oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087 
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Feb 2, 2016 10:25:44 GMT
Well I've put some "green" up for sale (not those three) over twenty minutes ago and nothing has happened.
edit: OOPS! Wrong account ... was thinking of GEIA. Sold now.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Feb 2, 2016 10:36:09 GMT
chris , having exported my uninvested GBBA cash yesterday across to my MLIA, my remaining GBBA money is now 100% invested but in just 3 loans (201, 222, 223) plus some micro shrapnel. Will the system naturally diversify my holdings into some of the upcoming loans as they launch this week? I'm a little uncomfortable having such large holdings in so few loans (certainly well over the 20% "limit" I understand the GBBA aims for). Thanks. It will actually try and sell out the excess of those loans to get back under the 20% limit as a matter of priority before then using the idle cash to buy back in to anything else that comes on the market. If it can diversify with others then it will do so but that algorithm isn't particularly efficient / aggressive at the moment. OK, hopefully it will sell off the excess soon then. It's currently holding £5400 of 222 and the same of 223 out of a total GBBA investment of £14,566 (so 37% in each). I can see there's a large chunk (>£37k) of 222 available but there's no availability on 223 at the moment. In fact, my MLIA has a small unfulfilled order for 223!
|
|
jonah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,031
Likes: 1,113
|
Post by jonah on Feb 8, 2016 19:35:46 GMT
My end of year views on this were here: p2pindependentforum.com/post/82014For a current snapshot, I've got 99.93% invested. It was actually at 100% invested last week, so excellent work there. This is currently over 34 different loans. It held parts of 4 other loans which have all been repaid. In terms of top holders: 165 29.8% 168 22.5%
174 19.9%
So, similar to GEIA, the 'overweight' loans are improving from buying parts in other loans which helps share the loan book out. This does have a very long tail though, with 21 loans each having 0.3% or less of the total account. My degree of concentration is there a slight concern. Over equal concern is the PF. It's down to 1.3%, a slight drop from c6 weeks ago and a way from the target level. To be fair to AC though, I'm not aware of it having needed to be called upon, so I assume that this reduction is down to growth in funds in the account.
Overall, a continuing positive product, but still a few rough edges to work out.
|
|
|
|
Post by smrutib on Mar 15, 2016 17:31:31 GMT
I am relatively new to AC and am not able to grasp how the provision fund will work given the lack of diversification in GBBA.
Say there are two investors, one of whom has 20% in Loan X and the other who has 1% in the same loan. I assume this is possible based on when these two investors came onto the GBBA platform. Is it?
Now say the worst case happens. Loan X defaults, security sale doesn't cover the capital and provision fund is not able to make up the shortfall. Will the first investor see a bigger loss than the second investor? I obviously don't think it's fair if thats the case but I will wait for the experts to comment before engaging in any rants.
Thanks
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Mar 15, 2016 23:25:27 GMT
For a current snapshot, I've got 99.93% invested. It was actually at 100% invested last week, so excellent work there. Overall, a continuing positive product, but still a few rough edges to work out.
I think I have one of the rough edges. My small account is 2.11% Awaiting Investment, and I have to go back in my statement all the way to 20/Nov/15 to find a purchase. With so many new loans having drawn down this year, I'm at a loss to explain why a small bit of one or more of those wasn't assigned to my GBBA. I just don't understand it at all. If it wasn't for the fact that the uninvested sum involved is small -- and is earning 3.75% because it's been swept into the QAA -- I'd have given up on the GBBA a while ago.
|
|
jonah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,031
Likes: 1,113
|
Post by jonah on Mar 16, 2016 6:16:58 GMT
I was wondering if chris had tweaked something on Tuesday... I had 7 buys in mine yesterday, ranging from single digit pounds to single digit pence! |
|
min
Member of DD Central
Posts: 615
Likes: 182
|
Post by min on Mar 16, 2016 7:17:20 GMT
I was wondering if chris had tweaked something on Tuesday... I had 7 buys in mine yesterday, ranging from single digit pounds to single digit pence! Might be because I withdrew chunk of mine yesterday as I need some cash in the next few weeks. Interestingly only took about 10 mins for withdrawal to happen. I was 100% invested but now have £0.74 waiting investment so presumably some diversification adjustments went on.
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Mar 16, 2016 19:57:02 GMT
I am relatively new to AC and am not able to grasp how the provision fund will work given the lack of diversification in GBBA. Say there are two investors, one of whom has 20% in Loan X and the other who has 1% in the same loan. I assume this is possible based on when these two investors came onto the GBBA platform. Is it? Now say the worst case happens. Loan X defaults, security sale doesn't cover the capital and provision fund is not able to make up the shortfall. Will the first investor see a bigger loss than the second investor? I obviously don't think it's fair if thats the case but I will wait for the experts to comment before engaging in any rants. Thanks Hi smrutib. Your concern was at the root of my initial question when kicking off this thread as I have some severe lumpiness in my GBBA as well that I am uncomfortable with longer term so was considering whether I would need to sell-out some of my GBBA to try and get the bigger loans reduced. chris promised that there was a back-end automated diversification tool on the way in a matter of weeks but we have seen nothing so far. Chris, were are we on this functionality?
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Mar 16, 2016 20:02:32 GMT
I am relatively new to AC and am not able to grasp how the provision fund will work given the lack of diversification in GBBA. Say there are two investors, one of whom has 20% in Loan X and the other who has 1% in the same loan. I assume this is possible based on when these two investors came onto the GBBA platform. Is it? Now say the worst case happens. Loan X defaults, security sale doesn't cover the capital and provision fund is not able to make up the shortfall. Will the first investor see a bigger loss than the second investor? I obviously don't think it's fair if thats the case but I will wait for the experts to comment before engaging in any rants. Thanks Hi smrutib . Your concern was at the root of my initial question when kicking off this thread as I have some severe lumpiness in my GBBA as well that I am uncomfortable with longer term so was considering whether I would need to sell-out some of my GBBA to try and get the bigger loans reduced. chris promised that there was a back-end automated diversification tool on the way in a matter of weeks but we have seen nothing so far. Chris, were are we on this functionality? Still being tested whilst I work on other things in parallel. As it's affecting lender funds there's no scope for error so it takes quite a while to test, resolve any issues found (such as being too slow), and then testing again. If I had an uninterrupted run at it there's probably less than a day of work left, but that's likely to still take a couple of weeks to resolve especially as I'm dependent on others helping to test.
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Mar 16, 2016 20:16:29 GMT
Hi smrutib . Your concern was at the root of my initial question when kicking off this thread as I have some severe lumpiness in my GBBA as well that I am uncomfortable with longer term so was considering whether I would need to sell-out some of my GBBA to try and get the bigger loans reduced. chris promised that there was a back-end automated diversification tool on the way in a matter of weeks but we have seen nothing so far. Chris, were are we on this functionality? Still being tested whilst I work on other things in parallel. As it's affecting lender funds there's no scope for error so it takes quite a while to test, resolve any issues found (such as being too slow), and then testing again. If I had an uninterrupted run at it there's probably less than a day of work left, but that's likely to still take a couple of weeks to resolve especially as I'm dependent on others helping to test. Thanks for the update chris, I appreciate you have many IT pots boiling at the moment, IFISA amongst them.
|
|
trouble
Member of DD Central
Posts: 127
Likes: 97
|
Post by trouble on Mar 17, 2016 1:29:31 GMT
I am relatively new to AC and am not able to grasp how the provision fund will work given the lack of diversification in GBBA. Say there are two investors, one of whom has 20% in Loan X and the other who has 1% in the same loan. I assume this is possible based on when these two investors came onto the GBBA platform. Is it? Now say the worst case happens. Loan X defaults, security sale doesn't cover the capital and provision fund is not able to make up the shortfall. Will the first investor see a bigger loss than the second investor? I obviously don't think it's fair if thats the case but I will wait for the experts to comment before engaging in any rants. Thanks You're new to AC and already thinking about ranting  If you don't understand it then don't invest until you do and you are happy to do so, but don't start with the premise of having a rant, we've enough loose canons on here as it is
|
|
|
|
Post by smrutib on Mar 17, 2016 6:49:51 GMT
I am relatively new to AC and am not able to grasp how the provision fund will work given the lack of diversification in GBBA. Say there are two investors, one of whom has 20% in Loan X and the other who has 1% in the same loan. I assume this is possible based on when these two investors came onto the GBBA platform. Is it? Now say the worst case happens. Loan X defaults, security sale doesn't cover the capital and provision fund is not able to make up the shortfall. Will the first investor see a bigger loss than the second investor? I obviously don't think it's fair if thats the case but I will wait for the experts to comment before engaging in any rants. Thanks You're new to AC and already thinking about ranting If you don't understand it then don't invest until you do and you are happy to do so, but don't start with the premise of having a rant, we've enough loose canons on here as it is That was a light hearted comment. My mistake, public forum - should have used emoticons.
|
|
|
|
Post by smrutib on Mar 17, 2016 6:58:57 GMT
Hi smrutib . Your concern was at the root of my initial question when kicking off this thread as I have some severe lumpiness in my GBBA as well that I am uncomfortable with longer term so was considering whether I would need to sell-out some of my GBBA to try and get the bigger loans reduced. chris promised that there was a back-end automated diversification tool on the way in a matter of weeks but we have seen nothing so far. Chris, were are we on this functionality? Still being tested whilst I work on other things in parallel. As it's affecting lender funds there's no scope for error so it takes quite a while to test, resolve any issues found (such as being too slow), and then testing again. If I had an uninterrupted run at it there's probably less than a day of work left, but that's likely to still take a couple of weeks to resolve especially as I'm dependent on others helping to test. I appreciate that you are working on a solution to make the GBBA portfolios more diversified. However, can you confirm my basic understanding that if there is a 'default with a shortfall' event then different investors in GBBA will see different level of losses? If so, then will the solution you are working on mitigate this problem (by making portfolios more diversified) or eliminate it (by making portfolios similar across all investors)? Thanks
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Mar 17, 2016 7:07:10 GMT
Still being tested whilst I work on other things in parallel. As it's affecting lender funds there's no scope for error so it takes quite a while to test, resolve any issues found (such as being too slow), and then testing again. If I had an uninterrupted run at it there's probably less than a day of work left, but that's likely to still take a couple of weeks to resolve especially as I'm dependent on others helping to test. I appreciate that you are working on a solution to make the GBBA portfolios more diversified. However, can you confirm my basic understanding that if there is a 'default with a shortfall' event then different investors in GBBA will see different level of losses? If so, then will the solution you are working on mitigate this problem (by making portfolios more diversified) or eliminate it (by making portfolios similar across all investors)? Thanks If there is a default with a crystalised loss (i.e. not enough security to cover the capital) and the provision fund is fully depleted and the platform doesn't inject more funds into the provision fund then yes the losses would be based upon individual holdings and would not be equal amongst all lenders in the GBBA. The solution I'm working on will trend towards, but never attain, equal portfolios for all investors. There is a time lag due to the processing time of the solution, so after a new investment is made your account can be out of balance for a few hours until the system has traded your "excess" with other lenders so that all lenders have broadly the same holdings. Because the system is a moving target and because the system will be optimised to make as few inter lender trades as possible rather than optimised for perfection, it will never be perfectly balanced amongst all lenders like the QAA is - it will strive to be good enough. The QAA uses a slightly different investment mechanism that allows us to keep everything perfectly balanced without clogging up everyone's statements with millions of trades.
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Mar 17, 2016 7:21:17 GMT
chris I appreciate that you are working on a solution to make the GBBA portfolios more diversified. However, can you confirm my basic understanding that if there is a 'default with a shortfall' event then different investors in GBBA will see different level of losses? If so, then will the solution you are working on mitigate this problem (by making portfolios more diversified) or eliminate it (by making portfolios similar across all investors)? Thanks If there is a default with a crystalised loss (i.e. not enough security to cover the capital) and the provision fund is fully depleted and the platform doesn't inject more funds into the provision fund then yes the losses would be based upon individual holdings and would not be equal amongst all lenders in the GBBA. The solution I'm working on will trend towards, but never attain, equal portfolios for all investors. There is a time lag due to the processing time of the solution, so after a new investment is made your account can be out of balance for a few hours until the system has traded your "excess" with other lenders so that all lenders have broadly the same holdings. Because the system is a moving target and because the system will be optimised to make as few inter lender trades as possible rather than optimised for perfection, it will never be perfectly balanced amongst all lenders like the QAA is - it will strive to be good enough. The QAA uses a slightly different investment mechanism that allows us to keep everything perfectly balanced without clogging up everyone's statements with millions of trades. I think this sounds great Chris, a few hours or even a day or so would be perfectly acceptable for me.
|
|
