Philadelphia Union's Jim Curtin is Wrong About Ted Lasso

Ted Lasso is a fictious coach for a fictitious 2nd division English football (soccer) league. So why was the reigning U.S. soccer league (Major League Soccer-MLS) coach of the year dissing on him?

Jim Curtin is a candidate for the U.S. men's national soccer team (USMNT). And he was asked about Lasso in an interview. The context was that U.S. coaches are challenged to land coaching jobs in the most competitive leagues in the world. Jesse Marsch, probably the American (from Wisconsin) that has succeeded most, just got sacked by Leeds United of the topflight English Premier League (EPL). Does the fictitious Ted Lasso promote the stereotype that U.S. coaches are somehow inferior to British, German, or French coaches?

In my opinion, this is a fundamental misunderstanding of the show and fictitious coach, played by Jason Sudeikis. It is not making fun of American coaches, or Ted Lasso. Just the opposite. It is making fun of soccer elitism and the world's resistance to the U.S. elevating its game, standing, players and coaches in a world dominated by other countries. In soccer, the world does not want us to succeed. It's their sport. 

For background, Lasso was recruited by AFC Richmond (fictitious club) by an owner that was going through a divorce and the wife hired Ted to tank the team because she despised her husband so much. Ted was an ex-college football (US football) coach.

Lasso came from Kansas. And in the show, has a thick accent, 70s moustache, and is armed with an endless supply of homespun anecdotes. He knows little of soccer. In fact, the show is based on a commercial done by Sudeikis years ago to promote EPL games in the United States. In that commercial, Lasso knew very little about soccer, embraced a disparaging nickname, and played the fool. Watch the video to get the picture if you're not familiar with it.

That is the premise of the show. And if that is as far as you got, you understand Curtin's comments.

But there's more. Much more. I'm not here to tell you that Lasso's coaching style is correct compared to other coaching styles. But I am here to tell you that a primary job of a coach is to maximize the talents of those under their charge. Not only so they play well but also play well as a team.

Notice I did not say the primary job of a coach is to have extensive tactical experience at the sport they are coaching. In fact, many great coaches rely on the tactical knowledge of assistants. Was Phil Jackson (Chicago Bulls) a great tactician, or did he make superstars play well together?

Notice I did not say the primary job of a coach is to have a great resume or played the game at the highest levels. Bill Belichick (New England Patriots) played center for the unheralded Wesleyan University. He was captain of the lacrosse team.

Here are the traits that make Ted Lasso a case study in leadership.

Surround yourself with leaders that complement you. Lasso's first assistant coach appointment was his friend and fellow football coach (Beard) because he knew that Beard would tell him the truth, whether he liked it or not. Beard also kept discipline in practice. His next appointment was the equipment manager (Nate) because Lasso realized that Nate had superior tactical knowledge of the game. His final appointment was a newly retired player (Roy Kent) giving the staff the credibility they needed with the players and its fans. 

Have humility. Lasso did not present himself as a soccer expert. That was the reason he surrounded himself with Nate and Kent. In fact, in their final game in season 2, Lasso implemented Nate's formation and announced it as Nate's formation to the team and anyone who asked. That level of honesty and humility actually had Nate suspicious that if the formation foundered, it would be easy to blame Nate. But in watching the show, you understand that would not be the case. Lasso would've shouldered the blame. How many coaches shine the spotlight on their assistants? Humility also allows you to hire people you believe better than you. I have seen bank CEOs make poor hires in key positions because they would feel threatened by strong and smart people around them. If you hire weaklings to make you feel better or more secure about yourself, you are limiting your organization. Lasso did not want to limit his team to support his ego. Because his ego was virtually nonexistent.

Team members react better to positive reinforcement. If your objective is to elevate individuals to be motivated to pursue a goal then positive reinforcement is more effective than negative. In spite of old school coaching styles which is a seemingly continuous barrage of negative feedback, this is less effective. Mind you, there is a place for negative feedback that encourages players and the team to make course corrections in pursuit of a goal. And Lasso does deliver negative feedback in a positive manner. At times it seems like a maddingly positive manner. But this is part of his charm and the stereotype the show's writers are trying to promote. To make him look like a simpleton to make soccer elitists feel a little better about themselves. Lasso has no such pretense (see "Have humility"). 

Make personal connections to your team. Each team member has different backgrounds, different needs, and different motivators. Lasso takes the time to get to know each individually and treats each differently according to their needs. Although perhaps Lasso's weakness is he seems to want players to like him, he certainly puts in the time and effort to show he cares about their success and happiness on an individual level. Although we want our teams to function as a cohesive unit, we must recognize that our team is made up of a collection of individuals. Lasso gets it. And his players want to deliver for themselves, their teammates, and him.

Lasso isn't setting U.S. soccer coaches back 20 years. It is using his success in spite of promoting extreme stereotypes to mock the peculiar elitism found in soccer around the world. If AFC Richmond succeeds, as I suspect the show will play out, how will that promote the belief that U.S. coaches aren't ready for prime time? 

~ Jeff

Bank Shareholder Liquidity Matters

Annually 1,500 bankers and those that advise them gather in the Arizona desert for Bank Director's Acquire or Be Acquired (AOBA) conference. In spite of the conference name, it's not all about bank M&A, or the Hobson's Choice of hunting or being hunted.

And I usually try to bring to Jeff4Banks.com readers at least one of the takeaways I gleaned from the conference. In a prior post, I highlighted a sidebar conversation I had with a fellow industry pro on ChatGBT. Here, I want to focus on a session I attended that I think would be valuable to all readers that are private, or trade thinly on exchanges like Pink Sheets.

This post is a complement to one that I did a year ago titled, Bank Shareholder Succession Matters. Are our retail shareholders aging? Will they soon want to exit, or pass down their shares to heirs that may or may not be interested in holding a thinly traded bank stock with opaque value? For larger, publicly traded financial institutions, this might not be a strategic challenge because they trade significant amounts of shares per day and over half of their shareholders are institutional, many of whom automatically buy into shares that trade on indices. 

But for most of you, shareholder liquidity takes intentional effort. And at AOBA, Laura Hamilton of OTC Markets Group, Inc., and Ciaran McMullan, former CEO of Suncrest Bank CA extolled the benefits of OTC listing, particularly OTCQX market listing in a session titled How to Maximize Your Stock as Currency.

Having Ciaran onstage with Laura as a case study added credibility to the presentation. Suncrest started in 2008 with a $19 million capital raise, and did three small follow-ons of $5, $8, and $7 million to support growth. Ten years after opening Suncrest did another $25 million raise led by p/e firm Castle Creek Capital LLC. During its existence Suncrest acquired three banks, one a smaller deal for $8 million, then another for $20 million and another much larger, at $69 million. All deals included Suncrest stock in the consideration. And to do stock deals, your stock has to be considered valuable by the target.

Suncrest sold in 2022 to CVB Financial Corp. for $234 million for 162% of tangible book when regional targets were selling for 146% of tangible book. It was a success story, and Ciaran attributed part of the success to having a liquid and visible stock via the OTCQX.

According to their presentation, the OTCQX Best Market offers transparent and efficient trading of established, investor-focused U.S. and global companies. To qualify for listing, companies must meet high financial standards, follow best practice corporate governance, demonstrate compliance with U.S. securities laws, be current in their disclosure, and be sponsored by a third-party advisor. 

Banks can leverage OTC Markets' Bank Reporting Standards to complete their Reg D or registered offering to trade on OTCQX, whereas NASDAQ and NYSE require full SEC registration pursuant to the '34 Act, which can be costly and burdensome. OTC Markets offers a diverse network of 90+ broker-dealers, including some of the largest community bank trading brokers such as Raymond James, DA Davidson, Janney Montgomery Scott, Piper Sandler, and KBW Stifel. It graduates a bank that trades thinly out of the CEO's desk or on the Pinks when a shareholder has a block of shares to trade from "I got a guy/gal", to "we have a market and trading volume." 

The cost, according to their presentation, was a $5,000 application fee, and $24,600 annually. Not a significant financial cost, and much of the disclosure and governance requirements are already in place at most banks. According to the presentation, the bid-ask spread was 2%, compared to 1.95% for NASDAQ, and OTCQX average shares per trade was slightly larger than NASDAQ. 

More important were some tips Ciaran had to achieve greater liquidity and visibility for your shares:

-  Increase your share count. Suncrest did it through follow-on offerings and using stock in deals. In addition, a bank could do stock splits or stock dividends.

-  Hold unique earnings webcasts, open to all stakeholders, and pick a hot-topic each quarter to add value to attendees and be different from the blah, blah, blah earnings webcasts from larger financial institutions.

-  Implement incentives for all staff to be shareholders. ESOP, DRIP, stock and option awards, etc.

-  All staff should be part of your investor relations programs. They'll be asked in the community about the bank and its prospects. Why not educate them about bank valuations and where the bank stands in terms of performance and valuation to peers?

-  Build credibility through transparency. There can be power through your shareholder disclosures. 

-  Work to get every customer interested in owning your shares.

There is psychological value for existing and would-be shareholders that know if they need to liquidate your shares that they can. It might be the difference between them buying or wanting to buy or being "not interested." Hiding in the Pinks or being private might exclude large populations of potential investors, leaving you few options when your older shareholder base wants to liquidate. 

Implement your plan before you need it. Because when you need it, will be too late.

~ Jeff

How Does ChatGPT Describe the Economy and Banking?

At Bank Director's Acquire or Be Acquired conference, I had a sidebar conversation with a longtime friend and banking industry investment banker about ChatGPT, which stands for Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer. As described by ZDNet.com, "ChatGPT is a natural language processing tool driven by AI technology that allows you to have human-like conversations and much more with a chatbot. The language model can answer questions, and assist you with tasks such as composing emails, essays, and code."

On its website, ChatGPT describes its limitations as may occasionally generate incorrect information, may occasionally generate harmful instructions or biased content, and has limited knowledge of the world and events post 2021. It's in its "feedback" phase from the public. It is open to anyone.

Will this replace the need to get information from humans, at least beyond what ChatGPT "learns" from humans by their writing? I'm not convinced. But I wanted to give it a try with relevant banking questions. Here are the results.

Me to ChatGPT: Describe the current economic situation in the United States.

ChatGPT: The current economic situation in the United States is characterized by growth and recovery following the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. The economy has been supported by fiscal stimulus, including government spending and relief programs, and a strong rebound in consumer spending. The labor market has also improved, with unemployment declining and job growth picking up. However, some industries and workers continue to struggle, and inflationary pressures and supply chain disruptions have created some challenges. Overall, the US economy is on a path of recovery, but the pace and strength of the recovery will depend on the course of the pandemic and the success of vaccination efforts. 

My take: This looks like it's from one year ago, consistent with ChatGPT's disclosed current limitations. But TV talking heads should be worried.

Me to ChatGPT: What is the outlook for the US economy?

ChatGPT: The outlook for the US economy is generally positive, with continued growth and recovery expected in the near term. Factors supporting this outlook include the ongoing rollout of COVID-19 vaccines, improving consumer and business confidence, and accommodative monetary policy from the Federal Reserve. However, there are also potential challenges and uncertainties that could impact the outlook, such as the pace of vaccine distribution, the emergence of new COVID-19 variants, and the possibility of inflationary pressures. Additionally, the implementation of new policies by the government, such as changes to taxes and regulations, could also influence economic outlook. Overall, the US economy is expected to continue growing, but the pace and strength of the expansion will depend on a number of factors, both domestically and globally. 

My take: Future predictions look like canned responses. And there is similar language in the first and second inquiries.

Me to ChatGPT: What is the outlook for US banks?

ChatGPT: The outlook for US banks is generally positive, with the industry expected to continue recovering from the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. The improving economic conditions and the steady growth in loan demand are expected to boost revenue for banks. Additionally, low interest rates, which have been maintained by the Federal Reserve, are expected to continue supporting profits for banks by reducing borrowing costs for customers and increasing the spread between interest earned on loans and interest paid on deposits. However, the ongoing pandemic and the potential for rising defaults and loan losses in certain sectors remain risks for the banking industry. Additionally, regulatory changes and increasing competition from fintech companies could also impact the outlook for banks in the future. Nevertheless, the US banking industry is expected to remain stable and continue to support the broader economy in the near term.

My take: I could envision a bank analyst saying the same thing on CNBC at the beginning of 2022. 

I asked the "best bank in the US" and it punted, saying it was subjective and gave me some criteria people consider when determining the best. Subjective questions might be a challenge.

Overall, I believe AI will evolve into a tool to weigh against our opinions. But I'm not sure, lacking context, discernment, and other "gray" factors, if it will surpass good old-fashioned judgment and common sense. 

Potential bank use cases of generative AI, aside from the questions above: Research on certain industries to help determine credit risk, such as "How did the hotel industry perform in the 2008 recession?"; Vendor management due diligence, such as "Where can I find third-party reviews on the nCino loan operating system?"; Talent management, such as "What do Generation Z want from their employers?"; Assistance in cyber security measures, such as "Describe the 2021 Kaseya ransomware attack."; And make content writing easier by asking specific questions that used to take more research, such as "Describe the impact on small business from the 2017 tax cut."

The tool is still new and evolving. It has the potential to streamline research that helps make decisions. However, as I mentioned, it will not do well in replacing discernment, context, and gray areas where community banks tend to operate.

~ Jeff

 

The Difference Between a Community Bank and a Big Bank

I recently spoke to a community group, and subsequently a community bank all-staff meeting regarding the definition of a community bank. The FDIC has defined community banks in their December 2020 Community Banking Report that either exclude or include the following criteria:

Seems complicated. Especially when a community bank could have no office with more than $8.24B in total deposits but could have no more than $1.65B in total assets. A pretty small asset size, in my opinion. But the FDIC did confess that a community bank was not easily defined. 

If you ask me, the definition of a community bank is more subjective. Here is how I defined the difference between a community bank and a big bank.

A community bank lends depositor money here.

A big bank lends a little here, there, and everywhere.

A community bank is vested in the success of the communities it serves. When the community(s) suffer, so does the bank.

A big bank is hardly vested in the success of any one or a few communities.

A community bank's risk management practices, such as lending to certain industries, making character loans, deposit availability, etc. are made near the customers most impacted by those practices.

A big bank makes risk management decisions at headquarters in a location far, far away.

Community bank customers get the bank's A-team.

If you're not a very large borrower with eight figure loan needs, you're likely getting a bench player, if you get a player at all. You might end up with a bot named Michele or Michael.

Community bank leaders are at your churches, in your restaurants, at the ballfields, and in your community organizations.

Big bank leaders are not.

Communities are better for having community banks in them. Is that true for big banks?

~ Jeff

Finovate Best of Show 5 Years Later

Among bankers, there is anxiety. Anxiety from outsiders promoting newfangled technologies that must be adapted in order for their bank to be relevant. Anxiety from insiders chiding them to innovate because this customer or that customer asked about some piece of technology their other bank has. Anxiety from conferences that feature young speakers touting shiny objects.

Anxiety

There is little benefit to anxiety if it doesn't result in action. And knowing where and when to act is critical in a changing industry like ours. The more we create and later hone the formula for making strategic decisions that result in positive action, the less anxious we will be.

For example, if you empower employees to present innovation ideas to your executive team or a committee, do so in a systematic way. Have the employee build a business case. A business case that you would have created the template and provided instructions on how the employee should proceed in getting their innovation idea considered and possibly adopted. Not a process so cumbersome it inhibits adoption of great ideas. But cumbersome enough to provide the needed filters to not chase shiny objects. Such as...

1) Must we do it (as in CECL)? 2) Is it consistent with strategy (as in demanded by high lifetime value (LTV) customers)? 3) Will it make us more efficient in how we run the bank (lower expense and/ or efficiency ratio)? 4) Will it improve the customer experience (and extend customer longevity, shorten sales cycles, improve pricing power)? 5) What is the cost? And, as you will note from the rest of this article, 6) Longevity of solution(s) provider.

Only then would you move to the solutions to solve the problem or innovate. But what solutions? Does it depend on the last conference attended by an employee? How much longevity does the solutions provider have?

This is increasingly on the minds of bankers. Many solutions providers in the fintech space are very young, don't have many installations, and have yet to turn a profit. Does it mean they are not viable alternatives to your bank? Not necessarily. But bankers want to ensure if they partner with a solutions provider, they will be viable into the future. And ideally would not have sold to a big three core processor that increases core dependency.

That is why I occasionally look at Finovate best of show companies. To see where they are now because they were much ballyhooed by a top trade show in the country for fintech solutions. It should be instructive to bankers that evaluate solutions and implement a disciplined innovation culture, without creating such roadblocks that slow bankers down into becoming the bank they need to be for long-term relevance.

Finovate Best of Show: Fall 2017

Five years ago, these were rated the best. I include the description from Finovate five years ago, and where they are today.

Envestnet

2017 Finovate Description: Envestnet was recognized for its Financial Health Check that leverages account and transaction-level data to measure and score overall financial health across multiple dimensions including spending, savings, borrowing, and planning.

Today: Envestnet continues to transform the way financial advice and insight are delivered by powering financial advisors and service providers with technology solutions that work toward expanding a holistic financial wellness ecosystem. It has over 108,000 advisors working for more than 6,000 companies including 18 of the 20 largest banks. Although reporting positive EBITDA in the four years and year-to-date (9/30/22) since being named best of show, it has reported net losses in two of the four full years and year to date. 

Finn.ai

2017 Finovate Description: Finn.ai was chosen for its Virtual Banking Assistant, powered by artificial intelligence and available via channels ranging from Facebook Messenger to Amazon Alexa. It makes everyday banking simple and easy for customers.

Today: Finn AI was purchased by Glia in June 2022 where it remains a leading AI-powered virtual assistant platform for banks and credit unions, partnering with major FIs including ATB Financial, BECU, United Federal Credit Union, EQ Bank, Civista Bank and Truist Momentum.

Jiffee

2017 Finovate Description: Jiffee won best of show for its tap & pay mobile technology that turns any device into a payment terminal, enabling for consumers to pay anywhere and everywhere without relying on plastic credit and debit cards. 

Today: Jiffee is a white-label mobile payment and authorization platform that securely confirms the identities of both parties on either side of a transaction. Jiffee is owned by Neontri, formerly Braintri, a private fintech based in Warsaw, Poland that entered the U.S. market in 2019. There were no financials available and no list of U.S. users on their website.

Sensibill

2017 Finovate Description: Sensibill was selected for its +Pulse solution that helps spot revenue opportunities from on- and off-card purchase data, providing targeted prospect list for personalized, in-app campaigns. 

Today: Canada-based Sensibill is a customer data platform designed specifically for the financial services industry with an AI-powered, ethically sourced first party data with real-time actionable insights that help FIs drive personalization at scale. They claim over 60 million users across over 150 FIs in North America and the U.K. In October 2022, Sensibill was acquired by fintech aggregator Q2.

SpyCloud

2017 Finovate Description: SpyCloud was selected for its monitoring and alert service that helps organizations better understand their employee and customer digital footprints by giving them visibility into their exposed credentials actively being traded in the underground.

Today: Spycloud's products leverage a proprietary engine that collects, curates, enriches and analyzes data from the criminal underground, driving action so enterprises can proactively prevent account takeover and ransomware. Its customers include half of the ten largest global enterprises, mid-size companies, and government agencies around the world from its Austin, Texas headquarters. It has been funded with four rounds for over $58 million, the latest raise occurring in 2020. 

Sustainably

2017 Finovate Description: Chosen for its social good platform for consumers and businesses that turns the spare change from shopping into micro-donations to philanthropic causes. 

Today: As best I can tell, Sustainably, a U.K. based 2016 startup that helped businesses and consumers earmark spare change from purchases to their charity of choice, shut down this year. Although this fintech did not make it, the idea could advance an FIs higher purpose by helping their customers fulfill their higher purpose.

Voleo

2017 Finovate Description: Voleo was selected for its social trading app that makes it easy for people to invest together, saving time and money, while simultaneously leveraging the collective wisdom of networked investors to pursue market-beating returns.

Today: According to its website FAQ, effective June 2020, Voleo USA, Inc. closed its US brokerage. Although they claimed their user base swelled dramatically, Covid-19 had cut off traditional funding sources and since they were not yet profitable, their parent company indicated it was unable to continue to support the operating losses.  

Of the seven Finovate Fall 2017 Best of Show, three continue to operate independently. Two were acquired, and two shuttered. This exemplifies the anxiety bankers experience when selecting partners. There is vendor risk that the solution might not make it, as is usual when partnering with relatively new firms/ solutions. Take solace that your partner selling to a larger technology firm is usually a good thing, perpetuating the solution and its evolution.

However, there is risk. And bankers must assess the risk when selecting a solution partner. But only after going through the disciplined process outlined at the beginning of this article so you have a better chance of avoiding shiny objects.

~ Jeff

Banking's Top 5 Total Return to Shareholders: 2022 Edition

For the past eleven years I searched for the Top 5 financial institutions in five-year total return to shareholders because I support long-term strategic decision making that may not benefit next quarter's or even next year's earnings. And I am weary of the persistent "get big or get out" mentality of many industry pundits. If their platitudes about scale are correct, then the largest FIs should logically demonstrate better shareholder returns, right?

Not so over the eleven years I have been keeping track. The first bank to crack the Top 5 over $50 billion did so in 2020. As a reference, the best SIFI bank in five-year total return this year was JPMorgan Chase at 82nd overall. 

My method was to search for the best banks based on total return to shareholders over the past five years. I chose five years because banks that focus on year over year returns tend to cut strategic investments come budget time, which hurts their market position, earnings power, and future relevance more than those that make those investments. I call this "pulling into the pits" in my book: Squared Away-How Can Bankers Succeed as Economic First Responders. Short-term focus is a common trait of banks that focus on shareholder primacy over stakeholder primacy.

Total return includes two components: capital appreciation and dividends. However, to exclude trading inefficiencies associated with illiquidity, I filtered out those FIs that trade less than 1,000 shares per day. I changed this from 2,000 shares as it was pruning too many fine institutions. But the 1,000 shares/day minimum naturally eliminates many of the smaller, illiquid FIs. I also filtered for anomalies such as recent merger announcements as a seller, turnaround situations (losses suffered from 2017 forward), mutual-to-stock conversions, stock dividends/splits without price adjustments, and penny stocks. 

As a point of reference, the S&P US BMI Bank Total Return Index for the five years ended December 9, 2022 was -1.21%.

Before we begin and for comparison purposes, here are last year's top five, as measured in December 2021:

#1.  Silvergate Capital Corporation (NYSE: SI)

#2.  MetroCity Bankshares, Inc. (Nasdaq: MCBS)

#3.  Triumph Bancorp, Inc. (Nasdaq: TBK)

#4.  Live Oak Banchsares, Inc. (Nasdaq: LOB)

#5.  SVB Financial Group (Nasdaq: SIVB)

Here is this year's list:

#1. Communities First Financial Corporation (OTCQX: CFST)  

Communities First Financial Corporation is the bank holding company for Fresno First Bank, which opened in December 2005 dedicated to meeting the banking needs of businesses, professionals, and successful individuals in Central California. Its headquarters is the only location. Each employee has an ownership stake in the bank through its Employee Stock Ownership Plan. In 2021, the bank expensed over $530 thousand to the ESOP to benefit employees. Twenty-six percent of the bank is owned by the Board, Executive Management, and the ESOP. I would call that stakeholder alignment. Since 2016, over 50% of total deposits are non-interest bearing, driving superior cost of funds and net interest margin. In addition, the bank developed a niche in the payments business, sponsoring multiple independent sales organizations (ISOs) specializing in bankcard and ACH payment solutions, generating $2.5 billion in processing volume in the third quarter of this year. All this generated a year-to-date ROA / ROE slash line of 2.23% and 29.56% respectively, and a 225.3% five-year total return to shareholders. Welcome to the top of the heap!

#2. Coastal Financial Corporation (Nasdaq: CCB)

Since 1997, Coastal Community Bank, the wholly owned bank subsidiary of Coastal Financial Corporation, has delivered a full range of banking services to small and medium-sized businesses, professionals, and individuals throughout the greater Puget Sound (Washington) area through a traditional community bank branch network in its three-county market. The bank consists of two segments: 1) the traditional community bank, and 2) CCBX, which is its Banking as a Service (BaaS) division started in 2018. Prior to starting CCBX and for the year ended 2017, the Company had $806 million in total assets and $5.4 million in net income for an ROA of 0.73%. As of or for the year-to-date September 30, 2022, the Company had $3.1 billion of total assets, $36.7 million net income (YTD annualized), and a 1.27% ROA. Their CCBX segment continues to evolve, with 19 active partners, two in testing, five signed letters of intent, and three in wind-down as the bank focuses on larger and more mature relationships. What has this bifurcated business model delivered? A 221.5% five-year total return and #2 on the JFB Top 5! Well done!

#3 OFG Bancorp (NYSE: OFG)

San Juan based OFG Bancorp is a financial holding company under U.S. and Puerto Rico banking laws and regulations. Founded in 1964, OFG's banking subsidiary, Oriental Bank, is one of Puerto Rico's largest banks, and is focused on the island and the U.S. Virgin Islands. OFG also has Trust and Insurance services, which represent 1.9% and 2.6% of total revenues, respectively. The Company has grown to $10.1 billion in total assets at September 30, 2022, fueled by organic growth and acquisitions. The bank has a diversified loan portfolio of residential, commercial, and consumer loans. Most consumer loans are auto loans which represent 28% of the total loan portfolio. Loan yields for the YTD ended September 30th was 7.32%. Which compensates for an annualized net charge-off rate of 1.16%. Risk versus Reward. Demand deposits represent 61% of the deposit base, driving a net interest margin of 4.96%. The result: a 1.57% ROA and 15.25% ROE and a robust 219.4% five-year total return. Awesome!

#4 First BanCorp (NYSE: FBP)

First BanCorp is a full service financial institution with operations in Puerto Rico, the British Virgin Islands, and Florida. Its vision is grounded in the principle that investing in its employees, supporting the communities it serves, and providing an outstanding experience to customers is paramount to being successful and delivering shareholder value long-term... i.e. they pursue stakeholder primacy, and here they are in the Top 5 total return to shareholder list. At $18.4 billion in total assets, it is the largest among our Top 5 all stars. Their net interest margin popped 30 basis points from year end 2021 to present because the balance sheet is chock full of core deposit funding accompanied by a heavy dollop of variable rate loans. This helped drive down their efficiency ratio to under 48%. But there's more! In their investor deck they told shareholders that the efficiency ratio was likely to gradually rise to 50% as they continue to invest in people, technology, and capital projects. In other words, they are pulling into the pits to further pursue stakeholder primacy and make the investments needed for a long-term future. Refreshing! Oh and they delivered 203.5% five-year total return to shareholders. That too.

#5 The Bancorp, Inc. (Nasdaq: TBBK) 

Founded in 2000, this $7.8 billion financial institution remains one of the few banks in the U.S. that specializes in providing private-label banking and technology solutions for non-bank companies ranging from entrepreneurial start-ups to those in the Fortune 500.  They provide white label payments and depository services (think Paypal, Chime) and deploy that funding into specialized lending programs such as lending to wealth management firms, commercial fleet leasing, and real estate bridge lending. Note their asset size, because their value as the BaaS bank for Chime is that they are under $10 billion in total assets and not subject to the Durbin Amendment portion of the Dodd-Frank Act that fixes interchange income pricing. It has not been all sunshine and rainbows for TBBK. They were under an FDIC consent order from 2014 through 2020 relating to their BSA and OFAC compliance and their relationship with third parties seeking access to the banking system. Bankers considering becoming a BaaS provider to such third parties should read this order. Also, The Bancorp posted a $96.5 million loss in 2016, just outside the window the JFB Top 5 looks back to determine if it's a turnaround that drove total return. There probably is some of that in their ranking. But they posted a 1.69% ROA and 18.30% ROE year-to-date and have an aspirational goal (which they disclosed) of having a >2% ROA and >20% ROE. They put it out there! And have delivered a 202.2% five-year total return to their shareholders. Welcome back! 

There they are. Interesting that three of the top 5 have some sort of BaaS operation. And there are two Puerto Rican banks. There were two major hurricanes, Maria and Fiona, during this measurement period and I'm confident that this impacted trading activity in these banks' stocks, although I can't articulate how. 

The evolution of this august list tells me that having something other than "plain vanilla" is driving performance and shareholder returns. 

I would be remiss not pointing out that the #1 total return bank for 2020 and 2021, Silvergate Capital Corporation, had a five-year total return of 71.6%. Not bad considering the -1.21% for the same period for the S&P US BMI Bank Total Return Index. But Silvergate's current 1-year total return was -87.1%, knocking it decidedly off the JFB Top 5 list (currently ranked 45th). Putting most of your eggs in the crypto basket has its highs and lows. Perhaps diversify?

~ Jeff

Note: I make no investment recommendations in this article or this blog.

Guest Post: 2nd Quarter 2022 Financial Markets and Economic Update by Dorothy Jaworski

 

Financial Markets & Economic Update -Fourth Quarter 2022

What a year 2022 has been!  Thanksgiving is this week and we can all be thankful for our families and friends.  May we all enter this holiday season joyously.  We are closer to the end of inflation and employment is still strong, with job openings exceeding unemployed persons by several million.  We’ve seen tremendous market declines in both stocks and bonds, volatility, and a Federal Reserve who is raising interest rates at a breathtaking pace.  Short-term rates have risen from .25% to 4.00% so far and the Fed says they are not done yet.  Housing markets have suffered, with mortgage rates climbing up to 7.00%.  We are thankful that there has been some recovery in stocks and bonds over the past two weeks.

My biggest concern with the Fed is that they are continuing to pile on outsized rate hikes and are not spacing them out to consider the typical six- to nine-month lag in their policy moves.  As Milton Friedman famously wrote: “Monetary policy affects the economy with long and variable lags.”  Thus, the Fed needs to anticipate and assess the damaging effect of large rate hikes on the markets and on economic activity.  I was rejoicing when I saw their latest FOMC statement from early November, which included wording about the pace of future hikes (they tell us there will be more): “The Committee will take into account the cumulative tightening of monetary policy, the lags with which monetary policy affects economic activity and inflation, and economic and financial developments.”  Maybe they will wait and assess the effect of the four big .75% hikes in June, July, September, and November; based on lags, we are not fully seeing their impact yet.  As Philadelphia Fed President Harker said recently: “Inflation is known to shoot up like a rocket and then come down like a feather.” 

The Fed is raising rates to reduce aggregate demand to fight off inflation, even though they themselves waited too long to raise rates and inflation began as a supply-chain-driven problem, when production of goods could not keep up with new demand.  The downside to all of the rate hikes is that we face a high risk of recession in 2023.  Consumer spending and business inventory financing will be hurt by higher interest expense and it will take a toll on savings and corporate margins, respectively.

 

Inflation

Milton Friedman also wrote that “inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon.”  Money supply, as measured by M2, was growing in 2020 by over 20% year-over-year and in 2021 by 12% to 20% due to the Fed injecting liquidity through its bond buying program of $100 billion per month and the federal government passing continued Covid-19 relief bills, placing trillions of dollars into the economy.  It is no wonder that demand surged.  And M2 growth started 2022 at 12%, with the Fed still buying its $100 billion of bonds through the month of March, even though they knew inflation was a serious issue.  And now M2 growth is down to 1.3% in October, which is below the range we experienced during the prior 10-year recovery of 3% to 5%.  The Fed has reduced their balance sheet by $900 billion so far in 2022; a decline of $1 trillion is the equivalent of 1.00% of tightening.  Remember this “hidden tightening” as you see the rate hikes piling up.

Rates have risen since March 2022.  The CPI peaked at +9.1% year-over-year in June and is now +7.7% in October, which is a good declining trend but still too elevated.  The Fed’s preferred measure is the PCE deflator, which was +4.2% in the third quarter compared to +7.3% in the second quarter and +7.5% in the first quarter.  The core PCE (excluding food and energy) has fallen to 4.5% in the third quarter from +5.6% in the first quarter.  The CPI and PCE measures differ in the amount of housing and shelter used in the calculation; CPI has a weight of 42% for housing and 32% for shelter, which the PCE indices use 15% to 16%.

I mentioned earlier that the Fed was raising rates to reduce aggregate demand.  They cannot control the supply side, which has been particularly hard hit for goods from China, as their Zero-Covid policy locks down entire cities.  More analysts are pointing at energy policy as one of the main contributors to inflation, when government stopped drilling expansion of oil and natural gas and distribution networks such as the Keystone Pipeline to pursue a “green” agenda full of batteries, solar power, and wind.  The problem is that we are not ready as an economy to turn on a dime away from fossil fuels and businesses are reluctant to make the necessary capital investments to drill for more oil.  When Russia invaded Ukraine last February, the price of oil shot up to $110 per barrel in June but has since returned to pre-invasion levels at $77 per barrel.  Transportation costs have increased leading to an increase in the price of just about everything, especially food, where prices are dependent on the cost of goods getting to their final destination.  Food and energy prices have been damaging to family budgets.

 

Leading Indicators

How are the leading indicators doing?  There is some good news for inflation but worse news for the economy.  The index of leading economic indicators has continued to fall further, with October at -.8%, following September’s -.5%, and is now down for eight consecutive months.  This indicator accounts for the lag in Fed policy and projects six to nine months in the future. 

The FIBER leading inflation index also continues to fall, but this decline is good news for inflation.  The index turned down in May 2022 and is now -8.0% in October, following -5.8% in September.  This index also looks out six to nine months.

Stock markets have declined most of the year before stabilizing recently.  The Dow Jones and S&P 500 averages are down -6% and -16% respectively.  Nasdaq has been the worst performing, at -28% year-to-date.  Stocks are a forward-looking mechanism, based on projections of corporate earnings.  PE ratios 12 months forward are currently at 17.5 times for the S&P 500, which is slightly over the historical average of 16 times.  Bond markets have also declined from the relentless Fed interest rate hikes, with the Treasury aggregate price index down -12.7% in 2022.  The Fed said they will look for financial stress and may be getting their wish as we have witnessed crashes in Bitcoin and other “digital coins” and the sudden collapse of the FTX exchange.

Housing is leading the way lower as one of the most rate sensitive sectors of the economy.  Mortgage rates soared to above 7%, up from 3.25% at the beginning of the year; the higher rates have backed down slightly in the past couple of weeks but are still contributing to a fall in affordability.  New home sales surprised to the upside in October, but existing home sales keep falling.  Inventories remain tight for existing homes and much higher for new homes.  Commercial real estate is also under some pressure with projects proving uneconomical at higher borrowing rates.

Consumer savings rates are down to 3.1% in September as consumers dip into savings to afford higher priced goods.  Consumer credit has continued to rise at a time when credit card and borrowing rates are all up dramatically.  These signs, as well as personal income that has not kept up with inflation, are ominous for the consumer.  Labor markets have held up well so far but we are starting to see cracks.  Fed Ex, Amazon, and many technology companies who are dependent on consumer spending are cutting costs and laying off employees.  And they are doing this right before the holidays.  Employment is a lagging indicator and its weakness has been shown in fewer payroll jobs each month, with October at +261,000, but household employment declined by -328,000 jobs, pushing the unemployment rate up by .2% to 3.7%.

Finally, the Treasury yield curve is now inverted at both critical points.  The 10 year to 2 year Treasury spread is -.76% today and the Fed’s favorite measure, the 10 year to 3 month spread is at -.57%.  An inverted yield curve is a historically reliable indicator of future recession by six to 12 months on average, although it may be much longer.  In 2023, we will be there.  Long-term Treasuries will be seeing the recession first and typically will decline before short-term rates, which is happening now. 

 

The Outlook

NBER will declare a recession when four conditions are met:  falling production, falling real personal income, falling real business sales, and rising unemployment.  The first three conditions are very weak.

The Fed has acknowledged cumulative effects of rate hikes and lags in policy, but increases of nearly 400 basis points in nine months in a 2% (at best) economy cannot be good.  Recession probability is now very high for 2023 and will get higher if the Fed continues to increase rates.  There are signs in leading indicators, business surveys such as ISM, S&P, and Philly Fed, and actual reports that inflation is declining.  Unemployment should increase slowly from layoffs, hiring freezes, and cuts in job openings.

The yield curve is inverted in both important spread measures- the 10 year-2 year and the 10 year-3 month, and history tells us that recession follows inverted curves with a lag.  Government debt remains high, at $31.3 trillion currently, or 120.5% of GDP.  Remember, debt levels greater than 90% put pressure on GDP, leaving it at subpar levels.  GDP is about even to up slightly for 2022, after negative first and second quarters and a surprising increase of 2.6% in the third quarter with another increase possible in the current quarter.  I don’t expect better growth in 2023, and I don’t think the Fed does either, but they won’t say so.

 

“It is worth remembering that it is often the small steps, not the giant leaps, that bring about the most lasting change.”  Queen Elizabeth II

 

Thanks for reading!  D. Jaworski 11/23/22

Dorothy Jaworski has worked at large and small banks for over 30 years; much of that time has been spent in investment portfolio management, risk management, and financial analysis. Dorothy has been with Penn Community Bank and its predecessor since November, 2004. She is the author of Just Another Good Soldier, and Honoring Stephen Jaworski, which details the 11th Infantry Regiment's WWII crossing of the Moselle River where her uncle, Pfc. Stephen W. Jaworski, gave his last full measure of devotion.