FS: All active and past loans

For completeness, here are the figures for number of loans as opposed to value.  Most relevant for investors placing £x in each and every loan.

Values by the "Status" and "Defaulted" columns (i.e. those provided by FS):


The "Loan Active" and "Loan Completed" broken down by days overdue (days past the Expected End):


Calculating the performing (active loans less than 3 months overdue and completed loans with full payment of capital and interest), and non-performing (active loans overdue by at least 3 months, partially recovered loans and unredeemed loans):

The number of non-performing loans expressed as a percentage of the number of outstanding loans is 23%.

Yup, downloading each and every loan on the All past loans page, tiresome.  If you sum all of those loans (excluding the cancelled loans) you get £261m not the £266m on the statistics page.  Anyone know why?

I'll try and analyse the interest paid and outstanding at some point but, it is a bank holiday weekend and the sun is shining

What I’ve often wondered (but never been bored enough to work out) is how much the FS figures are flattered by renewal loans, especially where the renewal interest is rolled up into an increased LTV or funded by a further loan / tranche.

Consider, for example, a £1m loan at 50% LTV that renews 3 times, increasing the loan each time for the accrued interest, but then eventually defaults. AIUI, the first 3 loans would forever be reported by FS as completed, fully performing loans (totalling something like £3.25m), more than overshadowing the eventual circa £1.2m default. In practical terms, it was really a single 2+ year loan where the borrower never paid a penny.

Powerboats spring to mind, and even the disastrous Whitehaven scheme claims 3 fully performing Completed loans!

To alert that I've replaced the non-performing loan tables in the two OPs.  The NPL Rate should of course be calculated from all loans.  I've also added the NPL Rate of the outstanding loan book.

Consider a portfolio of one year loans all at 12% interest paid at the end of the year. It is simple arithmetic that if 30% by value of a portfolio default at an average loss of 28% then this will wipe out the interest on the performing loans. Or if 20% of loans default with a 48% loss, or if 40% default at 18% etc. None of these scenarios looks outlandish to me.

I have a script that runs every 15 mins that pulls in data for all loans, completed loans, late loans, > 3 months late, > 6 months late, > 1 year late amongst other things.  The results are saved in a database.

Yes 90 days late is the IMF definition of a NPL.  In general though for dev/bridge loans many organisations use a longer time frame but it is fairly subjective.  For unsecured business loans and the like (like FC loans), loans that are 3 months late are a massive worry.  If the business is in trouble, they can't cover the interest and there are no assets then the risk of complete loss is very high.  For a bridge loan, overrunning is very typical.  Not being able to pay interest after 6 months does not impair the value of the asset...of course if the asset is very illiquid with a dubious valuation then the risk of default was high on day 1.  If I wrote a bridge on a residential home in London at 50% LTV...then I really wouldn't be too worried if they were a few months late in refinancing.  If I had lent against a performance, high spec powerboat then I would be worried as there is absolutely no market for such a boat and I would never have lent in the first place.

My point was that if a loan had repaid in full then it can't be considered non-performing, even if it paid 3 months late.  The loans to worry about are those that result in an actual loss.