3 ms·

> SVB got unlucky due to some unique structural problems "Getting unlucky" in banking is making a few risky loans, getting defaulted on, and coming below proje

> SVB got unlucky due to some unique structural problems "Getting unlucky" in banking is making a few risky loans, getting defaulted on, and coming below projected growth for the quarter. The bank's revenue gets a hit, the shareholders takes a haircut, all part of the playbook, happens every now and then. What "getting unlucky" is not is not understanding interest rate risk so much that you blow your entire bank up. It's like calling someone who drove drunk and killed 16 pedestrian "little unlucky while turning a corner", absolutely not in the same ballpark.

nemo44x 4y ago
You’re missing the point. They had to do something with the deposits. There were so many deposits because of gov and Fed policy. There was no demand for loans because there was free money everywhere. SBN isn’t the only bank in this position. I read a NYT article from 2021 describing this situation and like every bank is in this position. Interest rates whipsawed from record lows to 20 year highs in 12 months. No one was ready for that. This is all because of gov and fed policy. We will see a lot of banks failing in the coming weeks and months.
- polygamous_bat 4y ago
  > They had to do something with the deposits. There were so many deposits because of gov and Fed policy. There was no demand for loans because there was free money everywhere. Easy, buy treasury bills. What? They don't pay interest through the nose? Guess SVB is not getting double digit revenue growth this year, and you're not getting that big bonus. So sad. Anyway. > SBN isn’t the only bank in this position. I read a NYT article from 2021 describing this situation and like every bank is in this position. Link? Also I am quite sure most other banks had the good sense to understand that they need to hedge against interest rate risk. > Interest rates whipsawed from record lows to 20 year highs in 12 months. No one was ready for that. This is all because of gov and fed policy. Yes, and gov and fed policy was there to address acts of God (aka COVID) and Putin (aka the Russia-Ukraine war). Should we send a list of demands to them?
  - digitaltrees 4y ago
    1. They did buy treasury bills. Those lost value. 2. It’s literally impossible that other banks did a better job as the asset class for treasury and MBS is the same for every bank. The difference is that SVBs customers were more negatively affected by rising rates after also being more positively affected by low rates than other banks. So I don’t expect a systemic problem here but SVB was structurally unlucky. 3. The fed could have acted sooner to raise rates, that would have allowed a more gradual process. They could also have set up an exchange program as they are doing now. Plenty of banks bought long term treasuries that are underwater now but will recover in the long run. So if a member bank is facing liquidity problems it should be able to access the discount window or some similar facility to smooth the timing risk. Let’s all remember it’s in everyone’s interest to have safe banks and a functioning financial system. When macro policy has unintended consequence there is nothing wrong with supporting the system.

nemo44x 4y ago

You’re missing the point. They had to do something with the deposits. There were so many deposits because of gov and Fed policy. There was no demand for loans because there was free money everywhere. SBN isn’t the only bank in this position. I read a NYT article from 2021 describing this situation and like every bank is in this position. Interest rates whipsawed from record lows to 20 year highs in 12 months. No one was ready for that. This is all because of gov and fed policy. We will see a lot of banks failing in the coming weeks and months.

polygamous_bat 4y ago
> They had to do something with the deposits. There were so many deposits because of gov and Fed policy. There was no demand for loans because there was free money everywhere. Easy, buy treasury bills. What? They don't pay interest through the nose? Guess SVB is not getting double digit revenue growth this year, and you're not getting that big bonus. So sad. Anyway. > SBN isn’t the only bank in this position. I read a NYT article from 2021 describing this situation and like every bank is in this position. Link? Also I am quite sure most other banks had the good sense to understand that they need to hedge against interest rate risk. > Interest rates whipsawed from record lows to 20 year highs in 12 months. No one was ready for that. This is all because of gov and fed policy. Yes, and gov and fed policy was there to address acts of God (aka COVID) and Putin (aka the Russia-Ukraine war). Should we send a list of demands to them?
- digitaltrees 4y ago
  1. They did buy treasury bills. Those lost value. 2. It’s literally impossible that other banks did a better job as the asset class for treasury and MBS is the same for every bank. The difference is that SVBs customers were more negatively affected by rising rates after also being more positively affected by low rates than other banks. So I don’t expect a systemic problem here but SVB was structurally unlucky. 3. The fed could have acted sooner to raise rates, that would have allowed a more gradual process. They could also have set up an exchange program as they are doing now. Plenty of banks bought long term treasuries that are underwater now but will recover in the long run. So if a member bank is facing liquidity problems it should be able to access the discount window or some similar facility to smooth the timing risk. Let’s all remember it’s in everyone’s interest to have safe banks and a functioning financial system. When macro policy has unintended consequence there is nothing wrong with supporting the system.