|
The full report is ready for download for subscribers. The professional version
is roughly twice the length of the public preview (see below). Any institutions
who are contemplating a subscription may reach out to me (Reggie
Middleton) access a sample.
Here are the chronology of posts that led to this analysis, ultimately producing
the public preview of the analysis (below) and the full forensic analysis as
well:
- The
Fed Believes Secrecy is in Our Best Interests. Here are Some of the Secrets
- Why
Doesn't the Media Take a Truly Independent, Unbiased Look at the Big Banks
in the US?
- As
the markets climb on top of one big, incestuous pool of concentrated risk...
- Any
objective review shows that the big banks are simply too big for the safety
of this country
- Why
hasn't anybody questioned those rosy stress test results now that the facts
have played out?
- A Must Read: An
Independent Look into JP Morgan. This contains the "public preview" document
(
JPM
Public Excerpt of Forensic Analysis Subscription 2009-09-18 00:56:22 488.64
Kb), which is free to download.
For subscribers:
JPM
Forensic Report (092209) Final- Retail 2009-09-24 03:12:17 130.93 Kb
JPM
Report (092209) Final - Professional 2009-09-24 03:13:31 550.72 Kb
Enjoy!
For good measure, here is an excerpt from some interesting reading from a
respected bank analysis firm regarding the subject matter at hand.
"During the peak of the financial bubble, nearly one-fifth of the earnings
in the S&P 500 came from financials. Today the figure is half that and
declining. As we remind subscribers of the IRA
Advisory Service every chance we get, the forward ROE for banks is likely
to be far lower over the next five years than it was over the past decade.
Thus we have to wonder how the G-20 leaders expect banks to raise massive
amounts of new equity at a time when they are going to be far less profitable
and facing higher near-term credit costs, both individually and as an industry,
than at any time since the 1980s. The IMF projects that while loan losses
on US bank balance sheets may not reach the 5% seen in the 1930s, losses
rates could peak near 4%, a rate that is still catastrophic. A 4% loss rate
is close to 3x 1990s level loss rates, this vs. the 2x 1990 loss rate peak
projected by IRA.
We view the current "debate" within the G-20 about bank capital as largely
irrelevant in financial terms but very significant for the markets. Neither
Secretary Geithner not his counterparts within the G-20 seem to understand
the precarious situation that is still facing the largest global financial
institutions. Let's take a look at JPMorganChase (NYSE:JPM), which we downgraded
to a "negative" outlook last week in The IRA Advisory Service, using the
EC model in The IRA Bank Monitor as a means of illustrating the problem.
As of Q2 2009, JPM was rated "C" based on an aggregate Stress Index score
of 2.0 vs. 3.1 for the industry as a whole (1995=1). The Banking Stress Index
is a quarterly stress test survey of all FDIC insured banks. JPM has parent
level tangible common equity of 5.42% and bank-only TCE of 5.6%. While the
bank units of JPM cumulatively have $114 billion in Tier One Risk Based Capital, the
EC calculated for JPM's bank units by The IRA Bank Monitor is $474 billion
or 4x the bank's regulatory capital. The RAROC calculated for JPM is
just 0.148% vs. a nominal ROE of 5% at Q2 2009.
BTW, users of the consumer and professional
version of The IRA Bank Monitor may view the detailed EC analysis for
JPM and other banks for Q2 2009.
If the G-20 finance ministers get their way and force JPM to increase its
Tier 1 RBC to say $250 billion, that implies that ROE and EPS would be more
than cut in half. Does this sound like an attractive investment proposition?
More, if anything like the present reforms on OTC derivatives being proposed
in the EU and US become law, the earnings and returns for JPM and all large
banks will likely fall further from levels observed during the past five
years -- even with no regulatory capital increase mandated by the G-20.
So here's our question for Secretary Geithner, Chairman Greenspan and the
G-20 finance ministers: Just how do you suppose that larger global banks
will be able to raise and maintain additional capital if their earnings are
falling and their risk-taking opportunities are receding? The forward model
for banks under the G-20 world view looks a lot like a GSE with utility-type
attributes that only a government would be willing to fund. And remember
that lower leverage means these banks must take more risk in their trading
activities to maintain ROE and EPS targets."
May I posit as an answer to the well articulated question above, that the
ability to raise capital (at least in the very recent past and potentially
in the very near future) is predicated on the snake oil salesman manipulating
markets and accounting earnings at direct cost to the retail investor and the
institutions that are "not in the know", and ultimately to the detriment of
confidence in the stock market in general. After all, I agree with IRA's outlook
on the banking industry wholeheartedly yet they have managed to raise quite
a significant amount of capital 6 months to date. The more interesting question
is "What will happen when the chickens come home to roost?"
|
Reggie
Middleton
Reggie Middleton, LLC
Perpetual Interests, LLCTM
http://boombustblog.com/
Who am I?
Well, I fancy myself the personification of the free thinking
maverick, the ultimate non-conformist as it applies to investment and analysis.
I am definitively outside the box - not your typical or stereotypical Wall
Street investor. I work out of my home, not a Manhattan office. I build my
own technology and perform my own research - in lieu of buying it or following
the crowd. I create and follow my own macro strategies and am by definition,
a contrarian to the nth degree.
Since I use my research as a tool for my own investing
to actually put food on my table, I can stand behind it as doing what it is
supposed too - educate, illustrate and elucidate. I do not sell advice, I am
not a reporter hence do not sell stories, and I do not sell research. I am
an entrepreneur who exists just outside of mainstream corporate America and
Wall Street. This allows me freedom to do things that many can not. For instance,
I pride myself on developing some of the highest quality research available,
regardless of price. No conflicts of interest, no corporate politics, no special
favors. Just the hard truth as I have found it - and believe me, my team and
I do find it! I welcome any and all to peruse my blog, use my custom hacked
collaborative social tools, read the articles, download the files, and make
a critical comparison of the opinion referencing the situation at hand and
the time stamp on the blog post to the reality both at the time of the post
and the present. Hopefully, you will be as impressed with the Boom Bust as
I am and our constituency.
I pay for significant information and data, and am well
aware of the value of quality research. I find most currently available research
lacking, in both quality and quantity. The reason why I had to create my own
research staff was due to my dissatisfaction with what was currently available
- to both individuals and institutions.
So here I am, creating my own research for my own investment
activity. What really sets my actions apart is that I offer much of what I
produce to the public without charge - free to distribute and redistribute,
as long as it is left unaltered and full attribution is given to the author
and owner. Why would I do such a thing when others easily charge 5 and 6 digits
annually for what some may consider a lesser product? It is akin to open
source analysis! My ideas and implementations are actually improved and
fine tuned when bounced off of the collective intellect of the many, in lieu
of that of the few - no matter how smart those few may believe themselves to
be.
Very recently, I have started charging for the forensics
portion of my work, which has freed up the resources to develop the site to
deliver even more research for free, particularly on the global macro and opinion
front. This move has allowed me to serve an more diverse constituency, which
now includes the institutional consumer (ie., investment turned consumer banks,
hedge funds, pensions, etc,) as well as the newbie individual investor who
is just getting started - basically the two polar opposites of the investing
spectrum. I am proud to announce major banks as paying clients, and brand new
investors who take my book recommendations and opinions on true wealth and
success to heart.
So, this is how I use my background and knowledge in new
media, distributed computing, risk management, insurance, financial engineering,
real estate, corporate valuation and financial analysis to pursue, analyze
and capitalize on global macroeconomic opportunities. I have included a more
in depth bio at the bottom of the page for those who really, really need to
know more about me.
Visit his blog Boom
Bust Blog.
Copyright © 2007-2009 Reggie Middleton
Image rendition and html coding Copyright © 2000-2009
SafeHaven.com
ADVERTISEMENTS
« Opinions expressed at SafeHaven are those of the
individual authors and do not necessarily represent the opinion of SafeHaven
or its management. Articles are available via RSS/XML. Please
visit RSSHelp for instructions. »
|