Dashboard Idea, page-9

$1.014m revenue last quarter
I'm projecting about $1.470m for this current quarter, then $1.691m for the following quarter (hopefully $1.47m proves fairly accurate, but $1.691m is practically a guess).

Those projections are for the existing business segments only. The advisor platform and ETF should only add to those projections.

So say they start out with fees from the ETF of $450k annualised on 100m under management, equating to $112k in the first full quarter. So next quarter could be boosted from $1.69m projection to $1.80m. 6.5% boost to revenue from the ETF. That's actually roughly equal to the revenue from subscription fees from the premium website service.

Then whether the proportion of revenue due to the ETF grows from 6.5% depends on if the ETF FUM grows faster than the website... That's why I say I have no idea what the ETF will contribute. Will the 100m initial FUM grow to >$200m in 1 year? Because the website seems to be growing quicker than 100% in the past year.

So the ETF will not be enormous initially, but with potential to take over subscription fees at least, if it grows quicker than the website does (if it grows to >$200m FUM within 1 year).

Question: will the ETF have minimal costs? (Other than the initial and ongoing marketing expenses) I wonder whether that revenue can be assumed to be profitable revenue. The IP is already developed for the website, so you'd assume the cost of running the fund would be pretty low.

Then the question of the advisor platform: how large will that be relative to the retail side of the website. It's a good question, but again, no idea. The company (or was it the research report, I forget) has given their own random projection of 1 advisor signing up per month with X clients making X trades. It seems tough to predict how much these 2 divisions will grow when they're just being released now.


Below are my projections (completely excluding ETF and Advisor Platform):



The orange numbers are my projected growth rates for this quarter. Green numbers are calculated based on those.
- Trades - I'm predicting a big jump in growth rate to 55%, partly because of the announcement about Jul-Aug (just before the end of the 2 months) beating Apr-Jun (3 months). Plus I see other signs pointing to a strong quarter. It's a big call considering that would be a big jump in growth rate.
- Active Clients / Client Cash - I'm thinking trades growth is partly due to seasonality and partly due to new sign-ups, so I'm thinking clients/cash will grow less than trades.
- Revenue - simply the mid-point between trades growth and client cash growth, since interest and trades make up similar proportions of total revenue.
- Expenses - based on the previous quarterly report's projection for this quarter's expenses. Normally management are pretty accurate at predicting expenses, so I used their number.
Result: -300k cashflow (from -578k cashflow last quarter).
Things could easily change with so much going on - ETF, advisor platform etc. And the projections don't include those.


I calculated a couple of other metrics. Trades per trader per month - it's not really showing improvement. Hopefully that turns upwards.
Average Revenue Per User (active traders only, annualised) - looking fine. I'm just keeping an eye on it. This compares to $60 new customer acquisition cost mentioned in June-2019.

They had also mentioned "ARPU from each Active Trader is now between $400 and $500" in Dec-2018, which differs from my numbers. Not sure if they were exaggerating, or we have a different calculation method. I just take quarterly revenue divided by active clients number multiplied by 4 quarters to annualise it.


So my -$300k (negative) cashflow projection is based on the following assumptions (and not including advisor platform or ETF):

	Assumptions (Next Q)	Rate
1	Trade Growth	55%
2	Client Growth	45%
3	Client Cash Growth	35%
4	Revenue Growth	45%
5	Expenses Growth	11% (11% equates to $1.77m expenses, as was projected in the last quarterly)

Pretty big assumptions, but I'll be proved right or wrong on ~4 Oct.