A Glimpse At How Big Fintechs Are Approaching The Small Business Loan Market
March 1, 2023| Company Name | Status | Notes |
| Square Loans | Just recorded its biggest originations year ever. $4.07B funded in 2022 | |
| Enova/OnDeck | Seeing tremendous demand. Focusing on diversification. $2.97B funded in 2022 | |
| Shopify Capital | Reporting strong renewals. Just had its biggest originations year ever with $1.66B funded in 2022. | |
| Upstart | Suspended business loan originations only 6 months after it started them. | |
| LendingClub | Has suspended its equipment financing and commercial real estate lending divisions. | |
| SoFi | Not interested in joining the small business loan market at this time. |
LendingClub Ceases Equipment Financing Biz
February 22, 2023
Similar to Upstart, LendingClub is hitting the pause button on a segment of its lending business. In particular the company announced that it has ceased originations in equipment finance and commercial real estate.
“…commercial real estate and equipment finance, in this environment just not as attractive returns for the bank or for shareholders,” said LendingClub CEO Scott Sanborn in the Q4 earnings call. “So, we aren’t originating new loans there.”
What will remain on the commercial side, however, is its SBA Government Guaranteed Lending business.
Last Chance to Comment on SBA’s Proposal to Lift SBLC Moratorium
January 4, 2023
In November, the Small Business Administration formally proposed a rule to lift the moratorium on licenses for Small Business Lending Companies (SBLCs). The moratorium wasn’t some pause borne out of the covid era. It’s been in place since 1982, creating a market of just 14 licensed SBLCs over the span of 40 years. Originally this moratorium had only gone into place because the SBA “did not have adequate resources to effectively service and supervise additional SBLCs” but now in modern times the SBA has determined there’s a problem, “that certain markets where there are capital market gaps continue to struggle to obtain financing on non-predatory terms.” Their solution? Lift the moratorium.
The proposal was published on November 7th and the public’s ability to comment ends on January 6th. One potential outcome of lifting the moratorium is that fintechs could potentially become licensed SBLCs. That appears to be a desired outcome for Funding Circle who shared their comment on social media on Wednesday.
“We need the SBA to lift the SBLC moratorium in order for us to apply to originate 7(a) loans nationally,” Funding Circle wrote. “This would allow us to leverage our platform technology and more than a decade of lending experience to expand access to 7(a) loans for underserved communities and to do so quicker, at a lower cost and with a superior customer experience.”
With more than 60 comments garnered on the proposal so far, Funding Circle is virtually the only fintech to have weighed in at all. A number of comments from the traditional finance realm were highly critical of the idea of allowing fintechs to become SBLCs, citing their supposed inexperience and perceived failures to responsibly dole out PPP funds. Others expressed a belief that the SBA still did not have the resources necessary to supervise additional SBLCs even after 4 decades and that the agency is already stretched too thin as it is.
“SBA should not expand 7(a) Program until it requests, and receives from Congress, an appropriation to fund the additional SBA staff necessary to supervise additional 7(a) lenders,” the American Bankers Association wrote.
There are complexities and nuances to the pros and cons of the arguments, but the opportunity to comment at all is running out. The deadline is Friday January 6th.
Anyone can submit their own comment here.
Update: Upstart, another fintech, had their comment processed by the SBA after this story was posted. The company also supports lifting the moratorium.
Fintech Lender Signals That Capital Markets Are Worried
July 11, 2022
Concern about the economy is real. Upstart, the publicly traded online consumer lending marketplace, is noticing such a shift that it felt compelled to publish a sneak peek of its Q2 earnings. And it’s not good.
“Inflation and recession fears have driven interest rates up and put banks and capital markets on cautious footing,” said Dave Girouard, co-founder and CEO of Upstart. Girouard followed that by saying that its marketplace is “funding constrained,” a challenge “largely driven by concerns about the macroeconomy among lenders and capital market participants.”
Originations in Q2 were down as a result.
Though the company is still optimistic that its risk models will perform, the economic headwinds come just as it was beginning to roll out its new small business lending product.
In May, Girouard said that their small business loan pricing model would include more than 500 variables about both the applicant and business.
“It will also feature our loan month modeling framework, which is one of the most impactful innovations added to our personal loan product a few years back,” Girouard said. “Our initial testing suggests that version 1 of our SMB model will deliver higher accuracy, as measured by Area Under the Curve, or AUC, than peer models that have been in the market for years.”
Upstart plans to publish its official Q2 earnings on August 8th. The price of its stock is down 93% since its all time high reached last October.
Ohio Sends State Reps to Vegas to Pitch Fintech Companies
October 28, 2021
As brokers, lenders, and fintech companies look into having offices outside of New York or California now more than ever before, the state of Ohio used Money 20/20 to pitch their state as the best home for any company dealing with money or the innovations surrounding it.
With Ohio’s lack of a state-level corporate income tax, relatively low rent, and modest wages compared to places like New York, headquartering in the state is a business decision that Terry Gore, Senior Director of Financial Services in Fintech for Jobs Ohio, referred to as a “no brainer.”
“I’ve been coming to this event for the last four years, the organization probably the last five or six years, and we think we have a very unique value proposition for the audience this year,” said Gore. That [proposition] is fintech, insurtech, in terms of the ecosystem that we have in Ohio, and using that to support their continued growth and expansion.”
Gore broke the pitch down into three main components about why Ohio is the most economically sensible state to headquarter a company in.
“We’re ranked in the top three in terms of headquartered banks and insurance companies, and we’re the fifth largest final services sector in the US market, so from a potential partner standpoint, I think we’ve checked that box.”
He went on to stress the access to higher education that Ohioans have, arguing that their talent pool is right up there with that of New York and California.
“Most people don’t know, just from a number of citizens’ perspective, we’ve got just under twelve million, we have talent,” said Gore. “We’ve got over 200 colleges and universities, from a talent pool perspective, those companies could tap into that.”
The final component Gore stressed was Ohio’s geography. Nestled in between New York and Chicago, he described it as the perfect place for a company that does a wide array of business across the heartland and the coasts to call home.
“We’re in the eastern standard time zone, we’re just a short two hour flight from three quarters of the financial centers in North America. So you know it’s one of those things where you don’t have to be located in New York to be able to drum up business in New York, you can just literally have a day trip and work that market.”
Ohio has already become a home for major players in the fintech world with companies like Klarna and AllianceData already hosting their headquarters in the state.
“We’ve been able to attract California based companies like Upstart, who moved into central Ohio and opened up their second headquarters, which is now larger than their California based location,” Gore said.
In the midst of their efforts to express all the benefits their state offers, Gore admitted that perception of his state to the rest of the country has a major influence on the decision making that goes into doing business there.
“We want to be viewed more traditionally than what the state has been viewed as, and that’s pretty much focused on manufacturing or a fly-over state. If you’re going to complain about the weather, I can’t help you.”
Marcus Has Reached $100 Billion in Deposits
September 24, 2021
Marcus by Goldman Sachs, the prestigious investment firm’s attempt at being a conventional bank, announced that they have over $100 billion in deposits after just five years in operation. The online platform that began as an invite-only savings platform has transformed into a full-blown consumer bank, operating on the futuristic model of operating savings and CD accounts digitally.
“If you told me we would accomplish so much in just five years from launch, I would have said you were crazy,” wrote Harit Talwar in a LinkedIn post on Thursday that announced his retirement from Marcus. “It shows that nothing is impossible when you have the best people.”
In his post, Talwar praised Marcus’ desire to take risks, acting as a separate entity while having to operate within the confines and upkeep of the Goldman Sachs reputation.
“We had the audacity to think big, and it’s safe to say we proved the skeptics wrong – eight million customers, $100 billion in deposits, nearly $10 billion in card and loan balances, $1.5 billion in run rate revenue, two J.D. Power wins and partnerships with the top brands in the world including Apple, Amazon, Walmart, JetBlue, AARP, General Motors and more,” Talwar wrote.
Marcus launched in 2016 with some of the best interest rates in the banking industry. It introduced the Goldman Sachs brand to an entire new group of customers by offering up high interest rates on accounts with no fees, which was nearly unheard of at the time. Two years after launch, Marcus had over $35 billion in deposits.
Marcus’ path was almost completely different prior to its launch. The original idea prior to Marcus was a platform called Mosaic, a banking concept meant for borrowers with good credit that were looking to refinance other debt.
In his retirement post, Talwar credited the camaraderie that developed between employees as a major factor resulting in the success of Marcus. “The team has given more than perhaps in prior jobs, but maybe that is the price of building something this extraordinary at an unprecedented pace,” Talwar wrote. “Yet by sharing those experiences in the trenches, we’ve made lasting friendships and redefined what a consumer business looks like.”
The outlook for Marcus is seemingly endless. Online banking is trendier than ever, and the outlook for banking is losing the brick-and-mortar mentality.
Experts also believe that Marcus has helped Goldman Sachs’ progress into new markets. “Marcus has taken advantage of a core strategic advantage—[Goldman Sachs’] lack of a preexisting deposit customer base— to prove that digital deposit gathering at scale is possible for a large institution,” Todd Baker, Managing Principal of Broodmoar Consulting and Senior Fellow at Columbia University told AltFinanceDaily.
When the company first came about, AltFinanceDaily reported that Marcus may be poaching customers from a peer-to-peer lender named LendingClub. The two companies are now more alike than ever given that LendingClub is also now a bank. LendingClub, still new to the banking scene however, had only amassed $2.5B in deposits as of June 30, 2021.
It seems that Marcus may have been ahead of the curve when it comes to fintech’s place in traditional banking, racking up staggering figures across the board and showing young upstart competitors just how strong it is.
Cross River Bank Makes Moves as Fintech Acquirer, VC
July 13, 2021
Known in the space as the fintech partner bank, Cross River took another step down the path leading the industry: Last month, the bank bought PeerIQ, a company that does data analytics for loan underwriting. The bank also launched a venture capital arm to continue investing in startup fintechs in a more formalized way- though they have been partners for years.
“PeerIQ is a company we’ve known for a number of years; we’ve been working with them, partnering with them and in various ways for two or three years,” Phil Goldfeder, Senior Vice President of Public Affairs at Cross River, said. “We recognized that we would probably better serve our customers and partners if we came together, so we’re happy that we’re able to acquire Ram [Ahluwalia, CEO of PeerIQ] and his team at PeerIQ and we’re excited about the collaboration moving forward.”
PeerIQ will function as a part of Cross River, bringing intelligent analytics to every transaction. Cross River, located 14 floors up just across the George Washington Bridge in New Jersey, has about $13.5 billion of assets and has originated more than $46 billion in loans since 2008, Bloomberg estimates. The way forward, as Goldfeder said, was through innovation, leveraging tech and teams like PeerIQ’s to better serve clients. That also means using the formal VC branch to help new firms grow their platforms and future acquisitions.
“Number one is to grow on PeerIQ’s core business, providing data analytics, and creating technology in the secondary market, but more importantly, for Cross River to help our partners and our clients serve,” Goldfeder said. “There’s, no question that we will continue to explore companies that would help strengthen Cross River and the fintech ecosystem and provide additional services to our partners.”
The bank has over 15 partnerships with top fintechs, like publicly traded Affirm, Rocket Loans, Coinbase, and private firms funded through VC rounds like Stripe. The bank most recently became a significant part of the PPP government emergency loan program. Ranking among giants like JP Morgan and Bank of America, Cross River ranked 6th overall for dollar amount approved. According to the bank, they doled out 490,000 PPP loans for a total of $13 billion, making up 4% of the entire program volume.
The way forward is clearly through embracing what it always has been at its base: the bank across the Hudson that is willing to partner with upstart brands and help them take over the world. With a flurry of consolidation purchases in the “post-pandemic” world (if that isn’t too early to say) that are only going to increase, Cross River seems to be on to something. Goldfeder said that Covid showed the rest of the world what the fintech space has known for ten years, that added value for customers and partners means innovation.
“Post-pandemic, where I think there was a larger recognition from the financial services industry of the need to innovate,” Goldfeder said. “Cross River is always known that we need to innovate… The post-pandemic dynamic we recognize that there’s tremendous value in creating a more formal venture arm to examine, explore companies that we can invest in to help them grow, help them succeed, and …. increase our support of our partners.”
Bloomberg reported Cross River is in secret talks to raise $200 million of funding at a valuation of $2.5 billion or more. The bank previously raised $100 million in 2018 in a round led by KKR, AltFinanceDaily reported, and in 2016 raised $28 million.
Merchant Cash Advance is as Old as The Renaissance
March 21, 2021
The first merchant cash advance enthusiast ended up the richest man in the history of the world. Jakob Fugger was the cash king of Europe 500 years ago, and his climb to wealth indirectly caused the Protestant Reformation. One of the pivotal events in western history, the Reformation led to the eventual “fad” of democratic representational government— all because some guy bought the future receivables of a silver mine.
In Jakob Fugger the Rich, historian Jakob Strieder writes the Fugger enterprise began as one of the upstart merchant families of the Renaissance. The Fuggers were traders and cloth merchants from Augsburg, Germany. They created a network of aristocratic clients, furnishing weddings and parties through trading warehouses in modern-day Venice, Florence, and Austria. Jakob Fugger I lent some money around, but when Jakob Fugger II joined the family shipping warehouse in Venice, he looked for a better return on capital.
According to International Business History: A Contextual and Case Approach, Fugger entered an agreement to supply some cash- 23,627 Florins to a silver mine owned by Archduke Siegmund in 1487.
Siegmund had plenty of silver laying around for collateral; he just needed cash for the day-to-day. It was a collateral-backed loan, common today: if he couldn’t pay it back, the Fuggers would get paid in silver. The transaction worked so well that a year later, Siegmund reapplied, this time in a revolutionary way. Siegmund would get 150,000 florins, and the Fuggers would get paid the future receivables of the silver mine: unrefined and cheap future silver for cash now.
The problem, written by historian Greg Steinmetz in The Richest Man Who Ever Lived, was the Church. Any interest-based transaction was specifically outlawed, though there were hundreds of lenders during this era. The line from Luke 6:35, “Lend and expect nothing in return,” was taken by the Church to mean an outright ban on usury, defined as the demand for any interest at all.

Even savings accounts were considered sinful, but Venetians ignored these rules as they preferred making money to pleasing God, entombed in the motto “First Venetians, then Christians.” Fugger began accepting deposits like a bank to his clients, with a 5% return to investors.
But convicted usurers could be excommunicated and denied a Christian burial, a nightmare for a capitalist who relied on a Christian network. Fugger did not worry about punishment or the apparent sin of money lending, but as he became a fixture in European society, his reputation became increasingly vulnerable.
Fugger needed the laws to be changed, or at least relaxed, or his lending business was in trouble. In 1515, he wrote a letter to Pope Leo X and funded a debate in the St. Petronius Basilica in Bologna. The debate ran for five hours, a back and forth of philosophy, scripture, and rampant crowd heckling. In the end, it was declared a tie, but Pope Leo X that year signed a papal “bull” reforming the concept of usury.
Originally, the Church pointed to the philosopher Aristotle’s model for determining what was okay to charge for and what wasn’t. Aristotle had said that charging someone for a cow because it produced milk was fine, but money was a dead thing and unfair to profit from.
A silver mine produced silver and as such paying cash for the future proceeds of the mine had allowed Fugger to more or less carry on his business. It wasn’t called merchant cash advance back then but he applied that model wherever he could. Not everyone in need of money had a business, however, and it was critical that he be allowed to charge interest when circumstances called for it.
More than a millennium after Aristotle, Pope Leo X found that risk and labor involved with safeguarding capital made money lending a living thing. As long as a loan involved labor, cost, or risk, it was in the clear. This opened a flood of church-legal lending: Fugger’s lobbying paid off with a fortune.
Jakob Fugger was off to the races and he greatly expanded his financial services business. Historian Dennis McCarthy found that the Fugger family grew their war chest nine times over in the next seventeen years, a gain of 927%. Their funding efforts bought a trading empire, and they entered into agreements with nobles that placed entire countries as collateral.
McCarthy wrote: That was one of the problems with the Fugger model- “how does one take possession of Austria or France or Spain when its rulers default or lag behind debt repayment schedules?”
After gaining the good faith to lend in the Church’s eyes, the papacy itself became a Fugger customer. Positions in the Church were inseparable from social and political power, and the only way to get a place on the totem pole was by paying for a title. Just as the richest silver mine owners didn’t have the cash to pay for lunch- so did wealthy aristocrats need capital to afford positions in the cloth.
By the time Martin Luther “nailed” his 95 theses to the door of a church in 1517, he was rallying against the Fugger funding family and its stranglehold on the Roman Catholic Church.
It all came down to an in-house promotion. Albert Brandenburg brought a whole new meaning to the concept of “moneychangers in the temple.” A German Archbishop of Magdeburg, Brandenburg was promoted to Elector of Mainz: the second in command of the Holy Roman Empire. Unfortunately, he had to pony up 21,000 ducats to pay the Roman Curia (the Church’s admin)- for the title. Naturally, he didn’t have the cash, and the Fuggers stepped in.
Brandenburg got a loan on interest. To pay it back, he also paid Pope Leo X for the right to sell indulgences. Indulgences were contracts the church sold to forgive sins, allowing believers to purchase their way out of purgatory and into heaven. A fresh round of indulgences was printed to fund the construction of St. Peter’s Basilica, and Brandenburg was entrusted to sell them in 1517. (Their sale was later banned by the Church in 1567).
The sale of indulgences
interlinked the Church with Fugger, and solidified Luther’s desire to maintain the Faith through an alternate system. Luther’s complaints spawned the Reformation, and his followers and independent revolutionaries like John Calvin would bring the rise of Protestantism, the Church of England, and ultimately what historian Alec Ryrie wrote as the foundation of modern mercantilism.
“I’m saying that there are some specific parts of modern life that derive directly from the Protestant Reformation. We couldn’t have these features if it hadn’t happened.” Ryrie said. “That combination of free inquiry, democracy, and limited government is pretty much what makes up liberal, market democracies. It runs the modern world.”
To this day, no one is sure of the extent of the Fugger fortune. Historian Mark Häberlein found that Fugger struck a deal with Augsburg Tax authorities in 1516: he agreed to pay an annual lump sum on the condition that his family’s true wealth would never be revealed. He died in 1525.
To get an idea of the extent of his wealth, we can base calculations on the cost of butchering a pig in 1522 (yes, that’s a real metric.) It cost one Gulden, a new coin minted in 1500 to butcher a hog. The German coin contained about the same amount of gold as a Florin.
Based on those ham prices, Jim Ulvog from Ancient Finances estimated that in 2017 a single florin would be worth ~$900, and other writers have put the florin in the same range. Though the true wealth of the Fuggers may never be known, when Charles V aimed to take control of the Holy Roman Empire in 1519, the Fuggers were lending Charles 543,000 guldens to buy votes: approximately $448 million. That’s just in a single deal.
It’s been said that merchant cash advances or sales-based financing is relatively new, but it could be argued that such transactions are so old that life as we know it in the modern world only exists because a guy 500 years ago was engaged in non-loan transactions to fund businesses in a manner that was Church-compliant and wanted to expand.





























