|
Post by robberbaron on Sept 27, 2017 18:46:59 GMT
I presume you are referring to Proplend. Why do you say SM is illiquid? I have always been able to sell loans in 24-48 hours no problem. Have things changed recently as I have not chosen to sell any in a while? That is true but liquidity goes both way. If you can sell easily but not buy then the market is illiquid. This is more a con for the new investor who wants to diversify on Proplend but can't because there are no loans or the parts are too large.
|
|
|
Post by robberbaron on Sept 27, 2017 16:49:47 GMT
Note that the claim that "investors have never lost any money" can be very misleading. All a platform has to do to achieve this is to never resolve the very bad loans and let them linger in default forever (I think you all know who I'm referring to...).
Personally I prefer a platform with a history of resolving bad loans quickly to one that extend and pretend that nothing is wrong.
|
|
|
Post by robberbaron on Sept 27, 2017 16:31:43 GMT
If the emphasis is on "diversifying" your IFISA portfolio then you're somewhat limited before you start, since each individual is only allowed one IFISA per FY. Not if you are transferring old ISA funds. You can open as many IFISA as you want but only fund one with this year ISA allowance. I already have S&S ISAs in fact that's where my funds come from. I'm trying to diversify away from shares since that's also where my pension is invested. I would say from a tax point of view you are better off putting your P2P investment into IFISA since otherwise you'd pay tax at your marginal income tax rate and put your shares/funds outside since you have a £5000 dividend allowance + capital gain allowance every year. Of course there is always a chance the commies will win the next election then there will be no safe hiding place.
|
|
|
Post by robberbaron on Sept 21, 2017 9:35:01 GMT
I am looking at diversifying my IFISA portfolio and I couldn't find any IFISA review thread so I thought I'd start one. AbundancePros:- Green SMEs so good for diversification
- Modern website
Cons:- No loans at the moment and no pipeline
- SM illiquid and hard to use effectively
Status: Reducing due to cash drag and the cashback has ended Recommendation: Avoid Funding Secure Pros:
- Lots of new loans on a daily basis
- Some non-property pawnbroker loans. Good for diversification.
Cons:- Somewhat illiquid SM
- Interest only paid at maturity so no compounding.
Status: Stable due to platform diversification. Recommendation: Invest
Proplend Pros:- Different tranches with different LTVs
Cons:
- No new loans
- Illiquid SM
- Minimum investment £5000 for old loans and £1000 for new ones.
Status: Stable due to no better alternative yet. Recommendation: Wait for more loans
|
|
|
Post by robberbaron on Sept 6, 2017 7:41:33 GMT
Would it be possible to add a 'sector' column (e.g. properties, SMEs, consumer, invoice, etc.)? This would help building a diversified portfolio.
|
|
|
Post by robberbaron on Jul 31, 2017 16:49:58 GMT
The website says IFISA will be available to non-existing lenders this year. Can I register a normal account and then request an IFISA account straight away? As it happens you can - we're lifting these restrictions imminently. Thanks. Richard Thanks. Any slightly more precise ETA?
|
|
|
Post by robberbaron on Jul 31, 2017 16:02:25 GMT
The website says IFISA will be available to non-existing lenders this year. Can I register a normal account and then request an IFISA account straight away?
|
|
|
Post by robberbaron on Jul 27, 2017 21:39:44 GMT
But surely the point is up until recently LY did not require proof of address to set up an account and given they have set up an account and taken funds it seems inequitable that when that same person wants to withdraw funds they want proof and will refuse to repay. If that same person cant prove a permanent address say they live out of hotels all year there must me a mechanism to be able to return funds, after all this problem only arisen from lendy's slack procedures in the past. Yes unless they want to avoid getting fined for violating anti-money laundering regulations. If that's not flexible enough for you blame the politicians. www.gov.uk/guidance/money-laundering-regulations-your-responsibilities
|
|
|
Post by robberbaron on Jul 22, 2017 17:23:40 GMT
New to abundance and have a question. The documentation seems to indicate drawdown is in October for the debenture. What happens between the loan filling and debenture drawdown in terms of interest payments? From their worked out example you are not earning interest until October.
|
|
|
Post by robberbaron on Jul 14, 2017 16:42:03 GMT
So presumably there will be a very high demand for new loans on the 29th? Say if a 12% loan became available on the primary market on the 25th of July and I, one way or another, obtained some and held it at midnight at the end of 31st of July I'd get a cashback payment on 1st August of 1% of that holding. After that, there will never be any further cashback payments on that loan at any time. I assume I wouldn't get that cashback payment if it was up for sale at that time. If that's the case that's a very shortsighted play by Lendy encouraging reckless behaviour. A lot of people would be trying to pass the parcel on the 1st of August. If they can't and get burned they won't bid the next time. There is a need to fund the DFL last tranches but surely this could be achieve with some long term incentives rather than by bloating the SM even more with loan parts that nobody wants.
|
|
|
Post by robberbaron on Jul 14, 2017 13:10:34 GMT
The autobidder doesn't seem to work. I got outbid by a BH who took almost the entire loan despite offering a higher rate than me.
|
|
|
Post by robberbaron on Jul 14, 2017 8:00:09 GMT
Hi, thanks for your message. There has been no change. It has always been the case. See lendy.co.uk/terms. Paul It might be time to reconsider this policy. Right now the reasons to not invest with Lendy are pilling up: no IFISA, no interest on SM or late loans, illiquid SM, no willingness to admit losses on defaulted loans instead of extend and pretend.
|
|
|
Post by robberbaron on Jul 14, 2017 7:45:08 GMT
I'm sure someone will be able to point out a flaw in my argument, but at the moment I don't see what I'm missing... (incidentally I'm suggesting a drop to say 60% as the new norm to make life a little more comfortable and appealing to lenders...and no, I don't know where the borrowers are supposed to get extra money if it leaves them a little short for their development) The problem with your reasonning is that with lower LTV (i.e. lower risk) you would likely have to accept lower rates. There is no free lunch. You can see that on all platforms lower LTVs tend to have lower rates. The only way you could keep rates where they are and lower LTV would be if the demand from borrowers wastly outstrip the supply from lenders.
|
|
|
Post by robberbaron on Jul 10, 2017 21:48:21 GMT
Ironically, I moved all my data to Google Sheets, as I found it surprisingly versatile, and with the QUERY Formula, you can create something that is close to a DB. It's now set up for all my platform investments, and most of it is automatic via scraping data from the source (i.e. the Platform Dashboard). Do you scrap data directly from Google Sheets or do you use another program?
|
|
|
Post by robberbaron on Jul 5, 2017 16:05:34 GMT
They also make money from fees, some front ended (arrangement) some back ended (exit). There is no imperative for them to make the SM more active in the short term; however a stagnant market would (and does) damage medium and long term confidence. But to keep it in perspective the current SM is c.4% of the current loan book which is around the same as the total of arrangement and exit fees. The question is does the size of the SM affect lender confidence and the ability of the platform to fund new (and further tranches of DFLs) loans? Don't forget the burgeoning default loans. One of them celebrated its 1 year delinquency anniversary yesterday and the average is 263 days. It seem the incentive to be able to pretend that no investor has ever lost money on the platform is much stronger than the incentive (or lack thereof) to aggressively repossess and liquidate them.
|
|