What is the rating of P2P online loan? P2P online lending is a rapidly developing emerging industry. There is no effective regulatory policy, which not only lacks authoritative information sources, but also lacks effective channels to verify the authenticity of data. Let's take a look at what the P2P online loan rating is.
What is the rating of P2P online loan? Starting from 1 20 13, Internet finance, P2P online lending and P2P online lending ratings are on fire. In addition to the ratings of various websites, Fitch Ratings, one of the three major rating companies in the world, also announced its participation in P2P online loan rating.
Generally speaking, industry ratings are mainly divided into two categories, one is regulatory ratings, which are rated by regulatory authorities.
For example, the CBRC's regulatory rating on commercial banks and the Jiangsu Provincial Financial Office's regulatory rating on small loan companies in the province. The other is the third-party rating, such as the credit rating of countries (regions) and enterprises by third-party institutions such as Standard & Poor's and Fitch.
At present, although the regulatory authorities have clearly put forward the red line of P2P development, the regulatory regulations have not yet been promulgated and the industry standards have not been unified.
In this context, whether the third-party rating of P2P online loans can play a professional role and fairly reflect the real situation of the evaluated P2P platform has become a realistic problem facing the development of P2P industry. From an objective and fair point of view, the third-party rating of P2P online loans can reflect the following contents:
What is the rating of P2P online loan?
First, rating indicators should conform to the direction of regulatory policies.
Peer-to-peer lending, whether it is a credit intermediary or an information intermediary, is the industry with the heaviest financial attributes in the field of internet finance, and it essentially undertakes many functions of assisting risk management. P2P online loan rating needs to reflect the regulatory red line, which is the basis of rating credibility.
165438+1On October 26th, Pan, deputy governor of the People's Bank of China, stressed at the 20 14 China Payment and Clearing and Internet Finance Forum that peer-to-peer lending should not engage in a fund pool or illegally absorb public funds. Previously, Director Rebecca of the Innovation Department of China Banking Regulatory Commission also put forward ten principles of P2P online loan supervision.
Including clear information intermediary identity, no fund pool, no self-financing, adhere to the service of small and micro, do not pursue high interest rates, and fully disclose information. If a P2P platform that touches the regulatory red line can still achieve good rating results, the credibility of the rating will be greatly reduced.
Second, the distribution of rating indicators should be balanced.
Internet finance combines the elements of Internet and finance, emphasizing not only customer experience, but also investment security. Therefore, the rating score of P2P online loans cannot simply emphasize one aspect, but should be considered as a whole.
But for most investors, the first consideration should be the rationality and accuracy of safety indicators and the proportion of scores. If the safety-related indicators are few, vague or the score ratio is limited, the reference value of the rating to investors will be reduced.
At the same time, the customers of P2P online lending include both borrowers and borrowers, so their customer experience should include not only investors, but also borrowers, such as financing cost, raising time, borrowing period and so on.
Especially for the financing cost, we should not simply adopt the listing interest rate, but also fully consider the "hidden" factors such as repayment methods and charging standards.
Third, the rating should minimize subjective influence.
As an emerging industry, P2P online lending industry standards have not yet been introduced, such as the definition of bad standards? How to measure technical security? How to compare the degree of information disclosure and so on.
The regulatory rating of banking institutions considers asset quality and risk control level, and will be measured by indicators such as non-performing loan amount and non-performing loan ratio, and the authenticity and effectiveness of the data will be ensured through prudential supervision, systematic monitoring and daily submission by regulatory agencies such as the People's Bank of China and the China Banking Regulatory Commission.
As a third party, P2P online loan rating is not effectively assisted by regulatory policies, and it not only lacks authoritative information sources, but also lacks effective channels to verify the authenticity of data.
Except for the public data such as transaction volume, the core information basically depends on the active disclosure of P2P institutions, so it is difficult to guarantee the authority and reliability of the data provided by them. Some truthfully disclose, but the score is low, and some resort to deceit, which may lead to a higher score.
On the other hand, some indicators are subjective, and scoring can only rely on the subjective judgment of "judges". Therefore, when designing rating indicators, we should pay special attention to the availability and authenticity of information, and minimize the space for subjective judgment in the rating process through quantitative' data support'.
As an emerging industry in the process of rapid development, P2P online lending is constantly innovating its format and mode from international to domestic.
From the previous "peer-to-peer" to the current "end-to-end", as well as innovations such as bill financing and policy financing, the P2P online loan rating needs to be constantly adjusted and updated according to the development of the online loan industry, and the rating technology needs to be continuously improved.
What is the rating of P2P online loan? What are the misunderstandings in P2P online lending industry?
P2P= pool of funds+maturity mismatch?
What is a pool of funds? Simply put, the platform gathers the funds of investors with different maturities and amounts, and then invests in different projects.
A person in charge of P2P platform said that the suspected fund pool of online loans means that the online lending platform has not established a direct corresponding lending relationship between borrowers and lenders, and obtained and collected lending funds before matching the lending relationship.
Not setting up a pool of funds is the bottom line for regular platforms to do P2P business. At present, many platforms in the online lending industry claim that they do not involve customer funds, but only undertake functions such as information matching, tool support and service. The customer funds of the platform are paid by the third party or entrusted to the bank.
However, the reporter learned that there are also some platforms that publicize and sign fund custody cooperation with third-party payment companies or banks. In fact, they still stay at the level of signing the cooperation intention agreement, which is still far from the actual landing.
Because the ultimate reason behind the analysis of the industry's thunder phenomenon often points to the above two keywords, both investors and onlookers have certain psychological hints, that is, all P2P online lending platforms are carriers of fund pool and maturity mismatch.
P2P online lending with light assets as its core feature does not need a fund pool in essence. Lenders and borrowers are directly connected through the internet platform, and the transfer of funds is completed through third-party payment. The capital flow should be decentralized and directly connected. The fund pool is often related to maturity mismatch. The essence of maturity mismatch is the division of time, thus growing in a short time.
An industry insider told this reporter, for example, that if the borrower's loan term is one year, some P2P platforms may split the one-year term into four investment projects with a term of three months, and the principal and interest received by the former investor due is actually the funds of the latter investor.
Once the follow-up funds are missing, the platform will not be able to repay the principal interest of the previous investors, which will lead to the break of the platform capital chain and the difficulty in withdrawing cash. It can be seen that maturity mismatch is more likely to lead to liquidity risk.
Gregory D Gibb, chairman of lufax, once said that liquidity risk will become the biggest risk faced by P2P online lending industry. Many people in the industry said that the main way to solve this risk at present is to establish a P2P "secondary market tide,
This model originated from lufax. After an investor holds the platform project for a certain period of time, he can initiate the "secondary market transfer" through the platform, and after another investor "takes over", he can get the principal and interest of the investment.
"The split of credit line cannot be mismatched, because" debt "itself is a divisible asset, which is essentially different from time split. From a financial point of view, the concept of the amount of creditor's rights is beneficial rather than harmful. " Some people in the legal profession said.
Debtor information has no bottom line disclosure?
In the field of P2P, there is often a misunderstanding about information transparency, that is, the debtor's information is not private and should be completely disclosed to the public, which is called "data transparency".
But the fact is that there is a certain "bottom line" for debtor information disclosure. The person in charge of a P2P platform said that publishing debtor information indefinitely, on the one hand, could not effectively help borrowers to judge risks, on the other hand, caused the debtor's personal information to be leaked online.
In fact, pure online information disclosure cannot completely and effectively reduce risks. Due to the high fraud risk of borrowers in P2P industry, offline auditing of borrowers is an important measure to protect investors in reality.
"Online and offline risk control mode is still the mainstream of P2P online lending platform." Shi said that the audit includes some specific aspects, that is, the borrower's risk level.
"The information of offline credit review should be disclosed to investors as non-private information after processing for their judgment and choice." Shi pointed out, for example,
The information disclosed shall include but not limited to the borrower's loan purpose, credit qualification, income, repayment source, age, assets, family status, etc. But at the same time, Shi said that the name, ID number and contact information in the borrower's identity information should be regarded as private information and should not be made public.
Because P2P peer-to-peer lending has a strong "Internet" imprint, investors are more faced with a screen with hyperlinks and text descriptions before making investment decisions.
Once an investor makes an investment decision, its rights and obligations with the platform and the debtor will have corresponding legal effect. Therefore, before and after investment, investors, platforms and debtors are in different legal latitudes and have different requirements for information disclosure.
Earlier, Gregory D Gibb said that in the next few years, part of Internet finance in China may still be online to offline, and the asset side needs offline audit, otherwise the fraud risk will be great.
Adverse selection of operation characteristics
It is true that P2P online lending industry is of great significance and value to China's financial market and private economy, but how to choose a "reliable" platform among thousands of online lending platforms is a more realistic problem.
Many insiders said that the "big platform" was first mentioned in the "trick" of choosing a platform, and the dimensions of judging the big platform were different, such as whether to get venture capital, whether to have credit endorsement from a larger institution, and so on.
Our reporter once asked, "If you had 65,438+10,000 yuan, what would you invest?" Many white-collar workers have been consulted on this question, and the answers are surprisingly similar. They all said that they should either choose a platform with a strong background like lufax or deposit it directly in Yu 'ebao.
"As an important part of Internet finance, the core of P2P is finance, so whether risk management can be done well is the core and key." A senior industry insider said that the level and strength of the platform risk control team is particularly important.
In addition, from the analysis of the characteristics of the current high-risk platform running, we can make adverse selection.
The two characteristics of the running platform are the same. One is that the platform interest rate is surprisingly high, and the other is that the whereabouts of investors' funds are unknown. "Low interest and support have become the most obvious signs," said the insider.
Yan Dinggui, president of you and me, said that investors should pay attention to the logic of platform disclosure transactions, such as how the borrower introduced the platform, whether the platform represented other people's assets in a channel mode or an independent product developed by the platform itself;
Whether the target of customer loan is sufficient collateral or pure credit loan. "On the basis of good judgment logic, restore the basis of a platform operation as much as possible," Yan Dinggui said.
In addition, once investors enter the investment process, all transaction records related to investment funds will become the focus of platform selection. "The monthly repayment list, contract documents and repayment batches of investment claims should be open and transparent."
Yan Dinggui said that these contents will not only become the selection criteria for investors during the "testing water" period, but also an important legal basis for borrowers not to pay for judicial channels.