අපි කරුණු පරීක්ෂා කරන ආකාරය.

How we score app-based lenders, and why you can check our work.

This document explains the consumer-friendliness rubric used across LoanSharkBait. It is published openly so that every score is transparent, reproducible, and open to challenge. If you think a score is wrong, the final section explains how to contest it.

---

What the score is - and isn't

The LoanSharkBait score rates how a lender treats the borrower on a set of specific, observable criteria - chiefly how honestly it discloses cost, whether it asks for clear consent, and how it handles your data and collection. It is expressed as a single 0-100 figure with a plain-language band (Poor → Good).

It is not a verdict on whether a company is "good" or "bad" overall, a legal judgment, or a measure of anything we haven't tested. A lender can score well on one dimension and poorly on another, and we report each dimension separately so you can see the full picture rather than a slogan. Where a lender does something right, it earns the points - including lenders we are otherwise critical of.

---

Five principles behind every score

1. Higher is better for the borrower. A high score is a compliment. We are measuring consumer-friendliness, not severity.

2. Scores come from observable evidence. Each score is matched to a documented fact - what the app flow actually showed, what the loan agreement actually says, or what credible reporting has established - never from impression or sentiment.

3. When in doubt, we score conservatively. If the evidence is ambiguous between two levels, we assign the lower of the two and explain why in the evidence note. This means we never inflate a problem; if anything, we understate it.

4. The same method applies to every lender. Identical dimensions, identical tests, identical scale - including for any lender we are personally in dispute with. No lender is held to a harsher or softer standard than the others.

5. Every score carries evidence and a confidence label. Each per-lender score is published with the evidence it rests on and a confidence label (see below). A score may not be presented as established fact if its evidence is only reported or alleged.

---

How a single dimension is scored

Each of the seven dimensions is scored on a 0-4 scale. Every point on the scale has a written, observable test. To score a dimension, we find the level whose test matches the documented evidence and assign that number. We then record the evidence line and its confidence label.

The scale reads, in general terms:

---

The seven dimensions

Each dimension answers one question and carries a weight (the weights sum to 1). The three dimensions that most directly affect a borrower's money and consent carry the most weight.

1. Pre-contract cost transparency - *weight 0.20*

Does the app show the total amount repayable (and the due date) before you commit?

2. Rate-disclosure honesty - *weight 0.20*

Is the true cost disclosed honestly, or hidden behind a "0% / low interest" headline?

3. Consent / confirmation flow - *weight 0.20*

Is there a clear, deliberate confirmation step before funds are disbursed?

4. Data & permissions - *weight 0.15*

How much unnecessary data or device access is requested or reserved?

5. Collection-threat language - *weight 0.10*

How aggressive is the documented collection posture?

Note: a score of 0 here often rests on borrower testimony rather than a contract clause. We require such evidence to be well-sourced, and we label it "alleged" unless it is documented.

6. CRIB representations - *weight 0.075*

Are any CRIB-related statements to borrowers accurate?

7. Licensing transparency - *weight 0.075*

How clearly does the lender disclose its actual regulatory status?

Status-label method for Phase 3b. The public `not-licensed` data value is rendered as "Not a CBSL-licensed finance company" / "not on the CBSL register". It means only that the disclosed operator was not found on CBSL's Licensed Finance Companies list dated 27.05.2026 or Registered Finance Leasing Establishments list dated 10.06.2026 when searched by entity name and available registration number on 2026-06-22. It is not a legal conclusion that the lender is operating illegally. There remains an unresolved legal grey area about whether every app-based lender in this research set is required to hold one of those CBSL licences.

---

How the overall score is calculated

Each dimension's 0-4 score is converted to a fraction of its maximum, multiplied by its weight, and summed, then expressed out of 100:

overall = Σ ( (dimension_score / 4) × dimension_weight ) × 100

Because the weights sum to 1, a lender that scored 4 on every dimension would reach 100, and one scoring 0 across the board would reach 0. The figure is rounded for display; the unrounded value is used for ranking in the comparison table.

Score bands (shown next to the number for quick reading):

---

Confidence labels

Every underlying fact - and therefore every score and finding - carries one of three labels:

• Confirmed - taken directly from a primary source we hold, such as a loan agreement, or from the lender's own published material or the regulator's own register.
• Reported - established by credible journalism or research, cited to its source. Not yet independently confirmed by us.
• Alleged - contested or not established; presented as an allegation, not a fact.

A score may rely on confirmed evidence outright. Where it leans on reported or alleged evidence, that is disclosed, and the score is treated accordingly.

---

Fairness, limits, and right of reply

• Per-criterion, not a global verdict. Each dimension stands alone. We never collapse "scored low on cost transparency" into "this is a scam." We report what we measured.
• Right of reply. Every lender may submit a response, which we publish alongside its profile. If a lender shows that a fact or score is wrong, we correct it and note the change.
• We can be wrong. Apps change their flows and terms; reporting can be incomplete. Scores reflect the evidence available at the date shown and are updated as better evidence arrives.
• Not advice. Scores are information for public education, not legal or financial advice, and not a recommendation to use or avoid any lender.

---

Versioning

This rubric is versioned. When a dimension, test, or weight changes, we record it in the methodology change log and re-run every lender's score under the new version, so all scores on the site always reflect the same, current method. Each lender profile shows the date its evidence was last reviewed.

---

Challenging a score

If you are a lender, a borrower, or a researcher and believe a score or a fact is wrong, use the contact route on the About page. Tell us the specific dimension and the evidence you rely on. Where the evidence supports it, we will correct the score and publish a note of the change. We would rather be accurate than be first.