S&P Cuts 5 Banks to “Junk” Status

June 28, 2009 by · Leave a Comment 

On June 17, 2009, S&P downgraded the credit ratings or outlooks on 22 banks. In this post, we take a closer look at the five regional banks that were cut to “junk” status.

When any credit-rating service downgrades a company from ‘BBB’ to ‘BB” – which occurred with these five banks – this reclassifies its debt from investment grade to “junk” status. According to S&P’s definition of ‘BB’, any adverse business, financial or economic conditions could lead to the bank’s inadequate capacity to meet its financial commitments.

Conducting business with any bank that has been cut to “junk” status, means being safety-conscious and paying attention to the bank’s performance. As a depositor, cash accounts at all FDIC-insured institutions are guaranteed up to $250,000. To learn about the protection on your bank accounts, visit the FDIC.gov.

Additionally, if you are looking for objective appraisals about your bank or would like to explore your options, you can visit Bankrate. Their Safe & Sound ratings provide trustworthy and free ratings for businesses and consumers. Bankrate does advise “to evaluate independently all financial institutions, consider other information — including the strength of the financial institution’s management — and to contact financial institutions individually to seek answers to their questions.”

For the exception of Whitney Bank, all of these banks sustained net losses in 2008 compared with 2007. Click on the bank link for stock performance.

Cut to S&P “Junk” Status

(Year-Ended 12/31)

Total Net Income

2008

Total Net Income

2007

Carolina First Bank

Greenville, SC

($547,118,000)

$73,276,000

Citizens Republic Bancorp

Flint, MI

(393,052,000)

100,842,000

Huntington Bancshares

Columbus, OH

(113,800,000)

75,200,000

Synovus Financial

Columbus, GA

(582,438,000)

526,305,000

Whitney Bank

New Orleans, LA

58,585,000

151,054,000

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Tags: , , , ,

Standard & Poor’s Bank Credit Ratings — June 17, 2009

June 27, 2009 by · Leave a Comment 

Standard & Poor’s (S&P) and Moody’s are the giant financial rating agencies. On June 17, 2009, S&P analysts downgraded the credit ratings or outlooks on 22 banks. Eight within this group are bank holding companies (BHCs) that underwent the stress test. The remaider are regional banks. Both of these groups received a one- or two-notch rating cut. They were also put on a negative watch which means that their ratings could be cut even further.  Five of the regional banks were downgraded to “junk” status. The one exception is PNC Financial that was upgraded one notch.

S&P said that its rating modifications reflect “our belief that operating conditions for the industry will become less favorable than they were in the past, characterized by greater volatility in financial markets during credit cycles, and tighter regulatory supervision.”

By way of contrast, Moody’s did not release any bank credit ratings alongside S&P. In fact, Moody’s does not expect to downgrade ratings for any of the BHCs that made TARP fund repayments. Should the economic picture change, Moody’s may cut their ratings.

Also on June 17, the Obama administration proposed an overhaul of financial regulation. For the credit-rating establishment, the administration is only proposing modest changes. Considering that credit-raters at S&P, Moody’s and Fitch gave out high ratings on many subprime securities during the real estate boom, it is unclear why there is no proposal to overhaul the credit-rating industry. To the outrage of detractors, the credit rating establishment will continue to be compensated by investment banks selling the securities. So much for managing conflicts of interest and rating independence.

For stock performance, click on the bank’s link:

Bank Holding Companies New Rating

Old Rating
BB&T Corp. A/Stable

A+/Watch Neg
Capital One Financial Corp. BBB/Negative

BBB+/Watch Neg
Fifth Third Bancorp BBB/Negative

A-/Watch Neg
KeyCorp BBB+/Negative

A-/Watch Neg
PNC Financial Services Group

A/Stable

A/Watch Neg
Regions Financial Corp. BBB+/Negative

A/Watch Neg
U.S. Bancorp A+/Stable

AA/Watch Neg
Wells Fargo & Co. AA-/Negative

AA/Watch Neg
Regional Banks

Associated Banc BBB/Negative BBB+/Watch Neg

Astoria Financial BBB-/Negative BBB/Watch Neg

Carolina First Bank BB+/Negative

“junk” status

BBB/Watch Neg

Citizens Republic Bancorp BB-/Negative

“junk” status

BBB-/Watch Neg
Comerica Inc. A-/Negative A/Watch Neg

First National Bank of Omaha

(privately owned)

BBB-/Negative BBB-/Watch Neg

Huntington Bancshares BB+/Negative

“junk” status

BBB/Watch Neg

M&T Bank A-/Negative A-/Watch Neg

Susquehanna Bancshares BBB-/Negative BBB/Watch Neg

Synovus Financial BB-/Negative

“junk” status

BBB+/Watch Neg
Valley National Bancorp A-/Negative A-/Stable

Webster Financial BBB-/Negative BBB/Watch Neg

Whitney Holding Corp BB+/Negative

“junk” status

BBB/Watch Neg

Wilmington Trust BBB/Negative BBB+/Watch Neg

Rating Definitions:

AAA: Extremely strong capacity to meet its financial commitments.

AA: Very strong capacity to meet its financial commitments.

A: Strong capacity to meet its financial commitments

BBB: Adequate capacity to meet its financial commitments.

BB, B, CCC, and CC: regarded as having significant speculative

characteristics

BB: Adverse business, financial, or economic conditions could

lead to the bank’s inadequate capacity to meet its financial commitments.

B: Adverse business, financial, or economic conditions will likely impair

the bank’s capacity or willingness to meet its financial commitments.

CCC: Currently vulnerable, and is dependent upon favorable business,

financial, and economic conditions to meet its financial commitments.

CC: Highly vulnerable to meet its financial commitments.

R: Under regulatory supervision owing to its financial condition.


No tags for this post.

Bankroll: Credit Rating Agencies

June 21, 2009 by · Leave a Comment 

The giant financial rating agencies are Standard & Poor’s (S&P) and Moody’s.

Standard & Poor’s (S&P) is a financial services company that rates stocks and corporate and municipal bonds according to risk profiles. It’s parent company is McGraw-Hill, a publishing company.

Moody’s Investors Service is an independent, unaffiliated research company that assigns ratings on the basis of risk and the borrower’s ability to make interest payments. Moody’s backs its ratings with exhaustive financial research and unbiased commentary and analysis.

Both of these rating services have dedicated followers. There are, of course, smaller credit-rating services with modest staff that are dwarfed by Moody’s and S&P. The ratings are generally released during industry cycle changes and not at specified intervals like quarterly and annual reports.

However, any discussion of these services would not be complete without reference to a 10-month review conducted by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The review, “Summary Report of Issues Identified in the Commission Staff’s Examinations of Select Credit Rating Agencies,” was released in July 2008.

The SEC report found that some analysts at Moody’s, S&P and Fitch Ratings gave unjustified high ratings to mortgage and related securities. These phoney “high” ratings turned out to be much riskier and lower than their ratings would have actually implied. In many cases, credit raters were paid by investment banks selling the securities. This in turn prompted the SEC review to question improperly managed conflicts of interest and their rating independence.

The SEC report concluded by saying that “Each credit rating agency was cooperative in the course of these examinations and has committed to taking remedial measures to address the issues identified.”

Having said this, you will often see media references to S&P or Moody’s. For an understanding of the ratings, listed below are the rating profiles and definitions for each service.

S&P – Long-Term Rating Definitions

AAA: Extremely strong capacity to meet its financial commitments.

AA: Very strong capacity to meet its financial commitments.

A: Strong capacity to meet its financial commitments

BBB: Adequate capacity to meet its financial commitments.

BB, B, CCC, and CC: regarded as having significant speculative

characteristics

BB: Adverse business, financial, or economic conditions could lead to the bank’s inadequate capacity to meet its financial commitments.

B: Adverse business, financial, or economic conditions will likely impair the bank’s capacity or willingness to meet its financial commitments.

CCC: Currently vulnerable, and is dependent upon favorable business, financial, and economic conditions to meet its financial commitments.

CC: Highly vulnerable to meet its financial commitments.

R: Under regulatory supervision owing to its financial condition.

Moody’s Long-Term Rating Definitions

Aaa: Highest quality, with minimal credit risk.

Aa: High quality and are subject to very low credit risk.

A: Upper-medium grade and are subject to low credit risk.

Baa: Moderate credit risk and may possess certain speculative characteristics.

Ba: With speculative elements and are subject to substantial credit risk.

B: Speculative and are subject to high credit risk.

Caa: Poor standing and are subject to very high credit risk.

Ca: Highly speculative and are likely in, or very near, default, with some prospect of recovery of principal and interest.

C: Lowest rated class and are typically in default, with little prospect for recovery of principal or interest.

Note: Moody’s adds numerical modifiers 1, 2, and 3 to each rating classification from Aa through Caa.

Modifier 1: higher end of its generic rating category.

Modifier 2: mid-range ranking.

Modifier 3: lower end of that generic rating category.

When S&P and Moody’s release ratings for the bank holding companies that underwent stress testing, they will be posted under “Bankroll.”


No tags for this post.

Quarterly Results: First Quarter 2009

June 21, 2009 by · Leave a Comment 

It is reassuring to see that four of the bank holding companies (BHCs) that failed the stress test show increases in total net income during the first quarter 2009 compared with 2008. The remaining BHCs (highlighted in red) indicate net losses or reductions in total net income for the first quarter 2009 compared with 2008. Click on the bank links for their corporate press releases.

Quarter ended March 31

(Dollars in millions)

Revenue

Total Net Income

2009

2008

2009

2008

Bank of America

$35,758

$17,003

$4,247

$1,210

Citigroup

24,789

13,219

1,577

(5,111)

Fifth Third Bancorp

1,473

1,684

50

286

GMAC Financial Services

2,199

2,410

(675)

($589)

KeyCorp

1,106

1,241

(488)

218

Morgan Stanley

3,042

7,917

(177)

1,413

PNC Financial Services

3,871

1,821

530

377

Regions Financial

1,875

1,926

77

337

SunTrust Banks

2,239

2,225

(815)

291

Wells Fargo

21,017

10,563

3,045

1,999

Six out of 10 banks posted net losses or reductions in total net income for the first quarter 2009 compared with 2008:

Fifth Third Bancorp, Cincinatti, OH: $50 million net income

Fortune 500 Rank: 307

Profile: Banking, investment advising and other services for individual consumers, corporations and not-for-profit organizations. Fifth Third is one of the largest money managers in the Midwest.

“From the beginning of this current credit cycle, we have been aggressively dealing with our most problematic loan portfolios,” said Kevin T. Kabat, Chairman, President and CEO of Fifth Third Bancorp. Mr. Kabat stated, “During the fourth quarter of 2008, we took actions to further reduce the risk in these portfolios, primarily residential home builder and commercial non-owner occupied real estate loans in Michigan and Florida.” Due to increasing loan-loss reserves, Fifth Third’s first-quarter profits fell 19 percent. To cover future bad loans, it has set aside $544 million — a fivefold increase from a year ago.

GMAC Financial Services, Detroit, MI: $675 million net loss

Fortune 500 Rank: 78

Profile: Automotive finance, mortgage operations, insurance, commercial finance and online banking with operations in North America, South America, Europe and Asia-Pacific.

GMAC announced that “Results in the quarter were primarily attributable to continued pressure in mortgage operations related to valuation adjustments on mortgage servicing assets, weaker credit performance on both auto and mortgage assets, mark-to-market adjustments on derivatives, and an original issue discount related to the fourth quarter debt exchange.”

KeyCorp, Cleveland, OH: $488 million net loss

Fortune 500 Rank: 321

Profile: Banking, commercial leasing, investment management, and other products and services for individual consumers, corporate and institutional clients. KeyCorp’s 14-state network operates in the Northwest, Rocky Mountain, Great Lakes and Northeast regions.

Chief Executive Officer Henry L. Meyer III stated that “Our results reflect an extremely challenging operating environment and the expedient steps we continue to take to identify problem loans and to build Key’s loan loss reserves.” Specifically, the loss for the current quarter was primarily the result of taking an $875 million provision for loan losses, which exceeded net charge-offs by $383 million.

Morgan Stanley, New York, NY: $177 million net loss

Fortune 500 Rank: Not a public company

Profile: Investment banking, securities, investment management and wealth management services for corporations, governments, institutions and high net worth individuals. Morgan Stanley has more than 600 offices in 36 countries.

John J. Mack, Chairman and CEO, said, “Morgan Stanley would have been profitable this quarter if not for the dramatic improvement in our credit spreads – which is a significant positive development, but had a near-term negative impact on our revenues.” The firm realized net losses of $1 billion on real estate investments and a $1.5 billion drop in net revenue related to the tightening of credit spreads on some of its long-term debt. In September 2008, Morgan Stanley converted from an investment bank to a bank holding company. This allowed the firm to gain access to emergency TARP funds.

Regions Financial, Birmingham, AL: $77 million net income

Fortune 500 Rank: 245

Profile: Banking, trust, securities brokerage, mortgage and insurance products and services for individual consumers, businesses and corporations. Regions operates in 16 states across the South, Midwest and Texas.

“We are very encouraged by the strong performance of our core business, particularly our continued growth in households and customer deposits,” said Dowd Ritter, chairman, president and chief executive officer. However, Regions also said that its most stressed portfolios continue to be residential home builders, home equity second liens in Florida, and condominiums. Those stressed assets currently amount to $8.7 billion, or about 9 percent of the total loan portfolio.

SunTrust Banks, Atlanta, GA: $815 million net loss

Fortune 500 Rank: 193

Profile: Banking, credit, trust, and investment services for individual consumers, businesses and institutional clients. SunTrust operates 1,694 retail branches in the Mid-Atlantic and Southern regions.

James M. Wells III, SunTrust Chairman and Chief Executive Officer said “SunTrust, like other financial institutions, is still working through credit and earnings challenges as the weak economy continues to take a toll on performance.” The first quarter loss was entirely driven by the $715 million goodwill charge and increased reserves for loan losses. Specifically, this was largely due to a write-off on the sagging value of mortgage and real estate loans.

No tags for this post.

U.S. Big Banks Repay TARP Funds on June 17, 2009

June 20, 2009 by · Leave a Comment 

On June 9, 2009, the U.S. Treasury announced that 10 bank holding companies (BHCs) were considered financially stable enough to repay their TARP funds. For the exception of Morgan Stanley, all of the BHCs listed below passed the stress test. Northern Trust, which was not part of stress testing and therefore not included in this post, was the 10th bank.

June 17 was the first day that these banks were eligible to start repayments. By the end of the day, all 10 banks had repaid their TARP funds. To exit this government bailout completely, they must also repurchase the Treasury’s warrants to buy back their stock. Although these BHCs have notified the Treasury about their intentions, none of these banks have repurchased their warrants.

Click on the bank links to see their press releases about TARP fund repayments to the U.S. Treasury:

Repaid TARP Funds

American Express

$3,388,890,000

BB&T

$3,133,640,000

Bank of New York Mellon

$3,000,000,000

Capital One Financial

$3,555,199,000

Goldman Sachs Group

$10,000,000,000

JP Morgan Chase

$25,000,000,000

Morgan Stanley

$10,000,000,000

State Street

$2,000,000,000

U.S. Bancorp

$6,599,000,000

$66,676,729,000

The remaining recipients of TARP funding that failed the stress test and haven’t won approval to repay the government are: Bank of America, Citigroup, Fifth Third Bancorp, GMAC, KeyCorp, PNC Financial Services, Regions Financial, SunTrust Banks and Wells Fargo. These BHCs have until November 9, 2009 to implement their capital plan that was submitted to the U.S. Treasury on June 8, 2009.

No tags for this post.

Bankroll: June 17, 2009

June 17, 2009 by · Leave a Comment 

Starting this week, FindSafeBank will regularly post newsworthy items about the 19 bank holding companies that underwent the stress test. We need to ferret out information on everyday things in addition to U.S. Treasury press releases, bank financial reporting and related matters.

Passed Failed

American Express

Bank of America

BB&T

Citigroup

Bank of New York Mellon

Fifth Third Bancorp

Capital One Financial

GMAC

Goldman Sachs Group

KeyCorp

JP Morgan Chase

Morgan Stanley

MetLife

PNC Financial Services

State Street

Regions Financial

US Bancorp

SunTrust Banks
Wells Fargo

Stay tuned for upcoming posts.

No tags for this post.

Treasury’s Monthly Bank Lending Survey: April 2009

June 16, 2009 by · Leave a Comment 

On June 15, 2009, the U.S. Treasury released results from its April bank lending survey. Participants in the survey represent the top 21 recipients of TARP funds through the Capital Purchase Program (CPP).  For the exception of CIT Group, Comerica and Marshall & Ilsley, all of these bank holding companies underwent the stress test:

American Express JP Morgan Chase
Bank of America KeyCorp
Bank of New York Mellon Marshall & Ilsley
BB&T Morgan Stanley
Capital One Financial Northern Trust
CIT Group PNC Financial Services
Citigroup Regions Financial
Comerica State Street
Fifth Third Bancorp SunTrust Banks
Goldman Sachs Group US Bancorp
Wells Fargo

The survey of these 21 banks found a slight decline in outstanding loan balances for first lien mortgages, home equity lines of credit, credit card loans, and other consumer loans. Within the context of our declining global economy, consumers are now focused on reducing debt which is driving down the outstanding loan balances held by these major banks. Consistent with this, usage of credit cards and home equity lines of credit were flat in April. Of the 21 banks surveyed, there was also a modest decline in new loan applications.

As for businesses, the demand for commercial and industrial (C&I) loans was well below normal levels. As companies continue to downsize and cut costs, so does the demand for such loans. Banks project that the lower demand for C&I loans will persist through the second quarter of 2009.

Within commercial real estate (CRE), the April survey results indicated continuing poor market conditions and general caution by businesses. Loan balances were flat and the surveyed banks reported that the demand for commercial real estate loans remained well below normal levels.

Once the U.S. Treasury releases the May survey next month, the results will be posted.

No tags for this post.

Treasury Allows 10 BHCs to Repay their TARP Funds

June 12, 2009 by · Leave a Comment 

On June 9, 2009, the U.S. Treasury announced that 10 of the bank holding companies (BHCs) that underwent the stress tests will be allowed to repay their TARP funds. In total, these 10 banks owe the Treasury $68 billion.  Combined with the $1.9 billion received to date from other banks, the Treasury will receive nearly $70 billion in repayment of TARP funds. Tim Geithner, Secretary of the Treasury, said “These repayments are an encouraging sign of financial repair, but we still have work to do.”

Since the announcement, the media has made various assumptions about the actual payback list of banks. However, the Treasury’s press release did not list any of the 10 banks. Once the U.S. Treasury releases the names of the banks that can repay the government’s bailout funds, the specifics will be posted under “TARP Funds.”

No tags for this post.

TARP Funds as of May 27, 2009

June 7, 2009 by · Leave a Comment 

The 19 bank holding companies (BHCs) that underwent the stress test have until June 8, 2009 to develop a plan to raise funding from private sources and until November 9, 2009 to implement the plan.

On October 14, 2009, the Capital Purchase Program (CPP), within TARP, was offered to the financial community to provide new capital to banks. Banks participating in CPP receive funds from the Treasury in exchange for purchase of bank shares with warrants. These shares are considered “Tier 1” capital. For the exception of MetLife, all of the other BHCs that underwent the stress test elected to participate in TARP’s Capital Purchase Program.

Due to the restrictions that come with TARP funds, many banks are scrambling to raise capital and pay off their TARP debt to get rid of the government warrants and buy back their shares. During the week of June 8th, the Federal Reserve will announce which of these BHCs will be allowed to pay back government bailout funds.


FAILED Stress Test: Amount of TARP funds borrowed:

(Dollars in billions)

TARP Funds

Bank of America

$45,000

Citigroup

50,000

Fifth Third Bancorp

3,408

GMAC Financial Services

12,500

KeyCorp

2,500

Morgan Stanley

10,000

PNC Financial Services

7,579

Regions Financial

3,500

SunTrust Banks

4,850

Wells Fargo

25,000

PASSED Stress Test: Amount of TARP funds borrowed:

(Dollars in billions)

TARP Funds

American Express

$3,389

BB&T

3,134

Bank of New York Mellon

3,000

Capital One Financial

3,555

Goldman Sachs Group

10,000

JP Morgan Chase

25,000

MetLife

0

State Street

2,000

U.S. Bancorp

6,599

Stay tuned for upcoming results posted under “TARP Funds.”

No tags for this post.

TARP Funds – Purpose

June 6, 2009 by · Leave a Comment 

Back in September 2008, the global credit markets nearly froze. Several major financial institutions – Lehman Brothers, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and American International Group – went under. To stabilize their capital situation, the very established partnerships of Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley changed their charter to become commercial banks. Against this backdrop, the number of failed FDIC-insured banks keeps growing.

On October 3, 2008, the U.S. Treasury created the new Office of Financial Stability to establish and manage a Treasury fund called the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). Through TARP, the Treasury can now buy up to $700 billion of mortgage backed securities (MBS) from “troubled” banking institutions. The goal of this bailout is to increase liquidity in the secondary mortgage markets through purchase of illiquid MBS – thereby reducing the potential losses at the institutions who currently own them.

On October 14, the Capital Purchase Program (CPP), within TARP, was offered to the financial community to provide new capital to banks. In turn, this allows the banks to offer more business loans thereby stimulating the economy.

The deadline for responding to this offer was November 14. Banks participating in CPP receive funds from the Treasury in exchange for purchase of bank shares with warrants. These shares are considered “Tier 1” capital. The Treasury was immediately given $250 billion to buy equity stakes in nine major U.S. banks and many smaller banks. Going forward, the President must certify additional funds as needed.

There are restrictions that come with TARP funds. For example, banks must be willing to: sell an amount of stock equal to 1-3% of their risk-weighted assets; lose some tax benefits; and incur limits on executive compensation. For this reason, many banks are scrambling to raise capital, pay off their TARP debt to get rid of the government warrants and buy back their shares. During the week of June 8th, the Federal Reserve will announce which of the 19 banks that underwent the stress tests will be allowed to repay government bailout funds.

With that in mind, stay tuned for the upcoming results posted under “TARP Funds.”

No tags for this post.

SEO Powered by Platinum SEO from Techblissonline