ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 1,088
|
Post by ashtondav on Dec 5, 2019 15:12:06 GMT
In terms solely of "risk" is there any difference between the 90day account and QAA? In other words if "Business As Usual" came to a grinding halt aren't withdrawals from every account stopped or slowed, or is priority given to QAA, then 30 day and finally 90 day?
In other words if (a la FC) delays went to 3 months the QAA account becomes a 90 day account and the 90 day account becomes a 180 day account. The only difference is the 3 months, so if you are unlikely to be in need of funds for, say 6 months, there is no advantage in using the QAA. This is especially the case if you are in 90 day and immediately issue a withdraw order - where you'd average a 45 day account.
Or am i muddled (highly likely)
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 1,088
|
Post by ashtondav on Dec 5, 2019 10:32:56 GMT
Calculating from the tax statements with custom dates.
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 1,088
|
Post by ashtondav on Dec 4, 2019 18:41:14 GMT
Wow...the only reported sale so far today on this thread is a single £13.57 sale by mikeh Hoping we get a move on tomorrow! Ah, I have not been paying attention since the change. I cancelled all my sales on the 1st, I am not eager enough to sell at a discount so will just let nature take its course with the fairly modest amounts I have left in. Just need to avoid the temptation to try and pick some up, arguably if they looked 'iffy' they could be sold on at the same value. This, together with the declining sales from July according to page 1, will mean sellers will be out probably in 3 or 4 months
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 1,088
|
Post by ashtondav on Dec 4, 2019 14:01:01 GMT
My last month hasn’t been too bad £240 interest, £102 bad debt on £31,000 so if maintained (BIG IF) heading for 5.2%.
Year to Dec 6 was 3.2%,
six months to Dec 6th 2.2% or 4.4% annualised.
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 1,088
|
Post by ashtondav on Dec 4, 2019 12:56:13 GMT
For me 3.6% core 4.1% plus
For the wife 3.3% core 2.6% plus. Her performance page gives the helpful comment:
“It looks like your current NAR for Plus is below target. This might be because your loans have had a higher than expected default rate so far” we’ll i’ll Be damned - surely not!
As an early adopter (2005) I get a bonus 1% so i’m Not displeased with 4.6% and 5.1%. But it’s still shocking compared to what I get on RS (before recent changes) and AC (for 90 day money), hence my investment dropping from well over £100,000 to about £20,000.
The wife’s portfolio performance on £16,000 invested is appalling. It beggars belief, actually.
To be honest I can’t think of a reason for investing in a p2p with no provision fund. In fact I can’t think why I would invest in an under delivering platform that offers no security backing for its loans and no provision fund, well I suppose Zopa is the platform least likely to collapse. That’s it’s only unique selling point, and I hold as diversification only.
Assetz Capital 90 day, 30 day and QAA for new funds until Zopa delivers the returns it advertises.
The poor Zopa products seem to imply to me that they attach more importance to their banking initiative.
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 1,088
|
Post by ashtondav on Dec 3, 2019 18:42:09 GMT
60% effectively ditching LW. I guess it will reduce cash drag for the remaining 40%. Lets hope the 40% have the biggest wedge.
Bl**dy hell, Mathew reassure, please. REASSURE...
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 1,088
|
Post by ashtondav on Dec 3, 2019 18:27:05 GMT
Hmmm, a lot of planning in the industry for "collapse".
Quite depressing talk in a new industry.
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 1,088
|
Post by ashtondav on Dec 3, 2019 18:24:36 GMT
Well, assuming the members of this forum are the best informed and probably the larger investors, the results of this poll show the industry has a lot of work to do. The recent knee jerk reactions of AC, RS, LW, FC and the inability to get anywhere near the advertised rates on ZOPA must end.
A LOT OF WORK. So get bl**dy cracking.
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 1,088
|
Post by ashtondav on Dec 3, 2019 17:58:17 GMT
But now, today the £140M investment has been confirmed.
Watch this space...
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 1,088
|
Post by ashtondav on Dec 3, 2019 9:02:03 GMT
From the page you linked: "This is prior to actual and expected recoveries (which are taken into account in the bad debt rate figures above)."
Any defaulted loan gets added to that subtotal, even if full recovery has already been made resulting in no eventual loss to investors.
Yes but that applies to both the "expected" and "actual" default rates, so it doesn't look to me like it should account for any of the large difference between the values. The default rate doesn't depend on recoveries anyway. Even if AC are good at predicting losses, being bad at predicting default rates would seem to say something about their ability to assess the risks of loans. The loss rate also includes the recoveries and the 3.85%/3.75% figures look to refer to that - the default rates and losses figures could be consistent if recoveries were somehow much better than predicted, although I doubt that's the case, so I still feel confused... So am I. Very confused. And the nature and content of this thread’s responses shows it is indeed confusing...
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 1,088
|
Post by ashtondav on Dec 2, 2019 18:49:07 GMT
Aha, so like the workings of the PF it's a mystery wrapped in an enigma...
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 1,088
|
Post by ashtondav on Dec 2, 2019 18:39:41 GMT
Probably going for higher quality smaller volume borrowers who attract lower rates - hence the cr*p thats available for lenders on Max. And it's not even Max, as it was "maxxed" by 1 year today. What a shower!
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 1,088
|
Post by ashtondav on Dec 2, 2019 16:45:02 GMT
Cant believe we reached page 102 and the problems are still not resolved. The only resolution is increased demand from lenders. And if they even sniff this thread that ain’t gonna happen. The 1.25% might help, though.
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 1,088
|
Post by ashtondav on Dec 2, 2019 16:42:09 GMT
The average loan duration is 40 months 14.6% funds are in currently suspended loans (based on original loan values; actual values should make this look better because amortising loans shrink over time; those numbers are not in the loan book). Assuming all suspended loans are in default, which is a worst case assumption, and a recovery rate of 85% as per years 2013-15 (stated on that statistics page) one would predict a 2.2% bad debt rate. Thanks for that, Corto. I can understand that logic when you put it that way. But how good good is ACTUALLY at predicting defaults. According to their headline they’re gold star. According to the stat quoted in post 1 they’re a little below bronze.
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,812
Likes: 1,088
|
Post by ashtondav on Dec 2, 2019 14:05:15 GMT
Er, neither of those stories say they have secured the funding. Just that they "are set to get the funding". As an early lender i have ZOPA share options - i've been "set to get funding" for some years, now
In short, this is yesterday's news...
|
|