Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.5089/9781513571928.001.A001
Emilia Jurzik, Cian Ruane
We document that publicly listed Chinese state-owned enterprises (SOEs) are less productive and profitable than publicly listed firms in which the state has no ownership stake. In particular, Chinese listed SOEs are more capital intensive and have a lower average product of capital than non-SOEs. These productivity differences increased between 2002 and 2009, and remain sizeable in 2019. Using a heterogeneous firm model of resource misallocation, we find that there are large potential productivity gains from reforms which could equalize the marginal products of listed SOEs and listed non-SOEs.
{"title":"Resource Misallocation Among Listed Firms in China: The Evolving Role of State-Owned Enterprises","authors":"Emilia Jurzik, Cian Ruane","doi":"10.5089/9781513571928.001.A001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5089/9781513571928.001.A001","url":null,"abstract":"We document that publicly listed Chinese state-owned enterprises (SOEs) are less productive and profitable than publicly listed firms in which the state has no ownership stake. In particular, Chinese listed SOEs are more capital intensive and have a lower average product of capital than non-SOEs. These productivity differences increased between 2002 and 2009, and remain sizeable in 2019. Using a heterogeneous firm model of resource misallocation, we find that there are large potential productivity gains from reforms which could equalize the marginal products of listed SOEs and listed non-SOEs.","PeriodicalId":13701,"journal":{"name":"International Corporate Finance eJournal","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87243999","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper infers the degree of economic integration amongst G-7 countries by estimating a two country DSGE model separately for each country in the group. In doing so, the two economies in the model are represented by the observations for a specific country and the corresponding values for the rest of G-7. To infer the degree of economic integration, the model's shock processes are reconfigured so that they include a component that is common for each economy and shocks can be transmitted from one economy to the other. Capturing the degree of economic integration by the relative contribution of common and foreign shocks to the variation of domestic variables, the paper draws inferences that are at odds with those based on more traditional measures of globalization. Countries that are more open to trade and financial flows in the data are ranked lower in terms of economic integration according to post-estimation statistics.
{"title":"A Structural Approach to Measuring the Degree of Economic Integration: Evidence From G-7 Countries.","authors":"U. Aysun","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3789612","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3789612","url":null,"abstract":"This paper infers the degree of economic integration amongst G-7 countries by estimating a two country DSGE model separately for each country in the group. In doing so, the two economies in the model are represented by the observations for a specific country and the corresponding values for the rest of G-7. To infer the degree of economic integration, the model's shock processes are reconfigured so that they include a component that is common for each economy and shocks can be transmitted from one economy to the other. Capturing the degree of economic integration by the relative contribution of common and foreign shocks to the variation of domestic variables, the paper draws inferences that are at odds with those based on more traditional measures of globalization. Countries that are more open to trade and financial flows in the data are ranked lower in terms of economic integration according to post-estimation statistics.","PeriodicalId":13701,"journal":{"name":"International Corporate Finance eJournal","volume":"90 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90510757","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
George Chalamandaris, Kuntara Pukthuanthong, Nikolas Topaloglou
We propose a stochastic spanning to evaluate whether anomalies are genuine under factor-model framework. Our approach is nonparametric and does not rely on any assumption of return distribution and investor risk preferences. It depends on the whole distribution of returns, rather than only on the first two moments. Of the anomalies we consider, only a few expand the opportunity set of the risk-averter and have real economic content. Our approach is consistent in identifying genuine anomalies in and out of samples. This is in contrast to mean-variance (MV) spanning tests where anomalies identified in-sample, not out-of-sample.
{"title":"Are Stock-Market Anomalies Anomalous After All?","authors":"George Chalamandaris, Kuntara Pukthuanthong, Nikolas Topaloglou","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3752177","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3752177","url":null,"abstract":"We propose a stochastic spanning to evaluate whether anomalies are genuine under factor-model framework. Our approach is nonparametric and does not rely on any assumption of return distribution and investor risk preferences. It depends on the whole distribution of returns, rather than only on the first two moments. Of the anomalies we consider, only a few expand the opportunity set of the risk-averter and have real economic content. Our approach is consistent in identifying genuine anomalies in and out of samples. This is in contrast to mean-variance (MV) spanning tests where anomalies identified in-sample, not out-of-sample.","PeriodicalId":13701,"journal":{"name":"International Corporate Finance eJournal","volume":"90 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84547439","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper shows analytically the optimal allocation of public debt between local and foreign currency denominated debt. The stark differences in optimal behavior between developed and developing countries are accounted in terms of larger sensitivity of local interest rates to fiscal deficits in the developing world. The presence of excess saving in the developed economies particularly accentuates this observation.
{"title":"Optimal Share of Public Debt in Local Currency","authors":"C. Sarmiento","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3784343","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3784343","url":null,"abstract":"This paper shows analytically the optimal allocation of public debt between local and foreign currency denominated debt. The stark differences in optimal behavior between developed and developing countries are accounted in terms of larger sensitivity of local interest rates to fiscal deficits in the developing world. The presence of excess saving in the developed economies particularly accentuates this observation.","PeriodicalId":13701,"journal":{"name":"International Corporate Finance eJournal","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76120733","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Oscar F. Contreras, Benjamin Smith, Joseph Bendix, C. Lopez
This report uses the 2021 Global Opportunity Index and its different categories to provide an overview of Latin America's attractiveness to foreign investors, especially when compared to other emerging markets and developing economies (EMDE). It also offers an in-depth look at Latin America's global capital inflows (emphasizing their composition and evolution over the past decade) and the regions' cross-border M&A activity.Overall, the report highlights that many of the main challenges to foreign investors (and, more broadly, to a sound investment climate in the region) stem from the lack of a strong, transparent, and predictable legal framework, including well-functioning legal and judicial systems. Thus, the analysis suggests that Latin American governments must take concrete measures to strengthen the rule of law and tackle the pervasive corruption that undermines public trust.
{"title":"Global Opportunity Index 2021: Focus on Latin America","authors":"Oscar F. Contreras, Benjamin Smith, Joseph Bendix, C. Lopez","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3780183","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3780183","url":null,"abstract":"This report uses the 2021 Global Opportunity Index and its different categories to provide an overview of Latin America's attractiveness to foreign investors, especially when compared to other emerging markets and developing economies (EMDE). It also offers an in-depth look at Latin America's global capital inflows (emphasizing their composition and evolution over the past decade) and the regions' cross-border M&A activity.Overall, the report highlights that many of the main challenges to foreign investors (and, more broadly, to a sound investment climate in the region) stem from the lack of a strong, transparent, and predictable legal framework, including well-functioning legal and judicial systems. Thus, the analysis suggests that Latin American governments must take concrete measures to strengthen the rule of law and tackle the pervasive corruption that undermines public trust.","PeriodicalId":13701,"journal":{"name":"International Corporate Finance eJournal","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77911283","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
English Abstract: Financial liberalization accelerates global banks’ entry into new markets where host countries hope to spur investment and economic growth. However, banks sometimes retreat from their global ambitions and exit these new markets. This study demonstrates how difficulties of foreign banks in new markets may emerge due to disadvantages in the ability to assess credit quality compared to that of established domestic banks. We present a duopoly model where two banks conduct investigations in the search of qualified loan borrowers. The model assumes that the domestic bank has a cost advantage in evaluating a borrower’s credit quality compared to the competing foreign bank. Despite the cost heterogeneity, an equilibrium exists in which two such banks coexist in the market. Specifically, the information cost advantaged bank orchestrates a cream skimming strategy which entails lower-price commitments of loan products and higher investigation levels to screen and find low-risk borrowers. In contrast, the information cost disadvantaged bank chooses a bottom fishing strategy which consists of higher-priced loan offers with lower investigation levels. This results in high acceptance rates of high-risk borrowers in the foreign bank’s loan profile and correspondingly, higher default rates. We analyze the results to derive implications for development policy.
{"title":"Financial Globalization: Effects on Banks’ Information Acquisition and Credit Risk","authors":"Christopher Paik","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3777745","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3777745","url":null,"abstract":"<b>English Abstract:</b> Financial liberalization accelerates global banks’ entry into new markets where host countries hope to spur investment and economic growth. However, banks sometimes retreat from their global ambitions and exit these new markets. This study demonstrates how difficulties of foreign banks in new markets may emerge due to disadvantages in the ability to assess credit quality compared to that of established domestic banks. We present a duopoly model where two banks conduct investigations in the search of qualified loan borrowers. The model assumes that the domestic bank has a cost advantage in evaluating a borrower’s credit quality compared to the competing foreign bank. Despite the cost heterogeneity, an equilibrium exists in which two such banks coexist in the market. Specifically, the information cost advantaged bank orchestrates a cream skimming strategy which entails lower-price commitments of loan products and higher investigation levels to screen and find low-risk borrowers. In contrast, the information cost disadvantaged bank chooses a bottom fishing strategy which consists of higher-priced loan offers with lower investigation levels. This results in high acceptance rates of high-risk borrowers in the foreign bank’s loan profile and correspondingly, higher default rates. We analyze the results to derive implications for development policy.<br>","PeriodicalId":13701,"journal":{"name":"International Corporate Finance eJournal","volume":"941 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85563744","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper studies the effect of FDI firms' financial advantages on firm productivity in host countries and examines the related policy implications. If FDI firms face lower financing costs but have higher fixed production costs than local firms, a simple Melitz-type model predicts that because of their financial advantages, FDI firms could have even lower cutoff productivity than local firms, especially in financially vulnerable sectors. The same mechanism will also lower the average productivity of FDI firms especially in financially vulnerable sectors, although FDI firms on average are still more productive than local firms. These predictions are supported by the Chinese firm-level data. Then, we study policy implications in a two-country model that resembles these empirical patterns. The counterfactual policy analysis shows that offering tax benefits to FDI firms could be counterproductive because it attracts FDI firms that are even less productive than local firms. The policy in the host country to improve its financial market efficiency could also hurt the country's welfare because of the interaction between financial market reforms and the distortionary taxes imposed on local firms to finance FDI subsidies.
{"title":"FDI and Firm Productivity in Host Countries: The Role of Financial Constraints","authors":"Wontae Han, Jian Wang, Xiao Wang","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3776807","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3776807","url":null,"abstract":"This paper studies the effect of FDI firms' financial advantages on firm productivity in host countries and examines the related policy implications. If FDI firms face lower financing costs but have higher fixed production costs than local firms, a simple Melitz-type model predicts that because of their financial advantages, FDI firms could have even lower cutoff productivity than local firms, especially in financially vulnerable sectors. The same mechanism will also lower the average productivity of FDI firms especially in financially vulnerable sectors, although FDI firms on average are still more productive than local firms. These predictions are supported by the Chinese firm-level data. Then, we study policy implications in a two-country model that resembles these empirical patterns. The counterfactual policy analysis shows that offering tax benefits to FDI firms could be counterproductive because it attracts FDI firms that are even less productive than local firms. The policy in the host country to improve its financial market efficiency could also hurt the country's welfare because of the interaction between financial market reforms and the distortionary taxes imposed on local firms to finance FDI subsidies.","PeriodicalId":13701,"journal":{"name":"International Corporate Finance eJournal","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84327759","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
We examine whether the sudden loss of public information search capacity caused by Google’s withdrawal from China affects Chinese analysts’ earnings forecasts. We find that in the period after Google’s withdrawal, analyst forecast accuracy declines, particularly for firms with foreign trade. This decline in analyst forecast accuracy suggests that Google’s withdrawal hinders analysts’ acquisition of firms’ foreign information, which decreases the quality of their earnings forecasts. Consistent with this argument, we find that the effect of Google’s withdrawal is stronger for firms with greater business complexity and more opaque financial reporting. We also find that corporate site visits serve as an alternative information source that can compensate for the information loss caused by Google’s withdrawal. Our evidence suggests a potential cost of limiting the flow of public information about firms in the capital market.
{"title":"Does a Sudden Breakdown in Public Information Searches Impede Analyst Forecast Accuracy? Evidence from Google’s Withdrawal from China","authors":"Yangyang Chen, Zi Li, Lijun Ma, Min Zhang","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3775434","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3775434","url":null,"abstract":"We examine whether the sudden loss of public information search capacity caused by Google’s withdrawal from China affects Chinese analysts’ earnings forecasts. We find that in the period after Google’s withdrawal, analyst forecast accuracy declines, particularly for firms with foreign trade. This decline in analyst forecast accuracy suggests that Google’s withdrawal hinders analysts’ acquisition of firms’ foreign information, which decreases the quality of their earnings forecasts. Consistent with this argument, we find that the effect of Google’s withdrawal is stronger for firms with greater business complexity and more opaque financial reporting. We also find that corporate site visits serve as an alternative information source that can compensate for the information loss caused by Google’s withdrawal. Our evidence suggests a potential cost of limiting the flow of public information about firms in the capital market.","PeriodicalId":13701,"journal":{"name":"International Corporate Finance eJournal","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73380410","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
We show that foreign lenders and low market share lenders extend more credit in comparison to other lenders during lending booms leading to banking crises, but not during other credit expansions. Less established lenders also increase the amount of credit they extend to riskier borrowers, without asking for collateral or imposing covenants and higher interest rates. Our results suggest that taking lenders’ characteristics into account could provide an indicator for how much risk an economy is accumulating and be a useful barometer for macroprudential policies.
{"title":"Who Lends Before Banking Crises? Evidence from the International Syndicated Loan Market","authors":"Mariassunta Giannetti, Yeejin Jang","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3739393","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3739393","url":null,"abstract":"We show that foreign lenders and low market share lenders extend more credit in comparison to other lenders during lending booms leading to banking crises, but not during other credit expansions. Less established lenders also increase the amount of credit they extend to riskier borrowers, without asking for collateral or imposing covenants and higher interest rates. Our results suggest that taking lenders’ characteristics into account could provide an indicator for how much risk an economy is accumulating and be a useful barometer for macroprudential policies.","PeriodicalId":13701,"journal":{"name":"International Corporate Finance eJournal","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90390786","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Tania Ziegler, Rotem Shneor, K. Wenzlaff, Ana Odorovic, Rui Hao, Lukas Ryll
This year’s report is titled ‘Shifting Paradigms’ to, in part, emphasise the continued growth and development of the European Alternative Finance Industry, but also underscore that these patterns of growth can develop and change as the sector continues to develop and mature. Throughout the region, platforms have continued to grow, respond to regulation, and expand operations internationally. In some regions, model prominence has shifted, allowing for others to grow. At times, this has been a response to the development or lack of regulation, or simply a result of competing market forces. Last year’s report, ‘Expanding Horizons’, sought to exemplify the positive developments in European Alternative Finance in 2016 and foreshadowed future developments in the industry. The sector as a whole has continued to expand, and across the board has grown in volume. As with last year, this study captured market data from 45 European countries, and continued to explore issues with regard to innovation, research and development, as well as internationalisation trends. This year’s European Alternative Finance Industry Report has been produced by the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance at Cambridge Judge Business School and the University of Agder. This report was generously supported by Invesco and the CME Group Foundation. Highlights from the report This year’s study gathered data from 269 platforms with reported operations in 2017. These 269 platforms were responsible for 519 unique data entries across 45 countries in Europe. The study shows that the total European online alternative finance market (including the UK) grew by 36 per cent to reach €10.44 billion in 2017. The United Kingdom is still the largest individual alternative finance market, albeit with a declining market share from 73 per cent in 2016 to 68 per cent in 2017. Excluding the UK from overall volume, the European online alternative finance industry grew 63 per cent from €2.06 billion to €3.37 billion in 2017. France (€661.37 million), Germany (€595.41 million) and the Netherlands (€279.93 million) remained the top three national markets for online alternative finance by market volume in Europe, excluding the United Kingdom. For the fourth year in a row P2P Consumer Lending accounted for the largest market share of European Alterative Finance (excluding the UK). This model accounted for 41 per cent of all volume and grew by 99.8 per cent from €697 million in 2016 to €1.39 billion in 2017. Internationalisation of platforms is on the rise. In 2017, 88 per cent of platforms reported some level of cross-border inflows, while 61 per cent reported outflows. This represents a growth of 11 per cent for platforms reporting cross-border inflows, and 17 per cent growth for those reporting cross-border outflows. Despite growth in international orientation of platforms, the extent of actual localisation of services, interface and brand remains limited. While in 2016, models tha
今年的报告以“范式转换”为主题，在一定程度上强调了欧洲另类金融行业的持续增长和发展，但也强调了这些增长模式可以随着该行业的持续发展和成熟而发展和变化。在整个地区，平台持续增长，响应监管，并在国际上扩大业务。在一些地区，模式的重点已经转移，从而允许其他模式的发展。有时，这是对监管发展或缺乏的反应，或者仅仅是市场力量竞争的结果。去年的报告《拓展视野》试图举例说明2016年欧洲另类金融的积极发展，并预示了该行业未来的发展。整个行业继续扩张，整体销量也在增长。与去年一样，这项研究收集了45个欧洲国家的市场数据，并继续探讨有关创新、研发以及国际化趋势的问题。今年的《欧洲另类金融行业报告》由剑桥大学贾奇商学院(Cambridge Judge Business School)的剑桥另类金融中心(Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance)和阿格德大学(University of Agder)联合撰写。本报告得到景顺和芝加哥商品交易所集团基金会的慷慨支持。今年的研究收集了269个平台的数据，这些平台在2017年报告了运营情况。这269个平台负责欧洲45个国家的519个独特数据条目。该研究显示，2017年，欧洲在线替代金融市场(包括英国)增长了36%，达到104.4亿欧元。英国仍然是最大的个人另类金融市场，尽管市场份额从2016年的73%下降到2017年的68%。不包括英国在内，欧洲在线替代金融行业从2017年的20.6亿欧元增长到33.7亿欧元，增长了63%。法国(6.6137亿欧元)、德国(5.9541亿欧元)和荷兰(2.7993亿欧元)仍然是欧洲(不包括英国)在线替代金融市场的前三大国家。P2P消费借贷连续第四年占据欧洲另类金融(不包括英国)的最大市场份额。这一模式占总销量的41%，从2016年的6.97亿欧元增长到2017年的13.9亿欧元，增长了99.8%。平台的国际化正在上升。2017年，88%的平台报告了一定程度的跨境资金流入，61%的平台报告了跨境资金流出。这意味着，报告跨境资金流入的平台增长11%，报告跨境资金流出的平台增长17%。尽管平台的国际化趋势有所增长，但服务、界面和品牌的实际本地化程度仍然有限。虽然在2016年，与更大销量相关的模型报告了更高水平的商业模式变化，但在2017年观察到相反的趋势。对于销量排名前五的模式类型，50%或更多的平台表示没有改变其商业模式。然而，产品创新却全面高涨。正如去年所观察到的那样，大多数创新都集中在通过流程简化和自动化来提高平台的运营效率，以及优化支付处理和客户验证。此外，与去年一样，欧洲平台的次要研究重点是客户服务功能的投资和开发，主要是社交媒体和促销工具、社区管理和CRM系统。随着整个欧洲的监管制度不断发展，平台对这些监管的充分性的看法也在不断发展。总的来说，虽然总体观点仍然存在分歧，但似乎赞成的程度一直在上升。
{"title":"The 4th European Alternative Finance Benchmarking Report","authors":"Tania Ziegler, Rotem Shneor, K. Wenzlaff, Ana Odorovic, Rui Hao, Lukas Ryll","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3772260","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3772260","url":null,"abstract":"This year’s report is titled ‘Shifting Paradigms’ to, in part, emphasise the continued growth and development of the European Alternative Finance Industry, but also underscore that these patterns of growth can develop and change as the sector continues to develop and mature. Throughout the region, platforms have continued to grow, respond to regulation, and expand operations internationally. In some regions, model prominence has shifted, allowing for others to grow. At times, this has been a response to the development or lack of regulation, or simply a result of competing market forces. \u0000 \u0000Last year’s report, ‘Expanding Horizons’, sought to exemplify the positive developments in European Alternative Finance in 2016 and foreshadowed future developments in the industry. The sector as a whole has continued to expand, and across the board has grown in volume. As with last year, this study captured market data from 45 European countries, and continued to explore issues with regard to innovation, research and development, as well as internationalisation trends. \u0000 \u0000This year’s European Alternative Finance Industry Report has been produced by the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance at Cambridge Judge Business School and the University of Agder. This report was generously supported by Invesco and the CME Group Foundation. \u0000 \u0000Highlights from the report \u0000 \u0000This year’s study gathered data from 269 platforms with reported operations in 2017. These 269 platforms were responsible for 519 unique data entries across 45 countries in Europe. The study shows that the total European online alternative finance market (including the UK) grew by 36 per cent to reach €10.44 billion in 2017. The United Kingdom is still the largest individual alternative finance market, albeit with a declining market share from 73 per cent in 2016 to 68 per cent in 2017. Excluding the UK from overall volume, the European online alternative finance industry grew 63 per cent from €2.06 billion to €3.37 billion in 2017. \u0000 \u0000France (€661.37 million), Germany (€595.41 million) and the Netherlands (€279.93 million) remained the top three national markets for online alternative finance by market volume in Europe, excluding the United Kingdom. \u0000 \u0000For the fourth year in a row P2P Consumer Lending accounted for the largest market share of European Alterative Finance (excluding the UK). This model accounted for 41 per cent of all volume and grew by 99.8 per cent from €697 million in 2016 to €1.39 billion in 2017. \u0000 \u0000Internationalisation of platforms is on the rise. In 2017, 88 per cent of platforms reported some level of cross-border inflows, while 61 per cent reported outflows. This represents a growth of 11 per cent for platforms reporting cross-border inflows, and 17 per cent growth for those reporting cross-border outflows. Despite growth in international orientation of platforms, the extent of actual localisation of services, interface and brand remains limited. \u0000 \u0000While in 2016, models tha","PeriodicalId":13701,"journal":{"name":"International Corporate Finance eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82313945","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：