A loan platform in Singapore recently presented a teaser rate while, in the very same piece, conceding that “rates are often misleading.” It is unusual to see an operator “acknowledge” the flaw at the core of its own marketing — and it highlights how fragile trust in digital loan advertising has become.
Why this matters beyond lending
Banks sometimes display higher rates intentionally as a form of risk management, filtering out rate-sensitive borrowers while rewarding stronger profiles with better terms. This is defensible when it is their own product and strategy. The concern arises when third-party comparison sites recycle these figures and present them as if they were real, comparable offers. In such cases, borrowers are misled, and the damage does not stop at lending. Payments, fintech, and the wider financial services ecosystem all depend on public confidence. If consumer trust erodes here, it erodes everywhere.
What regulators abroad are doing
- The U.S. Federal Trade Commission fined LendEDU for passing off paid rankings as objective comparisons.
- The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau warned that steering consumers to products because of remuneration is abusive.
- Australia’s ASIC sued Choosi for posing as a comparison site while mostly promoting one insurer.
- The Australian Government’s MoneySmart platform explicitly cautions that many comparison sites are commercial businesses paid to highlight lenders.
How widespread are these platforms?
The reach is vast. Money.co.uk in the UK records around 920,000 monthly visits. SmartFinance in Vietnam ~7,200 per day. ComparaOnline across Chile, Brazil, and Mexico registers approximately 822,000 visits over three months. Ratehub.ca in Canada attracts around 1.6 million, and YallaCompare in the UAE about 1.4 million. With audiences of this scale, misleading advertising cannot be treated as a side issue.
Implications for Singapore
The MAS Guidelines on Fair Dealing state:
“A financial institution should not use gifts or rebates to unduly influence the financial decisions of customers.”
But such safeguards can be circumvented when banks work through third-party comparison sites to do indirectly what they cannot do directly. Whether via paid placements or lead-generation funnels, borrowers may be nudged in ways that sidestep the spirit of these rules. It raises not only compliance questions for banks but also broader reputational risks for digital finance in Singapore.
Closing thought
This is not only about SMEs and borrowers making better choices. It is about ensuring that misleading advertising in one corner of finance does not contaminate trust across the ecosystem. As debates around finfluencers have shown, regulators will not confine scrutiny to a single channel once concerns about financial advertising take hold. For industry peers, the lesson is simple: address transparency gaps now, or risk seeing the entire digital finance space tarred with the same brush.
Daniel Tan is the Founder of FindTheLoan.com.
TNGlobal INSIDER publishes contributions relevant to entrepreneurship and innovation. You may submit your own original or published contributions subject to editorial discretion.
Featured image: rupixen on Unsplash