|
Post by buttchopf23 on Oct 7, 2019 10:45:25 GMT
Coinloan, a marketplace to invest in crypto backed loans: - invest EUR and other currencies plus cryptos - set most of the terms yourself (duration, interest rate etc) - 15-16% yields in EUR achievable - no cryptos needed to participate - from EUR 100 - LTV on loans set at 70% -> liquidation mechanism in place to protect loaned money. Anyone also using it? Opinions? Further reading if interested www.p2phero.blog/2019/10/07/coinloan-p2p-with-or-without-crypto-for-high-returns/?lang=en (the blog uses referrals)
|
|
|
Post by southseacompany on Oct 7, 2019 13:16:48 GMT
Interesting site, but allowing LTV of up to 91% without a margin call strikes me as extremely high risk, considering how quickly cryptocurrencies can fall. Compare this to other crypto lending platforms: Compound liquidates at 150% coverage (66% LTV) and dYdX at 125% (80% LTV). Furthermore, those are effectively "pooled" so that you're not individually at significant risk from one borrower's default. On the safer side of the spectrum, there are centralised platforms like Nexo and Celsius. In particular, Nexo pays 8% on euro balances with instant access, which seems rather generous in light of the current low P2P yields.
Overall, I think the borrowers on these platforms are overpaying a lot. They put up a liquid, easy-to-value collateral subject to automatic liquidation at any time, yet they pay 16% for euro loans when eurozone interest rates are in sub-zero territory. Talk about a raw deal!
|
|
|
Post by buttchopf23 on Oct 8, 2019 12:36:41 GMT
Thanks for that. Yes, that rather low buffer of about 10% before a liquidation happens concerned me as well in the beginning. It seems it has worked so far as there were enough cases of sudden drops in value. So I guess it works, but not sure if it does in the worst case. That's a risk I am willing to take I believe compound etc are allowing margin trading on their platforms? I only know nuo from a user experience. Rates are high there as well, at least for stable coins. Advantage which imo Coinloan has against those is the fiat offering and higher ltv for the borrower. Sure you can lend at 8% to nexo, but this is simply not good enough for me (although I am a nexo tokenholder, so I am glad that other people think different ). If borrowers pay too much is a difficult question. You can borrow with nexo at 8% p.a, but you need to repay in nexo. If you pay w/o nexo, you still pay 16%. On Coinloan.I see offers go at 12% from time to time.
|
|
|
Post by southseacompany on Oct 10, 2019 13:22:42 GMT
Well, I decided to sign up for Coinloan to get a feel for it myself. Of course, it's too early to comment on it further.
As for fairness of the deals: A mortgage is generally (and in Basel III regulations) considered the safest kind of private loan. It is secured on a relatively illiquid asset that the owner (or their tenant) can damage, impairing its value. It takes a long time to foreclose on it, and selling it may also take a long time, at least outside large cities. A crypto loan is secured on very liquid collateral that the borrower has to deposit at the platform, so it can be seized and sold in seconds when needed. If we ignore the asset's higher volatility, it logically follows that the crypto loan is at least as safe as a mortgage. Yet mortgages in the eurozone have interest rates of maybe 2%, while crypto loans go for 15-16%, or in the case of Nexo's special offer, "just" 8%. That, to me, is a mispricing of risk.
Everything is relative, but when Metrokredit/Tengo/etc. pay 10% for loans backed only by a guarantee from a dodgy small company whose financial statements are vague or missing, an 8% interest rate for a secured, overcollateralised loan is relatively very attractive in my opinion.
Disclosure: I also own some Nexo tokens (a modest amount).
|
|
|
Post by jmot on Oct 11, 2019 10:09:24 GMT
Well, I decided to sign up for Coinloan to get a feel for it myself. Of course, it's too early to comment on it further. As for fairness of the deals: A mortgage is generally (and in Basel III regulations) considered the safest kind of private loan. It is secured on a relatively illiquid asset that the owner (or their tenant) can damage, impairing its value. It takes a long time to foreclose on it, and selling it may also take a long time, at least outside large cities. A crypto loan is secured on very liquid collateral that the borrower has to deposit at the platform, so it can be seized and sold in seconds when needed. If we ignore the asset's higher volatility, it logically follows that the crypto loan is at least as safe as a mortgage. Yet mortgages in the eurozone have interest rates of maybe 2%, while crypto loans go for 15-16%, or in the case of Nexo's special offer, "just" 8%. That, to me, is a mispricing of risk. Everything is relative, but when Metrokredit/Tengo/etc. pay 10% for loans backed only by a guarantee from a dodgy small company whose financial statements are vague or missing, an 8% interest rate for a secured, overcollateralised loan is relatively very attractive in my opinion. Disclosure: I also own some Nexo tokens (a modest amount). I signed up with them a couple of months ago but did not invest, my main issue with them is not their business model which in my opinion is fairer and better than Nexo (they are true P2P crypto vs Fiat loans exchange) or the LTV ratios. The risk is the platform, it is a tiny company (if I remember well their capital is just a few ks in EUR), there is no client money separation and you are depositing FIAT money (euros) into a bank account in their name. Your loans might perform really well, but your money is stuck on the platform until the loans expire and I am very concerned that when it comes to withdraw the money, it is not going to be there due to platform failure.
The bottom line is that it looks very much like just another very badly capitalized crypto exchange and plenty of crypto exchanges with short track record, little capital and bad governance failed.
|
|
|
Post by southseacompany on Oct 11, 2019 13:38:15 GMT
I signed up with them a couple of months ago but did not invest, my main issue with them is not their business model which in my opinion is fairer and better than Nexo (they are true P2P crypto vs Fiat loans exchange) or the LTV ratios. The risk is the platform, it is a tiny company (if I remember well their capital is just a few ks in EUR), there is no client money separation and you are depositing FIAT money (euros) into a bank account in their name. Your loans might perform really well, but your money is stuck on the platform until the loans expire and I am very concerned that when it comes to withdraw the money, it is not going to be there due to platform failure. The bottom line is that it looks very much like just another very badly capitalized crypto exchange and plenty of crypto exchanges with short track record, little capital and bad governance failed.
Of course you have a point. I was somewhat overstating the case to stimulate discussion. The platform also has execution risk (especially wrt hacking) and risk of fraud (since there's no way to verify all the stated collateral exists). That being said, if you are only looking at the company's registered share capital (which indeed is 2500 eur), you may be missing the fact that they raised over $3 million of funding in an ICO, which rather undermines the accusation of it being badly capitalized.
|
|
|
Post by jmot on Oct 11, 2019 17:02:46 GMT
I signed up with them a couple of months ago but did not invest, my main issue with them is not their business model which in my opinion is fairer and better than Nexo (they are true P2P crypto vs Fiat loans exchange) or the LTV ratios. The risk is the platform, it is a tiny company (if I remember well their capital is just a few ks in EUR), there is no client money separation and you are depositing FIAT money (euros) into a bank account in their name. Your loans might perform really well, but your money is stuck on the platform until the loans expire and I am very concerned that when it comes to withdraw the money, it is not going to be there due to platform failure. The bottom line is that it looks very much like just another very badly capitalized crypto exchange and plenty of crypto exchanges with short track record, little capital and bad governance failed.
Of course you have a point. I was somewhat overstating the case to stimulate discussion. The platform also has execution risk (especially wrt hacking) and risk of fraud (since there's no way to verify all the stated collateral exists). That being said, if you are only looking at the company's registered share capital (which indeed is 2500 eur), you may be missing the fact that they raised over $3 million of funding in an ICO, which rather undermines the accusation of it being badly capitalized. Have you got any pointer to the ICO? I missed that.
|
|
|
Post by southseacompany on Oct 12, 2019 0:58:41 GMT
According to this the soft cap in the ICO was $3 million, and this was the official announcement that the soft cap had been reached in Dec 2017. The token sale was extended to end in Feb 2018, so clearly the total raised must have been higher than that. However, I couldn't find the exact amount raised with a quick Google search, so disclosure here leaves something to be desired, as usual in the P2P field.
|
|
|
Post by jmot on Oct 12, 2019 4:06:24 GMT
I performed some further due diligence. They raised their ICO when ETH and in general all cryptos were at the absurd top: www.icodata.io/coin/coinloanSo the crypto they collected is worth much less in fiat right now and you can bet their running expenses are in fiat.
I then purchased their only annual report (31/12/18) to see if some of the ICO money flowed somehow into the ExFinance OU company assets since a fiat lender claim is only against the balance sheet of this company when withdrawing money according to T&C coinloan.io/terms-and-conditions/ (see section 12, nothing mentioned about fiat in case of insolvency) I let the results speak for themselves (all in eur):
Total equity 124 Including nominal value of share capital 2500 Including unpaid share capital -2,500 (the sole shareholder and CEO did not even bother to deposit the small amount of shares money, in my opinion he is taking the proverbial ....) Total liabilities and equity 19,359
Income Statement (EUR) 3/21/2018 -12/31/2018 other business earnings 948 Miscellaneous operating expenses -824 business profit (loss) 124 Profit (loss) before income tax 124 Profit (loss) 124
Notes to the financial statements Note 1 Accounting policies This report is a condensed annual financial report of a micro-enterprise based on the Estonian Financial Reporting Standard, which is aimed at provide the user of the report with the information required by the Accounting Act regarding the financial position and performance of the reporting entity.
Lots of unanswered questions: - Where has all the money raised by the ICO gone? Is it stored into an escrow account? If yes where?
- I understand that crypto raised by the ICO could well be off balance sheet (this is already very bad news for lenders in Coinloan), but how are the employees and collaborators of the company paid? Obviously not from ExFinance OU balance sheet and obviously to survive (pay their rent and living expenses) they need fiat.
- what kind of oversight the money raised by the ICO has got?
The opacity of Coinloan runs very deep, unless the guy I pointed out above (no one else would do since he is the only legal representative of the company) starts to answers questions about where the ICO money is stored and why it has not been invested at all in the equity of the company, I shall avoid lending on the platform due to its total lack of transparency and tiny balance sheet on which I could make a claim as a fiat lender.
I also read the whitepaper for the ICO: icosbull.com/eng/ico/coinloan/whitepaper nowhere it is mentioned where the money of the ICO will be stored, it is fully available to spend as the owners of the crypto wallets wish. Basically the CEO and his collaborators (I would not call them employees, since I cannot find any legal relationship except some linkedin connections) are probably making use of the ICO raised money without any agreed governance and the actual company that owns the fiat bank accounts where the fiat lenders deposit the money is not self sustaining at all.
|
|
|
Post by southseacompany on Oct 12, 2019 8:18:36 GMT
Thanks jmot , useful info there. Interesting that the "operating" company seems to have no relationship to the actual business, since neither the costs nor the income flow through it. These guys have at least two entities, CryptoFinance OÜ (14337507) and ExFinance OÜ (14453478), but they haven't published details of the legal structure, so the whole thing is basically a black box.
|
|
|
Post by buttchopf23 on Oct 22, 2019 18:32:32 GMT
Thanks to both.
I found this:
“CoinLoan has three Estonian Financial Licenses (FVR000111, FRK000091, and FFA000241). These licenses allow us to operate fiat, crypto, and alternative means of payment worldwide.“
Need to check if that info provides some connections or clues.
@southsea: did you see nexo lowered its borrowing fees... and with coinloan they dropped as well after my post.
|
|
|
Post by southseacompany on Oct 23, 2019 2:29:09 GMT
“CoinLoan has three Estonian Financial Licenses (FVR000111, FRK000091, and FFA000241). These licenses allow us to operate fiat, crypto, and alternative means of payment worldwide.“ There are links to the licenses on CoinLoan's page, but all of them are issued to ExFinance OÜ, so unfortunately that doesn't help to clarify the company structure. @southsea: did you see nexo lowered its borrowing fees... and with coinloan they dropped as well after my post. To an extent, my argument that the rates are too high is playing out. Borrowing costs are down, and deposit interest is down (for example, on Compound and Celsius). It seems Nexo has decided to take a very aggressive growth strategy, maybe trying to become a crypto banking unicorn in the process. It might be difficult for CoinLoan and others to keep up. Time will tell.
|
|