Mintos vs FFForest
Head-to-head comparison of Mintos (87/100) and FFForest (31/100): yields, default rates, guarantees, secondary market, regulation and minimum investment.
Side-by-side comparison
| Criterion | Mintos | FFForest |
|---|---|---|
| Crowdscope score | 87/100 | 31/100 |
| Country | Latvia | Latvia |
| Founded | 2015 | 2025 |
| Loan types | P2P marketplace | Renewable energy / Forestry |
| Indicative yield | 10.8% | 16.5% |
| Default rate | 10% | 0% |
| Regulatory status | Investment firm (FCMC) | Non régulé ECSP |
| Minimum investment | 10 € | 500 € |
| Cumulative funded volume | 12,500,000,000 € | 6,700,000 € |
| Registered investors | 600,000 | 1,700 |
| Secondary market | Yes | No |
| Auto-invest | Yes | Yes |
| Guarantees | Buyback, Group guarantee | Nantissement forestier |
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 FFForest — frequently asked questions
Mintos or FFForest: which one should you choose?
On the Crowdscope framework, Mintos scores higher (87/100 versus 31/100). Mintos advertises around 10.8% with a 10% default rate under the Investment firm (FCMC) regime, while FFForest advertises around 16.5% with a 0% default rate under the Non régulé ECSP regime. The right choice depends on whether you prioritise yield, liquidity or regulatory protection.
Which of Mintos and FFForest offers the higher yield?
FFForest advertises the higher indicative yield (16.5% versus 10.8%). A higher advertised yield usually reflects higher credit or liquidity risk, not a better product.
Which platform is more liquid, Mintos or FFForest?
Mintos operates a secondary market while FFForest does not, which makes early exits easier on the former.
Can you invest on both Mintos and FFForest?
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