Thanks Fred. As always, great work.
One thought that occurred to me, however, is that while "cures" are certainly the gold standard for collections, they are not the only thing (or even the most important thing) that matters. Ultimately, what lenders really care most about is how much money is being collected from late borrowers. For example, one of my two Late-4's hadn't made a payment since September 5, when all of a sudden it made a payment (of about 120% of a monthly payment) on March 19 (when it was 5.5 months late). I was overjoyed! Obviously, that payment did not "cure" the loan (in fact, it didn't even move it out of the Late-4 category), but it represented $911 in lenders' pockets (after subtracting NSF and Collection Fees). But that "success" is not reflected in your analysis. Similarly, one of my two Late-3's made its last on-time payment on September 11, but has since made 4 payments in collections (the first was a double payment, and each of the next 3 were half-payments), totalling 3.5 months of payments. That is $1,785 in the pockets of lenders, also not reflected in your analysis.
Thinking back, I believe that I may have never had a loan in collections cure; yet, as noted above, I have received non-trivial collections payments. Is it possible for you to track the percentage of dollars collected by the CA's versus dollars of loans placed with the CA's? Wouldn't that be a more useful number?