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

Last updated - 6 September 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. It appears that the lender has failed to pass on some borrower repayments to Mintos, most likely due to liquidity issues. This unfortunately appears to be a very similar situation to Eurocent, which is still unresolved and proceeding through the Polish bankruptcy process. 

We have been expecting a new default to come from Mintos lenders for a while now, but we are slightly surprised that it is Aforti that has been the next lender to run into issues. They had scored 50/100, not a high score, but there are more obviously risky lenders out there. Their most recent report showed a profit in Q1 2019, following an underlying pre-tax profit (before goodwill write-off) of almost €1m in 2018. Reporting quality was much better than average, with up to date presentations and audited financial statements. Their stock price remains high and apparently unaffected by the Mintos announcement. Aforti’s leverage was however higher than average and for now we see this as potentially the most likely the reason that they may be experiencing funding difficulties. 

For now Mintos investors with Aforti loans in their portfolio have to wait to get more information to understand the situation better. There is still a possibility that Aforti can source further capital and/or liquidity and this may be a temporary issue. We understand meetings are being held this week with Aforti management to discuss the situation. Unfortunately our current assessment is that the firm is most likely to be put into runoff. Why? Once a small firm like this loses the confidence of funding partners like Mintos, and liquidity issues are made public, without shareholder support it is very difficult to find alternative funding and avoid an insolvency procedure. This will in our view most likely lead to losses for Mintos investors and a delay in recovering their investments.

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 No
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 2017 6.6 4.3 0.2 0.5 Yes
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 Dec 2017 17.7 0.8 -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
Efaktor Dec 2018 7.2 0.5 0.1 0.2 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
1pm Nov 2018 141.6 57.3 7.1 7.2 Yes
Metrokredit May 2018 0.7 0.3 -1000 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 - September 2019

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.

Ratings re-affirmed:

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

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, Mozipo, 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

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

  1. Gian Piero Reply

    27793 Loans Available, today 17 September. It is becoming very difficult to have a diversified loan mix of the top 15 originators. Mogo and Creditstar, but then there is not much left. Some say this is seasonal, does anybody know if there might be something else to explain this lack of loans?

  2. Pingback: El consultor inversor Inversión en crowdlending y riesgos

    • Oscar Harrington Post authorReply

      There’s 2 important things we look at – the ratio of equity to loans (higher the better), and the absolute amount of capital. If a company has only received a small amount of equity funding it’s going to get a poor score even if the ratios look OK. We also take into account whether the business is profitable or not – if it is losing money we will want it to be holding more equity.

      • Rui Reply

        I see, thanks for that explanation. I’d like to suggest, if I may, that you add an explanatory section to this blog article clarifying how you calculate your scores please, I think that’d be great for everyone who comes across it. Thanks for all your trouble, cheers.

  3. Nuno Reply

    Thank you so much for keeping this page Oscar
    This is one of the best if not the best source of guidance information concerning mintos Originators
    When you review some company up like for example Varks some time ago, those poor guys must see a tsunami of cash rushing their way, they must go: “wtf ??? all our loans were just bought”
    I remember Simbo loans disapeared in a sanp overnight

  4. Jan Cech Reply

    There was an update on Everest financial statements published on Mintos on 4th September. In the new financial statements they are making nice profits…

    • Oscar Harrington Post authorReply

      Hi Jan. Yes there are new ‘pro-forma’ figures provided showing a very different story.. We are asking Mintos to clarify what these pro-forma financials are and why the results are so different

  5. Tomas Reply

    Hello Oscar,

    Everest probably uploaded other documents with other results. I do not understand that.

    Banknote and Credistar published results for 1H 2019
    for Banknote: https://www.expresscredit.lv/documents/ExpressCredit_finance_statements_unaudited_2019_2Q_eng.pdf
    for Credistar: https://s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/mintos-prod-public-files/93DEADD9-BE5D-9025-BD9E-E81B6D9F5054.pdf (at the end of the document)

  6. Vin McQueen Reply

    Regarding Everest – it is not so unusual since they have a massive balance of issued bonds and bank loans. While EBIT is positive (7.3m PLN in 2018 and 9.5m PLN in 2017), they pay massive interests and end up with negative gross profit. Additionally they have to pay huge tax, because costs on impairment is not a tax costs according to tax authorities (similar story as Capital Service, I was explaining in comments) and that’s why they have huge loss.

    On the positive note, they also have huge equity, so they afford to carry those losses on their balance sheet.

  7. Christian Reply

    Hey guys, thanks as always for being so quick on updating, truly outstanding. Good you caught the losses, I just glanced over the Mintos documents and I was positively surprised as you were in the beginning. I am wondering now why Mintos gave it a A-, there must be a good reason for the loss and hope in the horizon to stabilize again, otherwise Mintos cannot possibly give an A- despite the track record. I think they know and see more than the statements, what are your thoughts? I want to believe and do believe that their evaluation and rating process has been refined over time, so assigning a loss making company with an A- if there is no good reason to believe this can be reversed sounds very wrong and risky to the point that investors will feel betrayed by hiding this piece of information.

Leave a Reply

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