Why Savings Plan Logic Doesn't Work for Loans

The new auto-invest system feels like a step backward, and I think it's worth explaining why.

The core issue is a product-market fit mismatch: savings plans make sense for equities, where you deploy capital once and let it compound. Loans are fundamentally different — they amortize. Principal and interest return continuously, so reinvestment isn't a one-time event but an ongoing operational requirement. Applying a brokerage-style savings plan to a loan portfolio creates structural cash drag by design.

The weekly reinvestment interval is the most obvious symptom, and the logic is simple: the plan deploys a fixed amount on a fixed schedule, nothing more. So any cash returned between cycles sits uninvested. The more productive your portfolio — the more interest and principal coming back — the larger that idle surplus grows. You're essentially penalized for having a well-performing portfolio.

With the old priority-based system, idle funds were reallocated automatically and continuously. That matched how loans actually behave.

For the record, the old system had real shortcomings too: the hard portfolio size cap was arbitrary (why not allow an uncapped allocation?), and the inability to route interest payments directly to a linked bank account was a meaningful quality-of-life gap. Both are worth fixing.

But the solution shouldn't be to replace a system built around the mechanics of lending with one borrowed from equity investing. I'd strongly encourage Mintos to reconsider — either restore the priority-based logic or build something that actually accounts for the continuous cash flow nature of loan portfolios.