SMBX vs Worthy Bonds 2026: Two $10 Bonds, Only One Has a Maturity Date

Short answer

The two products look identical from the outside: a $10 bond, a fixed rate in the high single digits, no investor fee, an app, and a pitch about funding real businesses. They are built on different securities laws and the difference is the whole comparison. SMBX is a Regulation Crowdfunding funding portal. Each bond is a direct obligation of the named business, filed on that business's own Form C with a prospectus showing its revenue, net income and existing debts; it has a fixed term, repays principal and interest monthly from the first month, and when it is gone, it is gone. Worthy is a Regulation A direct issuer. Each bond is an unsecured, full and unconditional obligation of a single-purpose Worthy subsidiary, which pools the money into loans through affiliated Worthy Lending entities; the bond has no maturity, and the issuer redeems it when you ask, 'as loan collections and other asset liquidation permits'. On SMBX you are lending to a bakery. On Worthy you are lending to a lender.

Short answer

On SMBX, a borrower that stops paying stops paying you, and only you and the other holders of that bond. SMBX halts distributions at 30 days delinquent, works with the business to cure, and for unsecured bonds recovers what it can; your other bonds are unaffected by that borrower's default (a platform-level servicing failure is a separate risk). On Worthy, a borrower that stops paying does not touch your bond directly, because you do not hold the loan. It reduces the collections from which the issuer redeems everyone. When enough of Worthy Peer Capital's small-business borrowers defaulted, the issuer 'temporarily delay[ed]' redemptions from August 22, 2022 for every holder still in the program (it had sold to 12,285 investors), not for the ones whose money happened to fund the bad loans, because there is no such thing. Interest kept accruing at 5.5% on paper. Three and a half years of collections and asset sales later, the issuer was dissolved with $7,811,269 unpaid and nothing to distribute. The pooled structure spread the loss to every holder and the no-maturity structure meant no one could force the question earlier.

Short answer

Worthy sold about $262 million of bonds across five programs from 2018. The three earliest, $150 million from 49,022 investors, all stopped redeeming between August 2022 and 2023. By December 31, 2025 they had recorded $127.16 million of redemptions against that $150 million and held $22.79 million that could not be redeemed. On January 30, 2026 Worthy Peer Capital and Worthy Peer Capital II were dissolved with no assets, $12.66 million unpaid between them, and Peer Capital II holders were told to consider their bonds worthless. Worthy Community Bonds still owes $10.13 million, reported no revenue in 2025 and has fully reserved its last $4.2 million loan. The two programs still selling, Property Bonds and Property Bonds 2, carry substantial-doubt going-concern paragraphs, stockholders' deficits of $6.68 million and $4.05 million, and the same redemption-liquidity risk factor that preceded the earlier suspensions. None of this is alleged misconduct: it was disclosed on EDGAR as it occurred, by the issuers themselves.

Short answer

SMBX's record is the inverse shape: visible bond by bond, and incomplete. Its public dashboard returns 222 auctions with amount raised, investors, term, rate and payments made against payments due. AltStreet's reading on September 16, 2026: 211 funded for $21.84 million, all 63 matured bonds showing every scheduled payment made, 147 of 148 repaying bonds within one monthly payment of schedule, 11 failed to reach their minimum. The auction numbers run to 275, so 53 are absent, and the endpoint carries no default, delinquency or write-off field; archived listings recover 48 of the absent auctions, 34 of them SEC-filed offerings, but the pages hold no data. So the two records are not symmetrical. Worthy's losses are disclosed in audited filings; SMBX's, if any, would sit in auction numbers the dashboard does not return. The difference in structure still holds: a borrower credit loss on SMBX, when one is found, is confined to that issuer's bond rather than pooled across unrelated borrowers. A platform-level servicing failure is the separate risk that could touch many SMBX bonds at once.

Short answer

This is where the comparison inverts. The platform with the cleaner structure has nothing for sale: SMBX funded 48 bonds in 2025 and seven in 2026, none since April, its last Form C failed, an August 2026 filing reports another unsuccessful close, and on September 16, 2026 its marketplace was empty, with no statement from the company. The platform with the failed programs is still selling: Worthy Property Bonds and Property Bonds 2 offer 6.5% today, on a site that promises anytime liquidity, from issuers whose auditor expresses substantial doubt about their ability to continue and whose balance sheets show liabilities above assets. The two live questions are different. For SMBX holders it is whether servicing of 148 repaying bonds continues if the portal does not resume, with no backup servicer disclosed. For Worthy holders it is whether the two Property Bonds issuers will honor a redemption request when it is made, a question their own filings decline to answer with a fulfillment rate.

Short answer

SMBX's site makes claims that its own data supports: the 11.5% ceiling, free investing by bank account, and city totals consistent with the dashboard. Its one weak spot is a promise in the investor educational materials that issuers' annual reports 'will be made available within 120 days' of fiscal year-end, when 89 of 106 confirmed-funded older issuers filed neither an annual report nor a termination. Worthy's site makes claims that its own filings contradict, and has since August 2022: bonds 'fully liquid and redeemable at any time without penalties', Worthy Peer Capital and Community Bonds named as current issuers, '$200,000,000 in Bonds Sold' with no mention of the $22.79 million that stopped being redeemable. The filings put sales at about $262 million, so even the headline understates the scale while omitting the losses.

Short answer

If SMBX lists offerings again, it is the better vehicle for a fixed rate at $10: a named borrower whose financials you can read, a term, monthly principal back from the first month, and a borrower credit loss that stays on its own bond. Until then, an investor who wants the same idea today has Honeycomb Credit, at the cost of a 3% fee. Worthy Property Bonds are for nobody who is relying on the liquidity language; they are unsecured paper of an issuer with a going-concern paragraph whose sister programs froze and dissolved, and the only defensible way to hold them is sized for a multi-year freeze after reading the March 2026 1-K. Existing holders of the suspended or dissolved Worthy programs have no platform decision left to make, only a claim to track: Community Bonds' next 1-U for a dissolution or worthlessness statement.