Analysis of Internet Finance Models and Risk Response Strategies in the Big Data Era
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/ffkymk24Keywords:
Internet finance, big data, P2P lending, credit risk, regulatory technology, financial innovation, machine learning, risk management.Abstract
The rapid proliferation of big data technologies has fundamentally reshaped the landscape of internet finance, giving rise to novel business models that challenge conventional financial paradigms. This paper systematically analyzes the principal internet finance models operating in the big data era—including peer-to-peer (P2P) lending, third-party payment platforms, crowdfunding, robo-advisory services, and supply chain finance—and evaluates their intrinsic risk structures. Employing a mixed-methods framework that integrates quantitative data analysis with qualitative case studies, we examine the principal categories of risk (credit risk, liquidity risk, operational risk, and systemic risk) associated with each model. Furthermore, we propose a multi-layered risk response strategy encompassing regulatory technology adoption, credit scoring innovation through machine learning, enhanced disclosure mechanisms, and coordinated supervisory frameworks. Our findings indicate that while big data analytics substantially improves risk identification and management efficiency, significant regulatory gaps and information asymmetry challenges persist. This research contributes a structured analytical framework to the growing body of literature on internet finance governance and offers actionable recommendations for regulators, platform operators, and investors.
Downloads
References
[1] Gomber, P., Koch, J. A., & Siering, M. (2017). Digital Finance and FinTech: Current research and future research directions. Journal of Business Economics, 87(5), 537–580.
[2] Internet Finance Association of China. (2023). China Internet Finance Annual Report 2023. Beijing: NIFA Press.
[3] KPMG. (2023). Pulse of Fintech H2'22: Fintech Trends for 2023. KPMG International.
[4] Zhu, R., Liu, C., Li, T., Wu, J., Ayogu, I., & Wu, S. (2023). Big data and internet finance: An analysis of research hotspots and development trends. Frontiers in Big Data, 6, 1167464.
[5] Xie, P., & Zou, C. (2012). The theory of internet finance. Finance & Trade Economics, 8, 11–22.
[6] Arner, D. W., Barberis, J., & Buckley, R. P. (2016). The evolution of fintech: A new post-crisis paradigm? Georgetown Journal of International Law, 47(4), 1271–1319.
[7] Tang, H. (2019). Peer-to-peer lenders versus banks: Substitutes or complements? Review of Financial Studies, 32(5), 1900–1938.
[8] Morse, A. (2015). Peer-to-peer crowdfunding: Information and the potential for disruption in consumer lending. Annual Review of Financial Economics, 7, 463–482.
[9] Claessens, S., Frost, J., Turner, G., & Zhu, F. (2018). Fintech credit markets around the world: Size, drivers and policy issues. BIS Quarterly Review, September 2018, 29–49.
[10] Butaru, F., Chen, Q., Clark, B., Das, S., Lo, A. W., & Siddique, A. (2016). Risk and risk management in the credit card industry. Journal of Banking & Finance, 72, 218–239.
[11] Li, Y., Spigt, R., & Swinkels, L. (2017). The impact of FinTech start-ups on incumbent retail banks' share prices. Financial Innovation, 3(1), 26.
[12] Philippon, T. (2019). On fintech and financial inclusion. NBER Working Paper 26330. National Bureau of Economic Research.
[13] Financial Stability Board. (2022). FinTech and Market Structure in Financial Services: Market Developments and Potential Financial Stability Implications. Basel: FSB.
[14] Huang, R. H. (2018). Online P2P lending and regulatory responses in China: Opportunities and challenges. European Business Organization Law Review, 19(1), 63–92.
[15] People's Bank of China. (2015). Guiding Opinions on Promoting the Healthy Development of Internet Finance. State Council Document No. 221. Beijing.
[16] Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance. (2023). The Global Alternative Finance Market Benchmarking Report. Cambridge: Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
[17] World Bank Group. (2022). Global Findex Database 2021: Financial Inclusion, Digital Payments, and Resilience in the Age of COVID-19. Washington, DC: World Bank.
[18] Ant Group. (2023). Ant Group Annual Report 2022–23. Hangzhou: Ant Group Co., Ltd.
[19] Statista. (2023). Crowdfunding—Worldwide: Market forecast report. Hamburg: Statista GmbH.
[20] Statista. (2023). Robo-Advisors—Worldwide market data report. Hamburg: Statista GmbH.
[21] McKinsey & Company. (2020). Supply-chain finance: The emergence of a new competitive landscape. McKinsey Working Papers on Risk.
[22] LendingClub Corporation. (2023). LendingClub Annual Report 2022. San Francisco: LendingClub.
[23] People's Bank of China. (2021). China Financial Stability Report 2021. Beijing: China Financial Publishing House.
[24] IBM Security. (2023). Cost of a Data Breach Report 2023. Armonk, NY: IBM Corporation.
[25] Securities and Exchange Commission. (2020). Staff Report on Equity and Options Market Structure Conditions in Early 2020. Washington, DC: SEC.
[26] Deloitte. (2023). RegTech Universe 2023: Mapping the Solutions Landscape. London: Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited.
[27] Financial Conduct Authority. (2022). Annual Report and Accounts 2021/22. London: FCA.
[28] Jagtiani, J., & Lemieux, C. (2019). The roles of alternative data and machine learning in fintech lending: Evidence from the LendingClub consumer platform. Financial Management, 48(4), 1009–1029.
[29] Monetary Authority of Singapore. (2023). Annual Report 2022/23: Building Trust, Serving Singapore. Singapore: MAS.
[30] European Commission. (2023). Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Payment Services in the Internal Market (PSD3). COM/2023/366 final. Brussels: European Commission.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Highlights in Business, Economics and Management
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
