RSS Feed
Twitter
Facebook
Email
HomeElizabeth Warren Calls for New Bank Stress Tests
Posted by Larry Doyle on February 11th, 2010 9:34 AM |
The initial Bank Stress Tests run by Treasury Secretary Geithner were largely a sham. I questioned as much last April in writing, “Bank Stress Tests: Major Sham?”:
As with any test, the results are only meaningful if the process and proctor have unquestioned integrity. The proctors for the Bank Stress Test are none other than Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and Fed chair Ben Bernanke. Why is a testing authority of the magnitude of FDIC, led by Sheila Bair, not more involved in the process? Ms. Bair is the one individual in our country with the greatest level of interaction with and understanding of the student body, that being the banking industry as a whole and individual banks specifically.
What does the FDIC, led by Ms. Bair, have to say about the upcoming Bank Stress Tests? The New York Post provides a CHILLING perspective: (more…)
Bank Stress Tests? Take Home Exams and Partially Self-Graded
Posted by Larry Doyle on April 24th, 2009 3:10 PM |
The Treasury just released the methodology used in assessing the vitality of the 19 largest banks via the Bank Stress Tests. The market took the release of this methodology as a big yawn. Treasury offered that the capital at some banks has been “substantially reduced.” Please tell us something we don’t know.
The worst case scenario used by Treasury still falls into the camp of what most analysts view as the expected scenario.
In reading deeper into some of the reviews of the methodology, I am struck by the leeway provided to the banks in measuring the credit quality of loans on the banks’ books and the likelihood of deterioration on those loans. I view that as the wiggle room described by Meredith Whitney earlier this week.
As Bloomberg reports, Fed Says Capital at Some Major Banks Is Substantially Reduced:
“Firms were allowed to diverge from the indicative loss rates where they could provide evidence that their estimated loss rates were appropriate,” the study said.
Regulators used the market shocks of the second half of 2008, when Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. declared bankruptcy, as the model for testing banks with trading portfolios of $100 billion or more.
As they pored over banks’ loan and securities portfolios and off-balance-sheet liabilities, examiners increasingly focused on the quality of credits. They were concerned about wide variations in underwriting standards, a regulatory official said this week.
Supervisors concluded that banks’ lending practices need to be given as much weight as macroeconomic scenarios in determining the health of each bank, the official said.
The goal of the reviews is to keep the major financial institutions lending over the next two years, and to determine how much capital they may need if the economic slump worsens.
Supervisors will weigh how much capital each company holds, its ability to retain earnings over the next few years, future access to private capital and the extent any asset writedowns.
The Bank Stress Tests are not only largely a take home exam, but now we discover they are partially self-graded.
Call me suspicious.
In speaking with friends on Wall Street, I have heard from a number of individuals that there is still a large short base in a number of the financials. The short base is providing a strong cushion to that sector specifically and the market in general.
LD
The Red Sea
Posted by Larry Doyle on April 24th, 2009 11:26 AM |
While there is tremendous focus on the Bank Stress Tests, there remains limited focus overall on the centerpieces of our domestic housing finance industry. I am talking about Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, and the Federal Home Loan Banks. Some have categorized these institutions as “black holes.” I believe a more appropriate designation would be The Red Sea as these institutions are awash in losses and continue to bleed money.
We may never know the circumstances surrounding the death of acting Freddie Mac CFO, David Kellerman, but there is a lot of focus by government officials on these institutions. There has been much less focus by private analysts. To that end, I am most grateful to Bloomberg’s David Reilly for reporting on Fannie Mae Creates Housing Mirage With Bum Loans.
Effectively, Fannie Mae is giving funds away to very high credit risk individuals who would have otherwise most likely already defaulted on their mortgages. As Reilly reports:
Give money away. That was a solution to the housing crisis mortgage giant Fannie Mae hit on last year.
Faced with growing numbers of homeowners unable to make mortgage payments, Fannie decided to fund loans to borrowers that were instant losers.
The point was to buy time. Even though those loans resulted in a $453 million loss, they helped keep troubled homeowners from defaulting. That meant Fannie for now didn’t have to make good on loan guarantees that may have cost it as much as $2.4 billion.
Make no mistake, this Fannie Mae program was also being utilized by Freddie Mac. Reports have come out that Freddie Mac’s Kellerman was pressured by Freddie’s accountants to improperly report their financials. In a similar vein, Fannie is playing another version of the “shell game” in order to buy time and forestall losses. (more…)
Will Bank Stress Tests Be “Put on a Curve?”
Posted by Larry Doyle on April 22nd, 2009 9:10 AM |
Will the soon to be released Bank Stress Tests provide real clarity on the health of our banking industry or will the tests be “curved?” Meredith Whitney, highly regarded bank analyst, has indicated that the tests will provide plenty of wiggle room for the banks. Just yesterday Secretary Geithner “goosed” the market by indicating the majority of banks have sufficient capital. To what degree can we trust what Turbo-Tim is telling us?
Mohamed El-Erian, CEO of PIMCO (Pacific Investment Management Company) provides a blueprint for an honest review of the Stress Tests. Mr. El-Erian highlights the following in a Financial Times article:
First, transparency is key. Whether the government likes it or not, hundreds of analysts around the world will reverse engineer the stress tests. The government would be well advised to assist the process through clarity. Obfuscation would result in damaging market noise and further derail the real economy. At the minimum, policymakers need to provide credible details on the methodology, the underlying assumptions and scenario analyses.
To this point, neither the banks nor the government have provided real transparency. What are we to expect when Congress pressures the FASB to relax mark-to-market accounting thus forever clouding real transparency?
Second, the results of the stress tests must be part of a comprehensive, forward-looking package to resolve problems at banks. Out-performing banks should be provided with exit mechanisms from the exceptional government support that they have been receiving and, presumably, no longer need. At the other end, there must be clarity as to how capital-deficient banks that no longer have access to private capital will be handled. (more…)
Why Is the Market Selling Off Today?
Posted by Larry Doyle on April 20th, 2009 2:30 PM |
The broad equity market indices are down 3+% on the day. Why would that happen when the bulk of company news today was generally positive? At least on the surface the news was positive:
1. Bank of America posted .44 earnings per share vs. expectations of .04
2. Eli Lilly earnings were up 23% outpacing expectations.
3. Halliburton disappointed with earnings down 35% but that is due to the massive correction in the price of oil from a year ago.
Merger Activity:
4. Oracle is purchasing Sun Microsystems in a $7.4 billion deal.
5. Pepsi is buying two bottling companies for $6 billion.
6. Glaxo is purchasing Stiefel for $2.9 billion.
Leading economic indicators declined by .3 but that decline is offset by an improved reading from the prior month.
Then, why is the market down so much? Two reasons are promoted, but only one of them is getting proper coverage.
Market analysts supposedly are focused today on the ongoing increases in chargeoffs and writedowns on the loan portfolios in the banking industry. These loans consist of credit card loans, residential mortgages, commercial mortgages, and corporate loans.
I don’t buy this line of reasoning for today’s selloff. Increased chargeoffs and writedowns have been widely expected for a while. The level of reserves taken by the banks has been widely panned as being insufficient. Then why is the market down so much? (more…)
Bank Stress Tests: Threading the Needle
Posted by Larry Doyle on April 19th, 2009 12:44 PM |
For those involved in assessing the solvency of our domestic banking system, the prospects of releasing the results of the Bank Stress Tests are frightening. How do Secretary Geithner, Fed chair Bernanke, regulators, and President Obama himself maintain credibility with the markets while simultaneously growing confidence in the public?
As Bloomberg reports, Bank Regulators Clash Over U.S. Stress-Tests Endgame. Secretary Geithner clearly was trying to buy time when he proposed the Bank Stress Test model. The day of reckoning will soon be upon us. The administration will release the model used on April 24 and the results on May 4th. However, there are enormous conflicts within the administration and the regulatory community as to how to release the information and how much information to release.
As Bloomberg highlights,
The U.S. Treasury and financial regulators are clashing with each other over how to disclose results from the stress tests of 19 U.S. banks, with some officials concerned at potential damage to weaker institutions.
With a May 4 deadline approaching, there is no set plan for how much information to release, how to categorize the results or who should make the announcements, people familiar with the matter said. While the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and other regulators want few details about the assessments to be publicized, the Treasury is pushing for broader disclosure.
The disarray highlights what threatens to be a lose-lose situation for Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner: If all the banks pass, the tests’ credibility will be questioned, and if some banks get failing grades and are forced to accept more government capital and oversight, they may be punished by investors and customers.
“There are plenty of ways to go wrong here,” said Wayne Abernathy, executive vice president of the American Bankers Association in Washington. “It might have sounded good at the time, but now looking back, it has far more risk than benefit.”
What will come of this? The pressure from all corners is increasing on Geithner. Can he snatch victory from what may appear to be a lose-lose situation? Can he somehow or other get the results forestalled and maintain credibility? Can he keep the various constituencies placated? Truly, he needs to “thread the needle.”
Listen to NQR’s Sense on Cents with Larry Doyle this evening from 8-9 p.m. as I discuss how I think Secretary Geithner will try to thread the needle.
LD
Tune in Sunday Evening to NoQuarter Radio’s Sense on Cents with Larry Doyle
Posted by Larry Doyle on April 19th, 2009 7:34 AM |
Please join me Sunday evening from 8-9 p.m. ET for NoQuarter Radio’s Sense on Cents with Larry Doyle. 
The developments in the markets, economy, global finance, Wall Street, and Washington are occurring at breakneck speed. I will try to slow things down a bit and provide a sense of perspective. What did we learn in the markets over the last week and what does that mean for the weeks and months ahead? We will address a wide range of issues, including: transparency and quality of earnings, Goldman’s and JP Morgan’s initiative to pay back TARP, and upcoming bank stress test results.
In addition, my guest Sunday night will be Chris Lowney. Lowney, formerly a Jesuit, was named a Managing Director of J.P. Morgan while still in his thirties and held senior positions in New York, Tokyo, Singapore and London until leaving the firm in 2001. He served successively on Morgan’s Asia-Pacific, Europe, and Investment Banking Management Committees. Lowney’s first book, Heroic Leadership: Best Practices from a 450-Year-Old Company that Changed the World, was the #1 ranked bestseller of the CBPA (Catholic Book Publishers Association) and was named a finalist for a 2003 Book of the Year Award from ForeWord magazine. It has been translated into ten languages. (more…)
Wall Street Plays Washington
Posted by Larry Doyle on July 7th, 2009 5:15 PM |
Politicians and bankers work the stage while the media maitre’d pretends to care how you really feel. Ultimately, the curtain goes down, the lights go on and you’re stuck with a bill that leaves you aghast.
Welcome to the Brave New World of the Uncle Sam economy 2009.
Today Bloomberg releases news that Delinquencies on U.S. Home-Equity Loans Reach Record:
The ABA is not exactly timely with this news in regard to home equity lines of credit; Sense on Cents shared similar color on May 20th in “Bank Stress Tests: Vigorous or Sham? Let’s Review HELOC Losses”:
This brings us to the topic of losses within the banking system and the integrity of the Bank Stress Tests. The Wall Street banks were more than happy to “put on a show” with Secretary Geithner leading the orchestra and the FASB in a supporting role given their relaxation of the mark-to-market. Now we get to revisit the fact that banks are still sitting on hundreds of billions in embedded losses. (more…)
Tags: ABA report on loan delinquencies, American Bankers Association report on loan delinquencies, assumed HELOC losses in Bank Stress Tests, Bank Stress Tests Major Sham, banks need $300 billion, banks will lose more money, Brave New World of Uncle Sam Economy, charade on Wall Street and Washington, Delinquencies on U.S. Home Equity Loans Reach Record, Deutsche Bank report on bank losses, FASB relaxation of mark to market, FDIC comment on Bank Stress Tests, HELOC losses, how much more money do banks need, Kevin Doyle of 12th Street Capital, managed earnings for banks, normalized profits for banks, politicians and bankers are showmen, relationship Wall Street and Washington, U.S. Lenders May Have to Raise $300 Billion, Wall Street Washington show, what are normalized profits
Posted in Bank Stress Test, Banking Institutions, Economy, General, Wall Street, Washington D.C., markets | 3 Comments »