Why we rank by total cost, not headline APR
Headline APR is what most comparison sites lead with, and it is also the number that hides the most. A subscription-based cash-advance app can advertise 0% APR while charging you $9.99 a month. A tip-based app can advertise 0% APR while collecting an "optional" tip three out of four times the UI prompts for it. A short-window app can charge $5 on a $100, 7-day advance and look almost free in dollars while the annualized rate runs over 260%.
So we do not rank by APR alone. We rank by the real total cost of borrowing $500 over a typical repayment window, because that is closer to what readers actually do with these products than a single headline rate. Total cost is a sum of every charge a real borrower would actually pay on that hypothetical borrow.
What goes into total cost
The line items we add up for every product, in the order they appear on a typical loan agreement:
- Disclosed APR (or derived APR from the lender's fee structure where the lender will not publish a number).
- Monthly subscription fees, prorated over the repayment window. A $9.99 subscription on a 14-day borrow contributes about $4.66 to that one transaction.
- Lightning / Express / Turbo / instant-transfer fees, where the standard ACH option is slower than 24 hours. We assume readers want the money in hours, not days, because that is the borrower behavior the apps are designed for.
- Default tip amounts on tip-model apps. We use the in-app default value, not $0, because the California DFPI's 2021 study showed 73% of users tip when the UI prompts them. "Optional" is a legal claim, not a behavioral one.
- Origination fees deducted from proceeds, where applicable. A 5% origination on a $500 advance means you receive $475 but owe back $500 plus interest. We count the missing $25.
Once those line items are summed, we annualize: (total fees / advance amount) x (365 / repayment days) x 100. That number is the apples-to-apples cost-of-borrow we rank against.
The three editorial adjustments
Cost is not the only signal that matters. After the cost-adjusted ranking is built, we apply three adjustments that move products up or down the list when the raw cost numbers are close.
- State availability. An app ranked second in one state may be ranked fifth nationally if it is only live in a handful of states. We weight in favor of apps that operate broadly across the United States, so the ranking holds for a reader in any zip code, not just the lender's preferred ones.
- Underwriting transparency. Where a lender will not publicly disclose an APR range, we flag it on the product card and adjust rank down. A product that hides its pricing until you submit personal information is, by our editorial position, less rankable than one that shows the math up front.
- Consumer-complaint history. Where the CFPB, FTC, or a multi-state attorneys-general action is currently active or recently settled, we flag it on the card and adjust rank accordingly. We do not treat a settled enforcement action as disqualifying, but we do treat an active one as a signal worth surfacing.
Each adjustment is a defined number of rank positions, not a vibe. A product can move up to three positions in either direction based on the three adjustments combined. Anything bigger than that and the underlying cost ranking should change, not the adjustment.
What we will not do
Three things this site refuses to do, restated here because the methodology depends on them.
- We do not trade rank for payment. Affiliate relationships are noted in the disclaimer; they do not change rank. If a partner asked us to move a product up in exchange for a higher referral rate, we would say no and write about being asked. That has not happened.
- We do not list web-only lenders. Every product in the ranking has a verified iOS or Google Play listing. If you cannot install the app from a real store, it does not belong on the list.
- We do not borrow other sites' rankings. Every position in our top-10 is derived from the inputs above. Where another publisher arrived at a different conclusion, we do not adjust toward consensus.
What we exclude
The roster is not exhaustive on purpose. Specific exclusions, with the reason in plain language:
- Web-only lenders. No iOS or Google Play listing means the user can be trapped in a sideload flow that bypasses the App Store and Play Store 36% APR ceilings.
- Employer-gated B2B earned-wage-access apps like Payactiv, DailyPay, and Branch. Excellent products, often the cheapest borrow available to a US worker, but the reader cannot sign up; the reader's employer has to.
- Apps with unresolved major enforcement matters. Dave is currently excluded for this reason while the CFPB and FTC matter is unresolved.
- Apps with insufficient install base to meaningfully evaluate. Under 25,000 reviews across the App Store and Google Play does not give us enough signal on real-world borrower experience.
- Apps that do not operate in the United States. The site is US-focused. We do not list lenders licensed only in other jurisdictions.
How often we refresh
Monthly at minimum. Faster when an app materially changes its pricing, state availability, or underwriting. The "Updated" stamp in the page hero on the comparison page reflects the most recent refresh. If a major regulatory development drops between refresh cycles (a new CFPB advisory opinion, a state EWA registration deadline, a CABs licensing change in Texas), we update the affected products immediately and note the date on each card.
Refresh also means re-checking inputs we already published. APRs drift. Subscription tiers split or consolidate. Apps add or drop states. We re-pull the in-app disclosure on a sample of borrows each month to confirm what we listed is still what the lender is charging today.
Where the data comes from
We rely on three categories of source, in this order:
- The lender's own published disclosures. The in-app loan-agreement screen, the public pricing page, and any state-specific disclosure required by a regulator. These are primary.
- Federal and state regulator filings. CFPB advisory opinions and consent orders, FTC actions, state attorney general settlements, NMLS Consumer Access license records, state department of financial protection registries (California DFPI, New York DFS, Texas OCCC, etc.).
- Independent secondary research. National Consumer Law Center reports, Consumer Federation of America comment letters, peer-reviewed academic work on small-dollar lending, and reporting from established financial publications.
We do not source rankings from competitor comparison sites. If we see a number that is materially different from what we would compute, we go back to the primary source and check both.
What you should do with this
Use the ranking as a starting list, not a final answer. Three borrower-side checks we recommend before you tap "agree" on any product on the list:
- Verify the lender in NMLS Consumer Access (nmlsconsumeraccess.org) for your state.
- Read the state-specific disclosure screen inside the app at the final loan-agreement page, not the marketing page.
- Run the math on your specific borrow with the formula above. Our cost is a $500-borrow normalization. Your numbers will differ if you borrow a different amount or repay on a different timeline.
Questions about the methodology, or a number on the comparison page that does not match what you see in an app today? Tell us through the contact form. Confirmed corrections get a dated note on the affected card and an entry in the next monthly refresh.