No to a change in number of notes - I made that change last year.
Yes to a change in investment criteria - dropped from taking a lowest grade of B5 down to B2.
I'm not sure that change has made all of the difference, but certainly some of it.
Printable View
:)
I think you've got to be a bit careful making assumptions from this level of data. Just skimming the actual values, it looks like large investors (i.e. more loans), typically have a significantly higher RAR than those with fewer loans.
Probably because large investors have a better understanding of which are the better loans, and possibly because they are less risk averse.
Smaller investors, possibly more risk averse, selecting lower grade loans - so lower RAR. More of these smaller investors pushing the mean well down from actual?
Interesting but I have a bigger portfolio and not enough loans available to replace repayments. I have considered reducing diversification but don't feel comfortable that I could achieve enough quickly enough to grow my portfolio that way. I have also lost a little confidence in Harmoney to be brutally honest.
Agree. Since I started investing with Harmoney I've been 'astounded' at their complete lack of communication with Investors. I think in the early days they did, even had some staff posting here. It really comes down to blind faith, which is now waning for most.
A few 'lender' based posts on their blog, here or even Facebook, would be beneficial:
- when/why changes are made
- some detail of the current poor loan supply
- will poor loan supply continue/improve
- future 'planned' changes
- anything really
:t_down:
I think that if someone was able to get into the data it might be found that Harmoney was losing far more than its shareholders wanted, in just running the platform, so the decision was taken to manage that loss by investing in its own right, using BNZ funding, and to heck with the impact on the actual Peers in the P2P concept. If that is so, then our exposures are going to trend to zero, while our arrears will trend higher (as I have noticed in recent months).
Tend to agree, and why wouldn't shareholders run the business in their interests?! Cash level is getting ridiculous but I have decided to give it a little longer and have upped the investment per loan and dropped a little further into the A zone. I will feel a whole lot more comfortable when I have a few hundred loans at the new level!
More competition for P2P platforms:
Fintechs plotting a revolution in SME lending
Prospa already up and running by the looks - not sure what sort of interest rates they offer (dependant on the business, time in business etc.).
Harbour Asset Management has been investing in Harmoney loans
http://investmentnews.co.nz/investme...an-disclosure/
Brown said the fund currently held about $600,000 in roughly 200 underlying Harmoney loans - means an average to $3000 per loan. I wonder if they're buying on the retail platform or if they're getting special access as an institution and beating the rest of us to the loans?
I was told recently that $2m was the minimum for wholesale but that they are not taking any more applications. Zip chance on either score!
Massive cock-up on my part yesterday. I had just bought a loan on Lending Crowd. I then went on to Harmoney and placed an order with the dollar amount not units! Something made me go back and check a little later but it was too late! Just raised my amount per loan too!
Another 10% of my portfolio turned to cash since last month and not a loan seen which meets my longstanding (3 year) set of criteria. Someone is getting to cherry pick before us.
I know the Harmoney ads I'm being served up on various platforms aren't making any mention of P2P.
I also liked this bit from the http://investmentnews.co.nz/investme...an-disclosure/ article:
"Brown said Harbour also did extensive due diligence on Harmoney before embarking on the peer-to-peer loans including a review of the platform’s credit ranking system and client servicing practices.
“We looked at a couple of other peer-to-peer platforms but Harmoney was the only one with critical mass and a reasonable historical record,” he said. “As investors you want to know the platform will be there in five years time.”"
Ironic much?