Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Investors - LC / Re: Dear LC
« Last post by nonattender on Today at 02:27:07 PM »
And yes, the Fed has announced plans to raise.  But they will immediately cut the next recession.  These are bets that can make you money (if correct) on which will happen first.  It is hard for me to imagine CD rates of 3% in 6-9 months.  That would be a 100bp increase.  The futures market only expects ~2 increases through 2020.  Again, money can be made if you have conviction in that bet.

Where's that bookie?

The bookie is your favorite CME futures brokerage.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/20/goldman-the-fed-will-need-to-stop-economy-from-overheating-next-year.html

(Glad you're back to doing all that heavy chart work!)
2
No; sorry but I haven't ever really looked into it.
3
Thx Rob - do you know anywhere they document that activity?  I know the 424(b)(3) filings on Edgar have a column that tells you how much of the loan LC funded.
4
If things haven't changed then if an approved loan isn't fully funded then LC will fund the shortfall itself. This has always been a very small amount.
5
So I'm trying to figure out if there is such a thing as a loan that makes it through LC's application process but then doesn't get funded?  My understanding of the usual data sources they provide (https://www.lendingclub.com/info/download-data.action) are
1.  loans that make it through the application screen and are successfully funded.
2.  loans that don't make it through the application screen

Is there such a thing as :
3. loans that make it through the application screen and are NOT successfully funded

If by chance they're in the usual data sources LC gives, how would I pick out those loans?
6
Investors - LC / Re: Dear LC
« Last post by Rob L on Today at 10:42:17 AM »
I like the visual representation. Part of the issue to consider is that we naturally assume prior LC returns are the benchmark, but they could have been too high to begin with. As a result, it may be interesting to separate out impacts from credit quality and impacts from changing interest rates. I imagine that is much harder to calculate though

Okay, I already did that but it was part of the "I don't want to bore you" data I omitted  ;)

The second chart below is very interesting. It appears that LC lowered its lending standards very significantly in 14Q3, 14Q4. One trick to reading the tables is to recognize that equal calendar dates fall on diagonals, For example calendar time 14Q3 MOB 36 is the same as 14Q4 MOB 33 is the same as 15Q1 MOB 30,etc. We know the LC scandal began in mid-May 2016 or half way into 16Q2 MOB 1. If the scandal contributed to an increase in charge offs they should begin to show up maybe 6 months later. The scandal charge off periods include 16Q2 MOB 9-15, 16Q1 MOB 9-18, 15Q4 MOB 12-21, and 15Q3 MOB 15-24. On the earlier side 15Q3 seems to have been completely unaffected by the scandal. I can only conclude that lending standards were significantly higher in this and earlier vintages. They are also past the peak charge off months. But 15Q4 was probably hit with the double wammy of a lowered lending standards by LC and the effects of the scandal. For vintages 16Q3 and later LC's originations plummeted and there isn't enough data determine if lending standards have been raised.

In the final chart (MOB to MOB within Vintage) data has the characteristic shape rising steeply in first 12-18 months then tapering off.
Just what you would expect. Everything is better since 16Q2 but better is relative and still looks pretty dismal. It's early yet so guess we'll tune in later and find out.

So, here it is (LC, Grade C, 36 month term only):


7
Investors - LC / Re: Dear LC
« Last post by Rob L on Today at 08:49:00 AM »
All the data below has been compiled for C grade notes...
If you want a view of the good old days (and 14Q1 wasn't the very best):


You've found a beautiful way to display this.  I like this chart best.

Was this 36 month only, or mixed 36 & 60 ?

Thanks for the complement.
All the tables are 36 month only. I haven't looked at the 60's at all. Should have made that clear from the get go.
8
Investors - LC / Re: Kind of bittersweet these last few days...
« Last post by dr.everett on Today at 12:02:10 AM »
More on the bittersweet feelings. My taxable account is now down to about 200 notes, total of about $2k left. The remainders are Late notes that probably will not sell and will eventually charge off, along with about 50-ish current notes. Now all that's left is letting it finish winding down. I'll continue to discount what's remaining up to a point, but nothing to incur any significant losses.

My IRA account is winding down- starting to increase the discount gradually to keep the notes selling there. Given what I've seen liquidating both accounts, I think I may be done around March/April 2018 timeframe. Learned a lot doing this. Especially patience.

The liquidation journey has been interesting- I looked at the numbers a few days ago and managed to turn a significant loss into a small profit. Taxes will surely be interesting in a few months as well. (Not looking forward to that...)

Fundrise is up and running and I know what to do when the next (final) batch is ready.

LC Stock is on it's way back up- yeah- looking forwards to a $2-3 swing. Gotta end a somewhat depressing post on a high note. ;)

Good luck to all still here- I try to check things out still from time to time. May still come back in the future if things change. The IRA will stay put, but the "mad" money may return if/when the winds change for the better.
9
Investors - LC / Re: Dear LC
« Last post by rawraw on November 20, 2017, 08:10:57 PM »
I like the visual representation. Part of the issue to consider is that we naturally assume prior LC returns are the benchmark, but they could have been too high to begin with. As a result, it may be interesting to separate out impacts from credit quality and impacts from changing interest rates. I imagine that is much harder to calculate though
10
Investors - LC / Re: Dear LC
« Last post by Fred93 on November 20, 2017, 07:19:59 PM »
All the data below has been compiled for C grade notes...
If you want a view of the good old days (and 14Q1 wasn't the very best):


You've found a beautiful way to display this.  I like this chart best.

Was this 36 month only, or mixed 36 & 60 ?
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10