Nectaro and ViaInvest are the closest match-up in this comparison series. Both are Latvian, both are MiFID II regulated, both work exclusively with loan originators inside their own corporate group, and both keep things simple. They’re built on the same template. The differences come down to age, liquidity, and yield.
The short version: ViaInvest is the older, more liquid option with a secondary market and a 15-year-old parent group. Nectaro is younger but pays more and has a bigger conglomerate behind it. Both are regulated affiliated-originator platforms, so the choice is mostly about whether you prioritize liquidity or returns.
Quick Comparison: Nectaro vs ViaInvest
| Feature | Nectaro | ViaInvest |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2023 | 2016 |
| Country | Latvia | Latvia |
| Regulation | MiFID II (Bank of Latvia) | MiFID II (Latvian FKTK, since 2021) |
| Avg. Returns | ~13.5% (14.91% in 2025) | ~12-13% |
| Buyback Guarantee | Yes (60 days) | Yes (30 days) |
| Secondary Market | No (roadmap 2026) | Yes |
| Auto-Invest | Yes (+0.29% bonus) | Yes |
| Min. Investment | EUR 50 (EUR 10 via auto-invest) | EUR 10 |
| Loan Originators | 2 (Dyninno-affiliated) | VIA SMS Group subsidiaries |
| Investor Protection | EUR 20,000 scheme | EUR 20,000 scheme |
| Fees | None | None |
| Parent Group | Dyninno Group | VIA SMS Group (since 2009) |
Returns and Performance
Nectaro is ahead on yield. Its 2025 return came in at 14.91%, with averages around 13.5%. ViaInvest advertises around 12%, sometimes a touch higher depending on the loan mix. Both pay well by P2P standards, but Nectaro has the higher ceiling.
Neither has a long enough independent record to call the difference settled. ViaInvest has the advantage of a parent group, VIA SMS, that has operated since 2009 across Sweden, Poland, and the Czech Republic, which lends its loan book some institutional weight. Nectaro’s track record is shorter, but its 0.0% loss rate so far and the depth of the Dyninno Group behind it are reassuring. On performance, Nectaro edges it; on the maturity of the lending operation underneath, ViaInvest does.
Regulation and Structure
Both platforms are MiFID II regulated by the Latvian central bank, both carry the EUR 20,000 investor compensation scheme, and both belong to the informal alliance of regulated Latvian P2P platforms. On paper, their investor protections are identical.
They also share the same structural quirk: every loan comes from an originator inside the platform’s own group. ViaInvest funds its loans through VIA SMS Group’s lending subsidiaries; Nectaro funds its through Dyninno’s CreditPrime and Abele Finance. This keeps the process transparent and easy to follow, but it concentrates your risk on a single corporate family in both cases. If you’re choosing between them, you’re really choosing which group you trust more, not whether you’re avoiding concentration. You aren’t.
Liquidity
This is ViaInvest’s standout advantage. It has a functioning secondary market, so you can sell loans before maturity and exit early when you need to. Nectaro has no secondary market yet (it’s promised for 2026), which means your capital is locked until each loan matures or repays early.
ViaInvest also leans on short 30-day consumer loans with a 30-day buyback trigger, so capital cycles back quickly even without using the secondary market. Nectaro’s loans run longer (up to several years in Moldova), which makes the missing secondary market a bigger constraint there. If liquidity matters to you, ViaInvest is clearly the more flexible of the two.
Fees and Experience
Both charge no investor fees, and both provide annual tax reports to simplify reporting. Nectaro’s auto-invest adds a +0.29% rate bonus plus Smart Reinvest to reduce idle cash. ViaInvest’s interface is clean and its registration is fast, helped by being voted the most popular P2P platform in the community in 2025.
The experiences are similar enough that fees and interface won’t decide this for most people. It comes back to the yield-versus-liquidity trade.
Who Should Choose Which?
Choose Nectaro if you:
- Want the higher return (13-15%)
- Don’t need to exit positions early
- Like the +0.29% auto-invest bonus and Smart Reinvest
- Prefer the backing of a large, diversified conglomerate
Choose ViaInvest if you:
- Want liquidity through a working secondary market
- Prefer short-term loans that cycle quickly (30-day terms)
- Value a longer-established platform and parent group
- Want a fast, simple, well-regarded interface
Use both if: You like the regulated affiliated-originator model but want to spread your concentration across two different parent groups, Dyninno and VIA SMS, rather than betting on one.
Verdict
These two are genuinely close, which is why the Nectaro review calls ViaInvest its nearest comparison. For pure return I’d lean Nectaro, where 14.91% with MiFID II regulation is a standout combination. For flexibility I’d lean ViaInvest, where the secondary market and short loan terms make it easier to get your money out.
If I’m picking one for a buy-and-hold allocation, it’s Nectaro for the extra yield. If I want a regulated platform I can exit at will, it’s ViaInvest. Holding both is the cleanest way to keep the regulated, simple model while not concentrating everything on a single group.
For the full picture, read my Nectaro Review and ViaInvest Review.
Frequently Asked Questions
Are Nectaro and ViaInvest both regulated?
Yes. Both are MiFID II regulated by the Latvian central bank and both carry the EUR 20,000 investor compensation scheme. They belong to the same informal alliance of regulated Latvian P2P platforms.
Which one is more liquid?
ViaInvest. It has a working secondary market that lets you exit loans early, plus short 30-day loan terms. Nectaro has no secondary market yet (planned for 2026) and runs longer loans, so capital is locked in for longer.
Do they both rely on affiliated loan originators?
Yes, and this is their shared weakness. ViaInvest funds loans through VIA SMS Group subsidiaries; Nectaro through Dyninno’s CreditPrime and Abele Finance. In both cases your risk is concentrated on the platform’s own corporate group.
Related
Leave a Reply