The IMF GFSR has a nice table (p. 10) showing the estimates of global bank writedowns by domicile in billions of U.S. dollars. In bar charts (full bar = estimated holdings, red = estimated writedowns):
Message: Euro area banks are bigger and smarter, no? But they will probably have to raise more capital.
(Foreign exposures of regional banking systems are based on BIS data on foreign claims. The same country proportions are assumed for both bank holdings of loans and securities. For each banking system, the proportion of exposure to domestic credit categories is asumed to apply to the overall stock of foreign exposure.)
Message: Euro area banks are bigger and smarter, no? But they will probably have to raise more capital.(Foreign exposures of regional banking systems are based on BIS data on foreign claims. The same country proportions are assumed for both bank holdings of loans and securities. For each banking system, the proportion of exposure to domestic credit categories is asumed to apply to the overall stock of foreign exposure.)
Mahalanobis - am 2009-10-02 22:44
Mahalanobis meinte am 2. Oct, 23:04:
Hope I got the numbers right
us <- matrix(c(4057,419,
1062,195,
1147,163,
2099,120,
2592,128
), nrow=2)
rownames(us) = c("Holdings", "Writedown")
colnames(us) = c("R Mortgage", "Consumer", "C Mortgage", "Corporate", "Foreign")
uk <- matrix(c(
1787,74,
411,70,
344,51,
1978,108,
2886,300
), nrow=2)
rownames(uk) = c("Holdings", "Writedown")
colnames(uk) = c("R Mortgage", "Consumer", "C Mortgage", "Corporate", "Foreign")
eu <- matrix(c(
5319,177,
914,32,
1434,102,
6227,107,
6048,395
), nrow=2)
rownames(eu) = c("Holdings", "Writedown")
colnames(eu) = c("R Mortgage", "Consumer", "C Mortgage", "Corporate", "Foreign")
png(filename="C://us_w.png", width=499, height=500)
barplot(us, ylim=c(0,6500), main="U.S. Banks", col=c("blue", "red"))
dev.off()
png(filename="C://uk_ww.png", width=499, height=500)
barplot(uk, ylim=c(0,6500), main="U.K. Banks", col=c("blue", "red"))
dev.off()
png(filename="C://eu_w.png", width=499, height=500)
barplot(eu, ylim=c(0,6500), main="Euro Area Banks", col=c("blue", "red"))
dev.off()
pj (guest) meinte am 3. Oct, 00:39:
Bigger, yes, but smarter - why? Because they've written down fewer assets? By that standard, Bernie Madoff was the smartest hedge fund manager. He never wrote down any losses.
Mahalanobis antwortete am 3. Oct, 15:47:
Hm.
The estimated writedowns include realized writedowns or loss provisions for 2007:Q2 to 2009:Q2 and expected additional writedowns or loss provisions: 2009:Q2 - 2010:Q4. According to the IMF up to now US banks have recognized 60% of anticipated writedowns, while euro area and UKI domiciled banks have recognized about 40 percent.So the figures somehow include the fact that Euro area banks have written down less so far and should write down more in 2009 and 2010. Maybe some Euro area banks will and can (HTM) spread their writedowns over the next decade but I don't know how much this enters the data.
pj (guest) antwortete am 3. Oct, 21:53:
Good point - I forgot this went through end of 2010. However, the banks are avoiding writedowns of assets they know are bad but won't come due for years. Wells Fargo in the US recently said that they were in a better position than other banks to avoid recognizing losses on Option ARMs because theirs don't recast for 10 years. So negative amortization can go on longer before people quit paying, yet they can book fewer writedowns! I expect huge bank writedowns in 2011-2015. And idiosyncracies of laws and assets may have a lot to say about whether the writedowns occur by Q4 2010.
mthomas (guest) meinte am 13. Nov, 20:58:
Lots of problems still
On a somewhat related topic, I saw a very interesting article on the dollar and gold as a result of Fed’s continued efforts to debase our currency and continue to try to solve a debt crisis with more debt: Gold Price Headed to $2,300 on Hyperinflation Risk?here’s an excerpt: “The gold price, and the price of other hard assets, is rising as more investors across the globe ask themselves how these deficits and debts will be resolved. Furthermore, new congressional initiative aimed at politicizing the Fed would give the Secretary of the Treasury a veto over Section 13(3) governing emergency action by the Federal Reserve – and effectively taking away the independence of the central bank. Setting aside discussion of the power that the Federal Reserve currently has, if politics enters the arena of monetary policy, then the U.S. dollar’s fate is sealed. Political leaders who reflexively seek political refuge in populist pork-barrel and loose fiscal policies during difficult economic times may soon have the same power – and ballot-box pressure – over monetary policy.”
