Liquidity isnt a problem with liquidity printers and Yellen.
Svb got instant liquidity at the push of a button. Dont drink the bong water.
Svb got instant liquidity at the push of a button. Dont drink the bong water.
Liquidity isnt a problem with liquidity printers and Yellen.
Svb got instant liquidity at the push of a button. Dont drink the bong water.
They did have a lot of badly performing loans. But the bank failed because the asset side of its balance sheet couldn't protect it from depositors wanting to cash out, as you said they had an issue with duration risk. If they had enough liquidity they could have possibly survived the impact of their bad lending practices. They didn't have enough liquidity so they became insolvent. The bad loans was one nail in the coffin.
They had already tapped The Fed on the shoulder for a loan previously which wasn't enough.
It's a simple case of depositors pulling funds out of the bank but the bank not having enough money to meet those withdrawals because they bought securities with them that were classified as AFS.
In the case of SVB it was, they had a narrow depositor base of largely high net-worth individuals which means the risk wasn't spread. Poor management practices, combined with The Fed raising rates led to a run on deposits which created the liquidity issues.
Yep, so they had a liquidity issue. Because they couldn't manage the bank properly, dodgy loans being one of the things they didn't manage well.
Now that's a good gif/image.
I thought there were discussions about SVB having too much long maturity treasury bonds and these bond prices dropped rapidly due to the rapidly increasing interest rate by the Fed to fight inflation. SVB failed to hedge against rising interest rates. Large depositors (tech founders) were alerted to this emerging danger and caused a panic run of withdrawals.
I guess the plunging bond prices had a damaging impact on the asset side of their balance sheet? Correct me if I am completely wrong and off my tree!
I know I like to oversimplify things, but in the comments section of this video someone says
There are bubbles in virtually all asset classes, and once the music stops, boom! Suddenly it's a credit crisis.
Yep, a 5% rate environment is probably too high, just as a 1% rate environment is too low.
The high rates hit in an unexpected part of the economy, it was targeted at consumers but ended up hitting the fringe banking sector
In the video Nielson says to keep an eye on the BTFP, if it starts to progressively blow out over the short term then the contagion is probably spreading.
It's predictable what they will do, because they do not want to cause a collapse, but the system is way too f%$ked. The sudden collapse of the Soviet Union is a good example; no one believed that the system would fail, but new the system was absolutely unsustainable. And "no one saw it coming" or "there will be no financial crisis in our lifetime"That's a good example, everyone is saying there isn't a shortage of chairs issue because the music is still playing. Even though everyone knows there is a shortage of chairs and at some point the music will stop.
Atm everyone is still valuing their assets at record high prices, but at some point they will have to accept the real lower value which will cause a lot of people/companies to be instantly underwater. The big question is when does the music stop and in the mean time do CB's do another massive QE programs to delay it again?