P2P 대출중개 플랫폼의 금융중개 역할에 관한 연구 (Study on the Financial Intermediary Role of P2P Lending Platform)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국금융학회
· 수록지 정보 : 금융연구 / 32권 / 2호 / 21 ~ 62페이지
· 저자명 : 이성복

초록

본 연구는 직접금융 방식으로 차입자와 투자자 간의 자금융통의 거래를 중개하는 P2P 대출중개 플랫폼이 전통적인 은행의 금융중개 역할을 대체할 수 있는지 또는 보완할 수 있는지를이론적으로 살펴보았다. 이를 위해 은행만 존재하는 경제와 P2P 대출중개 플랫폼도 존재하는경제의 대출시장 균형을 비교하였다. 그 결과, 본 연구는 P2P 대출중개 플랫폼이 차입자에게대출이자율을 은행보다 높거나 낮게 제시할 유인을 갖지 않는다는 것을 발견하였다. 또한 본연구의 분석결과는 대출시장에서 P2P 대출중개 플랫폼이 은행의 금융중개 역할을 부분 또는전부 대체할 수 있을 뿐만 아니라, 은행만 존재하는 경제에서 은행이 신용할당으로 인수하지않는 차입자의 신용위험을 투자자에게 중개하며 은행의 금융중개 역할을 보완할 수 있다는 것을보여준다.

영어초록

This study examines whether P2P lending platforms that directly intermediate between borrowers and investors can substitute and/or complement the financial intermediary role of traditional banks by analyzing a theoretical model of the loans market. In particular, the study compares the equilibrium of the loans market in which only banks exist with that of where banks and P2P lending platforms compete against each other. As a result, the study found that P2P lending platforms do not have incentives to offer borrowers higher or lower loan interest rates than banks. It implies that whether P2P lending platforms substitute the financial intermediary role of banks is determined by the investors, not the borrowers. This result is also explained by the structure of fees paid to P2P lending platforms by borrowers and investors respectively. P2P lending platforms maximizing their own profit in equilibrium determine the borrower fee to make it indifferent for borrowers to choose between borrowing from banks and financing from investors through P2P lending platforms, whereas they set the investor fee to make investors at least prefer taking borrowers’ credit risk to depositing in banks.
The results of the study show that P2P lending platforms can partially or fully substitute banks in the loans market and that they also can complement banks by providing loans for borrowers whose credit is supposed to be rationed by banks if there are no P2P lending platforms in the loans market. These findings depend on the gap of convenience utilities provided to borrowers and investors by banks and P2P lending platforms respectively.
When the total of convenience utilities by banks is greater than the total of convenience utilities by P2P lending platforms, the financial intermediary role of banks in the loans market is partially substituted by P2P lending platforms. However, if otherwise, P2P lending platforms can fully substitute the financial intermediary role of banks. The main reason that P2P lending platforms can substitute banks in the loans market is that unlike banks, P2P lending platforms make profit by intermediating directly between investor and borrowers, not by taking borrowers’ credit risk like banks. It is also because the investors expect higher returns from directly funding borrowers than from depositing in banks. Furthermore, unlike banks, P2P lending platforms do not have incentives of credit rationing so that they can intermediate between investors and even borrowers whose credit is most likely to be rationed by banks. It implies that P2P lending platforms complement the financial intermediary role of banks and also expand the provision of loans to borrowers.

참고자료

· 없음