Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Fred93

Pages: 1 ... 130 131 [132] 133 134 ... 141
1966
Peer Lending Server / Re: ERROR: download of notes failed
« on: July 11, 2014, 05:34:42 AM »
Here too.  Lending Club made a change Thurs in how existing notes are downloaded.  Something like this occurs about every 2 weeks.

Mr Fixit usually gets us a PLS update within a few days of one of these events.

1967
Peer Lending Server / Re: Corrections and Suggestions
« on: July 10, 2014, 03:55:59 PM »
You can catch some of those income typos by adding a maximum income to your filter.  This approach is far better than a blacklist of particular loans, as this issue will occur on future loans from time to time.

1968
Investors - LC / Re: Notes exclusively for automated investing?
« on: July 10, 2014, 03:54:19 PM »
I doubt that regulations would allow LC to restrict some of the loans to automated investing, since as an issuer they have to give equal access to everybody.

There is no such regulation.

1969
Investors - LC / Re: Change to Loan Issuing Process
« on: July 09, 2014, 12:43:17 AM »
This is so strange that I suspect it is somebody's interpretation of a legal requirement.  Perhaps some bank regulator said "Hey, unless you hold these loans for a day or two, I don't think you really originated them, but just did a sleight of hand for somebody else".

If it is simply some guys at the bank thinking they can raise their fees, surely there are a lot of banks in the world who could perform this regulatory nicety of "originating" the loans, and that ought to make for competition.

It is sad that LC people have decided to be so opaque and lie about the reason for each change.  They're obviously hiring people of a lower grade than they did in the early days.

1970
Investors - LC / Re: Change to Loan Issuing Process
« on: July 08, 2014, 11:23:01 PM »
Same time to first payment from what I read....it just will be a smaller payment. 2 business days is 2-5 actual days of interest we will lose.  I see this as a price increase

Pardon me.  However,  a smaller 1st payment and a delay in 1st payment are equivalent to lenders.  We get a lower equivalent interest rate. 

1971
Investors - LC / Re: Notes exclusively for automated investing?
« on: July 08, 2014, 10:28:15 PM »
There are 1200 loans on the site, and you can't find any?  You must have very narrow criteria.

Open up your filters.

1972
Investors - LC / Re: Change to Loan Issuing Process
« on: July 08, 2014, 10:27:06 PM »
Does this add 5 days to the already 45 days before first payment?

It used to be 30 days, but now they allow the borrower to set his 1st payment day plus or minus 15 days from the day-of-month of issue.  So it is often 45 days.  Now its 45+5 = 50 days?

Then they hold the payment for 4 business days (4 to 7 days)...

1973
Investors - LC / Re: How long are loans "In Funding"
« on: July 04, 2014, 05:37:54 PM »
Here's another view.


I cut off the graph arbitrarily at 30 days.  There are a few loans in each year that go out to 40-something.  There are also a few loans from 2009 which apparently issued before listing, and are not shown.

Looks like 2014 has been significantly quicker than other years.  Don't know why.

Just as a curiosity, here are some of the very quick and very slow loans.  quick is issue before list.  slo is >50 days.
quick id=373485 02/25/2009 00:00:00 02/22/2009 00:00:00
quick id=379014 03/03/2009 00:00:00 02/28/2009 00:00:00
quick id=380274 02/23/2009 00:00:00 02/22/2009 00:00:00
quick id=380572 02/23/2009 00:00:00 02/22/2009 00:00:00
quick id=380920 02/25/2009 00:00:00 02/22/2009 00:00:00
quick id=380998 02/26/2009 00:00:00 02/25/2009 00:00:00
quick id=381545 02/28/2009 00:00:00 02/26/2009 00:00:00
quick id=381581 03/01/2009 00:00:00 02/26/2009 00:00:00
quick id=381693 03/01/2009 00:00:00 02/26/2009 00:00:00
quick id=381812 03/03/2009 00:00:00 02/28/2009 00:00:00
quick id=381889 03/02/2009 00:00:00 02/27/2009 00:00:00
quick id=381902 03/02/2009 00:00:00 02/28/2009 00:00:00
quick id=382065 03/03/2009 00:00:00 02/27/2009 00:00:00
quick id=382129 03/03/2009 00:00:00 02/28/2009 00:00:00
quick id=382331 03/04/2009 00:00:00 02/28/2009 00:00:00
quick id=382509 03/05/2009 00:00:00 02/28/2009 00:00:00
quick id=383163 03/09/2009 00:00:00 03/06/2009 00:00:00

slo id=5607677 05/30/2013 00:00:00 07/31/2013 00:00:00
slo id=5716404 06/05/2013 00:00:00 07/31/2013 00:00:00

1974
Started to take you up on the offer...I created a user ID.....but then needed to take pictures of government ID and upload along with utility bill, social network, Paypal credentials, etc.

They make you upload paypal credentials ?  Whoa.

I guess that's how they learn how long your paypal account has existed.

1975
NSR Invest / Re: LC loan number comparison
« on: July 03, 2014, 06:44:32 PM »
Help me some more if you can. When you just append all the files you get 296879 loans. If you sort by status you find 19065 with no status issued from 7/12/2013 all the way through 3/31/2014. Removing these gives you the correct number of loans 277814.

Can you tell me what these loans are or were?

I'm not in front of my database at the moment, but look at the policy column.  Policy=2 loans are some new lower credit grade (or something) loans they're not offering to us at this time, and they've blocked out many fields.  I throw those out, for obvious reasons.

Quote
My missing loans arose because I also removed loans whose status begins "Does not meet the credit policy. Status:" followed by current, or paid in full, etc because I didn't know how to interpret this status. That is where my missing 2748 loans went.

These are not quiet period loans. Can you tell me how this "does not meet ..." status arises and what it means?

Oh yes.  That's a horrible hack where they overloaded a column with two different kinds of information.  Ok for humans maybe but the most horrible sort of nonsense for computers to read!  When people at my company do this I yell at them. 

I removed the "does not meet" substring, and left the loans in the set.  LC hasn't said anywhere public what these loans are, but someone here talked with LC about this, and there's a bit of an explanation in some message here somewhere.  Perhaps you could search for "does not meet...".  If I remember correctly it means something like the credit policy was updated after this loan was listed but before it issued.  The credit policy changes all the time I imagine, so this is something I believe we should ignore.  The fact that someone at LC thought it was appropriate to throw in some words into a column of data, and thought it was obvious and didn't require explanation is just another example of how their people don't have the same perspective as the consumers of this data, and they would benefit by talking with us more.

1976
Investors - P / Re: Prosper as a cash or CD proxy - Advice requested
« on: July 03, 2014, 05:11:33 PM »
Once your money is invested in loans every month (actually daily) some amount will be returned to your cash account as earned interest and principal paid. If your average loan return is 10%, monthly approximately 1% of your total notes will be back in your cash account. If you need a small amount of money, this can be withdrawn easily.

Agree with the principal.  The amount is higher tho.

Suppose you have a mix of 36 month and 60 month loans.  Lets call the average 48 months.  Your entire principal is paid back over 48 months, so principal alone averages a little more than 2% per month.  (ie 1/48 = about 2%)  On top of that there's interest, which might be nearly another 1% per month.  Then a significant fraction of borrowers pay off early, so in practice there's even more, maybe another 0.5%   That adds up to around 3.5%/month cash becoming available. 

If you recycle this money by buying new loans, it continues.  If you take it out or fail to reinvest it, then the amount coming out goes down each month. 

This is of course a cash flow calculation, not a returns calculation.

1977
NSR Invest / Re: LC loan number comparison
« on: July 03, 2014, 03:02:32 PM »
My database, built from the 3 file download from LC, contains 277814 loans.

1978
Investors - LC / Re: Loan Information Asymmetrical Timing
« on: July 03, 2014, 06:08:01 AM »
With my tests of CSV vs API speed, I found the CSV to be considerably faster and with consistent response times versus the API.  The API ranged in response times from 2x to 30x.

Yep.  Apparently the LC team took my comments (and data I sent them) about API speed problems to heart, and made some adjustments.   A few days ago I got a brief email that said simply "try it now".  The 10x, 20x, 30x slower numbers appear to be gone, and now the API BrowseLoans function responds with similar speed as the CSV.  (API is maybe as much as 1.5x the CSV time in my recent tests.)  Still seems more variable than it should be, and not nearly as fast as it could be, so I believe more gain is possible.

Asked them what they changed, but so far they've been silent. 

Now loanBrowseLoans(all) takes me on the order of 1 second, instead of the 10 to 40 seconds I had seen in the past.  I've given them an argument for why it could be 200ms, (because its about 1.5 Megabytes of data, which should take 400ms to arrive over my 30Mbps cable modem service, and if they would turn on compression in their http server, the size would be cut in half, which computes to 200ms) but don't have any evidence that I managed to engage them on these points.

Meanwhile, I can't argue with the improvement so far.

Did get a brief comment today that they are working on some of the API deficiencies described in my memo.   No specifics.

Overall very positive, tho still a bit mysterious.

1979
Found it!  Oh man.  A typo in my big field name translation table.  Knew I shouldn't have typed that in the middle of the night.

Thanks again.

1980
Our results don't match. I think you may have parsing error looking at 383 in months since recent inquiry. It is too long (31 years).

Ah ha!  Exactly the kind of feedback I was looking for.   I translated the CSV format historical data to the form present in the API.  Lots of room for errors.  I'll go track it down.

Pages: 1 ... 130 131 [132] 133 134 ... 141