Banking's Total Return Top 5

Last year I searched for the Top 5 financial institutions in total return to shareholders because I grew weary of the "get big or get out" mentality of many bankers and industry pundits. If their platitudes about scale and all that goes with it are correct, then the largest FIs should logically demonstrate better shareholder returns.

Not so last year, and not so again this year.

My method was to search for the best banks based on total return to shareholders over the past five years... capital appreciation and dividends. However, to exclude trading inefficiencies associated with illiquidity, I filtered for those FIs that trade over 2,000 shares per day. This, naturally, eliminated many of the smaller, illiquid FIs.

For comparison purposes, here are last year's top five, as measured during September, 2011:

#1 BofI Holdings, Inc.

#2 Signature Bank

#3 ESB Financial Corporation

#4 Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.

#5 German American Bancorp

This year's list is in the table below:

 The two report A-listers are BofI Holdings, Inc., and Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. Special mentions are Signature Bank that was #7 this year, and German American Bancorp that was #9. No slouches there.

#1. BofI Holdings Inc.

BofI Holdings Inc. and its subsidiary BofI Federal Bank aspire to be the most innovative branchless bank in the United States providing products and services superior to their competitors, branch-based or otherwise. In its latest investor presentation, BofI highlighted it's expense ratio (operating expense as a percent of average assets) compared to peer as 1.67% versus 3.17%, respectively, and efficiency ratio (operating expense as a percent of total revenue) compared to peer as 35% versus 63%, respectively. So, as a branchless bank, BofI has leveraged its significantly lower operating expenses into profit. That profit led to the top spot in five year total return to shareholders, two years running. Well done!

#2. Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.

In 1979, George Gleason, a 25-year-old attorney, purchased controlling interest and assumed active management of the bank as Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer. At the time, the bank had a couple dozen employees and total assets of $28 million. Today the bank has more than 100 offices in seven states. It's growth since 2010 has been fueled by seven purchases of failed banks. This has led to $863 million of covered loans (loss share arrangements with FDIC), and a yield on such loans of 8.69%, according to its latest investor presentation. This has led to a mind blowing net interest margin of 6.01% for the quarter ended September 30, 2012. OZRK moved up three places in total return to shareholders from last year's ranking. Well done!

#3. Access National Corporation

New to the august list is Access National, whose mission is to provide credit, treasury management and private banking services to emerging businesses with revenues of up to $100 million... very specific, and refreshing given that so many banks cannot choose a specific niche for fear of alienating other constituencies. Those buckshot banks don't have much representation in this top 5 list. Coincidence? You decide. Another interesting fact is that Access National's management team, which owns 15% of the bank, is relatively young, ranging in age between 41 and 53 years old. To be fair, Access National is headquartered in Reston, VA, one of the best banking markets in the country. Focused mission, young management team, great markets... great ingredients in a success recipe.

#4. Hingham Institution for Savings

Founded in 1834, Hingham Savings' mission is  to provide the finest in community banking, with integrity and teamwork. This usually earns the jfb blah, blah, blah statement since we can affix that mission to 90% of the banks across the US. But slow and steady wins the race, in this case. Hingham's ROA from 2007-2011 was 0.63%, 0.81%, 0.93%, 1.05%, and 1.14% respectively. It's third quarter 2012 ROA was 1.15%. Slow, steady improvement. By the way, 0.63% represented it's lowest ROA in a 10-year stretch. But looking at their performance, it's fair to ask... "what financial crisis?" Hingham's tagline, "Simple Banking. Honest Value. Happy Customers" is consistent with a typical industry theme described by one of my colleagues: "boring banking is beautiful". It's this simplicity and consistent performance that most likely resulted in their superior, long-term total return to their shareholders.

#5. Texas Capital Bancshares, Inc.

Texas Capital Bank delivers highly personalized financial services to Texas-based businesses with more than $5 million in annual revenue. Recognizing the inherent link between business owners and their personal wealth, TCB manages the personal wealth of Texans with net worth of more than $1 million. Similar to three of the five banks on our list, TCB is a relatively recent addition to banking, being founded in 1998. Actually, since Bank of the Ozarks has significantly changed since it's FDIC acquisition spree, one might include them in the list of "new" banks. TCB is largely a growth story, and mostly organic growth since it has not been very acquisitive. Since 2007, operating revenue has grown at a 22% compound annual growth rate (CAGR), while non-interest expenses grew at a 17% CAGR. This positive operating leverage generated net income CAGR of 32% during the same period, supporting their Top 5 position in total return to shareholders. Well done TCB!

There you have it! The jfb all stars in top 5 total return. Congratulations to all of the above that developed a specific strategy and is clearly executing well. Your shareholders have been rewarded!

Do you think there are themes that have led to these banks' performance?

~ Jeff

Note: I make no investment recommendations in my blog. Please do not claim to invest in any security based on what you read here. You should make your own decisions in that regard. FINRA makes people take a test to ensure they know what they are doing before recommending securities. I'm sure that strategy works out.

Top 5 Total Return to Shareholders: #2 Signature Bank

I was recently moderating a strategic planning discussion with a multi-billion dollar in assets financial institution. During the discussion, the President of one of the bank's most profitable divisions opined that less than $10 billion in assets was the "dead zone". They had to grow to survive.

I challenged the thinking. But he held firm that the regulatory environment, changing customer preferences, and the pace and expense of technology were driving the market towards bigger is better. In that, I thought, he has a point.

But I'm always looking for support. This blog has dug deep into the numbers to support the notion that bigger is better. I wrote about the best performing FIs in ROA (see link here), and how growth impacted expense and efficiency ratios (see link here). Neither supported this regional president's opinion.

This time, I searched for the top five best performing FIs by total return to shareholders over the past five years. After all, what is the point of becoming big if you cannot deliver value to shareholders? I used two filters: the FI had to trade over 2,000 shares per day so there is some level of efficiency in the stock (this created a larger FI bias in so doing); and the FI could not have a mutual-to-stock conversion during that period, which muddies the waters.

I will review my top five in descending order. Last post was dedicated to the #3 ESB Financial Corporation of Ellwood City, Pennsylvania (see post here). The rest of this post goes to our number 2 bank:

#2: Signature Bank (Nasdaq: SBNY) of New York, New York

 

Signature Bank is a very interesting story. Started in 2001 with a significant investment from Bank Hapoalim, Israel's largest bank, it has been on an upward trajectory ever since. Signature has been so successful that it's growth was beginning to put strains on Bank Hapoalim's capital. So in 2004, Signature went public and in 2005 Bank Hapoalim divested its controlling interest.

From 2006 through the second quarter of 2011, the bank's assets grew from $5.4 billion to $13.1 billion. It made no acquisitions. During that period return on average assets went from 0.72% in 2006 to 1.15% year to date. It did not lose money during the financial crisis. This superior performance led to superior total return to shareholders (see chart).

How did Signature do it? As stated, they did not do it through whole bank, branch, or asset acquisitions. Instead, they do it by attracting high performing private banking teams. This strategy started from the very beginning by wooing former Republic National Bank of New York  bankers. Republic was acquired by HSBC in 1999. Apparently, HSBC's treatment of key bankers created fertile ground for their recruitment by Signature.

But it is not the disenfranchisement of HSBC bankers that is fueling their current success. It is their commitment to building a bank designed to support private bankers serve their clients extraordinarily well. Read their vision statement, which is different than any I have ever read or helped design:

"Signature Bank was created to provide talented, passionate, and dedicated financial professionals a supportive environment in which they can conduct their practice to the maximum benefit of their clients.

The result is a special feeling clients associate with Signature Bank professionals and, ultimately, the Signature Bank brand: the experience of being financially well cared for."

How many vision statements have we read that takes great strains to offend no one, and commit to nothing? In this alone, Signature stands tall.

If you roll your eyes at the thought of a vision, don't lose track of Signature because they may roll over you.

Another key differentiator of Signature's strategy is their single point of contact delivery system. Banks that try to deliver multiple products and services to customers often have different customer touch points. For cash management, call John, for a loan, call Jane, etc. But Signature simplifies for their clients, and lets their relationship manager find the resources necessary to serve client needs. In fact, in an era where it's difficult to tell one bank from another, Signature prides itself in how it is different. See the below slide from their investor presentation.

Congratulations to Signature Bank. They rank #2 in total return to shareholders over the past five years. So far, our list is:

#3: ESB Financial Corporation
#4: Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.
#5: German American Bancorp


~ Jeff

Note: I make no investment recommendations in my blog. Please do not claim to invest in any security based on what you read here. You should make your own decisions in that regard. My bank stock broker chuckles when I phone in trades. Get the picture?

Top 5 Total Return to Shareholders: #4 Bank of the Ozarks

I was recently moderating a strategic planning discussion with a multi-billion dollar in assets financial institution. During the discussion, the President of one of the bank's most profitable divisions opined that less than $10 billion in assets was the "dead zone". They had to grow to survive.

I challenged the thinking. But he held firm that the regulatory environment, changing customer preferences, and the pace and expense of technology were driving the market towards bigger is better. In that, I thought, he has a point.

But I'm always looking for support. This blog has dug deep into the numbers to support the notion that bigger is better. I spoke of the best performing FIs in ROA (see link here), and how growth impacted expense and efficiency ratios (see link here). Neither supported this regional president's opinion.

This time, I searched for the top five best performing FIs by total return to shareholders over the past five years. After all, what is the point of becoming big if you cannot deliver value to shareholders? I used two filters: the FI had to trade over 2,000 shares per day so there is some level of efficiency in the stock (this created a larger FI bias in so doing); and the FI could not have a mutual-to-stock conversion during that period, which muddies the waters.

I will review my top five in descending order. Last post was dedicated to the #5 Bank, German American Bancorp of Jasper, Indiana (see post here). The rest of this post goes to our number 4 bank:

#4: Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. (Nasdaq: OZRK) of Little Rock, Arkansas

Over a 100-year banking history, Bank of the Ozarks expanded from its headquarters in Little Rock, Arkansas, to more than 100 locations throughout the Southeast and is consistently ranked among the top performing banks in America (see chart).

Bank of the Ozarks began in 1903 as a small community bank in Jasper, Arkansas, and by 1937, included an additional bank in Ozark, Arkansas. In 1979, George Gleason, a 25-year-old attorney, purchased controlling interest and assumed active management of the bank as Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer. At the time, the bank had a couple dozen employees and total assets of $28 million.

What is interesting about the success of Bank of the Ozarks and its CEO is the fact that he wasn't the "experienced banker" regulators almost insist upon when approving the appointment of bank leadership. There are plenty of sad stories of bank demise at the hands of experienced bankers. Bank of the Ozarks and their regulators were not so myopic in their view. If our industry is to change, then who should be change agents?

In 1994, with a total of five banking offices in rural Arkansas markets, Bank of the Ozarks launched an aggressive growth strategy to expand the number of banking offices and product and service offerings. Collectively, the management team built an Arkansas franchise rivaling the largest banks in the state. The company moved its headquarters to Little Rock in 1995. The company held its initial public offering of stock in 1997. Since that time, the company has grown to more than 100 locations throughout Arkansas, Texas, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Alabama and Florida.

How did they grow so quickly? They acquired seven failed institutions in Georgia, Florida, and South Carolina from the FDIC, adding over $2 billion of acquired assets since March 2010. Such aggressive growth has led to positive operating leverage as net income and EPS has grown faster than assets (see table from their investor presentation).

Bank of the Ozarks has historically been a very good performer as they grew and prior to their recent FDIC deal binge. Their ROA in 2006 when their assets were $2.5 billion was 1.24%. Aided by the FDIC transactions and as a result of disciplined execution of those deals and the accounting of those transactions, OZRK is now a $4.0 billion bank with a 3.60% ROA year to date.

The eye-popping ROA is partially a result of the increased net interest margin, presently 5.67%, due to the accounting of the acquired loans from the FDIC. This margin will drop off as the discounted loans accrete, but if past is prologue OZRK will be well positioned to continue its historic superior performance.

So to summarize, Bank of the Ozarks Inc. achieved superior financial performance by embracing a young, forward looking CEO that clearly has a bent for successful execution. FDIC assisted transactions doubled the size of the institution, and the challenge for the next five years is how well the management team can run a much larger, and geographically sprawling franchise.

Congratulations to Bank of the Ozarks. They rank #4 in total return to shareholders over the past five years. So far, our list is:

#4: Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.
#5: German American Bancorp

~ Jeff

Note: I make no investment recommendations in my blog. Please do not claim to invest in any security based on what you read here. You should make your own decisions in that regard. My wife won't let me buy bank stocks without her permission, so why would you buy based on what I write?