IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fip/fedpwp/19-22.html

Consumer Lending Efficiency:Commercial Banks Versus A Fintech Lender

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph P. Hughes
  • Julapa Jagtiani
  • Choon-Geol Moon

Abstract

We compare the performance of unsecured personal installment loans made by traditional bank lenders with that of LendingClub, using a stochastic frontier estimation technique to decompose the observed nonperforming loans into three components. The first is the best-practice minimum ratio that a lender could achieve if it were fully efficient at credit-risk evaluation and loan management. The second is a ratio that reflects the difference between the observed ratio (adjusted for noise) and the minimum ratio that gauges the lender?s relative proficiency at credit analysis and loan monitoring. The third is statistical noise. In 2013 and 2016, the largest bank lenders experienced the highest ratio of nonperformance, the highest inherent credit risk, and the highest lending efficiency, indicating that their high ratio of nonperformance is driven by inherent credit risk, rather than by lending inefficiency. LendingClub?s performance was similar to small bank lenders as of 2013. As of 2016, LendingClub?s performance resembled the largest bank lenders ? the highest ratio of nonperforming loans, inherent credit risk, and lending efficiency ? although its loan volume was smaller. Our findings are consistent with a previous study that suggests LendingClub became more effective in risk identification and pricing starting in 2015. Caveat: We note that this conclusion may not be applicable to fintech lenders in general, and the results may not hold under different economic conditions such as a downturn

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph P. Hughes & Julapa Jagtiani & Choon-Geol Moon, 2019. "Consumer Lending Efficiency:Commercial Banks Versus A Fintech Lender," Working Papers 19-22, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedpwp:19-22
    DOI: 10.21799/frbp.wp.2019.22
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.philadelphiafed.org/-/media/frbp/assets/working-papers/2019/wp19-22.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.21799/frbp.wp.2019.22?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pampurini, Francesca & Pezzola, Annagiulia & Quaranta, Anna Grazia, 2024. "Lending business models and FinTechs efficiency," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    2. Hughes, Joseph P. & Moon, Choon-Geol, 2022. "How bad is a bad loan? Distinguishing inherent credit risk from inefficient lending (Does the capital market price this difference?)," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    3. Onorato, Grazia & Pampurini, Francesca & Quaranta, Anna Grazia, 2024. "Lending activity efficiency. A comparison between fintech firms and the banking sector," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    4. Çağlar Hamarat & Daniel Broby, 2022. "Regulatory constraint and small business lending: do innovative peer-to-peer lenders have an advantage?," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 8(1), pages 1-25, December.
    5. Janbek, Khalil-Etienne & Bancel, Franck, 2024. "Fintech lenders and borrowers screening: Superior abilities or lax practices?," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    6. Yiping Huang & Xiang Li & Han Qiu & Changhua Yu, 2023. "Big tech credit and monetary policy transmission: micro-level evidence from China," BIS Working Papers 1084, Bank for International Settlements.
    7. Wang, Haijun & Mao, Kunyuan & Wu, Wanting & Luo, Haohan, 2023. "Fintech inputs, non-performing loans risk reduction and bank performance improvement," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    8. Arif Perdana & Pearpilai Jutasompakorn & Sunghun Chung, 2023. "Shaping crowdlending investors’ trust: Technological, social, and economic exchange perspectives," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-17, December.
    9. Krzysztof Waliszewski & Ewa Cichowicz & £ukasz Gêbski & Filip Kliber & Jakub Kubiczek & Pawe³ Niedzió³ka & Ma³gorzata Solarz & Anna Warchlewska, 2023. "The role of the Lendtech sector in the consumer credit market in the context of household financial exclusion," Oeconomia Copernicana, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 14(2), pages 609-643, June.
    10. Huang, Yiping & Li, Xiang & Qiu, Han & Su, Dan & Yu, Changhua, 2024. "Bigtech credit, small business, and monetary policy transmission: Theory and evidence," IWH Discussion Papers 18/2022, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH), revised 2024.
    11. Rui Ai & Yuhang Zheng & Serhat Yüksel & Hasan Dinçer, 2023. "Investigating the components of fintech ecosystem for distributed energy investments with an integrated quantum spherical decision support system," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 9(1), pages 1-28, December.
    12. Cornelli, Giulio & Frost, Jon & Gambacorta, Leonardo & Jagtiani, Julapa, 2024. "The impact of fintech lending on credit access for U.S. small businesses," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    13. Pierri, Nicola & Timmer, Yannick, 2022. "The importance of technology in banking during a crisis," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 88-104.
    14. Mr. Nicola Pierri & Mr. Yannick Timmer, 2020. "Tech in Fin before FinTech: Blessing or Curse for Financial Stability?," IMF Working Papers 2020/014, International Monetary Fund.
    15. Cheng, Aijun, 2023. "Evaluating Fintech industry's risks: A preliminary analysis based on CRISP-DM framework," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 55(PB).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C58 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Financial Econometrics
    • G21 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Banks; Other Depository Institutions; Micro Finance Institutions; Mortgages
    • L25 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Performance

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fip:fedpwp:19-22. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Beth Paul (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/frbphus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.