Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Technologies

Microfinance Organizations in Ukraine During the War: Why the Microcredit Market Is Growing While Banks Are Returning Slower

While bank lending recovers slowly, online microfinance organizations like Moneyveo are recording growing demand — and this is not just about convenience, but about a structural gap in financial accessibility.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

May 21, 2026 · 2 min read

Microfinance Organizations in Ukraine During the War: Why the Microcredit Market Is Growing While Banks Are Returning Slower

In the second quarter of 2024, the net hryvnia credit portfolio of businesses in Ukraine grew by 20.5% year-over-year — but these are bank loans for companies. For an ordinary person who needs 5,000 hryvnia until payday or for an urgent purchase, a bank still means an office, paperwork, and waiting in line. This gap is filled by microfinance organizations.

A market that regulators learned to notice

From January 1, 2021, microcredits with a term of up to one month and an amount of up to one minimum salary fall under the Consumer Credit Law. It is prohibited to increase the rate in case of default, and fines and penalties are limited. This changed market logic: those who build repeat customer flow survive, rather than those who profit from debt traps.

Moneyveo received the award Best digital lending company at the Ukrainian FinTech Awards in 2024 and Best MFO Online at FinAwards — both awards reflect not only marketing activity, but also that the industry already has its own quality assessment standards.

Why automated decision-making beats manual processes

Traditional bank underwriting — a credit manager, paper application, call to the employer — is designed for a stable peaceful environment. Online scoring uses different signals: behavioral data, BankID, digital footprint. No employment certificates needed — and this is crucial for millions of Ukrainians whose employer evacuated, changed ownership, or ceased operations due to the war.

"The Moneyveo team is always focused on helping people and cooperating with clients"

— Moneyveo CEO, according to RBC Ukraine

This is corporate rhetoric. But behind it is real mechanics: the average MFO rate can reach up to 2% per day — and a customer taking a loan for 7 days pays differently than one taking it for a month. The transparency of specific product terms remains the main criterion for an informed borrower.

24/7 availability: convenience or vulnerability?

The ability to get money at night or on weekends — a real advantage for someone in an emergency. At the same time, this very accessibility lowers the barrier to impulsive decisions. The market knows this: the most responsible players build pauses and confirmations into their UX — not from altruism, but because a repeat customer without a debt spiral is more profitable than a one-time borrower in default.

  • BankID identification — reduces fraud risk, but does not eliminate it completely if a bank account is compromised.
  • Data sharing with third parties — is regulated by contract and law, but the user should read the terms rather than just clicking "agree".
  • Cashback and loyalty programs — reduce the real cost of credit for a disciplined borrower, but do not change the base rate.

What's next

The MFO market in Ukraine is maturing: there is regulation, there are industry awards, there is competition for service quality. But the key question is not how quickly you can get money — but whether the NBU will be able to introduce a unified credit obligation register for MFOs, which would prevent situations where one person borrows from ten services at the same time. If such a register becomes fully operational — the market will gain a tool for real borrower protection, not just declarative protection.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026