Invest1 distinct publisher3 min readUpdated
Lenders are competing to launch 100%-guaranteed products while public funds' repayments on behalf of borrowers hit a decade high. The screening did not vanish; it moved.
The Investor · Invest desk
Compiled by The InvestorSomething wrong?How this is made
Follow any of these and your For You feed starts watching them — no settings page required.
The 85 to 90 percent norm at the Korea Credit Guarantee Fund and the Korea Technology Finance Corporation is not a rounding convention. That residual slice is the reason a bank reads the borrower's books, and both institutions say it exists precisely to keep loss risk on the lender and hold down bad guarantees [6]. Take the slice to zero and the asset changes character: the guarantor repays the whole principal on default [2], so the bank is left underwriting nothing and earning a spread on quasi-public credit. Kim Seok-ki of the Korea Institute of Finance puts it plainly, saying banks have little incentive to assess business viability themselves under the current system [14].
The funds' own numbers show what that costs before the new vintages are even tested. The combined guarantee balance grew 2.9 percent from 2023 to last year [1], while combined repayments made on borrowers' behalf rose 41.7 percent to 4.0039 trillion won, the highest in ten years [9]. Payouts expanded roughly fourteen times faster than the book they came from [5]. Measured against the balance, the loss rate went from about 3.15 percent to about 4.34 percent, a rise of 1.19 percentage points [2]. None of that damage comes from the full guarantees now being signed: the productive finance agreements date from April [3] and the Hana programme from the 23rd of this month [1], so the deterioration is happening on a book written mostly under partial cover.
Seoul has already ruled on the instrument once. After regional credit guarantee foundations watched their subrogation ratio climb from 1.01 percent in 2021 to 5.66 percent last year, the government moved in June to ban full guarantees there in principle, allowing them only where policy needs require [10][11]. The national funds are going the other way, with 100 percent cover appearing repeatedly inside special-contribution agreements framed as policy support [7].
On stated program size, the full-guarantee push is still modest: the six agreements named by Sedaily total about 2.86 trillion won [3], near 3.1 percent of the 92.3 trillion won outstanding [4]. The trend line matters more than the stock. Guaranteed loans already made up 18.2 percent of the 42.6578 trillion won in small and mid-sized enterprise lending the five major banks booked as productive finance [12], and an official at one commercial bank defends the mechanism on the grounds that startups without collateral cannot borrow on their own credit at all [13]. That defence covers the guarantee. It does not explain why the last ten to fifteen points of it had to go, on an instrument the paper describes as a crisis tool [15].
There is a fuse on this. The 1.4 trillion won of productive finance cover runs at 100 percent for the first three years only [3], and the 610 billion won regional growth tranche with IBK is on the same three-year clock [4]. In year four those loans revert to partial cover, and the banks inherit a share of credit files they never built.
Ranked by verification strength, evidence, and original report placement.
Hana Bank said on the 23rd that it signed a business agreement with the Korea Credit Guarantee Fund and the Korea Technology Finance Corporation to provide 200 billion won ($144 million) in loans under a guarantee-based financial support program for young companies, targeting sole proprietors aged 39 or younger and companies led by young entrepreneurs, with a 100% guarantee ratio.
A 100% guarantee ratio means that if a loan defaults, the guarantee institution repays the entire principal on the borrower's behalf.
In April, the Korea Credit Guarantee Fund signed roughly 1.4 trillion won ($1 billion) in productive finance agreement guarantees with KB Kookmin, Shinhan, Hana and Woori banks, applying a 100% guarantee ratio for the first three years.
The Korea Credit Guarantee Fund applied a 100% guarantee for three years on 610 billion won in agreement guarantees for balanced regional growth pursued with IBK Industrial Bank of Korea.
A maximum 100% guarantee ratio applies to a 300 billion won guarantee supplied by the Korea Credit Guarantee Fund and eight banks to Hyundai Motor auto parts suppliers, a 200 billion won guarantee for young companies by the fund and IBK, and a 150 billion won guarantee by the Korea Technology Finance Corporation and Hana Bank for artificial intelligence, bio and content companies in the Incheon area.
The Korea Credit Guarantee Fund and the Korea Technology Finance Corporation in principle operate partial guarantees of around 85% to 90%, with the aim of leaving banks some loss risk, preventing moral hazard at financial firms and reducing bad guarantees; both can raise the ratio to 100% in exceptional cases such as core sectors.
Evidence-backed comparisons of source perspectives and observed adoption signals. Read the methodology
Which Builder, Operator, and Investor concerns the observed source mix emphasized—not a truth score.
Evidence, demonstrated adoption, hype gap, incentives, and confidence are assessed independently, each on its own current evidence. How these are measured.
Consistent institutional figures, one outlet, no primary documents
The numeric spine is specific and internally coherent: named agreement sizes, a three-year guarantee balance series, a three-year subrogation series, a regional subrogation ratio and a share-of-lending figure. But the entire cluster rests on a single publisher's reporting, no underlying disclosure, filing or regulator statement is linked, and the guarantee institutions and the regulator are not quoted. The interpretive core (banks 'competing', screening being neglected) is characterization plus one think-tank quote rather than measurement.
Full guarantees are live across major banks and a measurable share of SME lending
This is not a proposal stage story. Six named full-guarantee programs are signed across Hana, KB Kookmin, Shinhan, Woori, IBK and an eight-bank Hyundai supplier facility, guaranteed loans are 18.2% of the five major banks' productive-finance SME lending, and the guarantee book stands at 92.3 trillion won. Adoption is scored below the top band because the named 100% programs are only about 3.1% of the total guarantee balance, so full-coverage lending specifically is still a minority of the system.
Trend is documented; the causal story runs ahead of the data
The reported facts are real and mostly verifiable in their own terms, so this is not an inflated story. The overstatement is narrow and specific: the piece links banks' recent 100% guarantee agreements to a decade-high subrogation figure without decomposing payouts by vintage or program, and describes lenders as 'competing' on a crisis instrument while the named full-guarantee volume is only about 3.1% of the guarantee book. The dek's claim that screening 'moved' is a reasonable inference but is not evidenced by any screening-outcome data.
Interested parties on both sides, partly anonymous
Incentive structure is visible in the material itself: banks book fee-earning assets with no principal risk under full guarantees, guarantee institutions absorb the resulting losses, and policy sponsors gain lending volume under the productive-finance banner. On the sourcing side, the defense of guaranteed lending comes from an unnamed commercial bank official with a direct stake, while the critique comes from a named research fellow at a bank-sector-linked institute; the guarantee funds and regulator, who bear the loss, are given no voice.
Directionally solid, single-outlet, causality unresolved
Confidence is moderate. The quantitative trend (rising payouts on a near-flat guarantee book, repeated 100% agreements, a June supervisory tightening) is specific, mutually consistent and recent, which supports the core observation. It is limited by having exactly one publisher, no primary or regulator documentation, unverified attribution of the payout surge to current full-guarantee practice, and the absence of any comment from the institutions bearing the loss.
invest
Korea's mortgage market now rations by queue: 79 lending curbs at 13 banks by August 121 distinct publisher
invest
Korea's 3-million-won emergency loans jump 39.2% while banks squeeze everything else1 distinct publisher
invest
Korea's brokerages added 402 staff in a quarter while mortgages headed to 5.78%1 distinct publisher
invest
Korea's COFIX climbs a fourth month, pushing variable mortgage ceilings to 5.89%1 distinct publisher
Distinct publishers with included, body-backed reporting in this cluster.
en.sedaily.com
1 article · August 24, 2026