P2P lending volumes grew again in September. Lending Club originated more than 200 million US$ in loans in one month. I do monitor development of p2p lending figures for many markets. Since I already have most of the data on file I can publish statistics on the monthly loan originations for selected p2p lending services. This time I added Folk2Folk to the table.
Table: P2P Lending Volumes in September 2013. Source: own research Note that volumes have been converted from local currency to US$ for the sake of comparision. Some figures are estimates/approximations.
Notice to p2p lending services not listed: If you want to be included in this chart in future, please email the following figures on the first working day of a month: total loan volume originated since inception, loan volume originated in previous month, number of loans originated in previous month, average nominal interest rate of loans originated in previous month.
P2P Lending volumes have grown again in August. I do monitor development of p2p lending figures for many markets. Since I already have most of the data on file I can publish statistics on the monthly loan originations for selected p2p lending services. This time there are two more services listed than last month.
Table: P2P Lending Volumes in August 2013. Source: own research Note that volumes have been converted from local currency to US$ for the sake of comparision. Some figures are estimates/approximations.
Notice to p2p lending services not listed: If you want to be included in this chart in future, please email the following figures on the first working day of a month: total loan volume originated since inception, loan volume originated in previous month, number of loans originated in previous month, average nominal interest rate of loans originated in previous month.
It has been some time since I last did an article at P2P-Banking.com on lending volumes. I do monitor development of p2p lending figures for many markets. Since I already have most of the data on file I can publish statistics on the monthly loan originations for selected p2p lending services. July was another month of rapid growth. As the table shows p2p volumes originated grew strongly for nearly all services when compared to the last month or last years month.
Table: P2P Lending Volumes in July 2013. Source: own research Note that volumes have been converted from local currency to US$ for the sake of comparision. Some figures are estimates/approximations.
Notice to p2p lending services not listed: If you want to be included in this chart in future, please email the following figures on the first working day of a month: total loan volume originated since inception, loan volume originated in previous month, number of loans originated in previous month, average nominal interest rate of loans originated in previous month.
This post reviews a selection of p2p lending companies and does a rating on more factors than just loan volume. While I describe below what factors led to my rating, please note that the rating represents my personal opinion.
The table lists the companies in alphabetical order and gives:
New loan volume per month
This amount is in all cases but Zopa retrieved from the company websites and represents loans funded from Feb. 16th till March 15th 2012, and then converted into US$ at today’s currency exchange rates.
Brand/Press
Extend and tone of press coverage in the past months. Since a large share of new users is introduced to p2p lending services via media, positive media coverage is extremely important. Continued positive media coverage has helped some companies to associate positive values to their brand.
Growth/Marketing
This column especially rates if the new loan volume is growing continuously month after month. Furthermore it puts the absolute volume into perspective to the size of the market. It is obvious that absolute numbers in a country with a small population (e.g. Estonia) will be much lower than those in a country with a large population (e.g. US). Furthermore it takes into account if the (online) marketing measures of the the company succeed in winning new borrowers and lenders (though in most markets lenders do not need to be actively acquired).
Sustainability
Sustainability rates a mix of several factors:
ROIs for lenders / default rates Most p2p lending companies that failed in the past, did so as a result of high default rates which led to negative lender ROIs and caused massive lender churn
Ability of company to raise new funding Most p2p lending companies still have to bridge a considerable time-span at their current growth rate before they become cash flow positive. The ability to raise more funding to finance continued operation is essential for their success. Isepankur announced that it operated profitable in 2011.
Business model
User satisfaction
This rates the publicly voiced user opinion. Major factor are the comments in forums. To a lesser degree I took the user experience published in blog articles into account. The problem with lender experiences published in blogs often is that the writer is casting a positive image, since he earns commissions for newly referred customers through the affiliate program of the p2p lending site. Also these review are often written at the start of the lending activity at which point the lender’s ROI is naturally unharmed by the experience of defaults.
*estimate Empty fields: I had not enough information to rate these. E.g. with some of the new UK p2p lending companies I felt I had too few indicators to reach an opinion.
Availability of information also influenced the selection of companies. Due to language barriers including more services (e.g. the Japanese p2p lending companies) was not feasible for me.
Developments since last year
UK and US markets show impressive growth. A few smaller players stopped funding new p2p loans (Quakle, CommunityLend, BigCarrots). German services are struggling to achieve growth (Auxmoney had 2 good months lately).
More than 2 years have passed, since P2P-Banking.com published the first overview table of p2p lending companies. At that time the focus was to create a comprehensive list and to get a perspective on the loan volumes.
Today I want to look at a smaller selection of p2p lending companies and do a rating on more factors than just loan volume. While I describe below what factors led to my rating, please note that the rating represents my personal opinion.
The table lists the companies in alphabetical order and gives:
New loan volume per month
This amount is in most cases retrieved from the last month(s) figures from the company websites (if they have statistic sections), and then converted into US$ at today’s currency exchange rates. In other cases it is a rough estimate by me based on volume figures published in media in the recent past. For CommunityLend I failed to find a per month figure (the total figure from launch to mid-February is here).
Brand/Press
Extend and tone of press coverage in the past months. Since a large share of new users is introduced to p2p lending services via media, positive media coverage is extremely important. Continued positive media coverage has helped some companies to associate positive values to their brand.
Growth/Marketing
This column especially rates if the new loan volume is growing continuously month after month. Furthermore it puts the absolute volume into perspective to the size of the market. It is obvious that absolute numbers in a country with a small population (e.g. Canada) will be much lower than those in a country with a large population (e.g. US). Furthermore it takes into account if the (online) marketing measures of the the company succeed in winning new borrowers and lenders (though in most markets lenders do not need to be actively acquired).
Sustainability
Sustainability rates a mix of several factors:
ROIs for lenders / default rates Most p2p lending companies that failed in the past, did so as a result of high default rates which led to negative lender ROIs and caused massive lender churn
Ability of company to raise new funding Most p2p lending companies still have to bridge a considerable time-span at their current growth rate before they become cash flow positive. The ability to raise more funding to finance continued operation is essential for their success
Business model
User satisfaction
This rates the publicly voiced user opinion. Major factor are the comments in forums. To a lesser degree I took the user experience published in blog articles into account. The problem with lender experiences published in blogs often is that the writer is casting a positive image, since he earns commissions for newly referred customers through the affiliate program of the p2p lending site. Also these review are often written at the start of the lending activity at which point the lender’s ROI is naturally unharmed by the experience of defaults.
Empty fields: I had not enough information to rate these. E.g. with some of the new UK p2p lending companies I felt I had too few indicators to reach an opinion on the sustainability.
Availability of information also influenced the selection of companies. Due to language barriers including more services (e.g. the Japanese p2p lending companies) was not feasible for me.
Danish startup C4 World on it's platform MyC4 allows lenders to finance micro loans to African entrepreneurs (Afripreneurs). P2P briefly featured the MyC4 plans earlier. The goal is to "eradict poverty through business". The service is currently in beta, but signing up and lending at MyC4 is already possible.
MyC4 differs in its approach from Kiva: At MyC4 lenders do earn interest on the loans. Currently interest rates of 20-24% are typical with loan terms of 6 or 12 month.
