P2P-Banking.com

Short news update on Prosper.com developments:

• Changes at the Prosper management team: John Witchel (former CTO) and Tom Pigoski are no longer listed as part of the management team. A comment on this blog post indicates that John Witchel has left the company while Tom Pigoski is on family leave. Chris Denend is now CTO.
• Prosper says it will enable faster listings for qualified borrowers. In a streamlined process some borrowers may post loan listings without adding a title, description or picture.
• Reading statistics published by Prosper? Have a good look on the definitions! In the market survey results, published on Aug. 12th, it looks like on some parameters the year to date figures for 2008 are rising compared to 2007. However looking in the definitions, Prosper compares 7 months in 2008 to 6 months in 2007. (quote:
  2008 Year-to-Date: January 1, 2008 through July 31, 2008.
  2007 Year-to-Date: January 1, 2007 through June 30, 2007.)

The Prosper study I featured yesterday lists the Prosper fees. While it does not attempt to calculate the revenues of Prosper.com it gives some indications regarding the operating costs:

According to Mendelson (2006), the primary costs of Prosper consist of …, (2) a $4 fee for identity authentication, credit pulling, and bank-account setup per active borrower, (3) customer service at the average rate of four interactions per loan and $2 per interaction, and (4) a fixed overhead cost of approximately $3 million per year. …

Given these estimates, it is difficult to measure Prosper accounting in precision. However, there is no doubt that Prosper’s revenue does not cover its full cost (as of February 2008). The difference is met by a large stock of venture capital.

Regarding the Prosper revenues, Mike did a calculation estimating the November 2007 revenues at 114,000 US$. If this is correct, it did not even cover fixed overhead.

Prosper changed fees since that last calculation.

The new study "Dynamic Learning and Selection: The Early Years of Prosper.com" by Seth Freedman and Ginger Zhe Jin, both at the Department of Economics, University of Maryland analyses Prosper data in a time frame from April 19th 2006 to December 31st 2007.

The study analyses the development of the Prosper.com marketplace and how lenders refined their strategies as a result to own experiences and changed settings.

They write:

Overall, we conclude that Prosper is evolving from a comprehensive market to a market that primarily serves the borrowers who have access to traditional credit. This implies that Prosper will compete head-to-head with the traditional banks rather than pick up a missing market. Assuming away any cost in information processing, we estimate that the average rate of return of a Prosper loan is 6% if Prosper loans continue to perform according to what we have predicted from their existing performance. From the lenders point of view, this number compares favorably to 6-month certificate of deposit and 3-year Treasury bill, but less favorably to the rate of return implied by the S&P 500 in the same time period.

Other findings are that high interest loans yield lower returns due to high default rates and that the probability for defaults of Prosper loans peak at month 10 and the edge down.

The main uses of Prosper loans are:

33% of all previous Prosper listings have mentioned credit card consolidation, which is higher than the mention of business (23%), mortgage (15%), education (22%), and family purposes (20%) such as weddings.  

Cited from the conclusion chapter of the study:

The first two years of Prosper has enlivened the concept of P2P lending, but the road towards success is full of challenge. While it is tempting to expect P2P lending to alleviate credit rationing for near- or sub-prime risks, we find Prosper evolving from a comprehensive market toward a market that primarily serves borrowers who have access to traditional credit. This implies that Prosper will compete head-to-head with the traditional banks, rather than pick up a missing market. This pattern is not unique to Prosper. …

How can Prosper compete with traditional banks? Our study suggests that the microfinance approach, as implemented through Prosper groups, has failed to select good risks or enhance loan performance. But on the up side, lenders are learning fast about the pitfalls of P2P lending thanks to the transparency of Prosper. Our calculation suggests that, if the loans continue to perform as what we have predicted from the market performance, Prosper loans could yield an average return of 6%.

See related post on the Prosper blog.

Prosper.com announced yesterday that the offers received for late loans to be sold off as defaults were to low to be acceotable. Doug Fuller, Vice President of Operations says, that with offers at 1.5 cents for the dollar, Prosper believes "the prudent course of business is NOT to sell them at this time". More on the Prosper blog post.

Prosper will run television ads (preview them online). The TV spots will be aired in test markets starting this week.

Prosper.com made the videos of the Prosper Days 2008 available. Thanks Prosper!

I will just feature one session here. In "Managing large portfolios" Adam Weyeneth, President of Fair Deal Credit talks about the issues for institutional lenders that want to invest into the asset class of p2p loans.

Link to this video and the related videos of the other sessions.

Announced today Prosper.com has achieved nationwide lending (exceptions South Dakota and Texas) with an interest rate maximum of 36 percent. Previously maximum interest rates varied on a state by state basis depending by the licenses Prosper had acquired.

Prosper chose the same construct to go national as did Lendingclub in December - both partnered with WebBank, Utah.

All loans originated through the Prosper marketplace are made by WebBank, a Utah-chartered Industrial Bank. Prosper provides services to WebBank in connection with the origination of such loans and Prosper services loans made to Prosper borrowers on behalf of registered Prosper lenders who purchase such loans.

This step has good potential to multiply the monthly loan volume originated by Prosper, as chances for obtaining a loan were in the past harmed in some states by low state interest rate caps (especially for lower credit grades).

CBS recently featured Prosper and Lendingclub under the headline "Beating the financial giants at their own game".

P2P Lending service Lendingclub.com, which launched last May, today surpasses 10 million US$ in loans. While the total amount is still much lower then the loan volume of competitor Prosper.com (currently over 120 million US$ loan volume) the growth acceleration of Lendingclub is really impressive.

Rob Garcia, Director Web production at Lending Club, told P2P-Banking.com:

This milestone confirms the validity of our approach to person-to-person lending, but more importantly, our value proposition to our borrowers and lenders.  Borrowers are realizing 20-30% better rates than going through the banks, while our lenders enjoy 12% average returns.  We are working to take this concept to a larger audience, so $10M is just a mile marker in our marathon.

The growth can be seen in this chart. For Prosper loan volume compare chart on this page. So basically in February Lending Club has originiated close to the amount Prosper did, when taking into account only those loans that would fit the minimum criteria of Lending Club's 640 FICO score and <30% DTI.

The statistic information at Lendingclub.com shows that over 1200 loans have been issued. So far few loans are late, but since most of the loans are very young, it is to early to tell which level of defaults will have to be expected. The statistic page also shows that Lendingclub declined over 80 million US$ in loan applications.

If you sign up via this link, you get a 25 US$ bonus by Lending Club (and I am paid a referral fee).

Prosper Days 2008 took place Monday and Tuesday. Judging from the impressions of attending lenders, who blogged about it, it was a well organised event, but for seasoned lenders there were few news announced. No news about the long awaited secondary market. One blogger sees the Bidding via API function as highlight. Further news is that Prosper will start suing borrowers who defaulted on their loans. This could improve results in the collection process, where effiency is low. Explanations of Prosper about which changes were tested in the collection process were appreciated. 
A good improvement will be Prosper's plan to change payment dates. So far the date a payment is due has been dependent on the initiation date of the loan. Soon payment dates will be matched with borrowers pay day. I am sure this will reduce lates, but I do wonder why such an obvious and easy change was not implemented much earlier. Some of the international sites from inception took into consideration at which time of the month the borrowers are likely to be liquid when setting payment dates.

I hope Prosper will publish videos of the session on their website, like they did with the Prosper Days 2007.