US banks suffer steeper losses, but retain large cushions in annual Fed health check
By Pete Schroeder and Nupur Anand
WASHINGTON, June 26 (Reuters) -The biggest U.S.banks would have enough capital to withstand severe economic and market turmoil, the Federal Reserve's annual "stress test" exercise showed on Wednesday, but firms faced steeper hypothetical losses this year due to riskier portfolios.
The exercise found 31 big banks would weather a spike in the jobless rate, severe market volatility, and dives in the residential and commercial mortgage markets and still retain enough capital to continue lending.
Specifically, the Fed found levels of high-quality capital at the banks would dip to 9.9% at their lowest levels, which is more than twice the regulatory minimum.
The relatively clean bill of health clears the way for the banks to announce capital plans to shareholders in the coming days, including stock buybacks and dividends. Banks can announce capital plans after the market closes on Friday, a senior Fed official said.
However, the test did find banks suffered steeper losses this year, and not because the test got tougher. The 2024 version of the stress test was broadly similar to last year's, and the Fed said the higherlosses were due to how bank portfolios have shifted in the last year.
The Fed singled out growing credit card balances and delinquency rates, riskier corporate credit portfolios, and lower projected profits as weighing on banks this year.
"It is not changes in the scenario driving the results. Rather, the three main factors driving this year's results were associated with changes in banks' balance sheets," said Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Michael Barr in a statement.
The banks that weretested would suffer a combined $685 billion in losses under ahypothetical severe scenario. On average, banks saw their capital ratios fall by 2.8 percentage points, the steepest decline since 2018.
Of the banks tested, Charles Schwab Corp reported the highest capital levels under the test, posting a 25.2% capital ratio under that severe scenario. Bank of New York Mellon Corp, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, Northern Trust and State Street all reported double-digit capital ratios after the test, as did the US operations of Deutsche Bank and UBS.
By comparison, some smaller regional lenders saw their capital levels skirt closer to the minimums, with BMO, Citizens Financial Group, and HSBC all reporting stressed capital ratios below 7%.
The largest global banks all posted capital ratios well above minimums, with JPMorgan posting the highest at 12.5%, and Wells Fargo the lowest at 8.1%. Bank of America posted a 9.1% capital ratio, and Citigroup posted a 9.7% ratio.
While banks were expected to perform well under this year's exam as they have in years prior, the annual results are significant for each firm because how well they perform dictates how much capital they must hold against potential losses. Excess funds beyondthose capital levels can then be returned to shareholders.
Reporting by Pete Schroeder, editing by Deepa Babington
Related Assets
Latest News
Disclaimer: The XM Group entities provide execution-only service and access to our Online Trading Facility, permitting a person to view and/or use the content available on or via the website, is not intended to change or expand on this, nor does it change or expand on this. Such access and use are always subject to: (i) Terms and Conditions; (ii) Risk Warnings; and (iii) Full Disclaimer. Such content is therefore provided as no more than general information. Particularly, please be aware that the contents of our Online Trading Facility are neither a solicitation, nor an offer to enter any transactions on the financial markets. Trading on any financial market involves a significant level of risk to your capital.
All material published on our Online Trading Facility is intended for educational/informational purposes only, and does not contain – nor should it be considered as containing – financial, investment tax or trading advice and recommendations; or a record of our trading prices; or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instruments; or unsolicited financial promotions to you.
Any third-party content, as well as content prepared by XM, such as: opinions, news, research, analyses, prices and other information or links to third-party sites contained on this website are provided on an “as-is” basis, as general market commentary, and do not constitute investment advice. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, it would be considered as marketing communication under the relevant laws and regulations. Please ensure that you have read and understood our Notification on Non-Independent Investment. Research and Risk Warning concerning the foregoing information, which can be accessed here.
