All platforms

    Mintos vs ClubFunding

    Head-to-head comparison of Mintos (87/100) and ClubFunding (60/100): yields, default rates, guarantees, secondary market, regulation and minimum investment.

    Side-by-side comparison

    CriterionMintosClubFunding
    Crowdscope score87/10060/100
    CountryLatviaFrance
    Founded20152015
    Loan typesP2P marketplaceReal estate
    Indicative yield10.8%9.5%
    Default rate10%0%
    Regulatory statusInvestment firm (FCMC)ECSP
    Minimum investment10 €1000 €
    Cumulative funded volume12,500,000,000 €1,800,000,000 €
    Registered investors600,00042,000
    Secondary marketYesNo
    Auto-investYesNo
    GuaranteesBuyback, Group guaranteeHypothèque, Caution, Garantie à première demande

    Crowdscope verdict

    Mintos takes the higher Crowdscope score (87/100) in this head-to-head, driven by its mix of track record, regulation, guarantees and liquidity. Scores measure structural robustness, not expected return — capital is at risk on both platforms and diversifying across several operators remains the primary risk-control tool.

    Mintos vs ClubFunding — frequently asked questions

    Mintos or ClubFunding: which one should you choose?

    On the Crowdscope framework, Mintos scores higher (87/100 versus 60/100). Mintos advertises around 10.8% with a 10% default rate under the Investment firm (FCMC) regime, while ClubFunding advertises around 9.5% with a 0% default rate under the ECSP regime. The right choice depends on whether you prioritise yield, liquidity or regulatory protection.

    Which of Mintos and ClubFunding offers the higher yield?

    Mintos advertises the higher indicative yield (10.8% versus 9.5%). A higher advertised yield usually reflects higher credit or liquidity risk, not a better product.

    Which platform is more liquid, Mintos or ClubFunding?

    Mintos operates a secondary market while ClubFunding does not, which makes early exits easier on the former.

    Can you invest on both Mintos and ClubFunding?

    Yes. Diversifying across several platforms is a common way to limit platform-failure risk, since it spreads exposure across different originators, jurisdictions and regulatory regimes. Capital remains at risk on both.

    Last updated: · Reviewed by the Crowdscope editorial team