All platforms

    Mintos vs PeerBerry

    Head-to-head comparison of Mintos (87/100) and PeerBerry (77/100): yields, default rates, guarantees, secondary market, regulation and minimum investment.

    Side-by-side comparison

    CriterionMintosPeerBerry
    Crowdscope score87/10077/100
    CountryLatviaCroatia
    Founded20152017
    Loan typesP2P marketplaceP2P marketplace
    Indicative yield10.8%9%
    Default rate10%0%
    Regulatory statusInvestment firm (FCMC)Non régulé ECSP
    Minimum investment10 €10 €
    Cumulative funded volume12,500,000,000 €3,300,000,000 €
    Registered investors600,000117,000
    Secondary marketYesYes
    Auto-investYesYes
    GuaranteesBuyback, Group guaranteeBuyback, Group guarantee

    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 PeerBerry — frequently asked questions

    Mintos or PeerBerry: which one should you choose?

    On the Crowdscope framework, Mintos scores higher (87/100 versus 77/100). Mintos advertises around 10.8% with a 10% default rate under the Investment firm (FCMC) regime, while PeerBerry advertises around 9% 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 PeerBerry offers the higher yield?

    Mintos advertises the higher indicative yield (10.8% versus 9%). A higher advertised yield usually reflects higher credit or liquidity risk, not a better product.

    Which platform is more liquid, Mintos or PeerBerry?

    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 PeerBerry?

    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