Upstart Holdings Inc

Previous wording

•If we are unable to manage the risks associated with the Upstart Macro Index (UMI), which is at an early research and development stage with an unproven track record, our credibility, reputation, business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Current wording

•If we are unable to manage the risks associated with the Upstart Macro Index (UMI), which we introduced in 2023 and does not have a long history or proven track record, our credibility, reputation, business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Previous wording

Uncertainty, volatility and negative trends in general economic conditions historically have created a difficult operating environment for our industry. Many factors, including factors that are beyond our control, have impacted and will continue to impact our business, financial condition and results of operations by affecting the supply of capital to our marketplace from our lending partners and institutional investors, the demand by borrowers of Upstart-powered loans, and borrowers’ ability and willingness to repay their loans. These factors include, but are not limited to, interest rates, inflation, personal savings rates, U.S. politics and presidential elections, fiscal and monetary policies, unemployment levels, disruptions in the banking sector, lower consumer confidence, reduced consumer discretionary spending, conditions in the housing market, immigration policies, gas prices, energy costs, government shutdowns, trade wars and delays in tax refunds, as well as events such as natural disasters, acts of war, geopolitical conflicts, terrorism, catastrophes and pandemics. If any of these factors negatively affect borrowers, lending partners or institutional investors, or if we are unable to mitigate the risks associated with them, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Current wording

Uncertainty, volatility and negative trends in general economic conditions historically have created a difficult operating environment for our industry. Many factors, including factors that are beyond our control, have impacted and will continue to impact our business, financial condition and results of operations by affecting the supply of capital to our marketplace from our lending partners and institutional investors, the demand by borrowers of Upstart-powered loans, and borrowers’ ability and willingness to repay their loans. These factors include, but are not limited to, interest rates, inflation, personal savings rates, U.S. politics and presidential and congressional elections, fiscal and monetary policies, unemployment levels, disruptions in the banking sector, lower consumer confidence, reduced consumer discretionary spending, conditions in the housing market, immigration policies, gas prices, energy costs, government shutdowns, trade wars and delays in tax refunds, as well as events such as natural disasters, acts of war, geopolitical conflicts, terrorism, catastrophes and pandemics. If any of these factors negatively affect borrowers, lending partners or institutional investors, or if we are unable to mitigate the risks associated with them, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Previous wording

In recent years, the United States has experienced historically high levels of inflation. In response, the government has implemented policy interventions, and the U.S. Federal Reserve has raised, and may continue to raise, interest rates. While the goal is to curb inflation, these interventions may have broad macroeconomic implications and may contribute to an economic downturn, higher unemployment rates or disrupt the banking sector.

Current wording

In recent years, the United States has experienced historically high levels of inflation. In response, the government has implemented policy interventions. The U.S. Federal Reserve raised interest rates eleven times in 2022 and 2023. While the goal was to curb inflation, these interventions may have had, and could continue to have, broad macroeconomic implications, including contributing to an economic downturn, higher unemployment rates or disruptions to the banking sector. In response to indications of lower inflation levels, the U.S. Federal Reserve lowered interest rates in September 2024 and is expected to continue lowering interest rates.

Previous wording

During an economic down cycle, there is a greater risk that borrowers will not make payments on loans. Borrowers may not prioritize repayment of unsecured personal loans over loans that are secured by necessities, for example, mortgages or auto loans. Higher interest rates often lead to higher payment obligations, which may reduce the ability of borrowers to remain current on their obligations. These factors lead to increased delinquencies, defaults and bankruptcies declared by borrowers, resulting in more charge-offs and less recoveries, all of which have had, and could continue to have, a material adverse effect on the credit performance of loans facilitated on our marketplace and our business. For example, the vintages of core personal loans that originated in the first quarter of 2021 through the third quarter of 2023 are forecasted to underperform relative to the target returns set at the time of loan origination. When a borrower defaults on a loan, it increases our costs to service the loan. Because default rates have been higher than expected, it has negatively impacted, and may continue to negatively impact, demand by our lending partners to originate loans, and institutional investors to fund loans, facilitated through our marketplace. Any sustained decline in applicant approvability or acceptance of loan offers or loan origination volume, or any increase in delinquencies or defaults by borrowers beyond our expectation, would harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Current wording

During an economic down cycle, there is a greater risk that borrowers will not make payments on loans. Borrowers may not prioritize repayment of unsecured personal loans over loans that are secured by necessities, for example, mortgages or auto loans. Higher interest rates often lead to higher payment obligations, which may reduce the ability of borrowers to remain current on their obligations. These factors lead to increased delinquencies, defaults and bankruptcies declared by borrowers, resulting in more charge-offs and less recoveries, all of which have had, and could continue to have, a material adverse effect on the credit performance of loans facilitated on our marketplace and our business. For example, the vintages of core personal loans that originated in the first quarter of 2021 through the fourth quarter of 2023 are forecasted to underperform relative to the target returns set at the time of loan origination. When a borrower defaults on a loan, it increases our costs to service the loan. Because default rates have been higher than expected, it has negatively impacted, and may continue to negatively impact, demand by our lending partners to originate loans, and institutional investors to fund loans, facilitated through our marketplace. Any sustained decline in applicant approvability or acceptance of loan offers or loan origination volume, or any increase in delinquencies or defaults by borrowers beyond our expectation, would harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Previous wording

Our business depends on sourcing and maintaining diverse and resilient loan funding from institutional investors to our marketplace. The institutional investors provide loan funding to our marketplace by purchasing whole loans, pass-through certificates and asset-backed securities. Out of the total principal of loan originations facilitated on our marketplace during the six months ended June 30, 2024, 57% were purchased by institutional investors. The availability and capacity of loan funding from institutional investors depend on many factors that are outside of our control, such as economic and market conditions, interest rates, liquidity in the capital markets and regulatory reforms. While we have experienced funding constraints since 2022 due to the macroeconomic environment, we believe the market sentiment from institutional investors has started to improve and we have since increased the loan funding capacity. We cannot be sure that the existing funding sources will continue to be available, or any new funding source will become available, on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Decreased funding from institutional investors has negatively impacted our business in the past, and may negatively impact us in the future. Any sustained decline in investor demand for Upstart-powered loans or securities secured by such loans for any reason, including due to adverse economic conditions or due to any increase in delinquencies, defaults or losses beyond our expectation, may adversely affect our financial results.

Current wording

Our business depends on sourcing and maintaining diverse and resilient loan funding from institutional investors to our marketplace. The institutional investors provide loan funding to our marketplace by purchasing whole loans, pass-through certificates and asset-backed securities. Out of the total principal of loan originations facilitated on our marketplace during the nine months ended September 30, 2024, 67% were purchased by institutional investors. The availability and capacity of loan funding from institutional investors depend on many factors that are outside of our control, such as economic and market conditions, interest rates, liquidity in the capital markets and regulatory reforms. While we have experienced funding constraints since 2022 due to the macroeconomic environment, we believe the market sentiment from institutional investors has started to improve and we have since increased loan funding capacity. We cannot be sure that the existing funding sources will continue to be available, or any new funding source will become available, on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Decreased funding from institutional investors has negatively impacted our business in the past, and may negatively impact us in the future. Any sustained decline in investor demand for Upstart-powered loans or securities secured by such loans for any reason, including due to adverse economic conditions or due to any increase in delinquencies, defaults or losses beyond our expectation, may adversely affect our financial results.

Previous wording

A significant portion of our loan funding from institutional investors comes from committed capital and other co-investment arrangements. These arrangements may include terms that provide downside risk protection, subject to certain limits and conditions. In particular, we have agreed to compensate investors, subject to a limit, if credit performance on the loans under these arrangements deviates from our initial expectations. As such, if the loans do not perform as expected due to unexpected shifts in borrower behaviors, ability to pay or otherwise or our models’ expectation for credit performance is inaccurate for any reason, our financial results could be adversely impacted. As of June 30, 2024, our maximum exposure to losses under these committed capital and other co-investment arrangements was approximately $260 million. This amount has grown from approximately $40 million as of June 30, 2023, as we have entered into more committed capital and other co-investment arrangements. As the amount of our maximum exposure to losses under these arrangements grows and may continue to grow in the future, risks associated with committed capital and other co-investment arrangements could have a greater impact on our business, financial condition and results of operation. Committed capital and other co-investment arrangements have negatively impacted our financial results through unfavorable fair value adjustments and may continue to do so in the future. We may also experience declines in revenue and transaction volume if existing committed capital or other capital arrangements do not provide funding on the agreed upon terms or we fail to secure additional committed capital or other capital arrangements in the future on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Moreover, the capital arrangements that we have recently entered into during a high interest rate environment, such as the committed capital and other co-investment arrangements, may become more costly if interest rates fall and the terms of such arrangements remain through a full economic cycle. Despite our efforts, we may continue to experience funding constraints and cannot be certain if any measures we have taken, such as committed capital or other co-investment arrangements, or will take to address or mitigate the effects of funding constraints, will be sufficient or successful. In the event of funding constraints, we may not be able to maintain our current loan origination volume without incurring substantially higher funding costs, agreeing to terms that are not favorable to us or relying on our balance sheet to support funding, each of which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Current wording

A significant portion of our loan funding from institutional investors comes from committed capital and other co-investment arrangements. These arrangements may include terms that provide downside risk protection, subject to certain limits and conditions. In particular, we have agreed to compensate investors, subject to a limit, if credit performance on the loans under these arrangements deviates from our initial expectations and, subject to certain conditions, if we are unable to sell loans to our committed capital providers at volume. As such, if the loans do not perform as expected due to unexpected shifts in borrower behaviors, ability to pay or otherwise, if we have a decrease in borrower demand for loans on the Upstart platform, or if our models’ expectation for credit performance is inaccurate for any reason, our financial results could be adversely impacted. As of September 30, 2024, our maximum exposure to losses under these committed capital and other co-investment arrangements was approximately $357.9 million. This amount has grown from $66.1 million as of September 30, 2023, as we have entered into more committed capital and other co-investment arrangements. As the amount of our maximum exposure to losses under these arrangements grows and may continue to grow in the future, risks associated with committed capital and other co-investment arrangements could have a greater impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Committed capital and other co-investment arrangements have negatively impacted our financial results through unfavorable fair value adjustments and may continue to do so in the future. We may also experience declines in revenue and transaction volume if existing committed capital or other capital arrangements do not provide funding on the agreed upon terms or we fail to secure additional committed capital or other capital arrangements in the future on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Moreover, the capital arrangements that we have recently entered into during a high interest rate environment, such as the committed capital and other co-investment arrangements, may become more costly if interest rates fall and the terms of such arrangements remain through a full economic cycle. Despite our efforts, we may continue to experience funding constraints and cannot be certain if any measures we have taken, such as committed capital or other co-investment arrangements, or will take to address or mitigate the effects of funding constraints, will be sufficient or successful. In the event of funding constraints, we may not be able to maintain our current loan origination volume without incurring substantially higher funding costs, agreeing to terms that are not favorable to us or relying on our balance sheet to support funding, each of which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Previous wording

The performance of loans facilitated through our marketplace is significantly dependent on the effectiveness of our proprietary AI models used to evaluate a borrower’s credit profile and likelihood of default. Our AI models have not been extensively tested during economic downturn or recession. Even if credit decisions take into account macroeconomic conditions, there is no assurance that our AI models can accurately predict loan performance during periods of adverse economic conditions or quickly respond to changing economic conditions. If our AI models are unable to accurately reflect the credit risk of loans under such economic conditions, we, our lending partners and our institutional investors would experience greater than expected losses on such loans, which would harm our reputation and erode the trust we have built with our lending partners and institutional investors. We have experienced and may continue to experience high delinquency rates and underperformance of loans originated using our AI models in recent periods. For example, the quarterly vintages of core personal loans that originated in the first quarter of 2021 through the third quarter of 2023 are forecasted to underperform relative to the target returns set at the time of loan origination. The fair value of the loans on our balance sheet has declined and may continue to decline. Our business, financial condition and results of operations can continue to be adversely affected if our AI models are not able to accurately and timely assess the impact of macroeconomic conditions on the performance and default rates of loans facilitated through our marketplace.

Current wording

The performance of loans facilitated through our marketplace is significantly dependent on the effectiveness of our proprietary AI models used to evaluate a borrower’s credit profile and likelihood of default. Our AI models have not been extensively tested during economic downturn or recession. Even if credit decisions take into account macroeconomic conditions, there is no assurance that our AI models can accurately predict loan performance during periods of adverse economic conditions or quickly respond to changing economic conditions. If our AI models are unable to accurately reflect the credit risk of loans under such economic conditions, we, our lending partners and our institutional investors would experience greater than expected losses on such loans, which would harm our reputation and erode the trust we have built with our lending partners and institutional investors. We have experienced and may continue to experience high delinquency rates and underperformance of loans originated using our AI models in recent periods. For example, the quarterly vintages of core personal loans that originated in the first quarter of 2021 through the fourth quarter of 2023 are forecasted to underperform relative to the target returns set at the time of loan origination. The fair value of the loans on our balance sheet has declined and may continue to decline. Our business, financial condition and results of operations can continue to be adversely affected if our AI models are not able to accurately and timely assess the impact of macroeconomic conditions on the performance and default rates of loans facilitated through our marketplace.

Previous wording

In the current macroeconomic environment with elevated costs of borrowing and risks associated with consumer credit, the pool of qualified borrowers has become smaller, and fewer applicants have received or accepted loan offers on our marketplace than they have in the past. Approving more borrowers on our platform can also be limited as we have historically held the maximum annual percentage rate of Upstart-powered loans to less than 35.99% due to regulatory reasons. Moreover, loan terms have become less borrower-friendly in the current environment with higher interest rates, and we have experienced an overall decrease in borrower demand. These factors have and may continue to negatively affect transaction volume on our marketplace and therefore our revenue. If we are not able to maintain or increase transaction volume on our marketplace, or attract and retain qualified borrowers, our growth prospects, business, financial condition and results of operations would be adversely affected.

Current wording

In the current macroeconomic environment with elevated costs of borrowing and risks associated with consumer credit, the pool of qualified borrowers has become smaller, and fewer applicants have received or accepted loan offers on our marketplace than they have in the past. Approving more borrowers on our platform can also be limited as we have historically held the maximum annual percentage rate of Upstart-powered loans to 35.99% or less due to regulatory reasons. Moreover, loan terms have become less borrower-friendly in the current environment with higher interest rates, and we have experienced an overall decrease in borrower demand. These factors have and may continue to negatively affect transaction volume on our marketplace and therefore our revenue. If we are not able to maintain or increase transaction volume on our marketplace, or attract and retain qualified borrowers, our growth prospects, business, financial condition and results of operations would be adversely affected.

Previous wording

Our success depends in significant part on the participation of our lending partners in our marketplace. In the six months ended June 30, 2024, 85% of our total revenue was generated from platform, referral and servicing fees that we receive from our lending partners. Our lending partners also provide loan funding to our marketplace by retaining a significant portion of the loans facilitated through our marketplace. Out of the total principal of loan originations facilitated on our marketplace during the six months ended June 30, 2024, 27% were retained by our lending partners. If we are unable to keep existing lending partners or attract new lending partners to our marketplace, or if we are unable to maintain or increase the portion of loans retained by the lending partners, our financial performance could suffer.

Current wording

Our success depends in significant part on the participation of our lending partners in our marketplace. In the nine months ended September 30, 2024, 86% of our total revenue was generated from platform, referral and servicing fees that we receive from our lending partners. Our lending partners also provide loan funding to our marketplace by retaining a significant portion of the loans facilitated through our marketplace. Out of the total principal of loan originations facilitated on our marketplace during the nine months ended September 30, 2024, 25% were retained by our lending partners. If we are unable to keep existing lending partners or attract new lending partners to our marketplace, or if we are unable to maintain or increase the portion of loans retained by the lending partners, our financial performance could suffer.

Previous wording

We enter into a separate agreement with each of our lending partners. Our agreements with our lending partners are nonexclusive and may contain minimum fee amounts. Our lending partners could decide to stop working with us, ask to modify their agreement terms in a cost prohibitive manner when their agreement is up for renewal or enter into exclusive or more favorable relationships with our competitors. In addition, their regulators may require that they terminate or otherwise limit their business with us, or impose regulatory pressure limiting their ability to do business with us. See the risk factors titled “—Our business is subject to a wide range of laws and regulations, many of which are evolving, and failure or perceived failure to comply with such laws and regulations could harm our business, financial condition and results of operations” and “—The CFPB has sometimes taken expansive views of its authority to regulate consumer financial services, creating uncertainty as to how the agency’s actions or the actions of any other agency could impact our business” for more information. Moreover, we could in the future have disagreements or disputes with any of our lending partners, which could negatively impact or threaten our relationship with them. In our agreements with lending partners, we make certain representations and warranties and covenants concerning our compliance with specific policies of a lending partner, certain procedures and guidelines related to laws and regulations applicable to our lending partners, as well as the services to be provided by us. If those representations and warranties were not accurate when made or if we fail to perform a covenant, we may be liable for any resulting damages, including potentially any losses associated with impacted loans, and our reputation and ability to continue to attract new lending partners would be adversely affected. Additionally, our lending partners may engage in mergers, acquisitions or consolidations with each other, our competitors or with third parties, any of which could be disruptive to our existing and prospective relationships with our lending partners. If we fail to maintain or grow the number of lending partners, our business, financial condition and results of operation could be adversely affected.

Current wording

We enter into a separate agreement with each of our lending partners. Our agreements with our lending partners are nonexclusive and may contain minimum fee amounts. Our lending partners could decide to stop working with us, ask to modify their agreement terms in a cost prohibitive manner when their agreement is up for renewal or enter into exclusive or more favorable relationships with our competitors. In addition, their regulators may require that they terminate or otherwise limit their business with us, or impose regulatory pressure limiting their ability to do business with us. See the risk factors titled “—Our business is subject to a wide range of laws and regulations, many of which are evolving, and failure or perceived failure to comply with such laws and regulations could harm our business, financial condition and results of operations” and “—The CFPB has sometimes taken expansive views of its authority to regulate consumer financial services, creating uncertainty as to how the agency’s actions or the actions of any other agency could impact our business” for more information. Moreover, we could in the future have disagreements or disputes with any of our lending partners, which could negatively impact or threaten our relationship with them. In our agreements with lending partners, we make certain representations and warranties and covenants concerning our compliance with specific policies of a lending partner, certain procedures and guidelines related to laws and regulations applicable to our lending partners, as well as the services to be provided by us. If those representations and warranties were not accurate when made or if we fail to perform a covenant, we may be liable for any resulting damages, including potentially any losses associated with impacted loans, and our reputation and ability to continue to attract new lending partners would be adversely affected. Additionally, our lending partners may engage in mergers, acquisitions or consolidations with each other, our competitors or with third parties, any of which could be disruptive to our existing and prospective relationships with our lending partners. If we fail to maintain or grow the number of lending partners, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Previous wording

If we are unable to manage the risks associated with the Upstart Macro Index (UMI), which is at an early research and development stage with an unproven track record, our credibility, reputation, business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Current wording

If we are unable to manage the risks associated with the Upstart Macro Index (UMI), which we introduced in 2023 and does not have a long history or proven track record, our credibility, reputation, business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Previous wording

UMI is our effort to quantify the level of macroeconomic risks in terms of the losses or defaults within Upstart-powered unsecured personal loan portfolios, excluding small dollar loans. UMI is at an early stage of its development and does not have a long history or track record. Since it is a relatively new initiative, UMI remains unproven and, therefore, may not perform as expected. We intend to continue our research and development efforts to improve UMI. In light of such efforts, we have revised our previously published UMI values, including to remove seasonal patterns, and may further change or revise the current or past UMI values in the future. Any significant changes or revisions could harm our reputation and credibility with our lending partners and institutional investors, which in turn could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Current wording

UMI is our effort to quantify the level of macroeconomic risks in terms of the losses or defaults within Upstart-powered unsecured personal loan portfolios, excluding small dollar loans. We introduced UMI in 2023 and it does not have a long history or track record. Since it is a relatively new initiative, UMI remains unproven and, therefore, may not perform as expected. We intend to continue our research and development efforts to improve UMI. In light of such efforts, we have revised our previously published UMI values, including to remove seasonal patterns, and may further change or revise the current or past UMI values in the future. Any significant changes or revisions could harm our reputation and credibility with our lending partners and institutional investors, which in turn could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Previous wording

For the six months ended June 30, 2024, we incurred a net loss of $119.1 million. We have expended, and intend to continue to expend, significant funds to develop and improve our proprietary AI models, attract additional borrowers to our marketplace, enhance the features and overall user experience on our platform, expand loan product offerings and otherwise continue to grow our business, and we may not be able to increase our revenue enough to offset these significant expenditures. We have incurred, and expect to incur in the future, significant losses for a number of reasons, including the other risks described in this section, and unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications and delays, macroeconomic conditions and other unknown events. Any failure to increase our revenue sufficiently to keep pace with our investments and other expenses would prevent us from being profitable. If we are unable to successfully address these risks and challenges as we encounter them, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Current wording

For the nine months ended September 30, 2024, we incurred a net loss of $125.8 million. We have expended, and intend to continue to expend, significant funds to develop and improve our proprietary AI models, attract additional borrowers to our marketplace, enhance the features and overall user experience on our platform, expand loan product offerings and otherwise continue to grow our business, and we may not be able to increase our revenue enough to offset these significant expenditures. We have incurred, and expect to incur in the future, significant losses for a number of reasons, including the other risks described in this section, and unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications and delays, macroeconomic conditions and other unknown events. Any failure to increase our revenue sufficiently to keep pace with our investments and other expenses would prevent us from being profitable. If we are unable to successfully address these risks and challenges as we encounter them, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Previous wording

We have held more Upstart-powered loans on our balance sheet in recent years and may continue to do so in the future. We have used, and may continue to use, our balance sheet to support our research and development activities for new loan products and borrower segments. In addition to research and development activities, we have used and may continue to use our balance sheet to purchase loans from lending partners to address fluctuations in supply and demand in our marketplace and periodically sell these loans to institutional investors prior to their maturity. Out of the total principal of loan originations facilitated on our marketplace during the six months ended June 30, 2024, 16% were held on our balance sheet, excluding loans held in consolidated securitization. As of June 30, 2024, we held $685.5 million of loans on our balance sheet, excluding loans held in consolidated securitization. We hold loans on our balance sheet at fair value and estimate fair value using a discounted cash flow methodology. An increase in the market interest rates reduces the fair value of loans held on our balance sheet by increasing the discount rate used to determine fair value under the discounted cash flow methodology. Currently, we are in a high interest rate environment. The high interest rates have negatively affected the fair value of loans held on our balance sheet and may continue to do so in the future. In addition, for these loans and any future loans to be held on our balance sheet, we bear the credit risk in the event of borrower default. Our exposure to rising borrower default rates and their volatility has increased, and may continue to increase, as we hold more Upstart-powered loans on our balance sheet. The R&D loans make up a substantial portion of the loans held on our balance sheet and are generally more risky and more likely to default than the core personal loans. Recently, the default rates and charge-offs for these loans have been higher than expected for certain loan categories, and consequently, we had to make unfavorable fair value adjustments to the loans on our balance sheet. These unfavorable fair value adjustments have negatively impacted our revenue, and if we continue to experience higher than expected default rates or the loans otherwise fail to perform as expected, we would need to make additional unfavorable fair value adjustments in the future, which would negatively impact our revenue. It is also possible that we may recognize a loss if we sell the loans held on our balance sheet, such as the R&D loans, at an unfavorable price. Furthermore, a portion of our revenue is interest income derived from the loans held on our balance sheet, and if we increase the amount of loans held on our balance sheet, we become more dependent on interest income as a source of revenue and become more vulnerable to credit risk and borrower defaults associated with these loans. From a liquidity perspective, the growing amount of loans on our balanc…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

We have held more Upstart-powered loans on our balance sheet in recent years and may continue to do so in the future. We have used, and may continue to use, our balance sheet to support our research and development activities for new loan products and borrower segments. In addition to research and development activities, we have used and may continue to use our balance sheet to purchase loans from lending partners to address fluctuations in supply and demand in our marketplace and periodically sell these loans to institutional investors prior to their maturity. Out of the total principal of loan originations facilitated on our marketplace during the nine months ended September 30, 2024, 8% were held on our balance sheet. As of September 30, 2024, we held $537.6 million of loans on our balance sheet, excluding loans held in consolidated securitization. We hold loans on our balance sheet at fair value and estimate fair value using a discounted cash flow methodology. An increase in the market interest rates reduces the fair value of loans held on our balance sheet by increasing the discount rate used to determine fair value under the discounted cash flow methodology. Currently, we are in a high interest rate environment. The high interest rates have negatively affected the fair value of loans held on our balance sheet and may continue to do so in the future. In addition, for these loans and any future loans to be held on our balance sheet, we bear the credit risk in the event of borrower default. Our exposure to rising borrower default rates and their volatility has increased, and may continue to increase, as we hold more Upstart-powered loans on our balance sheet. The R&D loans make up a substantial portion of the loans held on our balance sheet and are generally more risky and more likely to default than the core personal loans.

Previous wording

When we are the sole sponsor of securitizations, we are required under Regulation RR to retain at least five percent of the credit risk in such transactions for a specific period of time, depending on the type of asset that is securitized. We have in the past and may choose to retain additional securities, such as notes or certificates, issued in asset-backed securitization transactions we sponsor or facilitate. The certificates represent residual equity interests in the SPEs and are subordinated to the notes and thus are exposed to greater credit risk. In 2023, we acted as a sole retaining sponsor to asset-backed securitizations and, in one instance, retained not only the securities required for risk retention purposes under Regulation RR, but also additional residual equity interests, exposing us to greater credit risk. The securities we retain may lose value, including becoming worthless. In the future, we may retain securities issued as part of our securitizations beyond risk retention requirements again. In addition, other matters, such as capital and leverage requirements applicable to banks and other regulated financial institutions holding asset-backed securities or increasing competition from other issuers of asset-backed securities, could negatively impact our business by decreasing institutional investor demand for securities issued through our securitization transactions. In addition, compliance with certain regulatory requirements, including the Dodd-Frank Act, the Investment Company Act and the so-called “Volcker Rule,” may affect the type of securitizations that we are able to complete.

Current wording

When we are the sole sponsor of securitizations, we are required under Regulation RR to retain at least five percent of the credit risk in such transactions for a specific period of time, depending on the type of asset that is securitized. We have in the past and may choose to retain additional securities, such as notes or certificates, issued in asset-backed securitization transactions we sponsor or facilitate. The certificates represent residual equity interests in the SPEs and are subordinated to the notes and thus are exposed to greater credit risk. In 2023, we acted as a sole retaining sponsor to asset-backed securitizations and, in one instance, retained not only the securities required for risk retention purposes under Regulation RR, but also additional residual equity interests, exposing us to greater credit risk. The securities we retain may lose value, including becoming worthless. In the future, we may retain securities issued as part of our securitizations beyond risk retention requirements again. In addition, other matters, such as capital and leverage requirements applicable to banks and other regulated financial institutions holding asset-backed securities or increasing competition from other issuers of asset-backed securities, could negatively impact our business by decreasing institutional investor demand for securities issued through our securitization transactions. In addition, compliance with certain regulatory requirements, including the Dodd-Frank Act, the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, or the Investment Company Act, and the so-called “Volcker Rule,” may affect the type of securitizations that we are able to complete.

Previous wording

If it is not possible or economical for us to securitize loans in the future, we may need to seek alternative financing to provide loan funding to our marketplace and to meet our existing debt obligations. Such funding may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. If the cost of such loan funding mechanisms were to be higher than that of our securitizations it would negatively impact our results of operations. If we are unable to access such financing, our ability to originate loans and our results of operations, financial condition and liquidity may be materially adversely affected.

Current wording

If it is not possible or economical for us to securitize loans in the future or for us to serve as risk retention holder in securitizations for the benefit of our investors who have purchased whole loans or pass-through certificates and/or our lending partners, we may need to seek alternative financing to provide loan funding to our marketplace and to meet our existing debt obligations. Such funding may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. If the cost of such loan funding mechanisms were to be higher than that of our securitizations it would negatively impact our results of operations. If we are unable to access such financing, our ability to originate loans and our results of operations, financial condition and liquidity may be materially adversely affected.

Previous wording

The servicing fees generated by our loan servicing activities for the loans sold to institutional investors and contributed to asset-based securitizations and pass-through certificate transactions also represent a material portion of our earnings. There is no assurance that our institutional investors will continue to purchase loans or securities (either through whole loan sales, asset-backed securities, pass-through certificate issuances or other direct or indirect purchase arrangements) or that they will continue to purchase loans in transactions that generate the same spreads and/or fees that we have historically obtained. During the six months ended June 30, 2024, we sold loans that had been originated in an earlier, lower interest rate environment. We recognized losses on these sales which reduced our revenue. As we hold more loans on our balance sheet, our business, financial condition and results of operation could be adversely affected, including further reductions in revenue. Factors that may affect demand by institutional investors for Upstart-powered loans include:

Current wording

The servicing fees generated by our loan servicing activities for the loans sold to institutional investors and contributed to asset-based securitizations and pass-through certificate transactions also represent a material portion of our earnings. There is no assurance that our institutional investors will continue to purchase loans or securities (either through whole loan sales, asset-backed securities, pass-through certificate issuances or other direct or indirect purchase arrangements) or that they will continue to purchase loans in transactions that generate the same spreads and/or fees that we have historically obtained. During the nine months ended September 30, 2024, we sold loans that had been originated in an earlier, lower interest rate environment. We recognized losses on these sales which reduced our revenue. As we hold more loans on our balance sheet, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected, including further reductions in revenue. Factors that may affect demand by institutional investors for Upstart-powered loans include:

Previous wording

In connection with our committed capital and other co-investment arrangements, we have agreed to compensate, subject to a limit, if credit performance on the loans deviates from expectations. As of June 30, 2024, our maximum exposure to losses under these committed capital and other co-investment arrangements was approximately $260 million. See “Note 5. Beneficial Interests” for more information. Committed capital and other co-investment arrangements could negatively impact our financial results. We may also experience declines in revenue and loan volume if existing committed capital or other capital arrangements do not provide funding on the agreed upon terms or we fail to secure additional committed capital or other capital arrangements on commercially reasonable terms, or at all.

Current wording

In connection with our committed capital and other co-investment arrangements, we have agreed to compensate our loan buyers/co-investors, subject to a limit, if credit performance on the loans deviates from expectations. As of September 30, 2024, our maximum exposure to losses under these committed capital and other co-investment arrangements was approximately $357.9 million. See “Note 5. Beneficial Interests” for more information. Committed capital and other co-investment arrangements could negatively impact our financial results. We may also experience declines in revenue and loan volume if existing committed capital or other capital arrangements do not provide funding on the agreed upon terms or we fail to secure additional committed capital or other capital arrangements on commercially reasonable terms, or at all.

Previous wording

Our top three lending partners originate a significant portion of loans on our marketplace. In the six months ended June 30, 2024, our top three lending partners collectively originated 80% of the Transaction Volume, Number of Loans and accounted for 72% of our total revenue. There are no minimum commitments to originate any loans under the agreements we have with our lending partners. If our top three lending partners were to suspend, limit or cease their operations or otherwise terminate their relationship with us, our business, financial condition and results of operations would be adversely affected. As of June 30, 2024, we had more than 100 lending partners participating on our marketplace, and we continue to expand our lending partnerships to new participants. If we are unable to continue to increase the participation by other lending partners on our marketplace, we will continue to be reliant on a small number of lending partners for a significant portion of loan originations and revenue, which could harm our business.

Current wording

Our top three lending partners originate a significant portion of loans on our marketplace. In the nine months ended September 30, 2024, our top three lending partners collectively originated 86% of the Transaction Volume, Number of Loans and accounted for 71% of our total revenue. There are no minimum commitments to originate any loans under the agreements we have with our lending partners. If our top three lending partners were to suspend, limit or cease their operations or otherwise terminate their relationship with us, our business, financial condition and results of operations would be adversely affected. As of September 30, 2024, we had more than 100 lending partners participating on our marketplace, and we continue to expand our lending partnerships to new participants. If we are unable to continue to increase the participation by other lending partners on our marketplace, we will continue to be reliant on a small number of lending partners for a significant portion of loan originations and revenue, which could harm our business.

Previous wording

For example, consumer advocacy groups, state legislatures, politicians and certain government and media reports have advocated governmental action to prohibit or severely restrict consumer loan arrangements where banks contract with a third-party platform such as ours to provide origination assistance services to bank customers. These arrangements have sometimes been criticized as “renting-a-bank charter” or “rent-a-bank”. Such criticism has frequently been levied in the context of payday loan marketers, though other entities operating programs through which loans similar to Upstart-powered loans are originated have also faced criticism. The same groups, as well as state legislative bodies, are now challenging the right of state-chartered banks to export their rates to other states, which sometimes allows out-of-state banks to charge consumers higher rates than in-state lenders. A few states have proposed legislation prohibiting out-of-state, state-chartered banks from lending at rates higher than the state usury limit or at rates set by the states’ licensed-lending laws, and at least one state has passed such legislation. The high-interest loans that have been subject to more frequent criticism and challenge are fundamentally different from Upstart-powered consumer loans in many ways, including that Upstart-powered loans typically have lower interest rates and longer terms, and Upstart-powered loans do not renew. In particular, interest rates of Upstart-powered loans have always been and are currently less than 36% APR, as compared to the triple-digit interest rates of many payday or small dollar loans that have been subject to such criticism. However, states that are addressing their rent-a-bank and rate exportation concerns through legislation may impact our marketplace if the state rate limit is below 36%. Where that happens, our state-chartered lending partners may need to scale back lending on our marketplace to comply with state laws or terminate their participation in our marketplace, leading to a reduction in origination volume. It could also negatively impact demand for Upstart-powered loans, our ability to attract new lending partners, our ability to attract loan funding to our marketplace or reduce the number of potential borrowers to our marketplace. Any of the foregoing could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

Current wording

For example, consumer advocacy groups, state legislatures, politicians and certain government and media reports have advocated governmental action to prohibit or severely restrict consumer loan arrangements where banks contract with a third-party platform such as ours to provide origination assistance services to bank customers. These arrangements have sometimes been criticized as “renting-a-bank charter” or “rent-a-bank”. Such criticism has frequently been levied in the context of payday loan marketers, though other entities operating programs through which loans similar to Upstart-powered loans are originated have also faced criticism. The same groups, as well as state legislative bodies, are now challenging the right of state-chartered banks to export their rates to other states, which sometimes allows out-of-state banks to charge consumers higher rates than in-state lenders. While Iowa decided in the 1980’s to prevent rate exportation, a few states have more recently proposed legislation prohibiting out-of-state, state-chartered banks from lending at rates higher than the state usury limit or at rates set by the states’ licensed-lending laws, and at least one state has passed such legislation. For example, Colorado passed legislation to opt out of the federal law that allows out-of-state, state-chartered banks to export their rates to Colorado. While Colorado’s opt-out is currently enjoined from becoming effective, at least three additional states have followed Colorado and proposed legislation to end the rate exportation in their states allowed under federal law for out-of-state, state-chartered banks. The high-interest loans that have been subject to more frequent criticism and challenge are fundamentally different from Upstart-powered consumer loans in many ways, including that Upstart-powered loans typically have lower interest rates and longer terms, and Upstart-powered loans do not renew. In particular, interest rates of Upstart-powered loans have always been and are currently less than 36% APR, as compared to the triple-digit interest rates of many payday or small dollar loans that have been subject to such criticism. However, states that are addressing their rent-a-bank and rate exportation concerns through legislation may impact our marketplace if the state rate limit is below 36%. Where that happens, our state-chartered lending partners may need to scale back lending on our marketplace to comply with state laws or terminate their participation in our marketplace, leading to a reduction in origination volume. It could also negatively impact demand for Upstart-powered loans, our ability to attract new lending partners, our ability to attract loan funding to our marketplace or reduce the number of potential borrowers to our marketplace. Any of the foregoing could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

Previous wording

Any negative publicity or public perception of Upstart-powered loans or other similar consumer loans or the consumer lending service we provide may also result in us being subject to more restrictive laws and regulations and potential investigations and enforcement actions. For example, some unfair or deceptive practices by vehicle dealerships can be attributed to us as a purchaser of retail installment contracts under the FTC Holder Rule, which allows a vehicle purchaser to bring any claim against the dealership to the holder of a retail installment contract. In addition, regulators may decide they are no longer supportive of our AI lending marketplace if there is enough negative perception surrounding such practices. We may also become subject to lawsuits, including class action lawsuits, or other challenges such as government enforcement or arbitration, against our lending partners or us for loans originated by our lending partners on our marketplace, loans we service or have serviced, or retail installment contracts we have purchased. If there are changes in the laws or in the interpretation or enforcement of existing laws affecting consumer loans similar to those offered on our marketplace, or our marketing and servicing of such loans, or if we become subject to such lawsuits, our business, financial condition and results of operations would be adversely affected.

Current wording

Any negative publicity or public perception of Upstart-powered loans or other similar consumer loans or the consumer lending service we provide may also result in us being subject to more restrictive laws and regulations and potential investigations and enforcement actions. For example, some unfair or deceptive practices by vehicle dealerships can be attributed to us as a purchaser of retail installment contracts under the FTC Holder Rule, which allows a vehicle purchaser to bring any claim against the dealership to the holder of a retail installment contract. In addition, regulators may decide they are no longer supportive of our AI lending marketplace if there is enough negative perception surrounding such practices. We may also become subject to lawsuits, including class action lawsuits, or other challenges such as government enforcement or arbitration, against our lending partners or us for loans originated by our lending partners on our marketplace, loans we service or have serviced, loans we hold for sale or investment on our balance sheet, or retail installment contracts we have purchased. If there are changes in the laws or in the interpretation or enforcement of existing laws affecting consumer loans similar to those offered on our marketplace, or our marketing and servicing of such loans, or if we become subject to such lawsuits, our business, financial condition and results of operations would be adversely affected.

Previous wording

AI and related technologies are subject to public debate and heightened regulatory scrutiny. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) recently indicated that AI remains a regulatory hot topic for the agency including the use of complex credit scoring models as part of the loan underwriting process. The agency has taken several steps to increase regulatory scrutiny of financial technology companies that rely on AI. In April 2023, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), the Department of Justice (“DOJ”), the CFPB, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) released a joint statement on AI demonstrating their interest in monitoring the development and use of automated systems and enforcement of their respective laws and regulations, and in October 2023, President Biden signed an Executive Order aimed at protecting consumers against harms caused by AI. The Congressional Research Service released a report on April 3, 2024 on the use of AI and machine learning in financial services, noting that financial industry policymakers face competing pressures of providing beneficial technology and avoiding any consumer harm from such technology. In addition, recently, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) cautioned companies against “AI washing” and took enforcement actions against companies for their claims about the use of AI in their products and services. In June 2024, the Treasury Department also issued a request for information seeking public comments on the use of AI in the financial services sector and the opportunities and risks presented by developments and applications of AI within the sector. Any negative publicity or negative public perception of AI could negatively impact demand for our AI lending marketplace, hinder our ability to attract new lending partners or slow the rate at which lending partners adopt our AI lending marketplace. From time to time, certain advocacy groups have made claims that unlawful or unethical discriminatory effects may result from the use of AI technology by various companies, including ours. Such claims, whether or not accurate, and whether or not concerning us or our AI lending marketplace, may harm our ability to attract prospective borrowers to our marketplace, retain existing and attract new lending partners and achieve regulatory acceptance of our business.

Current wording

AI and related technologies are subject to public debate and heightened regulatory scrutiny. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) recently indicated that AI remains a regulatory hot topic for the agency including the use of complex credit scoring models as part of the loan underwriting process. The agency has taken several steps to increase regulatory scrutiny of financial technology companies that rely on AI. In April 2023, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), the Department of Justice (“DOJ”), the CFPB, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) released a joint statement on AI demonstrating their interest in monitoring the development and use of automated systems and enforcement of their respective laws and regulations, and in October 2023, President Biden signed an Executive Order aimed at protecting consumers against harms caused by AI. The Congressional Research Service released a report on April 3, 2024 on the use of AI and machine learning in financial services, noting that financial industry policymakers face competing pressures of providing beneficial technology and avoiding any consumer harm from such technology. In addition, recently, the SEC cautioned companies against “AI washing” and took enforcement actions against companies for their claims about the use of AI in their products and services. In June 2024, the Treasury Department also issued a request for information seeking public comments on the use of AI in the financial services sector and the opportunities and risks presented by developments and applications of AI within the sector. Any negative publicity or negative public perception of AI could negatively impact demand for our AI lending marketplace, hinder our ability to attract new lending partners or slow the rate at which lending partners adopt our AI lending marketplace. From time to time, certain advocacy groups have made claims that unlawful or unethical discriminatory effects may result from the use of AI technology by various companies, including ours. Such claims, whether or not accurate, and whether or not concerning us or our AI lending marketplace, may harm our ability to attract prospective borrowers to our marketplace, retain existing and attract new lending partners and achieve regulatory acceptance of our business.

Previous wording

New laws and regulations and changes to existing laws and regulations continue to be adopted, implemented and interpreted in response to our industry and the emergence of AI and related technologies. Recent financial, political and other events, including disruptions in the banking sector, may increase the level of regulatory scrutiny on financial technology companies. One state has gone so far as to pass an AI Act that requires certain companies using “high-risk” AI to disclose such use and how the algorithms work to consumers. As we expand our business into new markets, introduce new loan products and continue to improve and evolve our AI models, regulatory bodies or courts may claim that we are subject to additional requirements. Such regulatory bodies could reject our applications for licenses or deny renewals, delay or impede our ability to operate, charge us fees or levy fines or penalties, commence investigations or inquiries into our business practices, or otherwise disrupt our ability to operate our AI lending marketplace, any of which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. For example, in February 2024, the CFPB published a decision and order in a supervisory designation proceeding against a non-bank installment lender that officially established the CFPB’s supervisory authority over such lenders due to the risk the non-bank lender posed to consumers. The CFPB opined that risk does not need to be based on a violation of law. If the CFPB decides to subject us to its supervisory process, it could significantly increase the level of regulatory scrutiny of our business practices. Related to automotive lending, in January 2023, the CFPB and the New York Attorney General filed a complaint against an auto lender that criticized the profit-driven model in auto lending. The CFPB then entered into consent orders with several auto lenders as the year progressed, related to unfair or deceptive fees and servicing practices. In July 2024, the CFPB entered into a consent order with a large bank for unlawful repossession practices. With regulators actively scrutinizing the auto lending space, we may be subject to heightened scrutiny of the retail installment contracts we purchase and service. In addition, the Biden Administration recently announced a government-wide effort to eliminate “junk fees” which could subject our business practices to even further scrutiny. While what constitutes a “junk fee” remains undefined, the category of what may be considered a junk fee is ever growing. The CFPB has called out certain ancillary products and pay-to-pay fees charged by debt collectors, and FTC issued a final rule on junk fees as unfair and deceptive fees. These efforts, in conjunction with the New York Junk Fee Prevention Act passed in February 2024, signal that the “junk fee” initiative is likely to continue to broaden in scope. We may be subject to scrutiny should the “junk fee” initiative expand to include fe…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

New laws and regulations and changes to existing laws and regulations continue to be adopted, implemented and interpreted in response to our industry and the emergence of AI and related technologies. Recent financial, political and other events, including disruptions in the banking sector, may increase the level of regulatory scrutiny on financial technology companies. One state has gone so far as to pass an AI Act that requires certain companies using “high-risk” AI to disclose such use and how the algorithms work to consumers. As we expand our business into new markets, introduce new loan products and continue to improve and evolve our AI models, regulatory bodies or courts may claim that we are subject to additional requirements. Such regulatory bodies could reject our applications for licenses or deny renewals, delay or impede our ability to operate, charge us fees or levy fines or penalties, commence investigations or inquiries into our business practices, or otherwise disrupt our ability to operate our AI lending marketplace, any of which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. For example, in February 2024, the CFPB published a decision and order in a supervisory designation proceeding against a non-bank installment lender that officially established the CFPB’s supervisory authority over such lenders due to the risk the non-bank lender posed to consumers. The CFPB opined that risk does not need to be based on a violation of law. If the CFPB decides to subject us to its supervisory process, it could significantly increase the level of regulatory scrutiny of our business practices.

Previous wording

Moreover, the CFPB has issued several interpretive statements and guidance documents that could impact our business practices including, but not limited to, a September 2023 circular on compliance obligations under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (“ECOA”) for companies that rely on complex algorithms when making credit decisions and the fall 2023 statements on junk fees and, with the DOJ, on fair lending for non-citizens. More recently, the CFPB published a circular that criticized the use of boilerplate language in consumer agreements where such language would be unlawful if enforced against the particular consumer agreeing to the contract. The CFPB also issued an interpretive rule expanding states’ authority to enforce requirements of federal consumer financial laws, including the ECOA. State regulators have also increased the level of regulatory scrutiny on financial technology companies and the bank partnership model. For example, Colorado opted out of the federal law that allows out-of-state, state-chartered banks to export their rates to Colorado. While Colorado’s opt-out is currently enjoined from becoming effective, at least three additional states have followed Colorado and proposed legislation to end the rate exportation in their states allowed under federal law for out-of-state, state-chartered banks. Massachusetts also recently used its unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices (“UDAAP”) law to find that a fintech company that partnered with a federally insured, state-chartered bank to offer loans in the state was the “true lender” of the loans, and required the fintech company to permanently cease all business in Massachusetts. Increased scrutiny of bank partnership arrangements continues, as states codify laws to determine who is the true lender for certain loans with the goal of regulating either the non-bank partner or limiting the rate that can be charged and/or collected. Moreover, the OCC, FDIC, and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System issued joint guidance indicating they intend to use their supervisory authority (i.e. exams) to review bank third-party relationships with financial technology companies including a review of third-party business practices that could pose a risk of potential consumer harm that could impact the safety and soundness of the banks subject to agency supervision. The agencies have also issued statements on the topic. Should the agencies examine or issue consent orders against any of our lending partners, such actions may involve a review of our business practices to determine whether they pose a risk to the safety and soundness of those lending partners.

Current wording

State regulators have also increased the level of regulatory scrutiny on financial technology companies and the bank partnership model. Massachusetts recently used its unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices (“UDAAP”) law to find that a fintech company that partnered with a federally insured, state-chartered bank to offer loans in the state was the “true lender” of the loans, and required the fintech company to permanently cease all business in Massachusetts. Increased scrutiny of bank partnership arrangements continues, as states codify laws to determine who is the true lender for certain loans with the goal of regulating either the non-bank partner or limiting the rate that can be charged and/or collected. Moreover, the OCC, FDIC, and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System issued joint guidance indicating they intend to use their supervisory authority (i.e. exams) to review bank third-party relationships with financial technology companies including a review of third-party business practices that could pose a risk of potential consumer harm that could impact the safety and soundness of the banks subject to agency supervision. The agencies have also issued statements on the topic. Should the agencies examine or issue consent orders against any of our lending partners, such actions may involve a review of our business practices to determine whether they pose a risk to the safety and soundness of those lending partners.

Previous wording

Our success depends in part on our loan servicing and collection efforts. In the six months ended June 30, 2024, 26% of our revenue was generated from loan servicing fees. The vast majority of Upstart-powered loans are not secured by any collateral, guaranteed or insured by any third party or backed by any governmental authority. As a result, we are limited in our ability to collect on such loans on behalf of our lending partners and institutional investors if a borrower is unwilling or unable to repay them. Where the loan is secured by an automobile, we could still be limited in our ability to collect on the loan if we cannot secure the automobile. The ability to collect on the loans is largely dependent on the borrower’s continuing financial stability, and consequently, collections can be adversely affected by a number of factors, including, but not limited to, unemployment, divorce, death, illness, bankruptcy or the economic or social factors beyond personal circumstances of a borrower. In addition, the application of various federal and state laws, including federal and state bankruptcy and insolvency laws, may limit the amount that can be recovered on these loans. It is possible that a higher percentage of consumers will seek protection under bankruptcy or debtor relief laws as a result of the current inflationary environment, the possibility of a recession and market volatility. Federal, state, or other restrictions could impair our ability to collect amounts owed and due on the loans facilitated through our marketplace, reduce income received from the loans facilitated through our marketplace, or negatively affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Current wording

Our success depends in part on our loan servicing and collection efforts. In the nine months ended September 30, 2024, 24% of our revenue from fees, net was generated from loan servicing fees. The vast majority of Upstart-powered loans are not secured by any collateral, guaranteed or insured by any third party or backed by any governmental authority. As a result, we are limited in our ability to collect on such loans on behalf of our lending partners and institutional investors if a borrower is unwilling or unable to repay them. Where the loan is secured by an automobile, we could still be limited in our ability to collect on the loan if we cannot secure the automobile. The ability to collect on the loans is largely dependent on the borrower’s continuing financial stability, and consequently, collections can be adversely affected by a number of factors, including, but not limited to, unemployment, divorce, death, illness, bankruptcy or the economic or social factors beyond personal circumstances of a borrower. In addition, the application of various federal and state laws, including federal and state bankruptcy and insolvency laws, may limit the amount that can be recovered on these loans. It is possible that a higher percentage of consumers will seek protection under bankruptcy or debtor relief laws as a result of the current inflationary environment, the possibility of a recession and market volatility. Federal, state, or other restrictions could impair our ability to collect amounts owed and due on the loans facilitated through our marketplace, reduce income received from the loans facilitated through our marketplace, or negatively affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Previous wording

Further, because such personal loans are unsecured, there is a risk that borrowers will not prioritize repayment of such loans, particularly in any economic downcycle. To the extent borrowers have or incur other indebtedness that is secured, such as a mortgage, a home equity line of credit or an auto loan, borrowers may choose to repay obligations under such secured indebtedness before repaying their Upstart-powered personal loans. In addition, borrowers may not view Upstart-powered loans, which were originated through an online lending marketplace, as having the same significance as other credit obligations arising under more traditional circumstances, such as loans from banks or other commercial financial institutions. Any of the foregoing could lead to higher default rates and decreased demand by our lending partners and institutional investors to fund loans facilitated through our marketplace, which would adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Current wording

Further, because such personal loans are unsecured, there is a risk that borrowers will not prioritize repayment of such loans, particularly in any economic down-cycle. To the extent borrowers have or incur other indebtedness that is secured, such as a mortgage, a home equity line of credit or an auto loan, borrowers may choose to repay obligations under such secured indebtedness before repaying their Upstart-powered personal loans. In addition, borrowers may not view Upstart-powered loans, which were originated through an online lending marketplace, as having the same significance as other credit obligations arising under more traditional circumstances, such as loans from banks or other commercial financial institutions. Any of the foregoing could lead to higher default rates and decreased demand by our lending partners and institutional investors to fund loans facilitated through our marketplace, which would adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Previous wording

Consumer lending is a vast and competitive market, and we compete to varying degrees with all other sources of unsecured consumer credit. This can include banks, non-bank lenders including retail-based lenders and other financial technology lending platforms. Because personal loans often serve as a replacement for credit cards, we also compete with the convenience and ubiquity that credit cards represent. Many of our competitors operate with different business models, such as lending-as-a-service, have different funding sources, have different cost structures or regulatory obligations, or participate selectively in different market segments. They may ultimately prove more successful or more adaptable to new regulatory, economic, technological and other developments, including utilizing new data sources or credit models. We may also face competition from banks or companies that have not previously competed in the consumer lending market, including companies with access to vast amounts of consumer-related information that could be used in the development of their own credit risk models. Our current or potential competitors may be better at developing new products due to their large and experienced data science and engineering teams, who are able to respond more quickly to new technologies. Many of our current or potential competitors have significantly more resources, such as financial, technical and marketing resources, than we do and may be able to devote greater resources to the development, promotion, sale and support of their platforms and distribution channels. We face competition in areas such as compliance capabilities, commercial financing terms and costs of capital, interest rates and fees (and other financing terms) available to consumers from our lending partners, approval rates, model efficiency, speed and simplicity of loan origination, ease-of-use, marketing expertise, service levels, products and services, technological capabilities and integration, borrower experience, brand and reputation, and terms available to our loan funding institutional investor base. Our competitors may also have longer operating histories, lower commercial financing costs or costs of capital, more extensive borrower bases, more diversified products and borrower bases, operational efficiencies, more versatile or extensive technology platforms, greater brand recognition and brand loyalty, broader borrower and partner relationships, more extensive and/or more diversified loan funding institutional investor bases than we have, greater capacity to fund loans through their balance sheets, and more extensive product and service offerings than we have. Furthermore, our existing and potential competitors may decide to modify their pricing and business models to compete more directly with us. Our ability to compete will also be affected by our ability to provide our lending partners with a commensurate or more extensive suite of loan products than those offered by o…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

We face competition in areas such as compliance capabilities, commercial financing terms and costs of capital, interest rates and fees (and other financing terms) available to consumers from our lending partners, approval rates, model efficiency, speed and simplicity of loan origination, ease-of-use, marketing expertise, service levels, products and services, technological capabilities and integration, borrower experience, brand and reputation, and terms available to our loan funding institutional investor base. Our competitors may also have longer operating histories, lower commercial financing costs or costs of capital, more extensive borrower bases, more diversified products and borrower bases, operational efficiencies, more versatile or extensive technology platforms, greater brand recognition and brand loyalty, broader borrower and partner relationships, more extensive and/or more diversified loan funding institutional investor bases than we have, greater capacity to fund loans through their balance sheets, and more extensive product and service offerings than we have. Furthermore, our existing and potential competitors may decide to modify their pricing and business models to compete more directly with us. Our ability to compete will also be affected by our ability to provide our lending partners with a commensurate or more extensive suite of loan products than those offered by our competitors. In addition, current or potential competitors, including financial technology lending platforms and existing or potential lending partners, may also acquire or form strategic alliances with one another, which could result in our competitors being able to offer more competitive loan terms due to their access to lower-cost capital. Such acquisitions or strategic alliances among our competitors or potential competitors could also make our competitors more adaptable to a rapidly evolving regulatory environment. To stay competitive, we may need to increase our regulatory compliance expenditures or our ability to compete may be adversely affected.

Previous wording

Furthermore, we have reduced our workforce in the past and may further reduce our workforce in the future to lower our operating costs and streamline operations. These reductions in our workforce may adversely affect employee morale, our culture and our ability to attract and retain personnel who are critical to our business. It may also negatively impact our ability to pursue new initiatives due to insufficient resources and personnel. We may be unsuccessful in distributing duties and obligations of impacted employees among the remaining employees. We also may not realize the anticipated benefits and cost savings and may suffer unintended consequences, such as the loss of institutional knowledge, higher than expected employee turnover and significant disruptions in our day-to-day operations. If we are unable to realize the expected operational efficiencies or cost savings from the reductions in our workforce, or if we experience significant adverse consequences as a result, our business, financial conditions and results of operations may be adversely affected.

Current wording

Furthermore, we have reduced our workforce in the past and may further reduce our workforce in the future to lower our operating costs and streamline operations. These reductions in our workforce may adversely affect employee morale, our culture and our ability to attract and retain personnel who are critical to our business. It may also negatively impact our ability to pursue new initiatives due to insufficient resources and personnel. We may be unsuccessful in distributing duties and obligations of impacted employees among the remaining employees. We also may not realize the anticipated benefits and cost savings and may suffer unintended consequences, such as the loss of institutional knowledge, higher than expected employee turnover and significant disruptions in our day-to-day operations. If we are unable to realize the expected operational efficiencies or cost savings from the reductions in our workforce, or if we experience significant adverse consequences as a result, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected.

Previous wording

We are increasingly dependent on information systems, services and infrastructure to operate our business. In the ordinary course of our business, we collect, process, transmit and store large amounts of sensitive information, including personal information, credit information and other sensitive data of borrowers and potential borrowers. It is critical that we do so in a manner designed to maintain the confidentiality, integrity and availability of such sensitive information. We also have arrangements in place with certain of our third-party vendors that require us to share consumer information. We have outsourced elements of our operations (including elements of our information technology infrastructure) to third parties, and as a result, we manage a number of third-party vendors who may have access to our computer networks and sensitive or confidential information. In addition, many of those third parties may in turn subcontract or outsource some of their responsibilities to other third parties. As a result, our information technology systems, including the functions of third parties that are involved or have access to those systems, are large and complex, with many points of entry and access. While all information technology operations are inherently vulnerable to inadvertent or intentional security breaches, incidents, attacks and exposures, the size, complexity, accessibility and distributed nature of our information technology systems, and the large amounts of sensitive information stored on those systems, make such systems potentially vulnerable to unintentional or malicious, internal and external attacks. Any vulnerabilities can be exploited from inadvertent or intentional actions of our employees, third-party vendors, lending partners, institutional investors, or by malicious threat actors. While we continuously mature our security controls to address the evolving threat landscape, such measures will not provide absolute security, and we cannot assure you that our remediation efforts will be successful. Cybersecurity attacks are increasing in their frequency, levels of persistence, sophistication and intensity, and are being conducted by sophisticated and organized groups and individuals with a wide range of motives (including, but not limited to, industrial espionage) and expertise, including organized criminal groups, “hacktivists,” nation states and others. These risks may be heightened in connection with geopolitical conflicts.

Current wording

While all information technology operations are inherently vulnerable to inadvertent or intentional security breaches, incidents, attacks and exposures, the size, complexity, accessibility and distributed nature of our information technology systems, and the large amounts of sensitive information stored on those systems, make such systems potentially vulnerable to unintentional or malicious, internal and external attacks. Any vulnerabilities can be exploited from inadvertent or intentional actions of our employees, third-party vendors, lending partners, institutional investors, or by malicious threat actors. While we continuously mature our security controls to address the evolving threat landscape, such measures will not provide absolute security, and we cannot assure you that our remediation efforts will be successful. Cybersecurity attacks are increasing in their frequency, levels of persistence, sophistication and intensity, and are being conducted by sophisticated and organized groups and individuals with a wide range of motives (including, but not limited to, industrial espionage) and expertise, including organized criminal groups, “hacktivists,” nation states and others. These risks may be heightened in connection with geopolitical conflicts. In addition to the extraction of sensitive information, cyber attacks could result in compromising the integrity or availability of our information systems, products and services or infrastructure to operate our business and the confidentiality of our and borrowers’ data. Such attacks could include the deployment of harmful malware, ransomware, denial-of-service attacks, social engineering and other means. The prevalent use of mobile devices increases the risk of data security incidents. Further, our Digital First working environment could increase the risks of security breaches and incidents as more of our employees are accessing our services and infrastructure remotely, reducing physical and social security controls on employee monitoring.

Previous wording

Because techniques used to obtain unauthorized access or to sabotage systems change frequently and generally are not recognized until they are launched against a target, we, our businesss partners or any third parties that we rely on to operate our business may be unable to anticipate these techniques or to implement adequate preventative measures. In addition, many governments have enacted laws requiring companies to notify individuals of data security breaches involving their personal data. These mandatory disclosures regarding a security breach are costly to implement and often lead to widespread negative publicity following a breach, which may cause borrowers and potential borrowers to lose confidence in the effectiveness of our security measures for our products and enterprise. Any security breach or incident, whether actual or perceived, would harm our reputation and ability to attract new borrowers to our marketplace.

Current wording

Because techniques used to obtain unauthorized access or to sabotage systems change frequently and generally are not recognized until they are launched against a target, we, our business partners or any third parties that we rely on to operate our business may be unable to anticipate these techniques or to implement adequate preventative measures. In addition, many governments have enacted laws requiring companies to notify individuals of data security breaches involving their personal data. These mandatory disclosures regarding a security breach are costly to implement and often lead to widespread negative publicity following a breach, which may cause borrowers and potential borrowers to lose confidence in the effectiveness of our security measures for our products and enterprise. Any security breach or incident, whether actual or perceived, would harm our reputation and ability to attract new borrowers to our marketplace.

Previous wording

While we regularly monitor activity inside and outside the company, attackers have become very sophisticated in their tactics and techniques, and we may not be aware that we have been attacked. Any event that leads to unauthorized access, use or disclosure of personal information or other sensitive information that we or our vendors maintain, including our own proprietary business information and sensitive information such as personal information regarding borrowers, loan applicants or employees, could disrupt our business, harm our reputation, compel us to comply with applicable federal and/or state breach notification laws and foreign law equivalents, subject us to time consuming, distracting and expensive litigation, regulatory investigation and oversight, mandatory corrective action, require us to verify the correctness of data, or otherwise subject us to liability under laws, regulations and contractual obligations, including those that protect the privacy and security of personal information. This could result in increased costs to us and result in significant legal and financial exposure and/or reputational harm. In addition, any failure or perceived failure by us or our vendors to comply with our privacy, confidentiality or data security-related legal or other obligations to our lending partners or other third parties, actual or perceived security breaches, or any security incidents or other events that result in the unauthorized access, release or transfer of sensitive information, which could include personally identifiable information, may result in governmental investigations, enforcement actions, regulatory fines, litigation, or public statements against us by advocacy groups or others, and could cause our lending partners and other third parties to lose trust in us or we could be subject to claims by our lending partners and other third parties that we have breached our privacy- or confidentiality-related obligations, which could harm our business and prospects. Moreover, security incidents and other inappropriate access can be difficult to detect, and any delay in identifying them may lead to increased harm of the type described above. There can be no assurance that our security measures intended to protect our services and infrastructure will successfully prevent service interruptions or security incidents. For example, in April 2020, we were made aware of a software error which allowed access to certain consumers’ accounts through the Upstart website without providing such consumers’ passwords. As a result, certain of such consumers’ personal information, such as their name, address and job information (but not full social security information), could have been accessed by a third party. We promptly deployed an update to our software to address such vulnerability and conducted an internal investigation. We are not aware of any information being compromised as a result of this error. We cannot provide any assurance that similar vu…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

While we regularly monitor activity inside and outside the company, attackers have become very sophisticated in their tactics and techniques, and we may not be aware that we have been attacked. Any event that leads to unauthorized access, use or disclosure of personal information or other sensitive information that we or our vendors maintain, including our own proprietary business information and sensitive information such as personal information regarding borrowers, loan applicants or employees, could disrupt our business, harm our reputation, compel us to comply with applicable federal and/or state breach notification laws and foreign law equivalents, subject us to time consuming, distracting and expensive litigation, regulatory investigation and oversight, mandatory corrective action, require us to verify the correctness of data, or otherwise subject us to liability under laws, regulations and contractual obligations, including those that protect the privacy and security of personal information. This could result in increased costs to us and result in significant legal and financial exposure and/or reputational harm. In addition, any failure or perceived failure by us or our vendors to comply with our privacy, confidentiality or data security-related legal or other obligations to our lending partners or other third parties, actual or perceived security breaches, or any security incidents or other events that result in the unauthorized access, release or transfer of sensitive information, which could include personally identifiable information, may result in governmental investigations, enforcement actions, regulatory fines, litigation, or public statements against us by advocacy groups or others, and could cause our lending partners and other third parties to lose trust in us or we could be subject to claims by our lending partners and other third parties that we have breached our privacy- or confidentiality-related obligations, which could harm our business and prospects.

Previous wording

We rely on our proprietary AI models, which are statistical models built using a variety of data-sets. Our AI models rely on a wide variety of data sources, including data collected from applicants and borrowers, credit bureau data, and our credit experience gained through monitoring the payment performance of borrowers over time. Under our agreements with our lending partners, we receive licenses to use data collected from loan applicants and borrowers. The CFPB has proposed rules on “open banking” and who qualifies as a credit reporting agency that would give consumers certain rights in deciding how companies like us can use their personal financial data, and also proposed additional restrictions and requirements on companies that use such data. If we are unable to access and use data collected from applicants and borrowers, data received from credit bureaus, repayment data collected as part of our loan servicing activities, or any other data for our AI models, or our access to such data is limited, our ability to accurately evaluate potential borrowers, detect fraud and verify applicant data would be compromised. Any of the foregoing could negatively impact the accuracy of our pricing decisions, the degree of automation in our loan application process and the volume of loans facilitated on our marketplace. In addition, if we were required to share all of the unique data we collect from applicants and borrowers with third parties, that could lessen Upstart’s competitive advantage.

Current wording

We rely on our proprietary AI models, which are statistical models built using a variety of data-sets. Our AI models rely on a wide variety of data sources, including data collected from applicants and borrowers, credit bureau data, and our credit experience gained through monitoring the payment performance of borrowers over time. The CFPB recently issued a final rule on “open banking” and protection of personal financial data rights that would give consumers certain rights in deciding how companies like us can use and transfer their personal financial data, and also proposed additional restrictions and requirements on companies that use such data. If we are unable to access and use data collected from applicants and borrowers, data received from credit bureaus, repayment data collected as part of our loan servicing activities, or any other data for our AI models, or our access to such data is limited, our ability to accurately evaluate potential borrowers, detect fraud and verify applicant data would be compromised. Any of the foregoing could negatively impact the accuracy of our pricing decisions, the degree of automation in our loan application process and the volume of loans facilitated on our marketplace. In addition, if we were required to share all of the unique data we collect from applicants and borrowers with third parties, that could lessen Upstart’s competitive advantage.

Previous wording

In our asset-backed securitizations, pass-through certificate transactions, warehouse credit facilities and whole loan sale arrangements, we make numerous representations and warranties concerning the characteristics of the Upstart-powered loans sold and transferred in connection with such transactions, including representations and warranties that the loans meet the eligibility requirements of those facilities and of institutional investors. If those representations and warranties were not accurate when made and are not timely cured or incurable, we may be required to repurchase the underlying loans. Failure to repurchase such loans could constitute a default, an event of default or termination event under the agreements governing our various arrangements or transactions and could require us to indemnify certain financing parties. Through June 30, 2024, the number of repurchased Upstart-powered loans as a result of inaccurate representations and warranties represents less than 1% of all Upstart-powered loans. While only a small number of Upstart-powered loans have been historically repurchased by us, there can be no assurance that we would have adequate cash or other qualifying assets available to make such repurchases if and when required. Such repurchases could be limited in scope, relating to small pools of loans, or significant in scope, across multiple pools of loans. If we were required to make such repurchases and if we do not have adequate liquidity to fund such repurchases, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected. In addition, a high volume of repurchases due to a breach of such representations and warranties could have an adverse impact on our reputation as a loan seller and servicer.

Current wording

In our asset-backed securitizations, pass-through certificate transactions, warehouse credit facilities, whole loan sale arrangements and other commercial transactions, we make numerous representations and warranties concerning the characteristics of the Upstart-powered loans sold and transferred in connection with such transactions, including representations and warranties that the loans meet the eligibility requirements of those facilities and of institutional investors. If those representations and warranties were not accurate when made and are not timely cured or incurable, we may be required to repurchase the underlying loans. Failure to repurchase such loans could constitute a default, an event of default or termination event under the agreements governing our various arrangements or transactions and could require us to indemnify certain financing parties. Through September 30, 2024, the number of repurchased Upstart-powered loans as a result of inaccurate representations and warranties represents less than 1% of all Upstart-powered loans. While only a small number of Upstart-powered loans have been historically repurchased by us, there can be no assurance that we would have adequate cash or other qualifying assets available to make such repurchases if and when required. Such repurchases could be limited in scope, relating to small pools of loans, or significant in scope, across multiple pools of loans. If we were required to make such repurchases and if we do not have adequate liquidity to fund such repurchases, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected. In addition, a high volume of repurchases due to a breach of such representations and warranties could have an adverse impact on our reputation as a loan seller and servicer.

Previous wording

As a public company, we are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and the rules and regulations of the applicable listing standards of the Nasdaq Global Select Market. We expect that the requirements of these rules and regulations will continue to increase our legal, accounting, and financial compliance costs, make some activities more difficult, time-consuming, and costly, and place significant strain on our personnel, systems, and resources.

Current wording

As a public company, we are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and the rules and regulations of the applicable listing standards of the Nasdaq Global Select Market. We expect that the requirements of these rules and regulations will continue to increase our legal, accounting, and financial compliance costs, make some activities more difficult, time-consuming, and costly, and place significant strain on our personnel, systems, and resources.

Previous wording

Our ability to operate our platform depends, in part, upon our proprietary technology. We may be unable to protect our proprietary technology effectively which would allow competitors to duplicate our AI models or AI lending marketplace and adversely affect our ability to compete with them. We rely on a combination of copyright, trade secret, patent, trademark laws and other rights, as well as confidentiality procedures, contractual provisions and our information security infrastructure to protect our proprietary technology, processes and other intellectual property. While we have two patents issued, two patent applications allowed and two patent applications pending, we have limited patent protection and our patent application may not be successful. A third party may attempt to reverse engineer or otherwise obtain and use our proprietary technology without our consent. The pursuit of a claim against a third party for infringement of our intellectual property could be costly, and there can be no guarantee that any such efforts would be successful. Our failure to secure, protect and enforce our intellectual property rights could adversely affect our brand and adversely impact our business.

Current wording

Our ability to operate our platform depends, in part, upon our proprietary technology. We may be unable to protect our proprietary technology effectively, which would allow competitors to duplicate our AI models or AI lending marketplace and adversely affect our ability to compete with them. We rely on a combination of copyright, trade secret, patent, trademark laws and other rights, as well as confidentiality procedures, contractual provisions and our information security infrastructure to protect our proprietary technology, processes and other intellectual property. While we have, as of September 30, 2024, four patents granted and four patent applications pending in the United States related to our proprietary risk model and data engineering, we have limited patent protection and our patent applications may not be successful. A third party may attempt to reverse engineer or otherwise obtain and use our proprietary technology without our consent. The pursuit of a claim against a third party for infringement of our intellectual property could be costly, and there can be no guarantee that any such efforts would be successful. Our failure to secure, protect and enforce our intellectual property rights could adversely affect our brand and adversely impact our business.

Previous wording

The CFPB and each of the prudential bank regulators that supervise our lending partners have issued guidance stating that institutions under their supervision may be held responsible for the actions of the companies with which they contract. In addition, several state regulators have issued rules that impact how non-banks protect data that is shared by or with third parties. As a service provider to supervised entities and when subject to state laws on similar topics, we must ensure we have implemented an adequate vendor management program. We or our lending partners could be adversely impacted to the extent we fail to implement a vendor management system that is satisfactory to the CFPB and other regulators or our vendors fail to comply with the legal requirements applicable to the particular products or services being offered. Our use of third-party vendors is subject to increasing regulatory attention.

Current wording

The CFPB and each of the prudential bank regulators that supervise our lending partners have issued guidance stating that institutions under their supervision may be held responsible for the actions of the companies with which they contract. In addition, several state regulators have issued rules that impact how non-banks protect data that is shared by or with third parties, and eight federal regulators recently issued a proposed rule to establish joint standards for collections of information reported to certain agencies, including proposed standards for data transmission to the agencies. As a service provider to supervised entities and when subject to state laws on similar topics, we must ensure we have implemented an adequate vendor management program and would have to comply with any data transmission requirements to which our lending partners are subject. We or our lending partners could be adversely impacted to the extent we fail to implement a vendor management system that is satisfactory to the CFPB and other regulators or our vendors fail to comply with the legal requirements applicable to the particular products or services being offered. Our use of third-party vendors is subject to increasing regulatory attention.

Previous wording

Certain recent litigation and regulatory enforcement has challenged, or is currently challenging, the characterization of bank partners as the “true lender” in connection with programs involving origination and/or servicing relationships between a bank partner and non-bank lending platform or program manager. As noted above, the Colorado Administrator has entered into a settlement agreement with certain banks and non-banks that addresses this true lender issue, such settlement to end in 2025 or under the change to Colorado law to prohibit rate exportation to the state. Specifically, the settlement agreement sets forth a safe harbor indicating that a bank is the true lender if certain specific terms and conditions are met. However, other states could also bring lawsuits based on these types of relationships. For example, in June 2020, the Washington, DC Attorney General filed a lawsuit against online lender Elevate for allegedly deceptively marketing high-cost loans with interest rates above the Washington, DC usury cap. The usury claim is based on an allegation that Elevate, which was not licensed in Washington, DC, and not its partner bank, originated these loans, and was therefore in violation of the state’s usury laws. This case ultimately settled, with Elevate agreeing to charge rates only up to 24% and to refund consumers who were charged rates over what is allowed under Washington, DC law. A similar complaint against an online lender, Opportunity Financial, LLC (“OppFi”), was filed in early 2021, alleging that it rather than a bank originated these loans and the loans were therefore in violation of Washington, DC usury laws. The parties settled this case in November 2021, but OppFi faced similar allegations in a lawsuit it proactively filed in California to stop the state from enforcing state regulations against it. In June 2021, a putative class action lawsuit was filed against the online lender Marlette Funding LLC in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, alleging that the company, doing business as Best Egg, was the true lender of usurious loans, with a rate of interest far in excess of the 6% rate permitted to be charged in Pennsylvania by unlicensed non-banks, originated through a partnership with Cross River Bank (Case No. 21-CV-985). Furthermore, in April 2022, OppFi filed a lawsuit against the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation in Los Angeles Superior Court, to challenge the Department’s application of California usury caps to loans originated on OppFi’s online platform. OppFi argued that the Department was applying a “true lender” test to several loans to California residents that exceeded the applicable California usury limit for small dollar loans, even though such test does not exist in California law. While OppFi received a favorable decision in October 2023 that denied California’s motion for preliminary injunction, in California and other states, there is an ongoing risk that g…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

Certain recent litigation and regulatory enforcement has challenged, or is currently challenging, the characterization of bank partners as the “true lender” in connection with programs involving origination and/or servicing relationships between a bank partner and non-bank lending platform or program manager. As noted above, the Colorado Administrator has entered into a settlement agreement with certain banks and non-banks that addresses this true lender issue, such settlement to end in 2025 or under the change to Colorado law to prohibit rate exportation to the state. Specifically, the settlement agreement sets forth a safe harbor indicating that a bank is the true lender if certain specific terms and conditions are met. However, other states could also bring lawsuits based on these types of relationships. For example, in June 2020, the Washington, DC Attorney General filed a lawsuit against online lender Elevate for allegedly deceptively marketing high-cost loans with interest rates above the Washington, DC usury cap. The usury claim is based on an allegation that Elevate, which was not licensed in Washington, DC, and not its partner bank, originated these loans, and was therefore in violation of the state’s usury laws. This case ultimately settled, with Elevate agreeing to charge rates only up to 24% and to refund consumers who were charged rates over what is allowed under Washington, DC law. In June 2021, a putative class action lawsuit was filed against the online lender Marlette Funding LLC in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, alleging that the company, doing business as Best Egg, was the true lender of usurious loans, with a rate of interest far in excess of the 6% rate permitted to be charged in Pennsylvania by unlicensed non-banks, originated through a partnership with Cross River Bank (Case No. 21-CV-985). Furthermore, in April 2022, Opportunity Financial, LLC (“OppFi”) filed a lawsuit against the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation in Los Angeles Superior Court, to challenge the Department’s application of California usury caps to loans originated on OppFi’s online platform. OppFi argued that the Department was applying a “true lender” test to several loans to California residents that exceeded the applicable California usury limit for small dollar loans, even though such test does not exist in California law. While OppFi received a favorable decision in October 2023 that denied California’s motion for preliminary injunction, in California and other states, there is an ongoing risk that government agencies and private plaintiffs will seek to challenge these types of relationships that are similar to our business model. Finally, in June 2024, the Massachusetts Attorney General entered into a settlement with a fintech company it believed to be the true lender of loans originated using the bank partnership model, relying on the state’s UDAAP authority to reach such a conclusion, rather t…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Previous wording

The counterparties to the capped call transactions entered into in connection with the offering of the Notes (as defined below) are financial institutions, and we are subject to the risk that one or more of the counterparties may default or otherwise fail to perform, or may exercise certain rights to terminate, their obligations under the capped call transactions. Our exposure to the credit risk of the counterparties will not be secured by any collateral. Global economic conditions have in the past resulted in the actual or perceived failure or financial difficulties of many financial institutions. If a counterparty to one or more capped call transactions becomes subject to bankruptcy or other insolvency proceedings, we will become an unsecured creditor in those proceedings with a claim equal to our exposure at the time under such transactions. Our exposure will depend on many factors but, generally, our exposure will increase if the market price or the volatility of our common stock increases. In addition, upon a default or other failure to perform, or a termination of obligations, by a counterparty, the counterparty may fail to deliver the shares of our common stock or cash required to be delivered to us under the capped call transactions and we may suffer adverse tax consequences or experience more dilution than we currently anticipate with respect to our common stock. We can provide no assurances as to the financial stability or viability of the counterparties.

Current wording

The counterparties to the capped call transactions entered into in connection with the 2026 Notes and 2029 Notes are financial institutions, and we are subject to the risk that one or more of the counterparties may default or otherwise fail to perform their obligations under the capped call transactions. Our exposure to the credit risk of the counterparties will not be secured by any collateral. Global economic conditions have in the past resulted in the actual or perceived failure or financial difficulties of many financial institutions. If a counterparty to a capped call transaction becomes subject to bankruptcy or other insolvency proceedings, we will become an unsecured creditor in those proceedings with a claim equal to our exposure at the time under the relevant capped call transaction. Our exposure will depend on many factors but, generally, an increase in our exposure will be positively correlated to an increase in our common stock market price and in the volatility of the market price of our common stock. In addition, upon a default or other failure to perform, or a termination of obligations by a counterparty, we may suffer adverse consequences of experience more dilution with respect to our common stock than anticipated. We can provide no assurance as to the financial stability or viability of any of the counterparties.

Previous wording

•federal and state securities laws, including, among others, the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, the Exchange Act, the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended, or the IAA, and the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, or the Investment Company Act, rules and regulations adopted under those laws, and similar state laws and regulations, which govern how we offer, sell and transact in our loan financing products; and

Current wording

•federal and state securities laws, including, among others, the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, the Exchange Act, the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended, or the IAA, and the Investment Company Act, rules and regulations adopted under those laws, and similar state laws and regulations, which govern how we offer, sell and transact in our loan financing products; and

Previous wording

Where applicable, we seek to comply with state broker, credit service organization, small loan, finance lender, servicing, collection, money transmitter and similar statutes. Nevertheless, if we are found to not comply with applicable laws, we could lose one or more of our licenses or authorizations, become subject to greater scrutiny by other state regulatory agencies, face other sanctions or be required to obtain a license in such jurisdiction, which may have an adverse effect on our ability to continue to facilitate loans, perform our servicing obligations or make our marketplace available to consumers in particular states, which may harm our business. Further, failure to comply with the laws and regulatory requirements applicable to our business and operations may, among other things, limit our ability to collect all or part of the principal of or interest on Upstart-powered loans. In addition, non-compliance could subject us to damages, revocation of required licenses, class action lawsuits, administrative enforcement actions, rescission rights held by investors in securities offerings and civil and criminal liability, all of which would harm our business.

Current wording

Where applicable, we seek to comply with state broker, small loan, finance lender, servicing, collection, money transmitter and similar statutes. Nevertheless, if we are found to not comply with applicable laws, we could lose one or more of our licenses or authorizations, become subject to greater scrutiny by other state regulatory agencies, face other sanctions or be required to obtain a license in such jurisdiction, which may have an adverse effect on our ability to continue to facilitate loans, perform our servicing obligations or make our marketplace available to consumers in particular states, which may harm our business. Further, failure to comply with the laws and regulatory requirements applicable to our business and operations may, among other things, limit our ability to collect all or part of the principal of or interest on Upstart-powered loans. In addition, non-compliance could subject us to damages, revocation of required licenses, class action lawsuits, administrative enforcement actions, rescission rights held by investors in securities offerings and civil and criminal liability, all of which would harm our business.