blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Jan 13, 2015 13:59:39 GMT
Oh dear. The loan book outstanding is only £336m; you don't count the repayments. The whole loans figure of £101m is presumably the original principal, so estimate the outstanding whole loans at £85m and subtract to give approx £250m outstanding partial loans. Then subtract HMG at say 10% to get £225m outstanding partial loans with normal investors - individuals or their agent companies. Divide by 36,300 such lenders.
Result £6.2K
This is not far off FC's own figure of about £5000 per active lender given in 2013 in a press release, I cannot remember when. Lent does not include bids or available funds.
(Yes the whole loan lenders are a few lenders with a separate platform who lend on whole loans. Dominated by one or possibly more institutional lenders. Not visible on our platform, except as the rejects with out-of-sequence numbers, but included in the statistics and the loan book. The average over all three classes, HMG/BBB Whole Loans and the mass of partial lenders is not useful.)
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Jan 13, 2015 14:24:57 GMT
Note on Whole Loans.
Of the last 100 loan numbers accepted in the loan book, 72 were first offered as whole loans, four were not bid for, resulting in 68 Whole Loans and 32 Partial Loans. It should be noted that the rates on the platform are a function of loan supply and lender demand. Clearly the loan supply is affected by FC's division into whole and partial and the rates are where they are at present because most loans have been going to the Whole Loan lenders.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2015 14:59:12 GMT
Blender, is this is why the number of loans are so sparse, the total value of the loans has dropped way down (no wonder they dare not have total value at the bottom) and the quality seems to have dropped as well?
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Jan 13, 2015 15:13:50 GMT
Yes. Last January all of the loan requests would have come to the partial platform, and because only a third are currently doing so rates are lower than they would otherwise be. The interest rate for the whole loan lenders is set by rates per band on the partial board (over a period), and so reducing the number of loans going to the partial board actually reduces the rates for the whole loan lenders as well. However the rates seem to be still acceptable to the whole loan lenders. There is obviously a diminution of total loans supply, but the division between whole and partial, which affects interest rates, is decided by FC in an undeclared way.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2015 15:32:02 GMT
So they are moving out of P2P and into B2P?
I guess this is also where Orchard will come in?
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Jan 13, 2015 15:40:40 GMT
What are the rates being set by Fraternising Crumpets when whole loans are being offered?
I thoroughly object to having to "make do" with what the privileged few don't fancy. It can only result in overall loan quality being poorer on the open market, and explains why I have withdrawn repayments three times recently because I have struggled to find enough loans offered of good (apparent) quality at a reasonable rate. (They can stuff A+ loans at around 6% from which FC take 1% and there is (they say) 0.6% to be deducted as default risk. 4.4%? Even Zopa (who have ditched Rate Promise and are failing to achieve "projected rate" AGAIN) is beating that on 5yr, and I have refused to touch Zopa for 18 months, too.
As for A+ 3 yr .... the small ones also boil down to 4.4%, a rate almost to be matched by the 3 yr Pensioners Bond (only £10K) from NS&I soon. With the current oil driven low inflation rates probably leaving banks/BSs probably lowering their saver rates (to near zero soon) I might even do that (being an ancient flatulant). The oil can just as quickly go up again, and fast. It depends on whether OPEC wants to carry on giving Putin a thrashing (IMHO).
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Jan 13, 2015 15:49:53 GMT
The rates for whole loans are fixed for each band. They are determined by averaging the last 'n' loans accepted on the partial board - when 'n' is a number I cannot remember - less than 100. So the split between the whole and partial affects the rates for both. You can call it market manipulation or stabilisation according to your point of view. It is a very important control. Push the lever towards WL and rates go down - push the lever towards PL and rates go up.
|
|
wysiati
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 86
|
Post by wysiati on Jan 13, 2015 16:15:24 GMT
Yes. Last January all of the loan requests would have come to the partial platform, and because only a third are currently doing so rates are lower than they would otherwise be. The interest rate for the whole loan lenders is set by rates per band on the partial board (over a period), and so reducing the number of loans going to the partial board actually reduces the rates for the whole loan lenders as well. However the rates seem to be still acceptable to the whole loan lenders. There is obviously a diminution of total loans supply, but the division between whole and partial, which affects interest rates, is decided by FC in an undeclared way. There is also a lag as whole loan market % rates are moving average rates, so we could have had a situation where achieved rates in the whole loan market exceeded those achieved in the general auction market. Another factor is the changing nature of participation in the whole loans market with increasing passive (in the sense of not being loan pickers) investors, so the rejection rate may be structurally lower going forward.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Jan 13, 2015 16:24:57 GMT
There is also a lag as whole loan market % rates are moving average rates, so we could have had a situation where achieved rates in the whole loan market exceeded those achieved in the general auction market. Never mind "could have had", we actually have that situation. e.g. considering A+ loans accepted since 4 Jan, Partial Loan investors have achieved rates ranging from 6.0% to 8.0%, and Whole Loan investors have achieved rates ranging from 7.6% to 8.9%.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Jan 13, 2015 16:32:38 GMT
Yes that is right, there is a lag down and up, and I am not 100% sure if the whole loan rates are not part of the calculation, ie is it the last n partial loans or the last n loans of any type (not fixed).
I am not sure of the propriety of FC having such control over rates. On the one hand the FC market does need to have some stabilisation, and mechanisms such as MBR and the diversion to whole loans can provide useful limits. But on the other hand I am concerned about the lack of any stated rule or objective. Then again I am not sure that rate setting by auction is scalable, and it is becoming a minority occupation squeezed between whole loan lenders and Autobidders - with property fixed. An open mind but careful watching, I think. If FC try to remove our visibility of the whole loans then alarm bells will ring.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2015 10:24:24 GMT
I received the usual weekly newsletter yesterday, once I waded through the usual c@ p, I saw a headline about how exciting it was to having 50+ auctions to bid on. Made me sick to my stomach. Nothing about the total value of those auctions, or about the value of auctions going to the whole bid market, or the present average interest rate or even that most auctions are 100% filled with 10 minutes of being launched. Talk about trying to make sow's ears into silk purses. Not really sure that FC bother to read these posts, but "there are better deals out there guys".
|
|