Quilo

Name: Quilo
Brand: Quilo

AI Native

Solve C&I, CRE, SMB underwriting and liquidity for credit unions, community banks and emerging debt funds

Est 2021|Valuation $107M|Raised $10.5M

LinkedIn 914|Website|FTEs 30|HQ New York, New York, US

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

LoanStreet vs Quilo (closest match): - LoanStreet has a visible third-party review presence and public-facing adoption claims that buyers can validate independently. Quilo’s public review footprint and third-party validation are limited in the sources accessed for this report. - Quilo differentiates in public materials by emphasizing digital syndication workflows and limited core integration, as well as stating the use of automated decisioning capabilities; these are vendor claims requiring validation. nCino vs Quilo (adjacent): - nCino is a broad cloud banking platform; Quilo’s public materials focus more narrowly on participations and syndication workflows. Buyers focused on core transformation or broad LOS replacement may compare alternatives such as nCino. Sources: - Third-party review and analyst product pages (LoanStreet) - Official vendor product and feature pages (Quilo) - Company background and encyclopedic summaries (nCino)

Market share and adoption trends

Reliable, public market-share data specific to Quilo was not identified.
LoanStreet’s public materials include adoption claims that are visible on third-party pages; such vendor-provided figures should be validated independently.

Source:

Third-party review and analyst product pages (LoanStreet)

	Quilo	LoanStreet	nCino
Starting Price	Not publicly listed (demo / trial-driven)	Not clearly public; subscription-based pricing varies by institution and features	Typically enterprise pricing; not transparently listed publicly
Best For	Community FIs seeking digital loan participations and platform support for syndication workflows	Lenders seeking a mature loan participation marketplace/network and tooling	Banks/CUs needing a broad end-to-end cloud banking/lending platform
Key Strength	Emphasis on digital loan participations and a stated goal of being core-independent; vendor describes audit logging and oversight features	Market positioning around loan participation with visible third-party review presence	Broad platform maturity and larger vendor ecosystem
Key Weakness	Limited public third-party reviews and limited publicly documented security attestations; network depth and liquidity metrics not evidenced publicly	Pricing transparency limited; different vendor focus areas	Typically larger implementation scope and cost; not specialized for participations

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

LoanStreet vs Quilo (closest match):

LoanStreet has a visible third-party review presence and public-facing adoption claims that buyers can validate independently. Quilo’s public review footprint and third-party validation are limited in the sources accessed for this report.
Quilo differentiates in public materials by emphasizing digital syndication workflows and limited core integration, as well as stating the use of automated decisioning capabilities; these are vendor claims requiring validation.

nCino vs Quilo (adjacent):

nCino is a broad cloud banking platform; Quilo’s public materials focus more narrowly on participations and syndication workflows. Buyers focused on core transformation or broad LOS replacement may compare alternatives such as nCino.

Sources:

Third-party review and analyst product pages (LoanStreet)
Official vendor product and feature pages (Quilo)
Company background and encyclopedic summaries (nCino)

Market share and adoption trends

Reliable, public market-share data specific to Quilo was not identified.
LoanStreet’s public materials include adoption claims that are visible on third-party pages; such vendor-provided figures should be validated independently.

Source:

Third-party review and analyst product pages (LoanStreet)

	Quilo	LoanStreet	nCino
Starting Price	Not publicly listed (demo / trial-driven)	Not clearly public; subscription-based pricing varies by institution and features	Typically enterprise pricing; not transparently listed publicly
Best For	Community FIs seeking digital loan participations and platform support for syndication workflows	Lenders seeking a mature loan participation marketplace/network and tooling	Banks/CUs needing a broad end-to-end cloud banking/lending platform
Key Strength	Emphasis on digital loan participations and a stated goal of being core-independent; vendor describes audit logging and oversight features	Market positioning around loan participation with visible third-party review presence	Broad platform maturity and larger vendor ecosystem
Key Weakness	Limited public third-party reviews and limited publicly documented security attestations; network depth and liquidity metrics not evidenced publicly	Pricing transparency limited; different vendor focus areas	Typically larger implementation scope and cost; not specialized for participations

Quilo

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Market share and adoption trends

02Market Map

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Market share and adoption trends

02Market Map