Private lender vs bank: how to choose

The question isn't really "which is better" - a bank and a private lender are built to solve different problems, and most borrowers who end up choosing wrong picked based on rate alone, without weighing the thing rate can't buy: certainty within a timeframe.

What each is actually built for

• Banks: lower headline rates, longer terms, but a full serviceability assessment and a credit approval process measured in weeks
• Private lenders: faster decisions and assessment based on security and exit, priced higher to reflect that speed and flexibility
• Banks generally want two years of financials and a clean, straightforward file
• Private lenders can work with self-declared income, a tight timeline, or a scenario a bank has already declined

Where a private lender is the right call

A private lender like Alphacon makes sense when timing is the binding constraint - a settlement date that won't move, a bank decline on a fundamentally sound deal, or income that's real but not yet reflected in two years of tax returns. Alphacon assesses on the security and a credible exit, not a credit score test, and issues indicative terms the same day.

Where a bank still wins

If the deal isn't time-pressured and the borrower's income is straightforward and well-documented, a bank's lower rate and longer term will usually be cheaper over the life of the loan. Private lending is a purpose-built tool for a specific set of scenarios, not a general substitute for a standard mortgage.

The right question isn't which lender is cheaper in isolation. It's which one can actually get the deal done inside the time available.

Alphacon lends to companies and trusts for genuine commercial and investment purposes only - this isn't consumer credit, and Alphacon doesn't hold an Australian Credit Licence. For the right deal, that trade-off between rate and speed is exactly what makes the numbers work.