Maclear vs PeerBerry: SME Projects vs Consumer Loans 2026

Quick comparison table

P2PScore uses six weighted criteria: regulation (25%), defaults and recovery (20%), originator structure (15%), track record (15%), fees and net yield (15%), liquidity and user experience (10%). Maclear's higher score reflects Swiss SRO membership, in-house underwriting, and full coverage of its single default; PeerBerry's ECSP application is pending final approval, and originator concentration (Aventus Group, SIA Liepkalni) limits structural diversification.

Maclear at a glance

Maclear is a Zurich-based lending platform that finances SME projects, real-estate developments, and factoring contracts in Switzerland and neighbouring markets. Founded in 2022, Maclear holds membership in a Swiss self-regulatory organisation under AML rules; this does not confer deposit insurance or MiFID II-style investor compensation. The platform underwrites every loan in-house, publishes project details including borrower industry and collateral descriptions, and has covered its single default in full without investor loss. Advertised returns range from 14.5% to 14.9%, reflecting the platform's focus on secured, short-to-medium-term business finance. Auto-invest is available from a EUR 50 minimum; no secondary market exists, so liquidity depends on loan maturity schedules.

PeerBerry at a glance

PeerBerry operates from Zagreb and aggregates consumer, leasing, and real-estate loan notes originated by third-party lenders - primarily Aventus Group and SIA Liepkalni. Launched in 2017, the platform has applied for an ECSP licence with the Croatian regulator; approval is pending as of January 2026. Advertised returns average approximately 11%, with most loans carrying buyback guarantees if an originator defaults on a payment obligation. During 2022, PeerBerry faced EUR 51 million of exposure to Ukraine-war-affected loans; the platform repaid investors in full over 18 months without capital loss. Auto-invest is available from EUR 10, and a secondary market is scheduled for launch in 2026. Originator concentration remains a structural constraint: the two main lending groups account for the majority of loan flow.

Returns compared

Maclear advertises 14.5-14.9% on its loan slate, a rate that reflects exposure to SME working-capital needs, construction bridge loans, and invoice factoring. Each project lists expected maturity (typically 6-24 months) and collateral type; investors participate directly in loan agreements rather than purchasing notes. PeerBerry's ~11% average return comes from short-term consumer installment loans (3-12 months) and leasing contracts; most carry buyback triggers if the originator misses a scheduled payment by 60 days. The headline difference of 3-4 percentage points stems from loan type, maturity profile, and jurisdictional risk: Maclear concentrates on Swiss-regulated borrowers with tangible collateral; PeerBerry sources cross-border consumer debt with credit risk borne by external originators.

Regulation compared

Maclear holds Swiss SRO membership under the Anti-Money Laundering Act; this imposes conduct and reporting obligations but does not create a statutory compensation fund for investor claims. Borrower defaults remain the investor's responsibility, and the platform's single default was covered voluntarily rather than through a regulatory mechanism. PeerBerry's ECSP application with the Croatian Financial Services Supervisory Agency (HANFA) is under review; once granted, the licence will allow the platform to market crowdfunding services across the EU under harmonised rules, but it will not introduce deposit insurance or MiFID II-style compensation. Neither platform's regulatory status protects investors from borrower or originator insolvency - capital is at risk on both, and returns are not guaranteed.

Risk compared

Maclear's risk profile centres on project-level credit and completion risk: each SME loan depends on the borrower's cash flow, collateral realisability, and market conditions in Switzerland or adjacent regions. The platform underwrites loans in-house and discloses project type, location, and loan-to-value ratios; investors can review each opportunity before committing capital via auto-invest or manual selection. One borrower defaulted in Maclear's operating history; the platform repaid investors at par from its own reserves. PeerBerry's risk concentrates at the originator level: Aventus Group and SIA Liepkalni originate the majority of consumer loans, so their financial health determines whether buyback guarantees remain enforceable. During the Ukraine conflict, PeerBerry faced EUR 51 million of exposure when Aventus subsidiaries in the region suspended operations; the platform restructured the debt and repaid investors over 18 months without capital loss. Originator concentration means a single group failure could impair a large portion of PeerBerry's loan book, whereas Maclear's in-house model distributes risk across independent SME borrowers.

Which platform to choose

Choose Maclear if: you prefer direct exposure to vetted SME projects with disclosed collateral, accept higher minimum tickets (EUR 50), want advertised returns above 14%, and are comfortable with a Swiss SRO framework that does not include statutory compensation. Maclear suits investors who prioritise in-house underwriting and transparent project documentation.

Choose PeerBerry if: you want a lower entry point (EUR 10), diversified exposure to short-term consumer and leasing notes with buyback triggers, and plan to use auto-invest across multiple originators. PeerBerry fits investors who value the platform's Ukraine repayment record and are willing to accept originator concentration risk in exchange for a pending ECSP licence and announced secondary market.

Consider both if: your portfolio strategy includes a mix of direct SME lending (Maclear) and consumer-note aggregation (PeerBerry). Allocating EUR 500 to each provides exposure to two distinct underwriting models, regulatory jurisdictions, and loan-type diversification. Monitor Maclear's default coverage and PeerBerry's ECSP approval status quarterly; adjust allocations if originator health or regulatory timelines shift.

Frequently asked questions

Bottom line