Kiva proposes that lenders share part of the currency risk

In today’s conference call, Kiva explained plans to reduce currency risks for the local MFIs by having lenders absorb losses, if currency depreciation is higher then a threshold x% (with x% yet to be defined).

Currently currency risk for loans issued in local currency is fully taken by local MFIs of Kiva. In future MFIs can select for new loans, if they want to keep it that way, or if a new stop-loss rule shall apply.

The details are explained in this presentation:

Slide 14 shows how many of the loans would be affected, if the stop loss rule would have applied in 2008/ in the last 5 years.

One question in the Q&A of the conference call was, why currency risk came up just now after years of operation of Kiva and the answer was that the problem is now more pressing with the recent appreciation of the US dollar.

Another question was, if a possible solution would be that Kiva just would supply the hard currency as collateral to a local bank in the country which would then issue the loan in local currency. The answer was that this would be impractical, because in case the local currency appreciates then the bank would demand a raise in the collateral, which could not be handled as neither Kiva has the funds nor could the lenders on the loans affected be expected to make an additional payment for this.

It will be interesting to see, if some MFIs stick to the current mode and upload loans with no currency risk sharing to the platform.

On MYC4 lenders take currency risk in full but earn interest.

MYC4 providers react on high default rates

Over the last months it became clear that MYC4.com loans default at a much higher percentage then expected. MYC4 management states several growth and quality problems that led to the situation. Better training of the local providers, partner ratings, spot audits and a license system are measures that shall improve the quality in loan selection and management in the future.

Currently one challenge is to deal with the failing loans issued in the past. The earlier problems with Ivory coast loans continue. About half of the issued loans were insured by the organisation MISCOCI against defaults. MISCOCI failed today and is reported to be bankrupt. MYC4 has announced a few minutes ago, that they will publish until March 20th, what this means for the lenders on the defaulted Ivory Coast loans (MISCOCI covered 242 loans with an outstanding balance of 388,644 Euro).

NotreNation, one of the providers in Ivory Coast, yesterday named poor selection of borrowers by inexperienced credit agents and the difficult economic situation in Ivory Coast as reasons for high default rates.

GrowthAfrica, a provider in Kenya with a high portfolio at risk rate (PAR) has announced yesterday that it will buy back 65 very poorly performing loans at 95 percent of the balance from the lenders. This step was taken as GrowthAfrica felt they share responsibility for the poorly performing loan portfolio. GrowthAfrica expects to buy back loans for more then 125,000 Euro in total.

Pertuity Direct starts affiliate program

P2P Lending service Pertuity Direct has launched an affiliate program. The new referral marketing campaign of Pertuity Direct pays:

  • 35 US$ for each referred completed and approved borrower application for a loan
  • 50 US$ for each completed investor application
  • performance incentives for websites that generate at least 5 leads per month

The campaign runs at affiliate network CJ, where Lending Club does administrate it’s affiliate program, too. Lending Club pays 35 US$ commission for each loan application and 60 US$ per lender registration plus performance incentives.

See earlier posts about p2p lending services using affiliate marketing.

Lending Club invested 2.4 million US$ to fund loans

As P2Plendingnews.com has researched Lending Club has invested 2.4 million US$ of its own money to fund loans since the relaunch in last October. The total volume of funded loans is approx. 10 million US$, that means that Lending Club funded about 24% of all loans itself.

The data is from weekly sales reports that Lending Club files with the SEC. The sales reports look like this and give details on each loan funded.

More details and numbers in the article (recommended reading) by P2Plendingnews.com.

While this may be contrary to the “pure” idea of peer to peer lending my take on this is:

  1. I see it as a positive development. By using own money to fund loans Lending Club demonstrates their belief in the business model and shares the same risk it expects lenders to take. By the way: There are ongoing discussions at MYC4 about changes that could lead to MyC4 and MYC4 providers to share more risk in funded loans.
  2. By co-funding loans Lending Club adds continuity. When supply of money by lenders is low, Lending Club co-funds more. That way the demand by borrowers can be served without interruptions.
  3. However since due to SEC filings very detailed information on the funded loans is publicly available, the explanation of Rob Garcia that the download data was removed due to privacy concerns (see previous post), seems stale.
  4. P2Plendingnews questions, if Lending Club can continue with co-funding for running out of funds. On the other hand, Lending Club earns interest from the funded loans and can sell the notes any time on the secondary market (that would explain why so many of the notes there are offered for sale immediately after the loan was funded).
  5. One further and important aspect: Only residents of 25 states can participate as lenders on Lending Club directly. However on the Note Trading platform residents of all but the states Kansas, Maryland, Ohio, Oregon, Texas and Vermontand the District of Columbia can buy notes.
    That means by co-funding loans and selling part of their investments on the Note Trading Platform Lending Club enables a larger target audience to use their service.

Please share your opinion by commenting here or in the Lending Club forum. Thank you.