Diversification in Assetz investment accounts

The faqs do not say 20% per loan limit. There is no mention of a limit. They give two examples but set no limits. They might as well say 'we can invest 100% in a single loan and not diversify your funds at all if we choose'.

When you transfer funds into an investment account, the system will automatically diversify your account funds across many matching loans at any given time, with the aim of doing so in an equal and proportionate way and subject to loan availability. For example, if 50 suitable loans are available, the account will aim to invest approximately 2% of account funds into each loan. Likewise, with only five suitable loans, the account will aim to invest approximately a fifth (20%) of account funds into each loan.

Lets face it ACs t&cs are written in such a way as to keep things as fluid as possible for them.

What they do say though is
..the actual extent of the automatic diversification may be limited unless/until new loans become available.

But I've not seen any evidence that they reallocate investments as new loans become available.

Over 40% of my GBBA is in one loan. What the hell do you mean 20% is the maximum? You clearly do not understand the AC business model which, for a "fire and forget" account is unfit for purpose unless the PF pays interest on defaulted loans. AIUI, this will be addressed this month.

A recurring issue, much discussed previously, is that an initial 20% stake in a loan becomes a rather larger % if money is later withdrawn from the account and the algorithm cannot sell the excess to bring it down to 20% again, eg. if there is a large selling queue or the loan is suspended.

Approx 24% of my GBBA1 money is in loan #227. Percentage creeps up due to #227 being suspended and my GBBA1 account emptying.

I can imagine that when loans of this size (close to £6m) come into the system:

i) though AC have 10,000s of lenders, there may not be huge amounts of un-allocated money in lenders' account. Hence anybody who has just put a lump sum into AC stands a good chance of getting a very high percentage. 
ii) having had (say) 20% of your money allocated to one loan, the diversification algorithm fails to lower that percentage significantly when other loans and other un-allocated money are present.

The above is just my guess.

I wouldn't mind the 20%+ if I had confidence the PF would pay out quickly, say no more than 1 year after a loan first defaults (and stays defaulted).  However, AC's own figures show Actual Bad Debt Fund Usage as 0.00% of total contributions to the reserve fund from those loans each year since 2011 (excludes bank interest income and other administrative fees and charges). www.assetzcapital.co.uk/key-investing-information/defaults-and-losses/

Hence if the PF has been paying out, can't have been that much (or AC's Actual Bad Debt Fund Usage figures are incorrect).

Smoke and Mirrors.

You can tell there's something not quite right at AC now they have formally withdrawn from this forum. Engaging with customers is usually an indication of positive times. Intentionally not engaging with the most informed segment of your market is neither clever nor good business.

Draw your own conclusions, with the proviso that improvements have been promised for this month that address the current appalling AC diversification and Provision Fund failings

I'm patiently waiting for AC's new algorithm. When I invested in late 2016 diversfication for my GBBA (Series 1) account was very good. Generally I had about <1 percent of the value per loan.

As people stated in here it isn't happening for the time being. It wont' change in my eyes until the new algorithm (and still possibly.)

AC is facing a challenge and so far I have liked the transparent way AC have dealt with the situation, infact I have increased my investment with AC over the last week. There is some justification for some of the dissent in my opinion but it is still far from concluded what the outcome is going to be. People should view P2P like any other investment, a gamble but one in which you expect to win (but there are no guarantees). I think one challenge the P2P industry faces is it will attract people who view it as a form of saving (ie provision funds and promises of secturiy) - which it is not.