• curiouscat.com
  • About
  • Books
  • Glossary

    Categories

    • All
    • carnival (41)
    • chart (8)
    • Cool (35)
    • Credit Cards (45)
    • economic data (62)
    • Economics (439)
    • economy (126)
    • Financial Literacy (292)
    • Investing (324)
    • Personal finance (356)
    • Popular (43)
    • quote (194)
    • Real Estate (120)
    • Retirement (65)
    • Saving (90)
    • Stocks (158)
    • Taxes (51)
    • Tips (129)
    • Travel (7)

    Tags

    Asia banking bonds capitalism chart China commentary consumer debt Credit Cards credit crisis curiouscat debt economic data Economics economy employment energy entrepreneur Europe Financial Literacy government health care housing India interest rates Investing Japan John Hunter manufacturing markets micro-finance mortgage Personal finance Popular quote Real Estate regulation Retirement save money Saving spending money Stocks Taxes Tips USA

    Recently Posts

    • New Health Care Insurance Subsidies in the USA
    • Individual Stock Portfolio Investment Planning
    • Finding Great Investments Keeps Getting Harder
    • Huge Growth in USA Corporate Debt from 2005 to 2020
    • Retirement Portfolio Allocation for 2020
    • Tencent Gaming
    • Tucows: Building 3 Businesses With Strong Positive Cash Flow
    • The 20 Most Valuable Companies in the World – Jan 2019
    • 20 Most Popular Posts on the Curious Cat Investing and Economics Blog in 2018
    • An Inverted Yield Curve Predicts Recessions in the USA
  • Blogroll

    • Curious Cat Management Improvement Blog
    • Freakonomics
    • I Will Teach You to be Rich
    • Jubak Picks
  • Links

    • Articles on Investing
    • fool.com
    • Investing Books
    • Investment Dictionary
    • Leading Investors
    • Marketplace
    • Trickle Up
  • Subscribe

    • RSS Feed

    Curious Cat Kivans

    • Making a Difference

Investing and Economics Blog

Peer to Peer Portfolio Returns and The Decline in Returns as Loans Age

This is a continuation of my previous post: Investing in Peer to Peer Loans

LendingClub suggest a minimum of 100 loans (of equal size) to escape the risk of your luck with individual loans causing very bad results. Based on this diversity the odds of avoiding a loss have been very good (though that obviously isn’t a guarantee of future performance), quote from their website (Nov 2015):

With just $2,500 you can spread your investment across 100 Notes. 99.9% of investors that own 100+ Notes of relatively equal size have seen positive returns.

chart of expected returns

This chart, from LendingClub, shows a theoretical (not based on past performance) result. The basic idea is that as the portfolio ages, more loans will default and thus the portfolio return will decline. This contrasts with other investments (such as stocks) that will show fluctuating returns going up and down (over somewhat dramatically) over time.

For portfolios of personal loans diversity is very important to avoid the risk of getting a few loans that default destroying your portfolio return. For portfolios with fewer than 100 notes the negative returns are expected in 12.8% of the cases (obviously this is a factor of the total loans – with 99 loans it would be much less likely to be negative, with 5 it would be much more likely). I would say targeting at least 250 loans with none over .5% would be better than aiming at just 100 loans with none over 1% of portfolio.

There are several very useful sites that examine the past results of Lending Club loans and provide some suggestions for good filters to use in selecting loans. Good filters really amount to finding cases where Lending Club doesn’t do the greatest job of underwriting. So for example many say exclude loans from California to increase your portfolio return. While this may well be due to California loans being riskier really underwriting should take care of that by balancing out the risk v. return (so charging higher rates and/or being more stringent about taking such loans.

So I would expect Lending Club to adjust underwriting to take these results into account and thus make the filters go out of date. Of course this over simplifies things quite a bit. But the basic idea is that much of the value of filters is to take advantage of underwriting weaknesses.

chart of LendingClub returns as portfolio ages historically

This chart (for 36 month loans) is an extremely important one for investors in peer to peer loans. It shows the returns over the life of portfolios as the portfolio ages. And this chart (for LendingClub) shows the results for portfolios of loans issued each year. This is a critical tool to help keep track to see if underwriting quality is slipping.


In a very good result for LendingClub the worst performances are the first 2 years (2008 and 2009). Investing is challenging and trying to examine historical data and draw conclusions is not simple. The conclusion that LendingClub learned from their initial efforts in 2008 and 2009 and improved seems reasonable to me.

2010, 2011 and 2012 all have the loans completed (or nearly so, fro 2012) and the truth about peer to peer lending (or really any lending) can be seen from the chart. The return of the portfolio declines as it ages (as loans default).

What you should keep an eye on if you invest in peer to peer loans is if the lines for new years started to look much worse over time than previous years (for example if they started to look like 2008 or 2009). If that happened, ask why. If the economy entered a deep recession that may well explain it. But if there is not a macroeconomic explanation then you need to worry about underwriting quality.

If I decided the risk was real that underwriting quality had declined what I would likely do it stop reinvesting my payments in new loans (or reduce the amount of that I was doing). It is possible with LendingClub to sell your fractions of loans to other investors. I doubt I would bother with this but it is another option. Of course, unless you correctly determine underwriting quality declined faster than the other investors do their bids for those loans are going to be low (you will likely lose money on the sales).

In 2010 and 2011 returns started in the 11% to 12% range and by the time the loans closed the return was a bit above 6%. This is the type of decline you can expect (and it will be worse if there are bad macroeconomic conditions).

2012 started above 12% and is on track (with 2 months left) to slightly exceed the final returns for 2010 and 2011. The chart (and these comments) are based on all 36 month loans of all grades made in those years. LendingClub lets you show view the chart of 36 or 60 month loans and for all loans or looking at a specific grade. Remember in looking at all loans the returns are going to be impacted by the makeup of the loans (how many are A, B, C, D etc.). But you can also look at it directly for each grade to see if issues are cropping up in more specific areas.

An example of a site that examine past loan results to guess about future: How Will P2P Lending Perform During a National Recession?

it’s amazing to note that banks still did not lose money on credit cards during the 2008 recession. The stock market fell 57% in six months, yet major banks kept earning and earning.

What we see is the average return of 8.8% steadily dropping after each recession:

After the 2000 recession, avg. credit card returns fell 20% to an ROI of 7%
After the 2008 recession, avg. credit card returns fell 40% to an ROI of 5.2%
…
If this is equally felt in peer to peer lending, it could mean:

A more typical recession may also drop a peer lending return by 20% – say from 6% to 4-5%.
A more serious recession may also drop a peer lending return by 40% – say from 6% to 3-4%.
Of course, these losses will be easier if investors hold more A-grade loans, and more ugly if investors hold more E-grade loans.

100m deep is another useful resource. It provides an interactive tool to let you look at the past results based on characteristics (employment length, purpose of loan, home ownership, income, loan term, etc.) you chose.

My investigation so far makes me think peer to peer lending is a sensible place for a sophisticated investor to put a portion of their fixed income investments. I would go slowly and not commit a large amount to such investments but taking a small stake with a couple percent of a portfolio may well be wise for investors that know what they are doing. I will have more posts looking at peer to peer loans, including more on filters and automated investing with LendingClub.

Related: Investment Risk Matters Most as Part of a Portfolio, Rather than in Isolation
– Corporate and Government Bond Yields (2008) – All-weather Portfolio

November 23rd, 2015 John Hunter | 3 Comments | Tags: Investing

Comments

3 Comments so far

  1. Investing in Peer to Peer Loans at Curious Cat Investing and Economics Blog on January 2, 2016 2:25 pm

    […] Peer to Peer Portfolio Returns and The Decline in Returns as Loans Age […]

  2. LendingClub Filters, Selecting Loans and Automated Investing at Curious Cat Investing and Economics Blog on March 8, 2016 11:25 am

    […] post continues our series on peer-to-peer lending (and LendingClub): Peer to Peer Portfolio Returns and The Decline in Returns as Loans Age, Investing in Peer to Peer Loans. LendingClub, and other peer-to-peer lenders let you use filters […]

  3. Ending my Experiment of Investing in Peer to Peer Loans at Curious Cat Investing and Economics Blog on July 18, 2017 9:26 am

    […] Peer to Peer Portfolio Returns and The Decline in Returns as Loans Age (2015) – Investing in Peer to Peer Loans – Looking for Yields in Stocks and Real Estate (2012) […]

Name (required)

Email (required)

Website

Speak your mind

« Investing in Peer to Peer Loans
Out of Pocket “Maximum” – Understanding USA Health Care Costs »
Copyright © Curious Cat Investing and Economics Blog

    Personal Finance

    • Credit Card Tips
    • IRAs
    • Investment Risks
    • Loan Terms
    • Saving for Retirement
  • Archives

      All Posts
    • March 2021
    • January 2021
    • August 2020
    • March 2020
    • February 2020
    • January 2020
    • May 2019
    • January 2019
    • December 2018
    • November 2018
    • October 2018
    • August 2018
    • May 2018
    • February 2018
    • January 2018
    • November 2017
    • October 2017
    • September 2017
    • August 2017
    • July 2017
    • May 2017
    • April 2017
    • March 2017
    • February 2017
    • January 2017
    • December 2016
    • November 2016
    • October 2016
    • September 2016
    • August 2016
    • July 2016
    • June 2016
    • May 2016
    • April 2016
    • March 2016
    • February 2016
    • January 2016
    • December 2015
    • November 2015
    • October 2015
    • September 2015
    • August 2015
    • July 2015
    • June 2015
    • May 2015
    • April 2015
    • March 2015
    • February 2015
    • January 2015
    • December 2014
    • November 2014
    • October 2014
    • September 2014
    • August 2014
    • June 2014
    • April 2014
    • March 2014
    • February 2014
    • January 2014
    • December 2013
    • November 2013
    • September 2013
    • August 2013
    • July 2013
    • June 2013
    • May 2013
    • April 2013
    • March 2013
    • February 2013
    • January 2013
    • December 2012
    • November 2012
    • October 2012
    • September 2012
    • August 2012
    • July 2012
    • June 2012
    • May 2012
    • April 2012
    • March 2012
    • February 2012
    • January 2012
    • December 2011
    • November 2011
    • October 2011
    • September 2011
    • August 2011
    • July 2011
    • June 2011
    • May 2011
    • April 2011
    • March 2011
    • February 2011
    • January 2011
    • December 2010
    • November 2010
    • October 2010
    • September 2010
    • August 2010
    • July 2010
    • June 2010
    • May 2010
    • April 2010
    • March 2010
    • February 2010
    • January 2010
    • December 2009
    • November 2009
    • October 2009
    • September 2009
    • August 2009
    • July 2009
    • June 2009
    • May 2009
    • April 2009
    • March 2009
    • February 2009
    • January 2009
    • December 2008
    • November 2008
    • October 2008
    • September 2008
    • August 2008
    • July 2008
    • June 2008
    • May 2008
    • April 2008
    • March 2008
    • February 2008
    • January 2008
    • December 2007
    • November 2007
    • October 2007
    • September 2007
    • August 2007
    • July 2007
    • June 2007
    • May 2007
    • April 2007
    • March 2007
    • February 2007
    • January 2007
    • December 2006
    • November 2006
    • October 2006
    • April 2006
    • March 2006
    • January 2006
    • December 2005
    • October 2005
    • July 2005
    • May 2005
    • April 2005
    • April 2004