So the higher the number the higher the risk? The number seems more predictive than the letter! Does this perhaps suggest there could be an algorithm override happening? Perhaps I got the wrong end of the stick - again!
Printable View
The number in the second chart (y-axis) is the total number of defaults for that grade - these numbers are for my loans.
If you compare my C and D loans, D loans have had less defaults than C loans (by one) and I have more D's than C's - so D's are well ahead of C's for my loans. (i.e. D's are showing lower 'risk' than C's for my loans)
Selection of loans is different for everyone, so my results won't be indicative of someone else's, but they do show that using Harmoney generated average values can provide poor indications of actual risk/return.
Very interesting Myles.
It looks like for your loan book, defaults for C4 and C5 are worse than D1, D2, D3 and D4, and again D5 is worse than any Es.
As you say, it may indeed be because of your selection criteria, which I presume is a mix of grade-related criteria items (employment status, residence status, marital status, age, income, ratio) and non-grade-related (loan purpose, loan length, pp). If your selection criteria was purely related to items which influence the grade, then you'd expect your figures to be similar to HM, but obviously it's not.
Harmoney raises more Financing for Ozzy expansion....
https://www.interest.co.nz/news/1023...-and-2-unnamed
wow:
In the interest article:
Harmoney describes itself as a digital platform lender. Although it was licensed by the Financial Markets Authority as a P2P lender in 2014, Roberts says he now can't see a viable P2P lending model in New Zealand which is why Harmoney has started lending its own money.
So the founder of Harmoney cannot see a viable P2P lending future in NZ.
New scorecard (1.6) will be in force this Thursday (7th Nov)
Reached $5k in interest today, so thought it was timely to share some stats. I've really slowed down this year, due to the reduced quantity of loans hitting the retail marketplace, and tightening up on my investment criteria.
Total loans = 1,008
Average amount invested per loan = $39.63
Average age of loan in portfolio (current status) = 341 days
Average weighted interest rate (current status) = 20.73%
RAR (as at 26-10-2019) = 15.45%
XIRR (as at 6-11-2019) = 9.20%*
*adjusted by writing-off any loans that are 60+ days in arrears
Loan Book:
A = 32 loans
B = 232 loans
C = 333 loans
D = 308 loans
E = 89 loans
F = 14 loans
Attachment 10832
Attachment 10833
Attachment 10834
Nice going Alundra. I've hit the two year mark and approaching 15k on 80k active. Diversified across several P2P with around 200k in overall (a year ago had 70% in HM, now only 40%).
Its going to be a tougher environment returnwise with 1.6. The loans from H2 2018 are now 70% repaid, so 6 months max of RARs at the higher level, and then reducing quick as scorecard 1.6 loans replace the rewrites in the portfolio..
Static Loss Data H2 2017 H1 2018 H2 2018 H1 2019 H2 2019 OVERALL Count 203 525 1,141 781 870 3,520 Origin Amnt $ 6,809 $ 19,083 $ 45,546 $33,193 $ 41,642 146,272 Months 22 16 10 4 - 1 Interest Paid $ 1,285 $ 2,929 $ 6,183 $2,828 $ 994 14,219 Principal Repaid $ 5,719 $ 15,728 $ 30,251 $ 11,811 $ 2,701 66,209 Principal Remaining $ 905 $ 3,194 $ 14,800 $21,252 $ 38,941 79,093 Principal 31+ Days in Arrears $ 27 $ 79 $ 636 $ 730 $ 480 1,951 Default $ 185 $ 161 $ 495 $ 130 $ - 970 Expect Default - Full Term $ 445 $ 981 $ 1,641 $1,471 $ 1,835 6,373 HM Cohort Static Loss 3.80% 2.01% 0.96% 0.01% 0.00% 0.74% Portfolio Static Loss 2.71% 0.84% 1.09% 0.39% 0.00% 0.66% Expect Static Loss 6.53% 5.14% 3.60% 4.43% 4.41% 4.36%
Quick question re Harmoney's behaviour as regards to institutions vs retail investors.
This morning, I was monitoring the listings, refreshing often as I had some money to invest in loans. It was a good morning actually, and quickly some loans appeared. A D2, 2 D4s, a E5, a C1 and a F1. And then, but quite a while later, a B4. Now the B4 has a loan ID lower than the all the ones mentioned (LAI-00178855 for those who were monitoring too). Which to me means the application was completed earlier (am I right?).
So my question is: do we as retail investors see those "safer loans" after institutions have had first dibs, whereas those institutions (or HM) are happy for us to see the riskier loans first?
Because if that is not the case, then why are we seeing loans appear not in the order of their loan ID?