Homunity Review - A Real AMF Licence, a Tikehau Parent, and a Default Line That Still Reads Zero

French real-estate crowdfunding platform, live since 2014, wholly owned by the listed asset manager Tikehau Capital, and holding a genuine Crowdfunding Service Provider authorisation from the AMF, the French markets regulator. It publishes one of the more granular performance tables in Europe, broken down year by year. That table is also where the problem sits. Of 667 projects ever financed, 175 are either more than six months late or inside insolvency proceedings, together carrying EUR 309M of unpaid capital. The line labelled definitive loss still reads zero.

What is Homunity in 60 seconds

Homunity connects retail investors with French property developers. A developer needs the last slice of funding for a building project, and the platform lets individuals lend it through bonds, which are debt instruments paying a fixed coupon. The bonds are issued by a single-purpose vehicle set up for each deal, and repayment is bullet, meaning you get nothing at all until the end, then capital and all accrued interest in one payment, usually 12 to 24 months later. The minimum ticket is EUR 1,000 and there is no way out before maturity, since the platform has no secondary market. Homunity is authorised by the AMF under the EU crowdfunding regulation and is owned by Tikehau Capital, a listed asset manager. Neither the licence nor the parent covers you if a developer fails to repay.

Strengths

• A real, verifiable licence, with the exact scope stated. Homunity appears on the AMF white list of Crowdfunding Service Providers under licence number FP-2023-31, granted 9 November 2023, one day before the old French CIP regime was abolished. The register records the authorised activity precisely: placing without firm commitment of transferable securities plus reception and transmission of client orders, in bonds. That wording matters. Placing without firm commitment means Homunity does not underwrite the issues and does not take the credit risk itself. The licence is passported into eight other member states, and the platform is absent from the AMF’s list of providers whose authorisation has been withdrawn. We found no AMF sanction, warning or blacklist entry.

• A genuinely granular public performance table, broken down by vintage. Homunity publishes a year-by-year table from 2016 onwards showing, for each vintage, the number of projects, nominal financed, capital repaid, projects fully repaid, projects late by nought to six months, projects late by more than six months, projects in insolvency proceedings, the weighted average coupon, and an internal rate of return calculated net of risk. Many French competitors publish far less. Fundimmo puts its data in an image-based PDF, WiSEED’s page did not render at all when we checked, and Baltis publishes nothing. This is real disclosure, and it is the reason the rest of this review can be specific.

• A large, listed parent that keeps the operator solvent. Tikehau Capital’s 2025 Universal Registration Document, published 19 March 2026, lists Homunity as a fully consolidated 100% subsidiary held through Homming SAS, and reports EUR 507M of assets under management on the Homunity business line at 31 December 2025. That matters for continuity: workouts on 175 troubled projects take years, and a platform with a listed parent behind it is less likely to disappear mid-recovery than a bootstrapped competitor. Two French platforms, Koregraf and WeShareBonds, ceased activity during 2025.

• No fees to investors, stated plainly. Homunity charges investors nothing on entry, exit or management, and says so in its FAQ. Its commissions come from developers. Cash awaiting investment is held at Lemonway, a licensed payment institution, which protects uninvested balances even though it does nothing for money already lent.

• It does sometimes litigate on investors’ behalf. In September 2025 the Lyon court granted Homunity and one of its issuing vehicles full repayment of a EUR 1.52M note plus penalties against a defaulting developer. On at least one 2026 project the platform refused an operator’s request for an extension and sued instead. This is evidence that the recovery mandate investors sign is occasionally used.

Things to Watch

• Zero defaults is a definition, not an outcome. Homunity’s table shows 0 projects and EUR 0 under “Perte definitive (Defaut)” for every year since 2016. It reaches that number by recognising a loss only once a court has finally determined it. Everything short of that sits in the late or insolvency buckets indefinitely. As of the 10 July 2026 data, that is 175 projects and roughly EUR 309M of unpaid capital, which is about 36% of everything the platform has ever financed. The clearest illustration is the developer Axone Promotion, renamed ENVI, put into judicial liquidation in June 2024 with around EUR 6.45M borrowed through Homunity. In a January 2025 reply to an investor circulated on an investor forum, the platform wrote that most of the guarantors were insolvent and that the project was not yet considered a loss. On our reading, the zero is accurate under Homunity’s own definition and misleading as a risk signal, and no investor should read it as a track record.

• On the platform’s own numbers, most of the live book is impaired. Of the EUR 469.6M still outstanding, EUR 103.9M is on projects still in their funding or normal repayment window. The remaining EUR 365.7M, close to 78%, is late by up to six months, late by more than six months, or in insolvency. On the nominal ever financed, more than six months late is 25.2% and insolvency proceedings are 10.6%. The 2022 vintage is the worst: 68 of 113 projects are late beyond six months or insolvent, and the return net of risk for that year is 3.04% against a contractual coupon of 8.46%. The 2023 vintage is close behind. Investors who joined between 2021 and 2023 are the ones carrying this.

• The table has no category for renegotiated deadlines, and its peers do. ClubFunding, working to the same French sector reporting framework, publishes a separate bucket for projects running on modified schedules and puts 146 projects and EUR 218.9M in it. Homunity’s table jumps straight from “in progress” to “late by nought to six months” with nothing in between. Several French review sites have argued for years that extensions signed with developers are not being counted as delays. We are flagging the absence of the category rather than asserting we know where those projects sit, and it is a fair question to put to the platform. Homunity also books no provision line at all, where a comparable competitor, Raizers, discloses EUR 33.9M of provisions and losses alongside its own zero.

• Restructurings are wiping out returns, not trimming them. In August 2026 bondholders on projects backed by the developer Coffim were asked to vote on terms that, per the platform’s own letters as published by two investors on public forums, repay 15% of capital and cancel the rest of the capital together with all interest, accrued and future, in exchange for an uncertain claim capped at half the original capital. Homunity’s own wording in that letter was that if accepted, the investment will produce no return and only 15% of capital will come back. Separate correspondence describes a 95% haircut discussed at a May 2025 webinar on another developer’s programmes. These are reported through forums rather than obtained by us directly, so treat them as reported. They are consistent with the direction of the published table.

• Investor sentiment is the weakest in its peer group, and part of that is structural. Trustpilot showed 2.1 out of 5 on 343 reviews when we read it on 1 September 2026, with 61% at one star, against ClubFunding at 3.7, Raizers at 3.6 and Anaxago at 3.3. The reviews are unprompted, so the sample skews to the aggrieved, and at least two entries on the first page are off-topic recovery-scam spam. But the substantive French complaints are specific, name real projects and repeat the same pattern: maturities extended six months at a time rather than a default being declared, and portfolios where most positions are impaired rather than one or two. Note also that Homunity’s terms concentrate the recovery mandate in the platform’s own hands, and that its FAQ warns investors may be asked to vote on bearing litigation and recovery costs.

How It Works

1. Open an account and pass identity checks. Registration is free and includes KYC, the identity verification that anti-money-laundering rules require. Under the EU crowdfunding regulation, non-sophisticated investors also go through an entry knowledge test and a simulation of ability to bear loss.
2. Fund your wallet by bank transfer. Cash is held at Lemonway, a licensed payment institution, until you commit it to a project.
3. Pick a project. Each listing names the developer, the building, the coupon, the term, the security package and the risks. Security is developer-level and per project: a guarantee from the developer’s own holding company, a personal guarantee from its director, a mortgage that is often second-ranking behind a bank, or a pledge over the vehicle’s shares.
4. Invest at least EUR 1,000, or EUR 2,000 on some deals, in the bonds of the vehicle set up for that project. Spreading across many projects is the only diversification available to you.
5. Wait for maturity. Nothing is paid until the end, when capital and interest arrive together. There is no secondary market and no early exit, so treat the money as locked. Extensions of typically up to six months are contractually possible, and in the current market they are common.

Who Homunity Is For

Homunity fits an experienced French-resident investor who already understands property development risk, who can put at least EUR 15,000 to EUR 20,000 to work in order to hold fifteen or twenty separate EUR 1,000 tickets, and who wants a platform that publishes enough detail to be argued with. The vintage table, the licence and the Tikehau parent are all real, and the platform is unlikely to vanish while workouts run. If you are going to take French real-estate crowdfunding risk at all, taking it somewhere that shows you its worst year in a public table is a defensible choice.

It is a poor fit for beginners, for anyone who cannot lock money for several years rather than the advertised two, and for anyone who needs the option to sell. It is a particularly poor fit for anyone reading the zero on the default line as evidence of a clean record. It is also not a diversifier: every project is the same bet on French property developers surviving the same market, so a portfolio of thirty Homunity deals is one risk held thirty times.

Compared to Alternatives

Homunity vs. Maclear. Different products and different regulatory frames, and neither is straightforwardly safer. Homunity holds a full AMF authorisation under the EU crowdfunding regulation, with the AMF supervising the platform directly. Maclear operates under Swiss self-regulatory organisation membership, which covers anti-money-laundering obligations only and is not investment-firm supervision, and it carries no investor compensation scheme. On that axis Homunity is clearly ahead. On outcomes the comparison reverses: Maclear lends across several European countries against SME collateral at coupons around 14%, while Homunity is a single-country, single-sector book where roughly 36% of everything ever lent is currently late beyond six months or in insolvency. Maclear’s own recovery process has not been tested at scale, so its clean record is short rather than proven. The honest summary is stronger supervision at Homunity, less concentrated exposure at Maclear.

Homunity vs. Mintos. These barely compete. Mintos is a Latvian marketplace supervised under MiFID II, the EU’s investment-firm regime, with an investor compensation scheme of up to EUR 20,000 covering platform failure or misappropriation of client money, a working secondary market, a EUR 50 minimum and dozens of independent loan originators. Yields are lower, typically 8% to 11%. Homunity has no compensation scheme, no secondary market, a EUR 1,000 minimum and one sector. For an investor who wants liquidity, diversification and a regulatory backstop, Mintos is not a close call. Homunity’s case is that its bonds are secured against real buildings, which Mintos consumer loans are not, and that its coupons are higher. On the 2022 and 2023 vintages that security has not translated into repayment.

Homunity vs. ClubFunding. The closest peer: same country, same product, same AMF licence type, both publishing granular tables. ClubFunding is roughly twice the size at EUR 1.92bn financed, has repaid 54% of capital against Homunity’s 46%, and reports one small definitive loss rather than none, which is a marginally more honest position. It also publishes a bucket for renegotiated deadlines that Homunity does not, and its Trustpilot score is 3.7 against 2.1. Neither book is healthy: on ClubFunding’s own 31 August 2026 figures only about 22% of outstanding capital is still on its original schedule, and the equivalent Homunity number is also about 22%. Both are the same French property cycle seen through two tables. ClubFunding is ahead on disclosure completeness and sentiment, Homunity is ahead on having a listed parent behind the operator.

Bottom line on competitors. Homunity is neither the worst-disclosing nor the best-performing French platform. It sits in the transparent half on format and the stressed end on substance, and the sector-wide context is unforgiving: the 2025 Forvis Mazars and France FinTech barometer, published in March 2026, found 25% to 30% of French real-estate crowdfunding projects more than six months late and 20% to 25% in insolvency proceedings, and concluded that one project in two shows significant difficulties.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Homunity regulated? Yes. It holds Crowdfunding Service Provider authorisation FP-2023-31 from the AMF, granted 9 November 2023 under Regulation (EU) 2020/1503, and appears on the AMF’s public white list. The authorisation covers placing bonds without firm commitment and transmitting client orders. It does not make the AMF responsible for whether a developer repays you, and there is no investor compensation scheme covering credit losses.

Does Tikehau Capital guarantee my money? No. Tikehau Capital owns Homunity outright, which supports the platform’s continuity as a business, but it does not stand behind individual project bonds and has never said it does. Homunity’s own FAQ states that the coupon is contractual and is not guaranteed by a bank or an insurer, and that if the developer fails, payment of interest can be compromised. Your counterparty is the property developer, not the platform and not its parent.

Why does Homunity report zero defaults when so many projects are late? Because it recognises loss only when a loss has been finally established by a court. Projects that are years late, or whose developer is in insolvency proceedings, stay in the late and insolvency buckets and never reach the default line until the proceedings close. On the 10 July 2026 data that is 175 projects carrying about EUR 309M. The zero is correct under that definition and should not be read as a track record.

What is the minimum investment? EUR 1,000 per project, rising to EUR 2,000 on some projects, per the platform’s own FAQ. There is no cheaper entry point into its crowdfunding product. Because meaningful diversification means fifteen or twenty separate tickets, the practical starting capital is considerably higher than the headline minimum.

Can I sell before maturity? No. Homunity states its own illiquidity plainly: no secondary market and no early exit. Repayment is bullet, so nothing arrives until the end, and contracts typically allow the developer to extend, often by up to six months. In the current market those extensions are common.

What does it cost? Nothing to the investor. There are no entry, exit or management fees, and Homunity is paid by the developers. One caveat from its own FAQ: where a project runs into difficulty, investors can be asked to vote on bearing the costs of litigation or recovery.

Bottom Line

Homunity gets the institutional layer right. The AMF licence is real and verifiable, the parent is a listed asset manager, the auditor is a recognised firm, and the public statistics table is more detailed than most of its competitors manage. What that table shows is a book under heavy stress: 175 of 667 projects late beyond six months or in insolvency, about 78% of outstanding capital impaired, a return net of risk of 5.80% against a 9.20% average coupon, and restructurings being put to bondholders that cancel interest entirely. The zero on the default line is a definition rather than a result, and the missing category for renegotiated deadlines is a fair question to put to the platform. This is a platform to approach with a small, deliberately sized allocation, spread across many projects, with money you can leave untouched for far longer than the advertised term, and only if you have read the vintage table for yourself.

Affiliate disclosure. CrowdIndex earns a commission when readers sign up to platforms through links on this page. This does not affect our editorial assessment. Homunity’s ranking on CrowdIndex is based on the editorial criteria documented on our Methodology page. We last reviewed this article on September 1, 2026.