A non-bank lender in Australia is, technically, any lender that isn't authorised under the Banking Act 1959 — i.e. not an ADI (authorised deposit-taking institution) regulated by APRA. In practice, the term covers a wide spectrum: from billion-dollar specialist mortgage lenders that look almost identical to banks operationally, to small private credit firms writing 30 files a month, to fund managers running mortgage income trusts. They all share one thing — funding sources other than retail deposits.
This guide draws a map of the Australian non-bank lending market in 2026, splits it into three working tiers, and explains where each fits. Written for borrowers and the brokers who introduce them — not as a directory, but as a frame for thinking about which kind of non-bank suits a given file.
Why non-bank lending exists
Australian banking regulation is calibrated for retail deposit protection. The capital adequacy, liquidity, and concentration rules APRA imposes on ADIs are necessary for a system that guarantees retail deposits up to $250,000. Those same rules also narrow the lending envelope ADIs can write — particularly for property, where APRA macroprudential settings have repeatedly tightened serviceability buffers and capped investor lending concentration.
Non-bank lenders fund through wholesale debt facilities, institutional mandates, retail mortgage funds, or balance-sheet capital — sources not subject to APRA prudential rules. The tradeoff is that they typically price wider than ADIs, but with more flexibility on credit policy, serviceability, and speed.
Tier 1: Specialist non-banks (Pepper, Liberty, Resimac, La Trobe)
The tier-two non-banks — Pepper Money, Liberty Financial, Resimac, La Trobe Financial, Bluestone, MA Money, Brighten — are institutional-scale mortgage lenders. Most are listed (or subsidiaries of listed groups), funded through securitisation warehouses, RMBS issuance, and wholesale debt. Loan books run into the billions.
Operationally they look almost identical to a bank: branch-style submission portals, defined credit policies, serviceability calculators, automated decisioning. What differs is the credit envelope — they write lower LVR full doc, higher LVR alt doc, self-employed with 12 months trading, near-prime credit, and specialised security types the majors decline. Pricing sits 0.5–2% above equivalent major-bank rates.
When to use: a credible file the majors decline on policy, where the borrower has 6–12 weeks to settle and wants institutional execution.
Tier 2: Private lenders (Archer Wealth, peers)
Private credit lenders sit one tier deeper. Funded through wholesale facilities, mortgage funds, P2P investors, or balance-sheet capital, they write smaller loan books (typically $100m–$3bn under management) but with materially tighter decision loops — same-team underwriting, indicative same-day, settlement in days rather than weeks.
The product set focuses on short-to-medium tenor: 6–36 month first mortgages, bridging, second mortgages, development site acquisition, residual stock — products where speed and flexibility matter more than the lowest rate. Pricing sits 7.85% to 12.5% per annum depending on file profile, LVR, and exit.
When to use: files outside both major-bank and tier-two non-bank envelopes — pre-DA development acquisitions, self-employed with short trading history, complex trading structures, files where the borrower needs to settle in days.
Tier 3: Niche specialists
Beyond the institutional tier-two non-banks and the private credit firms sits a third tier of niche specialists: SMSF lenders, NRAS-specific lenders, construction-only lenders, mortgage trusts targeting specific asset classes (childcare, medical, aged care), and individual private lenders writing one-off files. Some are genuine specialists; some are opportunistic.
The diligence here matters more than at tiers 1 and 2 — credit policy is sometimes informal, funding sources can be thin, and discharge processes vary. The right pattern is to work with niche specialists only when the file genuinely needs the specialisation, and to introduce through a broker who's seen the lender deliver before.
How to compare lenders within a tier
Pricing is the obvious comparison, but it's not where the decision actually lives. Three questions matter more:
- Does indicative equal formal? The cleanest non-bank lenders have the same credit team underwriting indicative and formal. The indicative carries the conditions the formal will lock — no drift between submission and settlement.
- How is the exit underwritten? A 12-month non-bank loan is a refinance problem in 12 months. The difference between a good lender and a bad one is whether the exit is modelled at submission, with the LVR sized to the post-exit value.
- Speed without compromise? Same-day indicative terms from a lender that re-underwrites on formal isn't speed — it's a head fake. Same-day indicative from a lender where the credit team has the file in front of them is real speed.
Regulatory frame
Non-bank lenders aren't APRA-regulated, but they're not unregulated. Consumer credit lending in Australia is regulated under the NCCP Act regardless of who writes it, requiring an Australian Credit Licence (ACL). Wholesale and business-purpose lending sits under the broader Corporations Act regime, requiring an AFSL where investment products are issued. Archer Wealth's lending is conducted under AFSL 548263.
Membership in AFCA (the Australian Financial Complaints Authority) and credit licence holdings are the baseline checks. A non-bank lender that can't produce both is one to avoid.
How files run at Archer
Archer Wealth sits in the private credit tier — 7-product suite, national coverage, broker-channel only, same-team underwriting on indicative and formal. Indicative same-day, indicative equals formal, written across first and second mortgages, bridging, development, commercial, and short-term property-secured liquidity.