Post by eascogo on Nov 14, 2016 18:34:59 GMT
A post by kaya [p2pindependentforum.com/post/152368] prompted me to look up Trustpilot's ratings of a number of P2P platforms. I can imagine the many who grumble about poor returns on their bank savings. Realisation that they are in fact in negative territory once inflation is factored in should prompt a search for alternatives. To the uniniated P2P websites offering rates of 5% or 6%, let alone twice that, are likely to ring alarm bells and the obligatory warnings that their money is at risk can add to that mistrust. A similar picture awaits those contemplating S&S investments. For those taking the jump Trustpilot may have been one source of further information. Forumites are privileged in having accessed a source of detailed and up-to-date information but trawling through the many threads is not for everyone. So how useful would Trustpilot be as a guide to P2P investment?
For what it is worth I have collected the ratings from Trustpilot. Results are shown in decreasing order of ratings. Forumites preferences are unlikely to match that ordering but there might be some wisdom in the collective experience of the crowd as reflected by Trustpilot.
Site Number Initial Score
of reviews review in out of 10
--------------------------------------------------------------------
RS 1906 Apr2012 9.8
Z 1700 Feb2013 9.8
FC 1448 Oct2013 9.2
MT 115 Apr2016 9.0
FS 28 Feb2014 8.8
SS 185 Jan2015 8.1
AC 65 Mar2014 7.9
ReBS 4 Mar2016 7.2
ABL 0
COL 0
The popularity of platforms is evident in this table though the top three mentioned here have been around far longer. However a high number of reviews spread over a long time period may no longer reflect current status. As forumites are well aware perceptions of a platform changes rapidly but a change in opinion would not show in the scores until long after the event (this could be the case with the top three sites here). Conversely a few poor reviews impact heavily on the overall score when the number of reviews is small (I would have expected MT to be at the top). Of course a low number of reviews makes ratings largely irrelevant but still likely to be influential.
For what it is worth I have collected the ratings from Trustpilot. Results are shown in decreasing order of ratings. Forumites preferences are unlikely to match that ordering but there might be some wisdom in the collective experience of the crowd as reflected by Trustpilot.
Site Number Initial Score
of reviews review in out of 10
--------------------------------------------------------------------
RS 1906 Apr2012 9.8
Z 1700 Feb2013 9.8
FC 1448 Oct2013 9.2
MT 115 Apr2016 9.0
FS 28 Feb2014 8.8
SS 185 Jan2015 8.1
AC 65 Mar2014 7.9
ReBS 4 Mar2016 7.2
ABL 0
COL 0
The popularity of platforms is evident in this table though the top three mentioned here have been around far longer. However a high number of reviews spread over a long time period may no longer reflect current status. As forumites are well aware perceptions of a platform changes rapidly but a change in opinion would not show in the scores until long after the event (this could be the case with the top three sites here). Conversely a few poor reviews impact heavily on the overall score when the number of reviews is small (I would have expected MT to be at the top). Of course a low number of reviews makes ratings largely irrelevant but still likely to be influential.
