remaining invested in Aasa Poland and have withdrawn any rating due to lack of information.

Our views on the new lenders

In June 2018 Mintos introduced a British lender – Novaloans. The business is extremely small, but has a good profit history over the last 2 years. If it was much larger we would be very positive about the business but its initial rating is only 51. Mintos also introduced Ukrainian lender Alex Credit. The business is extremely small, with a loan portfolio of only €3 million, however it is profitable. Its initial rating is 41. Another new lender is a Polish lender called Dziesiatka Finanse.  Unlike many lenders on Mintos it has been operating for 8 years. The main downside again is that it is very small. It is however part of a larger group (although it does not receive a guarantee from the group). Our initial score is 62. In June Spanish auto lender called Lendrock also joined. The business model seems promising however it is currently extremely small with a limited track record. Our initial score is 41. In May a tiny lender from Mexico called Dineria joined Mintos. We are really not sure how they qualified to join Mintos given that they have less than €2m of loans, and have negative equity. We awarded them a score of only 12/100, and Mintos has awarded a rating of only B-.

A recent lender to join that has scored well is Indonesian Fintech lender Kredit Pintar. Kredit Pintar reports that it had a very profitable first year of operations (which is a little surprising for a new business) and a strong capitalisation (equity is much higher than its loan book). We note that it is backed by some well known investors and its app is highly rated by customers on the Google Play store. It has achieved an initial score of 66, which should increase in the future as it builds a longer track record and provides more financial information about its business. Mintos gave it a B+ rating.

In February 2019 a profitable lender from Spain joined Mintos – Dineo. Dineo achieved an initial score of 60. Once it publishes its 2018 financials, and improves its financial disclosures, we think this score will improve. The most recent lender to join was Mikro Capital from Russia. Mikro has good capital ratios and a reasonable size, however its earnings have been weak in the last two years, barely breaking even. Its initial score is 47.

In January 2019 Mintos introduced a company from Kosovo, called Monego. It was similar to many other lenders who have joined the platform recently, being a new lending business with next to no track record, operating in a small country. It achieved a score of 39, which is slightly higher than may be expected, but it currently has strong capital ratios. We also like that it has been described as a ‘related party’ of Mintos as we think Mintos is less likely to allow its investors to suffer a loss in this situation if the company is not successful.

Now you’ve reviewed our latest Mintos lender ratings – what’s the fastest way to choose the best loans on the  Mintos Primary Market? Check out our new Mintos Loan Scanner page, which allows you to compare very quickly the current interest rates, loan availability, and ratings for each lender on the platform. We will keep it updated, so check it next time you are thinking of buying more loans, or adjusting your auto-invest settings.

Next step: consider adding these sites to your portfolio

EstateGuru logo

EstateGuru is an excellent site that offers loans secured on real estate. Rates are high - around 11%. Currently mainly focused on the Baltic region of Europe but with plans to expand into other countries.

Viventor logo

Viventor is a similar site to Mintos, just smaller. Some secured loans are available. We also provide Viventor lender ratings.

Bulkestate logo

Bulkestate is a small but growing site focused on loans secured on real estate. It offers loans secured by real estate. Their rates are the highest in Europe for secured loans currently (11-14%)

October P2P logo

October is focused on lending to small businesses in France, Spain and Italy. Rates are often a little lower than the other sites we list here, but some investors will like October due to the countries it operates in.

PeerBerry logo

Peerberry offers loans from multiple lenders. Rates are usually around 12%, and most loans have buyback guarantees. The site is easy to use and has a great design.

Lenndy is another multi-lender P2P investment site. It is much smaller than Mintos, but it has an interesting range of loans. Many have high rates, with buyback guarantees

344 thoughts on “Who are the most solid lenders on Mintos? Our Mintos lender ratings

    • Oscar Harrington Post authorReply

      Thanks Hugo & Christian, we’ve added Everest now. Unfortunately it seems to be another case where the management presentation glosses over some of the more difficult realities…. The financial statements (in Polish) don’t provide a very good explanation of why the business is losing so much money. One reason is the high tax expense (likely because the tax deduction for bad debts takes longer to claim than the accounting expense), but otherwise we would expect a company with a €100m loan portfolio in Poland with those interest rates should be profitable.

  1. Pingback: Kokkuvõte – august 2019 – Rahats

    • Oscar Harrington Post authorReply

      Yes! Didn’t seem to be there before. Thanks again Christian we have updated for those results.

  2. Pingback: Best Mintos Investment Strategy - Setup In Under 5 Minutes!

    • Oscar Harrington Post authorReply

      Thanks as always Christian. Unfortunately they seem to have forgotten to upload the report to their website – the link they provide does not work! We’ve contacted them asking for a copy of the full results.

  3. Pingback: Mintos, Euroopan suurin vertaislaina markkinapaikka - Matkalla vaurauteen

  4. Pingback: Mintos Secondary Market - here's 5 ways to find the best loans

  5. Pingback: Mintos Loan Originators - Rules How to Choose the Best of Them

  6. Thomas Reply

    HI there

    It’s nothing directly linked to this site, however I am wondering what you think about this. I received an E-Mail from Mintos regarding that Iutecredit will buy back most of it’s loan portfolio and within the same E-Mail Mintos suggested other Loan Originators in which I could invest. A warning message regarding that the capital is at risk was missing.

    So I have answered in a short E-Mail, that they should always place a warning message regarding that the capital is at risk when investing.

    The answer was:
    Morning Thomas,

    Thank you for your thoughts, however, I do not really get why we should add that the capital is at risk?

    Kind regards
    I am starting to think, I am working with amateurs and have a bad feeling about it.

    What do you think?

    • Gian Piero Reply

      Hi Thomas, you are obviously right. What is even worse however is that IuteCredit has a half decent balance sheet, a good track record and is audited, while some of the alternative originators that Mintos suggests are of lesser quality. I think we should not expect Mintos to do our risk assessment.

    • RODDY Reply

      I think they did understood and I noticed today a change on the bottom of the site – they added the capital at risk line:

      2019 All rights reserved
      By using our website you agree to the use of cookies in accordance with our cookies policy.
      Investing puts your capital at risk, and past performance does not guarantee future returns. When you invest on Mintos, you acquire loan and other debt receivables. Mintos does not provide investment or asset management services, or any services that are subject to any financial services licence.↵

  7. Pingback: 16 Best Mintos Loan Originators - Best Strategy (2019)

  8. ThePoorInvestor Reply

    Hi Oscar,
    I think this is really good work. I will use your rating to evaluate my own risk strategy. You certainly have a different approach than Mintos has, and i kinda like that even though i think Mintos has done a good job.

    I do not know if i have overlooked this, but do you give a lesser grade if the loan originator is not audited?


    • Oscar Harrington Post authorReply

      Thank you. Providing audited numbers can help increase the score we give for disclosure/reporting quality.

  9. Conor Reply

    I have today 08/14/2019 at least 60% (117 of 216) of ID Finance loans in late a couple of days. Is this normal for rating B+ or score 78 points? Late in various term (1 to 60 days)

    • Oscar Harrington Post authorReply

      Thanks for the link Loord. Worth a read for all investors in Mogo loans. We agree with the key points – performance is still OK but the balance sheet has been getting more stretched as it grows its lending faster than its equity. This increased leverage has led us to progressively cut their score over the last 12 months, but they still remain one of the better options available on Mintos right now.

  10. Christian Reply

    Thanks for the updates Oscar! Did you actually see the quite detailed explanation for the open question regarding the “PLN 3.9m tax bill on pre-tax profits of only PLN 2m” issue for Capital Service? Looks helpful but I am not good enough to understand this :).

    Also, could you somehow keep the “old” Aforti rating on the website so we know how it was before the current situation? This will help in the future for comparison, so would be good to keep all the original numbers in there somehow (also the financial report numbers etc).

    Lastly, I think some score changes are missing in the new column, such as for Varks. I think if you go through the text describing the recent rating changes, all of those should be added, not just the newest ones – in essence, this column should be populated if there was at least one rating change ever, and then the last difference should be put into it. For the monthly updates you provide now, would be nice to have the same format in the first line (like 45 -> 40) so that it is easy and quick to see the change also in the future when there are multiple updates per originator and one wants to see previous rating changes. Great, I just love this site, it also gains so much attention due to your hard work maintaining it!


  11. former_investor Reply

    Fortunately I did not have any Aforti loans, but this is the last straw for me. My confidence in Mintos was diminishing with each month, now I am certain that when the financial crisis will hit the whole platform will collapse like a house of cards. It is clear that they are just like any other financial institution, meaning, they will not protect the investors. Quite the contrary, we are at the end of the food chain.

    Better leave now with interest earned to date than later with less or nothing.

    • RODDY Reply

      In my view, this type of investing is like investing in bonds. You have to your own DD when buying corporate bonds, and when doing well, you make good money and it is relatively safe, but you need to spread your risk. Mintos is nothing more than a kind of bonds market, and it is the job of the investor to check in what they are investing it, although they present themself to make it easy for investors, I’m afraid it always comes down to also perform your own research. There is no such thing as receiving 10 procent free or risk in this world.

      • former_investor Reply

        Hi Roddy,

        I completely agree with your view. Mintos is (now was) my first stab at investing, a successful one. But now I realize that it is not less risky than “traditional” ways, it actually may be more risky. Hence the opinion.

    • Gian Piero Reply

      I do not have Aforti, simply by sticking to Oscar’s good work. Oscar clearly wrote that he would not touch originators with a rating under 60. Simple and easy to follow. No Aforti. Doing some work one can refine Oscar’s gift to us. Perhaps excluding everybody that is not audited, or perhaps excluding (if you are EUR based) all investments that carry high currency risk. You might accept say an Albanian currency risk with a good originator (estimating it a medium risk), but not invest in an African one whoever the originators is, estimating this as high currency risks. It is also not all about excluding, for example Oscar has EBV under 60, yet I invest because it is invoice financing, the track record is of zero late payments, they are audited, there is no currency risk and the counterparty risk is EU treasuries. True, I invest exclusively in the best 15 originators, but further diversification by only adding risks makes no sense. Clearly making these kind of choices my average return is below 10,00%. Not bad in zero interest world.

  12. Victor Reply

    Mintos and Viventor confirm issues with Aforti loans. Mintos suspends investing and trading of Aforti loans.
    There’s something fishy going on here.
    Is Aforti next Eurocent?
    In Poland again….

    • Oscar Harrington Post authorReply

      Unfortunately it looks like it Victor. We have updated the page for this new event.

  13. Gian Piero Reply

    Hi Oscar, thanks again for your precious and hard work. I see that you show EBV as not audited. On Mintos you can find 2018 financials audited by Grant Thornton.

  14. Błażej Reply

    Hello, Oscar! First of all, I’d like to thank you for your great effort maintaining this list. I’ve just seen some loans from new company to me – SOS Credit. Do you have any opinion about them? And one more question – the post mentions updates on 5 August but it still looks same to me as it was in July. Maybe I’m missing something?

    Thanks in advance,

    • Oscar Harrington Post authorReply

      Thanks Blazej – we’ve now added SOS Credit, and also details of all the August score changes. Thanks for highlighting the new lender.

  15. Lasse Reply

    How come EBV Finance has been downgraded when revenue for 2018 was more tran tripled and net profit was more than doubled?

    • Oscar Harrington Post authorReply

      Increased leverage. Profit was effectively break even (0.3m for 2018) but the company is now levered ~9 to 1 rather compared to ~6 to 1 previously.

    • Oscar Harrington Post authorReply

      Thanks a lot Rui. Have updated tables. That document actually has an auditor stamp on it (if you look closely…)

    • Oscar Harrington Post authorReply

      Rui isn’t that what the table is showing? EUR 0.4m profit for the latest year (which is in this case 2018), and 1.8m for prior year.

      • Rui Reply

        Indeed, I was the one with my excel columns switched, too many hours string at this stuff! XD

    • Oscar Harrington Post authorReply

      Thanks again Christian. We updated the Lime figures a while ago but your comment made us realise we had not updated the latest reporting period figure. Presentations like Peachy drive us crazy – EBITDA is an irrelevant metric for financial companies (as interest costs are one of the most important costs) and it is just used to present a better picture than is really the case..

  16. Christian Reply


    thanks for keeping this up to date and improving it, I have some additional suggestions:

    1) The new format with the rating update overview is very nice, I like it! Maybe please also add the specific date to make it even more clear when this was updated, while keeping the structuring by month.

    2) For ID Finance, the table says just rating “B”, but this is not completely true: It differs among the different countries, might be better to also as B+ / B / B-.

    3) Linking the URL of the latest financial report that the table is based on directly in the first table in an additional column might also be a good idea, so people can check by themselves, this would enhance reproducibility and clarity where they are taken from. Also, if there was a way in WordPress so that people could add new reports in there (as opposed to adding a comment), that might also be the way to go forward.

    4) Lastly, maybe you could also add a column to the table that indicates the direction of change from the last update, and a “-” if there was none.

  17. Nuno Reply

    I agree with most recent posts here
    Oscar has done this community a great service by maintaining and updating all this information about the companies operating on Mintos. I am very thankful that this blog exists.
    Nevertheless we small retail investors are still in the infancy of this sort of financial report analysis; auditors, ratings etc and I agree that there is much room for improvement
    It is very important to be well informed and have a clear picture of what is going on to invest accordingly and lower the risk as much as possible.
    Thank you Oscar, and thank you everyone !

  18. GG Reply

    BTW the author of this post has done a great job and with the help of other posters I believe the list can be kept up-to-date.

    I have some issues with the scoring methodology, especially the equal weighting of the points systems and the fact that the most important measure of risk when you lend money to a company is: impairment allowances (NPL->non performing loans) vs equity (which already includes non distributed profits). Notice that it is useless to consider profit as a good indicator on its own since it includes dividends which are terrrible for lenders to the company since they reduce equity. For example Dineo has great profits, but its risk is high because this past year they decided to distribute almost 95% of their profits and then further finance the company through loans instead of equity (the parent company is really solid, but since there is no guaranteee from the holding company, taken in isolation it does not look great).

    Also it is very important to read the notes of the audited accounts on how the impairment allowances have been calculated: I prefer to look at the amount of late loans so that no subjective management assumptions are included. A few companies like BB Finance for example have made some really wild assumptions in 2018 which are not consistent with 2017 assumptions. It is hard work to read and analyze a full balance sheet.

    Finally the quality of the auditor is really important, some companies are audited by local unknown auditors. They may be good or bad, but a big international auditor company is to be preferred because it will represent less audit risk: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/audit-risk.asp

    Non audited companies are the worst because the risk that the numbers presented are just wishful thinking becomes very high, especially in jurisdictions outside the EU or USA (or other solid jurisdictions) where fiscal audit is weak. Fiscal audit is really the minimum set of controls for a non audited company.

      • Oscar Harrington Post authorReply

        Thanks Igor & Tomas – we’ve updated the table. And if anyone can work out why Capital Service had a PLN 3.9m tax bill on pre-tax profits of only PLN 2m please let us know!!

        • IgorJ Reply

          Hi Oscar, the answer to your question can be found in the document that was linked by Tomas. If you go to page 82, there is a ‘Note 14’ to the financials. It seems that the company had PLN 39.8m of costs that were not tax deductible. Their income tax basis was actually PLN 7.8m. Would it be possible that they were taxed at 50% tax rate?

          • Vin McQueen

            Hi guys, please find my explanation and breaking down below. Bottom line is – company has shown tax paid and deferred tax in one line that’s why it is so high.

            1. In Poland (probably not only there, but this I know for sure since I live here :)), tax law doesn’t allow you to deduct write-offs on bad loans from the tax base. IGORJ made a good point, in note 14 there is a breaking down, how from PLN 2.1m gross profit, they made it to PLN 7.8m tax basis – those 39.8 he mentioned is mostly write-offs on bad loans. It was mostly netted by interests they should get by they didn’t and others, so they finally landed at PLN 7.8m tax basis. CIT rate in Poland is 19%, so we have PLN 1.49m tax but we still missing PLN 2.44m tax. Consider above as step 1.

            2. Step 2 – provisions (reserves) for deferred tax – when you go to Note 10, you’ll find there a line “Rezerwa z tytułu odroczonego podatku dochodowego” which means provisions for deferred tax. In 2018 they made PLN 909k but they released PLN 133k, which gives PLN 776k additional tax shown in income statement. Still missing PLN 1.66m.

            3. Step 3 – Deferred tax assets – when you go to balance sheet, to assets, you’ll find there a line “Aktywa z tytułu odroczonego podatku dochodowego” which means deffered tax assets. Difference between balance at the end of 2017 (PLN 2,275k) and at the end of 2018 (PLN 613k) gives us missing PLN 1.66m.

            This is pretty difficult to understand without knowledge of accounting and tax rules, so it doesn’t surprise me, this needed explanation – I myself was wondering what is going on in this financial statement and needed refresh knowledge from my accounting classes 🙂

            Hope it helps!

  19. GG Reply

    BB Finance Group has recently (12.07.2019) published the consolidated 2018 accounts here: https://ariregister.rik.ee
    They are audited by KPMG (so a very solid auditor) and the results are not good at all. I purchased it for 2 euros, the report is in Estonian language but can easily be translated by google translate and the main problem is the following:
    Net loss of 1.1 million euros. Equity capital reduced by approx 1.5M euros

    “There was another change in regulations in Georgia significantly limiting the issue of consumer credit, which led to the decision to suspend operations in Georgia. The loss for the reporting period was largely due to the developments in the Georgian market in 2018
    In the second half of the year, large-scale investments in marketing were made.
    It was also decided to close the Czech market in 2019, based on a small share of the Group portfolio, but the time cost was equal to or even higher than the home market.”

    In addition their late loans doubled from 2017 to 2018 to more than 10M EUR, but their impairment allowances increased ONLY by 13%! (estimates made by management which auditors warn are a risk)

    Another bad event was the sale of bad loans that accrued a 2.9M loss (double of 2017). In addition they took a loan of almost 5M expiring in 2021 (which if things do not improve represents a serious liability in just 2 years time).

    it definitely should not have a Mintos A- rating and its rating here should be much lower in my opinion.

    • RODDY Reply

      Thanks for the info. I guess Oscar did not have the time yet, but definitely a drop in rating.

  20. Gian Piero Reply

    Hi Christian, you make a very valid point regarding reputation. One company of a group can have a bad year and the others help even if there is no group guarantee. This is a reasonable expectation. I have no inside information but it appears to me that in this case ID Finance made the deliberated choice to extract Spain from the group. Sending a very clear message that Spain is on its own. Before it was 100% part of the group, now it is zero percent part of the group. Invest accordingly.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *