Skip to content
Subscribe

Jupiter vs Liquid Logics

Loan Origination Systems head-to-head · axis by axis, same rubric for both

All Loan Origination Systems head-to-heads →

Jupiter
Lendesk Technologies ULC
3.7
Liquid Logics
Loan Origination Systems
3.1
AxisJupiterLiquid Logics
Production impact 3.6 3.1
Functionality & depth 3.6 3.1
Integrations & ecosystem 3.5 3.1
Adoption & support 4.0 3.1
Return on spend 4.0 3.1
Overall 3.7 3.1

Jupiter wins 5 of 5 axes. Same rubric, same weights, no sponsorships.

What the rubric says

Jupiter and Liquid Logics are both scored in Loan Origination Systems. Jupiter carries an overall of 3.7, Liquid Logics an overall of 3.1. The widest gap between them is Return on spend, at 0.9 of a point. That axis measures what the spend returns, which is not the same as being cheap. Jupiter takes it, 4 to 3.1.

Where the five axes separate

On Return on spend the record favours Jupiter, 4 against 3.1. On Adoption and support the record favours Jupiter, 4 against 3.1. On Production impact the record favours Jupiter, 3.6 against 3.1.

Pricing posture

Jupiter does not publish pricing. Its listed model is no seat fees and no annual contract; per-funded-loan and pass-through service charges, amounts not published.

Deployment and who each one targets

Deployment for Jupiter: Cloud. The entry for Liquid Logics names no deployment model. Segment focus for Jupiter: US mortgage brokers and individual loan officers.

What each record credits

Jupiter: Built-in credit and AUS with DU and LPA run directly in the platform, and no upfront. Liquid Logics: The deepest private lending specialist here.

What each record holds against them

Jupiter: Rocket sponsors it, and Rocket is a lender you compete with or submit. Liquid Logics: No SBA lending support at all.

Which one fits which shop

Best fit for Jupiter: Independent brokers who want a modern LOS with no upfront cost, especially those already submitting meaningful. Best fit for Liquid Logics: Established private and hard money lenders with meaningful construction draw and investor management needs.

The short answer

Jupiter finishes ahead on the published rubric, 3.7 to 3.1. The margin comes mostly from Return on spend. Same rubric, same weights, no sponsorships.

Who stands behind this review

MortgageTechReview

This score rests on evidence anyone can check. It also rests on the vendor's own documentation, pricing, integration pages, and ownership records. We do not claim to run every product ourselves. Nobody can. The rubric was published before this review existed. The vendor did not write this, and no vendor can buy a word of it. Every product in this category is weighted the same way.

How this was scored · Who publishes this · Dispute this score · Disclosure

Both tools are scored on the same weighted rubric, production impact carries the most weight. Comparisons are never sponsored. Disclosure →

The Stack Memo · free · one email a month

One email a month: what's actually worth demoing.

New reviews, category shake-ups, pricing changes we've spotted. No vendor spam, unsubscribe anytime.

No vendor spam·We never sell your address·Unsubscribe in one click

Or read the buying guides →

317 products · 15 categories · one rubric

Every mortgage tool, scored the same way.

No pay-for-play, no vendor-written listicles, no gate. Start from the category you are actually buying in.

Compare →