LC Eliminating 41 credit data fields from note download... goodbye modeling

[TonySaunders]

When I look at the bigger picture I consider this to be a reasonable thing for LC to do.

[Kombinator]

Can you explain how giving less data and choices to your customers even though the data is clearly available and useful a good thing to do in the long run?

One of the good things about the platforms has been their transparency and data sharing, if they take away half of the data sets there is now way that is good.

[TonySaunders]

It may not be "good". But I think it's "reasonable".

This may be the best solution for keeping the playing field theoretically level. You can't reasonably expect them to undergo a large development effort on the website in order to offer 41 new ambiguously-useful and overwhelmingly-various filters for every investor. That plus any other number of complications-we-don't-know-about (e.g. time constraints) probably makes this move the best solution.

None of it need be permanent... they are quite able to piecemeal-add filters/fields for everyone equally as it is expedient to do so in the future.

LC has made keeping-it-fair moves that were to the advantage of small-investors-with-automation in the past, and I appreciate the continued effort regardless of whether it is a slight upon my practices.

[rawraw]

It may not be "good". But I think it's "reasonable".

This may be the best solution for keeping the playing field theoretically level. You can't reasonably expect them to undergo a large development effort on the website in order to offer 41 new ambiguously-useful and overwhelmingly-various filters for every investor.

IMO They made it level by going in the opposite direction they should have. 

[hoggy1]

 
Removed Date Fields:
accept_d
exp_d
list_d
 
Removed Credit Attribute Fields:
acc_now_delinq
acc_open_past_24mths
bc_open_to_buy
percent_bc_gt_75
bc_util
delinq_amnt
mths_since_recent_inq
mths_since_recent_revol_delinq
mths_since_recent_bc
mort_acc
total_bal_ex_mort
total_bc_limit
total_il_high_credit_limit
num_rev_accts
mths_since_recent_bc_dlq
pub_rec_bankruptcies
num_accts_ever_120_pd
chargeoff_within_12_mths
tax_liens
num_sats
num_tl_op_past_12m
mo_sin_rcnt_tl
tot_hi_cred_lim             
tot_cur_bal
avg_cur_bal
num_bc_tl
num_actv_bc_tl
num_bc_sats
pct_tl_nvr_dlq
num_tl_90g_dpd_24m
num_tl_30dpd
num_tl_120dpd_2m
num_il_tl
mo_sin_old_il_acct
num_actv_rev_tl
mo_sin_old_rev_tl_op
mo_sin_rcnt_rev_tl_op
total_rev_hi_lim
num_rev_tl_bal_gt_0
num_op_rev_tl               
tot_coll_amt[/i]

My scoring system uses all the highlighted fields. I think my little LC experiment just ended.

[TonySaunders]

Now that I look at this list... I don't understand the motive for removing some of these. Regular users CAN see metrics like "Delinquent Amount". Why would they remove that from use by automation?

EDIT: Is there some part of the site that doesn't have this information available? Doesn't that seem like a pretty important and useful metric?

EDIT: Perhaps they will be adding new fields with the same data under a more consistent heading?

EDIT: Presumably, this means that they will be removing it from use by regular users as well. Otherwise it's a screen scraping game (again).

[TonySaunders]

I think this entire thread may have jumped into hysterical speculation.

Read the message carefully. (Link below.) It definitely says that all the data will still be available via the "download all" CSV file on the "My Notes" page. It does NOT specifically say that the data will not be available via the REST API. It only says that some areas of the site are changing.

I find the information WAAAAY too ambiguous for us to be assuming that it's getting ripped out of the API. They are clearly still fine with us having the data because you can still download it. It says that some format changes will be made in the API, but not that the API will definitely be limited.

http://kb.lendingclub.com/siteupdates/articles/Site_Updates/Recent-and-upcoming-changes-to-the-downloadable-data-files-and-API-services/?l=en_US&fs=Search&pn=1

EDIT: If the data is available in our downloadable note data and not in the API.. then it's like they are okay with us knowing about current delinquencies only AFTER we buy a note but not before. So is it a game of buying them to find out which ones suck, and then selling the ones you don't like?

[GS]

The way I read, it does say that the data files will be modified:

Upcoming Changes
As early as December 10, 2014 we will be making corresponding updates in the following places:

    The “Download All” file available on the Browse Notes page within your account
    The REST API Listed Loan service
    The SOAP API Browse Loans service

Then goes on to list what will be removed....

I think there is a better way to handle this.  Would it really be that difficult to add a "more credit data" link on each note's browse page, and provide these data points to all users?  I think even I could write that code.  It doesn't have to be filterable, just show it on a webpage.

I really think this is another bad decision on LC's part ... they've done some good things, but seems like too many bad things, recently. 

[AnilG]

Agree with you. Leveling the field is just an excuse to reduce the amount of information available to lenders to make smart decisions. From credit modeling, note selection, and determining overall borrower quality on marketplace lending platform perspective, it is not a good move to reduce the number of available loan and borrower attributes.

Lending Club is removing almost half of the available loan attributes. This is going to benefit Prosper as they provide 500+ loan attributes for their listings compared to less than 100 that LC was providing.

The way I read, it does say that the data files will be modified:

Then goes on to list what will be removed....

I think there is a better way to handle this.  Would it really be that difficult to add a "more credit data" link on each note's browse page, and provide these data points to all users?  I think even I could write that code.

I really think this is another bad decision on LC's part ... they've done some good things, but seems like too many bad things, recently.

[hoggy1]

I hadn't bothered to open a Prosper account until now. LC just can't be trusted. The data has always been poor with lots of errors and inconsistencies. They decided to fix things;"Hey, I got an idea! Why don't we just remove all the data? That will stop their bitching."

[rawraw]

Has anyone emailed LC to get their response about this?  If not, I will tomorrow

[TonySaunders]

I hadn't bothered to open a Prosper account until now. LC just can't be trusted.

Prosper once turned off the ability to trade on the trading platform for the entire state of Washington with no warning at all for 3 months. My money went from somewhat liquid to totally frozen overnight. I haven't put a penny into Prosper since then.

They didn't even LET US KNOW it would happen. I'll never go back. Even if I quit LC, I'll never go back to Prosper.

[hoggy1]

You won't even be able top tell if a borrower has current delinquencies. Astonishing!

[Thatguybil]

This is nuts.

[Lovinglifestyle]

I hadn't bothered to open a Prosper account until now. LC just can't be trusted.

Prosper once turned off the ability to trade on the trading platform for the entire state of Washington with no warning at all for 3 months. My money went from somewhat liquid to totally frozen overnight. I haven't put a penny into Prosper since then.

They didn't even LET US KNOW it would happen. I'll never go back. Even if I quit LC, I'll never go back to Prosper.

That's what I said too, just from hearing about Core's experiences.  I remember the Washington problem.  I didn't like it when they shut down their forum either. With so few loans,  wouldn't going back be a waste of time--or do people switching over go to higher loan amounts?