Connect with us

Technology

LendingClub Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2024 Results

Published

on

Grew Originations +13%, Revenue +17%, and Total Assets +20% in Fourth Quarter Compared to Prior Year

Executed $400 Million Loan Sale out of the Held-for-Sale Portfolio to a New Bank Buyer

SAN FRANCISCO, Jan. 28, 2025 /PRNewswire/ — LendingClub Corporation (NYSE: LC), the parent company of LendingClub Bank, America’s leading digital marketplace bank, today announced financial results for the fourth quarter and full year ended December 31, 2024.

“We executed well in 2024, exiting the year with growth in originations, continued credit outperformance, successful new products and experiences, and more than five million members,” said Scott Sanborn, LendingClub CEO. “From this strong foundation, we are well-positioned to accelerate as we move through 2025 and further grow originations, revenue, and return on equity while continuing to innovate for our members.”

Fourth Quarter 2024 Results

Balance Sheet:

Total assets of $10.6 billion increased 20% compared to $8.8 billion in the prior year, driven primarily by the success of the Structured Certificates program as well as the purchase of a $1.3 billion LendingClub-issued loan portfolio in the third quarter of 2024.Deposits of $9.1 billion increased 24% compared to $7.3 billion in the prior year, driven by the continued success of our savings and CD offerings.LevelUp Savings, launched in the third quarter of 2024, reached balances of nearly $1.2 billion at year end.87% of total deposits are FDIC-insured.Robust available liquidity of $3.3 billion.Strong capital position with a consolidated Tier 1 leverage ratio of 11.0% and a CET1 capital ratio of 17.3%.Book value per common share was $11.83, compared to $11.34 in the prior year.Tangible book value per common share was $11.09, compared to $10.54 in the prior year.

Financial Performance:

Loan originations increased 13% to $1.85 billion, compared to $1.63 billion in the prior year, driven by the successful execution of new consumer loan initiatives combined with strong marketplace investor demand.Total net revenue increased 17% to $217.2 million, compared to $185.6 million in the prior year, driven by improved marketplace loan sales pricing and higher net interest income on a larger balance sheet.Provision for credit losses of $63.2 million, compared to $41.9 million in the prior year, primarily driven by higher held-for-investment whole loan retention.Improved net charge-offs in the held-for-investment at amortized cost loan portfolio to $46.0 million, compared to $82.5 million in the prior year.Net charge-off ratio of 4.5% compared to 6.6% in the prior year.Net income of $9.7 million, compared to $10.2 million in the prior year.Net income for the fourth quarter of 2024 includes a one-time, post-tax $3.2 million non-cash impairment expense, as a result of the Tally acquisition, for internally-developed software.Return on Equity (ROE) of 2.9%, with a Return on Tangible Common Equity (ROTCE) of 3.1%, compared to an ROE of 3.3% in the prior year, with an ROTCE of 3.6%.Pre-Provision Net Revenue (PPNR) increased 34% to $74.3 million, compared to $55.6 million in the prior year.

Three Months Ended

Year Ended

($ in millions, except per share amounts)

December 31,
2024

September 30,
2024

December 31,
2023

December 31,
2024

December 31,
2023

Total net revenue

$           217.2

$            201.9

$           185.6

$           787.0

$           864.6

Non-interest expense

142.9

136.3

130.0

543.7

566.4

Pre-provision net revenue (1)

74.3

65.5

55.6

243.3

298.2

Provision for credit losses

63.2

47.5

41.9

178.3

243.6

Income before income tax expense

11.1

18.0

13.7

65.1

54.6

Income tax expense

(1.4)

(3.6)

(3.5)

(13.7)

(15.7)

Net income

$              9.7

$              14.5

$             10.2

$             51.3

$             38.9

Diluted EPS

$             0.08

$              0.13

$             0.09

$             0.45

$             0.36

(1)    See page 3 of this release for additional information on our use of non-GAAP financial measures.

 

For a calculation of Pre-Provision Net Revenue, Tangible Book Value Per Common Share, and Return on Tangible Common Equity, refer to the “Reconciliation of GAAP to Non-GAAP Financial Measures” tables at the end of this release.

 

Financial Outlook

First Quarter 2025

Loan originations

$1.8B to $1.9B

Pre-provision net revenue (PPNR)

$60M to $70M

Fourth Quarter 2025

Loan originations

>$2.3B

Return on tangible common equity (ROTCE)

>8%

 

About LendingClub

LendingClub Corporation (NYSE: LC) is the parent company of LendingClub Bank, National Association, Member FDIC. LendingClub Bank is the leading digital marketplace bank in the U.S., where members can access a broad range of financial products and services designed to help them pay less when borrowing and earn more when saving. Based on hundreds of billions of cells of data and over $95 billion in loans, our advanced credit decisioning and machine-learning models are used across the customer lifecycle to expand seamless access to credit for our members, while generating compelling risk-adjusted returns for our loan investors. Since 2007, more than 5 million members have joined the Club to help reach their financial goals. For more information about LendingClub, visit https://www.lendingclub.com.

Conference Call and Webcast Information

The LendingClub fourth quarter 2024 webcast and teleconference is scheduled to begin at 2:00 p.m. Pacific Time (or 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time) on Tuesday, January 28, 2025. A live webcast of the call will be available at http://ir.lendingclub.com under the Filings & Financials menu in Quarterly Results. To access the call, please dial +1 (404) 975-4839, or outside the U.S. +1 (833) 470-1428, with Access Code 507312, ten minutes prior to 2:00 p.m. Pacific Time (or 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time). An audio archive of the call will be available at http://ir.lendingclub.com. An audio replay will also be available 1 hour after the end of the call until February 4, 2025, by calling +1 (929) 458-6194 or outside the U.S. +1 (866) 813-9403, with Access Code 167509. LendingClub has used, and intends to use, its investor relations website, X (formerly Twitter) handles (@LendingClub and @LendingClubIR) and Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/LendingClubTeam) as a means of disclosing material non-public information and to comply with its disclosure obligations under Regulation FD.

Contacts
For Investors:
IR@lendingclub.com

Media Contact:
Press@lendingclub.com

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

To supplement our financial statements, which are prepared and presented in accordance with GAAP, we use the following non-GAAP financial measures: Pre-Provision Net Revenue (PPNR), Tangible Book Value (TBV) Per Common Share, and Return on Tangible Common Equity (ROTCE). Our non-GAAP financial measures do have limitations as analytical tools and you should not consider them in isolation or as a substitute for an analysis of our results under GAAP.

We believe these non-GAAP financial measures provide management and investors with useful supplemental information about the financial performance of our business, enable comparison of financial results between periods where certain items may vary independent of business performance, and enable comparison of our financial results with other public companies.

We believe PPNR is an important measure because it reflects the financial performance of our business operations. PPNR is a non-GAAP financial measure calculated by subtracting the provision for credit losses and income tax benefit/expense from net income.

We believe TBV Per Common Share is an important measure used to evaluate the company’s use of equity. TBV Per Common Share is a non-GAAP financial measure representing tangible common equity (common equity reduced by goodwill and customer relationship intangible assets), divided by the ending number of common shares issued and outstanding.

We believe ROTCE is an important measure because it reflects the company’s ability to generate income from its core assets. ROTCE is a non-GAAP financial measure calculated by dividing annualized net income by the average tangible common equity for the applicable period.

For a reconciliation of such measures to the nearest GAAP measures, please refer to the tables on pages 14 and 15 of this release.

We do not provide a reconciliation of forward-looking Pre-Provision Net Revenue and Return on Tangible Common Equity to the most directly comparable GAAP reported financial measures on a forward-looking basis because we are unable to predict future provision expense and goodwill, respectively, with reasonable certainty without unreasonable effort.

Safe Harbor Statement

Some of the statements above, including statements regarding our competitive advantages, macroeconomic outlook, anticipated future performance and financial results, are “forward-looking statements.” The words “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “outlook,” “plan,” “predict,” “project,” “will,” “would” and similar expressions may identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain these identifying words. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated by these forward-looking statements include: our ability to continue to attract and retain new and existing borrowers and platform investors; competition; overall economic conditions; the interest rate environment; the regulatory environment; default rates and those factors set forth in the section titled “Risk Factors” in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, as well as in our subsequent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. We may not actually achieve the plans, intentions or expectations disclosed in forward-looking statements, and you should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Actual results or events could differ materially from the plans, intentions and expectations disclosed in forward-looking statements. We do not assume any obligation to update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.

LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION
OPERATING HIGHLIGHTS
(In thousands, except percentages or as noted)
(Unaudited)

As of and for the three months ended

% Change

December 31,
2024

September 30,
2024

June 30,

2024

March 31,

2024

December 31,
2023

Q/Q

Y/Y

Operating Highlights:

Non-interest income

$        74,817

$        61,640

$     58,713

$     57,800

$        54,129

21 %

38 %

Net interest income

142,384

140,241

128,528

122,888

131,477

2 %

8 %

Total net revenue

217,201

201,881

187,241

180,688

185,606

8 %

17 %

Non-interest expense

142,855

136,332

132,258

132,233

130,015

5 %

10 %

Pre-provision net revenue(1)

74,346

65,549

54,983

48,455

55,591

13 %

34 %

Provision for credit losses

63,238

47,541

35,561

31,927

41,907

33 %

51 %

Income before income tax expense

11,108

18,008

19,422

16,528

13,684

(38) %

(19) %

Income tax expense

(1,388)

(3,551)

(4,519)

(4,278)

(3,529)

(61) %

(61) %

Net income

$          9,720

$        14,457

$     14,903

$     12,250

$        10,155

(33) %

(4) %

Basic EPS

$            0.09

$            0.13

$         0.13

$         0.11

$            0.09

(31) %

— %

Diluted EPS

$            0.08

$            0.13

$         0.13

$         0.11

$            0.09

(38) %

(11) %

LendingClub Corporation Performance Metrics:

Net interest margin

5.42 %

5.63 %

5.75 %

5.75 %

6.40 %

Efficiency ratio(2)

65.8 %

67.5 %

70.6 %

73.2 %

70.0 %

Return on average equity (ROE)(3)

2.9 %

4.4 %

4.7 %

3.9 %

3.3 %

Return on tangible common equity (ROTCE)(1)(4)

3.1 %

4.7 %

5.1 %

4.2 %

3.6 %

Return on average total assets (ROA)(5)

0.4 %

0.6 %

0.6 %

0.5 %

0.5 %

Marketing expense as a % of loan originations

1.27 %

1.37 %

1.47 %

1.47 %

1.44 %

LendingClub Corporation Capital Metrics:

Common equity Tier 1 capital ratio

17.3 %

15.9 %

17.9 %

17.6 %

17.9 %

Tier 1 leverage ratio

11.0 %

11.3 %

12.1 %

12.5 %

12.9 %

Book value per common share

$          11.83

$          11.95

$       11.52

$       11.40

$          11.34

(1) %

4 %

Tangible book value per common share(1)

$          11.09

$          11.19

$       10.75

$       10.61

$          10.54

(1) %

5 %

Loan Originations (in millions)(6):

Total loan originations

$          1,846

$          1,913

$       1,813

$       1,646

$          1,630

(4) %

13 %

Marketplace loans

$          1,241

$          1,403

$       1,477

$       1,361

$          1,432

(12) %

(13) %

Loan originations held for investment

$             605

$             510

$          336

$          285

$             198

19 %

206 %

Loan originations held for investment as a % of total loan originations

33 %

27 %

19 %

17 %

12 %

Servicing Portfolio AUM (in millions)(7):

Total servicing portfolio

$         12,371

$         12,674

$      12,999

$      13,437

$         14,122

(2) %

(12) %

Loans serviced for others

$           7,207

$           7,028

$        8,337

$        8,671

$           9,336

3 %

(23) %

(1)

Represents a non-GAAP financial measure. See “Reconciliation of GAAP to Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”

(2)

Calculated as the ratio of non-interest expense to total net revenue.

(3)

Calculated as annualized net income divided by average equity for the period presented.

(4)

Calculated as annualized net income divided by average tangible common equity for the period presented.

(5)

Calculated as annualized net income divided by average total assets for the period presented.

(6)

Includes unsecured personal loans and auto loans only.

(7)

Loans serviced on our platform, which includes unsecured personal loans, auto loans and education and patient finance loans serviced for others and retained by the Company.

 

LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION
OPERATING HIGHLIGHTS (Continued)
(In thousands, except percentages or as noted)
(Unaudited)

As of and for the three months ended

% Change

December 31,
2024

September 30,
2024

June 30,

2024

March 31,

2024

December 31,
2023

Q/Q

Y/Y

Balance Sheet Data:

Securities available for sale

$     3,452,648

$      3,311,418

$  2,814,383

$  2,228,500

$     1,620,262

4 %

113 %

Loans held for sale at fair value

$        636,352

$         849,967

$     791,059

$     550,415

$        407,773

(25) %

56 %

Loans and leases held for investment at amortized cost

$     4,125,818

$      4,108,329

$  4,228,391

$  4,505,816

$     4,850,302

— %

(15) %

Gross allowance for loan and lease losses (1)

$      (285,686)

$       (274,538)

$   (285,368)

$   (311,794)

$      (355,773)

4 %

(20) %

Recovery asset value (2)

$          48,952

$           53,974

$       56,459

$       52,644

$          45,386

(9) %

8 %

Allowance for loan and lease losses

$      (236,734)

$       (220,564)

$   (228,909)

$   (259,150)

$      (310,387)

7 %

(24) %

Loans and leases held for investment at amortized cost, net

$     3,889,084

$      3,887,765

$  3,999,482

$  4,246,666

$     4,539,915

— %

(14) %

Loans held for investment at fair value (3)

$     1,027,798

$      1,287,495

$     339,222

$     427,396

$        272,678

(20) %

277 %

Total loans and leases held for investment (3)

$     4,916,882

$      5,175,260

$  4,338,704

$  4,674,062

$     4,812,593

(5) %

2 %

Whole loans held on balance sheet (4)

$     5,553,234

$      6,025,227

$  5,129,763

$  5,224,477

$     5,220,366

(8) %

6 %

Total assets

$   10,630,509

$    11,037,507

$  9,586,050

$  9,244,828

$     8,827,463

(4) %

20 %

Total deposits

$     9,068,237

$      9,459,608

$  8,095,328

$  7,521,655

$     7,333,486

(4) %

24 %

Total liabilities

$     9,288,778

$      9,694,612

$  8,298,105

$  7,978,542

$     7,575,641

(4) %

23 %

Total equity

$     1,341,731

$      1,342,895

$  1,287,945

$  1,266,286

$     1,251,822

— %

7 %

(1)

Represents the allowance for future estimated net charge-offs on existing portfolio balances.

(2)

Represents the negative allowance for expected recoveries of amounts previously charged-off.

(3)

The balances at December 31, 2024 and September 30, 2024 include a loan portfolio that was purchased during the third quarter of 2024 of loans that we previously originated and sold.

(4) 

Includes loans held for sale at fair value, loans and leases held for investment at amortized cost, net of allowance for loan and lease losses, and loans held for investment at fair value.

 

The asset quality metrics presented in the following table are for loans and leases held for investment at amortized cost and do not reflect loans held for investment at fair value:

As of and for the three months ended

December 31,
2024

September 30,
2024

June 30,
2024

March 31,
2024

December 31,
2023

Asset Quality Metrics (1):

Allowance for loan and lease losses to total loans
   and leases held for investment at amortized cost

5.7 %

5.4 %

5.4 %

5.8 %

6.4 %

Allowance for loan and lease losses to commercial
   loans and leases held for investment at amortized
   cost

3.9 %

3.1 %

2.7 %

1.9 %

1.8 %

Allowance for loan and lease losses to consumer
   loans and leases held for investment at amortized
   cost

6.1 %

5.8 %

5.9 %

6.4 %

7.2 %

Gross allowance for loan and lease losses to
   consumer loans and leases held for investment at
   amortized cost

7.5 %

7.3 %

7.5 %

7.8 %

8.3 %

Net charge-offs

$          45,977

$          55,805

$          66,818

$          80,483

$          82,511

Net charge-off ratio (2)

4.5 %

5.4 %

6.2 %

6.9 %

6.6 %

(1)

Calculated as ALLL or gross ALLL, where applicable, to the corresponding portfolio segment balance of loans and leases held for investment at amortized cost.

(2) 

Net charge-off ratio is calculated as annualized net charge-offs divided by average outstanding loans and leases held for investment during the period.

 

LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION
LOANS AND LEASES HELD FOR INVESTMENT
(In thousands)
(Unaudited)

The following table presents loans and leases held for investment at amortized cost and loans held for investment at fair value:

December 31,
2024

December 31,
2023

Unsecured personal

$       3,106,472

$       3,726,830

Residential mortgages

172,711

183,050

Secured consumer

230,232

250,039

Total consumer loans held for investment

3,509,415

4,159,919

Equipment finance (1)

64,232

110,992

Commercial real estate

373,785

380,322

Commercial and industrial

178,386

199,069

Total commercial loans and leases held for investment

616,403

690,383

Total loans and leases held for investment at amortized cost

4,125,818

4,850,302

Allowance for loan and lease losses

(236,734)

(310,387)

Loans and leases held for investment at amortized cost, net

$       3,889,084

$       4,539,915

Loans held for investment at fair value (2)

1,027,798

272,678

Total loans and leases held for investment (2)

$       4,916,882

$       4,812,593

(1)

Comprised of sales-type leases for equipment.

(2) 

The balance at December 31, 2024 includes a loan portfolio that was purchased during the third quarter of 2024 of loans that we previously originated and sold.

 

LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION
ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN AND LEASE LOSSES
(In thousands)
(Unaudited)

The following table presents the components of the allowance for loan and lease losses on loans and leases held for investment at amortized cost:

December 31, 2024

December 31, 2023

Gross allowance for loan and lease losses (1)

$                 285,686

$                 355,773

Recovery asset value (2)

(48,952)

(45,386)

Allowance for loan and lease losses

$                 236,734

$                 310,387

(1)

Represents the allowance for future estimated net charge-offs on existing portfolio balances.

(2)

Represents the negative allowance for expected recoveries of amounts previously charged-off.

 

The following tables present the allowance for loan and lease losses on loans and leases held for investment at amortized cost and do not reflect loans held for investment at fair value:

Three Months Ended

December 31, 2024

September 30, 2024

Consumer

Commercial

Total

Consumer

Commercial

Total

Allowance for loan and lease
  losses, beginning of period

$    200,899

$        19,665

$ 220,564

$    210,729

$        18,180

$ 228,909

Credit loss expense for loans
  and leases held for investment

56,322

5,825

62,147

45,813

1,647

47,460

Charge-offs

(64,167)

(1,887)

(66,054)

(68,388)

(721)

(69,109)

Recoveries

19,544

533

20,077

12,745

559

13,304

Allowance for loan and lease
  losses, end of period

$    212,598

$        24,136

$ 236,734

$    200,899

$        19,665

$ 220,564

 

Three Months Ended

December 31, 2023

Consumer

Commercial

Total

Allowance for loan and lease losses, beginning of period

$    336,288

$        14,207

$ 350,495

Credit loss expense for loans and leases held for investment

43,227

(824)

42,403

Charge-offs

(88,904)

(1,193)

(90,097)

Recoveries

7,450

136

7,586

Allowance for loan and lease losses, end of period

$    298,061

$        12,326

$ 310,387

 

LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION
PAST DUE LOANS AND LEASES HELD FOR INVESTMENT
(In thousands)
(Unaudited)

The following tables present past due loans and leases held for investment at amortized cost and do not reflect loans held for investment at fair value:

December 31, 2024

30-59
Days

60-89
Days

90 or More
Days

Total Days
Past Due

Guaranteed
Amount (1)

Unsecured personal

$      23,530

$      19,293

$      21,387

$             64,210

$                     —

Residential mortgages

151

88

—

239

—

Secured consumer

2,342

600

337

3,279

—

Total consumer loans held for investment

$      26,023

$      19,981

$      21,724

$             67,728

$                     —

Equipment finance

$             67

$             —

$        4,551

$               4,618

$                     —

Commercial real estate

8,320

483

9,731

18,534

8,456

Commercial and industrial

6,257

1,182

15,971

23,410

18,512

Total commercial loans and leases held for investment

$      14,644

$        1,665

$      30,253

$             46,562

$             26,968

Total loans and leases held for investment at amortized cost

$      40,667

$      21,646

$      51,977

$           114,290

$             26,968

 

December 31, 2023

30-59
Days

60-89
Days

90 or More
Days

Total Days
Past Due

Guaranteed
Amount (1)

Unsecured personal

$      32,716

$      29,556

$      30,132

$             92,404

$                     —

Residential mortgages

1,751

—

—

1,751

—

Secured consumer

2,076

635

217

2,928

—

Total consumer loans held for investment

$      36,543

$      30,191

$      30,349

$             97,083

$                     —

Equipment finance

$        1,265

$              —

$              —

$               1,265

$                     —

Commercial real estate

—

3,566

1,618

5,184

4,047

Commercial and industrial

12,261

1,632

1,515

15,408

11,260

Total commercial loans and leases held for investment

$      13,526

$         5,198

$        3,133

$             21,857

$             15,307

Total loans and leases held for investment at amortized cost

$      50,069

$      35,389

$      33,482

$           118,940

$             15,307

(1)      Represents loan balances guaranteed by the Small Business Association.

 

LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
(Unaudited)

Three Months Ended

Change (%)

December 31,
2024

September 30,
2024

December 31,
2023

Q4 2024

vs

Q3 2024

Q4 2024

vs

Q4 2023

Non-interest income:

Origination fees

$         64,745

$          71,465

$         76,702

(9) %

(16) %

Servicing fees

17,391

8,081

17,450

115 %

— %

Gain on sales of loans

15,007

12,433

11,921

21 %

26 %

Net fair value adjustments

(24,980)

(33,595)

(53,892)

26 %

54 %

Marketplace revenue

72,163

58,384

52,181

24 %

38 %

Other non-interest income

2,654

3,256

1,948

(18) %

36 %

Total non-interest income

74,817

61,640

54,129

21 %

38 %

Total interest income

240,596

240,377

208,319

— %

15 %

Total interest expense

98,212

100,136

76,842

(2) %

28 %

Net interest income

142,384

140,241

131,477

2 %

8 %

Total net revenue

217,201

201,881

185,606

8 %

17 %

Provision for credit losses

63,238

47,541

41,907

33 %

51 %

Non-interest expense:

Compensation and benefits

58,656

57,408

58,591

2 %

— %

Marketing

23,415

26,186

23,465

(11) %

— %

Equipment and software

13,361

12,789

13,190

4 %

1 %

Depreciation and amortization

19,748

13,341

11,953

48 %

65 %

Professional services

9,136

8,014

7,727

14 %

18 %

Occupancy

3,991

4,005

3,926

— %

2 %

Other non-interest expense

14,548

14,589

11,163

— %

30 %

Total non-interest expense

142,855

136,332

130,015

5 %

10 %

Income before income tax expense

11,108

18,008

13,684

(38) %

(19) %

Income tax expense

(1,388)

(3,551)

(3,529)

(61) %

(61) %

Net income

$           9,720

$          14,457

$         10,155

(33) %

(4) %

Net income per share: 

Basic EPS

$             0.09

$             0.13

$             0.09

(31) %

— %

Diluted EPS

$             0.08

$             0.13

$             0.09

(38) %

(11) %

Weighted-average common shares – Basic

112,788,050

112,042,202

109,948,785

1 %

3 %

Weighted-average common shares – Diluted

116,400,285

113,922,256

109,949,371

2 %

6 %

 

LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME (Continued)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
(Unaudited)

Year Ended December 31,

2024

2023

Change (%)

Non-interest income:

Origination fees

$       283,420

$       279,146

2 %

Servicing fees

64,933

98,613

(34) %

Gain on sales of loans

49,097

47,839

3 %

Net fair value adjustments

(154,659)

(134,114)

(15) %

Marketplace revenue

242,791

291,484

(17) %

Other non-interest income

10,179

11,297

(10) %

Total non-interest income

252,970

302,781

(16) %

Total interest income

907,958

832,630

9 %

Total interest expense

373,917

270,792

38 %

Net interest income

534,041

561,838

(5) %

Total net revenue

787,011

864,619

(9) %

Provision for credit losses

178,267

243,565

(27) %

Non-interest expense:

Compensation and benefits

232,158

261,948

(11) %

Marketing

100,402

93,840

7 %

Equipment and software

51,194

53,485

(4) %

Depreciation and amortization

58,834

47,195

25 %

Professional services

32,045

35,173

(9) %

Occupancy

15,798

17,532

(10) %

Other non-interest expense

53,247

57,264

(7) %

Total non-interest expense

543,678

566,437

(4) %

Income before income tax expense

65,066

54,617

19 %

Income tax expense

(13,736)

(15,678)

(12) %

Net income

$         51,330

$         38,939

32 %

Net income per share:

Basic EPS

$            0.46

$            0.36

28 %

Diluted EPS

$            0.45

$            0.36

25 %

Weighted-average common shares – Basic

111,731,523

108,466,179

3 %

Weighted-average common shares – Diluted

113,122,859

108,468,857

4 %

 

LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION
NET INTEREST INCOME
(In thousands, except percentages or as noted)
(Unaudited)

Consolidated LendingClub Corporation (1)

Three Months Ended

December 31, 2024

Three Months Ended

September 30, 2024

Three Months Ended

December 31, 2023

Average
Balance

Interest
Income/
Expense

Average
Yield/
Rate

Average
Balance

Interest
Income/
Expense

Average
Yield/
Rate

Average
Balance

Interest
Income/
Expense

Average
Yield/
Rate

Interest-earning assets (2)

Cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash and other

$   1,193,570

$  14,194

4.76 %

$    939,611

$  12,442

5.30 %

$ 1,190,539

$  16,271

5.47 %

Securities available for sale at fair value

3,390,315

57,259

6.76 %

3,047,305

52,476

6.89 %

1,197,625

20,920

6.99 %

Loans held for sale at fair value

673,279

20,696

12.30 %

899,434

30,326

13.49 %

501,850

15,883

12.66 %

Loans and leases held for investment:

Unsecured personal loans

3,080,934

104,011

13.50 %

3,045,150

103,291

13.57 %

3,890,041

128,190

13.18 %

Commercial and other consumer loans

1,023,041

14,203

5.55 %

1,057,688

15,497

5.86 %

1,126,010

17,033

6.05 %

Loans and leases held for investment at amortized cost

4,103,975

118,214

11.52 %

4,102,838

118,788

11.58 %

5,016,051

145,223

11.58 %

Loans held for investment at fair value (3)

1,153,204

30,233

10.49 %

972,698

26,345

10.83 %

306,636

10,022

13.07 %

Total loans and leases held for investment (3)

5,257,179

148,447

11.29 %

5,075,536

145,133

11.44 %

5,322,687

155,245

11.67 %

Total interest-earning assets

10,514,343

240,596

9.15 %

9,961,886

240,377

9.65 %

8,212,701

208,319

10.15 %

Cash and due from banks and restricted cash

51,555

41,147

63,181

Allowance for loan and lease losses

(227,673)

(225,968)

(334,711)

Other non-interest earning assets

597,609

624,198

659,995

Total assets

$  10,935,834

$  10,401,263

$ 8,601,166

Interest-bearing liabilities

Interest-bearing deposits:

Checking and money market accounts

$       805,362

$    5,502

2.72 %

$ 1,092,376

$  10,146

3.70 %

$ 1,081,875

$    9,593

3.52 %

Savings accounts and certificates of deposit

8,214,866

92,698

4.49 %

6,944,586

86,717

4.97 %

5,720,058

66,660

4.62 %

Interest-bearing deposits

9,020,228

98,200

4.33 %

8,036,962

96,863

4.79 %

6,801,933

76,253

4.45 %

Other interest-bearing liabilities

615

12

7.20 %

486,736

3,273

2.69 %

24,180

589

9.74 %

Total interest-bearing liabilities

9,020,843

98,212

4.33 %

8,523,698

100,136

4.67 %

6,826,113

76,842

4.47 %

Non-interest bearing deposits

328,022

344,577

314,822

Other liabilities

251,239

225,467

238,806

Total liabilities

$    9,600,104

$ 9,093,742

$ 7,379,741

Total equity

$    1,335,730

$ 1,307,521

$ 1,221,425

Total liabilities and equity

$  10,935,834

$  10,401,263

$ 8,601,166

Interest rate spread

4.82 %

4.98 %

5.68 %

Net interest income and net interest margin

$  142,384

5.42 %

$ 140,241

5.63 %

$ 131,477

6.40 %

(1) 

Consolidated presentation reflects intercompany eliminations.

(2) 

Nonaccrual loans and any related income are included in their respective loan categories.

(3) 

The average balance for the fourth and third quarters of 2024 includes a loan portfolio that was purchased during the third quarter of 2024 of loans that we previously originated and sold.

 

LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS 
(In Thousands, Except Share and Per Share Amounts)
(Unaudited)

December 31,
2024

December 31,
2023

Assets

Cash and due from banks

$            15,524

$         14,993

Interest-bearing deposits in banks

938,534

1,237,511

Total cash and cash equivalents

954,058

1,252,504

Restricted cash

23,338

41,644

Securities available for sale at fair value ($3,492,264 and $1,663,990 at amortized cost, respectively)

3,452,648

1,620,262

Loans held for sale at fair value

636,352

407,773

Loans and leases held for investment

4,125,818

4,850,302

Allowance for loan and lease losses

(236,734)

(310,387)

Loans and leases held for investment, net

3,889,084

4,539,915

Loans held for investment at fair value (1)

1,027,798

272,678

Property, equipment and software, net

167,532

161,517

Goodwill

75,717

75,717

Other assets

403,982

455,453

Total assets

$      10,630,509

$     8,827,463

Liabilities and Equity

Deposits:

Interest-bearing

$        8,676,119

$     7,001,680

Noninterest-bearing

392,118

331,806

Total deposits

9,068,237

7,333,486

Borrowings

—

19,354

Other liabilities

220,541

222,801

Total liabilities

9,288,778

7,575,641

Equity

Common stock, $0.01 par value; 180,000,000 shares authorized; 113,383,917 and 110,410,602 shares issued and outstanding, respectively

1,134

1,104

Additional paid-in capital

1,702,316

1,669,828

Accumulated deficit

(337,476)

(388,806)

Accumulated other comprehensive loss

(24,243)

(30,304)

Total equity

1,341,731

1,251,822

Total liabilities and equity

$      10,630,509

$     8,827,463

(1) 

The balance at December 31, 2024 includes a loan portfolio that was purchased during the third quarter of 2024 of loans that we previously originated and sold.

 

LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION
RECONCILIATION OF GAAP TO NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
(Unaudited)

Pre-Provision Net Revenue
 

For the three months ended

For the year ended

December 31,
2024

September 30,

2024

June 30,

2024

March 31,

2024

December 31,
2023

December 31,
2024

December 31,
2023

GAAP Net income

$             9,720

$             14,457

$     14,903

$     12,250

$           10,155

$           51,330

$           38,939

Less: Provision for credit losses

(63,238)

(47,541)

(35,561)

(31,927)

(41,907)

(178,267)

(243,565)

Less: Income tax expense

(1,388)

(3,551)

(4,519)

(4,278)

(3,529)

(13,736)

(15,678)

Pre-provision net revenue

$           74,346

$             65,549

$     54,983

$     48,455

$           55,591

$         243,333

$         298,182

 

For the three months ended

For the year ended

December 31,
2024

September 30,

2024

June 30,

2024

March 31,

2024

December 31,
2023

December 31,
2024

December 31,
2023

Non-interest income

$           74,817

$             61,640

$     58,713

$     57,800

$           54,129

$         252,970

$         302,781

Net interest income

142,384

140,241

128,528

122,888

131,477

534,041

561,838

Total net revenue

217,201

201,881

187,241

180,688

185,606

787,011

864,619

Non-interest expense

(142,855)

(136,332)

(132,258)

(132,233)

(130,015)

(543,678)

(566,437)

Pre-provision net revenue

74,346

65,549

54,983

48,455

55,591

243,333

298,182

Provision for credit losses

(63,238)

(47,541)

(35,561)

(31,927)

(41,907)

(178,267)

(243,565)

Income before income tax expense

11,108

18,008

19,422

16,528

13,684

65,066

54,617

Income tax expense

(1,388)

(3,551)

(4,519)

(4,278)

(3,529)

(13,736)

(15,678)

GAAP Net income

$             9,720

$             14,457

$     14,903

$     12,250

$           10,155

$           51,330

$           38,939

 

Tangible Book Value Per Common Share
 

December 31,
2024

September 30,

2024

June 30,

2024

March 31,

2024

December 31,
2023

GAAP common equity

$         1,341,731

$          1,342,895

$          1,287,945

$          1,266,286

$          1,251,822

Less: Goodwill

(75,717)

(75,717)

(75,717)

(75,717)

(75,717)

Less: Customer relationship intangible assets

(8,586)

(9,439)

(10,293)

(11,165)

(12,135)

Tangible common equity

$         1,257,428

$          1,257,739

$          1,201,935

$          1,179,404

$          1,163,970

Book value per common share

GAAP common equity

$         1,341,731

$          1,342,895

$          1,287,945

$          1,266,286

$          1,251,822

Common shares issued and outstanding

113,383,917

112,401,990

111,812,215

111,120,415

110,410,602

Book value per common share

$                11.83

$                 11.95

$                 11.52

$                 11.40

$                 11.34

Tangible book value per common share

Tangible common equity

$         1,257,428

$          1,257,739

$          1,201,935

$          1,179,404

$          1,163,970

Common shares issued and outstanding

113,383,917

112,401,990

111,812,215

111,120,415

110,410,602

Tangible book value per common share

$                11.09

$                 11.19

$                 10.75

$                 10.61

$                 10.54

 

LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION
RECONCILIATION OF GAAP TO NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES (Continued)
(In thousands, except ratios)
(Unaudited)

Return On Tangible Common Equity
 

For the three months ended

For the year ended

December 31,
2024

September 30,

2024

June 30,

2024

March 31,

2024

December 31,
2023

December 31,
2024

December 31,
2023

Average GAAP common equity

$ 1,335,730

$   1,307,521

$ 1,266,608

$ 1,257,237

$ 1,221,425

$ 1,291,938

$ 1,204,050

Less: Average goodwill

(75,717)

(75,717)

(75,717)

(75,717)

(75,717)

(75,717)

(75,717)

Less: Average customer relationship intangible assets

(9,013)

(9,866)

(10,729)

(11,650)

(12,643)

(10,324)

(14,198)

Average tangible common equity

$ 1,251,000

$   1,221,938

$ 1,180,162

$ 1,169,870

$ 1,133,065

$ 1,205,897

$ 1,114,135

Return on average equity

Annualized GAAP net income

$      38,880

$        57,828

$      59,612

$      49,000

$      40,620

$      51,330

$      38,939

Average GAAP common equity

$ 1,335,730

$   1,307,521

$ 1,266,608

$ 1,257,237

$ 1,221,425

$ 1,291,938

$ 1,204,050

Return on average equity

2.9 %

4.4 %

4.7 %

3.9 %

3.3 %

4.0 %

3.2 %

Return on tangible common equity

Annualized GAAP net income

$      38,880

$        57,828

$      59,612

$      49,000

$      40,620

$      51,330

$      38,939

Average tangible common equity

$ 1,251,000

$   1,221,938

$ 1,180,162

$ 1,169,870

$ 1,133,065

$ 1,205,897

$ 1,114,135

Return on tangible common equity

3.1 %

4.7 %

5.1 %

4.2 %

3.6 %

4.3 %

3.5 %

 

View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/lendingclub-reports-fourth-quarter-and-full-year-2024-results-302362517.html

SOURCE LendingClub Corporation

Continue Reading

Technology

Truth-seeking: the Turning Point in Zunyi

Published

on

By

BEIJING, Oct. 18, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — An interview from China.org.cn with Wang Xiaohui and David Ferguson on the Long March:

 

Wang Xiaohui:

When you march toward your ideals but encounter repeated setbacks and failures, do you have the courage to pause, reflect on the path taken, and chart a new way forward?

David Ferguson:

If I continually encountered setbacks on the road to my ideals, I would stop and reflect seriously on whether my methods need adjusted or my direction needs corrected. This is a matter of being honest with oneself and honest about one’s shortcomings. Granted, this requires as much courage as setting out in the first place — because what you have to confront is not only the judgment of others, but your own ingrained reluctance to accept that you might have got it wrong.

Wang Xiaohui:

The waters of the Xiangjiang River ran crimson in the winter of 1934.

To cover the Red Army’s main force as they crossed the river, Chen Shuxiang, then Commander of the 34th Division of the Fifth Army Corps, led his troops to fight against vastly superior enemy forces until they ran out of ammunition and supplies. Severely wounded, Chen was captured alive. On the way to the enemy camp to be paraded for merit, Chen seized a moment of the enemy’s unawareness, tore his own intestines through his abdominal wound, and died a heroic death. He was only 29 years old.

The Battle of Xiangjiang River was the deadliest campaign for the Red Army since the start of the Long March. In less than two months, their troop strength plummeted from over 86,000 to just over 30,000.

At that critical moment, doubts and discontent among officers and soldiers with the military leadership peaked.

During the fights against the previous four Kuomintang (KMT) “encirclement” campaigns, the Red Army adopted Mao Zedong’s strategy of “luring the enemy in deep.” With flexible tactics in mobile warfare, the Red Army worked miracles of defeating superior enemies time and again. Yet, the tide turned completely during the KMT’s fifth “encirclement.”

At that time, the CPC was a branch of the Communist International (Comintern). After 1927, the Comintern instructed the CPC to adopt an urban-centered path in its revolution, for it was how Russia’s October Revolution had achieved victory. Affected by this directive, during the Fifth Counter-Campaign against “Encirclement and Suppression”, Bo Gu and Otto Braun, who held actual command of the Red Army, insisted on launching offensive operations to seize major cities.

Otto Braun also mechanically applied European conventional warfare tactics, forcing the Red Army into rigid positional and fortress battles. In the Battle of Guangchang, the poorly equipped Red Army fought head-on against enemy tanks and artillery on open terrain, resulting in more than 5,000 casualties, about one-fourth of all participating troops.

Successive military defeats forced the Red Army to launch a strategic shift. However, Bo Gu and Otto Braun insisted that everything be evacuated, including heavy equipment: printing presses, currency-making machines, and arms-manufacturing facilities… When crossing the Xiangjiang River, troops were slowed down by these cumbersome supplies, and numerous soldiers even laid down their lives for protecting these assets. Chen Shuxiang and his 34th Division wrote the gravest footnote to this bloody sacrifice.

By the banks of the Xiangjiang River, the spark of hope in the eyes of the Red Army soldiers was nearly quenched by the cold water. Could the rigid foreign doctrines truly guide the Red Army and China’s revolution? What path lay ahead?

History often unfolds in paradoxes: when all hope seems lost, a historical turning point is quietly emerging.

After the Battle of Xiangjiang River, Mao firmly opposed the original plan drafted by Bo Gu and Otto Braun to march towards Hunan. Instead, he proposed to advance to Guizhou where enemy defenses were weak. There, the Red Army broke through the natural barrier of the Wujiang River, and captured Zunyi. On Jan. 15, 1935, the CPC Central Committee convened an enlarged Political Bureau meeting in an old mansion, later known to the world as the Zunyi Conference.

Inside the modest living room on the second floor, a charcoal brazier expelled the winter chill. The CPC leadership sat around a long table to review why the Red Army had fallen into passive positions since 1933. Bo Gu attributed the defeats solely to the enemy’s overwhelming strength, while other leading officials like Zhou Enlai and Zhang Wentian pinpointed flawed military command as the fundamental cause.

Mao Zedong also made a pivotal speech.

As a revolutionary forged in rural base-area practice, Mao always sought truth from real combat experience. Citing victories from the previous four counter-“encirclement” campaigns, he rebutted Bo Gu’s opinions and criticized the flawed strategies of passive defense and abandoning mobile warfare tactics. In plain, incisive language, he pointed out that “the soldiers also needed to march, eat and sleep,” and that Braun’s rigid commands were completely divorced from the realities of China’s revolutionary warfare. 

Throughout the whole meeting, Bo Gu remained dejected; Braun sat near the door and lit one cigarette after another. Never had these “true Bolsheviks” faced such rigorous criticism before.

The intensive confrontation lasted three days. In the end, Mao Zedong was elected to the leadership of the Red Army and the CPC Central Committee, putting an end to the wrong guidance. This marked a life-and-death turning point in the history of the Communist Party of China.

The Zunyi Conference freed the CPC from the Comintern’s intervention, enabling the Party to independently master the destiny of China’s revolution. From then on, the Red Army turned peril into safety, and China’s revolution emerged from despair toward new life.

David Ferguson:

When faced with major setbacks, the Communist Party of China was not crushed; instead, it demonstrated the courage to confront and correct its own mistakes, thereby turning adversity into opportunity. For any ruling party, this kind of courage is exceptionally rare.

Throughout history, guided by the principle of seeking truth from facts, the Party has always corrected errors, updated systems and adjusted course. By doing so, it has guaranteed social progress. This is precisely the secret to success that has made the Party resilient and invincible.

Wang Xiaohui:

No grand undertaking advances without setbacks. Faced with obstacles and defeats, the CPC demonstrated extraordinary courage and wisdom. They sought truth from facts, corrected wrong courses, and led the revolution towards triumph.

The Zunyi Conference Spirit, embodied in firm conviction, adherence to truth, independence and self-reliance, solidarity and unity, was forged amid blood and fire. It has shaped the unique spiritual character of the CPC. In the years that followed, these timeless values continued to evolve and sustain the Party in the face of trials and challenges, endowing it with enduring vitality.

China Mosaic 
http://www.china.org.cn/video/node_7230027.htm

Faith: The Spark Born by the Yudu Riverside
http://www.china.org.cn/2026-10/17/content_118737624.shtml

 

 

View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/truth-seeking-the-turning-point-in-zunyi-302912139.html

SOURCE China.org.cn

Continue Reading

Technology

Truth-seeking: the Turning Point in Zunyi

Published

on

By

BEIJING, Oct. 18, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — An interview from China.org.cn with Wang Xiaohui and David Ferguson on the Long March:

 

Wang Xiaohui:

When you march toward your ideals but encounter repeated setbacks and failures, do you have the courage to pause, reflect on the path taken, and chart a new way forward?

David Ferguson:

If I continually encountered setbacks on the road to my ideals, I would stop and reflect seriously on whether my methods need adjusted or my direction needs corrected. This is a matter of being honest with oneself and honest about one’s shortcomings. Granted, this requires as much courage as setting out in the first place — because what you have to confront is not only the judgment of others, but your own ingrained reluctance to accept that you might have got it wrong.

Wang Xiaohui:

The waters of the Xiangjiang River ran crimson in the winter of 1934.

To cover the Red Army’s main force as they crossed the river, Chen Shuxiang, then Commander of the 34th Division of the Fifth Army Corps, led his troops to fight against vastly superior enemy forces until they ran out of ammunition and supplies. Severely wounded, Chen was captured alive. On the way to the enemy camp to be paraded for merit, Chen seized a moment of the enemy’s unawareness, tore his own intestines through his abdominal wound, and died a heroic death. He was only 29 years old.

The Battle of Xiangjiang River was the deadliest campaign for the Red Army since the start of the Long March. In less than two months, their troop strength plummeted from over 86,000 to just over 30,000.

At that critical moment, doubts and discontent among officers and soldiers with the military leadership peaked.

During the fights against the previous four Kuomintang (KMT) “encirclement” campaigns, the Red Army adopted Mao Zedong’s strategy of “luring the enemy in deep.” With flexible tactics in mobile warfare, the Red Army worked miracles of defeating superior enemies time and again. Yet, the tide turned completely during the KMT’s fifth “encirclement.”

At that time, the CPC was a branch of the Communist International (Comintern). After 1927, the Comintern instructed the CPC to adopt an urban-centered path in its revolution, for it was how Russia’s October Revolution had achieved victory. Affected by this directive, during the Fifth Counter-Campaign against “Encirclement and Suppression”, Bo Gu and Otto Braun, who held actual command of the Red Army, insisted on launching offensive operations to seize major cities.

Otto Braun also mechanically applied European conventional warfare tactics, forcing the Red Army into rigid positional and fortress battles. In the Battle of Guangchang, the poorly equipped Red Army fought head-on against enemy tanks and artillery on open terrain, resulting in more than 5,000 casualties, about one-fourth of all participating troops.

Successive military defeats forced the Red Army to launch a strategic shift. However, Bo Gu and Otto Braun insisted that everything be evacuated, including heavy equipment: printing presses, currency-making machines, and arms-manufacturing facilities… When crossing the Xiangjiang River, troops were slowed down by these cumbersome supplies, and numerous soldiers even laid down their lives for protecting these assets. Chen Shuxiang and his 34th Division wrote the gravest footnote to this bloody sacrifice.

By the banks of the Xiangjiang River, the spark of hope in the eyes of the Red Army soldiers was nearly quenched by the cold water. Could the rigid foreign doctrines truly guide the Red Army and China’s revolution? What path lay ahead?

History often unfolds in paradoxes: when all hope seems lost, a historical turning point is quietly emerging.

After the Battle of Xiangjiang River, Mao firmly opposed the original plan drafted by Bo Gu and Otto Braun to march towards Hunan. Instead, he proposed to advance to Guizhou where enemy defenses were weak. There, the Red Army broke through the natural barrier of the Wujiang River, and captured Zunyi. On Jan. 15, 1935, the CPC Central Committee convened an enlarged Political Bureau meeting in an old mansion, later known to the world as the Zunyi Conference.

Inside the modest living room on the second floor, a charcoal brazier expelled the winter chill. The CPC leadership sat around a long table to review why the Red Army had fallen into passive positions since 1933. Bo Gu attributed the defeats solely to the enemy’s overwhelming strength, while other leading officials like Zhou Enlai and Zhang Wentian pinpointed flawed military command as the fundamental cause.

Mao Zedong also made a pivotal speech.

As a revolutionary forged in rural base-area practice, Mao always sought truth from real combat experience. Citing victories from the previous four counter-“encirclement” campaigns, he rebutted Bo Gu’s opinions and criticized the flawed strategies of passive defense and abandoning mobile warfare tactics. In plain, incisive language, he pointed out that “the soldiers also needed to march, eat and sleep,” and that Braun’s rigid commands were completely divorced from the realities of China’s revolutionary warfare. 

Throughout the whole meeting, Bo Gu remained dejected; Braun sat near the door and lit one cigarette after another. Never had these “true Bolsheviks” faced such rigorous criticism before.

The intensive confrontation lasted three days. In the end, Mao Zedong was elected to the leadership of the Red Army and the CPC Central Committee, putting an end to the wrong guidance. This marked a life-and-death turning point in the history of the Communist Party of China.

The Zunyi Conference freed the CPC from the Comintern’s intervention, enabling the Party to independently master the destiny of China’s revolution. From then on, the Red Army turned peril into safety, and China’s revolution emerged from despair toward new life.

David Ferguson:

When faced with major setbacks, the Communist Party of China was not crushed; instead, it demonstrated the courage to confront and correct its own mistakes, thereby turning adversity into opportunity. For any ruling party, this kind of courage is exceptionally rare.

Throughout history, guided by the principle of seeking truth from facts, the Party has always corrected errors, updated systems and adjusted course. By doing so, it has guaranteed social progress. This is precisely the secret to success that has made the Party resilient and invincible.

Wang Xiaohui:

No grand undertaking advances without setbacks. Faced with obstacles and defeats, the CPC demonstrated extraordinary courage and wisdom. They sought truth from facts, corrected wrong courses, and led the revolution towards triumph.

The Zunyi Conference Spirit, embodied in firm conviction, adherence to truth, independence and self-reliance, solidarity and unity, was forged amid blood and fire. It has shaped the unique spiritual character of the CPC. In the years that followed, these timeless values continued to evolve and sustain the Party in the face of trials and challenges, endowing it with enduring vitality.

China Mosaic 
http://www.china.org.cn/video/node_7230027.htm

Faith: The Spark Born by the Yudu Riverside
http://www.china.org.cn/2026-10/17/content_118737624.shtml

 

 

View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/truth-seeking-the-turning-point-in-zunyi-302912139.html

SOURCE China.org.cn

Continue Reading

Technology

GMIF2026: AI Inference Powers the “Token Factory” and Drives System-Level Rethinking of Memory & Storage

Published

on

By

SHENZHEN, China, Oct. 18, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — The 5th GMIF Innovation Summit (Global Memory Innovation Forum 2026, GMIF2026) recently concluded at the Renaissance Shenzhen Bay Hotel. Co-hosted by the Shenzhen Memory Industry Association (SMIA) and the School of Integrated Circuits at Peking University, the summit was themed “The Future Built on AI Memory and Storage.” Now in its fifth edition, GMIF has grown from a regional industry gathering into a benchmark for the global semiconductor memory ecosystem, with diversified programs including keynote sessions, an investment forum, product exhibitions, a global livestream, and a golf friendship match, all centered on the value of memory and storage in the token economy and the AI inference era.

In the opening remarks by Rixin Sun, President of Shenzhen Memory Industry Association (SMIA), GMIF’s growth over five consecutive editions was traced from its early days to today. As a platform for global exchange, GMIF is built around the memory value chain, linking wafer IDMs and players in controllers, modules, packaging and testing, equipment and materials, and end applications to promote technical exchange, supply-demand matching, and ecosystem cooperation.

President Sun noted that as AI evolves from generative to agentic, inference efficiency, data scheduling, and system coordination have become shared priorities. Collaboration across the value chain is no longer a traditional supply-demand relationship, but a deeper partnership built around workload requirements, joint product definition, and scenario validation. Looking ahead, GMIF will pursue a more specialized and differentiated format, connecting memory companies with AI compute and end-application players worldwide.

Capital Meets Technology: Memory & Storage Moves to the Center of AI Infrastructure

As AI shifts from model training to large-scale commercial inference, the token is becoming a new unit of value. Inference demands low latency, high concurrency, and sustained throughput, which places memory and storage bandwidth, capacity, and energy efficiency among the variables that shape overall system efficiency and cost.

Daniel Yen of Morgan Stanley projected that global data center capital expenditure will stay strong in the coming years, with more than half of cloud data center capex expected to go to memory & storage (excluding HBM) by 2027. Yen identified six innovation paths to overcome the “memory wall” challenge: process migration, design changes, advanced packaging, memory peripherals, PIM/CIM, and new materials.

Prof. Yimao Cai, Dean of the School of Integrated Circuits at Peking University, pointed out that HBM remains central to high-end AI compute, but yield, cost, and thermal constraints limit broader adoption. NAND-based high-bandwidth technologies such as HBF have become a major research focus because of their cost advantage, and hybrid multi-media architectures could balance performance, capacity, and cost for deploying models with hundreds of billions of parameters.

Kevin Yoon, CVP & CTO of Samsung Memory China at Samsung Electronics, described how agents are generating massive KV cache demand and driving rapid iteration of tiered storage, citing Samsung’s work on Z-NAND, PCIe Gen6 SSDs, and ultra-high-capacity data center SSDs. Maya Zhang, Senior Director of Product Marketing from Sandisk, called this the first year of the “inference boom.” As inference reaches commercial scale, AI data centers are shifting from cost centers to value and capacity centers, and the evaluation framework is moving from TCO to TVO. NAND is becoming a strategic core component of AI, and the SSD is becoming a “token battery” that greatly improves the economics of the industry through token reuse.

Solidigm and Arm focused on the evolution of system-level design. Benny Ni, GAR Sales VP at Solidigm, noted high-capacity QLC SSDs are being adopted faster, and that memory offloading has moved from an alternative to a core design paradigm for data centers, while liquid cooling has become a prerequisite for unlocking high-end storage performance. John Xavier Lionel, Head of Global Storage Business at Arm, shared competition in the AI era is shifting from simply chasing higher TOPS to building a more efficient system balance among compute, memory, storage, and data movement. Arm’s cloud-edge-device continuum framework balances power, capacity, bandwidth, latency, security, and cost constraints at each tier, so that “the right AI workload runs in the right place.”

Moving from the cloud to the edge, Stanley Huang, AVP of Silicon Motion, stressed that devices are the ultimate carrier of AI experiences and that intelligent storage directly determines real-world device performance. Its PerformaShape technology allocates resources flexibly across different agents and greatly improves read/write consistency.

Sam Sun, Chairman of BIWIN, explained that large-scale AI inference is extending memory demand from data centers to the edge and endpoints, where differing needs in capacity, performance, power, size, and reliability are pushing storage from general-purpose specifications toward deep matching with specific scenarios and platforms. Drawing on full-stack capabilities from media selection and controller and firmware development to advanced packaging, testing, and volume delivery, BIWIN works closely with customers, platforms, and chip makers to tailor products to each use case, shortening development and validation cycles and improving system space, energy efficiency, and performance.

Token Factories Move Enterprise AI from Pilot to Production

As the token becomes the core unit of value, producing tokens efficiently and at low cost has become a shared challenge for enterprise AI adoption worldwide, and the “token factory” is emerging as a new industry paradigm. Tao Zhou, General Manager of the Server Division of Lenovo ISG China, said 80% of enterprises have deployed at least one type of agent, yet fewer than 40% of projects can scale and deliver positive ROI. Lenovo has built a full-stack “token factory” paradigm spanning data governance, compute optimization, and security management to address this.

A solid token factory depends on underlying storage media and architecture. Numbers Law’s PMD (Parallel Magnetic Drive) technology and NEXWISE‘s “KuberCloud” token factory solution contributed to full-stack capability from hardware to compute scheduling and model operations. Infplane, Maxio, and Genstoraige lowered the deployment threshold for large on-device models through AI SSD tiered offloading and memory expansion.

Real-world applications are also deepening. SYNCORE has achieved vehicle-cloud embodied intelligence across the whole vehicle. Dify, with its private agent architecture, and Paratera, with its MaaS compute service platform, are moving AI from basic compute supply toward deeper industry intelligence services, accelerating the industrialization of AI.

40 Companies Showcase the Core of the AI Memory & Storage Chain

The concurrent exhibition brought together 40 companies across the full value chain, from memory chips and controllers to compute servers, AIDC services, packaging and testing equipment, and system applications, presenting the latest advances in AI memory and storage from around the world.

Memory IDMs and controller makers led with new products. SanDisk featured its iNAND AT EU752 automotive UFS 4.1, SN861 enterprise NVMe SSD, and BiCS8 QLC NAND. Silicon Motion introduced the SM8466 PCIe Gen6 16-channel controller and the SM2524XT controller for edge SSDs. Maxio, YEESTOR, and other Chinese controller makers showed flagship PCIe Gen4/Gen5 and UFS controllers with enhanced LDPC, a sign that China’s controller portfolio is taking shape and benchmarking itself against leading international standards.

Compute and token factory solutions were another highlight. Lenovo exhibited its WenTian series of AI training-and-inference integrated servers. NEXWISE presented its full-stack token factory hardware and software, with heterogeneous compute management and token-based billing. Paratera showed its intelligent compute cloud and supercomputing cloud services, and Numbers Law demonstrated its PMD (Parallel Magnetic Drive) technology, aimed at sharply raising HDD IOPS and throughput. Infplane, Genstoraige, and Quanxing introduced KV cache offload and memory-fusion AI SSD solutions that use storage to share the compute load and significantly cut deployment costs.

Module makers and full-scenario solution providers brought a wide range of products. BIWIN exhibited enterprise SSDs, CXL products, wide-temperature industrial storage, and embedded products spanning AI cloud, edge, and device. KingSpec, POWEV, Topdisk, Barycn, Jielong Storage, HIKSEMI, and others presented industrial-grade, automotive-grade, server, and embedded product families, demonstrating strong volume production and reliable delivery.

Equipment, testing, and materials suppliers rounded out the floor. Attach Point, MICROVIEW, and Maxwell Technologies showed die attach and bonding equipment for 2.5D/3D advanced packaging. OKN Technology, Acroview Technology, Hongjingwei, and Tytantest introduced test and burn-in systems covering SSD, DRAM, and NAND that can accurately reproduce high-load AI I/O scenarios. Hemei Jingyi and Silergy brought storage IC package substrates and dedicated power management ICs. From advanced packaging equipment to test validation to core components, this supporting ecosystem lays the manufacturing foundation for volume production of AI memory and storage and for Chinese suppliers expanding overseas.

GMIF2026 Annual Awards Unveiled: Global Memory & Storage Leaders Build an Open, Collaborative Ecosystem

To recognize companies that have made outstanding contributions to the memory and storage value chain, the summit established the GMIF2026 Annual Awards, which cover memory, compute, packaging and testing equipment, test systems, and end applications across AI infrastructure, and were judged on technological innovation, industry contribution, market service, and real-world results.

Honorees, including Samsung Semiconductor, SanDisk, Solidigm, CXMT, Arm, Lenovo, Dify, Silicon Motion, Infplane, Genstoraige, Numbers Law, Paratera, SYNCORE, NEXWISE, Maxio Technology, BIWIN, Topdisk, KingSpec, POWEV, Quanxing Technology, OKN Technology, Attach Point, COMIX, Barycn, LKAUTO, Maxwell Technologies, Hemei Jingyi, Silergy, Heyan Technology, ExTripod Electronics, UNIMOS, GBAT, and Tytantest, were recognized for standout achievements in technology breakthroughs, product deployment, ecosystem building, and the industry chain.

Global Livestream and Golf Friendship Match Extend the Boundaries of Industry Cooperation

To join the global ecosystem and expand international cooperation, the summit featured a special Global Livestream by Memory Brands on LinkedIn, Facebook, and YouTube. Eight brands presented online: BIWIN, Silicon Motion, Quanxing Technology, OKN Technology, KingSpec, Maxwell Technologies, ExTripod Electronics, and Silergy. They gave overseas audiences a direct look at China’s latest advances in memory chips, advanced packaging, test systems, and other core AI infrastructure components, connecting technology standards, supply chain resources, and market demand across regions.

The momentum carried into the next day. The GMIF2026 “BIWIN Cup” golf friendship match, exclusively sponsored by BIWIN, brought senior executives from across the global memory value chain to the course. After a day of intensive discussion at the main forum, the setting was more relaxed, but the conversations among technology, capital, and markets carried on, helping speed practical cooperation across borders and sectors.

Conclusion

Across the GMIF program, one message stood out: global AI competition is moving beyond the “single-point era” of peak GPU performance into a “system-level era” that integrates storage, compute, networking, and software. In the token economy, memory and storage is shedding its auxiliary role and becoming the strategic foundation of AI inference.

This edition of GMIF brought together capital outlook, frontier technology, product innovation, real-world practice, and ecosystem collaboration, and, with the awards, livestream, and networking events, carried the conversation from ideas to product showcases, overseas exposure, and business deals. Going forward, GMIF will stay focused on the industry’s frontier issues and connect key players across the global memory value chain, promoting joint standards, technology development, and market expansion to open a new chapter for the AI memory and storage industry.

About GMIF

Global Memory Innovation Forum (GMIF) is a premier annual gathering that connects the global memory and storage community. Featuring diverse activities including keynote speeches, roundtable dialogues, supply-demand match-making, product showcases, industry rankings, awards programs, and global livestreaming, GMIF brings together key enterprises across the memory and storage chain, technical experts, terminal companies and investment institutions to exchange insights, build partnerships, and create business opportunities. Learn more about GMIF, please visit https://www.gmif.com.cn/. Follow us on LinkedIn, YouTube and Facebook.

Media Contact:
Carina Gu, wenjing.gu@gmif.com.cn

View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/gmif2026-ai-inference-powers-the-token-factory-and-drives-system-level-rethinking-of-memory–storage-302912123.html

SOURCE Shenzhen Memory Industry Association (SMIA)

Continue Reading

Trending