Editor's Note: The ratio of Distressed Assets to Total Capital Cushion is a variant of the famous Texas Ratio, which was widely used by US financial regulators to predict bank failure during the US Savings and Loan Crisis in the 1980s and early 1990s. The basic premise is that a bank with Distressed Assets greater than its Capital Cushion is in danger of insolvency because a significant drop in the value of the Distressed Assets will eat into a significant amount of the bank's capital. A bank that has a Distressed Ratio greater than 100% is flagged as borderline insolvent. For a more detailed discussion of this ratio, please visit a previous blog post: The Texas Ratio of Select Philippine Banks
This is a list of the top distressed Universal and Commercial (U/KB) as well as Thrift Banks in the Philippines as of March 31, 2016. It updates a previous blog post: "The Top Distressed Philippine Banks as of December 31, 2015".
This is a list of the top distressed Universal and Commercial (U/KB) as well as Thrift Banks in the Philippines as of March 31, 2016. It updates a previous blog post: "The Top Distressed Philippine Banks as of December 31, 2015".
To see where your bank stands relative to these banks, please check the previous blog post: "Philippine Banks Deteriorate in the 4th Qtr. of 2015".
The Top Distressed Philippine Banks | |||
Total Distressed Assets/ Total Capital Cushion | |||
March 31, 2016 | |||
In Php | |||
March 31, 2016 | |||
Bank | Total Distressed Assets (In PhP) | Total Capital Cushion (In PhP) | Distressed Assets/ Total Capital Cushion (In %) |
GSIS FAMILY BANK/ COMSAVINGS BANK | 1,388,430,990.85 | -64,278,097.71 | -2160.04% |
VILLAGE BANK INC (A THRIFT BANK) | 607,047,505.43 | 98,507,042.82 | 616.25% |
BANK OF CHINA LIMITED-MANILA BRANCH | 10,461,773,775.86 | 2,637,248,827.89 | 396.69% |
UNITED COCONUT PLANTERS BANK | 36,105,038,331.27 | 11,439,141,113.48 | 315.63% |
INTER-ASIA DEVELOPMENT BANK | 181,928,691.71 | 60,032,404.14 | 303.05% |
LEGAZPI SAVINGS BANK INC | 916,593,326.75 | 463,291,228.55 | 197.84% |
CHINA BANK SAVINGS INC | 11,676,720,431.38 | 7,519,966,463.26 | 155.28% |
ENTERPRISE BANK INC (A THRIFT BANK) | 458,910,599.16 | 318,128,721.32 | 144.25% |
LUZON DEVELOPMENT BANK | 961,447,429.40 | 685,550,251.87 | 140.24% |
MALAYAN BANK SAVINGS AND MORT BANK INC | 1,561,876,593.81 | 1,214,212,954.20 | 128.63% |
BATAAN DEVELOPMENT BANK | 116,870,667.31 | 97,245,069.83 | 120.18% |
DUMAGUETE CITY DEV BANK INC | 292,628,303.01 | 255,768,439.33 | 114.41% |
EQUICOM SAVINGS BANK INC | 952,257,946.59 | 842,893,942.69 | 112.97% |
WORLD PARTNERS BANK (A THRIFT BANK) | 181,422,345.06 | 168,274,099.33 | 107.81% |
METRO CEBU PUBLIC SAVINGS BANK | 62,804,365.40 | 58,826,562.87 | 106.76% |
UCPB SAVINGS BANK | 3,011,193,498.28 | 2,907,230,864.97 | 103.58% |
Grand Total | 68,936,944,801.27 | 28,702,039,888.84 | 240.18% |
GSIS Family Savings Bank aka Comsavings Bank's distressed ratio went negative because its total capital cushion became negative. In other words, it lost so much money that it no longer had any real capital backing up its assets. Hence, it was only a matter of time before the bank closed. And, true enough, it was forced to close by the BSP/Monetary Board last May 13, 2016. See previous post: BSP: GSIS Family Bank aka Comsavings Bank is Better Off Dead
Source: www.bsp.gov.ph
Disclaimer:
This list only serves as a screening guide. It is not a definitive guide and must be taken in the context of other factors. The figures are based on the individual banks' statement of condition as of March 31, 2016 as published in the BSP website (www.bsp.gov.ph). For this analysis, no attempt was made to go through the audited financial statements of each bank. Readers are suggested to make their own investigations and verify the figures presented. Both BSP and PDIC have their own problem bank screening systems that are much more sophisticated in scope and design, given that they have more access to information over the banks they regulate.
This list only serves as a screening guide. It is not a definitive guide and must be taken in the context of other factors. The figures are based on the individual banks' statement of condition as of March 31, 2016 as published in the BSP website (www.bsp.gov.ph). For this analysis, no attempt was made to go through the audited financial statements of each bank. Readers are suggested to make their own investigations and verify the figures presented. Both BSP and PDIC have their own problem bank screening systems that are much more sophisticated in scope and design, given that they have more access to information over the banks they regulate.
No comments:
Post a Comment