Some use as the average number followed by PY (per year, I assume). Others express average charges in APR terms. Kiva explains: Although Kiva and its lenders don't charge interest or fees to borrowers, many of Kiva's Field Partners do charge borrowers in some form in order to make possible the long-term sustainability of their operations, reach and impact. For this specific Field Partner, Kiva displays an Annual Percentage Rate (APR), which represents the estimated average cost paid by a borrower to this Field Partner to access a loan posted on Kiva, with that cost annualized and converted into a percentage rate. Currently, Kiva displays APR for most of its Field Partners that aren't microfinance institutions (MFIs), in addition to some that are. Kiva is exploring ways to simplify and standardize the process to collect, calculate, assess and share APR pricing information for more partners. Using tools provided by MicroFinance Transparency, Kiva calculates this APR based on a detailed analysis of the types of loans this Field Partner has posted and/or plans to post on Kiva. I was looking at a loan in Zimbabwe with funding via Camfed Zimbabwe (http://www.kiva.org/partners/305). It shows average cost to borrower as 0% APR. Does this mean that there are no charges to borrower or simply that Kiva has not calculated one for this Field Partner? If the latter, perhaps ?? APR would be a better way to let us know. Now I only loan where the APR or PY is 40% or less. Is that a valid criteria for lending? If it is 0 I think I will exclude it as too good to be true. Back to annual cost, I know some Field Partners perform services beyond lending and some have smaller average loans (likely more costly to service). If a Field Partner has a high average cost but is highly rated, has a low default rate and has been around for a while such as ASKI (http://www.kiva.org/partners/305), should I ignore its 47% PY. I am bothered by the charges MFIs impose on borrowers but understand that for these borrowers other sources of funds don't exist. But backing there loans seems like supporting pay day lending in the States. Whether staying under 40% makes sense I have no idea but it makes me feel better and I'll assume (unless you correct me) that 0% APR doesn't mean no cost to borrowers.