•
Insights
The next phase of patient finance
The market has grown, but not stabilised
Over the past decade, dental patient finance has grown from around £60 to 70m to over £600m annually. This was driven by Invisalign and cosmetic dentistry, increased private treatment volumes, and gradual adoption across practices.
But this growth has happened without a corresponding evolution in system design. Processes remain fragmented, underwriting remains inconsistent, and integration remains limited. Growth has masked structural weakness.
The broker model has already declined
As of 2026, traditional brokers are largely diminished at scale, and control has shifted toward lenders, or platforms with funding access.
This leaves an open question: what replaces the broker role fully? Pure lenders lack integration, and platforms require scale and capital.
Repeated market entry, and exit
Over the past decade, multiple players have attempted to enter: Klarna, Affirm in exploration, humm from Australia, HSBC via Divido, Barclays, BNP Paribas, and Close Brothers with a partial exit.
The common outcome was entry, limited traction, and exit or retrenchment. The reasons were a fragmented provider base, high variability in practice performance, lack of standardisation, and difficulty underwriting at scale. Dentistry looks simple from the outside, but behaves like a highly segmented risk market.
Scale is not enough
Large lenders have cheap capital and experience in retail finance, yet they have not dominated dentistry. The constraint is not capital. It is system integration and underwriting context. Patient-level behaviour matters, treatment-level outcomes matter, and practice-level variation matters.
Regulation is resetting the market
From 2026, all loans become regulated, full Section 75 exposure applies, and full FCA oversight is required. The immediate implications are a higher compliance burden, increased operational cost, and greater exposure to claims.
The margin for error is reduced. Previously, risk could be partially avoided. Now, risk must be actively managed.
Risk is being redistributed
Large lenders are already responding by insuring parts of portfolios and focusing on larger counterparties. This raises an emerging question: who serves the long tail of independent practices, small groups, and variable performance profiles?
The growth versus risk tension
The market now faces a fundamental trade-off. To grow, providers need to expand access, approve more patients, and serve more practices. To manage risk, they need to tighten underwriting, restrict counterparties, and limit exposure. The strategies required for growth and risk control are no longer aligned.
Market behaviour is still price-led
Despite evidence on conversion, operational cost differences, and system advantages, decision-making remains negotiation-driven and price-focused. The key question is whether practices will shift from price optimisation to outcome optimisation.
The role of technology is expanding
New capabilities now exist: AI-driven communication, integrated PMS workflows, and automated follow-ups. But adoption is uneven. Some practices fully embrace systemisation while others remain manual. An emerging divide is forming between system-led practices and process-led practices.
What remains unresolved
As of 2026, several key questions remain open:
Who will serve SME independents and small groups? Lenders prefer scale and the ability to sell or insure Section 75 risk, and Section 75 risk increases will also apply to previously unregulated activity.
Can underwriting improve fast enough? More data and more integration are required.
Will regulation trigger consolidation? The cost base and compliance burden are both rising.
Will practices change behaviour, shifting from price to conversion and system performance?
What is the sustainable market size? Over £1bn is likely, but it depends on adoption, system efficiency, and risk management.
Final reflection
The first phase of patient finance was about making it available. The second phase is about making it work, at scale, under regulation, and with real risk.
What remains unclear is not whether the market will grow, but who will be able to operate within it sustainably.