|
Post by contangoandcash on Aug 12, 2015 22:56:35 GMT
Thanks for replying Kev. Apologies of course it is 6am to 10pm.. Got them wrong way round.
My point is the small sample size is picking up noise, the smaller the sample the more noise it will pick up and the more random and volatile the MR will be.. Making the sample smaller still would be really bad news, moving MR up or down 1% on a whim.
FWIW I agree with that idea of not taking the MR trades into account, this is akin to a large market maker taking his own trades out of the data to see the real picture and remove bias.. though I doubt the markets are liquid enough to do this, particularly over just one day.
Putting at least a 3 day moving average on the VWAP seems logical to me, and makes it far harder to manipulate due to the extended effort it would take to do so, and effects of any manipulation (should someone wish to do so) would also have a lesser effect on MR trades.. Could use an exponential moving average if you want to give recent data more weight. Either way, extending the collection period will greatly smooth out the market bumps for MR users. Currently folks are getting messed around periodically when a rogue trade like that 3% earlier goes though (as an example) and shaves off 3 or more ticks for the next day's MR.
How do you explain that 3% offer? I'm sure you can understand the mood around here given it's timing and positioning. I'm also fairly sure you probably can't say anything about it...anyway, thanks for replying, it's appreciated... I do have plenty with you, so I'm keen to chew your ear, and be constructive... I fully accept people will do whatever they want with their money, including putting 5 offers totally £100k 5 ticks lower than the front of the queue. I just usually expect more money to equal more sophistication, but of course that isn't always the case... gold plated / diamond encrusted bathroom suites for example!
|
|
gnasher
Member of DD Central
Posts: 207
Likes: 146
|
Post by gnasher on Aug 13, 2015 4:38:57 GMT
I've had a suspicion for a few weeks now that RS are either: Placing fake borrowing orders where there's no lender money in order to try and drag the average rate down. Or Placing large piecemeal amounts of institutional borrowing requests (which the borrower understands will be placed over the long term) at rates where there is no lender money, in order to drag down the average rate. Utterly cynical, but I'm just calling it as I see it. To put it bluntly, I no longer trust Ratesetter. Oh jeez, really? *places head in hands and weeps* Why would an institutional lender (who is 100% in it for the money) be willing to lend at a lower rate, and lower current and future returns. Ridiculous. It's the monthly market , people just want their money out the door and working quickly for shorter periods of time. Those people that don't trust RateSetter (and by extension, me) should not be lenders. And probably should thereafter have better things to do with their time that post on the RateSetter thread. @ westonkevRSOh dear, poor Kev. I hope head is out of hands now and weeping stopped! I can understand that reaction, but I can also understand the sentiment behind teddy's post. I would like to say thank you once again for participating in this forum and enduring the rough and tumble that goes with it from time to time. Although RS choose not to engage officially I think your contributions provide a useful conduit between lenders and RS. I do hope some of the other managers read the forum even if they choose not to engage. I for one do completely trust RS, that is why I have a large wadge of money with you. I have no plans to withdraw money, but on the other hand I have stopped adding since CB started. I do not want too much exposed to the same platform risk, plus I do feel uneasy about the increasingly lumpy and volatile markets. While I get some satisfaction in getting my money away on the peaks, that it not what I am in RS for. I am here for a boring, predictable and SAFE haven for a proportion of what I have. That 100k at 3% on monthly did look odd, but perhaps easily explainable. Say business money, lowly clerk at the end of the day places money according to instructions left several days ago on post-it by now absent boss, it is not their money, why should they care! Not as strange as the large chunks we have seen going into the 5yr at silly low rates - but there we are - it happens. - hmmm - Financial Forecast Service? ..... oh no, naughty Kev, that is not an "F" word in there is it?
|
|
|
Post by jackpease on Aug 13, 2015 6:00:56 GMT
I trust RS too Kevin - sadly there seems to be a predictable cycle on this forum of excitement and enthusiasm for a platform that sucks investors in which turns to disillusionment and distrust as the platform matures.
This seems to be more marked for those platforms that engage on this forum (eg Assetz) and i wonder if engagement gives investors the feeling they have an element of ownership/control over the business then the investors get hacked off when they don't agree with/understand the minutiae of the business model that they think they have control over.
There are some platforms that are currently very popular that are not at all transparent - the returns seem implausible and you've alluded to these - and if they go pop, people on this forum will comment 'of course it was too good to be true'. For me vagaries of the Ratesetter market seem entirely plausible and while i reckon you are the least likely platform to go pop, if it did nobody could ever say Ratesetter was too good to be true
Jack P
|
|
|
Post by westonkevRS on Aug 13, 2015 6:32:29 GMT
How do you explain that 3% offer? I'm sure you can understand the mood around here given it's timing and positioning... The change in algorithm to actual trades from offers has to be a good thing, despite any perceived volatility. We can quiblle about timescales, if MR set loans should be included or not, etc - But the basic principle that it's on real deals has to be irrefutable. I personally wanted this change, and I'll never change that principle. I'm currently on holiday (rainy cold Isle of Mull as you ask), but on return I'll do two things: 1) Track down the £100k offer and try to find an explanation as long as the lender is contactable (you guys never seemed to answer your phone's....) and agreeable to help 2) Analyse the volatility of MR v before It will be impossible to show if those using MR are now getting a worse deal than before because of the suppressed rates due to the dreaded cash-back and the fact we now have more lenders than before (we are fast approaching 25,000 active lenders). Also I suspect some lenders got use to rates nearer 7% recently rather than nearer 5%. Looking at the longer run trends, the 7% was an anomaly and the 5% to be expected. I appreciate 5% isn't enough for the less risk adverse of our lenders, and I wish you luck in your search for a higher yield. But Rate Setter aspires to be a low risk dull platform, and that therefore brings lower returns. Just be careful out there my friends, there is no guarantee of a ride to the rescue of a small failed platform by RateSetter again (note, not a lot of appetite was shown by others before either). @ westonkevRS
|
|
wapping35
Member of DD Central
Posts: 385
Likes: 210
|
Post by wapping35 on Aug 13, 2015 6:40:10 GMT
I see 5yr MR is 5.7% today up from yesterdays 5.5%. Again makes no sense. I matched my order YR at 6.0% put on yesterday at 8.47pm last night. So same day as MR but 0.5% higher. In at 6.1% today and I envisage matching today or Friday. The new MR/YR rules have just increased daily rate volatility and made RS v high touch to use. But I guess if it means getting a 0.5% more and same day matching, I will have to grin and bear it. I expect over time fewer & fewer will use the MR option as they see the rates delivered are significantly lower. I would still love Kev to comment on what went wrong on Tuesday early afternoon with the 3 yr market:
|
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on Aug 13, 2015 7:09:08 GMT
There are a number of issues being conflated in this thread so I thought it would be good to recap what they were in case Kev does want to investigate and provide some answers. 1. There is the market volatility introduced by the change to YR and the possibility of using a longer term moving average (acknowledged). 2. The suspicious offer of £100 k at 3.0% which didn't seem plausible (acknowledged). 3. An explanation for scenarios like the screenshot below or a detailed explanation of how matching works. Hopefully, Kev can accept that this does not reflect a fluid, efficient market between lenders and borrowers. 4. The following scenarios quoted from ikorodu and morris This has happened to me and we were told that it had not happened before (even though RS were not aware that it had happened until I reported it) and that a fix had been introduced to prevent this from happening again. The fix seems to have failed. This is a public forum and praise, criticism and everything in between are dished out in equal measure. Simply stating that if you don't like how RS works, then you should go and lend somewhere else is not a constructive response. The questions are all valid. If reasonable explanations are provided, then our trust in the platform increases. If answers are evaded (display glitch), then trust deteriorates and it is that point that people can judge whether to remain or to exit the platform. Most people want the platform to succeed but the four points above have all prompted valid questions. Edit: I matched £2k at 5% on the 1 month market last night. Do I win some sort of prize?
|
|
wapping35
Member of DD Central
Posts: 385
Likes: 210
|
Post by wapping35 on Aug 13, 2015 7:16:21 GMT
I think the point (4) quoted comments in the 3 YR market happened at the same time as the screen shot, point (3). Clearly a problem but (3) & (4) really refer to the same problem.
|
|
|
Post by rarrar on Aug 13, 2015 8:18:00 GMT
If you are a newbie and wanting to place your money with out hassle or analysis of the rates then there is a good chance you will look at the prominent "Last Matched Rates" figures and go with these. These rates are very volatile and not particularly helpful by themselves. MR is only available for re-investment and not for placing new funds which for newbies would be uesful. It would be useful to see the MR displayed prominently alongside the "Last Matched Rate"
|
|
|
Post by westonkevRS on Aug 13, 2015 8:45:46 GMT
I would still love Kev to comment on what went wrong on Tuesday early afternoon with the 3 yr market: I suspect a lot of forum members are quote active anyways, certainly the ones I've met. So if the new methodology means higher returns with a bit of work, then lucky you. I know the borrower for the screenshot, and therefore this will be linked to the display issue associated with large loans. The specifics are detailed in another thread and clearly this display issue haven't been cleaned yet, but are essentially due to the time it takes to fill the loan. The lender money shown has effectively already been used to fill that loan, it just takes 15mins plus to complete. A screenshot taken shortly after would be normal. @ westonkevRS
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Aug 13, 2015 8:53:44 GMT
Hi Kev! All very interesting these days .... Ratesetter losing its "boring" label??? As I can't monitor anything for the next ten days I shall dump everything at 5.9% in 3 yr and hope for the best ..... can't see MR offering that. Enjoy your hols ..... don't waste too much time answering us ratenurdlenudgers .... though no doubt you'll still keep watch and will be mulling over our comments ...... . . . mulling over our c ............... oh dear . . . . < sodofftowalesgrumps!>
|
|
wapping35
Member of DD Central
Posts: 385
Likes: 210
|
Post by wapping35 on Aug 13, 2015 9:25:42 GMT
Thanks for replying on your holiday Kev. And I appreciate you will not have seen the issue "live", which we saw on the 3 Yr market on Tuesday. The problem with your reply is it did not clear up after 15 minutes. It was like that for 2-3 hours and the 5.6% borrower was being matched at 5.6% whilst money at 4.8-5.5% was untouched. If you look at the subsequent posts from Tuesday afternoon on this thread you will see this was happening. Also 2 forum members posted stating they were in the 3 year market (at the time) and seeing matches at 5.6% but their money at below 5.6% was unmatched. They were "ikorodu and morris" If you look at the above post from Locutus you will see this timeline summarised. Thks Locutus for doing this. I feel it would be good if this could be raised with the Techie guys post your holiday. ====== On the active member getting a far better rate with the new MR system I think that is fine to say. But I wanted to continue to being a passive member using MR , it is the change that has lead me to changing from MR to YR and indeed posting here (for the first time in nearly 12 months). I agree I can do better by switching to YR (that is what I have been doing) but I would like RS to take on board the feed back that the change has made the service offering higher touch for me and others (users of the old MR system). Effectively the service is worse but not sufficiently worse to make me stop leading at RS. I feel it would be better if the MR option at least allowed a lending floor to be set, effectively I would like this since MR is now v volatile. I know you said you would examine the volatility issue separately , but I feel it would be good for RS to have feed back on the impactions of that volatility on the Lender experience and RS service. Especially since there are tweaks which could ease that problem (setting MR but with a rate floor)... Anyway enjoy the Hol's ... I know the borrower for the screenshot, and therefore this will be linked to the display issue associated with large loans. The specifics are detailed in another thread and clearly this display issue haven't been cleaned yet, but are essentially due to the time it takes to fill the loan. The lender money shown has effectively already been used to fill that loan, it just takes 15mins plus to complete. A screenshot taken shortly after would be normal. @ westonkevRS
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Aug 13, 2015 9:43:58 GMT
I agree with wapping35 that the market rate at which passive members have their funds placed should be much nearer the realistic rate which could be expected to match by early afternoon on the day. Being matched early 0.5+% below what many people are getting by early afternoon is too much of a discrepancy. For instance, today I expect 5yr to be taking funds from the 6.2% pot by this afternoon. Already there is less than £7K left before 6% kicks in. Today's MR "earlybirds" have been rewarded with 5.7%. MR should have been set at least to 6%, even 6.1% to be fair to those lenders, and there are a lot of them. edit...it's not so much about smart-arses like me getting a higher rate, it's about the mainstream of RS savers who are getting (sometimes) considerably lower ones.
|
|
|
Post by contangoandcash on Aug 13, 2015 17:30:53 GMT
edit...it's not so much about smart-arses like me getting a higher rate, it's about the mainstream of RS savers who are getting (sometimes) considerably lower ones. That's it, there's a large set of users using MR getting an apparent raw deal. I don't have too much of an issue with effort being rewarded (setting your own rates), but people who do want to be boring, don't have the time or are just plain lazy (would be lovely for a change) appear to be overly penalised for it. Ideally, I want to be lazy and know I'm getting no more than 0.1-0.15% less than the dedicated people setting their own rates, spending their time doing so.
|
|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on Aug 13, 2015 17:39:51 GMT
Me too .. same complaint I have about granny autobid/buy users on FC getting a (too) raw deal ... or ZOPA where, eventually, everyone got a raw deal.
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Aug 14, 2015 8:09:08 GMT
Downloaded my email this morning, and there was a notification from RateSetter that a Monthly market repayment had gone straight back in at 3.8% - perhaps it's as well that I'd changed the reinvestment instructions, which were previously at 3.4%.
|
|