Forcibly displaced people have reduced access to financial credit, compared to comparable non-displaced groups. This is valid across all income groups but is most significant for people with low or no income, where debt often plays a significant part in any livelihood strategy. Since the demise in enthusiasm for microfinance and particularly microcredit as a development tool, debt has been widely understood as a burden to be avoided for all low-income groups. Yet in certain circumstances, such as community savings schemes, access to credit can be beneficial in contexts of displacement. This paper reports on a large household survey with people living in situations of protracted displacement in four countries: DRC, Ethiopia, Lebanon and Pakistan. Debt is extremely widespread amongst displaced people involved in our research, although they were generally uncertain about the conditions of the debts, such as interest rates and loan periods, which are often opaque. The paper also identifies the circumstances under which debt appeared beneficial to displaced people and when it is considered a burden. Even when it is clearly harmful, debt must be incorporated into a broader ‘displacement economies’ approach since it reflects the economic realities and priorities of people experiencing displacement.