When Do We Eat? The Value of Financial Individuality

Do you remember when you were growing up and your mother told you that you were special? Or maybe it was a teacher or your grandmother or a family friend. Chances are, a caring adult in your life encouraged your individuality and, more importantly, your independence. The lesson may have been taught in different ways, but was nonetheless important. Maybe you were encouraged to think twice before jumping off a bridge if all of your friends decided to do it. Maybe you were taught to "just say no" when presented with an opportunity to engage in an activity that threatened your moral fiber. However it was taught to you, I'd like to discuss the lesson's importance and relevance to your financial wellbeing.

Individuality and independence are important traits for people to possess in many respects. The right kind of individuality will set you apart from other candidates when applying for a job or admission into college. The wrong kind of individuality might earn you inquisitive glances from strangers and fearful looks from small children clutching their mothers' legs.

The ability to think critically and independently will also fuel your ability to responsibly manage money and increase your wealth. Lots of Americans have been frightened of the downward trending stock market and have been selling their stocks like nobody's business. The band wagon is speeding away from Wall Street just as fast as its little wheels can carry it, and the value of our investments are falling as a result. But just because so many people are jumping on, should you do it as well?

I guess it depends.

When I was in college, the most popular dining hall was called West End Market. It had a fun atmosphere and the food was diverse and delicious. But in my opinion, it was an absolutely miserable place to be at 6pm. Every evening, West End looked like Times Square on New Years Eve. Hokies arriving at dinnertime lined up like motorists at the DMV, often waiting more than 30 minutes for a sandwich or a plate of the ever-famous Chop House london broil.

I like eating at a normal time like everyone else, but being the impatient person that I am, one experience at West End during dinnertime was enough for me. I avoided it altogether for months, eating at the non-award-winning dining halls, until one day when I decided to pop in an hour early. You'd be amazed at the difference that hour made. At five, though I had worked up less of an appetite, I could hear crickets chirp as I leisurely approached every food station that I desired. Free tables were bountiful and I was able to feast in peace like Kevin McCallister on Christmas Eve. At six o'clock, patrons would be reminded of an overcrowded high school cafeteria on a day where all but one of the lunch ladies called in sick. Sure, it was easy to socialize, but those that came with the crowd wished they had brought a snack for the line.

So what does a dining hall have to do with investing? Well, when everyone is selling -- to the point the Dow falls to its lowest value in five years -- you have to ask yourself what your strategy is. You might not be starving until six, but at six, everyone will be starving. So chances are, you might not eat until seven. So you have to ask yourself, are you a six o'clock person? Or are you a five o'clock person?

The six o'clock person will sell, sell, sell and wait until the market is trending upward before they buy again -- just like everyone else. The five o'clock person will start buying when no one else is. He will understand that stocks are on sale and remind himself of the history of the market, which has always stood the test of time, despite its sometimes significant peaks and valleys. He's not famished yet, but he knows that hunger will come soon and he had better get in line before everyone else does.

Warren Buffet once said "Most people get interested in stocks when everyone else is. The time to get interested is when no one else is. You can't buy what is popular and do well."

Of course, investing in the stock market during a troublesome time is much more complicated than determining what time to go to dinner. But at a high level you have to ask yourself why you're there. Are you there to socialize? Or are you there to eat?

Prosper.com: Convincing My Wife, Part 2

...she ain't convinced yet.

In my continued efforts to convince my wife that Prosper.com is a good investment, I'll analyze another aspect of the website today. Today I'll study what makes the successful lenders successful, what makes the average lenders average, and what makes the biggest losers, well, the biggest losers. I'll be moving my analysis platform to a fabulous website that focuses solely on Prosper.com lender and loan data, EricsCC.com.

To get things moving along quickly, consider the following graph that shows all lenders' rates of return on a seemingly normal distribution curve (please click any graphic to enlarge it):
As you can see, the majority of lenders are making money, and a significant majority are also earning a higher rate of return than they would earn in a traditional savings account. However, of all the non-average lenders, there are more that are doing exceptionally poor than doing exceptionally well. This indicates that if you do not follow a reasonable, disciplined investment strategy, you are more likely to lose at a high rate vs gain at a high rate. I guess the same could be said about the stock market. Essentially, it's easier to make mistakes than it is to get lucky.

Do you ever watch that show called The Biggest Loser on NBC? Well meet the biggest loser on Prosper.com: scoobydoo. Here is a graphical representation of his investments:
As Antonio from the Merchant of Venice would say, His "ventures are in one bottom trusted." This guy has invested a lot of money into Prosper.com and has given several large loans to people with C-grade credit. If one or two of those loans defaults, his ship will have sunk.

Let's look at another big loser's profile. How about jasonpeery:
Here's another guy that has a poor, lazy investment strategy. He has invested over $50,000 in Prosper.com listings and has scores of late payments and defaults. This guy has made several individual loans over $1,000, including one that is in default for $11,000! Why in the hell would you EVER loan $11,000 to a person with high-risk credit? And without even asking them a question! I sure hope that jasonpeery is better at personal finance than he is at determining to whom he should lend his money. As Neil Boortz would say, I bet that this guy has a lot of rent-to-own furniture in his house. My guess is that this guy's grandmother died recently and left him a bunch of money. No one that worked for $11,000 and saved it would ever be that careless in giving it to a single high-risk stranger.

One thing to remember about Prosper.com's fee structure is that all individual loan fees are passed along to the borrower except for a 1% loan servicing fee which is paid by the lender. This means that, statistically speaking, there is no reason to invest more than $50 in ANY candidate. Period. If I lend $500 to one person or $50 to ten people, I will pay the same loan servicing fee. And though I may save a little time by investing more money in lower-risk candidates, it's just plain silly to not diversify to the max with sub-prime borrowers.

OK, so let's look at someone with an average return. Consider the portfolio of helpishere777:
Ahh, this is refreshing. This user is right in the middle. He is earning about 11% interest, which takes into account the probability of his late payments going into default. He has invested the same $50,000 that our last big loser had invested, but in a completely different way. Look at the nice even relationship between all of the blue and green lines. Do you know why they're all equal? Because he invested the same $50 into every single loan. He understands that in order to mitigate his risk, he needs to diversify -- especially if he can do it at no additional cost!

Now let's look at the best lender. I'm not going to evaluate the person earning the highest return on his money. Currently that person is DrakeCO, who is earning about 33.6% interest. However, the average length of his loans is less than one month and most of his loans have been large amounts (max of $1,500) to high risk borrowers. Because of the youth of his loans and the nature of his strategy, he is bound to fail. Instead, I'm going to look at someone earning about 20% return with a reasonably large average loan period (if it's not old, the borrowers don't have time to be late!) and a significant amount of money. It looks to me like the golden child of Prosper.com is brother_tam. Here is his portfolio:

brother_tam is obviously smart and probably a little lucky. He has invested a little more than $10,000 in Prosper.com, mostly in $50 increments. Of his 224 loans, he has given more than $50 only 13 times, probably just to spice up his account. As a lender that understands the need to diversify. He is aware that he can invest in lower-credit borrowers because of his discipline. But he doesn't invest in only low-credit borrowers. He has a nice normal distribution of his loans that has a mean slightly on the low-credit side.

To be a successful lender on Prosper.com, you need to stick with a disciplined strategy that is formulated around the values of diversification and a normally distributed loan strategy. When choosing which loans to bid on, consider your current portfolio and establish a quota. "Right now, 75% of my loans are to high-risk borrowers. I should invest in some low-risk borrowers."

Remember: there is no penalty for investing the minimum amount in a person. And with more than 2,300 active listings, you shouldn't run out of people to lend to.

If she's still not convinced, I'll have to write more tomorrow.

Prosper.com: Convincing My Wife, Part 1

My friend and frequent tepom.com commentator Steve Butcher has an active account with Prosper.com and is doing quite well with it. His current rate of return is about 16.9%. I'm interested in joining him and trying my hand at peer-to-peer lending, however, my wife takes a very conservative approach to lending and will definitely need some "talking-into" if I ever want to open an account.

I will write a small series of posts that will attempt to justify peer-to-peer investing and convince my wife at the end that it's a good idea. The end goal of my analysis will be to prove my hypothesis that Prosper.com provides an excellent lending opportunity by using their empirical loan data. If my hypothesis is proven, I will convince my wife to start investing and share with you all my plan of attack.

Day one analysis: The correlation between debt-to-income ratio and loan delinquency
Prosper.com evaluates borrowers' credit reports and assigns them an alphabetical risk rating, from AA (the best) to HR (high risk -- the worst), with A, B, C, D, and E in the middle. In today's analysis, I decided to evaluate the correlation between a borrower's debt-to-income ratio (DTI) and the delinquency rate for each credit classification. My analysis assumes that any amount that is not current (>15 days late) is considered delinquent. It should be noted that these numbers do not suggest a loan default, just the probability of delinquency. Here I evaluate both the number of default dollars and the number of default loans. In my opinion, the number of delinquent dollars are more important than the number of delinquent loans because we intend to diversify our money as much as possible. The more you diversify your money, the more important the number of deliquent dollars become. The less you diversify, the more important the number of delinquent loans become.

Though my analysis evaluates delinquencies as a whole, it should be noted that those with poorer credit that go into delinquency are much more likely to have their loans written off than those with better credit. Essentially, those that have better credit are better at getting themselves out of trouble.

Click a chart to enlarge:
Looking at all loans regardless of the borrower's DTI (the blue line), it comes as no surprise that as the borrower's credit rating declines, there is a higher probability of the loan becoming delinquent.

However, when three bands of DTI are considered, the equation changes. With a DTI of anywhere from zero to 50%, the curve doesn't shift or change significantly for any classification of borrower. However, with a DTI above 50%, the curve is flipped nearly upside down. This suggests that a dollar loaned to a person with great credit but a high DTI ratio is more likely to be late than a dollar loaned to a person with poor credit and a similarly high DTI.

Similarly, when looking at the number of delinquent loans, the curves are closely aligned for borrowers with DTI less than 50%. But once the DTI rises above 50%, the difference in likelihood of the loan's delinquency rises substantially, especially for borrowers with great credit.

To summarize, the number of loans that will become delinquent do not vary significantly as the borrower's DTI changes except when the borrower has great credit. A borrower with great credit and a high DTI is much more likely to become delinquent than a borrower with great credit and low DTI. A borrower with poor credit and a high DTI is just as likely as a borrower with poor credit and a low DTI to become delinquent on his or her loan. When you consider a dollar loaned, a dollar loaned to a person with great credit and high DTI is much, much more likely to be late as opposed to a dollar loaned to a person with great credit and a low DTI. The reverse is true for poor credit borrowers. A dollar loaned to a person with poor credit and a low DTI is more likely to be late than a dollar loaned to a poor credit borrower with a high DTI.

So what do we learn from this? When lending to people with great credit, be wary of those with a high DTI requesting a lot of money. Don't lend to them unless you can obtain a premium rate. When considering lending to a borrower with poor credit, be sure to diversify your money across different loans. If you're torn between two poor credit borrowers, if the only difference between their profiles is their DTI, consider lending your money to the one with the higher DTI, especially if their rate is higher!

More to come on other Prosper.com lending strategies.

Debunking Dave Ramsey's Snowball Plan for Debt Reduction

A reader recently commented on my site,  suggesting that I check out Dave Ramsey's website and learn about some of his suggestions for getting out of debt.  This morning, I performed a detailed analysis of his debt reduction plan which he calls the "Snowball Plan."

First accumulate $1,000 cash as an emergency fund. Then begin intensely getting rid of all debt (except the house) using my debt snowball plan. List your debts in order with the smallest payoff or balance first. Do not be concerned with interest rates or terms unless two debts have similar payoffs, then list the higher interest rate debt first. Paying the little debts off first gives you quick feedback, and you are more likely to stay with the plan.

I should mention that Mr. Ramsey is a faith-based financial advisor and regularly takes into account more than just the numbers.  When speaking on personal finace, he focuses on the "personal" just as much as the "finance."  Though his system has proven to be effective for some, it is not my style.

He urges his readers and listeners to build momentum when reducing their debt and try to feel a sense of accomplishment.  But let me warn you: those senses of momentum and accomplishment may not come cheaply.  Essentially, by "feeling good" about paying down debt, you risk taking more time to do it and thus wasting more of your money on interest payments.

Consider this analysis:

Let's say you have two loans: A student loan for $25,000 and an auto loan for $10,000.  The student loan has an interest rate of 8% and regular payments of $227 for 200 months.  The auto loan has an interest rate of 6% and regular monthly payments of $304 for 36 months.  In addition to your regular payments, let's say you have $100/month extra that you can apply to whichever loan you're currently paying and that once it is paid off, you will take the normal payments of it and apply them toward the other loan until it is paid off.  In this scenario, with minimum payments of $227 and $304 and extra cash of $100, you will be paying $631 per month until both loans are paid off.

Because the length of the student loan is much longer than the auto loan, even if you decide to apply the extra money to the student loan first, by the time it's paid off the auto loan will have been long-since paid off.  The total you will have spent on interest over the life of the two loans will be $10,603.  If you had decided to pay off the smaller auto loan first and then send all of your debt-reducing cash to the student loan, you would have saved $2,262 in interest.  In this case, Dave Ramsey's strategy works.

But let's look at another scenario.

Let's say you marry your college sweetheart.  After the wedding, you decide to merge your individual finances and adapt a joint financial strategy that works for both of you.  Let's say that you have a student loan of $30,000 at 9% for ten years.  Your spouse has less: only $15,000 at 6% for the same 10 years.  Like the previous example, you can pay an extra $100 each month toward the principal on whichever loan you're paying down first.

The terms (length) of the two loans are the same, one is twice the size of the other, and the smaller loan carries a smaller interest rate.  Dave Ramsey would tell you to pay off the smaller $15,000 loan first.  By doing that, you're costing yourself $1,534 in unnecessary interest.  If the difference in the interest rates was greater, this wasted amount would be even larger.  Let's say your loan carried 10% interest and your spouse's carried 5%.  You would then waste $2,058 in additional interest by paying the smaller loan first.

Let's tweak the numbers one more time: Assuming the same rates and balances,  a change in terms so that the smaller loan lasted for 15 years instead of ten would result in a waste of $2,656 in unnecessary interest payments; just because you listened to Mr. Ramsey.

As you can see, there is not a definitive high-level strategy that can accurately determine the order in which you should pay off your loans.  Mr. Ramsey tries to justify his financially flawed plan by adding emotion and human perception to the equation.  Here is my solution:  When considering the order in which you pay off your loans, crunch the numbers.  Once you prove which will save you the most money, set up a regular payment with your bank and forget about it.  You should find satisfaction in the fact that you're paying off your loans in the smartest, cheapest way possible.  Maybe it means paying off the smaller loan and maybe it doesn't.