Ledn vs Unchained: which bitcoin loan liquidates first?

Neither lender’s own page names a price at which it sells before the other. Ledn’s loans page states liquidation risk on a loan-to-value basis that starts at 50%. Unchained’s commercial-loans page defines a collateral-to-principal violation as a duty to restore the ratio, and prints no liquidation level at all. Both pages were read on 20 September 2026.

So “Ledn vs Unchained bitcoin loan, which liquidates first” has a structural answer, not a numeric one.

What this desk read, and what it could not

Four pages, all on 20 September 2026: Unchained’s commercial-loans page, Ledn’s bitcoin-backed loans page, Ledn’s rates survey, dated 13 September 2026, and Ledn’s custody-models explainer.

In the Ledn material read here, 70% and 75% levels did not appear and 80% was only an “illustrative” threshold; this site’s Strike assessment tabulated the ladder from Ledn’s rates page on 11 September, not re-verified here. Unchained’s page prints no liquidation ratio, no margin-call window and no partial-or-total rule.

Ledn vs Unchained bitcoin loan: which liquidates first on each lender’s own page?

Ledn’s pages price a sale of collateral on price and, from next January, at maturity. Unchained’s page prices a demand for more collateral or principal and stops there. On the evidence of their own pages the first to sell on a falling price is Ledn, because Ledn is the only one of the two that says it sells.

That is not a finding that Unchained never sells; the absence claim is scoped to the page, which as read prints no foreclosure level.

Where the ranking pages part company with the lenders

Each of the three pages ranking for this query as read prints something neither lender’s page states. Lygos gives Unchained a 67% margin call, an 83% liquidation and a 24-hour window, and labels 14% as its APR; the loans page shows 14% as the interest rate and 16.21% as the APR, and none of the thresholds. Spark says Unchained margin-calls by email and forecloses the whole position; the page read says neither. Bitmachina says Ledn lends client collateral to institutional counterparties; Ledn’s explainer says the collateral may be re-posted to a funding partner and that neither Ledn nor the partner may lend it out for interest, as this desk set out on 15 September.

None is shown here to be wrong; each is absent from the lender’s own page, the only place a borrower can hold anyone to. The rate itself is unsettled even between lender documents: Ledn’s 13 September survey quotes Unchained’s pricing-page example at 12% interest and 14.18% APR, a week before the loans page displayed 14% and 16.21%. What a borrower is really choosing between is a custodial promise with a stated sale and a key-controlled position with an unstated one.

What is the minimum loan amount at Ledn vs Unchained?

Ledn’s loans page states a minimum of USD 500, which at 50% LTV needs about USD 1,000 of bitcoin. Unchained’s commercial-loans page states a minimum principal of USD 150,000, and its 200% collateral-to-principal example needs USD 300,000 of bitcoin. Financing of USD 5m or more is referred to an institutional desk.

Can individuals still get a Bitcoin loan from Unchained?

Unchained’s page read on 20 September 2026 is headed Commercial Loans, describes them as bitcoin-backed loans for business, and lists loans only under the Business menu; the Personal menu read shows vaults, IRA, trust and inheritance products and no loan.

What happens if Bitcoin drops while I have a loan with Ledn or Unchained?

Ledn’s page says the borrower takes on liquidation risk if the collateral’s value falls; the pages read this run print no Ledn-specific threshold. Unchained’s page defines a CTP violation as the price at which collateral falls below the required level, after which the borrower must restore the ratio with collateral or principal. Neither page names a sale price.

Does Unchained rehypothecate Bitcoin collateral?

Unchained’s commercial-loans page says zero rehypothecation, with the collateral held in multisig and the borrowing company controlling one key so it can verify on-chain that the bitcoin has not moved. Ledn’s explainer allows restricted re-posting to a funding partner but says nobody may lend the collateral out for interest.

Pros and cons

Verdict

A borrower at either lender is pledging bitcoin that can be sold; the desk that wrote this has tested neither product, holds no position, and grades disclosure rather than desirability. None of this is financial advice.