Polly vs Loan Sifter
Pricing & Eligibility head-to-head · axis by axis, same rubric for both
Pricing & Eligibility
Optimal Blue, LLC (Constellation Software)
| Axis | Polly | Loan Sifter |
|---|---|---|
| Production impact | 3.8 | 3.1 |
| Functionality & depth | 4.4 | 2.8 |
| Integrations & ecosystem | 3.7 | 2.6 |
| Adoption & support | 4.1 | 3.6 |
| Return on spend | 3.8 | 3.8 |
| Overall | 4.0 | 3.0 |
Polly wins 4 of 5 axes. Same rubric, same weights, no sponsorships.
What the rubric says
Polly and Loan Sifter are both scored in Pricing & Eligibility. Polly carries an overall of 4, Loan Sifter an overall of 3. The widest gap between them is Functionality and depth, at 1.6 of a point. That axis measures whether it handles the messy loans and not just the clean file. Polly takes it, 4.4 to 2.8.
Where the five axes separate
On Functionality and depth the record favours Polly, 4.4 against 2.8. On Integrations and ecosystem the record favours Polly, 3.7 against 2.6. On Production impact the record favours Polly, 3.8 against 3.1. On Adoption and support the record favours Polly, 4.1 against 3.6. Return on spend is level at 3.8 for both.
In Pricing & Eligibility the rubric weights Functionality and depth heaviest, at 35 percent. That is why the two overalls sit where they do.
How the weights turn axes into a score
Production impact carries 25 percent of the Pricing & Eligibility score. It measures whether the tool moves volume, pull-through or cycle time. Functionality and depth carries 35 percent of the Pricing & Eligibility score. It measures whether it handles the messy loans and not just the clean file. Integrations and ecosystem carries 20 percent of the Pricing & Eligibility score. It measures how well it reaches the rest of the stack. Adoption and support carries 10 percent of the Pricing & Eligibility score. It measures whether the team adopts it and gets unstuck. Return on spend carries 10 percent of the Pricing & Eligibility score. It measures what the spend returns, which is not the same as being cheap.
Pricing posture
Polly does not publish pricing. Its listed model is quote only. Loan Sifter publishes pricing. Its listed model is published subscription, $79 per month base. One of the two can be costed before a sales call, the other cannot.
Deployment and who each one targets
Deployment for Polly: Cloud, API-first with field mapping to the LOS. Deployment for Loan Sifter: Cloud, browser based with claimed LOS and CRM connections. Segment focus for Polly: Lenders that want the pricing engine, the lock desk and the loan sale on one platform. Segment focus for Loan Sifter: Independent mortgage brokers comparing wholesale investor offerings. The two entries name different buyers.
What each record credits
Polly: Version control plus replay reprices old scenarios against the setup live at the time. Polly: No-code deployment lets the secondary desk launch products without vendor involvement. Polly: The Loan Trading Exchange carries the platform past lock into sale and delivery. Polly: Investors include 8VC, Menlo Ventures, Khosla Ventures, Fifth Wall and First American. Loan Sifter: Published base price of $79 per month, almost unique in this category. Loan Sifter: Optimal Blue states access to more than 120 wholesale investors daily. Loan Sifter: Quotes conforming, non-conforming, government, non-QM, home equity and construction. Loan Sifter: Backed by the category’s largest pricing vendor, so investor data upkeep holds.
What each record holds against them
Polly: Publicly names few technology partners: LendingPad, Vesta, Cordless and Uplist. Polly: Investor coverage is stated as hundreds, with no specific count published. Polly: No pricing, no per-loan figure, no volume bands, no implementation range published. Polly: The line stops short of hedging: no hedge advisory or trade management module described. Loan Sifter: Built for brokers; lenders get no lock desk, margin management, best execution or hedging. Loan Sifter: Claims LOS and CRM integration but names no system at all. Loan Sifter: The loansifter.com domain redirects into Optimal Blue with no independent presence. Loan Sifter: The $79 tier covers core pricing only; upper tiers are unpublished.
Which one fits which shop
Best fit for Polly: A secondary desk that wants to reconfigure products without opening a vendor ticket. Best fit for Loan Sifter: A small broker shop that needs wholesale rate comparison without an enterprise contract.
What each entry concludes
Polly: Polly built a pricing engine, then bolted a loan trading exchange onto it. Polly: A loan is priced and locked, then sold, without leaving the platform. Polly: The differentiators are practical: configuration version control, historical replay, no-code product launches and a mobile interface officers use. Polly: Backers include 8VC, Menlo Ventures, Khosla Ventures, Fifth Wall and First American. Polly: The trade against Optimal Blue is thinner published investor coverage and fewer named integrations. Loan Sifter: LoanSifter is Optimal Blue’s broker-facing pricing engine, the rare mortgage product with a price on the page. Loan Sifter: The base subscription costs $79 a month. Loan Sifter: Optimal Blue says it reaches more than 120 wholesale investors daily and serves roughly 6,000 users. Loan Sifter: A broker who wants side-by-side wholesale comparison and no lock desk or hedging buys this without a committee. Loan Sifter: The catch is scope: this is broker quoting and comparison, not the enterprise engine.
The short answer
Polly finishes ahead on the published rubric, 4 to 3. The margin comes mostly from Functionality and depth. Same rubric, same weights, no sponsorships.
Both tools are scored on the same weighted rubric, production impact carries the most weight. Comparisons are never sponsored. Disclosure →