Who publishes a range, and who publishes a floor

Of 27 US rows, 19 publish both ends of a range; of 20 UK rows, 9 do. The rest publish a floor only, a rate only after you apply, or a page my checker could not read, and each group is labeled as such.

How many lenders publish both ends?

Nineteen in the United States and nine in the United Kingdom, on August 25, 2026. The counts come from the dataset behind the provider list (checked 2026-08-25). That dataset was built from each lender's own rates page, and it is the only place these totals are produced.

MarketRowsPublish a rateBoth ends publishedRate only after applying
United States2723193
United Kingdom201793

^ Source: data/dataset.json aggregates (count-US, count-UK), generated by build.py, checked 2026-08-25. One further US row (Reach Financial) could not be read; the UK has none in that state.

The gap between the second and third columns is the floor-only group. In the United States the arithmetic is 23 published minus 19 with both ends. That leaves four pages. Three of the four state a floor and no ceiling (checked 2026-08-25). They are Happy Money at 8.95% APR "with autopay", PenFed Credit Union at 6.09% APR with autopay, and First Tech Federal Credit Union at 6.99% APR (checked 2026-08-25). The fourth, PNC, is the reverse case, a ceiling with no floor: "Your APR will not exceed 25.29%" (checked 2026-08-25). PNC is why the count of computable US lenders is 22 rather than 23. A best case needs a floor.

US: 23 published − 19 both ends = 4 (3 floor only, 1 ceiling only) UK: 17 published − 9 both ends = 8 (all floor only)

In the United Kingdom the same subtraction leaves eight lenders with a representative APR and no stated maximum (checked 2026-08-25). They are M&S Bank, NatWest, Barclays, TSB, Post Office Money, Novuna Personal Finance, Admiral Loans, and Monzo (checked 2026-08-25). All eight are computable at the floor. That is why the UK computable count matches the published count at 17.

What does a floor-only page let you compute?

One case, not two. Take PenFed's page. The published floor of 6.09% APR gives a best case on 10,000 over 36 months (checked 2026-08-25).

$10,000 × 6.09% APR, 36 months $304.63 × 36 months = $10,967

The worst case for PenFed is shown as not computable, because the maximum APR is not stated on the lender's published page (checked 2026-08-25). The page's own example, "24 monthly payments of approximately $445.46" on $10,000 at 6.09% APR, is the same rate at a different term (checked 2026-08-25). It confirms the floor, not the ceiling. You can change the term and amount yourself in the calculator.

A floor-only page in the United Kingdom carries a different meaning, because a UK floor is a representative APR. NatWest's page publishes "Representative 6.9% APR (available on loans between £7,500 and £14,950)" and adds that rates "may differ from the Representative APR" (checked 2026-08-25). At that rate the reference loan comes to £307.36 × 36 months = £11,064.96 (checked 2026-08-25). No worst case exists on this site, because NatWest states no maximum. Representative APR versus APR range explains why that 6.9% is not a lowest rate and what the 51% rule means.

One UK page publishes a range whose two ends are the same number. Metro Bank states a single 7.9% representative APR for all approved customers (checked 2026-08-25). Its best case and worst case on 10,000 over 36 months are therefore the same figure: £311.65 × 36 months = £11,219 (checked 2026-08-25). It is the only lender in either market where the two cases coincide.

Why does a floor-only page sit at the top of a sorted list?

Because the sort key is the best case, and a floor-only lender has nothing to pull it down. On the US 10,000-over-36-months table, PenFed's $10,967 best case sits between Happen's $10,945 and Achieve's $10,993 (checked 2026-08-25). No worst-case figure sits beside it. A reader scanning only the first column sees three lenders close together. The second column is where they part: Achieve's worst case is $16,487, Happen's is $16,481, and PenFed's is blank (checked 2026-08-25).

That blank is the honest state of the page, not a zero. What a personal loan costs sets out why a best case says the least about the loan most applicants receive. The caution applies with more force when the best case is the only figure available.

What are the three reasons a rate can be missing?

The lender does not publish one, my checker could not read it, or it is published in another currency for that market. Method keeps these apart, and this site never mixes them. Only the first is a fact about the lender.

The first group is "shows a rate only after you apply". In the United States that is U.S. Bank, Oportun, and Axos Bank; in the United Kingdom it is Zopa, Sainsbury's Bank, and AA Loans (checked 2026-08-25). Their pages show nothing until an eligibility check runs, or a single worked example that is not a range. Oportun prints an example of "an APR of 35.95%" on a $3,333 loan with a 10% fee, and Axos Bank prints one loan at 8.42% APR (checked 2026-08-25). A single example is a point, not a range, so I do not treat it as one.

The second group is "rate not readable on the published page". There is one such row, Reach Financial. Its personal-loan page served my checker only meta tags and the message "You need to enable JavaScript to run this app" on August 25, 2026 (checked 2026-08-25). That is a limitation of the tool I read pages with. It is labeled as mine, not held against the lender.

The third group, another currency, has zero rows in both markets on this date (checked 2026-08-25). The label exists so that a UK-priced page served to a US checker is never mistaken for a hidden rate.

What I left out, and why

One decision shapes these counts. A lender with per-band maximums but no single ceiling stays in the floor-only group. M&S Bank's rates table lists maximums such as "up to 16.9%" for £7,500 to £25,000 (checked 2026-08-25). I record the band floor of 5.9% and leave the ceiling blank, rather than pick one band's maximum as the page's ceiling (checked 2026-08-25). That is a judgment call, and it is recorded in the dataset notes so you can disagree with it.

Whether a fee is missing or absent is a separate question, counted separately. In the United States nine lenders publish "no fee" wording and eleven publish an origination fee (checked 2026-08-25). In the United Kingdom five publish "no fee" wording and none publishes a percentage fee (checked 2026-08-25). A page that says nothing about a fee is recorded as unconfirmed, not as zero. What a loan marketplace is paid for covers why a lead-based listing has no reason to separate these cases at all.

Where the answer changes

Who this article is not for

If you already hold an offer from a lender, the rate on it is the only rate that matters. Whether that lender publishes a range on its website is no longer your question. This article is for the reader who wants to know why some table rows have two numbers, some have one, and some have none.

Sources

How this article was made. Written by Kaz, an independent publisher. All figures come from the companies' own published documentation or regulator publications; each figure carries the date it was last checked. I have not borrowed from these lenders, nothing here is a personal test result, and nothing here is financial advice. The arithmetic is shown so you can recalculate with your own numbers. Found an error? Use the contact form; corrections are logged on the Editorial policy page.

Related articles

Written by Kaz (pen name). Figures are copied from providers' published pricing pages on the dates shown. We have not used these products. Corrections: contact form.