Advertisement

Electronic Commerce Research

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 131–158 | Cite as

Factors affecting platform default risk in online peer-to-peer (P2P) lending business: an empirical study using Chinese online P2P platform data

  • Yeujun Yoon
  • Yu Li
  • Yan FengEmail author
Article
  • 738 Downloads

Abstract

Most previous literatures focus on the micro level default risk of individual borrowers whereas the platform default risk has not been rigorously studied yet. In this paper, we investigate the factors affecting platform default risk by employing the Chinese online P2P platform data. We find significant evidence that severe competition among platforms can increase risky behaviors of platforms by allowing riskier borrowers into the system. Some of the risk management devices could alleviate the default risk of platforms; however, others are not effective at alleviating the default risks. In addition, we find evidence that macro environment such as stock market condition or increases in speculative investment opportunities plays critical roles to increase the platform default rate. Our study sheds light on the platforms’ default risk issues and verifies key factors that influence their risky behaviors.

Keywords

Online P2P (peer-to-peer) lending Online P2P platform default risk Electronic commerce 

References

  1. 1.
    Agarwal, S., & Hauswald, R. B. (2008). The choice between arm’s-length and relationship debt: Evidence from eloans. FRB of Chicago working paper no. 2008-10.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Akerlof, G. (1970). The market for” lemons”: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84, 488–500.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Allen, F., & Gale, D. (2000). Bubbles and crises. The Economic Journal, 110(460), 236–255.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Allen, F., & Gale, D. (2000). Financial contagion. Journal of Political Economy, 108(1), 1–33.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Allen, F., & Gale, D. (2004). Competition and financial stability. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 36(3), 453–480.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barasinska, N., & Schäfer, D. (2014). Is crowdfunding different? Evidence on the relation between gender and funding success from a German peer-to-peer lending platform. German Economic Review, 15(4), 436–452.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Barro, R. J. (1976). The loan market, collateral, and rates of interest. Journal of money, Credit and Banking, 8(4), 439–456.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bauer, W., & Ryser, M. (2004). Risk management strategies for banks. Journal of Banking & Finance, 28(2), 331–352.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Beck, T., Demirgüç-Kunt, A., & Levine, R. (2006). Bank concentration, competition, and crises: First results. Journal of Banking & Finance, 30(5), 1581–1603.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Berger, A. N., Klapper, L. F., & Turk-Ariss, R. (2009). Bank competition and financial stability. Journal of Financial Services Research, 35(2), 99–118.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Berger, A. N., & Udell, G. F. (1990). Collateral, loan quality and bank risk. Journal of Monetary Economics, 25, 21–42.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bester, H. (1985). Screening vs. rationing in credit markets with imperfect information. The American Economic Review, 75(4), 850–855.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Black, F. (1975). Bank funds management in an efficient market. Journal of Financial Economics, 2, 323–339.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Blum, J. (1999). Do capital adequacy requirements reduce risks in banking? Journal of Banking & Finance, 23(5), 755–771.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Blum, J., & Hellwig, M. (1995). The macroeconomic implications of capital adequacy requirements for banks. European Economic Review, 39(3), 739–749.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bofondi, M., & Gobbi, G. (2004). Bad loans and entry into local credit market. Temi Di Discussione Del Servizio Studi #509. Bank of Italy.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Boyd, J. H., & De Nicolo, G. (2005). The theory of bank risk taking and competition revisited. Journal of Finance, 60, 1329–1343.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Boyd, J. H., De Nicolò, G., & Jalal, A. M. (2006). Bank risk-taking and competition revisited: New theory and new evidence. IMF working paper 06/297.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Brandt, L., & Li, H. (2003). Bank discrimination in transition economies: Ideology, information, or incentives? Journal of Comparative Economics, 31(3), 387–413.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Broecker, T. (1990). Credit-worthiness tests and interbank competition. Econometrica Journal of the Econometric Society, 58(2), 429–452.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cameron, A. C., & Trivedi, P. K. (2005). Microeconometrics: Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Carpenter, M. A., Sanders, W. G., & Gregersen, H. B. (2001). Bundling human capital with organizational context: The impact of international assignment experience on multinational firm performance and CEO pay. Academy of Management Journal, 44(3), 493–511.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cebenoyan, A. S., & Strahan, P. E. (2004). Risk management, capital structure and lending at banks. Journal of Banking & Finance, 28, 19–43.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chaffee, E. C., & Rapp, G. C. (2012). Regulating online peer-to-peer lending in the aftermath of Dodd–Frank: In search of an evolving regulatory regime for an evolving industry. Washington and Lee Law Review, 69(2), 484–533.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chen, Y. (2006). Collateral, loan guarantees, and the lenders’ incentives to resolve financial distress. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 46(1), 1–15.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chen, D., & Han, C. (1970). A comparative study of online P2P lending in the USA and China. Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, 17(2), 1–15.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chen, P., Wang, C., & Liu, Y. (2015). Real estate prices and firm borrowings: Micro evidence from China. China Economic Review, 36, 296–308.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chetty, S., Eriksson, K., & Lindbergh, J. (2006). The effect of specificity of experience on a firm’s perceived importance of institutional knowledge in an ongoing business. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(5), 699–712.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Collier, B. C., & Hampshire, R. (2010). Sending mixed signals: Multilevel reputation effects in peer-to-peer lending markets. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work, CSCW 2010, Savannah, Georgia, USA (pp. 197–206).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Craig, B. R., & Dinger, V. (2013). Deposit market competition, wholesale funding, and bank risk. Journal of Banking & Finance, 37(9), 3605–3622.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Croushore, D. (2014). Money and banking. Mason: South-Western College Pub.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Davidson, W. H. (1980). The location of foreign direct investment activity: Country characteristics and experience effects. Journal of International Business Studies, 11(2), 9–22.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Diamond, D. W. (1984). Financial intermediation and delegated monitoring. Review of Economic Studies, 51, 393–414.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Diamond, D. W. (1991). Monitoring and reputation: The choice between bank loans and directly placed debt. Journal of Political Economy, 99, 689–721.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Delios, A., & Beamish, P. W. (1999). Ownership strategy of Japanese firms: Transactional, institutional, and experience influences. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 915–933.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Delios, A., & Beamish, P. W. (2001). Survival and profitability: The roles of experience and intangible assets in foreign subsidiary performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5), 1028–1038.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Delios, A., & Henisz, W. J. (2003). Political hazards, experience, and sequential entry strategies: The international expansion of Japanese firms, 1980–1998. Strategic Management Journal, 24(11), 1153–1164.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Dewatripont, M., & Tirole, J. (1995). The prudential regulation of banks. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Dorfleitner, G., Priberny, C., Schuster, S., Stoiber, J., Weber, M., de Castro, I., et al. (2016). Description-text related soft information in peer-to-peer lending—Evidence from two leading European platforms. Journal of Banking & Finance, 64, 169–187.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Duarte, J., Siegel, S., & Young, L. (2012). Trust and credit: The role of appearance in peer-to-peer lending. Review of Financial Studies, 25, 2455–2484.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Emekter, R., Tu, Y., Jirasakuldech, B., & Lu, M. (2015). Evaluating credit risk and loan performance in online peer-to-peer (P2P) lending. Applied Economics, 47(1), 54–70.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Everett, C. R. (2015). Group membership, relationship banking and loan default risk: The case of online social lending. Banking and Finance Review, 7(2), 1–17.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Fama, E. F. (1985). What’s different about banks? Journal of Monetary Economics, 15, 29–39.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Fazzari, S. M., Hubbard, R. G., & Petersen, B. C. (2000). Investment-cash flow sensitivities are useful: A comment on Kaplan and Zingales. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115(2), 695–705.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Feng, Y., Fan, X., & Yoon, Y. (2015). Lenders and borrowers’ strategies in online peer-to-peer lending market: an empirical analysis of PPDai. com. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 16(3), 242–260.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Fiordelisi, F., & Marques-Ibanez, D. (2013). Is bank default risk systematic? Journal of Banking & Finance, 37(6), 2000–2010.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Flannery, M. (1989). Capital regulation and insured banks choice of individual loan default risks. Journal of Monetary Economics, 24, 235–258.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Freedman, S., & Jin, G. Z. (2008). Do social networks solve information problems for peer-to-peer lending? Evidence from prosper.com. NET Institute working paper (pp. 1–63). http://observer.nsd.edu.cn/cn/userfiles/Other/2010-05/2010050714211151671581.pdf. Accessed July 10, 2016.
  49. 49.
    Freixas, X., Parigi, B. M., & Rochet, J. C. (2000). Systemic risk, interbank relations, and liquidity provision by the central bank. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 32(3), 611–638.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Furlong, F. T., & Keeley, M. C. (1989). Capital regulation and bank risk-taking: A note. Journal of Banking and Finance, 13, 883–891.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Gai, P., & Kapadia, S. (2010). Contagion in financial networks. In Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A: mathematical, physical and engineering sciences (Vol. 466, No. 2120, pp. 2401–2423). The Royal Society.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Gambacorta, L., & Mistrulli, P. E. (2004). Does bank capital affect lending behavior? Journal of Financial Intermediaries., 13, 436–457.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    GAO. (2011). Person-to-person lending: New regulatory challenges could emerge as the industry grows. U.S. Government Accountability Office. GAO-11-613. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11613.pdf. Accessed July 10, 2016.
  54. 54.
    Gennotte, G., & Pyle, D. (1991). Capital controls and bank risk. Journal of Banking and Finance, 15, 805–824.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Greiner, M. E., & Wang, H. (2010). Building consumer-to-consumer trust in e-finance marketplaces: An empirical analysis. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 15(2), 105–136.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Guiso, L., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2004). The role of social capital in financial development. American Economic Review, 94(3), 526–556.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Guillot, C. (2016). How rising interest rates could impact peer-to-peer lending. http://www.bankrate.com/finance/loans/rising-interest-rates-impact-p2p-lending.aspx.
  58. 58.
    Hart, O., & Moore, J. (1994). A theory of debt based on the inalienability of human capital. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109(4), 841–879.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Hellmann, T. F., Murdock, K. C., & Stiglitz, J. E. (2000). Liberalization, moral hazard in banking, and prudential regulation: Are capital requirements enough? American Economic Review, 90(1), 47–165.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Herrero-Lopez, S. (2009). Social interactions in p2p lending. In Proceedings of the 3rd workshop on social network mining and analysis, Paris, France (Vol. 3, pp. 1–8). ACM.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Herzenstein, M., Andrews, R. L., Dholakia, U. M., & Lyandres, E. (2008). The democratization of personal consumer loans? Determinants of success in online peer-to-peer lending communities. Bulletin of the University of Delaware, 5(3), 274–277.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Herzenstein, M., Sonenshein, S., & Dholakia, U. M. (2011). Tell me a good story and I may lend you money: The role of narratives in peer-to-peer lending decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 48((Special Issue)), 138–149.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Irby, L. (2017). How your credits score influences your interest rate, The Balance, 7. https://www.thebalance.com/how-your-credit-score-influences-your-interest-rate-960278.
  64. 64.
    Iyer, R., Khwaja, A. I., Luttmer, E. F., & Shue, K. (2009). Screening in new credit markets: Can individual lenders infer borrower creditworthiness in peer-to-peer lending? KS Faculty Research working paper series (pp. 1–42). John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/4448882/Khwaja-alia%20Screening%20New%20Credit%20Markets.pdf?sequence=1. Accessed July 8, 2016.
  65. 65.
    Jayaratne, J., & Morgan, D. P. (2000). Capital market frictions and deposit constraints at banks. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 32(1), 70–92.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Jiménez, G., Lopez, J. A., & Saurina, J. (2013). How does competition affect bank risk-taking? Journal of Financial Stability, 9(2), 185–195.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Keeley, M. C. (1990). Deposit insurance, risk, and market power in banking. American Economic Review, 80(5), 1183–1200.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Kim, D., & Santomero, A. M. (1988). Risk in banking and capital regulation. Journal of Finance, 43, 1219–1233.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Kishan, R. P., & Opiela, T. P. (2000). Bank size, bank capital and the bank lending channel. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 32, 121–141.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Klafft, M. (2008). Online peer-to-peer lending: A lenders’ perspective. SSRN Electronic Journal, 2(2), 371–375.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Leeth, J. D., & Scott, J. A. (1989). The incidence of secured debt: evidence from the small business community. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 24, 379–394.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Levinthal, D. A., & Fichman, M. (1988). Dynamics of interorganizational attachments: Auditor–client relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33(3), 345–369.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Li, X. (2015). Empirical analysis on the reason of P2P’s closing down. Journal of Financial Development Research., 3, 51–55. (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Liao, L., Li, M., & Sun, B. (2014). Smart investors: Partially liberalized interest rate and moral hazard. Economic Research Journal, 7, 125–137. (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Lichtenstein, S., & Williamson, K. (2006). Understanding consumer adoption of internet banking: An interpretive study in the Australian banking context. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 7(2), 50–66.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Lin, M., Prabhala, N. R., & Viswanathan, S. (2009). Social networks as signaling mechanisms: Evidence from online peer-to-peer lending. Working paper (pp. 1–46). University of Maryland.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Lin, M., Prabhala, N. R., & Viswanathan, S. (2013). Judging borrowers by the company they keep: Friendship networks and information asymmetry in online peer-to-peer lending. Management Science, 59(1), 17–35.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Lindenberg, E. B., & Ross, S. A. (1981). Tobin’s q ratio and industrial organization. Journal of Business, 54(1), 1–32.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Michels, J. (2012). Do unverifiable disclosures matter? Evidence from peer-to-peer lending. The Accounting Review, 87(4), 1385–1413.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Norden, L., & Weber, M. (2010). Credit line usage, checking account activity, and default risk of bank borrowers. The Review of Financial Studies, 23(10), 3665–3699.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Pennathur, A. K. (2001). “Clicks and bricks”: E-risk management for banks in the age of the internet. Journal of Banking & Finance, 25(11), 2103–2123.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Petersen, M. A., & Rajan, R. G. (1994). The benefits of lending relationships: Evidence from small business data. Journal of Finance, 49(1), 3–37.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Polena, M., & Regner, T. (2016). Determinants of borrowers’ default in P2P lending under consideration of the loan risk class (No. 2016-023). Jena Economic Research Papers, No. 2016-023.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Pope, D. G., & Sydnor, J. R. (2008). What’s in a picture: Evidence of discrimination from Prosper.com. Journal of Human Resources, 46(1), 53–92.Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Puro, L., Teich, J. E., Wallenius, H., & Wallenius, J. (2010). Borrower decision aid for people-to-people lending. Decision Support System, 49(1), 52–60.Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Ravina, E. (2008). Love & loans: The effect of beauty and personal characteristics in credit markets. Working paper, Columbia University.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Repullo, R. (2004). Capital requirements, market power, and risk-taking in banking. Journal of Financial Intermediation., 13, 156–182.Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Rochet, J. C., & Tirole, J. (1996). Interbank lending and systemic risk. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 28(4), 733–762.Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Saidenberg, M. R., & Strahan, P. E. (1999). Are banks important for financing large businesses? Current Issues in Economics and Finance, 5(12), 1–6.Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Salas, V., & Saurina, J. (2003). Deregulation, market power and risk behavior in Spanish banks. European Economic Review, 47(6), 1061–1075.Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Serrano-Cinca, C., Gutiérrez-Nieto, B., & López-Palacios, L. (2015). Determinants of default in P2P lending. PLoS ONE, 10(10).  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0139427
  93. 93.
    Spence, M. (1973). Market signaling: Information transfer in hiring and related processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Stiglitz, J., & Weiss, A. (1981). Credit rationing with imperfect information. American Economic Review, 71, 393–410.Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Thakor, A. V. (1996). Capital requirements, monetary policy, and aggregate bank lending: theory and empirical evidence. Journal of Finance., 51, 279–324.Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Tu, J., & Tong, Z. (2016). Risk reserve, loan default, and run on P2P lending platforms. Financial Theory and Practice, 2, 27–31. (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Verstein, A. (2012). Misregulation of person to person lending. Lecturer and Other Affiliate Scholarship Series. Paper 8, http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/ylas/8.
  98. 98.
    Weiss, G. N., Pelger, K., & Horsch, A. (2010). Mitigating adverse selection in P2P lending–empirical evidence from Prosper. Com. Available at SSRN 1650774.Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Wang, R., Hou, J., & He, X. (2017). Real estate price and heterogeneous investment behavior in China. Economic Modelling, 60, 271–280.Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Woodruff, M. (2014). Here’s what you need to know before taking out a peer-to-peer loan. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/what-is-peer-to-peer-lending-173019140.html.
  101. 101.
    Xie, C., & Wang, J. (2015). Research on credit risk of P2P network Lending Platform. Finance, 5(1), 1–5. (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Ye, X. (2014). Model risk and regulation research of P2P lending. Finance Regulation Research, 27, 71–82. (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Yeyati, E. L., & Micco, A. (2007). Concentration and foreign penetration in Latin American banking sectors: Impact on competition and risk. Journal of Banking & Finance, 31(6), 1633–1647.Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Yu, L., Kang, C., & Wang, L. (2015). Using game theory to analyze the regulation of internet financing: A case of P2P lending. Nankai Economic Studies, 5, 126–139. (in Chinese).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of ManagementKyung Hee UniversitySeoulKorea
  2. 2.Peking University HSBC Business SchoolShenzhenChina

Personalised recommendations