1. Unsafe online trading mode. This model is close to P2P online lending in the United States, that is, the platform only acts as a "matchmaker" and does not disclose information as a guarantee, and the risk is borne by investors. This is a pure credit loan. However, there are few platforms for this model in China. It is difficult for investors to accept it without providing financial guarantee.
Second, a secure online trading model. This P2P online lending platform is not a simple intermediary, but cooperates with guarantee institutions to verify the borrower's information and manage the funds. The platform is both a guarantor and a joint collector. For investors, the risk is low, but the operating cost of the platform also increases.
Third, the offline trading model. Similar to private lending, the online network platform is responsible for providing information and finally completing the transaction offline. Ordinary lenders need collateral, from pure credit loans to mortgage loans, which greatly reduces the risk, but offline transactions are restricted by geography.
Fourth, online and offline combination. This is an ideal mode at present. Small transactions are completed online. If the amount exceeds a certain amount, offline transactions are needed, and collateral is needed. This model has more advantages than simple online or offline transactions. Domestic P2P platforms mostly adopt the latter two modes. It is generally believed in the industry that if the four "red lines" are strictly observed, many P2P online lending platforms are suspected of stepping on the line. In the future, P2P online lending will return to intermediary nature, and three core issues must be solved.