How lending startups like Afterpay make their money

From The Conversation.

Startups like Afterpay that allow consumers to “instantly” borrow money for purchases are using a business model that has been around for centuries

It’s called “factoring” of accounts receivables. This is when a company sells its accounts receivables (money owed for a good or service that has already been delivered) to a lender, typically at a discount.

Typically, factoring arrangements are between a business and a lender, with the customer being oblivious to the arrangement. Afterpay’s innovation was to turn this centuries-old, back-office financial arrangement into something customer-facing.

In 2016-17, Afterpay generated about A$23 million in fees from retailers and another A$6.1 million in late fees. It wrote off only A$3.3 million in bad debt.

An example of traditional factoring would be a company selling A$100 in accounts receivables to a lender for A$95. The company gets A$95 cash up front (to spend on wages or ingredients) and eliminates the risk of not being paid. The lender makes a A$5 profit once the A$100 has been collected.

Similarly, if you make a A$100 purchase using Afterpay, the merchant immediately receives A$96. Afterpay then collects four instalments of A$25 from the customer, making a A$4 profit.

The A$4 difference is essentially the interest that Afterpay charges (equivalent to 4.17%). The unusual nature of the transaction is that Afterpay lends to the business and the customer repays Afterpay.

The 4.17% Afterpay charges in this example is quite a modest interest rate, at least compared to credit cards. However, since each loan is outstanding for only a short time, generally six to eight weeks, or a maximum of two months, Afterpay can earn much more than 4.17%.

This is because of compounding interest. Suppose a A$1,000 loan is made on January 1 at an interest rate of 4%, for two months. On March 1, A$1,040 is collected – the original A$1,000 plus A$40 interest.

Another loan is made on March 1 – A$1,040 at a 4% rate, for two months. On May 1, A$1,081.60 is collected – the original A$1,040 plus A$41.60 interest.

This can be repeated again and again. By December 31 the initial A$1,000 has grown to A$1,265.32. This equates to a 26.5% annual interest rate.

Except Afterpay doesn’t have to wait two months to collect the entire amount as a lump sum. Instead, it collects the money lent in instalments, which means the the annual interest rate is approximately 30%!

So, what are the risks?

There are three reasons a merchant may enable Afterpay on their site. The merchant could make a sale it would otherwise not make, hence revenue increases. It’s collecting cash upfront, which improves its balance sheet. And the merchant eliminates the risk it won’t be paid if a customer defaults.

However, there is a risk to Afterpay if the customer defaults and does not pay the amount due. Afterpay’s business model is akin to factoring without recourse.

There are two types of factoring of accounts receivable – with and without recourse. In factoring with recourse, the lender will return uncollected debts to the business.

In factoring without recourse, the lender is responsible for the collection of unpaid invoices from the customer and cannot return them. In other words, when factoring with recourse the business retains the risk of non-payment.

To discourage this behaviour, Afterpay charges fines if the customer fails to make payments (a A$10 late fee, and a further A$7 after seven days). If the customer still does not pay, Afterpay writes off both the initial loan and the fines charged. The fines are still counted as revenue in Afterpay’s accounts.

The greater risk that Afterpay faces is not from the customers defaulting on their loans, but from those who aren’t even using the service.

Customers making cash or credit card purchases may soon demand that online merchants give them a 4% cash discount – the same amount they pay Afterpay. If merchants comply and give everyone a 4% cash discount, the uniqueness of Afterpay’s business model will suffer. The cost of its loans would no longer be invisible.

Author: Saurav Dutta, Head of School at the School of Accounting, Curtin University

Warnings over home loans not meeting serviceability requirements

We discussed Mortgage Lending Standards on 6PR Today.

Banking analysts have raised concerns after the number of home loans being approved despite not meeting serviceability requirements jumped to its highest point since before the global financial crisis.

Digital Finance Analytics Principal, Martin North told Mornings with Gareth Parker, we could be headed for some strife if rates go up.

Listen to the discussion.

Some Majors Walk Away From Brokers

Further evidence of some majors deliberately dialing back their home loan origination via the broker channel is provided by data from AFG who reported in their latest Competition Index that the majors’ share of the market dropped again to 65.25% to continue the trend of the last six months. This is of course based on data though their books, so may not reflect the overall market, but is a fair indicator nevertheless.

Significantly, we see a fall by CBA and a rise by ANZ, both policy directed decisions.  Some of the slack is being taken up by smaller lenders.

The major banks dropped their share of fixed rate mortgages at 56.66 per cent, down from 64.98 per cent on the quarter ending January 2017, and a significant 12 per cent down on a year ago.

Also, refinancing through the majors dropped to 54.93 per cent of market share, and investor mortgages to the majors fell to 67.56 per cent of market share, around 7 per cent lower than the same period last year.

The recent political spotlight on the major lenders may encourage them to assess their competitive position as they once again fall out of favour with consumers. The non-major lenders have increased their market share to a post-GFC high of almost 35% across the quarter.

“The non-majors have continued to take market share from the majors this quarter, particularly among those seeking to refinance. Their share of the refinancing market grew by 6.5% with the big winners being AMP and ING,” said Mr Hewitt.

The non-majors also gained ground with those looking to fix their interest rate. Non-majors recorded an 8% lift in market share for fixed rates with ME Bank and ING leading the way.

First home buyers were also drawn towards the non-majors with a 2% gain in non-major market share evident from this group.

“Recent changes made by the Victorian state government to exempt first home buyers from stamp duty if they are purchasing a property for less than $600,000 will make this segment of the market one to watch,” said Mr Hewitt.

This latest move comes on top of a doubling of the first home buyers grant for regional purchases in that state and news of a $50 million pilot program designed to help people co-purchase a dwelling with the Victorian government set to launch next year.

RBA Credit Aggregates Confirms Higher Home Lending Growth

The RBA have released their Financial Aggregates for October 2016. Housing grew 0.6%, making an annual rate of 6.4%, still well above inflation. Personal finance was static, whilst business lending rose 0.5% making an annual rate of 4.4% (in original terms).

Looking at the seasonally adjusted data set, investment lending is growing at 5.3% and rising, owner occupied lending is 7.1% and falling, business lending is growing at 4.4% and falling, and other personal finance is down 1.1%. Investment lending is the only element to rise.

rba-credag-oct-2016-pc

Looking at the detailed data, seasonally adjusted, owner occupied lending rose 0.54% in the month, by $6.6 billion, to $1.04 trillion, investment lending rose 0.59%, by $3.3 billion to $560 billion, and business lending rose 0.27%, by $2.3 billion to $864 billion.

rba-credag-oct-2016We see therefore a fall in the relative share of lending to business, compared with housing, and the momentum in investment housing stronger than owner occupied housing. Both signs of trouble ahead.  Investment lending is 35% of all housing, and business lending 33% of all banking lending.

There were further adjustments to loan classification in the month, just to confuse further. The RBA said:

Following the introduction of an interest rate differential between housing loans to investors and owner-occupiers in mid-2015, a number of borrowers have changed the purpose of their existing loan; the net value of switching of loan purpose from investor to owner-occupier is estimated to have been $46 billion over the period of July 2015 to October 2016, of which $0.8 billion occurred in October 2016. These changes are reflected in the level of owner-occupier and investor credit outstanding. However, growth rates for these series have been adjusted to remove the effect of loan purpose changes.