Opinion

Felix Salmon

The BofA tail-risk discount

By Felix Salmon
October 19, 2010

Here’s a chart of what tail risk looks like, in the stock market:

bac.tiff

The thick blue line is Bank of America stock, hitting a new 52-week low today after reporting losses of $7.3 billion in the third quarter. The thin blue line is financial stocks generally, which are doing much better than BofA. And the thin red line is the S&P 500, which is significantly higher than it was this time last year.

To judge by the headlines, BofA ought to be doing pretty well. Its earnings report today beat expectations, and yesterday it announced that it was going to start foreclosing on properties again, long before anybody expected it would do so. On top of that, it’s the biggest bank in the U.S., with a deposit base of $900 billion—that’s 11.71% of the total U.S. deposit base, making BofA the clear leader on that front and the only bank now to break the 10% cap. With the Federal Reserve throwing free money at the entire U.S. financial system in an attempt to keep the recovery going, and the yield curve sloping upwards in the right direction for easy banking-sector profits, these ought to be good times indeed for BofA.

So why is BofA’s stock in the doldrums, relatively speaking? The answer is tail risk. Part of that risk is regulatory: BofA is too big to fail, and will therefore be subject to extra regulatory scrutiny and higher capital requirements than smaller banks. On top of that, huge swathes of the post-Dodd-Frank regulatory architecture remain to be written in detail, and the risks to big banks on that front are all to the downside, given how deregulated they were up until now.

But the much larger part is mortgage-related: JP Morgan came out yesterday and said that banks could be forced to buy back as much as $120 billion in mortgage bonds from investors. And BofA bears the lion’s share of that risk, incorporating as it does not only Merrill Lynch but also Countrywide.

The mortgage mess hasn’t gone away, and BofA is going to trade at a discount unless and until it’s resolved. That doesn’t mean that the market is pricing in some kind of mortgage-related disaster. It’s just pricing in a very uncertain probability distribution of possible outcomes, some of which are very bad indeed. And since investors hate that kind of uncertainty, the share price is underperforming, and is likely to stay low for as long as the uncertainty persists.

Comments
3 comments so far | RSS Comments RSS

So that is how it is, is it? BoA, because it is too big to fail, has to bear extra regulatory burden that pushes its stock price down. After reading so many times that TBTF banks have a competitive advantage, with counterparties eager to lend to them at discounted rates, this news of BoA’s pain almost makes me cry.

Disclosure: I am a depositor, although not a stockholder, of BoA

Posted by dolanecon | Report as abusive
 

Losing $7B in a quarter *beats* expectations? In the midst of a “recovery”? Wow, that is REALLY setting the bar low!

My preference is for businesses that turn a profit, not those that post massive losses in the midst of the widest spread we’ve seen in a decade between short- and long-term rates. What happens to their book if inflation (and short-term interest rates) picks up? What happens to their book if inflation *doesn’t* pick up and we hit a spell of deflation (along with another round of defaults)?

But I guess we might hope for the best — continued losses for a few years as their consumer business stagnates under regulatory pressure.

Just really hard to put a high price to that “best case” scenario.

Posted by TFF | Report as abusive
 

goog

Posted by test1020 | Report as abusive
 

Post Your Comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
  •