|
Post by rb5286 on May 12, 2016 14:40:51 GMT
Even more defaults have brought my losses (pre-recovery) with Rebs to almost 2,500 GBP. The default rate is now at 10.42% across the board and this has been rising at an alarming rate!
- Default rate on 3rd March 2016: 5.71% - Default rate on 31st March 2016: 8.74% - Default rate on 12th May 2016: 10.42%
As you can see, defaults have doubled in just over a 2 month period. I didn't track the stats before Mar 16, so can't comment before this point, but surely this is unsustainable? Now, I know that I'm essentially creating more bad publicity for this company, but you know what?...I hope no one else invests through this platform. It seems diligently checking borrowers is not a top priority, or maybe they just don't have the necessary experienced/qualified staff.
Disgruntled investor
|
|
|
Post by davee39 on May 12, 2016 16:00:24 GMT
I do not invest on this platform. The rates on offer indicate that the borrowers are very much 'sub-prime', equivalent to the 'E' grade on FC which predicts losses of 8%. Any business paying close to 20% for a loan has been rejected by the banks and is likely to be desperate. A translation of 'working capital for expansion' should be read as 'borrowing to stave off CCJ's'. I doubt that businesses operating at this stress level can be diligently checked, which is why the Banks have cut small business lending after getting burned.
|
|
trevor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 557
Likes: 381
|
Post by trevor on May 12, 2016 20:43:16 GMT
I invested a very small % of my P2P fund but after defaults reduced my % gain to less than RS and Z I am now selling out. Approx 25% of my original investment left to sell. If I can get out with no profit or loss I will now be happy. I have spread my money across 10 platforms and by a street this is the worst.
|
|
|
Post by rebsrep on May 12, 2016 20:59:54 GMT
If you read through some of the other threads on this subforum, you'll see the huge steps we've taken to improve our processes. Your dashboard figures have got worse because we're acting more swiftly on the troublesome loans and have moved them to the default/recovery section.
In the past 6 weeks or so (I don't have the exact number of weeks to hand) there have been no new loans entering troublesome periods, it's just the same set of underperformers. There are a handful of regular late payers but they do pay. Several loans have been refinanced elsewhere after pressure from us for the borrower to redeem and take their business elsewhere and there are more of those to come.
If you look at the secondary market there are only a few loans where all the ML's are for sale at the maximum discount i.e. people are trying to offload. Many of the loans are priced at a premium, i.e. people are happy to sell at a premium, but happy to hold them for the good return.
However to take rounded figures let me give you an example: Invest £10,000 at the start of a year at 20% return (across lots of loans to spread your risk) if exactly 10% go bad with zero recovery then you've earnt £2000 interest, but lost £1k of capital. So a net return of 10% which is still good. That 10% return improves if you reinvest your interest every month in new loans i.e compounding your return and assuming we recover some of the loans in debt recovery process, some of which we have done already. That 10% also improves by the promotional credits we pay and if you sell ML's off at a premium and buy at a discount which also spreads your risk further.
Unfortunately SME Debt recovery takes time, the processes we have to follow are often long and laborious and in some cases can take years. That's the nature of the industry, if you read Michaels Wednesday updates on any recovery process loans you'll get a very good feel for these processes.
Also as detailed on other threads we have new features/products in the pipeline which will attract loans with more security, but they need to go through a compliance checking process before we can release them.
|
|
baldpate
Member of DD Central
Posts: 549
Likes: 407
|
Post by baldpate on May 12, 2016 21:42:11 GMT
I agree with davee39 that the ReBS loans (or at least the C-rated ones) roughly equate with the FC E-band loans. But some caution is required when assessing and interpreting default rates. For example, the 8% which FC predict for E-band loans is an annualised rate : one can expect the lifetime bad debt rate for this FC loan class to be quite considerably greater. The ReBS headline rate is a cumulative (lifetime) figure, and with that in mind 10.42% may not seem too bad. However, the ReBS loanbook is still fairly immature : for example, of the 29 loans started in 2013 - the first year of substance - about 13 are still repaying ; the rest are either defaulted (5) replaced by a larger loan (5) or fully repaid (6). There is no doubt that the defaults rate has risen steeply in the last few months. However, in my opinion this is partly because it started from an artificially reduced base. When I started seriously analysing the loanbook earlier this year I found a number of non-performing loans which by any reasonably criteria should long since have been called defaulted, but which ReBS were apparently 'nursing'; since Feb/March they seem to have been taking a much more robust approach to calling defaults, which may partly be responsible for the sudden spike. I'm not trying to minimize the issue - more than 10% of my own loanbook (a mixture of B's and C's) is currently defaulted, which is definitely more than I expected at this stage, after lending for about 20 months with ReBS. I guess the big unknown is the recovery rate - I'm not holding my breath, though!
|
|
|
Post by rb5286 on May 13, 2016 7:40:50 GMT
Thanks for getting back so quickly Rebs rep. I had 3 loans that were put in the 'default category' this week, so there has recently been loans moved into the 'default' category. Before they were in trouble, but this wasn't reflected on the dashboard. I know that you've taken a more robust attitude to businesses that have fallen behind on payments, which is fair enough, businesses fail after all. Hence, the big increase in defaults this year. What worries me is that some businesses/individuals that have defaulted seem to have committed outright fraud!
Also, you're right that a 10% increase on your investment is great, if you have the opportunity to diversify, but it costs a substantial amount of money to buy the good loans on the SM (if they're even available). It seems that the new loans on offer at the time I was buying weren't great, even though they seemed attractive on paper.
What about offering the option to buy a little bit of every loan?
That being said, I knew the risks when I started, which is why I diversified over over different p2p platforms, bonds, index EFT's, property etc... The most important rule in the investment world is: don't lose money
|
|
|
Post by rebsrep on May 13, 2016 8:15:56 GMT
What about offering the option to buy a little bit of every loan? This product is in the pipeline, it's very well developed, it's vital for large investors who want to quickly build a diverse portfolio. My tip at the moment is to check say 5 loans per day (if you buy those just a few days before the repayment is due you in effect get an extra months interest to negate a small premium) and grab loans you like the look of. I can't give advice on which loans to purchase (FCA rules) but there are 2 or 3 loans that have parts at large discounts even though they pay on time every month (or pay consistently a few days late). There is also a big change coming hopefully today (board meeting yesterday and now running compliance checks on the change, before it's implemented) but it might be a few more days, that I'm hoping will make new loans more appealing to lenders. So please keep checking back over the next few days.
|
|
Steerpike
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,977
Likes: 1,687
|
Post by Steerpike on May 13, 2016 8:57:52 GMT
I started investing in March 15 and decided to exit early in 2016.
I bought little or nothing on the SM but did sell (sometimes at a profit) (parts of) some loans.
Buying on the PM resulted in significant dead money waiting for loans to complete (sometimes with extensions) and/or drawdown.
I have now withdrawn just over (100.7%) the sum that I deposited.
All that remains are three distressed loans amounting to about 3% of the total sum that I deposited.
I am pleased to have got my money back.
|
|
|
Post by Reged on May 13, 2016 10:58:10 GMT
I think a key point to bear in mind is that many of the loans that have defaulted in the past appear to have done so well into their repayment cycles, so for those who invested at the outset the losses are significantly less than the bald default statistics suggest. Indeed, one or two defaults would still have shown an overall profit according to my calculations. Don't forget that each repayment made is returning both some interest and some of the capital. The figures suggest to me that the greater risk is in buying late on the secondary market.
|
|
Maestro
Member of DD Central
Posts: 87
Likes: 24
|
Post by Maestro on May 13, 2016 18:35:00 GMT
I started investing in March 15 and decided to exit early in 2016. I bought little or nothing on the SM but did sell (sometimes at a profit) (parts of) some loans. Buying on the PM resulted in significant dead money waiting for loans to complete (sometimes with extensions) and/or drawdown. I have now withdrawn just over (100.7%) the sum that I deposited. All that remains are three distressed loans amounting to about 3% of the total sum that I deposited. I am pleased to have got my money back. Similar timeline and return for me, managed to divest from Rebs earlier this year through SM sales.
|
|
shimself
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,563
Likes: 1,171
|
Post by shimself on May 16, 2016 13:51:40 GMT
... What about offering the option to buy a little bit of every loan? ... There is an autoinvest thingy a fixed amount £10+ on every proposition that comes along. When defending REBS here some months ago, I did a thorough check on all my holdings, discounted anything that was late, discounted again for pessimism and still satisfied myself that my net return is better than elsewhere (although I did find that grade A loans have the worst default history!) I then went through all the loans on the SM and broadened my investment with small sums on lots of loans. I don't care too much about paying a buyer premium as long as the net return is acceptable. So far it has been working for me.
|
|
|
Post by austrianbogeyman on May 20, 2016 0:39:07 GMT
I'm sorry to have to say this, but I warned you.
Like all of you, I was 'nudged' into risky lending by the suppression of interest rates. It's no fun when tens of thousands of pounds of the income you rely on to survive gets withheld by the central bank flooding commercial banks with 0.5% interest money in order to make life easier for the wastrel cuckservative government's £100b+ a year debt habit.
But I realised soon enough that the borrowers on the platform included lots of government contractors. There's no way these people can pay us back: they get what they get from the taxpayers so there's no way they can borrow to deliver this year's contract and have enough left over next year to pay us back. It's as simple as that. People try to dress it up as something more subtle and complex but it really isn't.
The overwhelming majority of the lenders on this platform are ill-equipped to determine (from afar!) the viability of these loans and the platform itself has every incentive to keep on handing out other people's money because their cut doesn't depend on the loans staying good. As long as business is booming they're happy bunnies, so of course they're not going to bend over backwards chasing these people.
It's actually rather humiliating seeing the comments threads with multiple persons virtually BEGGING for an update on where their hard-earned money went, with the occasional (often wildly inaccurate) scrap of mostly feel-good information coming back at them.
Quite why anyone would want to further expand credit in the current bubble economy is a mystery, but we all fell for it.
We're no better and no worse than the muppets who poured their money into housing only to be hit by regulation after regulation until the whole thing's loss-making even *before* the inevitable correction, or the sheep who bought stocks in a FTSE with a CAPE of 30!!!!
It's time to face facts guys: the ruling élite in the 21st century is violently opposed to savers and conservatives and there is nothing they won't do to you. Take precautions accordingly: get some spare clothing, some tinned food, some tools, skills and whatever else you're going to need, because you're about to get a whole lot poorer.
|
|
thebillet
Member of DD Central
Posts: 64
Likes: 21
|
Post by thebillet on May 20, 2016 6:47:44 GMT
He's back!
|
|
shimself
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,563
Likes: 1,171
|
Post by shimself on May 22, 2016 9:43:36 GMT
I'm sorry to have to say this, but I warned you. ... But I realised soon enough that the borrowers on the platform included lots of government contractors. There's no way these people can pay us back: they get what they get from the taxpayers so there's no way they can borrow to deliver this year's contract and have enough left over next year to pay us back. It's as simple as that. People try to dress it up as something more subtle and complex but it really isn't. ... Your hypothesis being that nobody who does government work makes a profit, is that it?
|
|
ben
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 589
|
Post by ben on May 22, 2016 10:12:35 GMT
most government contractors probably make more then normal contractors as the government has the amazing ability to spend money on pointless rubbish and not get value for money
|
|