Smava

How p2p lending is different from bank loans

wiseclerk 1 Comment

Part I: Platform & lender view

Occasionaly, when I talk to analysts or journalists, their perception is that p2p lending is very similar to bank loans. They argue:

  1. The platform does check, if the borrower is eligible to receive a loan by validating credit history, income and other documents just like a bank would do (note: this argument applies more to Zopa and Smava, less to Prosper)
  2. The listings descriptions and photos just give the lender the illusion that they know where their money is going and for what purpose. In reality nobody checks the information in the listings and the listings could be all false.
  3. The p2p lending platform is just taking the role of the bank. The platform earns fees on each loans which is comparable to the spread the banks live on.

My opinion is that p2p lending is very different from banks giving loans.
One main difference is that the platform does not have the loans in their own books. The risk is carried by the lender. The platform must aim to provide as much information as possible to allow the lender to gauge the risk and it must prevent the lenders from fraud. It is then the decision of the lender, if – based on the information – he wants to bid or refrains.

For the lender the ability to decide who gets the money is a major motivation compared to depositing the money in a banking product. The p2p lending services are aware that the listings are a central point to their marketing. Zopa, which currently does not have individual borrower listings, will introduce 'Zopa listings' in the future.
Regarding argument 2: It is true that listings are not checked on any of the platforms and a borrower could use the loan for a totally different purpose then stated in the listing. My opinion is that this is not a problem, as long as lenders are aware of this and as long as the protection from fraud (identity theft; no intention of borrower to repay in the first place) is high. I don't care if 2, 3 or even 20% of the borrowers lie in their listings. I believe that the majority is telling the truth and what I really care about is that my money is repaid. The borrower said he wanted to use the money for the college education of his daughter and actually used the money to buy a new car? I personally would not care as long as he repays the loan.

P2P lending services achieve a level of constant interaction with the lenders few banking products reach. In the Prosper forums many lenders express that they spend a lot of time on Prosper browsing and selecting listings and that they find this process somewhat addictive.
Conversely that means that p2p lending is not for lenders that to large amounts of money without spending time.

Conclusion: P2P lending IS different from the way banks loan money. It offers a different marketing angle, the risk is taken by the individual lender rather then the bank, and gives the lender has more control over what his money is used for.

Is identity theft a possible threat to the p2p lending concept

wiseclerk

On most peer to peer lending services (Prosper, Lendingclub, Smava, Boober) the identity of the borrower is hidden to the lender. Only the service itself knows the identity of the borrower. Therefore the lender has no means to check if information given is accurate and has to trust the platform.

The service has to

  • ensure that it takes adequate measures to verify the identity the borrower has stated at registration is correct
  • instill trust to the lender that the fraud risk of borrowers impersonating under a false identity is minimal, non-existant or while existant not covered by the lender.

Prosper gives a "100% Identity Theft Guarantee" and in case of identity theft repurchases the fraudulent loan:

Prosper reserves the right to buy back loans at any time. If Prosper buys back a loan, the outstanding principal balance will be returned to lenders and the loan will be marked as "repurchased".

Prosper typically repurchases loans in accordance with Prosper's 100% Identity Theft Guarantee, under which Prosper has agreed to repurchase loans from lenders if the loan is found to involve identity theft of the named borrower's identity.

Prosper is committed to providing a safe and secure marketplace, and works with law enforcement authorities to prosecute to the fullest extent perpetrators of identity theft.

Rateladder had one of his loans repurchased today. But how often does this occur?

Looking at the Wiseclerk Prosper loan stats by status, the column Repurchased shows a value of 400000 US$. Out of the total loan value of 96 million US$ that is about 0.4%. Not all of the repurchased loans are due to identity fraud.

Prosper checks identity by several measures like checking documentaion supplied by the borrower, calling him, verifying bank adresses, sending postcards to his adress… There have been several discussions on this topic with details on the Prosper forum.

Other services use other measures. German Smava.de uses the PostIdent-process a service that requires the registering service to produce a government id (passport) in person. The Postident process is used by nearly all German online banks and is considered quite safe.

P2p lending services can tolerate only a low level of identity theft cases. The innovative approach of p2p lending requires that lenders trust the concept and the service. Fraud cases endanger that trust.

Smava – 6 month after start nearly all current

wiseclerk

On March 24th Smava.de launched its peer-to-peer lending service in Germany. Time for a recap on how Smava fared in its first 6 month of operation. How Smava operates can be read in this earlier article.
First the very positive news: So far in only 3 cases borrowers missed payment dates and in two of these cases the borrowers payed with only a few days delay. Therefore only one loan is currently late, resulting in that more than 99% of all loans are current. On the usability and interface side there have been no problems or complaints, the interface is working as expected. Thereis however room for improvement, especially in the account section where the handling gets a little clumsy once the lender has many loans.

But despite receiving very positive and extensive media coverage Smava so far failed to achieve mass appeal. While Smava says it has over 13000 registered users, Wiseclerk figures show approximately 250 active lenders and 180 active borrowers.


Source: Wiseclerk.com

In the 6 month Smava handled a loan volume of 500000 Euro (approx 0.7 million US$), rather tiny compared to the loan volumes Prosper and Zopa handle. One move to foster growth was that Smava opened to lower credit grades in the beginning of August. While this led to a rise of loan listings (see chart below), fewer of the new loan listings were funded. But still over 50% of loan listings do get funded. It is to early to judge how the low credit rate loans will impact the default ratio.


Source: Wiseclerk.com

Possibly the main reason for Smava’s slow growth is the effficiency of German banking. German banks have automated the consumer loan process and small consumer credits have interest rates (APR) of as low as 4 to 5% (for best credit grade). At Smava the interest rates at which loans are funding have risen compared to launch date, voiding the argument that Smava offers better rates then a bank for many cases.


Source: Wiseclerk.com

Smava is still faring well in the absence of serious peer to peer lending competion. With Dutch Boober troubled by regulation worries, the long announced plans of Boober to expand into Germany have yet to happen. Smava avoided regulatory problems in the first place because it partnered with a bank, which fulfils all regulation requirements.

Like Prosper Smava has yet to define the benefit of groups, which exist but have no plausible way of influencing/reducing the default risk.

German Smava opens to lower credit grades

wiseclerk

The German site for social lending Smava.de today allowed borrowers of the lower credit grades G and H to participate. Previously only borrowers of credit grades A through F could participate. According to information published by Smava, 80% of the German population have credit grades in the range A-F, while credit grade G accounts for 10% and credit grade H accounts for 5% of the population.

This move is contrary to the development at Prosper.com which started with a very broad range of credit grades and only later restricted borrower access tighter.

However Smava, so far has experienced not one late payment. Three payment cycles have been completed with 100% of borrowers paying on time.

Other changes at the Smava site today included a lower minimum bid of 250 Euro (down from 500 Euro) and a higher interest rate ceiling (maximum interest rate 18%; up from 15%).

Smava affiliate program launch

wiseclerk

Last week at the end of my post on the Prosper referral program I suggested:

The next step for even more growth

Currently all referral programs mentioned above have one thing in common. They are open only to existing members of the p2p lending services. Assuming they are successful and the p2p lending serves are seeking opportunities to enable even faster growth then the next step could be to start an affiliate program through networks like Zanox, CJ or Affilinet.

And today German Smava.de has launched an affiliate program through Affilinet. Though probably not a result of my blog post (or is it?), it is nice to see the development headed in the direction I anticipated.

The Smava affiliate program pays 15 Euro for each referred borrower that creates a listing and 10 Euro for each referred lender (who completes process of opening an account).

(Source: p2p-kredite.com)