Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Understanding The Lending Models of Indonesian Fintech Startups
Understanding The Lending Models of Indonesian Fintech Startups
Fintech startups can either lend to individuals or businesses. It’s important to note that
being a lender for individuals does not prevent the startups to lend to SMEs, and vice versa.
Generally, the key differentiating factor is the product offered by the startups. For the ones
targeting individual borrowers, the products commonly offered as depicted above, include
special purpose loans (mortgages, car financing and education loans), payday short term
loans, pawnshop services, multi-purpose consumptive loans and payroll financing loans. On
the other side, those who lend to businesses (SMEs) offer SME invoice financing, SME long
term financing and equity crowdfunding. Startups offering all of the above will take the
inherent risk of each type of loan and generally, manage this risk by balancing interest rates
against their projected non-performing loans.
Taking it one step further, we can also categorize based on where the startup sources their
lending capital. While there are essentially 3 models based on sources for lending capital,
startups also can combine multiple models. Below are the variety of models we can identify
today.
1. Crowd-lending or P2P Model:
P2P lending model is a model where the fintech startup acts as a connector between
borrowers and lenders- essentially becoming a marketplace for loans service. On top of being
a connector, the fintech company also runs a risk management platform to assess credit
worthiness for the borrowers and to assign interest rates to borrowers’ financing request. The
lenders can see the risk level for a specific loan request and make a decision based on that. In
the P2P lending model, the lenders are usually individuals who have access to money and the
borrowers could be an individual who needs consumptive loans or a SMEs that needs
additional working capital. Usually the platform will pool money from multiple lenders to
fully satisfy the funding requirements. Due to the platform only mediating the borrowing
process, default risk is being carried by the lenders. Fintech companies using this model
generates revenue by charging service fees which is usually deducted from the loan disbursed
to the borrowers. The interest payments from the borrowers would all be given to the
individual lenders for the project. Examples of startups with this model are Modalku,
Koinworks, and Investree.
2. Balance Sheet Model
3. Institution-Backed Lending:
Startup with this model partners with banks as their funding source. In general, the
partnership formed could be one of the 2 models below:
I. Pure Institution-Backed Model:
Pure Institution-backed model means the startups directly disburse from third-party
institutions’ pocket to make loans, thus the lender is basically the institutions. In this model,
the fintech startups act as a lead generator of credit worthy borrowers whereby only the
borrowers that pass the fintech startups’ risk assessment would be sent to the financial
institution. Since the loan is generated using the institutions’ money, the default risk is
assumed by the financial institutions as well. In this model, the fintech company makes
revenue from commission fees out of the loan disbursed.
II. Hybrid Model:
In the hybrid model, the startups borrow money from financial institution to make loans and
hence the startups incur cost of funds for each loan disbursed. In this model, different from
pure institution-backed model, the fintech companies are still being the lenders and
therefore assuming the loan default risk. The startups in this model generates revenue from
both origination fees and interest income. An example of a financial technology startup that
use this model is Julo.
Indonesia’s fintech lending landscape is heating up, and we are excited to see the impact of it
in the near future. Nevertheless, it is important to note that fintech lending cannot grow
alone if it is to maximize its potential in Indonesia. Strong payments and remittance systems
are mandatory to ensure the lending facilities are able to capture the entire population across
the archipelago. Fortunately, we have seen similar patterns of development in these sectors
which gives us a strong reason to be hopeful for fintech disruption.
Meski seringkali dianggap serupa karena sifatnya yang jangka pendek, P2P lending di bawah
naungan tekfin dengan payday loan memiliki model bisnis yang sama sekali berbeda. Lebih
luas lagi, industri tekfin lending di Tanah Air juga terdiri dari berbagai macam bentuk dan
segmentasi. Ada yang berfokus pada dana talangan konsumen dengan nominal di bawah Rp 3
juta dengan termin pinjaman kurang dari 1 minggu, ada pula yang hanya melayani pinjaman
untuk modal Usaha Mikro, Kecil, dan Menengah (UMKM) hingga Rp 2 miliar dengan termin
pinjaman 1 – 12 bulan. P2P lending sendiri bekerja sesuai dengan jenis yang kedua di mana
hal tersebut mempengaruhi ciri-ciri produk dan pendekatan mitigasi risiko yang dimiliki.
Secara definitif, P2P lending merupakan layanan yang menghubungkan orang yang ingin
mengajukan pinjaman dengan orang yang bersedia memberikan pinjaman melalui sebuah
online platform yang disebut marketplace.
Perbedaan P2P lending dan payday loan terletak pada berbagai hal. Apa saja?
Tingkat bunga
P2P lending menawarkan bunga yang relatif rendah mulai dari 5% – 30% per tahun, sedangkan
payday loan menawarkan bunga harian mulai dari 1% atau mencapai angka 300% per tahun.
Dalam menentukan bunga pinjaman, P2P lending senantiasa mengacu pada tingkat bunga
pinjaman bank atau lembaga keuangan lainnya dengan menekankan poin aksesibilitas dan
kecepatan proses serta persediaan dan permintaan di mana pemberi pinjaman turut melihat
kondisi pasar. Hal ini dikarenakan P2P lending tidak mengambil keuntungan dari biaya bunga—
keseluruhannya menjadi milik pemberi pinjaman. Pada praktiknya, masyarakat unbankable
seperti UMKM seringkali mengalami kesulitan mengajukan pinjaman dari bank atau lembaga
keuangan lainnya karena diminta untuk menyerahkan jaminan. Dengan P2P lending, keinginan
mereka untuk mendapatkan pinjaman akhirnya dapat difasilitasi melalui proses yang aman,
mudah, dan cepat.
Biaya tambahan
Melalui P2P lending, peminjam hanya perlu membayar bunga yang telah ditetapkan hingga
pinjaman terbayar penuh, sedangkan melalui payday loan, peminjam diperbolehkan untuk
memperpanjang masa pinjamannya namun harus membayar biaya tambahan. Di sinilah
pemberi pinjaman mendapatkan keuntungan paling banyak.