StructureInvestors buy shares in SPVs that own UK residential/commercial property (minimum £100). Fixed-term rental agreements (2–5 years) provide predictable yields distributed monthly to investors' e-wallets; capital and any uplift return on sale; a secondary market offers (non-guaranteed) liquidity. Parent Sama Group is described as a Shariah-compliant commercial real-estate developer.
The UK's first FCA-regulated Islamic fintech and first UKIFC-certified fintech — an equity property crowdfunding platform where investors buy shares in an SPV owning a specific UK property and receive rental income as dividends. Structurally sound (no riba, no debt), but it is a passive INVESTMENT from £100, not a way to buy a home to live in, and it is a high-risk product where capital can be lost. Now part of Sama Group; the certifying UKIFC scholars are not individually named.
Read the contract →Provider white papers, FAQs or fatāwā were read, but the executed contract itself is not public. This rates our certainty, not the provider’s compliance.
Established & regulatory standing
The verifiable facts
Established
Founded April 2016 (Irfan Khan); now part of Sama Group / Sama Investments.
Regulatory standing
Directly authorised and regulated by the FCA (Firm Reference 745636). The FCA classes this as a high-risk investment; FSCS does not cover poor investment performance, so protection is limited.
Shariah board
Who certifies it
Certified Shariah-compliant by the UK Islamic Finance Council (UKIFC) — the first UK fintech to receive UKIFC certification (Feb 2021, after a two-year review), with annual UKIFC audits. Individual certifying scholars are not publicly named.
A named, credentialled board is a real signal — but a provider’s own board certifying its own product is not the same as arm’s-length review. Weigh it alongside the independent commentary below.
Independent scholarly review
What independent scholars have said
The annual UKIFC Shariah audit is the primary independent mechanism; UKIFC is a credible, independent UK standards body.
Independent commentary is weighed, not treated as a final personal ruling. A body that rules one way is one respected voice, not a universal consensus — and rulings can lag changes to a live contract.
How the structure works
The mechanics, in principle
Investors buy shares in SPVs that own UK residential/commercial property (minimum £100). Fixed-term rental agreements (2–5 years) provide predictable yields distributed monthly to investors' e-wallets; capital and any uplift return on sale; a secondary market offers (non-guaranteed) liquidity. Parent Sama Group is described as a Shariah-compliant commercial real-estate developer.
This describes the structure in principle — it is not a verdict on the executed contract. Note too that FCA/PRA regulation guarantees consumer protection and solvency oversight, not Shariah-compliance; the checklist below is what tests the fiqh.
From the public documents
How the contract actually works
Read from Yielders’s own public materials — white papers, product pages, FAQs and fatāwā — not its executed contract, which is generally not published. Where a point is undisclosed, it is said plainly rather than guessed. Sources are listed below.
The equity SPV model aligns with Islamic principles — genuine co-ownership of a real asset, no interest, no conventional debt — and the FCA's FSCS warning reflects ordinary equity-investment risk, not a Shariah defect. Risk disclosures (capital loss, illiquidity, dilution from superior-rights share issuance) are appropriately detailed. UKIFC certification gives annual external assurance, but the certifying scholars are not individually named, so accountability is institutional rather than scholar-specific; reviews under Sama Group ownership are mixed on service. No full SPV subscription agreement is public for pre-signing review, and the Shariah-governance structure under the new group ownership is not clearly documented.
The Six-Pillar test
The questions that decide it
This is the universal lens this site applies to every home-finance contract, anywhere. Read each pillar as a question to put to Yielders’s executed contract — not its brochure.
- 1
Real ownership
Does the financier genuinely take ownership of the asset — even briefly — and bear a real owner's risk, rather than only ever holding a debt secured against it?
- 2
Risk-sharing
If the asset is destroyed or its value collapses, does the financier share that loss in proportion to its stake, or is the customer left bearing it alone?
- 3
Rent vs interest
In a lease/co-ownership, is the rent benchmarked to a genuine market rent for the property — or is it calibrated to an interest rate (a base-rate + margin) in disguise?
- 4
Default mechanism
On default, does the contract behave like the end of a real lease/partnership — or does it accelerate like a loan, demanding the full outstanding 'principal' plus charges?
- 5
No guaranteed pre-fixed return
Is the financier's return tied to real ownership and risk, or is it a pre-fixed, guaranteed sum that arrives regardless of what happens to the asset?
- 6
Substance over form
Strip away the Arabic labels: does the cashflow, risk, and outcome differ from a conventional loan — or is it the same economics wearing a compliant name (ḥiyal)?
Before you sign
What to ask Yielders, in writing
Put these to the provider in writing and keep the answers. The reply — not the marketing — is what tells you whether the structure holds.
This is an investment, not home finance — confirm you understand you cannot buy a home to live in with it.
What happens if a property is not sold within the projected timeframe?
Can superior-rights shares be issued in the SPV that dilute me, and under what circumstances?
Is there an active secondary market for my shares, and what liquidity/spreads apply?
Has the specific SPV/property I'm investing in received its own UKIFC review, or only the platform framework?
The honest gap
What we have not verified
- The certifying UKIFC scholars are not publicly named.
- Operational performance and Shariah governance under Sama Group ownership are not clearly documented.
- Customer reviews report mixed service/communication.
The reasoning
Why this verdict, and not another
A verdict is only as honest as the reasoning behind it. Here is why Yielders sits where it does — what keeps it off a clean pass, and what keeps it off an outright avoid.
Not a clean pass because
Not a home-finance product, a high-risk investment with potential total capital loss, disclosed dilution risk, unnamed certifying scholars, and mixed service reviews.
Not an outright avoid because
The UK's first FCA-regulated Islamic fintech with a credible annual UKIFC audit, a structurally sound equity-only model, a £100 minimum for accessibility, and certification after a rigorous two-year review.
Sources
What this read is built on
The verifiable references behind this page — provider documents and independent scholarly resolutions. Read them yourself; do not take our summary on trust.