« Prosper is really, REALLY testing my patienceLess than enthusiastic about Prosper's latest update »

Trackback address for this post

This is a captcha-picture. It is used to prevent mass-access by robots.
Please enter the characters from the image above. (case insensitive)

2 comments

Comment from: yankeefan [Member] Email
Basing a bid on auto-fund status worries me
the other criteria are pretty much fixed, how does changing a listing from auto fund to regular way make it a better risk?
10/31/07 @ 15:01
Comment from: asmythee [Member] Email
Autofund loans deserve the rep they get, and here's why:

(from an analysis/full dataset in mid-july)[See Below for Column Definitions]

AA CWF 208 3 1.42%
AA OFD 1081 7 0.64%
A CWF 225 10 4.26%
A OFD 901 15 1.64%
B CWF 365 23 5.93%
B OFD 1041 24 2.25%
C CWF 670 57 7.84%
C OFD 1301 43 3.20%
D CWF 826 96 10.41%
D OFD 1287 44 3.31%
E CWF 842 208 19.81%
E OFD 880 78 8.14%
HR CWF 898 349 27.99%
HR OFD 967 181 15.77%

(ALL LOANS) CWF 4083 780 16.04%
(ALL LOANS) OFD 7499 412 5.21%



column definitions (seperated by font):
First Column is Prosper Credit Grade
Second is Funding Option chosen where:
CWF = Loan was set to "CLOSE WHEN FUNDED"
OFD = Loan was set to "OPEN FOR DURATION"
("CLOSE WHEN FUNDED" loans are autoloans)
Third is current loans in the category
Fourth is # of loans late or worse
Fifth is total percent late in the category

Loan ages tend to be more or less equivalent across credit grades.


As a rule of thumb, they're at least twice as likely to go bad as the non-autoloans within their credit grade.



Conclusion:
This is one of those rare factors where I really don't even need to run a statistical test to see that this is a huge red flag.

Initially I was surprised at this. In retrospect though, autofunding seems like a great proxy for desperation -- "Give me my money NOW, I don't care so much about the rate"

10/31/07 @ 23:29

Comments are not allowed from anonymous visitors.