1、Peer-to-peer (P2P) lending came to the United States in 2006, when individual investors began lending directly to individual borrowers via online platforms. In the decade since, the industry has grown dramatically, and P2P lending is now widely regarded as the most progressive consumer fi nance inno
2、vation in fi nancial markets today. Online lenders and policymakers have suggested that the P2P market offers unique benefi ts to consumers. Three benefi ts are often repeated and seem to have become widely accepted. First, P2P loans allow consumers to refi -nance expensive credit card debt. Second,
3、 P2P loans can help customers build their credit history and improve their credit scores. Finally, P2P proponents claim that P2P lend-ing extends access to credit to those who are underserved by traditional banks.But signs of problems in the P2P market are appearing. Defaults on P2P loans have been
4、increasing at an alarming rate, resem-bling pre-2007-crisis increases in subprime mortgage defaults, where loans of each vintage perform worse than those of prior origination years (fi gure 1). Such a signal calls for a close examination of P2P lending practices. We exploit a compre-hensive set of c
5、redit bureau data to examine P2P borrowers, their credit behavior, and their credit scores. We fi nd that, on average, borrowers do not use P2P loans to refi nance pre-existing loans, credit scores actually go down for years after P2P borrowing, and P2P loans do not go to the markets under-served by
6、 the traditional banking system.1Overall, P2P loans resemble predatory loans in terms of the segment of the consumer market they serve and their impact on consumers fi nances. Given that P2P lenders are not regulated or super-vised for antipredatory laws, lawmakers and regulators may need to revisit
7、 their position on online lending marketplaces.Three Myths about Peer-to-Peer LoansYuliya Demyanyk, Elena Loutskina, and Daniel KollinerPeer-to-peer lending platforms, which provide a way for individuals who want to invest to lend to those who want to borrow, have experienced phenomenal growth in th
8、e past decade. Many praise the industry and maintain that P2P loans provide unique benefi ts to consumers. We examine a comprehensive set of credit bureau data to examine P2P borrowers, their credit behavior, and their credit scores. We demonstrate there is little evidence of these benefi ts. In fac
9、t, P2P loans resemble predatory loans in terms of the segment of the consumer market they serve and their impact on consumers fi nances.Figure 1. Delinquency Rates by Loan VintagePanel B: Subprime MortgagesPanel A: Peer-to-Peer LoansSource: Demyanyk and Van Hemert (2011). 024681012141220062007201020
10、112009201320122008Loan age (years)Percent delinquent2001200220032004200520072006Loan age (months)314131211109871765415160510152025Percent delinquentSource: Authors calculations based on data from TransUnion.ECONOMIC COMMENTARYNumber 2017-18November 9, 2017ISSN 0428-1276ec 201718.indd 3 11/6/2017 1:3
11、3:08 PMEvaluating Three Claims about P2P LendingWe investigate three questions: Are P2P loans used to refi nance previous loans, do P2P loans help borrowers build a better credit history, and do P2P lenders serve individuals or markets underserved by traditional banks? To accurately assess these que
12、stions, we need to compare the behavior of fi nancially identical people who differ only on one dimen-sion, namely whether they took a P2P loan. That is, we need a sample of people with the same trends of incomes, debt, credit scores, and patterns of loan repayment before any of them took out a P2P
13、loan. Some people in the sample have taken out a P2P loan and others have not. Data with the sample of fi nancially identical individuals are not readily available, so we construct the sample ourselves. We use data from the TransUnion credit bureau, in which we observe about 90,000 distinct individu
14、als who received their fi rst P2P loan between 2007 and 2012. We also observe about 10 million individuals who did not receive P2P loans and whom we label non-P2P individuals. Using a statistical technique called propensity score matching, we identify non-P2P individuals who are fi nancially similar
15、 to P2P individuals during the two years prior to the date on which P2P individu-als obtained their P2P loan. We match individuals based on the location of their residence, their credit score, their total debt, their income, their number of delinquencies in the past two years, and whether or not the
16、y have a mortgage. Are P2P loans used to refi nance previous loans?The most widely promoted argument in favor of P2P lending is that it lowers borrowing costs. Consumers can take on a fi xed-term and potentially lower-cost P2P install-ment loan and use the proceeds to repay expensive lines of credit
17、 (e.g., credit card accounts), thus lowering their overall borrowing costs.Figure 2. Growth of Peer-to-Peer Lending Figure 3. Interest Rates for P2P Loans and Credit CardsSource: TransUnion Consumer Credit Database. Source: B and . 110Outstanding balances (billions of dollars)10090807060504016151413
18、1211109Consumers with a personal loan (millions)Total balances Consumers with a balance2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016Average credit cardPeer-to-peer, A or B ratingPeer-to-peer, C or D ratingAverage peer-to-peer2007 2009 2011 2013 2015Percent191715131197From Peer to Peer to Institution to Pe
19、erWhile P2P lending hasnt changed much from the borrowers perspective since 2006, the composition and operational char-acteristics of investors have changed considerably. Initially, the P2P market was conceived of as individual investors lend-ing to individual borrowers (hence the name, “peer-to-pee
20、r”). Yet even from the industrys earliest days, P2P borrowers attracted institutional investors, including hedge funds, banks, insurance companies, and asset managers. Institutions are now the single largest type of P2P investor, and the institu-tional demand is almost solely responsible for the dra
21、matic, at times triple-digit, growth of P2P loan originations (fi gure 2).2The shift toward institutional investors was welcomed by those concerned with the stability of the fi nancial sector. In their view, the P2P marketplace could increase consum-ers access to credit, a prerequisite to economic r
22、ecovery, by fi lling a market niche that traditional banks were unable or unwilling to serve. The P2P marketplaces contribution to fi nancial stability and economic growth came from the fact that P2P lenders use pools of private capital rather than federally insured bank deposits.Regulations in the P2P industry are concentrated on inves-tors. The S
