Hickey on bank margins

writes in the Herald:

Everyone is kicking the big four Australian-owned because, it's assumed, they're profiteering on interest at the expense of farmers, homeowners, and businesses.

The big four are padding their profits by not passing on rate cuts, the argument goes. The other assumption is that the only “good” bank is Kiwibank, which is sacrificing profits by cutting rates.

The trouble is the free kickers are wrong on both counts. Our analysis of bank general disclosure statements (GDSs) to the end of December shows the net interest margins earned by the big four fell fast in the second half of last year.

Banks actually sacrificed $396 million of profit from interest rates on total assets of $329.5 billion.

Surprisingly, the big fours' bank fees also fell, in total and as a percentage of assets. The only reason bottom-line profits didn't fall as much is banks stripped out around $250 million of costs in the second half of last year.

That's an analysis 've not seen elsewhere. Margins are down, but costs also down.

Our analysis also shows Kiwibank had the highest net interest margin in the second half of last year, compared to the only other bank reporting a six-month figure, which was ASB.

It's hard to compare with the other banks, which reported three-month figures, but Kiwibank was the only bank not to see a contraction in its margin in the second half. The only thing making its net profit look less buoyant than the big four is that its operating costs (salaries, rents, advertising) are more than double those of its big four competitors as a proportion of total assets.

Again fascinating analysis. Bernard explains:

The best way to understand what is happening to interest margins and bank profits is to look at their GDSs, which detail their net interest , expenses, fee incomes, bad debt charges and, ultimately, net profit.

The key number is net interest income, which nets off all interest receipts and all interest payments. This effectively calculates the profit from interest on mortgages, credit cards, business loans and consumer loans, minus the cost of everything in the funding melting pot, including term deposits, long bonds, interbank funding locally and foreign short-term funding.

Simply looking at the bottom-line net profit numbers is misleading because they include all sorts of factors, including non-interest fee income, trading gains, cost reductions, bad debt charges and tax changes. It's also best to compare apples with apples by measuring everything as a percentage of assets to make sure the numbers aren't skewed by size.

It is nice to see business journalism that goes beyond someone reading a net profit amount and declaring it to be too high or too low!

Comments (20)

Login to comment or vote

Add a Comment