<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="static/style.xsl"?><OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd"><responseDate>2026-09-19T23:27:24Z</responseDate><request verb="GetRecord" identifier="oai:dspace.mit.edu:1721.1/98986" metadataPrefix="dim">https://dspace.mit.edu/server/oai/request</request><GetRecord><record><header><identifier>oai:dspace.mit.edu:1721.1/98986</identifier><datestamp>2022-01-13T07:54:52Z</datestamp><setSpec>com_1721.1_7582</setSpec><setSpec>com_1721.1_7581</setSpec><setSpec>col_1721.1_131023</setSpec></header><metadata><dim:dim xmlns:dim="http://www.dspace.org/xmlns/dspace/dim" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:doc="http://www.lyncode.com/xoai" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.dspace.org/xmlns/dspace/dim http://www.dspace.org/schema/dim.xsd">
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="contributor" qualifier="advisor" lang="en_US">Christian Catalini.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="contributor" qualifier="author" lang="en_US">Yang, Yang, S.M. Massachusetts Institute of Technology</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="contributor" qualifier="other" lang="en_US">Sloan School of Management.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="contributor" qualifier="department">Sloan School of Management</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="date" qualifier="accessioned">2015-09-29T18:56:54Z</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="date" qualifier="available">2015-09-29T18:56:54Z</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="date" qualifier="copyright" lang="en_US">2015</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="date" qualifier="issued" lang="en_US">2015</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="identifier" qualifier="uri">http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/98986</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="identifier" qualifier="oclc" lang="en_US">921177765</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="description" lang="en_US">Thesis: S.M. in Management Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Sloan School of Management, 2015.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="description" lang="en_US">Cataloged from PDF version of thesis.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="description" lang="en_US">Includes bibliographical references (pages 58-67).</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="description" qualifier="abstract" lang="en_US">Since the establishment of the first P2P lending platform in 2005, P2P lending industry has been nibbling the market share of traditional consumer credit. In 2014, Lending Club and Prosper originated over 7 billion personal loans. As one of the biggest traditional banks in the U.S., Citi issued 25.2 billion USD in 2014. Given the advantages of P2P lending over traditional banks, the market for P2P lending is expected to grow rapidly along with the improvement of the internal system of P2P lending platforms, external regulation and more participation from borrowers and lenders. Given the fact that most P2P lending platforms in China first imitated the business model from either the U.S. or European platforms, they have progressively evolved to incorporate different business models due to legislation, economic or behavioral reasons. Several findings are detected by analyzing the data form Lending Club and Prosper. First, although both platforms progressively improve the default rate each year, currently both platforms offer negative returns for investors. Second, if only considering finished/matured loans, higher credit score doesn't lead to less default risk. Third, on average, a default loan will cost a loss more than twice as much as the interest return offered to investors. Taking this cost matrix into consideration, the optimal data model won't necessarily provide the highest accuracy but maximum return. Fourth, the ex post return offered by the platforms is not enough to cover the potential risk facing investors.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="description" qualifier="statementofresponsibility" lang="en_US">by Yang Yang.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="description" qualifier="degree" lang="en_US">S.M. in Management Research</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="format" qualifier="extent" lang="en_US">67 pages</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="language" qualifier="iso" lang="en_US">eng</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="publisher" lang="en_US">Massachusetts Institute of Technology</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="rights" lang="en_US">M.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="rights" qualifier="uri" lang="en_US">http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="subject" lang="en_US">Sloan School of Management.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="title" lang="en_US">Analysis and assessment of credit rating model in P2P lending : an instrument to solve information asymmetry between lenders and borrowers</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="type" lang="en_US">Thesis</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="format" qualifier="mimetype">application/pdf</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dspace" element="authorsordered">false</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dspace" element="entity" qualifier="type">Publication</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="others" element="access-status">unknown</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="others" element="access-status">unknown</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="cerif" element="openaire" authority="" confidence="-1">&lt;Publication xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/1.1/" id="0d9b612a-5c02-4492-b598-32c9a221ad58">
	&lt;Type xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/vocab/COAR_Publication_Types">http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_1843&lt;/Type>
	&lt;Language>eng&lt;/Language>
   	&lt;Title>Analysis and assessment of credit rating model in P2P lending : an instrument to solve information asymmetry between lenders and borrowers&lt;/Title>
   	&lt;PublishedIn>
    	&lt;Publication>
      	&lt;/Publication>
   	&lt;/PublishedIn>
   	&lt;PublicationDate>2015&lt;/PublicationDate>
   	&lt;Authors>
      	&lt;Author>
        	&lt;DisplayName>Yang, Yang, S.M. Massachusetts Institute of Technology&lt;/DisplayName>
         	&lt;Affiliation>
         		&lt;OrgUnit>
         		&lt;/OrgUnit>
         	&lt;/Affiliation>
      	&lt;/Author>
	&lt;/Authors>
   	&lt;Editors>
	&lt;/Editors>
    &lt;Publishers>
        &lt;Publisher>
            &lt;DisplayName>Massachusetts Institute of Technology&lt;/DisplayName>
            &lt;OrgUnit />
        &lt;/Publisher>
    &lt;/Publishers>
    &lt;License>http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582&lt;/License>
    &lt;Keyword>Sloan School of Management.&lt;/Keyword>
   	&lt;Abstract>Since the establishment of the first P2P lending platform in 2005, P2P lending industry has been nibbling the market share of traditional consumer credit. In 2014, Lending Club and Prosper originated over 7 billion personal loans. As one of the biggest traditional banks in the U.S., Citi issued 25.2 billion USD in 2014. Given the advantages of P2P lending over traditional banks, the market for P2P lending is expected to grow rapidly along with the improvement of the internal system of P2P lending platforms, external regulation and more participation from borrowers and lenders. Given the fact that most P2P lending platforms in China first imitated the business model from either the U.S. or European platforms, they have progressively evolved to incorporate different business models due to legislation, economic or behavioral reasons. Several findings are detected by analyzing the data form Lending Club and Prosper. First, although both platforms progressively improve the default rate each year, currently both platforms offer negative returns for investors. Second, if only considering finished/matured loans, higher credit score doesn&amp;apos;t lead to less default risk. Third, on average, a default loan will cost a loss more than twice as much as the interest return offered to investors. Taking this cost matrix into consideration, the optimal data model won&amp;apos;t necessarily provide the highest accuracy but maximum return. Fourth, the ex post return offered by the platforms is not enough to cover the potential risk facing investors.&lt;/Abstract>
	&lt;Access xmlns="http://purl.org/coar/access_right" 
    >
    &lt;/Access>
&lt;/Publication>
</dim:field>
</dim:dim>
</metadata></record></GetRecord></OAI-PMH>