All platforms

    Mintos vs Finbee

    Head-to-head comparison of Mintos (87/100) and Finbee (76/100): yields, default rates, guarantees, secondary market, regulation and minimum investment.

    Side-by-side comparison

    CriterionMintosFinbee
    Crowdscope score87/10076/100
    CountryLatviaLithuania
    Founded20152015
    Loan typesP2P marketplaceConsumer lending, Business lending
    Indicative yield10.8%13%
    Default rate10%3.2%
    Regulatory statusInvestment firm (FCMC)Bank of Lithuania
    Minimum investment10 €5 €
    Cumulative funded volume12,500,000,000 €130,000,000 €
    Registered investors600,00025,000
    Secondary marketYesYes
    Auto-investYesYes
    GuaranteesBuyback, Group guaranteeFonds de provision, Recouvrement

    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 Finbee — frequently asked questions

    Mintos or Finbee: which one should you choose?

    On the Crowdscope framework, Mintos scores higher (87/100 versus 76/100). Mintos advertises around 10.8% with a 10% default rate under the Investment firm (FCMC) regime, while Finbee advertises around 13% with a 3.2% default rate under the Bank of Lithuania regime. The right choice depends on whether you prioritise yield, liquidity or regulatory protection.

    Which of Mintos and Finbee offers the higher yield?

    Finbee advertises the higher indicative yield (13% 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 Finbee?

    Both platforms operate a secondary market, so positions can be listed for sale before maturity — subject to buyer demand.

    Can you invest on both Mintos and Finbee?

    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