Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 297

How marketplace lending meets investor needs

The author of the article in Cuffelinks, Investor questions for marketplace lendersdraws attention to the perpetual need for responsible investors to be shrewd and judicious when deciding where to place their hard-earned money. This, of course, is sensible advice.

However, it’s also true that today’s investors face a risk environment of unprecedented complexity. In 2018, the S&P/ASX200 declined by 6.8%. Residential property values are falling and bank deposit rates fail to match inflation. In the last year, the Australian media landscape was dominated by the findings of the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry, with its revelations of duplicitous lending practices, improper fees, and general misconduct that, by the banks’ own admission, fell far short of community expectations.

The ground between equities and low deposit yields

Needless to say, today’s investors are eager for services that allow them to navigate a relatively safe path between the high-risk allure of equity investments and the lower yields offered by traditional financial institutions, which, for all their perceived stability, too often function as a costly and unduly complex intermediary between lenders and borrowers.

This then is the intersection at which peer-to-peer lending, or marketplace lending, has been able to thrive. At its best, marketplace lending appeals to investors who seek transparency and stability, but still wish for higher returns than would be available to them if they invested in traditional products like bank deposits.

Indeed, the author of Investor Questions for Marketplace Lenders concedes that, on this score, marketplace lending has succeeded. Marketplace lending demonstrates that, when the middleman is willing (or able) to tighten his belt — that is, when he narrows the spread between the lending and funding rates offered by traditional financial institutions — borrowers and lenders both benefit from competitive rates. For example, RateSetter lenders have averaged a return of over 7.5% since launch in Australia in 2014.

But what about risk? Readers of Investor Questions for Marketplace Lenders may conclude that marketplace lending involves an unacceptable degree of exposure. Let's examine this in more detail.

Three ways the lending exposure is addressed

First, many P2P platforms are structured such that investors don’t need take 'all of the risk' upon themselves. For example, several platforms require borrowers to contribute to a provision fund, which exists to protect lenders against the consequences of defaults and missed payments. For this reason, the P2P company RateSetter was able to pay its investors $11 million in interest in 2018 without one of them losing a single cent of capital or interest. Moreover, its Provision Fund has grown to represent over 6.1% of its loan book, which is substantially more than the losses it has experienced to date (approximately 1.4%), and its expected future losses. It gives investors a higher degree of confidence in their future returns.

Second, the risk involved in marketplace lending is further mitigated by the historical resilience of consumer credit itself as an asset class. Interestingly, even during a severe economic depression, the annualised loss experienced in consumer credit rates has tended to be less pronounced than with other forms of credit, such as commercial loans and investment property loans.

Automotive finance, for example, performs particularly well. Borrowers tend to prioritise paying off a secured car loan over other debts, which is unsurprising given that they need their car to get to work, attend interviews, and maybe even take the kids to soccer practice.

Finally, it’s misleading to imply that loans financed by marketplace lending bear any inherent resemblance to the type of subprime loans that gained widespread notoriety following the financial collapse of 2008. This false equivalence overlooks the crucial role played by marketplace lending platform operators when it comes to assessing the creditworthiness of prospective borrowers. Responsible operators subject loan applicants to a screening process that takes into account the very same factors any traditional financial institution would scrutinise, from credit histories to monthly income versus expenses.

Growing role in intermediation

In short, marketplace lending offers a simple way for investors to access consumer credit. As they continue to offer strong returns, Australian marketplace lenders are growing rapidly into the ~$140 billion consumer credit market. Ultimately, we expect that marketplace lending models will come to represent a significant and structurally important part of our financial system. This will likely involve marketplace lenders acting as a conduit between superannuation funds (both SMSFs and larger industry funds) and consumers seeking credit.

The evidence for this imminent transformation can be seen in specific examples of institutional participation. For example, RateSetter attracted $100 million in support from the Government’s Clean Energy Finance Corporation, which sought assistance with its expansion into consumer finance. As a result, RateSetter is now the largest funder of consumer loans for the purchase of renewable energy equipment, such as solar panels and home batteries.

We expect to see similar developments over the coming decades as marketplace lending moves into the mainstream. Its growth will now depend on the rate at which new investors and borrowers learn of the benefits that marketplace lending can offer them.

 

Daniel Foggo is CEO of RateSetter, Australia's largest peer-to-peer lender, and a sponsor of Cuffelinks. This article is for general information purposes only and does not consider the circumstances of any investor.  Investors should make their own independent enquiries and consult with a financial adviser.

For more articles and papers from RateSetter, please click here.

RELATED ARTICLES

Daniel Foggo on why P2P lending is not what you think

Five key ASIC findings on marketplace lending

Risk vs reward: How do P2P lenders stack up?

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

10 reasons wealthy homeowners shouldn't receive welfare

The RBA Governor says rising house prices are due to "the design of our taxation and social security systems". The OECD says "the prolonged boom in house prices has inflated the wealth of many pensioners without impacting their pension eligibility." What's your view?

House prices surge but falls are common and coming

We tend to forget that house prices often fall. Direct lending controls are more effective than rate rises because macroprudential limits affect the volume of money for housing leaving business rates untouched.

Survey responses on pension eligibility for wealthy homeowners

The survey drew a fantastic 2,000 responses with over 1,000 comments and polar opposite views on what is good policy. Do most people believe the home should be in the age pension asset test, and what do they say?

100 Aussies: five charts on who earns, pays and owns

Any policy decision needs to recognise who is affected by a change. It pays to check the data on who pays taxes, who owns assets and who earns the income to ensure an equitable and efficient outcome.

Three good comments from the pension asset test article

With articles on the pensions assets test read about 40,000 times, 3,500 survey responses and thousands of comments, there was a lot of great reader participation. A few comments added extra insights.

The sorry saga of housing affordability and ownership

It is hard to think of any area of widespread public concern where the same policies have been pursued for so long, in the face of such incontrovertible evidence that they have failed to achieve their objectives.

Latest Updates

Strategy

$1 billion and counting: how consultants maximise fees

Despite cutbacks in public service staff, we are spending over a billion dollars a year with five consulting firms. There is little public scrutiny on the value for money. How do consultants decide what to charge?

Investment strategies

Two strong themes and companies that will benefit

There are reasons to believe inflation will stay under control, and although we may see a slowing in the global economy, two companies should benefit from the themes of 'Stable Compounders' and 'Structural Winners'.

Financial planning

Reducing the $5,300 upfront cost of financial advice

Many financial advisers have left the industry because it costs more to produce advice than is charged as an up-front fee. Advisers are valued by those who use them while the unadvised don’t see the need to pay.

Strategy

Many people misunderstand what life expectancy means

Life expectancy numbers are often interpreted as the likely maximum age of a person but that is incorrect. Here are three reasons why the odds are in favor of people outliving life expectancy estimates.

Investment strategies

Slowing global trade not the threat investors fear

Investors ask whether global supply chains were stretched too far and too complex, and following COVID, is globalisation dead? New research suggests the impact on investment returns will not be as great as feared.

Investment strategies

Wealth doesn’t equal wisdom for 'sophisticated' investors

'Sophisticated' investors can be offered securities without the usual disclosure requirements given to everyday investors, but far more people now qualify than was ever intended. Many are far from sophisticated.

Investment strategies

Is the golden era for active fund managers ending?

Most active fund managers are the beneficiaries of a confluence of favourable events. As future strong returns look challenging, passive is rising and new investors do their own thing, a golden age may be closing.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2021 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.

Website Development by Master Publisher.