I have no way to verify the accuracy of this —
Can anyone provide any feedback on this? How is this composed, ranked, or otherwise produced?
Source:
UNOFFICIAL Troubled Bank List
Last updated: 08/29/2008
http://www.geocities.com/tubeguy@rogers.com/troubledbanks.htm
Download Troubled_Bank_List.pdf
All bank data can be found here. Just throw it into Excel, pick the data you want to look at, create a few formulas, sort and you are good to go.
https://cdr.ffiec.gov/public/
Barry,
I think next week is setting up to be very negative…as I have posted before, I am not in the market at this time, but continue to be very interested in what is happening here…
Two hurricanes, one of which through our oil producing areas, the finance minister for Britain Friday admits the worst economic crisis in 60 years, and even with the GDP numbers which have been worked over yesterday, the personal income and spending numbers look pretty weak to me…
I think we could be down 500 by the end of the week. Again, I am not in the market here, so just a guess…
Since we don’t start ’til Tuesday, any irrational exuberance to counter my “permabear” outlook?
Bruce in Tennessee
And why are so many in FL, GA and IL?
Here is where the excel friendly data (CSV) is:
http://www4.fdic.gov/sdi/main4.asp
Barry,
The FDIC discloses the number of banks on its “problem list” in its quarterly report. This is a link to the latest one: http://www4.fdic.gov/qbp/2008jun/qbp.pdf. However, the report does not disclose the names of the banks on the list, just total number and aggregate data about the banks.
I think the FDIC just discloses a list of failed banks, not problem banks. However, there are private services like IRA from which one can buy reports on bank health from services like BauerFinancial Inc. (www.bauerfinancial.com) or Creative Investment Research, Inc.(www.creativeinvest.com).
All that said, most people can deal with bank help by staying below the FDIC limits. And those that can’t — I’d guess mostly businesses with payroll needs — can open up a non-margin brokerage account that holds purely 30-day US treasury paper and a payroll disbursement account (with instructions to roll the proceeds into new 30-day US T paper), and wire money from the brokerage account to the disbursement account as needed.
Individual investor, cheered on by a forum.
http://www.tickerforum.org/cgi-ticker/akcs-www?post=52607
These are the notes from the original link to this that I saw on TickerForum
Notes:
Source: FDIC SDI (http://www4.fdic.gov/SDI/main.asp) Please note that this is NOT the OFFICIAL FDIC troubled bank list!
Texas Ratio = 100 * (Non-performing Assets + Other REO) / (Equity + Loss Reserves)
Non-performing assets (npa) excludes those non-performing assets that are guaranteed by the US government.
Effective Tier 1 Leverage Ratio = 100 * (Tier 1 capital + loss reserves – LGD estimate) / (average assets – ineligible intangibles – LGD Estimate + loss reserves)
Where LGD Estimate = NPA_1st liens * 0.4 + NPA_HELOC * 0.8 + NPA_construction_loans * 0.6 + NPA_farm * 0.6 + NPA_commercial_RE * 0.6 +
NPA_commercial/industrial * 0.8 + NPA_consumer * 0.6 + NPA_other * 0.8
Effective Equity/Assets calculated with same LGD assumptions but with total equity instead of Tier 1 equity and total assets instead of average assets – ineligible intangibles
Banks highlighted in red have effective tier 1 leverage ratio less than 4%, the FDIC minimum
Banks highlighted in orange have effective tier 1 leverage ratio between 4% and 5%.
Banks highlighted in yellow have effective tier 1 leverage ratio between 5% and 6%
Banks highlighted in cyan are known to be taking measures to address their situation
Banks with Texas Ratios less than 40 are excluded.
This list represents a small subsection of US banks. The majority of banks are currently well capitalized.
Being on this list does not necessarily mean a bank will fail, as they can try to raise capital or to sell themselves to new investors or another bank
This list is a work in progress.
This report is the result of an individual taking the data made available on the FIDC data site and applying fairly standard ration calculations that in fact probably closely mimic the real methodology of the FDIC troubled bank watch list.
It’s accuracy can be assumed due to the close correlation with actual “failures” and assisted acquisitions. A spot check of banks I know would tend to confirm the data and methodology. For instance a local bank under a regulatory order appears on the list and sizes appear correct…
It must be recognized that the regulators do not take over a bank based solely on the statistical result from this “public” data, but also have access to non-public information that may accelerate or retard the process.
See my site for other real estate market commentary http://tbrander.wordpress.com
Don’t know if this list is valid, but if so it’s complete bullshit. Think of it in terms of simple probabilities:
Over 100 banks on the list but not one moderately sized player. No WAMU (see Mish’s blog for the WAMU CDS horror show), no National City, no Corus, no FirstFed of California, no Regions, no Wachovia, no BankUnited, no FifthThird, no Suntrust, no Huntington, no Zions. Not one substantial bank is on the list except the already failed IndyMac. Look at the largest banks (by assets) on it: Chevy Chase, Western Bank of Puerto Rico, and AmTrust!
It’s a complete joke –117 banks on the list and not one major one? C’mon.
That means either the list is invalid or the FDIC is scared to death of putting a big bank on it. After all the list will eventually leak.
I would note that the list fails to show that PFF Bank and Trust was acquired, which occurred prior to the IndyMac failure.
Remember that the part of the iceberg that you can see is much smaller than the larger part beneath the waterline.
In this case the big bank failure is out there beneath the water, hidden by a variety of creative accounting maneuvers – and that’s why it is not on the list. You can’t see it but it is going to put a big hole in the Titanic. Readers of TBP can of course make an educated guess as to what will be the first big one to fail.
BTW, Bruce in TN – be aware of the other side of your thesis, we could get a series of benign data points, less damage than expected from Gustav and we could see a relief rally all the way to 1360. Not that I am expecting it, or positioned for it, but it is on my mind. Remember to trade what you see, in spite of your convictions.
Wells Fargo isn’t on that list Like was “Rumored” last week…
Can’t we start that one again…
I’ve been trying to follow the news on WaMu. Why isn’t WaMu listed on this troubled banks page? What is their Texas Ratio?
> I would note that the list fails to
> show that PFF Bank and Trust was
> acquired, which occurred prior to the
> IndyMac failure.
If you scroll over, that’s on the far right-hand-side. Grey seems to mean ‘Acquired’. And on the far-right-hand side you’ll see by whom. Black means failed of course.
Texas ratio:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_ratio
Where’s WAMU? I drove by the local Wamu on Friday and saw a sign that said 13-month CD at 5%!! Holy shit!!! That is desperation right there for deposits.
This ranking by equity (Tier I ratio) is really showing which banks at a certain point have very little shareholder’s equity left. So, it is probably right to expect those with negative or very small equity to disappear. But banks can fail for other reasons (such as liquidity drying up). So, if you don’t see a bank on here that you expect, there may not be such a low level of capital that it merits being on this list, but it could fail for other reasons.
WaMu is not a bank, so it won’t be on this list. The big and medium-sized banks are holding companies, with a variety of smaller bank subsidiaries. The operating subsidiary banks can be adequately capitalized while the holding company is suffering, and that won’t show up on the list, either.
Some of the operating subs may be on this list, but the regulators focus on the large holding companies to keep their regulated subs adequately capitalized. This is why you are only seeing smaller banks on the list.
Aside from that, it is ranked off of a simple ratio: net worth less a crude estimate of likely losses divided by adjusted assets. The crude estimate will be wildly wrong in some cases, but you have to make an assumption to get the discussion going, hey?
“And why are so many in FL, GA and IL?”
Because of the connection to the Florida real estate markets. IL might seem odd, but IL banks have long been involved in the FLA & AZ real estate markets. Somebody mentioned CORS; CORS is a good example, the largest investment in their portfolio was in a failed condo developer in FLA. Also, downtown Chicago (and the neighborhoods surrounding the Streeterville, Loop, Old Towne area) has (had) a rapidly growing condo market. Lots of local banks are tied up with these developments.
Regards,
TDL
I guess beggers can’t be choosers – I’m not the guy who’s going through the trouble to operate and maintain an unofficial troubled banks list. Still, it’s a shame the list linked to here is missing some of the big names.
WaMu owns and operates a bank, and it’s on neither the unofficial Troubled List linked here, nor the “nice banks” list operated by the same guy. National City is also conspicuously absent. Regions is on neither list. I’m not sure how the author decides which banks to include/exclude, but whatever the process is, it’s left off quite a few of the nation’s biggest, most important banks.
I am weird.
All of this fundamental research amounts to nothing, all the stats, all the reworked or take it as is fed data is worthless.
I went to the mall today and it was packed, full of back to school shoppers, sale porn loving deviates, and general lurkers.
Until I see the mall a ghost town and the next batman like movie doing moderately well instead of busting records I can’t see things getting cataclysmic as everyone on doom and gloom blogs say.
Do I think we should be trashed based on what I know is happening in our financial system? Yes! Hell yes! But the markets haven’t reflected that yet. Maybe this week big money comes back and kills all the nutty longs that bought back in, i dunno.
In the mean time I am day trading and watching the real world around me for signs of desperation. Not seeing it yet in a way that would resemble a pre-depression.