4 ms·

It's a little unique because it's a top 20 bank failing. As far as I can tell, it's not super unique in terms of % of fdic insured deposits. As a whole it's l

by dmoy 4y ago

It's a little unique because it's a top 20 bank failing. As far as I can tell, it's not super unique in terms of % of fdic insured deposits. As a whole it's like <30% FDIC insured in the whole US banking industry. > they’ll probably get all their money but it will still be bad They may not. Even for banks where most assets are FDIC insured, you'll see that not 100% of deposits are returned. Selecting a random recent one: https://closedbanks.fdic.gov/dividends/bankfind/Dividendindex?fin=10534 https://closedbanks.fdic.gov/dividends/bankfind/Dividendinde... ~95%.

mwarkentin 4y ago
Looks like 2.7% of their deposits were > 250k. So yes, it seems relatively unique (there are only 5 banks on this list with <15%). https://twitter.com/GRDecter/status/1634208652595699713?s=20 https://twitter.com/GRDecter/status/1634208652595699713?s=20
- MR4D 4y ago
  You've got that backwards. Reread the tweet you linked to: "Only 2.7% of SVB deposits are less than $250,000. Meaning, 97.3% aren't FDIC insured." Not a good situation at all.
  - dllthomas 4y ago
    Aren't fully FDIC insured, yes?
    - lobochrome 4y ago
      Yes - if you have 5M$ in the bank, you'll have 250k$ of that insured. Not that comforting.
      - dllthomas 4y ago
        But if you put in $250k because you're responsibly splitting things across banks, and the interest you've made on it raised you to $252k, you're counted amongst the 97.3% and it's not a big deal. I'm sure some people are out meaningful amounts of money, but I'm not sure what a typical account looks like.
        niij 4y ago
        It's 97.3% of deposits ($), not _depositors_
        dllthomas 4y ago
        Hm, you may be right, though "deposits are less than" is a really weird way to phrase it in that case.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]