|
|
Post by khampson on Jun 7, 2016 5:06:05 GMT
I have been a fc user for a few years, my question is can it still compete with other platforms for instance a A+ rated loan is listed at 8.3% but after bad debt and fees it says predicted return 6.3% but Assetz capital offer a product that is covered by the provision fun at 7% so is it worth the hard work of trolling through the information for each loan to see if it's worth the 0.7% less return?
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875 
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Jun 7, 2016 6:41:54 GMT
Over and above the AC provision fund, AC loans all have hard asset-backed security whereas FC SME loans mostly have nothing more solid behind them than a Personal Guarantee. Personally speaking, the only FC A+ SME loans I've ever bought were ones that closed early (pre-Sept 15 !) with my bids in at >10%.
|
|
|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on Jun 7, 2016 7:31:43 GMT
I agree... A+ is ridiculous. If they are really A+ now, how can we believe that they will still be A+ in 3 or 5 years? If they're really A+ they'd probably borrow elsewhere anyway. Ds and Es for me.
FC is really an institution/ autobid platform now, IMO.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Jun 7, 2016 7:49:59 GMT
I agree... A+ is ridiculous. If they are really A+ now, how can we believe that they will still be A+ in 3 or 5 years? If they're really A+ they'd probably borrow elsewhere anyway. Ds and Es for me. FC is really an institution/ autobid platform now, IMO. I did 'like' this, but then thought that it is such a good assessment of FC 2016 that you have to agree more fully. Also institution/autobid is probably where FC wants it to be - dispose of those pesky and costly experienced lenders. The hope for me is that the IFISA comes soon and I can buy some high rate property refinances into it - otherwise ...
|
|
bigfoot12
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,817
Likes: 816
|
Post by bigfoot12 on Jun 7, 2016 8:29:21 GMT
I have been a fc user for a few years, my question is can it still compete with other platforms for instance a A+ rated loan is listed at 8.3% but after bad debt and fees it says predicted return 6.3% but Assetz capital offer a product that is covered by the provision fun at 7% so is it worth the hard work of trolling through the information for each loan to see if it's worth the 0.7% less return? Of course if you put any money in AC it will pay 7% on virtually none of it at the moment. If you are lucky you might get 3.75% on some of it. AC seemed to shrink last year and having finally fixed their shortage of new loans the pipeline is broken again. FC have done a reasonable job of matching supply and demand. I think that the average return (of all loans) is somewhere about 7% after fees and bad debts, and because they have hundreds of new loans every month it should be easy to build a reasonably diversified portfolio. I like AC but if they can't maintain the loan flow they won't survive. Many of the newer loans have lower rates than in the past, I can't see them being able to pay into a provision fund and pay 7% if the loans visible in the pipeline are typical. I agree... A+ is ridiculous. If they are really A+ now, how can we believe that they will still be A+ in 3 or 5 years? If they're really A+ they'd probably borrow elsewhere anyway. Ds and Es for me. FC is really an institution/ autobid platform now, IMO. I am 50% in Ds and Es, so I am not disagreeing with you, but at least FC SME loans are amortizing so in 3 or 5 years most of the loan is paid back, which is less true of loans on other platforms.
|
|
|
|
Post by jackpease on Jun 7, 2016 11:25:29 GMT
I've been doing okay with FC having returned to them after forays elsewhere eg FK and Rebs which haven't gone as planned.
But since about April rates have dropped - i could flounce off 'I'm out' etc etc but then Ratesetter rates are down, Wellesley rates are down etc etc as like FC they are no doubt matching supply with demand.
I shall stick with FC as I suspect we as lenders need to cut our rate expectations just as low risk borrowers are able to borrow increasingly cheaply.
Too many borrowers have been dazzled by 12% platforms then in recent days start to contemplate the real meaning of risk and then turn on the platform when something doesn't go to plan. Even younger platforms may appear to offer a lot but have young loans which have not started to go wrong yet.
Jack P
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2016 15:27:54 GMT
I've been doing okay with FC having returned to them after forays elsewhere eg FK and Rebs which haven't gone as planned. But since about April rates have dropped - i could flounce off 'I'm out' etc etc but then Ratesetter rates are down, Wellesley rates are down etc etc as like FC they are no doubt matching supply with demand. I shall stick with FC as I suspect we as lenders need to cut our rate expectations just as low risk borrowers are able to borrow increasingly cheaply. Too many borrowers have been dazzled by 12% platforms then in recent days start to contemplate the real meaning of risk and then turn on the platform when something doesn't go to plan. Even younger platforms may appear to offer a lot but have young loans which have not started to go wrong yet. Jack P Happy to disagree with you. FC is not good anymore for experienced investors. FC is totally mismanaged, even the 'easy' A+ property loans are going seriously bad with them and the management, after a period of free lending, now is badly dealing with non-repayments, which is occurring in 100% of my property loans (more than 10 now 'late' with an indefinite repayment date). Just not to talk about the long string of fraud coming from lawyers on FC for example (I had 4 defaults from them!), where almost nothing is recovered (and in some cases with extra luxurious homes sold by wifes....). SME loans to me are DEAD, extremly risky on a Platform like FC which is not capable of running after defaulters in any case. SS is definitely a lower risk and higher value proposition, where the asset behind each loans are real and solid. Yes there is risk of course. Valutation might not correspond to the sale price in case of defaults, but at least the asset don't magically disappear, as I have seen for 2+ million guarantees on FC...
|
|
kt
Posts: 105 
Likes: 39
|
Post by kt on Jun 7, 2016 18:11:35 GMT
I do not understand why anyone would take a part of a loan which is to cover the repayment of a previous loan.
On top of that I do not think that FC have the appropriate knowledge to correctly price property. I have avoided property.
You say that 10 property loans are now late. By how long? I wonder how many are failing to pay the principle back. Perhaps we should build a list here.
KT.
|
|
|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on Jun 7, 2016 18:26:43 GMT
All the late ones are, by definition, failing to repay the principal .. that's the only way they can be late (on the final payment). Typically by 1-3 months, although some by only a few days (so far).
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Jun 7, 2016 19:22:02 GMT
I do not understand why anyone would take a part of a loan which is to cover the repayment of a previous loan. On top of that I do not think that FC have the appropriate knowledge to correctly price property. I have avoided property. You say that 10 property loans are now late. By how long? I wonder how many are failing to pay the principle back. Perhaps we should build a list here. KT. There is nothing wrong with lending to a refinance of a late running FC property loan. But perhaps wise to get out of the refinance before the repayments left drops to 1 and the horror starts all over again.
|
|
