Gaining a Seat at the Table: Enhancing the Attractiveness of Online Lending for Institutional Investors

References

• Agarwal S, Ambrose BW, Liu C (2006) Credit lines and credit utilization. J. Money Credit Banking 38(1):1–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal S, Alok S, Ghosh P, Gupta S (2020) Financial inclusion and alternate credit scoring for the millennials: Role of big data and machine learning in Fintech. Preprint, submitted January 14, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3507827.Google Scholar
• Balyuk T (2022) FinTech lending and bank credit access for consumers. Management Sci. 69(1):555–575.Link, Google Scholar
• Bartlett R, Morse A, Stanton R, Wallace N (2022) Consumer-lending discrimination in the FinTech era. J. Financial Econom. 143(1):30–56.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beioley K, Megaw N (2019) Peer-to-peer pressure: Do the risks outweigh the rewards? Financial Times (March 19), https://www.ft.com/content/6bf2c806-4a6b-11e9-8b7f-d49067e0f50d.Google Scholar
• Berg T, Fuster A, Puri M (2022) Fintech lending. Annual Rev. Financial Econom. 14(1):187–207.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bhutta N, Bricker J, Chang AC, Dettling LJ, Goodman S, Hsu JW, Moore KB, Reber S, Henriques Volz A, Windle R (2020) Changes in U.S. family finances from 2016 to 2019: Evidence from the survey of consumer finances. Fed. Reserve Bull. 106(5):1–42.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brandt MW, Santa-Clara P, Valkanov R (2009) Parametric portfolio policies: Exploiting characteristics in the cross-section of equity returns. Rev. Financial Stud. 22(9):3411–3447.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Byanjankar A, Mezei J, Heikkilä M (2021) Data-driven optimization of peer-to-peer lending portfolios based on the expected value framework. Intelligent Systems Accounting Finance Management 28(2):119–129.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Campbell JY, Viceira LM (2001) Who should buy long-term bonds? Amer. Econom. Rev. 91(1):99–127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cheung CS, Kwan CC, Sarkar S (2010) Bond portfolio laddering: A mean-variance perspective. J. Appl. Finance 20(1):103–109.Google Scholar
• Chi G, Ding S, Peng X (2019) Data-driven robust credit portfolio optimization for investment decisions in P2P lending. Math. Problems Engrg. 2019:1902970.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cho P, Chang W, Song JW (2019) Application of instance-based entropy fuzzy support vector machine in peer-to-peer lending investment decision. IEEE Access 7:16925–16939.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cremers KM, Petajisto A (2009) How active is your fund manager? A new measure that predicts performance. Rev. Financial Stud. 22(9):3329–3365.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DeMiguel V, Garlappi L, Uppal R (2009) Optimal vs. naive diversification: How inefficient is the 1/N portfolio strategy? Rev. Financial Stud. 22(5):1915–1953.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Du N, Li L, Lu T, Lu X (2020) Prosocial compliance in P2P lending: A natural field experiment. Management Sci. 66(1):315–333.Google Scholar
• Duarte J, Siegel S, Young L (2012) Trust and credit: The role of appearance in Peer-to-Peer lending. Rev. Financial Stud. 25(8):2455–2484.Google Scholar
• Emekter R, Tu Y, Jirasakuldech B, Lu M (2015) Evaluating credit risk and loan performance in online Peer-to-Peer (P2P) lending. Appl. Econom. 47(1):54–70.Google Scholar
• Everett CR (2015) Group membership, relationship banking and loan default risk: The case of online social lending. Banking Finance Rev. 7(2):15–54.Google Scholar
• Fu R, Huang Y, Singh PV (2021) Crowds, lending, machine, and bias. Inform. Systems Res. 32(1):72–92.Link, Google Scholar
• Fuster A, Plosser M, Schnabl P, Vickery J (2019) The role of technology in mortgage lending. Rev. Financial Stud. 32(5):1854–1899.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goldstein I, Jiang W, Karolyi GA (2019) To fintech and beyond. Rev. Financial Stud. 32(5):1647–1661.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gopal M, Schnabl P (2022) The rise of finance companies and fintech lenders in small business lending. Rev. Financial Stud. 35(11):4859–4901.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gu S, Kelly B, Xiu D (2020) Empirical asset pricing via machine learning. Rev. Financial Stud. 33(5):2223–2273.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guo Y, Jiang S, Qiao H, Chen F, Li Y (2021) A new integrated similarity measure for enhancing instance-based credit assessment in P2P lending. Expert Systems Appl. 175:114798.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guo Y, Zhou W, Luo C, Liu C, Xiong H (2016) Instance-based credit risk assessment for investment decisions in P2P lending. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 249(2):417–426.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huang H, Wang ML (2021) The fall of online P2P lending in China: A critique of the central-local co-regulatory regime. Banking Finance Law Rev. 36(3):481–515.Google Scholar
• Iyer R, Khwaja AI, Luttmer EFP, Shue K (2016) Screening peers softly: Inferring the quality of small borrowers. Management Sci. 62(6):1554–1577.Google Scholar
• Jiang C, Wang Z, Wang R, Ding Y (2018) Loan default prediction by combining soft information extracted from descriptive text in online Peer-to-Peer lending. Ann. Oper. Res. 266(1):511–529.Google Scholar
• Judd KL, Kubler F, Schmedders K (2011) Bond ladders and optimal portfolios. Rev. Financial Stud. 24(12):4123–4166.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaplan SN, Schoar A (2005) Private equity performance: Returns, persistence, and capital flows. J. Finance 60(4):1791–1823.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katsamakas E, Sánchez-Cartas JM (2022) Network formation and financial inclusion in P2P lending: A computational model. Systems 10(5):155.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kingma DP, Ba JL (2015) Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. Bengio Y, LeCun Y, eds. Proc. Internat. Conf. Learn. Representations (OpenReview.net, San Diego).Google Scholar
• Klein G, Shtudiner Z, Zwilling M (2023) Why do peer-to-peer (P2P) lending platforms fail? The gap between P2P lenders’ preferences and the platforms’ intentions. Electronic Commerce Res. 23:709–738.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kleinberg J, Lakkaraju H, Leskovec J, Ludwig J, Mullainathan S (2018) Human decisions and machine predictions. Quart. J. Econom. 133(1):237–293.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lin M, Prabhala NR, Viswanathan S (2013) Judging borrowers by the company they keep: Friendship networks and information asymmetry in online Peer-to-Peer lending. Management Sci. 59(1):17–35.Google Scholar
• Liu D, Brass DJ, Lu Y, Chen D (2015) Friendships in online Peer-to-Peer lending. MIS Quart. 39(3):729–742.Google Scholar
• Michaud RO (1989) The Markowitz optimization enigma: Is “optimized” optimal? Financial Anal. J. 45(1):31–42.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nemoto N, Storey DJ, Huang B (2019) Optimal regulation of P2P lending for small and medium-sized enterprises. Working paper, Asian Development Bank, Tokyo.Google Scholar
• Pope DG, Sydnor JR (2011) What's in a picture? Evidence of discrimination from Prosper.com. J. Human Resources 46(1):53–92.Google Scholar
• Serrano-Cinca C, Gutiérrez-Nieto B (2016) The use of profit scoring as an alternative to credit scoring systems in peer-to-peer (P2P) lending. Decision Support Systems 89:113–122.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Serrano-Cinca C, Gutiérrez-Nieto B, López-Palacios L (2015) Determinants of default in P2P lending. PLoS One 10(10):e0139427.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shen X, Tan T, Phan T, Keppo J (2023) Gender animus can still exist under favorable disparate impact: A cautionary tale from online P2P lending. Fox S, Harrington C, Huq AZ, Tan C, eds. Proc. 2023 ACM. Conf. Fairness Accountability Transparency (FAccT ‘23) (Association for Computing Machinery, New York).Google Scholar
• U.S. Treasury (2016) Opportunities and challenges in online marketplace lending. White paper, U.S. Treasury, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• Wang Z, Jiang C, Zhao H, Ding Y (2020) Mining semantic soft factors for credit risk evaluation in Peer-to-Peer lending. J. Management Inform. Systems 37(1):282–308.Google Scholar
• Xu JJ, Chau M (2018) Cheap talk? The impact of lender-borrower communication on Peer-to-Peer lending outcomes. J. Management Inform. Systems 35(1):53–85.Google Scholar