|
|
Post by skint4achange on Dec 4, 2017 16:29:36 GMT
P.s. The top 3 bands (A, A+ and B) account for default values of ~£50m while the lower 3 bands only have default values of ~£31.5m (With the lowest band (E) accounting for only ~£3.4m). So, we can all manipulate figures to make it work for us!  |
|
|
|
Post by df on Dec 4, 2017 16:39:58 GMT
This information used to be easily available from FC's own stats, but now it has to be worked out from the loan book, so here's my summary: | Risk Band | Total Loans | Defaults | Percent default | | A+ | 11207 | 158 | 1.41 | | A | 11910 | 442 | 3.71 | | B | 8991 | 505 | 5.62 | | C | 6455 | 468 | 7.25 | | D | 3608 | 265 | 7.34 | | E | 1080 | 75 | 6.94 |
These figures are numbers of loans, with no weighting given to the loan amount, and is for the entire loan book, including property. Really, the only anomaly is the E band, but this is probably just the relative age and size of this cohort. C and D are also rather close, but again D is a younger category and includes the previous C- band, which may have had a different risk profile. What is clearly *not* true is that most of the defaults are A+ and A, even in absolute terms this is not true never mind in percentage terms. Perhaps I should have phrased that as "Most of the FC loans on MY loan book", I wasn't however expecting to be made to go to the head masters office for the typo.  It all depends on your own portfolio and how lucky you are. Most of my defaults are B, but B loans are the largest proportion in my loan book. I've also noticed that most of my defaults are very recent loans. 1+ year old loans keep repaying, but it might be different for somebody else.
|
|
markr
Member of DD Central
Posts: 766 
Likes: 426
|
Post by markr on Dec 4, 2017 16:57:34 GMT
P.s. The top 3 bands (A, A+ and B) account for default values of ~£50m while the lower 3 bands only have default values of ~£31.5m (With the lowest band (E) accounting for only ~£3.4m). So, we can all manipulate figures to make it work for us! Indeed we can: what is the total value of loans originated in the top 3 bands, compared to the bottom 3?
|
|
|
|
Post by skint4achange on Dec 4, 2017 17:04:08 GMT
Probably a lot more, but that wasn't the original question nor was it what I stated. As you have so much time on your hands, look for yourself (Let me know when you find out though won't you!!) |
|
|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on Dec 4, 2017 20:00:07 GMT
And the more interesting question is actually 'what %age of the loan total got lost', and maybe even when (100% capital loss after 50 years of 23% interest is less of a big deal than 50% capital loss after 6 months). Lies, damn lies, and statistics.
|
|
|
|
Post by skint4achange on Dec 4, 2017 20:23:38 GMT
Don't you come on here trying to stir up a hornets nest!  |
|
benaj
Member of DD Central
N/A
Posts: 5,610
Likes: 1,739
|
Post by benaj on Dec 7, 2017 12:48:06 GMT
Is anyone else as disappointed in FC as I am? Where to start. Firstly, it seems as they’ve grown they have gotten worse. They have taken away your choice of what businesses you lend to as well as the amount you invest. The recent change is 0.5% portfolio and two default lending settings. This system is flawed as you could potentially end up loaning to 1 company twice. There is no easily available transparency of where funds go. One minute you have 500. Next it’s gone and you don’t know where. When a loan defaults, the risk bracket is removed to prevent you seeing what category failed. ...... FC have deleted their own official chat forum because of heated arguments - when really it was to stop people talking and forming a group opinion to leave the platform. Anyone find the same problems? Anything I’m missing or wrong about? I’m all ears The main reason FC made the changes is fairness to all FC investors. Before the changes, it's all about Yin and Yang, some had better returns than others because they were so good at picking the loans and autobid and bots helped them to achieve this with the secondary markets. Now, the rates are just being manipulated by the algorithm, fairness to all FC investors accepting their terms and conditions. I do prefer a little bit more transparency, at the moment, it is not easy to find out how much money has been lent to new borrower on a monthly basis. I am sure, once I get used to this new FC model, I can be worried free because there is no point chasing the details as long as I know my investment is achieving the target rates.
|
|
justme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 203 
Likes: 89
|
Post by justme on Dec 7, 2017 19:45:56 GMT
I do not understand what is the point in knowing who one lends to now . Comoletely unnecessary info.
|
|
|
|
Post by Badly Drawn Stickman on Dec 7, 2017 21:33:20 GMT
I do not understand what is the point in knowing who one lends to now . Comoletely unnecessary info. True. But one could argue that trends are always useful information in the bigger picture, I have it on good authority that quite a few 'property loans' of the type FC are plotting to no longer 'do' are appearing, some of moderately long duration. Anybody inclined to follow the logic of that might be able to draw interesting conclusions. Then again it may just not matter at all.
|
|
