Determinants of Default in Lithuanian Peer-To-Peer Platforms

Gaigalienė, Asta; Česnys, Dovydas

doi:10.1515/mosr-2018-0011

Abstract

The article analyses the factors that determine the probability of debtors’ default in the Lithuanian peer-to-peer market. The results of this study are compared with previous research.

References

1. Barasinska, N., Schäfer, D. (2014). Is Crowdfunding Different? Evidence on the Relation Between Gender and Funding Success from a German Peer-To-Peer Lending Platform // German Economic Review. Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 436–452. https://doi.org/10.1111/geer.1205210.1111/geer.12052
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
2. Cai, S., Lin, X., Xu, D., Fu, X. (2016). Judging Online Peer-to-Peer Lending Behavior: A Comparison of First-Time and Repeated Borrowing Requests // Information & Management. Vol. 53, No. 7, pp. 857–867. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2016.07.00610.1016/j.im.2016.07.006
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
3. Davis, K., Murphy, J. (2016). Peer to Peer Lending: Structures, Risks and Regulation. Internet access: http://kevindavis.com.au/secondpages/acadpubs/2016/JASSA%20Paper%20-%20P2P%20Lending%20-%20Davis%20and%20Murphy%20-%20final.pdf
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
4. Ding, J., Huang, J., Li, Y., Meng, M. (2018). Is There an Effective Reputation Mechanism in Peer-to-Peer Lending? Evidence from China // Finance Research Letters. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2018.09.01510.1016/j.frl.2018.09.015
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
5. Emekter, R., Tu, Y., Jirasakuldech, B., Lu, M. (2015). Evaluating Credit Risk and Loan Performance in Online Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Lending // Applied Economics. Vol. 47, No. 1, pp. 54–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2014.96222210.1080/00036846.2014.962222
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
6. Fong, A. (2015). Regulation of Peer-to-Peer Lending in Hong Kong: State of Play // Law and Financial Markets Review. Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 251–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/17521440.2015.111424810.1080/17521440.2015.1114248
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
7. Freedman, S., Jin, G. Z. (2017). The Information Value of Online Social Networks: Lessons from Peer-to-Peer Lending // International Journal of Industrial Organization. Vol. 51, pp. 185–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijindorg.2016.09.00210.1016/j.ijindorg.2016.09.002
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
8. Funding Circle Statistics. Internet access: www.fundingcircle.com/uk/statistics/
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
9. Ge, R., Feng, J., Gu, B., Zhang, P. (2017). Predicting and deterring default with social media information in peer-to-peer lending // Journal of Management Information Systems. Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 401–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2017.133447210.1080/07421222.2017.1334472
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
10. Guo, Y., Zhou, W., Luo, C., Liu, C., Xiong, H. (2016). Instance-Based Credit Risk Assessment for Investment Decisions in P2P Lending // European Journal of Operational Research. Vol. 249, No. 2, pp. 417–426. doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.05.05010.1016/j.ejor.2015.05.050
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
11. Lei, X. (2016). Discussion of the Risks and Risk Control of P2P in China // Modern Economy. Vol. 7, No. 04, pp. 399. doi: 10.4236/me.2016.7404310.4236/me.2016.74043
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
12. Lichtenwald, R. (2014). The History of Peer to Peer Lending. Peer and Social Lending. Internet access: http://peersociallending.com/news/history-peer-peer-lending/
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
13. Lin, M., Prabhala, N. R., Viswanathan, S. (2013). Judging Borrowers by the Company they Keep: Friendship Networks and Information Asymmetry in Online Peer-to-Peer Lending // Management Science. Vol. 59, No. 1, pp. 17–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2016.126252610.1080/00036846.2016.1262526
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
14. Lin, X., Li, X., Zheng, Z. (2017). Evaluating Borrower’s Default Risk in Peer-to-Peer Lending: Evidence from a Lending Platform in China // Applied Economics. Vol. 49, No. 35, pp. 3538–3545. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2016.126252610.1080/00036846.2016.1262526
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
15. Liu, Y., Zhou, Q., Zhao, X., Wang, Y. (2018). Can Listing Information Indicate Borrower Credit Risk in Online Peer-to-Peer Lending? // Emerging Markets Finance and Trade. Vol. 54, No. 13, pp. 2982–2994. https://doi.org/10.1080/1540496X.2018.142706110.1080/1540496X.2018.1427061
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
16. Ma, H. Z., Wang, X. R. (2016). Influencing Factor Analysis of Credit Risk in P2P Lending Based on Interpretative Structural Modeling // Journal of Discrete Mathematical Sciences and Cryptography. Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 777–786. https://doi.org/10.1080/09720529.2016.117893510.1080/09720529.2016.1178935
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
17. Malekipirbazari, M., Aksakalli, V. (2015). Risk Assessment in Social Lending Via Random Forests // Expert Systems with Applications. Vol. 42, No. 10, pp. 4621–4631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.02.00110.1016/j.eswa.2015.02.001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
18. Mateescu, A. (2015). Peer-to-Peer Lending. Data & Society Research Institute, pp. 19–25. Internet access: https://www.datasociety.net/pubs/dcr/PeertoPeerLending.pdf
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
19. Milne, A., Parboteeah, P. (2016). The Business Models and Economics of Peer-to-Peer Lending. Internet access: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.276368210.2139/ssrn.2763682
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
20. Pokorna, M., Sponer, M. (2016). Social Lending and its Risks // Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. Vol. 220, pp. 330–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.50610.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.506
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
21. Republic of Lithuania Law on Consumer Credit. No. XII-1989. Internet access: https://e-seimas.lrs.lt/portal/legalAct/lt/TAD/5c534e403c5c11e68f278e2f1841c088?jfwid=-vkzfyh270
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
22. Riggins, F. J., Weber, D. M. (2017). Information Asymmetries and Identification Bias in P2P Social Microlending // Information Technology for Development. Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 107–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2016.124734510.1080/02681102.2016.1247345
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
23. Serrano-Cinca, C., Gutierrez-Nieto, B., López-Palacios, L. (2015). Determinants of Default in P2P Lending // PloS One. Vol. 10, No. 10, pp. e0139427. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.013942710.1371/journal.pone.0139427
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
24. Wei, S. (2015). Internet Lending in China: Status Quo, Potential Risks and Regulatory Options // Computer Law & Security Review. Vol. 31, No. 6, pp. 793–809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2015.08.00510.1016/j.clsr.2015.08.005
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
25. Wooldridge, J. M. (2003). Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach. – Australia; Cincinnati, Ohio: South-Western College Pub., c2003.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
26. Zhang, Y., Li, H., Hai, M., Li, J., Li, A. (2017). Determinants of Loan Funded Successful in Online P2P Lending // Procedia Computer Science. Vol. 122, pp. 896–901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2017.11.45210.1016/j.procs.2017.11.452
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Determinants of Default in Lithuanian Peer-To-Peer Platforms

Abstract

Paradigm

My account