Regulated
Bonus running
Can sell early
- Risk level
- High
- Risk-return
- Medium
- Start from
- €50
Referral link · capital at risk
See 11 projects →
Creditstar Finland
Finland
Creditstar Finland Oy lends to people in Finland online, under the Creditstar name. Mintos investors lend it money and earn interest. Our memo scores it 41 out of 100, a D, and puts the chance it fails to pay within a year at about 12%.
Key figures
- Average rate
- 9.9%
- average, not guaranteed
- Loan portfolio
- €26,390,783
- Start from
- €50
Capital at risk. The rate is agreed, not guaranteed: if a borrower defaults you can lose some or all of your money.
Would AI invest?
AI 41 LowOur AI gives this project 41 out of 100: Low. How the AI score works
Information, not personal investment advice. The AI score rates the documents the platform publishes, can be wrong, and does not predict returns.
AI review
AILender memo · Creditstar Finland · Finland
Creditstar Finland: how likely is it to fail to pay its lenders?
Creditstar Finland Oy lends to people in Finland online, under the Creditstar name. It has been registered in Helsinki since 2009, it takes no deposits, and it belongs to an Estonian group. Mintos lists it as "Creditstar Finland OY". This memo asks one question: what is the chance it fails to pay its lenders back in the next 12 months, and why.
THIS IS NOT FINANCIAL ADVICE. This memo was prepared with the help of AI from publicly available documents. It is general information for education only — not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold anything, and it does not take account of your circumstances. Figures may contain errors; check them against the original documents. Investing through P2P platforms can result in the loss of all money invested.
Our score
41/ 100
D Weak
ABCDE
about 12%chance it fails to pay in the next 12 months
1 in 9the same number, put the other way round
Where that sits on our scale
Our framework caps this lender at 2% of a portfolio. That sits well inside Finland’s country limit of 25%, so it is the lender’s own 2% cap that applies. No one guarantees these notes, so nothing improves those odds. These caps are a convention of our scale, applied to every lender we cover. They are not advice about your money.
It earns well — and then sends almost all of it to its parent, which is why it has next to no cushion of its own
A few findings make us stop scoring and put the answer at 25% or more — a broken financial promise to lenders, an auditor who will not sign off cleanly. None of those is present here, so this is a D on the ordinary arithmetic of our six questions. What earns it is the shape of the business: before a charge from its parent the company made €6.3m in 2025, and after that charge it kept €96,000 — 52 cents of every €100 that came in, after 51 cents the year before. There is almost nothing behind it if a year goes wrong. Each figure below shows the odds as if that were the only risk the company faced.
💶 Earnings and safety cushion E
about 19%The owners’ money is 2.9% of what the company owns, and it was below zero for six years running before 2025.
📉 Are its loans repaid? D
about 12%Neither the company nor its auditor publishes any figure for how late its Finnish loans are, and its book grew by two-thirds in a year.
🇫🇮 How risky is Finland? A
about 1%Among the safer countries we cover, though five score above it. Finland’s own grade is B, not A — section 3 explains the chip. Its weakest point is whether borrowers can keep paying.
⚖️ Anything else? E
about 19%A filing Finnish law required and the board never made, a growing unpaid debt to the parent, and a group close to two of the promises it gave its lenders.
1. The owners’ money was below zero for six years, and the 2025 recovery is unexplained and unaudited.The owners’ money in this company went below zero in 2019, at minus €23,000, and stayed there. At the end of 2020 it was minus €347,000, and it stayed negative every year after that: minus €280,000, minus €172,000, minus €109,000, and minus €45,214 at the end of 2024, that last figure from accounts an auditor signed. Then two pages of the company’s own management figures for 2025 show plus €2,261,000. The year’s profit was €96,000, so trading explains about a twenty-fourth of the change — and the balance sheet in the same file puts the year’s result at minus €57,000, which would explain none of it. Issued capital is unchanged as far as the rounded figures show, and the line where a Finnish company records money an owner puts in without taking new shares is zero. The likeliest explanation is that the parent put money in, or turned part of what this company owes it into equity, but no document we found says so, and the group’s own audited 2025 report says nothing about Finland’s capital. Meanwhile the auditor’s report on the 2024 accounts, signed on 29 August 2025, records that the board had not made the filing Finnish company law requires when a company’s share capital is lost. The auditor signed the accounts off clean in spite of it, and did not warn that the company might be unable to keep trading.
2. Almost everything the company earns goes to its parent — and mostly not in cash.Before that charge, the company earned €1.34m in 2023, €4.61m in 2024 and €6.31m in 2025. The charge took €1.27m, €4.55m and €6.21m. What was left was €63,391, then €63,764, then €96,000. The accounts call it a "transfer pricing net margin allocation" — transfer pricing being what a group charges one of its own companies for services and know-how, and net margin allocation being the rule it uses to decide how much profit each company keeps. The group’s own documents describe a model in which profit earned in a subsidiary is directed back to the parent. None of it appears to have been paid in cash. The amount owed to the parent under that charge rose from €3.5m to €8.6m during 2024, while the charge for the year was €4.55m — so the balance went up by about €0.56m more than the charge, which the accounts do not explain. That is as far as the last audited balance sheet goes; the two-page 2025 file does not show what is still owed. At the end of 2024 the parent’s loan — itself labelled "Loans Creditstar International OÜ Transfer pricing" — plus the unpaid charge came to €34.7m of the company’s €46.2m of borrowing, 75% of everything it owed.
3. In 2022 and 2023, payments to Mintos investors across Creditstar companies were rescheduled.€7.42m was pending in July 2022, and investors agreed to be paid later, on new terms: 18% interest plus a 1% one-off payment. The plan aimed at full repayment by the end of 2022. By late March 2023 €3.4m of it had fallen due, a Mintos moderator wrote that €1m of that had been received, and Mintos moved the rescheduled amounts to its "In Recovery" status — the label it uses for money it is trying to collect from a lender that has stopped paying on time. We could not establish whether this company’s own notes were among them, and we found nothing similar for 2025 or 2026. On 13 September 2026 Mintos showed €357,700 of payments to investors pending across the whole Creditstar name on the platform, two days behind on average — 1.2% of the €28.9m outstanding under that name, against 1.0% across every lender on the platform that day. That figure covers this company and its Estonian sister Monefit together; Mintos does not split it.
Why this number matters
Every investment carries risk, and risk is not really a letter or a mark out of ten. It is two plain questions: how likely is it that this company fails, and how much of your money would you lose if it did. Put those together and you can see whether the reward is worth it.
For Creditstar Finland: about a 12% chance of failing in the next 12 months. If we assume about 30% of the money comes back in that case, the risk costs about 8.1% a year against the 9.92% the loans pay. That leaves roughly 2% — a positive number, but a thin one, and it depends entirely on our estimate of the odds being right.
Show how this works
1. The rate is a promise, not a result
An advertised 9.92% is what you are promised if everything goes well. What you keep is that rate minus what failures cost you. So the rate on its own tells you very little — and the highest rates on a platform are usually the ones being paid for a reason.
2. Put a price on the risk
Risk cost = chance of failing × share of your money you would not get back. Nobody knows the second number in advance. How much comes back has varied widely from case to case. We use 30% back, 70% lost, as our own working assumption so that memos can be compared with each other — it is not a measured figure, and the answer moves a lot if you choose differently.
3. Compare like for like
Take two imaginary lenders. One pays 14% but has a 17% chance of failing within the year: the risk costs about 11.9% a year, leaving roughly 2%. The other pays 9% with a 2.5% chance: the risk costs about 1.8%, leaving about 7%. The bigger number on the screen can easily be the worse one.
Creditstar Finland, worked through
| On our numbers | |
|---|---|
| Chance of failing in a year | about 12% |
| Loss if it fails (70%) | × 0.7 |
| Risk cost a year | about 8.1%, on the unrounded 11.6% |
| Rate offered on Mintos | 9.92% |
| Left after the risk cost | about 2% |
Two things this arithmetic leaves out. Small lenders fail more often than the rated companies whose history our odds come from, so 12% is a floor rather than a best guess. And a real failure does not arrive as a yearly cost; it arrives all at once, which is why how much you put in one place matters as much as the rate.
Where our number comes from: we score six questions out of five, weight them into a score out of 100, and convert that score into a chance of failure using the long-run default rates that S&P publishes for companies of each credit quality. Some findings override the score entirely and set the answer to at least 25%: lending more than half the owners’ money to people or companies connected to it, an auditor who will not sign off cleanly, an audit report carrying a material uncertainty about the business continuing, a broken financial promise to lenders — a minimum the company has to stay above — late payments to investors, or owners taking out more than the business earned two years running. A finding has to be about the company itself, not about its owner or the platform it lends through. None of them applies here, which is why this memo gives a number rather than a floor. It is our own estimate from public documents — not a credit rating, not a market price, and not a promise about what will happen.
The company at a glance
What it is
A Finnish online lenderBusiness ID 2301802-7, registered in Helsinki in December 2009 and trading under this name since April 2010. It takes no deposits. Consumer-credit companies in Finland have been supervised by the financial regulator, FIN-FSA, since 1 July 2023; a Finnish comparison site lists this company as registered with it, and we did not check the regulator’s own register.
Who it lends to
People, on a credit lineIts own pre-contract information sheet of March 2025 offers a credit line — an agreed limit the borrower can draw on, repay and draw again — of €2,000 to €10,000 at 14.99% a year plus a fee of 0.01% a day. That is an APR, the yearly cost of borrowing with every charge included, of 21.31% on €3,000 borrowed for a year. Across the whole book the money actually earned works out at about 30% of the average of the opening and closing amounts lent, or about 24% of the year-end book. Either way it is above that 21.31%, but the book grew two-thirds during the year, which flatters the first measure, and nothing published breaks the income down.
How much it has lent
€77.1mAt the end of 2025, up from €46.2m a year earlier — two-thirds more in twelve months.
Who owns it
An Estonian chain of companiesCreditstar International OÜ owns all of it; above that sit Creditstar Group AS and SA Financial Investments OÜ. The Estonian register names Aaro Sosaar as the person who ultimately owns it.
Where an investor can lend to it
Platform
MintosListed there as "Creditstar Finland OY". Finnish loans from this group are also funded through Lendermarket, where investors have something Mintos investors do not — see section 4.
Borrowed from investors
€25.6mMintos’s own overview page, read on 4 November 2026, against a "loan portfolio" figure of €13.5m that Mintos does not define anywhere we could find — the company’s own book was €77.1m at the end of 2025.
Average rate
9.92%Read on 4 November 2026 — Mintos’s own figure.
Payments to investors pending
€0.36m13 September 2026 — €357,700 across the whole Creditstar name on the platform, two days behind on average. That is 1.2% of the €28.9m outstanding under that name, against 1.0% platform-wide. Mintos does not split the figure between this company and its Estonian sister.
Mintos Risk Score
5.5As shown on Mintos’s score page of 9 October 2026, read on 4 November 2026 — Mintos’s own score, not ours. It is a low one by the platform’s standards: of the 54 lenders whose scores we captured on 13 September 2026, 46 scored above 6. Its four parts: how the loans are performing 6.0, how well it runs collections 6.5, how good its promise to buy back late loans is 3.7, and how the deal is put together 5.5.
The full review covers the borrower or company, the security, the cash flow, the risks and a verdict. Sign in to read it.
Information, not personal investment advice. The AI score rates the documents the platform publishes, can be wrong, and does not predict returns.
Ask AI about this project
Sign in to ask the AI about this project's documents.
Sign inLike this project?
👍 Yes · 0 👎 No · 0
Comments · 0
- No comments yet.
The platform and similar projects
Offered on
Similar open projects
ID Finance Spain
Mintos
- Average rate
- 9.86%
- average, not guaranteed
- Loan portfolio
- €22.3m
From €50
See project