MIMOSA 2.0 Emmanuelle Javoy, Daniel Rozas, Planet Rating & - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
mimosa 2 0
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

MIMOSA 2.0 Emmanuelle Javoy, Daniel Rozas, Planet Rating & - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jun 03, 2023 239 likes •392 views

MIMOSA 2.0 Emmanuelle Javoy, Daniel Rozas, Planet Rating & David Roodman The sector needs a common metric of market saturation to reduce risk of repayment crises The sectors reputation would suffer strongly from a new repayment

slide-1
SLIDE 1

MIMOSA 2.0

Emmanuelle Javoy, Daniel Rozas, Planet Rating & David Roodman

slide-2
SLIDE 2

The sector needs a common metric of market saturation to reduce risk of repayment crises

  • The sector’s reputation would suffer strongly from a new

repayment crisis

  • Warning signs were present in all past crises, but

insufficiently strong to induce timely changes of strategy

  • MIMOSA 1: a basic model using Findex and HDI can produce

a useful indicator of market saturation

  • It is possible to create a more robust indicator by pooling

efforts

2 June 2014

slide-3
SLIDE 3

REVIEW OF KEY FEATURES

MIMOSA 1.0

3

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Key features of the first version of MIMOSA

  • Relies exclusively on indicators from Global Findex and HDI
  • Provides an opinion on the risk of market saturation by

comparing the use of credit in a country to comparable countries in terms of HDI, formal savings and semi formal credit

  • Provides scores for 148 countries, among which 119 have an

HDI below 80

Webinar Presentation - MIMOSA 4

slide-5
SLIDE 5

A simple scoring scale

MIMOSA Score Market Penetration Number (share) of countries (HDI<80) 5 >100% above predicted level 6 (6%) 4 50-100% above predicted level 14 (13%) 3 0-50% above predicted level 29 (27%) 2 0-30% below the predicted level 32 (29%) 1 >30% below predicted level 28 (26%)

Microfinance Index for Market Outreach and Saturation ( MIMOSA)

5

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Usual suspects found in category 4 and 5

Market Score

1 5

Microfinance Index for Market Outreach and Saturation ( MIMOSA)

6

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Some weaknesses linked to the simplicity of the tool

  • Global Findex does not allow to discriminate between

regional differences

  • E.g. Lagos vs. other regions of Nigeria
  • Particularly problematic for large countries (Mexico, Nigeria, India,

etc.)

  • Global Findex is only updated every three years
  • Global Findex survey likely to have some biases
  • Cultural context influencing some answers (very low reported use of

credit in MENA)

7

slide-8
SLIDE 8

BUILDING A SUSTAINABLE INDICATOR TO MEASURE MARKET SATURATION

MIMOSA 2.0

June 2014 8

slide-9
SLIDE 9

METHODOLOGY & OUTPUT

MIMOSA 2.0

June 2014 9

slide-10
SLIDE 10

How to build a simple, yet robust indicator?

Features retained from the first version of MIMOSA

  • Comparability of scores across

countries/regions

  • Simple scale
  • Use existing databases and

indicators to reduce data collection burden

  • Consider all sources of credit and

not only MF

New features

  • Scores at regional/district

level within a country

  • Factors in regulation,

competition, and organization

  • f the MF sector and MFIs
  • Stronger focus on the

clientele served by MF

  • Possibility to update scores

every 12-24 months

June 2014 10

slide-11
SLIDE 11

MIMOSA 2.0: look within country borders

  • Regional market

capacity & penetration scores

  • Cross-comparable

across countries

  • Support better risk

assessment & investment decisions

June 2014 11 Source: MIX Market

slide-12
SLIDE 12

June 2014 12

Country level data

  • Global Findex
  • HDI
  • MF market infrastructure

Institutions

  • Competition
  • Branch concentration
  • Governance
  • Staff turnover

Clients

  • Cross-borrowing
  • No. of MF savers
  • Informal finance

Country Scores

~80 countries

Market & Regional Scores

~30 countries

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Methodology design: balance precision and cost

  • A maximum of 10 days per country, including maximum of 5 days
  • f data collection in the field
  • Indicators to be screened for “value-added/collection time” ratio
  • The validity of the approach will be tested by comparing results to

full-fledged OID surveys when they are produced in a country

  • Emphasis on “hard” indicators, to maintain consistency of results
  • More updates will be needed for riskier countries:
  • every 12 months for countries that score 4 or 5
  • every 18 months for countries that score 3
  • every 24 months for countries that score 1 or 2

June 2014 13

slide-14
SLIDE 14

THANK YOU MERCI

Emmanuelle Javoy – javoy.emmanuelle@gmail.com skype: javoy.emmanuelle – m: +33 6 61 32 19 34 Daniel Rozas – daniel@danielrozas.com skype: danrozas – m: +32 389 677 056 Edouard Sers, Planet Rating – Esers@planetrating.com skype: pr_esers

June 2014 14