Sean Murray is the President and Chief Editor of deBanked and the founder of the Broker Fair Conference. Connect with me on LinkedIn or follow me on twitter. You can view all future deBanked events here.
Articles by Sean Murray
No Fees, Ever – Is Goldman Sachs Winning Or Losing The Online Lending Battle?
September 30, 2019
Peer-to-Peer lending in the United States died the day Goldman Sachs launched a rival online lending company in 2016. Armed with a low cost of capital and the trust of a household name, Marcus, as Goldman Sachs referred to themselves, sought to further disrupt consumer lending by eliminating every type of fee including late fees. Its pitch was simple, “No fees. Ever.” Three years later, the company still hasn’t caught up to competitors like Lending Club in origination volume (Marcus’ loan book is $5B vs. Lending Club’s $15B). Its fee-less model may also be backfiring.
Goldman’s consumer lending business has racked up major losses, according to the WSJ. “It spent heavily to buy startups and cloud-storage space, hire hundreds of techies, and build call centers in Utah and Texas. Loans have gone bad at a higher rate than that of rivals.”
For all of the bank’s early bluster, they were so afraid of negative PR, that they launched without a collections department, leading to significantly high bad debt, the WSJ reports. That has since changed. But where Goldman Sachs appears to have lost, they may still be on track to win. As a consumer “bank” Marcus can also accept deposits. It had collected $36 billion as of year-end 2018 and added another $14 billion this year so far. Goldman also scored a valuable partnership with Apple on a branded credit card. The pitch is a familiar one, “No fees. Not even hidden ones.”
Apple promotes its card as “Created by Apple, not a bank,” yet The WSJ ironically reports that Goldman spent $300 million creating the card for Apple.
In a Q2 earnings call, Goldman CFO Stephen Scherr said that the bank was shifting its consumer lending focus from Marcus to the Apple Card. “I’d also say that if you look at the level and rate of growth in the Marcus loan business, while it continues to grow and perform well, we have slowed the increasing growth in that in contemplation of taking on increasing consumer credit through the card business,” he said. “What’s important for us is that we look at this on a risk-adjusted return basis not simply on a return on asset construct.”
Competitively, however, Scherr couldn’t answer if the consumer lending business’s costs will ultimately look more like a fintech lender or a bank as they scale. “What I can tell you is that what we have built jointly with Apple both on the front end and on the back end is intended to be operationally resilient, but equally is intended to be efficient both in terms of the application all through the delivery and on the back-end and so my expectation is that the efficiency will be reflected in that, but again premature to sort of put numbers around it.”
Of note is that Goldman acquired or acqui-hired from Clarity Money, Bond Street, and Final.
Could Peer-to-Peer Lending Be Resurrected By Falling Interest Rates? At Least For Now?
September 19, 2019
As interest rates rose and yields for investors at peer-to-peer (p2p) lenders collapsed, the allure of p2p lending, at least from my perspective, was gone.
Rates on FDIC-insured CDs hit 2.5% while annual returns at some popular p2p lenders had declined to less than 5%. That’s a very narrow spread between an investment that has no risk of loss versus one that has a risk of losing everything, is rather unpredictable, and is marred by a history of misleading investors and overstating returns.
I compared the options and made the obvious decision and started withdrawing my personally invested funds out of p2p lenders 3 years ago in favor of more traditional investments like stock index funds.
But now interest rates are falling and it’s possible that retail investors once wooed by modestly generous savings account rates could begin to consider alternative options to generate returns. Enter P2P lending, again.
At Lending Club, the percentage of individual investors has trended downward consistently. In Q1 2015 these investors accounted for 19% of all platform originations with a total of $308 million. In the most recent quarter, that group has shrunk down to 5% of originations and only $155 million.
But at StreetShares, an online small business lender that offers individual retail investors a fixed 5% annualized return, the trend is the opposite. In a recent statement the company filed with the SEC, they claimed they had actually shifted away from funds from institutional capital providers and towards funds from retail investors. It doesn’t get into the specifics about why that is but it’s certainly unusual. StreetShares’ investment offering carries a total risk of loss much like other p2p lenders.
But interest rates aren’t supposed to fall in a void where nothing else in the outside world is happening. Assuming the economy is cooling, or worse, eventually heading towards a recession, the somewhat attractive looking p2p loan yields will fall as well since defaults on the underlying loans will rise.
So what does this mean? It means that online lenders, to the extent they’re still interested, have a potentially short window to entice retail investors back. To do so, they’ll have to convince the world that past transgressions are behind them and that low savings account rates can be supplanted by people helping their peers in return for a slightly better yield. That’s how the entire concept took off to begin with. I say the window is short because once we’re actually in a recession, it will become incredibly hard to convince fearful investors to participate in making risky online loans especially if the average returns drop into the negative. Don’t be surprised when that happens.
Up Next On The New York Legislative Agenda: Funder, Lender, and Broker Licensing
September 10, 2019
New York State Senator James Sanders Jr. has introduced S6688, a commercial financing licensing bill that would require persons or entities engaging in the business of making or soliciting commercial financing products in New York state to obtain a license from the New York Department of Financial Services. The bill covers small business lenders, merchant cash advance companies, factors, and leasing companies for transactions under $500,000.
The bill likely won’t see any activity until the New York legislative session resumes in 2020, at which point it could be amended or killed.
As currently drafted, applicants for a license would be subject to a criminal background search and be required to submit their fingerprints for a review by agencies such as the FBI. In addition to paying an application fee, applicants would be required to maintain liquid assets of $50,000.
Sanders, the bill’s sponsor, is the Chairman of the banking committee. You can read the full text of the bill here.
Stripe Ventures Into Merchant Cash Advance Financing
September 6, 2019
Stripe, a payments firm lauded as the world’s most valuable private fintech company (at $22.5B), has officially launched a merchant cash advance product.
Dozens of news outlets have announced that the company is providing loans, but that’s not all, deBanked has learned. Both loans and merchant cash advances are available.
The company’s FAQ page originally explained the “Capital” product as a merchant cash advance but it’s since been updated to reflect that they offer access to both merchant cash advances and loans. An official Stripe spokesperson also clarified that an offer could be an MCA or a loan. The updated FAQ says that funding terms would be available in the customer dashboard, in the funding contract, and that which one a customer qualifies for depends on the specifics of their business.
Stripe merchant account customers can find out if they’re eligible for funding in their dashboard. If they’re not, they can still send Stripe a note through the dashboard to signal that they’re interested, say how much they’re looking for, and select what they plan to do with the funds. Stripe says they will not review your credit report and that all offers are based solely on Stripe transaction history.
The new product will not disrupt the separate integration with Funding Circle, according to a statement provided to Digital Transactions. Stripe customers can still apply to Funding Circle by connecting their Stripe account. Funding Circle offers term loans that range from six months to five years.
Stripe’s MCA product is currently only available in the US, but the company’s founders, Patrick and John Collison, brothers, hail from an unlikely place, rural Ireland. The company handles tens of billions of dollars in payments a year across 34 countries.
Like other recent entrants into the small business funding space, Stripe’s advantage is its ability to tap into its existing customer base. Other payments companies such as PayPal and Square, for example, were among the top four largest originators (for which public data is available) of alternative small business funding in 2018.
Note: This article has been updated to reflect the changes made on Stripe’s website as well as an additional clarification from the company.
A Side-By-Side Look At Small Business Funding Securitization Pools
September 6, 2019Several small business funding companies have closed majored securitization deals since 2018 with Kroll Bond Rating Agency rating the transactions. For the most recent transaction with National Funding, Kroll compared each securitized pool side-by-side in a chart. An abbreviated version of it is below:
| NFAS 2019-1 (National Funding) | RFS 2018-1 (Rapid Finance) | CRDBL 2018-1 (Credibly) | SFS 2018-1 (Kapitus) | |
| Weighted Avg Original Expected Time (months) | 9.9 | 11.7 | 11.5 | 7.8 |
| Weighted Avg RTR Ratio | 1.36x | 1.27x | 1.32 | 1.35 |
| Weighted Avg Credit Score | 664 | 665 | 679 | 649 |
| Weight Avg Time in Biz (years) | 9.6 | 14.6 | 12.3 | 12.5 |
| Percentage of MCA | 0.0% | 14.1% | 45.8% | 60% |
| Percentage of Loan | 100% | 85.9% | 54.2% | 40% |
New York’s COJ Restrictions Have Been Signed Into Law
August 30, 2019
Governor Cuomo has signed S6395, the law that outlaws entering a Confession of Judgment in New York against a non-New York debtor.
Rich Azzopardi, a senior advisor to the governor, said on social media that the law has “closed a loophole that allowed unscrupulous creditors to use NY courts to penalize out-of-state consumers with no ties to the state.” He congratulated Senators Brad Hoylman and Assembly Member Jeffrey Dinowitz for their work on the bill.
Senator Hoylman tweeted in response that “the entire business model of lenders who exploited New York’s court system and laws to prey on out-of-state small businesses through confessions of judgment was immoral.”
The Confession of Judgment ban is very specific, it prohibits the entering of a COJ in New York against a non-New York party. It does not prevent parties from filing lawsuits in New York. It does not prohibit COJs from being filed in other states. This law is significant because approximately 99% of COJs being utilized in the small business finance industry were being filed in New York regardless of where the debtor resided. That is because the New York Court system is the fastest and most efficient when it comes to entering COJs and securing a judgment.
The bill was drafted in response to a controversial story series published by Bloomberg reporters Zeke Faux and Zachary Mider that alleged abuses were taking place in the New York courts via COJs.
New York’s COJ Bill Has Been Delivered To The Governor
August 28, 2019
New York’s infamous Confession of Judgment bill has finally been delivered to the governor for his signature. Although the legislative process offers flexibility to depart from the statutory timelines (as we have witnessed), the governor now presumably has 10 days or less to sign it. Stay tuned.
The Confession of Judgment ban is very specific, it prohibits the entering of a COJ in New York against a non-New York resident. It does not prevent parties from filing lawsuits in New York. It does not prohibit COJs from being filed in other states. This law is significant because approximately 99% of COJs being utilized in the small business finance industry were being filed in New York regardless of where the debtor resided. That is because the New York Court system is the fastest and most efficient when it comes to entering COJs and securing a judgment.
The 2019 Top Small Business Funders By Revenue
August 14, 2019The below chart ranks several companies in the non-bank small business financing space by revenue over the last 5 years. The data is primarily drawn from reports submitted to the Inc. 5000 list, public earnings statements, or published media reports. It is not comprehensive. Companies for which no data is publicly available are excluded. Want to add your figures? Email Sean@debanked.com
| Company | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 |
| Square | $3,298,177,000 | $2,214,253,000 | $1,708,721,000 | $1,267,118,000 | $850,192,000 |
| OnDeck | $398,376,000 | $350,950,000 | $291,300,000 | $254,700,000 | $158,100,000 |
| Kabbage | $200,000,000+* | $171,784,000 | $97,461,712 | $40,193,000 | |
| Global Lending Services | $232,200,000 | $125,700,000 | |||
| Bankers Healthcare Group | $220,300,000 | $160,300,000 | $93,825,129 | ||
| National Funding | $121,300,000 | $94,500,000 | $75,693,096 | $59,075,878 | $39,048,959 |
| Forward Financing | $75,500,000 | $42,100,000 | $28,305,078 | ||
| ApplePie Capital | $69,700,000 | ||||
| Fora Financial | $68,600,000 | $50,800,000 | $41,590,720 | $33,974,000 | $26,932,581 |
| Reliant Funding | $64,800,000 | $55,400,000 | $51,946,000 | $11,294,044 | $9,723,924 |
| Envision Capital Group | $32,700,000 | ||||
| Expansion Capital Group | $31,300,300 | $23,400,000 | |||
| SmartBiz Loans | $23,600,000 | ||||
| 1 Global Capital | bankruptcy | $22,600,000 | |||
| IOU Financial | $19,200,000 | $17,415,096 | $17,400,527 | $11,971,148 | $6,160,017 |
| Quicksilver Capital | $16,500,000 | ||||
| Channel Partners Capital | $23,000,000 | $14,500,000 | $2,207,927 | $4,013,608 | |
| Lendr | $16,500,000 | $11,800,000 | |||
| Lighter Capital | $16,000,000 | $11,900,000 | $6,364,417 | $4,364,907 | |
| United Capital Source | $9,735,350 | $8,465,260 | $3,917,193 | ||
| Fundera | $15,600,000 | $8,800,000 | |||
| US Business Funding | $14,800,000 | $9,100,000 | $5,794,936 | ||
| Wellen Capital | $12,200,000 | $13,200,000 | $15,984,688 | ||
| PIRS Capital | $11,900,000 | ||||
| Nav | $10,300,000 | $5,900,000 | $2,663,344 | ||
| P2Binvestor | $10,000,000 | ||||
| Seek Business Capital | $8,800,000 | ||||
| Fund&Grow | $7,500,000 | $5,700,000 | $4,082,130 | ||
| Funding Merchant Source | $7,500,000 | ||||
| Shore Funding Solutions | $5,000,000 | $4,300,000 | |||
| StreetShares | $4,967,426 | $3,701,210 | $647,119 | $239,593 | |
| FitSmallBusiness.com | $3,000,000 | ||||
| Eagle Business Credit | $3,600,000 | $2,600,000 | |||
| Everlasting Capital | $2,500,000 | $2,100,000 | |||
| Swift Capital | acquired by PayPal | $88,600,000 | $51,400,000 | $27,540,900 | |
| Blue Bridge Financial | $6,569,714 | $5,470,564 | |||
| Fast Capital 360 | $6,264,924 | ||||
| Cashbloom | $5,404,123 | $4,804,112 | $3,941,819 | ||
| Priority Funding Solutions | $2,599,931 |
