Are variable rate loans ever a good idea?
First, let me fill in the gaps on your situation, based on the numbers you've given so far. I estimate that your student loan balance (principal) is $21,600. With the variable rate loan option that you've presented, the maximum interest rate you could be charged would be 11.5%, which would bring your monthly payment up to that $382 number you gave in the comments. Your thoughts are correct about the advantage to paying this loan off sooner.  If you are planning on paying off this loan sooner, the interest rate on the variable rate loan has less opportunity to climb. One thing to be cautious of with the comparison, though: The $1200 difference between the two options is only valid if your rate does not increase.  If the rate does increase, of course, the difference would be less, or it could even go the other way.  So keep in mind that the $1200 savings is only a theoretical maximum; you won't actually see that much savings with the variable rate option. Before making a decision, you need to find out more about the terms of this variable rate loan: How often can your rate go up? What is the loan rate based on? I'm not as familiar with student loan variable rate loans, but there are other variable rate loans I am familiar with: With a typical adjustable rate home mortgage, the rate is locked for a certain number of years (perhaps 5 years).  After that, the bank might be allowed to raise the rate once every period of months (perhaps once every year).  There will be a limit to how much the rate can rise on each increase (perhaps 1.0%), and there will be a maximum rate that could be charged over the life of the loan (perhaps 12%). The interest rate on your mortgage can adjust up, inside of those parameters.  (The actual formula used to adjust will be found in the fine print of your mortgage contract.)  However, the bank knows that if they let your rate get too high above the current market rates, you will refinance to a different bank.  So the mortgage is typically structured so that it will raise your rate somewhat, but it won't usually get too far above the market rate.  If you knew ahead of time that you would have the house paid off in 5 years, or that you would be selling the house before the 5 years is over, you could confidently take the adjustable rate mortgage. Credit cards, on the other hand, also typically have variable rates.  These rates can change every month, but they are usually calculated on some formula determined ahead of time.  For example, on my credit card, the interest rate is the published Prime Rate plus 13.65%.  On my last statement, it said the rate was 17.15%.  (Of course, because I pay my balance in full each month, I don't pay any interest.  The rate could go up to 50%, for all I care.) As I said, I don't know what determines the rate on your variable rate student loan option, and I don't know what the limits are.  If it climbs up to 11.5%, that is obviously ridiculously high.  I recommend that you try to pay off this student loan as soon as you possibly can; however, if you are not planning on paying off this student loan early, you need to try to determine how likely the rate is to climb if you want to pick the variable rate option. Fixed  You are confirming the amount you are going t pay over the term of the loan. Variable: 3.79% over 82mo. The total difference over the life of the loan comes to around $1200 That is the wrong way to calculate the variable portion. The variable is primarily set with a margin over a certain benchmark i.e. Fed rate. Assuming the Fed rate doesn't change over or only goes lower the variable rate is the one to go. If it rises then your payment will increase. And the margin they take over the benchmark rate may increase, so the total amount you pay might increase too.  I would assume a read through the T&Cs should clarify that for you. Is it ever a good idea to choose a variable rate loan? Only if you think we are in a low interest rate environment i.e. the economy is in doldrums and the Feds are trying to simulate the economy by decreasing the benchmark rates. And you are sure that the lender isn't going to increase his margins if the rate remains low for quite a substantial amount of time. And I might assume there will be penalties for paying off a loan quicker. "It all has to do with risk and reward. The risk is that interest rates will rise.  To entice you to go with the variable, they make it so it is cheaper if interest rates never rise. Your job is to guess whether interest rates are likely to go up or not. In a first approximation, you should go fixed. The bank employs very smart people whose entire job is to know whether interest rates will go up or not. Those people chose the price difference between the two, and it's sure to favour the bank. That is, the risk of extra payments you'll make on the variable is probably more than the enticement. But, some people can't sleep at night if their payments (or more realistically, the interest part of their payments) might double. If that's you, go fixed. If that's not you, understand that the enticement actually has to be turned up a bit, to get more people to go variable, because of the sleeping-at-night feature. Think long and hard about your budget and what would happen if your payment jumped. If you could handle it, variable might be the better choice. Personally, I have been taking ""variable"" on my mortgage for decades (and now I don't have one) and never once regretted it. I also counselled my oldest child to take variable on her mortgage. Over this century so far, if rates ticked up, they didn't tick up to the level the fixed was offered at. Mostly they have sat flat. But if ever there was a world in which ""past performance does not predict future results"" it would be interest rate trends. Do your own research." It is often the case (more commonly in countries other than the USA) that a fixed-term loan has an early redemption penalty, because the lender themselves will incur a cost for settling the loan early, while a variable-rate loan does not. If this is the situation and you think you might want to pay off the loan early, you should definitely consider the variable rate rather than then fixed rate. I have an example that may be interesting for your question. My grandfather had a tennis club around 35 years ago, and some other businesses. Some investments went bad and he was heading for bankruptcy due to the tennis club's expensive payments. So he asked to renegotiate a variable rate rather than a fixed rate, even though the interest rates were going up, not down. The idea was that if the current situation is going to bankrupt you, taking a chance might be better. As an analogy, if you can't swim and you'll drown in 6 feet of water, it doesn't matter that you're taking the risk to go deeper. You might have to take that chance to survive. He did keep the tennis club in the end but that's irrelevant here. For student loans, if I'm not mistaken, declaring bankruptcy doesn't free you of all their debt, so it may not be applicable.  And this situation is when renegotiating, not when negotiating the first time. because obviously if you're in trouble financially, taking a loan you know you can't repay is suicide. The earlier you are in your career, the more willing you should be to take a better opportunity even if it has a short-term financial cost.  You go to college even if McDonald's has an opening.  After college you may take an entry level job with better long-term prospects even if a higher paying job is available.  You may train for some professional qualification. Having expenses you have to pay limits your flexibility to do this.  A variable rate loan that goes up later may give you the freedom to make better decisions early on.  Thus in this case it may be worthwhile. That said - be very wary of variable rate loans.  Unless you have iron discipline, they give the opportunity to bury yourself. The simple answer is absolutely.  With the parameters you quote, if you will pay off the loan in 82 months or less, you will be ahead taking the variable rate. You have put your finger on the important question as well. The higher initial interest is buying insurance against rates rising if you don't pay off the loan within 82 months.  I suspect the contract loan term is much longer than that, because otherwise a variable rate does not make sense.  You need to assess whether the insurance you are buying is worth the premium.  You can look at what the formula for the variable rate would set the rate at today. It is probably somewhat higher than the 3.79%.  That will tell you how much rates have to rise to make the variable rate go above 5.02%. Note that if the loan term is around 160 months (and it could well be 180 months, 15 years) you can afford the interest to rise to about 6.2% for the last half and you will still be dollars ahead.  It could even rise higher if you discount expenses in the future.  You could also hope that if inflation rises to make interest rates rise like that you will get cost of living raises that make this easy to pay. Up to some degree, a higher or lower interest rate means a bit less or a bit more money in your pocket. If the interest rate gets too high, you may be in trouble. So you first look at the situation and ask yourself: At what interest rate would I be in trouble?  If this is a $20,000 student loan, then even a very high rate wouldn't be trouble. It would be unfortunate and unpleasant, but not fatal. For a $800,000 mortgage, that's different. Each percent more is $8,000 a year. Going from 3% to 10% would change the interest from $24,000 to $80,000 a year, which would be fatal for many people.  In a situation where you can afford increasing variable payments without problems you can go for it. If your variable rate would vary over time between 4% and 6% you would still be even. In that situation, go for variable (taking into account where you think interest rates will go in the future). For a mortgage, the security would likely be more important. (On the other hand, if your dad is a multi-millionaire who would help you out, then that big rate increase wouldn't be fatal, and you could go for a variable rate mortgage).  In some countries, you can cancel any loan contract when the interest rate is raised. So raising a variable mortgage interest rate would allow you to look elsewhere without early repayment penalties. Check out if that is the case for you. What's going on here is that the variable rate loan is transferring some of the risk from the bank to you.  In a reasonable deal taking on risk brings with it reward.  It's the same thing as deductibles on insurance--they're transferring some risk to you and thus your expected total cost goes down. Thus the proper evaluation of such deals is whether you can afford the outcome if you draw the short straw.  If you feel you can afford the highest payment that can result then the variable rate is a good deal.  If you're near your limit then stay with the safe option of the fixed rate. For a house this is easy enough to evaluate--run the calculations assuming the highest payment and see what the debt-to-income ratio is.  Note that when we were getting mortgages there was another factor involved: the variable rate loans had a higher initiation cost.  Combined with the very low difference between fixed and ARM rates at the time we went fixed but given the rates you quote going variable would have been a no-brainer for us.
It's complicated. Really, there's no solid answer for your question. Everybody's risk tolerance and time horizon is going to be different. Those who can take on more risk can take on lower-grade C-G loans at Lending Club. Those with less risk tolerance should emphasize As and Bs. "I started with lending club about a year ago.  I love it.  It has been insightful.  Off topic, but I am in a loan to a guy who make 120K a year and is regularly late and has a pretty high interest rate.  Crazy. You gain some economies of scale by going with a bigger note.  I have $100 notes that I get hit for 2 or 3 cents for a fee, where $25 notes are always a penny.  However, I don't think that should be your deciding factor. I scale my note purchases based on how much I like the status of the borrower.  For example, I did $100 (which is currently my max) for a guy with a reasonable loan amount 16K, a stable work history (15+ years), a great credit history, and a great interest rate (16.9%).  If one of those things were a bit out of ""whack"".  I might go $50, two $25.   I prefer 36 month notes, really 5 years to get out of debt?  It is unlikely to happen IMHO. Keep in mind that if you invest $100 in a loan, then you get one $100 note.  You can't break them up into 4 $25 notes.  For that reason, if you are likely to want to sell the note prematurely, keep it at $25.  The market is greater.   I've had a lot of success using the trading account, buying further discounted notes for people who want out of lending club, or get spooked by a couple of late payments and a change in billing date.   Another advantage of using the trading account is you start earning interest day 1.  I've had new notes take a couple of weeks to go through.   To summarize: There are some other things, but that is the main stuff I look at." I was active in Prosper when it started up. It was very easy to get attracted to the high risk loans with big interest rates and I lost about 14% after all my loans ran their course. (There's 10 still active, but it won't change the figure by much). Prosper has wider standards than Lending club, so more borrowers with worse credit scores could ask for loans. Lenders could also set interest rates far lower, so they could end up having loans with rates lower than the risk implied.  This was set up with the idea of a free market where anyone could ask to borrow and anyone could loan money at whatever interest rate they wanted,  It turns out a lot of lenders were not as smart as they thought they were. (Aside: it's funny how people will clamor for a free market, but when they lose money will suddenly be against the free market they said they wanted, this seems to apply to both individual p2p lenders up to massive multinational banks.).  Since then Prosper has tightened their standards on who can borrow and the interest rates are now fixed. So I expect going forward it will be less easy to lose a bunch of money.  The key is that one bad loan will erase the return of many good ones. So it's best to examine the loans carefully and stick with the high quality.  Simplified Example If you have 10 1 yr loans of $100 each paying 10% interest/year, you get 10% return at the end of the year, so $100 (10% of $1000.). BUT if one loan goes bad at the start, you have lost money. So a 90% success rate in picking borrowers leads to a loss. You want to diversity over quite a few loans and you want to fund quality loans.  I think really enjoyed investing through Prosper, because it gave me an insight into lending and loss ratios that I had not had before. It also caused me to look at the banks with even more incredulity when the case of the no-doc loans and neg-am loans came to light. The loan is very likely to be syndicated, yes. I only state 7-10 because all of our loans to this point have been 7 year terms. And in many ways, this loan is just one of those loans, multiplied out in a modular sense. "A) Yes, it does accomplish the goal of adding more money, but the money is in lieu of any return you can earn while the loan is outstanding. If you somehow knew exactly which periods where going to run negative, and you took a 401k loan during that time, you'd be in pretty good shape, but if you had that information you'd probably be ruling the world in short order and wouldn't care much about a measly 401k. B) It's a nice idea, but unfortunately you are not allowed to set your own interest rate. (If you could your idea would work perfectly.) The interest rate is bank specific, and is typically 1-2 points over prime. But if your plan was to leave your money sitting in cash or low interest bearing accounts anyway, the loan does actually achieve the goal of ""getting more money in there"". Though it's your money; you aren't ""earning"" it." If you get your income in the currency you have the new loan in, there is no exchange risk for the future. Assuming that you are able to get and serve that loan, it reduces your cost, so go for it. Yes, if the currency exchange rate changes the right way over the next years, you could have made a better deal - but consider it could also go the other way. If you really want to play this game, do it separately, by trading calls/puts on the currency exchange rate. See it as a separate and decoupled investment option. Variable Annuities would be one option though there are SEC warnings about them, for an option that is tax-deferred and intended to be used for long-term investing such as retirement. There is a bit of a cost to gain the tax-deferral which may not always make them worthwhile. You're talking about floating rate loans. It's so that the bond is marked back to market every 90 days. Any more often would be a hassle to deal with for everyone involved, any less often and they would be significant variance from LIBOR vs. the loan's specific rate. Usually that is the case that when fixed rates are lower than the variable rates, it is an indication that the banks feel the next movement in rates could be down. You also need to look at the fixed rates for different periods, for example 1 year fixed compared to 3 year fixed and 5 year fixed rates. If you find the 3 and 5 year fixed rates are higher than the 1 year fixed rates this could be an indication that the banks feel rates will fall in the short term but the falls won't last long and will continue to rise after a year or so. If the 3 year fixed rates are also low in comparison, then the banks may feel that the economy is heading for a longer term down trend. The banks won't want to lose out, so will change their fixed rates on their perception of where they feel the economy is headed. Since your post in May 2011, the standard variable rate has since dropped twice (in November and December) to be at 7.30%. You will also find that fixed rates have also been dropped further by the banks, indicating additional future cuts in the variable rates. Regards, Victor Unless you are getting the loan from a loan shark, it is the most common case that each payment is applied to the interest accrued to date and the rest is applied towards reducing the principal.  So, assuming that fortnightly means 26 equally-spaced payments during the year, the interest accrued at the end of the first fortnight is $660,000 x (0.0575/26) = $1459.62 and so the principal is reduced by $2299.61 - $1459.62 = $839.99 For the next payment, the principal still owing at the beginning of that fortnight will be $660,000-$839.99 = $659,160.01 and the interest accrued will be $659,160.01 x (0.0575/26) = $1457.76 and so slightly more of the principal will be reduced than the $839.99 of the previous payment.  Lather, rinse, repeat until the loan is paid off which should occur at the end of 17.5 years (or after 455 biweekly payments). If the loan rate changes during this time (since you say that this is a variable-rate loan), the numbers quoted above will change too. And no, it is not the case that just %5.75 of the $2300 is interest, and the rest comes off the principle (sic)? Interest is computed on the principal amount still owed ($660,000 for starters and then decreasing fortnightly). not the loan payment amount. Edit  After playing around with a spreadsheet a bit, I found that if  payments are made every two weeks (14 days apart) rather than 26 equally spaced payments in one year as I used above, interest accrues at the rate of 5.75 x (14/365)% for the 14 days rather than at the rate of (5.75/26)% for the time between payments as I used above each 14 days, $2299.56 is paid as the biweekly mortgage payment instead of the $2299.61 stated by the OP, then 455 payments (slightly less than 17.5 calendar years when leap years are taken into account) will pay off the loan.  In fact, that 455-th payment should be reduced by 65 cents.  In view of rounding of fractional cents and the like, I doubt that it would be possible to have the last equal payment reduce the balance to exactly 0. "If the interest rate on the student loan is lower than inflation, then the student loan will be ""cheaper"" the longer you take to pay it.   This is now a very rare instance, but there were programs and loan consolidation opportunities in the mid-200x's that allowed savvy student's to convert their loans to have an interest rate of around 1.5%. Right now the inflation rate is actually quite low, but it's not expected to stay there, and wasn't that low just a few years ago, so in the long run this type of debt will only be cheaper the longer it takes to pay off. It is risky, as others point out, as it can't be written off in bankruptcy, but there are other situations where it can be written off more easily than other debts, so on balance the risks aren't better or worse than other loans in general.  For specific individual situations the risk equation might work out differently, though. Further, student loans aren't considered traditional debt by some lenders for specific lending opportunities, thus allowing you to go into greater debt for certain types of purchases.  Whether this is good for you or not depends on the importance of the purchase. If you need to buy a house and the interest rate is higher than your student loan rate, it will be better, financially, to pay off the house first, while paying the minimum on the student loans.   If you have no other debt with a higher interest, and the student loan interest is higher than inflation, there is no reason to delay paying off the student loan." "I am lucky enough to have chosen a flexible mortgage that allows me to change payment amounts at certain, very lenient intervals (to a minimum amount).  So when I was laid off, the first thing I did was call my bank to lower my payments to a level that allowed me some breathing room, at my new, lower income.  If and when my family's income increases, I'll re-adjust my payments to a higher amount.   But if you're concerned about the ""what if""s in this economy, I'd definitely choose a mortgage that allows for flexibility so that you don't lose your house if you don't have to, particularly if your situation is temporary." "I figured that there must be some people in a corporate office somewhere who sign $100M loans for lunch. :)  The banks have that experience (but I'm not interested in asking them for a sample), and our consultants definitely have that experience, but I'm looking to evaluate the consultants with this exercise. If they provide the sample, then deliver to that sample, I'm still blind as to whether that sample is ""good"" as compared to something that the corporate world would use on the daily.  I'd take your advice for the $1M loan, but I can't help but think as the factors of 10 increase, the data required to properly negotiate also increases. I don't want to go in blind, and provide a proposal that looks like a high school project." The CBOE had a great article on this. I will search for it and edit. The normal dividends are not adjusted. Which is why you see early exercise of just out of the money options sometimes. To get that dividend. A special dividend, say a $50 stock with $1/yr dividend but now has a $3 one time dividend would likely result in an option strike adjustment. If you find a particular stock to be overvalued at $200 for example and a reasonable value at $175, you can place a limit order at the price you want to pay. If/when the stock price falls to your desired purchase price, the transaction takes place. Your broker can explain how long a limit order can stay open. This method allows you to take advantage of flash crashes when some savvy stock trader decides to game the market. This tactic works better with more volatile or low-volume stocks. If it works for an S&P500 tracking ETF, you have bigger problems. :) Another tactic is to put money into your brokerage cash account on a regular basis and buy those expensive stocks & funds when you have accumulated enough money to do so. This money won't earn you any interest while it sits in the cash account, but it's there, ready to be deployed at a moment's notice when you have enough to purchase those expensive assets.