Jonathan Coblentz
Analyst · Barclays
Thanks, Raul, and hello, everyone. In addition to GAAP, we also evaluate our performance based on fair value pro forma results, which we believe present a more consistent view of the underlying trends of the business. Unless I state otherwise, all of the metrics that I will now share with you will be on a fair value pro forma basis for the purposes of comparison to prior year periods. A full list of definitions and reconciliations can be found in our earnings materials. As Raul mentioned a moment ago, we experienced steady improvement throughout the second quarter, and that has continued into the current quarter. So I'll start by providing a summary of our second quarter results. And I'll also discuss some recent trends and insights from the month of July. We experienced a reduction in loan applications in the second quarter, and as part of our disciplined response to the pandemic, we tightened our underwriting criteria, both of which led to lower originations. Our aggregate originations of $157.6 million for the second quarter, down 67% from the prior year period, showed steady improvement month-over-month. As we experienced a gradual improvement in the overall economic environment, we increased our credit decisioning accordingly so that by the end of June, loan originations had increased 46% as compared to May. For July, our aggregate originations were $85.3 million, an increase of 24% over the month of June, narrowing the year-over-year decline to 54%. On both a GAAP and a fair value pro forma basis, total revenue for the second quarter was $142.7 million, up slightly relative to prior year quarter. The increase was primarily due to higher interest income during the period. Our interest income for the second quarter increased to $136.1 million, up 5% year-over-year, while our managed principal balance at the end of the period grew 3% over the prior year quarter to $1.9 billion. We achieved this level of growth despite a decline in our portfolio yield from 33.4% in the second quarter a year ago, to 31.5% for the most recent quarter. Noninterest income, which includes cash gain on sale from our whole loan sale program, decreased 48% to $6.6 million. The decrease reflects the lower volume of loans sold primarily attributable to the reduced level of originations as well as a lower gain on sale premium of 10% versus 10.2% in the prior year period. For the second quarter, net revenue, which is our total revenue after interest expense and net change in fair value, was $36.9 million, down 62% year-over-year. Net revenue was impacted due to changes in the fair value of our loan portfolio and asset-backed notes. Interest expense of $14.9 million was up 4% year-over-year. The higher interest expense was driven by an increase in our average daily debt balance of 14% year-over-year. Our cost of debt decreased to 4.2% in Q2 relative to 4.3% in the same period a year ago. Net increase or decrease in fair value or net change in fair value includes our current period principle net charge-offs and mark-to-market on our loans and debt. We provide a summary of the net change in fair value in our earnings presentation deck. As you'll see on Page 11 of the presentation, the second quarter $90.9 million net decrease in fair value consisted of a $45.2 million mark-to-market decrease on our loans and our debt and current period charge-offs of $45.7 million. The mark-to-market adjustments consisted of a $108.2 million mark-to-market decrease related to our asset-backed notes and a $63.1 million mark-to-market increase in our loans receivable. Let me take you through the drivers of our fair value marks in greater detail, starting with our asset-backed notes. As of June 30, the weighted average price of our asset-backed notes was 98.7%, up from 90.5% at March 31, reflecting a significant improvement in the prices of our bonds. While the increase in the fair value of our bonds resulted in a $108.2 million decrease in net change in fair value and net revenue, the prices are a positive indication of the conditions and accessibility of the capital markets. The $63.1 million increase in fair value on our loans receivable was driven by a quarter-over-quarter increase in the fair value price of our loans, from 96% as of March 31, to 99.4% as of June 30. The increase in fair value was mainly driven by 3 factors: first, consistent with the weighted average decrease in yield of our bonds, the discount rate on our loans decreased from 12.78% as of March 31, to 8.84% as of June 30; second, due to more customers returning to repayment, our remaining life of loan charge-offs decreased from 14.56% at March 31, to 12.73% at June 30; and third, fewer-than-expected Emergency Hardship Deferrrals resulted in a decrease in average life from 0.9 years as of March 31, to 0.8 years as of June 30. We've provided some additional supplemental information regarding our fair value assumptions at the end of our earnings deck. As part of our response to the pandemic, we have taken deliberate actions to reduce our expenses. Among others, these actions included limiting hiring to critical roles, reducing marketing expenditures and optimizing our retail network, which resulted in the closure of several retail locations. As of July 31, we had 334 retail locations across the U.S. Although we are actively reducing discretionary spend across the company, we have continued to protect the health and safety of our customers and employees and have incurred $2.4 million in COVID-19-related expenses in the second quarter. Our operating expenses for the second quarter were $93 million, up 12% over the prior year, but down 6% sequentially from the first quarter. In comparison, from the first quarter, to the second quarter in 2019, our operating expenses increased 6%. Operating costs associated with the -- our auto and credit card products, which are included in our overall OpEx, were $4 million for the second quarter. These investments contributed to our year-over-year OpEx increase. While we were able to decrease OpEx sequentially, lower revenue in the second quarter led to adjusted operating efficiency of 60%, which was 290 basis points higher than the comparable quarter last year and 260 basis points higher than the first quarter of 2020. Our customer acquisition cost for the second quarter was $413, up from $136 in the prior year quarter. The increase in CAC was driven by the decline in loans originated during the quarter. Our overall marketing investments were reduced in order to redirect our efforts to manage credit risk. As growth in originations increased in June, CAC decreased to $298 for the month. Our effective tax rate was 27% for Q2, which was consistent with our tax rate in the prior year period. Our effective tax rate held constant despite our net loss from operations, which, on a GAAP basis, was $34.2 million versus net income of $13.8 million in the prior year quarter. This equated to a GAAP net loss per share of $1.26 versus diluted earnings per share of $0.52 in the prior year quarter. Our adjusted net loss per share was $1.29 based on an adjusted net loss of $35.1 million versus adjusted EPS of $0.50 and adjusted net income of $10.9 million in the prior year quarter. Adjusted net income or loss is the numerator of our adjusted return on equity, which was negative 29.9% for Q2 versus 11.7% in the prior year quarter. Over time, we believe this metric should improve, and post pandemic, our long-term goal remains to achieve a high-teens ROE on a consolidated basis. Given the impact of the fair value marks on our bottom line, we believe it continues to be very valuable to use adjusted EBITDA as a proxy for our pretax cash profitability. In addition to adding back taxes, depreciation, amortization, stock-based compensation and onetime events, adjusted EBITDA also excludes the noncash impact of fair value accounting. For the second quarter, our adjusted EBITDA was $4.8 million compared to $19.9 million in the prior year quarter. As Raul mentioned earlier, our credit performance has shown notable improvements month-over-month. We've seen a significant decline in deferral requests over the quarter relative to the peak levels we saw toward the end of April. At the end of June, 5% of Oportun's portfolio was in Emergency Hardship Deferral status, down from 14.6% at the end of April. This trend continued into July, and our deferral levels as of the end of the month were 3.9%. Coupled with this positive trend is a reduction in our 30-plus-day delinquency rate. As of June 30, this rate had decreased to 3.7%, down from 4% at the end of both April and May. At July 31, 30-plus-day delinquencies improved further to 3.4%. Early-stage delinquencies have similarly declined, with 8- to 14-day delinquencies and 15- to 29-day delinquencies of 1.8% and 1.9%, respectively, at June 30 as compared to 1.9% and 2.8%, respectively, at May 31. As of July 31, these early-stage delinquency measures improved further to 1.5% and 1.8%, respectively. We regard this positive trend as an indication that our customers are currently managing through the crisis and returning to repayment status. Our annualized net charge-off rate was 10.6% for the second quarter, up from 8.9% for the first quarter ended March 31. Consistent with our charge-off policy, we evaluate our loan portfolio and charge-off a loan when we determine it to be uncollectible or when it is 120 days contractually past due. Based on our analysis of historical loan performance following natural disasters and other emergencies, more of our pre-pandemic loans originated were determined to be uncollectible prior to reaching 120 days past due. This led to a $4.1 million of additional charge-offs in June, increasing our annualized net charge-off rate by 96 basis points for the second quarter. We expect elevated levels of charge-offs to continue in 2020, but to be manageable. In July, our annualized net charge-off rate increased to 11.9%, with $4 million of additional charge-offs, a 290 basis point impact. Turning now to capital and liquidity, we continue to manage our funding program to maintain a liquidity runway of at least 12 months. As of June 30, total cash was $198 million comprised of cash and cash equivalents of $139.2 million and restricted cash of $58.7 million. As of our -- as of July 31, our total cash decreased to $165.8 million, largely reflecting the call of our 2017-B securitization, which was partially funded with $51 million of our unrestricted cash. To evaluate our liquidity, it is also valuable to look at our cash flow statement. Adjusted EBITDA includes the impact of charge-offs. The charge-offs are a noncash event. For the second quarter, our cash flow from operations was 49 -- $41.9 million as compared to $51.5 million for the prior year period. As of July 31, we had $176 million of undrawn capacity on our $400 million warehouse line that is committed through October 2021. We have continued to transfer certain loans from our warehouse line to pledge to our securitizations. Until we see a return to receivables growth, we will not need to increase our warehouse line capacity or issue a new securitization. This week, we elected not to renew our agreement to sell the access loans that we originate. We previously had sold these loans at a slight discount to par. Instead, we will retain any access loans we originate in the future and will continue to service the portfolio of existing access loans. We expect this change to have an immaterial impact on our business. As of the end of the second quarter, we had adjusted tangible book value of $429.8 million or $15.73 per share, reflecting a loss of $40.9 million for the quarter. In addition to having a strong equity capital base, we run our business at low leverage. Our debt-to-equity ratio was 3.1x, a reduction of -- from 3.6x the prior year. Turning now to our financial outlook. We anticipate that our future performance will continue to be impacted by the pandemic. The timing and magnitude of this impact remains uncertain, so we will not be providing specific guidance at this time for either 2020 or 2021. Like Raul, I am very excited about the announcements we made regarding the implementation of a 36% APR cap and the changes to our legal collections process. Although we currently expect the 36% APR capital ultimately reduce the portfolio yield by 70 basis points over time as the old portfolio runs off, we believe that capping our rates will be accretive to earnings. We anticipate that we will be able to attract more customers with lower pricing, and our 36% APR cap will be compelling to potential partners and organizations that seek to serve our customers. Separately, we believe that the changes we announced to our court collections process, combined with enhanced customer outreach tools, will result in approximately 15 basis points of impact to our annualized net charge-offs. Taken together, however, we believe these initiatives create an increased opportunity for growth. That concludes my remarks. And I will now turn the call back over to Raul.