The project

Who grades the graders

An independent research desk that scores every European P2P lending platform A+ to D. No money held, no grades sold, all sources disclosed.

What we do

p2p-platforms.eu runs a monthly grading cycle covering 19 European peer-to-peer lending platforms. Each platform receives a letter grade from A+ to D, calculated from five weighted checks: investor protection (30%), delivery track record (20%), advertised-versus-realised yield (20%), ownership and structure (15%), and exit options (15%). The method is explained in full on the methodology page.

Grades feed three lists. The Green list holds platforms suitable for core portfolio allocation. The Watchlist flags platforms that may fit satellite strategies or carry structure questions. The Red list names platforms we pass on entirely, with public reasons attached. Every platform on the site holds a current grade, updated the first Monday of each month. Archived grades stay in the site history for reference.

We publish platform reviews, comparison guides and return calculators. Every claim in a review ties back to a regulator filing, platform disclosure or third-party audit. Where data contradicts a platform's advertised figure, we publish both numbers and explain the gap. The guides section covers licensing differences, failure histories, diversification templates and tax frameworks across the European Economic Area.

What we never do

p2p-platforms.eu is not a platform, broker, bank or investment adviser. We do not hold client money, execute transactions or offer individual portfolio recommendations. We do not sell grades to platforms, accept payment for grade adjustments or remove Red-list entries on request. Platforms cannot buy their way onto the Green list.

We do not provide tax, legal or financial advice tailored to individual circumstances. Readers outside the standard risk-tolerant EEA retail-investor profile should consult a regulated adviser before deploying capital into P2P loans. Every money page on this site carries a capital-at-risk warning; peer-to-peer lending is speculative, uninsured in most cases, and losses are common when platforms or loan originators fail.

How we fund the work

The site earns disclosed affiliate commissions when a reader opens an account through a marked link and meets the platform's qualification threshold. Only two platforms currently carry affiliate CTAs: Maclear (the sole A+ grade, offering a EUR 30 bonus for deposits over EUR 1,000) and 8lends (a sponsored partner outside the graded list). Every affiliate button carries the rel="noopener nofollow noindex" attribute; we do not pass editorial authority to commercial relationships.

Sponsored content is labelled "Sponsored" in every instance. 8lends appears in navigation, comparison tables and select guides with that label attached. The platform does not hold a grade, does not appear in the Green/Watch/Red taxonomy, and readers always see the distinction. Full disclosure of affiliate arrangements, commission structures and editorial boundaries lives on the how we earn page.

Editorial principles

Every number on the site comes from a named source: regulator databases (ESMA registers, national supervisory filings), platform annual reports, audited accounts filed with company registries, or third-party service-provider statements. Where a platform withholds data or publishes conflicting figures, we note the gap and weight it negatively in the structure or protection score.

Corrections run within 48 hours of verification. If a reader spots an error in yield data, licence status or platform ownership, we check the primary source and update the page. The date of last update appears at page foot; material changes (grade movements, licence revocations, platform closures) trigger immediate republishing and a note in the relevant review.

Grades reflect our editorial opinion, formed from quantitative inputs and qualitative judgment on conduct, disclosure quality and investor treatment. They are not investment recommendations. A platform can hold an A grade and still fail; a C-grade platform can deliver solid returns if the borrower pool performs. The grade tells you what protects your capital if things go wrong, not whether things will go wrong.

Who writes this

The editorial desk runs lean. No named bylines, no staff profiles, no faces on the about page. The work stands on method and sources, not personality. We compare platforms the way you compare flights: filter the table, read the fine print, check what happens when the schedule breaks.

Questions, corrections, or tips on undisclosed related-party arrangements reach us through the contact form. We respond to fact-check requests within two business days. Platforms disputing a grade receive the scoring worksheet and source list on request, though the grade itself is not negotiable.

The short version

Independent comparison site. Grades 19 platforms monthly. Earns affiliate commissions from two partners, disclosed everywhere. No money held, no grades sold, no advice given. Method and sources published. Corrections within 48 hours.

Method

How we grade platforms

Five weighted checks: protection (30%), delivery (20%), yield reality (20%), structure (15%), exits (15%). Every platform gets the same scorecard.

Read the methodology →
Funding

How we earn

Affiliate commissions from Maclear and 8lends (labelled Sponsored). No payment for grades, no removal fees, no platform advertising.

Full disclosure →
Contact

Corrections & questions

Spotted an error in yield data or licence status? Tip on undisclosed ownership? Reach the desk through the contact form.

Contact us →