All platforms

    PeerBerry vs Debitum

    Head-to-head comparison of PeerBerry (77/100) and Debitum (62/100): yields, default rates, guarantees, secondary market, regulation and minimum investment.

    Side-by-side comparison

    CriterionPeerBerryDebitum
    Crowdscope score77/10062/100
    CountryCroatiaLatvia
    Founded20172018
    Loan typesP2P marketplaceP2P marketplace, Business lending
    Indicative yield9%11.5%
    Default rate0%0%
    Regulatory statusNon régulé ECSPIBF Lettonie
    Minimum investment10 €10 €
    Cumulative funded volume3,300,000,000 €195,000,000 €
    Registered investors117,00032,500
    Secondary marketYesNo
    Auto-investYesYes
    GuaranteesBuyback, Group guaranteeBuyback, Caution

    Crowdscope verdict

    PeerBerry takes the higher Crowdscope score (77/100) 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.

    PeerBerry vs Debitum — frequently asked questions

    PeerBerry or Debitum: which one should you choose?

    On the Crowdscope framework, PeerBerry scores higher (77/100 versus 62/100). PeerBerry advertises around 9% with a 0% default rate under the Non régulé ECSP regime, while Debitum advertises around 11.5% with a 0% default rate under the IBF Lettonie regime. The right choice depends on whether you prioritise yield, liquidity or regulatory protection.

    Which of PeerBerry and Debitum offers the higher yield?

    Debitum advertises the higher indicative yield (11.5% versus 9%). A higher advertised yield usually reflects higher credit or liquidity risk, not a better product.

    Which platform is more liquid, PeerBerry or Debitum?

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

    Can you invest on both PeerBerry and Debitum?

    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