Join other 4thWay HNW investors: harness your combined power for an even better deal.
Same loans, higher rates, more loans, risk guarantees. Join now for free!
Which P2P Lending Sites Are Profitable?
History has shown so far that when P2P lending sites, close, few of them end up paying reduced returns to lenders as a result of closing down and winding down loans until they're repaid. (Although, as usual, you can suffer losses from bad debts after closure – just like you can before closure, even if the P2P lending site is profitable.)
Importantly, your own lending is ringfenced, so that you're still owed it all if the provider in the middle shuts down.
So losing money as a direct result of a P2P lending company shutting is not the biggest risk. But it can happen.
And, certainly, in the event one of these companies goes out of business, there's a risk that you'll face delays in getting all your money back.
Read more on that in What Do We Make Of The P2P Lending Companies’ Wind-Down Plans? And more on risks in closure in The 12 Key Peer-To-Peer Lending Risks.
Providers when they close, whether profitable or not, have almost always paid lenders their dues anyway.
Yet lenders take comfort from profitability. That's why we have this guide, which we update reasonably regularly.
How much are the P2P lending sites making?
As this is still a pretty new industry, many providers are still operating at a loss as a they continue to raise funds to grow their businesses. That's normal.
But now, in mid-2023, we're finding that a continuing stream of P2P lending companies have been becoming profitable as they get out of the startup phase, and even start generating regular profits.
At least 15 P2P lending companies are now profitable. Eight of those have been profitable for three or more years in a row. On average, profits have grown over the past few years and losses have shrunk.
With profitability and greater revenue, they have been providing more information in their public accounts and more of their accounts are being independently audited.
Even so, many P2P lending companies are still very much in their startup phases and have yet to make a profit. For most of these, profitability figures are hard to come by, because they remain too small. Smaller companies don't have to file much information at the public registrar of companies.
What we know about their profits
Below is a list of different P2P lending companies with the latest information we have on their profitability.
Bear in mind that this information is largely taken from company reports, some of which haven't been externally audited by independent accountants. In other cases, the information comes from spokespeople at the companies. That increases the chances that there are some inaccuracies and sometimes even whoppers. (And even independently audited accounts are far from immune to error and deception.)
If you choose to read filed P2P lending company accounts for yourself, you'll need to take a fair bit of time to understand some of the idiosyncracies of accounting in this space.
For example, you'll need to learn to interpret the figures and even to correct them in the sense of making them more meaningful to you as an investor in their loans. And you'll have to work out how companies within a group or related to the group fit together in the overall picture. We try to make it easy for you by summarising the real situation as we see it below.
Assetz Exchange | profitable
Latest accounts up to end October 2022, which are not independently audited, tell us very little.
They indicate that it was most likely profitable over 12 months and Assetz Exchange* told us during 2022 that it was profitable. It's not yet clear whether it's reached stable profitability yet. I currently would expect it to deliberately over-spend in at least some of the coming years, to boost it's growth trajectory.
AxiaFunder | not profitable
AxiaFunder* is loss making as of its full year accounts to 2021 – which are unaudited and brief – and confirmed to us in mid-2022 by AxiaFunder itself. However, its trajectory is strong.
BLEND Network | not profitable?
BLEND Network isn't yet required to file complete, independently audited company accounts.
Looking back a few years, its abridged accounts indicate it perhaps made a five-figure loss in 2019 and six-figure losses in 2020 and 2021.
After that, I previously wrote that I expected its losses to grow for several years as it scales up its business. While the information in its brief accounts is sparse, I think it most likely made a seven-figure loss in 2022.
Its owners appear to have already injected enough money into the business to work on the growth it needs for another year or two.
CapitalRise | not profitable
CapitalRise* is not profitable and its unaudited accounts show losses of between £1.1 million and £1.5 million every year from 2019 to 2022 (with its financial year ending in June of each year).
This is not unusual at this stage in a P2P lending company's life. Its owners appear to put their money where their mouths are and they appear to be successfully growing the business at a rapid rate.
CapitalRise appears to have plenty of cash to keep it going while it grows into profitability.
CapitalStackers | profitable
CapitalStackers* has been profitable since around 2017 up to its latest reported year end of September 2022. From the limited information in its unaudited accounts, I estimate its profits are very small, but the stability of its profits counts for a lot.
Crowd2Fund | not profitable
I noted previously that Crowd2Fund's company accounts for 2022 were late, but they have now been filed.
Crowd2Fund hasn't made a profit yet. It's made losses of around £800,000 to £1 million in each of the past four years to April 2022.
While losses have stayed in a narrow range, revenue has been more variable. It was around £750,000 up to April 2019, fell 30% in the following 12 months, and then reached a nadir of just £90,000 in the 12 months to April 2021, after the worst pandemic year. Revenue to April 2022 recovered to £320,000.
Crowd2Fund's past three company accounts have been independently audited. Its auditor is Shipleys LLC, who we are not familiar with.
Its latest accounts state that it believes it has the resources to keep going until at least August 2024 and its auditors found no grounds to dispute that claim. (Auditors never project greater than 12 months into the future.)
CrowdProperty | profitable
CrowdProperty was profitable from October 2019 and remained so to its latest published but unaudited accounts, with an end date of March 2022. Annual profits peaked at £600,000.
During that period, it chose to again operate at a loss, so that it can spend more to grow more. Nevertheless, it still managed to make a profit during the period. All that said, its reported profitability in the year to March 2022 was before factoring in exceptional costs, so it likely made a loss after those.
It most likely will report another profit when its next accounts are published for the year to March 2023.
I have no doubt it could be a stably profitable company if it chose to stop growing, but it has still recently raised more funds by selling shares in its own business, suggesting it plans to spend more than it earns over the course of its new three-year growth plan.
Downing Crowd | profitable
Downing Crowd is a unit of a larger business, Downing LLP. We can't see the results of the Downing Crowd unit, but the overall business is nicely profitable, making at least seven-figure profits over the past eight years. It's been profitable for at least the past 15 years.
Revenue has been around £25 million to £35 million over the past four years to 2022.
easyMoney | profitable
easyMoney made its first profit of about £300,000 in 2020, after a loss of about £1 million the year before. Profits rose to nearly £600,000 in 2021 and then nearly £1.1 million in 2022.
It's had at least two independent auditors in the past three years, most recently Saffery Champness, which is known to us.
Folk2Folk | profitable
Folk2Folk has been profitable for four of its financial years in a row, up to January 2023. Profits rose from £200,000 in both 2019 and 2020 up to £1 million in the 12 months to January 2021, and then just shy of £2 million in the year to January 2022. It made £1.1 million to January 2023.
Revenue grew from around £3 million in prior years to almost £5 million in both of the past two years.
Auditors are Saffery Champness LLP, who we are familiar with.
Fund Ourselves | profitable
Accounts for Fund Ourselves' financial year to mid 2021 indicate profits of around £1.5 million, following a loss of close to a million. These are not full accounts and not audited, however. We have no more recent reports.
HNW Lending | profitable
Unaudited, published accounts indicate that HNW Lending was most likely profitable in recent years, although there are very limited details. HNW Lending* claimed in 2019 that it had been profitable every year.
Invest & Fund | not profitable
Invest & Fund* lost £300,000 in 2022, down on the loss of £1.1 million in 2021, matching its 2020 loss of £300,000. Revenue surpassed the previous 2020 high of £750,000 by hitting £1.4 million.
Invest & Fund's accounts are audited by Crowe U.K. LLP.
Kuflink | profitable
The Kuflink* group of companies made its second profit of more than £700,000 in 2022, up from £400,000 in the prior year, according to its accounts. This was on about £10 million in revenue, up from £6 million. Independent auditors are MHA MacIntyre Hudson.
It now says its stably profitable, which I find to be a highly plausible claim. It's projecting profits of £1.7 million to £2 million this year. About £1 million of those profits are already, at the beginning of 2023, close to being finalised.
Profits in Kuflink's P2P lending arm itself were down to £125,000 from £300,000, as it shifted some of its lending towards its bridging-loan business. This was to satisfy financial institutions that needed to see some more profitability from that side of its business. Revenue was steady, holding at about £2.4 million.
Kuflink's other bridging-loan business, its older brother so to speak, has mostly been profitable and growing since 2011.
Lendahand Ethex | profitable?
Published accounts – most recently for the 2021 calendar year – are not audited and not detailed, but indicate that it is gently profitable. We need more details to be certain.
LandlordInvest | profitable
LandlordInvest‘s unaudited accounts up to and including its 2022 financial year don't provide sufficient information, since they are the abridged versions, but it told 4thWay back in April 2022 that it was profitable in 2020 and 2021. P2P Finance News reports that it was very slightly profitable in 2022.
Lendwise | not profitable
Its accounts for the calendar year 2022 indicate losses probably of greater than half a million pounds, although the accounts are unaudited and highly abbreviated. Lendwise tells us it's forecasting profitability in 2023.
Loanpad | profitable
Loanpad* tells us it reached profitability on a monthly basis in June 2021 and it states that it will remain profitable from now on.
Its published accounts can't confirm this for certain, as they're abridged accounts for smaller companies, yet they indicate that it most likely is making profits, perhaps in the region of six figures in 2022.
Proplend | profitable
Proplend* had its first profitable calendar year in 2022, according to its most recent, unaudited accounts, making £130,000. In the prior two years it appeared to already be close; limited information indicated it had just small losses even through the pandemic and the following year.
Rebuildingsociety | unprofitable?
On balance it seems most likely that Rebuildingsociety was slightly unprofitable in 2022, but in prior years perhaps slightly proftable. Its published accounts are highly abridged, however, so there's low confidence on that assessment.
Rebuildingsociety remains a very small P2P lending company, but it does have an attractive balance sheet, with its assets far outweighing its liabilities.
Relendex | profitable
Relendex's accounts are too small to provide the details we need.
Relendex once told P2P Finance News that it was profitable for two years up to 2021. Relendex stated it made profits of £300,000 the following year and again told the industry news magazine that it was profitable in 2022, with larger profits than the prior year.
The limited information in its published accounts mean we're unable to check its figures, although its accounts do not have a full report from their independent auditors, anyway.
Shojin Property Partners | not profitable?
Shojin Property Partners has five relevant companies in its group, including the holding company. That isn't particularly unusual for ambitious companies involved in property or property lending, when they have plans for a variety of products.
However, it's tricky to figure out what's happening between each company and how relevant each one is, because the information in each of the accounts is very limited.
It probably made a profit in just one of the three years of 2018, 2019 and 2020. It seems most likely that it didn't make a profit in 2021. In 2022, while its “main” company (in my opinion) made a profit thanks only to taxes, I think overall the companies could have made a loss.
The independent auditors are Leaman Mattei, who we are not familiar with.
Somo | profitable
Somo* is profitable. It filed audited accounts for 2022 show a profit of over £5 million, up from just under £4 million the prior year. It's been profitable for many years and profits appear to have risen for several years in a row. Somo says that it's made a profit ever since 2015, when it was called BridgeCrowd.
Sourced Capital | not profitable
The latest we heard from Sourced Capital is that it's not profitable and likely a few years away. Published accounts are too small to show us any details. The 2022 accounts appear to indicate that Sourced Capital probably isn't profitable.
The Money Platform | profitable
Up from a loss of £200,000, The Money Platform made its first profit of £180,000 in 2022, according to brief, unaudited accounts.
Unbolted | not profitable?
Unbolted‘s unaudited, published accounts are highly abbreviated, but suggest it was probably close to breakeven in 2022, improving from what seem most likely to be losses in its earlier years, possibly of several hundred thousand pounds per year.
At this stage, profits aren't key for many of these fast growing startups, so you need to look at other ways to measure stability and strength. To that end, read Who Owns The P2P Lending Sites?
Independent opinion: 4thWay will help you to identify your options and narrow down your choices. We suggest what you could do, but we won't tell you what to do or where to lend; the decision is yours. We are responsible for the accuracy and quality of the information we provide, but not for any decision you make based on it. The material is for general information and education purposes only.
We are not financial, legal or tax advisors, which means that we don't offer advice or recommendations based on your circumstances and goals.
The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and not held by 4thWay. 4thWay is not regulated by ESMA or the FCA. All the specialists and researchers who conduct research and write articles for 4thWay are subject to 4thWay's Editorial Code of Practice. For more, please see 4thWay's terms and conditions.
*Commission, fees and impartial research: our service is free to you. 4thWay shows dozens of P2P lending accounts in our accurate comparison tables and we add new ones as they make it through our listing process. We receive compensation from Assetz Exchange, AxiaFunder, CapitalRise, CapitalStackers, HNW Lending, Invest & Fund, Kuflink, Loanpad, Proplend and Somo, and other P2P lending companies not mentioned above either when you click through from our website and open accounts with them, or to cover the costs of conducting our calculated stress tests and ratings assessments. We vigorously ensure that this doesn't affect our editorial independence. Read How we earn money fairly with your help.