Skip to content

Original research · September 2026

The state of Australian broker websites

We measured 54 broker websites that rank on page one of Google against the published MFAA, FBAA and ASIC standards.

To a client, these look the same. What sits behind them does not.

mortgage broker sydney
Broker Abroker-a.com.au

Mortgage Broker Sydney | Home Loans & Refinancing

Privacy policyCredit licence numberBest Interests Duty
Broker Bbroker-b.com.au

Award Winning Mortgage Brokers | Sydney

Privacy policyCredit licence numberBest Interests Duty
Broker Cbroker-c.com.au

Sydney Finance Broker | Home & Investment Loans

Privacy policyCredit licence numberBest Interests Duty
Illustration. Names, URLs and copy are fictional placeholders - no broker in this study is identified.

The finding we did not expect

0%

never mention the Best Interests Duty

Since 2021 a mortgage broker has been legally obliged to act in the client's best interests. A bank branch has no such duty. It is the strongest argument in broking, it costs nothing to say, and five out of six brokers on page one of Google do not say it.

Every square is one broker website ranking on page one

12 clear on every check42 had at least one gap

Where a regulator is involved.

Regulator-facing findings

Rules that bear on a marketing website. We report what a site does or does not publish. We do not allege a breach: we cannot see a broker's licensing position, and much of what the law requires is delivered in a Credit Guide rather than on a website.

Share of the 54 sites missing it

No complaints or dispute resolution process published

0%

34 of 54. ASIC RG 271 requires an accessible internal dispute resolution process. Most sites publish none.

An unsubstantiated superlative in the brokerage's own copy

0%

15 of 54. “The best rates”, “unbeatable”, “the #1 brokerage in the country”. Every hit was read by hand; claims inside client testimonials and claims citing a named award were excluded.

No privacy policy we could find

0%

11 of 54. Privacy Act APP 1.3 requires a clearly expressed policy that is freely available.

Describes itself as independent, impartial or unbiased

0%

7 of 54. NCCP s160B restricts these words for anyone receiving commissions - which is virtually every broker.

Guarantees a lending outcome

0%

1 of 54. One site advertises “Guaranteed loan approval”. Rare, but it is the claim a broker cannot make.

Expected, not required.

What the industry expects to see

None of the below is black-letter website law, and we will not pretend otherwise. It is what MFAA, FBAA and aggregator compliance teams expect a broker's site to show, and what a careful consumer looks for.

Share of the 54 sites missing it

No mention of the Best Interests Duty

0%

46 of 54. The strongest legal advantage a broker has over a bank branch, unmentioned.

No explanation of how the broker is paid

0%

42 of 54. Commission is disclosed in the Credit Guide, but not on the website where trust is won.

No website terms published

0%

38 of 54. An MFAA member template exists for exactly this and is going unused.

AFCA not disclosed

0%

36 of 54. Every broker is an AFCA member. Two thirds do not say so.

No MFAA or FBAA membership shown

0%

34 of 54. Membership is paid for annually and then left off the shopfront.

No ABN visible anywhere

0%

32 of 54. The simplest proof that a real registered business is behind the site.

No credit licence or credit rep number

0%

20 of 54. The number that lets a consumer verify the broker on ASIC Connect.

Credit where it is due.

What the industry has already solved

The technical basics are no longer the problem. Every site in the sample was secure and built for a phone, and the advertising language most people worry about was almost entirely clean.

  • 100%Served over HTTPS
  • 100%Mobile viewport declared
  • 100%No misuse of 'financial adviser', 'planner' or 'financial counsellor'
  • 100%No advertised interest rate on the homepage

One more, and it surprised us: not a single site in the sample advertised an interest rate on its homepage. The comparison-rate rule that dominates broker compliance training had nothing to bite on.

How it was measured.

We searched the way a client searches

No panel, no membership list, no volunteers. We ran the search a person actually runs when they need a broker, and measured the businesses they would actually find.

Ten searches, covering every mainland state, the ACT, Tasmania, and both metro and large-regional markets:

  • mortgage broker sydney
  • mortgage broker melbourne
  • mortgage broker brisbane
  • mortgage broker perth
  • mortgage broker adelaide
  • finance broker gold coast
  • mortgage broker canberra
  • mortgage broker newcastle
  • mortgage broker hobart
  • mortgage broker sunshine coast
These brokers rank on page one. That selects for businesses already investing in their web presence, so this sample skews towards the better end of the market. Every finding should be read as “of brokers who rank on page one”, not “of brokers”. It makes the gaps more striking, not less. 55 sites were sampled and 54 were readable.

The part most studies leave out.

How we avoided fooling ourselves

A study that only reports its findings is asking to be trusted. Here is what went wrong on the way, because it is the reason the numbers above are worth anything.

An early draft reported that not one site in 54 promised a guaranteed outcome. A working broker read it and said brokers muck that wording up all the time, so zero seemed wrong. She was right, and the fault was ours: the check required “guaranteed” to sit immediately before “approval”, so it walked straight past a live site advertising “Guaranteed loan approval - or we'll give you $500 cash for wasting your time”. The same review found two more blind spots: a smart apostrophe defeating every pattern containing one, and a claim of being “the #1 independent mortgage brokerage in the country” that no pattern was looking for. A zero is far more often a broken check than a clean industry.

And us.

We ran the same checks on our own work

Four WeCompound builds went through the identical script. All four were clear on every regulator-facing check, and carried the credit licence number, ABN, AFCA details, industry membership, Best Interests Duty statement and website terms that most of the sample did not.

One of ours failed a check, and it stays in the report

One of the four does not explain how the broker is paid, putting it in the same 78% as everyone else. We found it by running this study, and it is being fixed. A study that exempts its author is marketing, not research.

If you are a broker reading this.

The four that take an afternoon

  1. 01Say that you are bound by the Best Interests Duty, in a sentence a client would understand. It is your best argument and 85% of your competitors are not making it.
  2. 02Publish a privacy policy and link it from the footer of every page. Your association has a member template.
  3. 03Put your credit licence or credit representative number, your ABN and your AFCA membership in the footer.
  4. 04Explain how you are paid. “Lenders pay us a commission, and it does not change what you pay” removes the question every client is too polite to ask.

None of this needs a new website. If you would like your own site measured against the same checks, the audit is here.

Citing this study. WeCompound, The State of Australian Broker Websites 2026, September 2026. n=54 broker websites ranking on page one of Google across ten Australian locations, measured 2 September 2026. Findings describe what sites publish, not any broker's compliance position. Journalists, associations and aggregators are welcome to the underlying method - get in touch.

One more thing.

Ready for a site that pulls its weight?

Custom websites, built by a broker. Smart tools built in. Live in 2 to 5 weeks from sign-off. No discovery-call gatekeeping for pricing - see what you'll pay before you book.