All platforms

    Mintos vs Ventus Energy

    Head-to-head comparison of Mintos (87/100) and Ventus Energy (30/100): yields, default rates, guarantees, secondary market, regulation and minimum investment.

    Side-by-side comparison

    CriterionMintosVentus Energy
    Crowdscope score87/10030/100
    CountryLatviaEstonia
    Founded20152023
    Loan typesP2P marketplaceRenewable energy / Forestry
    Indicative yield10.8%18%
    Default rate10%0%
    Regulatory statusInvestment firm (FCMC)Non régulé ECSP
    Minimum investment10 €1000 €
    Cumulative funded volume12,500,000,000 €89,000,000 €
    Registered investors600,0004,500
    Secondary marketYesNo
    Auto-investYesNo
    GuaranteesBuyback, Group guaranteeNantissement actifs énergétiques

    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 Ventus Energy — frequently asked questions

    Mintos or Ventus Energy: which one should you choose?

    On the Crowdscope framework, Mintos scores higher (87/100 versus 30/100). Mintos advertises around 10.8% with a 10% default rate under the Investment firm (FCMC) regime, while Ventus Energy advertises around 18% 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 Ventus Energy offers the higher yield?

    Ventus Energy advertises the higher indicative yield (18% 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 Ventus Energy?

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

    Can you invest on both Mintos and Ventus Energy?

    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