BIS recently published a paper that studies the lending business model for big tech firms in comparison with the traditional bank intermediation process. The study concludes that banks and big tech firms need to focus on their comparative advantages to mitigate the inefficiencies inherent in their processes. As part of which, a bank-big tech joint venture, wherein a big tech provides information derived from big data to banks, is advisable in comparison to the big tech providing raw data to banks.
In the last decade, large technology companies, also known as big techs, have moved into the provision of financial services, with some becoming substantial players in payments in several advanced and emerging market economies. The big techs have access to massive amounts of data about firms that operate on their online platforms or use their QR-code payment systems. This information can be harnessed to improve the assessment of the credit risk of a firm. Recently, big techs have started competing with banks especially in the market for loans to small and medium-size enterprises (SMEs). The study presented in the paper examines the competition between big techs and banks in the loan market for SMEs where adverse selection and difficulty of enforcing repayment cause frictions. The study focused on loans to firms, in particular SMEs, because big techs mainly provide credit to small vendors in their ecosystem.
The study shows how competition between banks and big techs in attracting borrowers can lead to greater privacy of borrowers, as big techs have an incentive to temper their drive to collect information about firm characteristics. However, the limited capacity of big techs to recognize a firm's type increases the number of inefficient defaults and reduces investment in profitable opportunities. One way to mitigate these inefficiencies is for big techs to share their data with the banks that make loans funded with cheap deposits. The study investigated two information-sharing arrangements. In one, the big tech makes data public for any bank that wants to use them, for example, by conferring the firm type information to a public credit bureau. In the other arrangement, the big tech privately gives the firm type information to the bank, for example, by selling it credit scoring services. These two ways of sharing information lead to different outcomes.
Lack of access to deposits makes funding by big techs more costly than the funding by banks and it is a factor limiting their supply of lending. Conversely, lack of information would result in banks funding insolvent firms. Thus, it seemed natural to investigate whether it is possible to exploit these relative advantages so that the big techs gather the raw data, process them, and share relevant information with the banks that make loans funded with deposits. The study found that it could be more costly for a bank to extract information from the raw data, as big techs are likely to be better placed in terms of the use of credit scoring techniques based on machine learning and big data to better assess the creditworthiness of firms. Thus, a joint venture (bank-big tech) in which the big tech shares the information, such as credit scores, rather than the raw data, would be advisable. However, the analysis of the optimal business arrangement between banks and big techs is an additional relevant area for future research.
Keywords: International, Banking, Lending, Credit Assessment, Credit Scoring, Financial Disintermediation, P2P Lending, Big Data, Big Tech, Fintech, BIS
Across 15 years as a consultant and practitioner, Chris worked on a range of strategy, risk management and operational transformation initiatives with leading financial institutions throughout North America. From this collection of abstract, “what now?” challenges, he has developed specialties in credit optimization, business combinations and system implementations. Chris joined Moody’s in 2020 after leading CECL implementation and dual risk rating expansion at a $50 billion bank.
Across 35 years in banking, Blake has gained deep insights into the inner working of this sector. Over the last two decades, Blake has been an Operating Committee member, leading teams and executing strategies in Credit and Enterprise Risk as well as Line of Business. His focus over this time has been primarily Commercial/Corporate with particular emphasis on CRE. Blake has spent most of his career with large and mid-size banks. Blake joined Moody’s Analytics in 2021 after leading the transformation of the credit approval and reporting process at a $25 billion bank.
Previous ArticleHKMA Expects Banks to Join Commercial Data Interchange by End-2022
The European Banking Authority (EBA) proposed implementing technical standards on the interest rate risk in the banking book (IRRBB) reporting requirements, with the comment period ending on May 02, 2023.
The U.S. Federal Reserve Board (FED) set out details of the pilot climate scenario analysis exercise to be conducted among the six largest U.S. bank holding companies.
The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (FED) adopted the final rule on Adjustable Interest Rate (LIBOR) Act.
The European Central Bank (ECB) published an updated list of supervised entities, a report on the supervision of less significant institutions (LSIs), a statement on macro-prudential policy.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) published a circular on the prudential treatment of crypto-asset exposures, an update on the status of transition to new interest rate benchmarks.
The European Commission (EC) adopted the standards addressing supervisory reporting of risk concentrations and intra-group transactions, benchmarking of internal approaches, and authorization of credit institutions.
The China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission (CBIRC) issued rules to manage the risk of off-balance sheet business of commercial banks and rules on corporate governance of financial institutions.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) made announcements to address sustainability issues in the financial sector.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) published regulatory standards on identification of a group of connected clients (GCC) as well as updated the lists of identified financial conglomerates.
The General Board of the European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB), at its December meeting, issued an updated risk assessment via the quarterly risk dashboard and held discussions on key policy priorities to address the systemic risks in the European Union.