How we rate loan providers
Every score on this site comes from the same 6 criteria, weighted as set out below. We publish the rubric so you can disagree with it.
The criteria
| Criterion | Weight | What the score means |
|---|---|---|
| Regulatory standing | 25% | For a lender: whether it holds a Certificate of Authority, appears on the SEC list of recorded online lending platforms, and is clear of advisories. Confirmed against an SEC list or statement plus an OLP recording scores 9-10; confirmed authority alone scores 7; credentials published by the operator but not yet matched to an SEC list scores 4-5; not found scores 0. For a marketplace, which needs no Certificate of Authority because it does not lend, this measures disclosure instead: naming its partner lenders with their SEC registrations scores 8, naming its own operating company scores 6, disclosing only that it is not a lender scores 5, and an unidentifiable operator scores 3 or less. |
| Cost of credit | 20% | The effective rate including fees, judged against the 12% monthly ceiling SEC MC 14 applies to unsecured loans of PHP 10,000 or less over terms up to four months. Comfortably inside scores 8-10; priced at the ceiling scores 5; advertising a maximum well above it scores 1-2 and we say so in the review. Not scored for marketplaces: they do not set the price, so the criterion does not apply and its weight is redistributed across the rest. |
| Cost transparency | 20% | Whether you can find the total cost before handing over your details. Amount, term, interest and every fee published, in figures that agree with each other, scores 9-10. A rate range with undisclosed fees scores 4. Figures that contradict other figures on the same page score 2-3. "Apply to find out" scores 0-1. |
| Who you borrow from | 15% | Whether you know which licensed entity ends up holding the loan. A direct lender scores 9. A marketplace that names its partner lenders before you submit scores 6. One that does not name them scores 4. |
| Data handling | 10% | What the provider asks for and what its app requests. A clear privacy notice and no access to contacts scores 9-10. Requesting contacts or photos, which is the precondition for the debt-shaming this market has a history of, scores 0-2. |
| Getting approved | 10% | How broad the eligibility is and how much documentation is required, judged against what the provider claims. Published requirements that match reported experience score well; a stated approval time nobody meets scores badly. |
| Total | 100% |
Why some providers have no score
The overall figure is a weighted average of the criteria we have actually assessed, and every review states how many of the 6 that is. Where regulatory standing is still unresolved, or less than half the rubric weight is covered, we show the breakdown but withhold the headline number.
The alternative is to score the unknowns as average, which is how comparison sites end up with every provider sitting between 4.1 and 4.6 stars. A number that never varies is not information.
What we will not do
- Publish an interest rate, fee or loan amount we cannot link to the provider’s own published page. Missing figures say “see lender terms”.
- Write reviews in a borrower’s voice, or buy them in. Borrower reviews on this site are submitted by real people and read by a human before they appear.
- Let commission change a classification or a score. It affects the order providers appear in within their group, and we say so on every table.
How commission works here
We earn a commission when someone applies through some of our links. Within each group — direct lenders, and marketplaces — providers are ordered by how well they perform for our readers. What commission never changes is whether we tell you a provider is a marketplace rather than a lender, or that we could not find its registration.
Corrections
If a figure here is wrong, tell us and we will fix it and log it. Every correction we have made is listed on the corrections page.