Kviku is one of those names that used to show up often in P2P lending circles—especially among investors chasing high double-digit returns in emerging markets. I gave them the benefit of the doubt at first. They looked solid on paper: Russian roots, cross-border expansion, supposedly high-tech scoring systems. But let’s not sugarcoat it—Kviku has turned out to be a mess.

When the Music Stopped

If you were invested in Kviku during the early days, things probably looked fine. They were paying interest, claiming buyback guarantees, and issuing updates that sounded reassuring. Then came the geopolitical fallout: sanctions, financial restrictions, and an absolute collapse in credibility. Suddenly, payments stopped flowing—and communication dried up with them.

And here’s the kicker: Kviku kept promising repayments “soon.” Some platforms hosting their loans even doubled down on this, stringing along investors with timelines that never materialized. We’re now talking years, not months. And let’s be honest—if you haven’t been paid back by now, you’re probably never getting your money.

The Buyback Guarantee Lie

One of the biggest red flags in P2P lending is a “buyback guarantee” that depends entirely on the originator’s goodwill. Kviku proved exactly why that model is broken. When push came to shove, the guarantees weren’t worth the digital paper they were printed on. If the loan originator has no access to funds—or simply doesn’t want to pay—you’re stuck. That’s exactly what happened here.

Platform Silence & Excuses

The platforms that listed Kviku loans (like Bondster, Mintos, and others) did a poor job, to put it mildly. They allowed Kviku to drag on repayment timelines endlessly, citing vague excuses and political instability as the cause. Sure, some of that is fair—but the absolute lack of accountability or urgency showed where their priorities lie: not with investors.

Even when Kviku issued updates, they were cryptic at best and misleading at worst. “We’re finalizing restructuring,” “We’ve secured banking channels,” “We’ll resume payments next quarter”—it’s been the same recycled nonsense for over a year.

My Take

In my view, Kviku has joined the growing list of platforms and originators that overpromised, underdelivered, and ultimately betrayed the trust of retail investors. I’m chalking it up as a lesson and moving on. These days, I’m far more selective about who I trust with my capital—especially in higher-risk markets. Flashy returns mean nothing if you can’t withdraw your money.

Bottom Line

If you’re still hoping Kviku will make good on its obligations, I hope you’re right—but I wouldn’t hold my breath. For those looking at similar platforms now: be ruthless in your due diligence. Don’t just look at the yield—follow the money, the ownership, the regulation (or lack thereof), and the real-world ability to enforce contracts.

As always: stay diversified, stay skeptical, and remember that capital preservation beats high returns on paper that never materialize.

Bondster was once a promising addition to the European P2P lending space. When I first came across the platform, it offered what looked like solid returns, backed by buyback guarantees and a growing selection of loan originators. However, in recent years—especially into 2025—things have taken a sharp turn for the worse. After monitoring the platform, reading investor feedback, and reviewing my own experience, I can no longer recommend Bondster as a viable P2P investment option.

Red Flags That Can’t Be Ignored

Over time, what started as minor concerns grew into recurring problems. Transparency is minimal. The platform still fails to clearly communicate loan originator performance, recovery expectations, or how it handles defaults. Too often, you’re left guessing what’s really going on with your money.

What’s even more worrying is how many loan originators have defaulted on their buyback obligations—and how little Bondster has done to protect its investors. The buyback guarantee sounds reassuring in theory, but in practice, it’s often meaningless. I’ve seen more than half of some users’ portfolios go into the “60+ days late” category, with no clear resolution path.

Investor Sentiment Has Collapsed

A quick glance at recent Trustpilot reviews tells you everything you need to know. Investors are complaining about blocked funds, multi-year delays in recovery, and poor communication. The most recent reviews in mid-2025 are damning—users are not just dissatisfied; they feel deceived.

Even the most loyal supporters of Bondster are throwing in the towel. It’s no longer just about risk—it’s about trust, and that trust has eroded beyond repair.

The Bigger Problem: Misaligned Incentives

Bondster’s main priority appears to be onboarding new loan originators rather than safeguarding the interests of its existing investors. This raises questions about their long-term strategy and who they’re really working for. In my view, they’re not doing enough due diligence on originators or enforcing buyback agreements when things go south.

Add to that the lack of meaningful regulatory oversight and it becomes clear—Bondster is playing a dangerous game with investor capital. It’s privately owned, opaque in its operations, and has failed to adapt or improve in the face of repeated problems.

Looking Ahead

There was a time when I believed Bondster might evolve into a strong player in the European P2P market. That time has passed. In 2025, there are simply better options out there—platforms with stronger governance, better transparency, and actual enforcement of investor protections.

If you’re still on Bondster, I’d suggest reviewing your portfolio and starting the process of unwinding your position. And if you’re new to P2P lending, this is a reminder to look past the headline returns and focus on platform integrity and long-term reliability.

As always, do your own research, diversify smartly, and don’t fall for the promise of “guaranteed returns” without understanding who’s standing behind them—and whether they can actually pay.

When I first came across Crowdestor, I was intrigued. The European P2P platform had that slick, high-return, high-risk appeal—offering access to business loans, real estate, and startup financing, often with double-digit returns. It felt like the edgy cousin of Mintos or Bondora. But fast forward to today, and Crowdestor has become a textbook example of what can go wrong when aggressive marketing meets weak underwriting and zero accountability.

The Pitch vs. The Reality

Crowdestor sold a dream: investing in Baltic startups, restaurants, and real estate developments with the promise of 15–20% annual returns. The projects looked polished, the platform UI was clean, and the team seemed ambitious. But in hindsight, most of that turned out to be marketing fluff. The actual risk analysis was shallow at best. There was little transparency around borrower vetting, and in many cases, it seems loans were given to ideas rather than businesses with proven track records.

Default City

As of 2025, the number of non-performing loans on Crowdestor is staggering. It’s hard to get reliable figures because they don’t exactly lead with transparency, but if you’ve been following the platform—or worse, invested in it—you’ll know what I’m talking about. Delayed projects, vanished borrowers, and defaulted repayments have become the norm.

Some investors have portfolios where over 80% of loans are late or in recovery. That’s not a bump in the road—that’s a platform-wide failure of underwriting and follow-through. And let’s not even talk about the “Recovery Fund” they hyped up back in the day—it ended up being more of a PR gimmick than a real safety net.

The Communication Problem

Crowdestor’s investor updates are sporadic, vague, and often just an attempt to buy more time. You’ll get phrases like “we’re in negotiations,” “borrower communication ongoing,” or “legal steps under review.” It’s the same cycle: delay, deflect, disappear.

To make matters worse, they’ve pivoted to new ventures—launching crypto experiments and trying to push new products—while the original investors are left holding the bag. That tells me everything I need to know about their priorities.

My Experience

I tested the waters on Crowdestor early on, as I usually do with emerging platforms. Thankfully, I never committed more than I could afford to lose, because that’s exactly what happened. The platform became a graveyard of broken projects and empty promises. The ROI? Negative, both financially and in terms of time wasted trying to follow up on dozens of dead-end updates.

Lesson Learned

Crowdestor is a cautionary tale—one that highlights just how quickly things can unravel when flashy returns aren’t backed by solid fundamentals. In the end, it’s not about the platform’s pitch or branding—it’s about governance, accountability, and whether they actually care about their investors.

If you’re still on Crowdestor hoping for a turnaround, I genuinely hope you see some recovery. But I’ve moved on. There are better places to put your capital—places where risk is real, but at least the rules of the game are clear and enforced.

As always, don’t chase yield blindly. Look for transparency, skin in the game, and a track record that actually means something.