For Investors, Is Alternative Finance Collaborative or Disruptive ?

Rather than trying to supplant banking and venture capital, a collaborative model is emerging where digital platforms work side by side with traditional investors

Today we take a a look at the investor side of the alternative finance market, which is comprised of both retail and institutional investors. We foresee that equity crowdfunding, like debt-based P2P lending, will continue to evolve and attract ever more institutional investors going forward, boosting deal volumes and injecting more professionalism in the market.

The slashing of interest rates globally in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis pushed retail investors to look to non-traditional investments to boost returns. This major development boosted the popularity of the alternative finance market as an asset class. Since then, the increased access afforded by the online investment model has meant that the industry has secured its position alongside more traditional asset classes, drawing the interest of institutional investors.

As it stands, the investor side of the alternative finance market, incorporating both debt and equity, is made up of both retail and institutional investors. As the alternative finance market moves upstream, drawing larger more established SME issuers, institutions are becoming more involved. These institutions are investing in the space both through platforms and in the platforms themselves.

Retail

Retail investment into the P2P market has been primarily driven by the low interest rates available globally on bank deposits. When factoring in inflation rates, the picture for savers becomes even worse. In the UK for example, with interest rates at 0.5% after the financial crisis and inflation at around 2% up until recently, in real terms, capital deposited in banks was decreasing in value. Compared to the rates on offer from various different P2P platforms during the same period, it is easy to see why alternative lending has become so popular for consumers.

Other key drivers for P2P lending include: the diversification benefits brought about by incorporating new asset classes into a portfolio; consumers general dislike of banks as a result of their perceived role in the global recession; and the ability for investors to choose exactly where their capital goes.

Read more →

The Rapid Mainstreaming of Impact Investing

Crowdfunding Industry Overtakes Venture Capital and Angel Investing

By 2016 the crowdfunding industry is on track to account for more funding than venture capital, according to research firm Massolution’s annual report. With an estimated market value of $34 billion in 2015, crowdfunding has come a long way since its valuation of $880 million in 2010.

In comparison, the VC industry invests an average of $30 billion each year. Meanwhile the crowdfunding industry is doubling or more, every year, and is spread across several types of funding models including rewards, donation, equity, and debt/lending. In particular, equity crowdfunding – now being legalised in the US – holds huge disruptive potential.

Crowdfunding industry growth figures, as reported by Massolution

The crowdfunding market grew by 167% in 2014, continuing the exponential growth of previous years. Two months ago the thriving British FinTech (financial technology) sector witnessed its first billion-dollar business. The company? Funding Circle, a five year-old crowdfunding platform. Their $150 million funding round was over-subscribed.

Read more →

Four tips to improve impact investing in Southern Africa

It is clear that every country in Southern Africa has its own particular set of conditions that affect the ways in which impact investing is handled. Impact investors must therefore take their time to carefully learn about the conditions in each individual country. While a country-specific approach is obviously needed, GIIN researchers, in their report entitled Landscape for Impact Investing in Southern Africa, have compiled four key considerations that apply to Southern Africa, which are:

1) Leverage technical assistance (TA) facilities to build the pre-investment pipeline:

More pre-investment support is required in order to to develop a strong pipeline of investable opportunities for businesses; TA funders like USAID and DFID are recognising the importance of getting companies to the point where they can successfully raise capital.

The report says: “Targeted, tailored support requires an upfront commitment of resources but has proven effective in preparing potential targets for investment and in building high-quality deal flow. This process can also dramatically reduce diligence timelines if the investor is able, before investment, to increase familiarity with and visibility into a business.”

2) Develop sector specialisation:

Impact investors can also drive growth, impact and solid returns by narrowing down their focus on sector-specific portfolios. This has enabled some to use their existing knowledge to target some less well-known opportunities earlier and also to reduce diligence timelines.

The report expands: “Sectors such as agriculture, energy, and financial services present large opportunities where different companies often face similar challenges; learnings can be shared across portfolio companies.”

Read more →

The next step for crowdfunding: “crowd-directing”?

Investors today have access to a wider variety of investments than at any other time in history; the rise of the alternative finance industry has democratised investment, and unquoted equity is no longer just the preserve of finance professionals and industry insiders.

We now have unprecedented access to investments, and crowdfunding platforms give us the ability to evaluate, question and guide the offers and the entrepreneurs. This open forum is forging an era of investor education and knowledge-sharing which some people believe is contributing to the success of the enterprise.

According to the Altfi 2015 report Where are they now? over 80% of the companies that crowdfunded between 2011 and 2013 are still trading. Of these, many have raised further capital at higher valuations – and one has even realised a return for investors. This compares favourably alongside an October 2014 report by the insurer RSA that found that 55% of UK small and medium-sized enterprises did not survive five years.

Is the survival rate better for crowdfunded companies because the crowd contributes to its success and collaborative decision-making is better at picking a winner? Or is it too soon to judge?

In his 2004 book, The Wisdom of Crowds, James Surowiecki suggests that a large group of reasonably informed and motivated people is able to make better decisions than a small group of experts.

The book suggests that the view of a crowd is more accurate than all but a handful of individuals and that no individual is able consistently to make decisions superior to those of the crowd.

Surowiecki’s work was published long before crowdfunding was conceived, and its findings changed the business’ understanding of leadership and management. However, as the premise emerges that crowdfunded companies are more successful than non-crowdfunded companies should we should we revisit Surowiecki’s findings and examine again why diversity works?

If we agree that the crowd is more capable of selecting successful businesses than business angels, venture capital partners (VCs) and traditional financiers, are entrepreneurs missing a trick if they then forget about the crowd after funding?

Read more →