Loan Originators

OÜ Fresh Finance

7 – medium risk

Loan type

Credit line Consumer loan Refinancing loan


Flag: Estonia on Apple



Skin in the game


Buyback guarantee

 Buyback guarantee yes

Total loan portfolio

1 775 000 EUR

Borrower interest


Interest rate offered to investors


Credit mediator license number

Issued on

March 28, 2016


Our Due Diligence procedure and Loan Originator scoring system is divided into five topics, where Monestro performs in-depth analysis.
We make sure Loan Originators onboarded to our platform are financially strong companies operating in stable and regulated environments throughout detailed examination.

1. Loan Originator trustworthiness and their AML compliance.

We ask for the Company’s and Group’s organisational structure charts to ensure that they are not overcomplicated. In that, we check that its management is trustworthy and has no negative feedback in the media. We also check that their current strategy and working ways are coherent with the current legislation. In the end, the final approval is made through in-depth analysis of legal documentation and main processes descriptions, ensuring the use of AML recognised practices and internal controls, and the use of fair main marketing and advertising strategies.

2. Loan quality and profitability.

To generate a more stable profit for our investors – in Monestro, we are primarily interested in less-risky high-quality loans. Each of the Loan Originator that would like to trade through our portal must provide their portfolio with historical records of successful loan performance and numbers of underperforming loans while having an overall comparison against industry-average ratios.

3. Ensure precise loan management and debt collection.

Our analysts make sure that Loan Originators have efficient loan quality and creditworthiness scoring models. We obtain an understanding of the main IT platform in use by them, their risk management policies, and the loan control and recovery process. All this has to show capability of fulfilling their obligations to our investors and us, ensuring timely fund transfers.

4. Company’s stability and long term accountability.

Loan Originators would be asked to provide annual reports for at least three years and monthly reports for the period from the last annual report and their forecasts. Our analysts are going through audit reports and the latest internal changes, ensuring that loan originators’ performance is profitable. We also focus on the company’s development plans – provided with set goals in order to make better forecasts in the long term.

5. Already onboarded Loan Originators.

The due diligence control continues after Loan Originator has been already onboarded in the system. We perform a quarterly review of Loan Originators’ financials as well as receiving audited financial statements annually. Furthermore, we continue to keep close track of each loan portfolio performance and make sure Loan Originators continue to fulfil their obligations and be accountable in line with the abovementioned criteria in the long run.

Our Risk assesment scoring system

At Monestro, we strive to make our risk qualification for Loan Originators as efficient and transparent as possible.

Our risk qualification reflects how stable or risky the investment opportunities are for our investors. We know that higher investment return rates are usually associated with higher risk scores.

The scoring model is based on our due diligence and risk assessment practices during the Loan Originator onboarding. It is essential to mention that a Loan Originator’s score might change during our quarterly risk review.


10-9-8 / Low Risk

Loan Originator must comply with all or most of the below description.

The Loan Originator is well-known and financially healthy – with a stable or growing market position over at least the last two years, has positive equity and net operating income, plus a DSCR (Debt service coverage ratio) over 1.2.

Simultaneously, the company has a well-performing portfolio with a low rate of non-performing loans based on historical data. Loan issuing is thought through with a transparent and efficient internal scoring model.

The Loan Originator is a mature or growing, well-regulated and competent company with effectively designed and implemented practices, internal controls and a long-term focus.  To obtain this score, the Loan Originator should have been successfully audited by an external market supplier.


 7-6-5 / Medium Risk

This Loan Originator is somewhat financially weaker yet remains a stable company. With an average market share and its niche, the company has a positive net operating income and current ratio (current assets vs current liabilities) over 1.

The Loan Originator will have a solid performing portfolio with a medium to upper rate of historically repaid loans and a stable loan portfolio volume over the last two years.

The borrowers’ scoring model and collection department’s efficiency is a must.

The Loan Originator is a competent company with transparent historical records and audited by an external market supplier, preferably by a well-known audit company.


4-3-2 / High Risk

This Loan Originator is not stable over the last 2-3 (years) or might have a weak position on the market. It could be a mature company with a strategy to reload its business or a start-up that has not yet acquired its market share.

This company’s historical rate of non-performing loans is relatively high. However, overall portfolio performance is positive.

It might have negative financial ratios and performance. However, there should be a positive trend over the last two years and the LO must be able to cover non-performing loans and fulfil its obligations towards its investors (Buyback Obligation).


1 / Loan Originators who have not passed our risk assessment.

There are still a lot of Loan Originators who have not passed our Due Diligence and Risk Assessment. Such companies might not be onboarded due to quantitative or qualitative reasons.

Quantitative reasons would be significant financial performance issues and a weak financial position.

Qualitative reasons are unsteady market niche, management’s unprofessional or fraudulent activities, lack of internal controls or manual operations.