aju
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,500 
Likes: 924
|
Post by aju on Jan 27, 2019 18:58:43 GMT
www.zopa.com/lending/returns-performanceLooking at loans performance originating from 2018, Zopa might have improved with the Sep'18 figures. However, we all know it takes at least 3 missed payments before declaring default, we should see a clear picture if Zopa releases a new update around April 19. Clearly, it's not a coincidence Z back in profit in 2017 while 2017 Actual annual return was the worst since 2011. p2pindependentforum.com/thread/12876/zopa-back-profit It's interesting, if I'm analysing it properly, that the SG fund seems to be quite close to using up funds contributed in a given year for loan originated in that year. Just looking at the amount left in the fund there is 104% of the total fund left. I can't remember is the fund taken out as a proportion of the interest generated or rather front loaded fees. Whats quite striking is that there are quite a few SG loans left to go bad. Its also quite striking that the stats only seem to show SG paid out in the originated year. So I wonder how much of say the 2013 years SG fund is used up since 2013. Also they say 100% has principle repaid but Mrs AJU has a loan stated in Oct of 2013 and its not due to finish til next month. If that's the only one then I guess that rounding might give that figure. That said when I checked my data from November 28th I still had 5 SG loans from 2013. So the accuracy of their data may not be that great. Again this is small enough to be a rounding thing. Perhaps they left out SG loans as these were all SG loans. Looking at this data I also had 4 defaulted loans still active but as they say they didn;t include them.
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,814
Likes: 1,092
|
Post by ashtondav on Jan 28, 2019 14:55:00 GMT
Yes, January's ISA figures are looking as if they'll be my worst ever month since June 2017. Earnings £132, defaults £100. Four days to go though, so here's hoping. I do find the % of income actually received each month as a useful and quick-to-calculate figure which gives a snapshot of what's happening in my portfolio. As I say in my first post, it was 72% last year.
Same here for January. £25,000 invested, net interest -£10.50. Admittedly as i haven't been putting Money into Z for at least 2 years i'm now left with underperforming loans and defaults, but Compare and contrast with RS where i've now got £41,000 and latest monthly interest approaching £240.
As for the wife. She had £17,000 invested in January 2018, been reinvesting every month nad has earned about £515 in interest, mainly in core - a startling 3%.
I'll hang on and wait til i get the 2018/2019 tax statement for more analysis, as i'll only get hot under the collar while withdrawing repayments as fast as possible. From both accounts, now!
|
|
aju
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,500
Likes: 924
|
Post by aju on Jan 28, 2019 15:54:21 GMT
That's not great ashtondav , my worst month in Zopa ISA so far defaults wise is last Jan where defaults stripped off 76% of the interest, Adopter bonus softens this slightly. I keep track of this stuff since Zopa introduced the statements page - I have previous data too but never bothered to map this yet - and it seems to me that apart from the Zopa defaults sale in Nov not one of mine or Mrs Aju's considerable defaults in ISA have recovered a penny yet. Contrast that with the Invest side and some defaults in there are paying back monthly. I suspect though that none of the recent defaults in the invest side have paid either despite getting about £10-£12 a year on recoveries. It's not so easy to see if the recoveries are actually recent though as pre Jan 2015 there were no statements tables, however, since I have all my data since the time we both started I am thinking of seeing when Zopa actually recovered anything on more recent loans. (I'm a bit busy of late as I am running our Invest sides down and pushing it over to RS and am monitoring rates very closely to make sure we are lending at 6% or more, that said I'm wondering with all this brexit malarkey that this is a wise move probably should just be putting it into Marcus say until things are settled.) |
|
|
|
Post by p2psavvy on Jan 29, 2019 17:04:28 GMT
My 2018 return, even after the debt sale, was 1.84%.
My return for 2016 was 10.67% (two months only so no defaults), 2017 was 6.59% (defaults started in April 2017) and my annualised so far for 2019 is -10.85%
My overall return is currently 4.13% from Zopa Plus. I have now draw down about 65% from Zopa since July 2017.
|
|
zlb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,422
Likes: 333
|
Post by zlb on Jan 29, 2019 22:41:11 GMT
My 2018 return, even after the debt sale, was 1.84%. My return for 2016 was 10.67% (two months only so no defaults), 2017 was 6.59% (defaults started in April 2017) and my annualised so far for 2019 is -10.85% My overall return is currently 4.13% from Zopa Plus. I have now draw down about 65% from Zopa since July 2017. Makes my 3% for 2018 look good!
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,814
Likes: 1,092
|
Post by ashtondav on Jan 30, 2019 8:34:58 GMT
What I don’t understand is how the returns on Ratesetter are so much higher. Better management, credit rating, debt collection? Or a smoke and mirrors provision fund. Either way it doesn’t compute.
|
|
benaj
Member of DD Central
N/A
Posts: 5,597
Likes: 1,736
|
Post by benaj on Jan 30, 2019 8:52:13 GMT
What I don’t understand is how the returns on Ratesetter are so much higher. Better management, credit rating, debt collection? Or a smoke and mirrors provision fund. Either way it doesn’t compute. Let's compare the stats Z (Last updated Sep 18): www.zopa.com/lending/returns-performance RS (updated automatically in Real Time): invest.ratesetter.com/aboutus/statistics2017 Statistics:| Actual Defaults | Actual Annual Return | | Z: 2.82% | Z: 4.3% | | RS: 2.27% | RS: 4.07% |
It seems RS have lower default rates and slightly lower average return than Z due to the RS unique lending market model.
|
|
|
|
Post by p2psavvy on Jan 30, 2019 13:33:09 GMT
I think the big difference between Z and RS currently is how, as a lender, you can manage how you invest. Z is give us your cash and we choose the term, guess a rate that you will get, on average, if your lucky and we happened to pick for you the borrowers that might repay you. Whereas with R it's pick your term and rate, if the borrower decides not to pay then your covered by the PF and if the PF isn't big enough, any losses are shared across all lenders. Oh and if you want instant money, without penalty, then you can take a lower rate. with R, as with Z, lenders can and do pay back early, reducing your overall rate.
I was sucked into the Z expected rate of 6.4% after losses, when Plus started. I am really glad that I recognised the default patterns with Z very early on and decided to draw down rather than continue to invest. In contrast, my returns from R over about four years have been around 6%. On the negative side R does require a bit of effort and monitoring to get the best rates, whereas with Z you only have to control the loan part size for diversification.
|
|
aju
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,500
Likes: 924
|
Post by aju on Jan 30, 2019 13:54:32 GMT
I think the big difference between Z and RS currently is how, as a lender, you can manage how you invest. Z is give us your cash and we choose the term, guess a rate that you will get, on average, if your lucky and we happened to pick for you the borrowers that might repay you. Whereas with R it's pick your term and rate, if the borrower decides not to pay then your covered by the PF and if the PF isn't big enough, any losses are shared across all lenders. Oh and if you want instant money, without penalty, then you can take a lower rate. with R, as with Z, lenders can and do pay back early, reducing your overall rate. I was sucked into the Z expected rate of 6.4% after losses, when Plus started. I am really glad that I recognised the default patterns with Z very early on and decided to draw down rather than continue to invest. In contrast, my returns from R over about four years have been around 6%. On the negative side R does require a bit of effort and monitoring to get the best rates, whereas with Z you only have to control the loan part size for diversification. I agree that RS requires a bit of effort and it reminds me a little of the good old days of Zopa where Zopa meant what it said, we had to workout our rate offers, factor in our appetite for risk with lack of anything remotely like an SG or a PF etc. So it's much easier on RS now than it was then on Zopa. Happy memories though and gaming the RR (Rapid Returns) when rates were not brilliant was fun as well. All that said I have been getting >6.0 with a little bit of monitoring and punting, albeit using tools that allow me to monitor the ates movements on screen whilst also doing other work at the same time. My son even keeps badgering me to get 2 screens but my current screen works quite well I feel.
|
|
|
|
Post by df on Jan 30, 2019 20:59:38 GMT
I think the big difference between Z and RS currently is how, as a lender, you can manage how you invest. Z is give us your cash and we choose the term, guess a rate that you will get, on average, if your lucky and we happened to pick for you the borrowers that might repay you. Whereas with R it's pick your term and rate, if the borrower decides not to pay then your covered by the PF and if the PF isn't big enough, any losses are shared across all lenders. Oh and if you want instant money, without penalty, then you can take a lower rate. with R, as with Z, lenders can and do pay back early, reducing your overall rate. I was sucked into the Z expected rate of 6.4% after losses, when Plus started. I am really glad that I recognised the default patterns with Z very early on and decided to draw down rather than continue to invest. In contrast, my returns from R over about four years have been around 6%. On the negative side R does require a bit of effort and monitoring to get the best rates, whereas with Z you only have to control the loan part size for diversification. For me two big differences are PF and the rates. I've stopped reinvesting on Z when PF was abolished, now running down my Classic and Access which are still protected. Can't see much point investing in new Z products, unless they bring some attractive FSCS protected offers in near future. I've made a couple of mistakes on RS at the beginning, it was a bit overcomplicated for newbie spoiled by Z's simplicity. However, in terms of returns my RS experience is more fruitful than Z.
|
|
paule
Posts: 44
Likes: 10
|
Post by paule on Feb 13, 2019 17:00:18 GMT
Well according to Zopa's own figures my £20k in plus has given me a net annualised return of 1.5%. its been "invested" for 27 months. Knew it was performing badly......
My ISA plus has given nearly 4% but then I cant get to the capital without a penalty and when i do it will leave all the poor perforimng loans in.
So overall this is going to have cost me a fair bit...
Another lesson learnt
|
|
zlb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,422
Likes: 333
|
Post by zlb on Feb 15, 2019 18:11:21 GMT
Today's email advertises that they are the middle risk between equity and cash. Although they use the word target here, can they legally claim to be meeting people in the middle?
They say, "If you open one of our IFISAs today we’ll meet you in the middle with our target returns of 4.5%* in our ISA Core, and 5.2%* in our ISA Plus."
|
|
paule
Posts: 44
Likes: 10
|
Post by paule on Feb 16, 2019 8:31:19 GMT
I don't know - another £270 of bad debt this month so far so sitting at -240 for the month, bad debt is totally killing me with Zopa, still.
|
|
aju
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,500
Likes: 924
|
Post by aju on Feb 16, 2019 11:45:11 GMT
So this is almost certain to be my worst month by far in the invest side, haven't checked other accounts as yet, it seems that at present I have over £28 across 3 defaults with a max possible £30 expected interest for the month. I have around £2.80 in expected early adopter fee and thankfully old defaults have returned 0.57p!
I'm running Invest side down (reinvesting into RS for Mrs Aju as she does not pay tax) but as I say this was still a bit of a blow. If I'm right projecting an overall 197% loss measuring new defaults to interest received - ignoring the early adopter and recoveries.
The interesting thing is that all these defaults are from loans made in last 6 months. 2 of them are Core and one is Plus.
If I get too many of those months then I would have to seriously consider a fast pull out on the invest side perhaps. There is approx 6k in total left in my Invest with some 40% still covered by SG but this does leave a bad taste - will hold nerve for few more months but PF in RS looks more inviting than ever...
...Time will tell
|
|
|
|
Post by fuzzyiceberg on Feb 19, 2019 11:19:11 GMT
Aju - you do know there is no difference between loans that go in 'invest' and 'ISA' don't you? The Zopa algorithm will simply allocate a loan part to whoever is at the head of the queue for a loan in that particular market regardless of whether it is in an ISA wrapper or not. The only distinction is that D&E loans will only be allocated to Plus investors. That is why there is not a different 'target' rate for ISA/non ISA accounts.
|
|
