Peer to Peer Lending Returns – Prosper Says They Beat Lending Club

peer to peer lending returnsIn a previous article comparing Prosper vs. Lending Club, I indicated that I thought the peer to peer lending returns for both companies were essentially the same for investors using their service to invest in P2P loans.  I was however unable to do a direct comparison, because of the different ways the companies calculate their returns.

As one would expect, calling it tie was not satisfying for either company. Almost immediately I received an email from Prosper’s Chief Investment Officer asking me how I came to the conclusion that the peer to peer lending returns for both firms were the same.  After our discussion he send me the below response:


Why Prosper Feels its Peer to Peer Lending Returns are Superior To Lending Club

Response Delivered By Joseph Toms, Chief Investment Officer, Prosper

Editor’s Note: Prosper’s methodology of calculating returns only includes seasoned peer to peer loans.  Seasoned returns in this context refer to loans that are over 10 months old. Unseasoned would be all peer to peer loans, both over and under 10 months old.

As discussed, we feel incorporating unseasoned loans into the calculation overstates the actual return, particularly when a company loan portfolio is rapidly growing. However, in the interest of an apple-to-apple comparison we have run our performance numbers and are providing return figures that are unseasoned so that a true comparison can be made across the industry. When similar ROI methodologies are applied, Prosper’s ROI increases from 10.46% to 11.15%. This return is notably higher than the return previously noted throughout the article.  Prosper has led the industry in P2P lending returns since 2009.  

Perhaps a better way to compare returns is to use an independent third party site like  This creates an immediate apple-to-apple comparison using a consistent methodology that is wholly impartial. It’s also important to note that Prosper completely revamped its model in 2009. The company therefore has what we call Prosper 1.0 and Prosper 2.0 (the current model). When reviewing Lendstats’ objective analysis, an important point for consideration emerges.  If you compare the returns through the two completely different models of Prosper 1.0 and 2.0. the compound return of a dollar invested in 2007 ends up being 32.12% at Prosper versus 33.11% elsewhere. There is not much of a difference. However, if you compare the lending platforms in operation in the industry today, the Prosper 2.0 platform outperforms the competition: a compound return of 45.55% at Prosper and 32.09% at the second best P2P lender.  We think the data is irrefutable.  Prosper has led the industry in reliable high-yield P2P returns, outperforming the competition consistently since 2009.

More Articles On P2P Lending
Prosper vs. Lending Club Comparison
Does Prosper Or Lending Club Offer Better Returns On P2P Loans
P2P Loans: 10% Returns On Average For The Last 26 Years
Top 5 Peer to Peer Lending Sites for Investors

Articles From P2P Expert – Peter Renton

Peter Renton on P2P Lending: Are You Asking the Right Question?
What are the Risks People Associate with Peer to Peer Lending?


  1. Dan B says

    I can understand why Prosper would be annoyed with your conclusions. If the question is who has delivered the better results to date for the last 3 years then clearly the answer is Prosper………… aggregate as well as on each of the years individually. The numbers as supplied by Lendstats are pretty clear on this. I don’t understand why there would be any argument on this particular point except to point out an error on the part of the original article.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *