Affiliate disclosure. When you sign up via our links we may earn a commission. Rankings stay independent. Read full disclosure →
Up to 25% APR
EN
Modern EU parliament building with flags and sky in Brussels — the institutions behind ECSP and MiFID II rules.
Beginner guide

MiFID II vs ECSP vs SRO: What Each P2P Regulation Actually Protects You From

MiFID II, ECSP, SRO — what each P2P regulation actually protects investors from in 2026. Compare 19 EU platforms by regulatory tier.

By Daniel Brenner, Senior Editor · Updated 2026-05-18

MiFID II vs ECSP vs SRO: What Each P2P Regulation Actually Protects You From

A plain-language guide to the four regulatory regimes used by European P2P platforms in 2026 — what each one really covers when something goes wrong, and what it does not.

When marketing copy on a P2P platform says it is “regulated,” that single word can mean four very different things. Some of those things protect your capital meaningfully. Some only cover anti-money-laundering paperwork. And some platforms are not regulated at all.

This guide explains the four regimes in use across European P2P in 2026, with concrete examples drawn from the 19 platforms we cover on CrowdIndex — including CrowdIndex-Maclear, CrowdIndex-Mintos, CrowdIndex-Capitalia, and others. The goal is simple: by the end you should know what each label actually buys you, and what it does not.

📊 CrowdIndex Editor’s Pick: Maclear ranks #1 of 19 European P2P platforms (Score 9.2/10). Read full review →

1. Why P2P Regulation Matters in Europe

Regulation matters because it determines what happens when something goes wrong. As long as a platform keeps growing and borrowers keep paying, an unregulated outfit and a fully MiFID II-licensed investment firm can look almost identical to a retail investor. The difference shows up at stress points: a borrower defaults, a loan originator goes bust, the platform itself runs out of money, or a regulator opens an investigation.

At those moments, the regulatory regime answers four questions:

  1. Who supervises the platform — and is anyone actually empowered to step in?
  2. What rules must the platform follow in disclosures, capital, audits, and conduct?
  3. Is there an investor compensation scheme if the platform itself fails to return your money?
  4. What does the regulator have the legal power to do if the platform misbehaves — warnings, fines, license withdrawal, blacklists?

In 2026, European P2P platforms operate under one of four regimes: a full MiFID II Investment Firm licence (the strongest), an ECSP (European Crowdfunding Service Provider) authorisation, a Swiss SRO (self-regulatory organisation) membership covering anti-money-laundering only, or no specific financial regulation at all. This article walks through each one.

2. Quick Comparison Table

DimensionMiFID II Investment FirmECSPSwiss SROUnregulated
Who issues the licenceNational securities regulator (e.g., Latvijas Banka, BaFin, AMF)National regulator under EU Regulation 2020/1503 (e.g., Latvijas Banka, EFSA Estonia, Central Bank of Ireland, CNMV Spain)A government-recognised Swiss self-regulatory body (PolyReg, VQF, etc.) under FINMA oversightNobody specific
What it coversConduct of business, capital, custody of client assets, full prudential supervisionDisclosures, risk warnings, conflict-of-interest rules, operational requirements, capitalAnti-money-laundering (AML) compliance onlyGeneric company law, consumer law, tax law
Investor compensation schemeYes — up to €20,000 per investor under EU Directive 97/9/EC (covers platform failure to return client securities or cash)No formal investor compensation schemeNo investor protection at allNone
Capital requirementsHigh (initial capital €150K+ for an Investment Firm, ongoing capital adequacy buffers)Moderate — €25,000 minimum own funds or 0.2% of annual loans originated, whichever is higherMinimal — set by the SRO, not a prudential regulatorNone imposed by financial regulation
Examples on CrowdIndexCrowdIndex-Mintos, CrowdIndex-Nectaro, CrowdIndex-Twino, CrowdIndex-IndemoCrowdIndex-Capitalia, CrowdIndex-EstateGuru, CrowdIndex-Profitus, CrowdIndex-InSoil, CrowdIndex-Lendermarket, CrowdIndex-InRentoCrowdIndex-Maclear (PolyReg)CrowdIndex-Scramble, CrowdIndex-Loanch, CrowdIndex-Hive5, CrowdIndex-Robocash, CrowdIndex-PeerBerry, CrowdIndex-Crowdpear
What it does NOT coverBorrower defaults; loan originator failures; credit risk on the underlying loansPlatform insolvency (no compensation scheme); credit risk on loansInvestor protection of any kind; credit risk; insolvency outcomesAnything

3. MiFID II Investment Firm Licence (Strongest)

MiFID II stands for the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive II — the EU’s main framework for investment firms, brokers, and any business that arranges trades in financial instruments for retail clients. It is the same framework that licenses your stockbroker, your ETF platform, and most online trading apps in the EU.

To hold a MiFID II Investment Firm licence, a P2P platform must:

  • Meet initial capital requirements typically starting at €150,000, with ongoing capital adequacy buffers proportional to client assets and revenue.
  • Segregate client money and securities from the firm’s own balance sheet, usually held with regulated custodian banks.
  • File audited annual reports on time and submit to prudential supervision.
  • Apply conduct-of-business rules — best execution, suitability checks, conflict-of-interest disclosure, complaints procedures, marketing-communication standards.
  • Participate in the EU Investor Compensation Scheme under Directive 97/9/EC, which covers up to €20,000 per investor (typically 90% of net losses, capped at €20K) if the firm itself fails to return client securities or cash.

That last point is the headline benefit, and also the most-misunderstood one. The €20,000 cover is a platform-failure compensation: it pays out if the investment firm itself goes insolvent and cannot return your custody balances. It is not an insurance against the loans you bought going bad. We come back to this in section 7.

In 2026, MiFID II IF licences are rare in P2P. Most platforms cannot afford the capital and compliance overhead — the same overhead that allows a Tier 2 platform like CrowdIndex-Mintos to report a €2.1M net loss in 2024 while running a 180-person operation. The platforms in this regime are the ones large enough to absorb that cost, or new platforms (like CrowdIndex-Nectaro) that explicitly built around the regulation from launch.

Examples on CrowdIndex:

  • CrowdIndex-Mintos — Latvijas Banka MiFID II Investment Firm licence no. 06.06.08.719/534, issued August 2021. The first and largest MiFID II-licensed P2P platform in the EU.
  • CrowdIndex-Nectaro — Latvijas Banka MiFID II Investment Brokerage Firm licence; full €20K investor compensation scheme membership.
  • CrowdIndex-Twino — Latvijas Banka MiFID II Investment Brokerage Firm licence no. 06.06.08.720/536, dated 31 August 2021 (per our Twino-fulldossier; exact number before publication).
  • CrowdIndex-Indemo — Latvian MiFID II IF licence with NASDAQ CSD custody — institutional-grade infrastructure rare in retail P2P.

Note: all four of these platforms are licensed by Latvijas Banka (the Latvian central bank). This is not an accident — Latvia has actively positioned itself as the EU jurisdiction of choice for licensed fintech firms, and the regulator has developed deep expertise in this segment.

4. ECSP Licensed Crowdfunding Platforms — European Crowdfunding Service Provider (Strong)

The ECSP regime is the EU’s purpose-built regulation for crowdfunding platforms, created under Regulation (EU) 2020/1503 and operationally effective from November 2021 (with a transition period that ended in November 2023).

Unlike MiFID II — which was designed for stockbrokers and adapted for P2P — ECSP was designed specifically for the way crowdfunding platforms actually work. It standardises investor disclosures across the EU, requires risk warnings at sign-up, sets capital requirements at €25,000 minimum own funds (or 0.2% of annual loans originated, whichever is higher), and imposes conflict-of-interest rules including restrictions on platforms lending to their own related parties.

ECSP authorisations are issued by national regulators under harmonised EU rules. The licence then passports across the EU — a Latvian-authorised ECSP can serve French, German, Italian, Portuguese investors without needing a separate licence in each country.

The national regulators most active in ECSP licensing in 2026:

Important: ECSP has no investor compensation scheme. If the platform itself goes insolvent, you do not have a €20K guarantee. The regulation focuses on preventing platform failure (capital, governance, conflict rules) and on informing investors (standardised disclosures, mandatory risk warnings) — not on compensating you after the fact.

It is still the second-strongest framework in EU P2P after MiFID II IF, and for most retail investors it is the practical floor we look for at CrowdIndex.

Examples on CrowdIndex:

  • CrowdIndex-Capitalia — Latvijas Banka ECSP authorisation (1 November 2023), additionally backed by a €15M EIF/InvestEU cornerstone guarantee signed 31 March 2026.
  • CrowdIndex-EstateGuru — Estonian EFSA ECSP authorisation; currently in workout phase with 60% of portfolio in recovery (see section 8 for the regulator action this attracted).
  • CrowdIndex-Profitus — Lietuvos Bankas ECSP authorisation; €273M cumulative lent; clean capital-loss record but negative equity in FY24.
  • CrowdIndex-InSoil — ECSP-licensed; rebranded from HeavyFinance in April 2025; EIF €20M cornerstone.
  • CrowdIndex-Lendermarket— Central Bank of Ireland ECSP (reference C513967 ); 100% loan flow from Creditstar Group (single-originator concentration risk inside an ECSP wrapper).
  • CrowdIndex-InRento — Lietuvos Bankas ECSP; the only ECSP-licensed buy-to-let P2P in Europe with a clean 0% capital-loss record over 5 years.

Notice the spread: the same ECSP label covers platforms with spotless track records (CrowdIndex-InRento, CrowdIndex-Capitalia) and platforms in significant distress (CrowdIndex-EstateGuru). ECSP licensing is necessary, not sufficient. It is a quality floor, not a guarantee.

5. SRO — Self-Regulatory Organisation (Limited)

The SRO model is primarily a Swiss construct. Switzerland is not in the EU, so EU regulations like MiFID II and ECSP do not apply there. Instead, the Swiss anti-money-laundering law (the AMLA) requires every financial intermediary to either be supervised directly by FINMA (the federal Swiss financial-markets authority) or to be a member of a government-recognised SRO — a private body that supervises AML compliance on FINMA’s behalf.

Active SROs include PolyReg, VQF, ARIF, and OAR-G, among others. Each one supervises its members on anti-money-laundering compliance only: KYC procedures, source-of-funds checks, suspicious-activity reporting. They do not supervise capital, conduct of business, investor protection, custody arrangements, or product quality.

This is the part that gets routinely conflated in marketing copy. A P2P platform that says “we are regulated by PolyReg” or “we are an SRO member” is telling you the truth — but the truth is narrower than it sounds. SRO membership covers AML. It does not cover investor protection.

What this means in practice:

  • There is no €20,000 investor compensation scheme.
  • There is no capital adequacy requirement comparable to MiFID II.
  • The SRO has no power to compensate investors if the platform fails.
  • If the platform becomes insolvent, investors are unsecured creditors in a normal Swiss bankruptcy proceeding.

The single example on CrowdIndex:

  • Maclear — PolyReg SRO member; AML scope only. This is the regulatory context for Maclear’s “Things to Watch” framing. We rank Maclear #1 of 19 platforms (Score 9.2/10) on editorial grounds (yields of 14.5%–14.9%, multilingual access in six languages, and the CEO’s personal accountability on the Vibroedil default in July 2025, where investors were repaid from the CEO’s own funds rather than absorbing the loss) — but we are also explicit that SRO regulation does not provide investor protection, and we tell readers to size their position accordingly.

The honest framing: SRO membership is meaningful for the AML control it provides — Switzerland’s AML regime is strict and well-supervised — but it should not be confused with EU investor protection.

6. Unregulated P2P Platforms (No Investor Compensation)

The final category is the most common in EU P2P by number of platforms: platforms operating outside MiFID II, outside ECSP, and outside any Swiss SRO. These platforms operate under generic company law, consumer-protection law, and tax law in their country of incorporation, but they hold no specific financial regulation for the lending or investing activity itself.

Being unregulated does not automatically mean a platform is bad. Several long-running European P2P platforms have operated successfully without specific financial regulation for years — they predate ECSP, they sit outside the perimeter of MiFID II because of their business model, or the regulator in their jurisdiction has not yet required licensing.

What it does mean is that:

  • There is no investor compensation scheme.
  • There is no capital adequacy minimum.
  • There are no standardised disclosure rules.
  • There is no regulator to escalate to if the platform misbehaves — only general courts and consumer-protection authorities.

Examples on CrowdIndex:

  • CrowdIndex-Scramble — Estonia + UK direct-to-consumer brands operating a claims-assignment model. Innovative legal structure but not under ECSP or MiFID II.
  • CrowdIndex-Loanch — Fingular Group platform. Management linked to Vadim Gurinov senior (former CEO of Cashwagon, which defaulted in 2020).
  • CrowdIndex-Hive5 — Concentrated Ruptela Group ownership. Newer platform with governance concerns.
  • CrowdIndex-Robocash — Short-term consumer lending; 100% concentration with Robocash Group as single originator.
  • CrowdIndex-PeerBerry — Second-largest EU P2P by lifetime volume; 83%+ loans from Aventus Group.
  • CrowdIndex-Crowdpear — Sister platform to PeerBerry; first in Lithuania to achieve ISO 27001:2022.

Important nuance: track record is not the same as regulation. CrowdIndex-PeerBerry has a clean operating history, returned €51.4M of military loans in December 2024 under stress, and recently launched a secondary market. CrowdIndex-Robocash has years of consistent buyback execution. These platforms may genuinely be safer in practice than some regulated platforms in distress. The right question is not “regulated yes/no” — it is “what regulatory cover is there, and what is the track record, and what is the concentration risk?“

7. What Each P2P Regulation Does NOT Cover

This is the section that gets skipped in most P2P marketing, and it is also the most important one.

MiFID II Investment Firm — does not cover borrower default. The €20,000 compensation scheme protects you against the platform itself failing to return client securities or cash. It does not pay out if borrowers on the platform stop repaying their loans. Credit risk on the underlying loans is yours, full stop. The same is true if a loan originator (the intermediary in a model like CrowdIndex-Mintos) goes bust — that is a loan-quality event, not a platform-failure event, and the compensation scheme does not apply. This is exactly what happened in the 2020 COVID crisis and the 2022 Russia/Ukraine originator failures on Mintos: investors went into recovery proceedings, and the €20K scheme did not pay out.

ECSP — does not provide compensation if the platform fails. ECSP gets you standardised disclosures, capital requirements, conflict rules, and risk warnings. It does not get you compensation. If an ECSP-licensed platform goes insolvent, you are an unsecured creditor in normal insolvency proceedings, just as in the unregulated case. The protection ECSP offers is at the design-and-disclosure layer, not the compensation layer.

Swiss SRO — does not cover investor protection at all. It covers anti-money-laundering compliance. That is the entire scope. If you read marketing copy that implies Swiss SRO regulation gives you investor protection comparable to EU schemes, the copy is misleading.

Across all four regimes — regulation cannot prevent normal credit risk. Borrowers will default. Loans will go bad. Recovery will be slow. Some platforms manage this well; some manage it badly. No regulator can override the underlying credit reality of lending to small businesses or consumers.

The right mental model: regulation reduces certain failure modes (platform misbehaviour, platform insolvency with no fallback, undisclosed conflicts of interest). It does not reduce credit risk.

8. How European P2P Regulators Have Actually Acted (Real Examples)

The clearest signal of what regulation buys you is what regulators have actually done when platforms misbehaved. In 2026 we have several documented cases.

CrowdIndex-Reinvest24 — three separate regulator actions. The Estonian regulator EFSA (Finantsinspektsioon) issued a public warning against Reinvest24 on 29 January 2024, stating that the platform was operating without the required authorisation. The Spanish regulatorCNMV added Reinvest24 to its public blacklist of unauthorised investment-service providers. In June 2025 the Norwegian regulator Finanstilsynetalso issued an alert about the platform . Withdrawals on the platform were frozen from February 2024 and have not resumed in normal form since. This is what regulator coordination looks like when it works — multiple national authorities flagging the same operator across the EEA.

CrowdIndex-EstateGuru — Lithuanian Central Bank warning. On 19 July 2023theLietuvos Bankas issued a public warning that EstateGuru’s Lithuanian operations were being conducted without local authorisation. This did not shut down the platform — EstateGuru holds an Estonian ECSP licence that passports across the EU — but it was a public flag from a national regulator that something about how the platform was operating in Lithuania did not meet local requirements.

These are not theoretical examples; they are the actions the regimes were designed to produce. A regulator that can issue a public warning, add a platform to a blacklist, and force operational freezes is doing exactly what investor-protection regulation is supposed to do. None of these actions would have been available against an unregulated platform incorporated in a non-EU jurisdiction — there would simply have been nobody empowered to act.

It also illustrates why regulator-flagged platforms should be treated as red signals regardless of advertised yields. A platform under active regulatory criticism in 2026 is a different risk category from a platform with a clean regulatory standing.

9. The Practical Takeaway for Investors

Putting this together, here is how we think about the four regimes at CrowdIndex when ranking platforms and when advising readers on allocation:

Larger / safer allocations: MiFID II IF + ECSP platforms with clean track records. This is where the foundational portion of a P2P/P2B portfolio belongs. CrowdIndex-Mintos (MiFID II IF + €20K scheme), CrowdIndex-Capitalia (ECSP + EIF guarantee), CrowdIndex-InRento (ECSP + 0% capital loss record), CrowdIndex-Nectaro (MiFID II IBF), CrowdIndex-Profitus (ECSP, clean loss record). The regulatory cover here is genuine, the disclosures are standardised, and you have a regulator empowered to act if something goes wrong.

Tactical / smaller allocations: SRO or unregulated platforms with strong track records. Platforms like CrowdIndex-Maclear (Swiss SRO, but with documented CEO personal-accountability event and broad multilingual reach), CrowdIndex-PeerBerry (unregulated but with the December 2024 military-loan stress test passed), or CrowdIndex-Robocash (unregulated but with years of buyback execution) belong here. The trade-off is explicit: higher yields, weaker regulatory floor, no compensation scheme — therefore smaller position sizes, sized to what you can fully lose.

Avoid: regulator-alerted or red-flag platforms regardless of advertised yield. Platforms with active regulator alerts (CrowdIndex-Reinvest24), documented investigative findings (CrowdIndex-Debitum per Karsten Aichholz March 2026), or red-flag management histories (CrowdIndex-Loanch) sit in this category. Headline yields on these platforms can be very high — sometimes 14% or more — but no yield compensates for a platform with a regulator warning on file or an active investigative cluster. The math works against you over a multi-year holding period even before any specific event triggers.

This is how we sequence our editorial rankings. It is also how we recommend you sequence your own allocation: foundation first, tactical second, red-flagged platforms not at all.

10. Frequently Asked Questions

Is a MiFID II-regulated P2P platform “safe”? Safer than an unregulated one, yes — but “safe” is the wrong word. MiFID II protects you against specific failure modes (platform insolvency with no fallback, undisclosed conflicts, missing capital). It does not protect you against borrower default, which remains the dominant risk in any P2P portfolio. The right framing: MiFID II reduces certain failure modes; it does not eliminate credit risk.

If a platform has an ECSP licence, why isn’t there a €20,000 compensation scheme? Because ECSP was designed differently from MiFID II. The EU policymakers who wrote Regulation (EU) 2020/1503 took the view that crowdfunding platforms are not custodians of client securities in the same way an investment firm is, and built the protection at the disclosure / conduct / capital layer rather than at the compensation-scheme layer. The political view was that adding a compensation scheme would create incentives for platforms to take on more risk knowing the state would cover failures. Whether you agree with that policy choice or not, the practical consequence is real: ECSP has no €20K fallback.

Is Swiss SRO regulation worth anything for an investor? Yes, but narrowly. It means the platform is supervised on anti-money-laundering compliance, which is real and meaningful for issues like source-of-funds checks and suspicious-activity reporting. It does not mean the platform is supervised on investor protection, capital adequacy, or any of the core dimensions you actually care about as an investor. We use it as a soft positive in tier-ranking, not as a substitute for an EU regulator.

What about unregulated platforms with great track records — like CrowdIndex-PeerBerry or CrowdIndex-Robocash? They can be a legitimate part of a P2P portfolio at smaller sizes. The track record matters. The point is that the absence of regulation removes the regulator-failure-mode protection — you are relying entirely on the platform’s own behaviour, with no public supervisor to escalate to if something changes. That is fine if you size positions accordingly. It is not fine if you treat them as equivalent to MiFID II IF platforms in your allocation.

How do you actually verify a platform’s regulatory claims? Look up the licence number directly on the regulator’s public register. For Latvian platforms, check Latvijas Banka’s register. For Lithuanian platforms, Lietuvos Bankas. For Estonian platforms, EFSA. For Irish platforms, the Central Bank of Ireland. ECSP licences in particular are public and queryable by platform name. If a platform claims a licence number you cannot find on the public register, that is itself a red flag.

Which regulator is “best” for a P2P platform? There is no clear winner. Latvijas Banka has the deepest P2P/crowdfunding supervisory expertise in the EU; Lietuvos Bankas has been the most active issuer of ECSP authorisations; EFSA (Estonia) is fast but has issued the most regulator alerts; the Central Bank of Ireland is highly respected but supervises only a small number of crowdfunding platforms. What matters more than which regulator is that there is a regulator, and that the regulator publishes warnings, alerts, and licence withdrawals when warranted.

Are P2P lending platforms regulated in Europe? Some are, some aren’t. As of 2026, European P2P platforms fall into four regulatory categories: MiFID II Investment Firm (the strongest — Mintos, Twino, Nectaro, Indemo), ECSP authorisation under EU Regulation 2020/1503 (the dedicated crowdfunding regime — Capitalia, EstateGuru, Profitus, InRento, Lendermarket, InSoil, and others), Swiss SRO membership covering anti-money-laundering only (Maclear under PolyReg), and fully unregulated platforms operating under generic company and consumer law (Loanch, Scramble, Hive5, and others). The label “regulated” is not binary — it has four very different meanings depending on which regime the platform sits in. Always check the platform’s specific licence on the issuing regulator’s public register.

How does P2P lending regulation differ by country in Europe? The substance of the rules is harmonised at EU level — ECSP under Regulation 2020/1503 and MiFID II under Directive 2014/65/EU apply uniformly across the 27 member states. What differs by country is the regulator issuing the licence and that regulator’s track record of supervision. Latvijas Banka (Latvia) has the deepest crowdfunding expertise and supervises CrowdIndex-Mintos, CrowdIndex-Twino, CrowdIndex-Nectaro, CrowdIndex-Indemo, and CrowdIndex-Capitalia. Lietuvos Bankas (Lithuania) is the most active ECSP issuer and supervises CrowdIndex-Profitus, CrowdIndex-InRento, and CrowdIndex-Crowdpear. EFSA Estonia supervises CrowdIndex-EstateGuru and historically CrowdIndex-Reinvest24. The Central Bank of Ireland supervises CrowdIndex-Lendermarket. CNMV (Spain) and AMF (France) supervise platforms primarily operating from those jurisdictions. The UK left the EU regime and now operates a separate FCA-authorised P2P/crowdfunding regime — outside the scope of EU passporting. Switzerland is outside the EU entirely and uses the SRO model under FINMA oversight.

Are ECSP licensed crowdfunding platforms safer than MiFID II ones? No — MiFID II remains the stronger regime because it includes the €20,000 investor compensation scheme under Directive 97/9/EC, and it requires higher capital (€150K+ initial vs €25K minimum for ECSP). ECSP is the dedicated crowdfunding regulation and is sufficient for most retail P2P needs, but the absence of a compensation scheme is a real gap if the platform itself fails. The right framing: MiFID II = stronger; ECSP = sufficient for most retail use; SRO = AML only; unregulated = no regulatory backstop.

11. Bottom Line

The four regulatory regimes in European P2P — MiFID II Investment Firm, ECSP, Swiss SRO, and unregulated — protect investors very differently. Only one of them (MiFID II IF) includes a €20,000 investor compensation scheme. Only two of them (MiFID II IF and ECSP) involve a financial regulator with the power to issue public warnings, blacklists, and licence withdrawals. The Swiss SRO regime is meaningful for anti-money-laundering compliance but does not cover investor protection. Unregulated platforms can be legitimate at smaller portfolio sizes, but rely entirely on their own track record with no regulator to escalate to.

The right sequence for most retail investors: regulated core (CrowdIndex-Mintos, CrowdIndex-Capitalia, CrowdIndex-InRento, CrowdIndex-Nectaro, CrowdIndex-Profitus), then SRO or strong-track-record satellites at smaller sizes (Maclear, CrowdIndex-PeerBerry, CrowdIndex-Robocash), and avoid platforms with active regulator alerts on file (CrowdIndex-Reinvest24, CrowdIndex-Debitum, CrowdIndex-Loanch). Regulation is not a guarantee, but it is the single most useful filter we have when sorting through 19 platforms competing for your attention.

See our full ranking of 19 European P2P platforms →

💡 Top platform on CrowdIndex

Maclear is our #1 rated platform — Swiss SRO-positioned with 14.5%–14.9% yields, multilingual support, and the only documented case of a CEO covering investor losses from personal funds on a default.

See the full Maclear review →

Affiliate disclosure. CrowdIndex earns commissions when readers sign up to platforms through links in this guide. This is how we fund our research. It does not change our editorial ranking or the regulatory framing in this article. We document our methodology and editorial process publicly so you can verify our reasoning. Read the full affiliate disclosure →.