Banks Suffer another Big Decline Despite the Fed’s Bailout Magic

$BKK banking index courtesy of CotckCharts.Com

Last night, stock futures were roaring on news of a Fed bailout, but not so much this morning. 

The broader market limped at the open and is now up.

$SPX S&P 500 Daily Chart 

$SPX daily chart courtesy of StockCharts.Com

The boxes represent bounces off the support level at 3800. I do not know where the close will be, but so far this bounce looks feeble. 

I suspect we would have had a a lot more short covering if the Fed and FDIC allowed a mild haircut. 

What’s the Message?

Could it be that the banking sector is so feeble and has so much risk of contagion that the Fed felt forced to do a bailout? 

If that’s not the message, then someone please tell me what it is. 

$SPX S&P 500 Monthly Chart 

$SPX daily chart courtesy of StockCharts.Com

Most of the entire move up from the bottom in 2009 was due to an ocean of Fed liquidity. 

A routine bear market would take about half off the S&P 500, roughly to the 2400 level. And that is pretty much what I expect.

In the length of time it took me to make these charts, the S&P 500 slipped into the red. 

$SPX S&P 500 Weekly Chart 

$SPX weekly chart courtesy of StockCharts.Com

That is one possible ewave interpretation of where things might be. If accurate, we have had one big wave down, a correction up, and we are starting another wave down. 

Wave threes are usually the longest and strongest. 

Again, that is just one possibility. It’s more of a technical what if. I have not looked at how others me be charting this from an ewave standpoint

Ewave aside, this is a terrible looking chart technically.  

Fundamentally Speaking

Fundamentally, things are arguably worse. 

Inflation is not under control, the banking sector is in shambles, the Fed was forced to back off policy moves, wages are still moving higher, and corporate profits will be under huge pressure.

Severe bear markets always happens at the tail end of Fed-induced risk taking and this one was the biggest yet.

A 50 percent decline from the top is the minimum one should expect. That does not mean we get it, but it should be the expectation.

 Yellen Said “No Bailout” But It’s a Huge Bailout of the Banking System

For the banking background to this post, please see Yellen Said “No Bailout” But It’s a Huge Bailout of the Banking System

WSJ Comment: “You can’t run the most reckless monetary and fiscal experiment in history without the bill eventually coming due. The first invoice arrived as inflation. The second has come as a financial panic, with economic damage that may not end with Silicon Valley Bank.”

The Journal said the “economic damage that may not end with Silicon Valley Bank”. I suggest the economic damage cannot possibly end with SVB.

This post originated at MishTalk.Com.

Thanks for Tuning In!

Please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

If you have subscribed and do not get email alerts, please check your spam folder.

Mish

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!

Mish

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

59 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
JRM
JRM
1 year ago
How many $$MILLIONS did the “PLUNGE PROTECTION TEAM” pump into the foreign markets, before hours trading and during today’s US markets trading???
bayleaf
bayleaf
1 year ago
Democrats: It isn’t a bail-out and Jan 6th was the worst attack on the nation ever.
Republicans: It’s a bail-out and Jan 6th was staged by the Democrats.
FromBrussels2
FromBrussels2
1 year ago
How long still will your already crumbling Ponzi scheme addicted Empire of Lies and Eternal Wars survive and which countries will you drag down the cr*pper with you …again ?
8dots
8dots
1 year ago
For some regional banks it started earlier, but the real banking earthquake started on Mar 6. Today was the worst. We might get few aftershocks this week. The banking system might infect other sectors, for fun and entertainment, to be updated.
MarkraD
MarkraD
1 year ago
Took a short in VIX premarket, out by 10:a.m., ka-ching, it was a no-brainer – VIX spiked from retailers who weren’t yet abreast of Yellen’s “salvation”.
That said, Mish is right about his Fed angst, the Fed has become judge & Jury for the economy since 2008.
However, the fact that Congress did not reinstate Glass-Steagall in the aftermath of a massive crisis that was blatantly caused by it’s repeal tells me that maybe it’s best the Fed maintains it’s control until we finally get bribery out of politics and start seeing people get elected that actually care about the people they represent.
Yes, the Fed is comprised of bankers who benefit from Glass-Steagall’s repeal, but Congress is full of lawyers who fight tooth and nail for the benefit from any Tom/Dick/Harry that has money to buy elections.
The difference, for now, is that the Fed is more stable and aware of public outcry than Congress is, the same Congress that has members now trying to say Jan 6th was a “civil” action….or that billionaires paying a 1% effective rate is good for job creation…and we need to cut Medicare to balance the budget instead.
Get money out of politics, my opinion will change, but I can’t join the cool kids in the “fed hater” crowd until I see a better alternative for the economy.
.
JackWebb
JackWebb
1 year ago
No one, not even here, has commented on the Federal Home Loan Bank’s announcement today that it will float $64 billion in bonds. Children, SVB got $15 billion from the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco last fall. The other California crypo fraud (Silvergate Bank) got billions at the same time, but I don’t know how many billions. The shell game continues. The media are too stupid, too lazy, too biased, and too compromised to breathe a word of it.
Bam_Man
Bam_Man
1 year ago
Reply to  JackWebb
Current and expected future losses being socialized.
Nothing to see here. Move along now.
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  JackWebb
“VB got $15 billion from the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco last fall”
Could you explain what “got” means in this sentence? It is very ambiguous. Saying “I got $15 billion from my girlfriend” is very much different from saying “I got crabs from my girlfriend” so please tell me what “got” means in this context.
FromBrussels2
FromBrussels2
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug78
I understand your english is not what it used to be, but , ‘a reçu’ maybe ?
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  FromBrussels2
Given? I doubt that. Sold yes. Loaned? Maybe but for a price. Think on it. Got in English is one of the most used words because you can make it mean a lot of different things.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Paging Dr. Pangloss.
Paging Dr. Pangloss.
You have a call at the white courtesy phone.
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
That’s Biden.
Esclaro
Esclaro
1 year ago
Look on the bright side. Gold is looking great today!
Sunriver
Sunriver
1 year ago
‘Severe bear markets always happens at the tail end of Fed-induced risk taking and this one was the biggest yet.’
Lots of FED induced risk taking today in the ‘smaller’ bank market.
If the insolvent fundamentals are there for the ‘smaller’ banks, the next couple of weeks may just ‘shove’ the market into a phase 3 e-wave
OR
‘Looks like the bank insurance was just nationalized, next let’s do health insurance and many others.’ Good point.
I smell inflation.
Christoball
Christoball
1 year ago
I had a friend some 33 years ago say if he ever opened up a bank he would cut to the chase and name it “The Really Big Bank”. I thought this was really clever. He must have been a seer.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Christoball
First American Bank in the Midwest runs radio advertising on how their customer service is better than “The Really Big Bank.”
Christoball
Christoball
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
Maybe my friend got into marketing, and they used his slogan. I haven’t seen him in years.
Memento.mori
Memento.mori
1 year ago
Looks like the bank insurance was just nationalized, next lets do health insurance and many others.
Banks should be run as utilities.
They have been functioning as a big scam on the taxpayers and a vehicle of wealth transfer since we got off the gold std in the 70s.
If nothing is done to reign in and stop the theft by the banks, civilized society and peace will pay the price.
RunnerDan
RunnerDan
1 year ago
Reply to  Memento.mori
“…will CONTINUE to pay the price.”
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Memento.mori
For those who haven’t noticed, we are all working for the banks — with very few benefits.
MarkraD
MarkraD
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
Yes we are, and we’re also working for the biggest campaign contributors to congress.
MPO45v2
MPO45v2
1 year ago
Is Credit Suisse next?
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  MPO45v2
Credit Suisse has been ‘next’ for a while. It has already had one bailout this season.
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
Credit Swiss and Deutsch Bank are two peas in a pod.
Maximus_Minimus
Maximus_Minimus
1 year ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
Could be rescued by Commerzbank, though.
HippyDippy
HippyDippy
1 year ago
During lunch, CNN was on the restaurant tv. Thankfully it was on mute. Seemed to be really emphatic about this not being a bailout. Also, the WSJ repeater has a new book out about how the FED just prints money out of thin air. How breaking news. Cutting edge reporting that every 12 year old knows already.
On the stress tests they talked about, I remember some years ago that the FED had eased up on those tests since the banks were so shaky. Don’t worry though, SVB was too small for that test; though the claim is it will spread. Next few years is going to be a wild ride! Thanks voters! Your participation made this possible. Stupid slaves.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  HippyDippy
You made me recall that it is only in the past 15 years or so that part of the population has learned that the fractional reserve banking and banks lending deposits they teach in school has absolutely nothing to do with the way the banking system actually works. However, the true workings can be found online. May you all live in interesting times.
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
One of the great pleasures of education is learning that your teachers don’t know what they are talking about.
HippyDippy
HippyDippy
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
We are most definitely living in interesting times! Of course, most are clueless. I still stand by my belief that liberty will win out. It’s inevitable. But it’s gonna be a bumpy ride!
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
Steve Keen on Youtube is a good start.
Not always right, but not much wrong.
dtj
dtj
1 year ago
I see that S&P chart a lot differently. The trend is up, not down. Bottom already reached (3491.58) in October. Fed about to stop raising interest rates which will be interpreted as a pivot even if they just hold them steady.
HippyDippy
HippyDippy
1 year ago
Reply to  dtj
Sure, just ignore all the fundamentals, and everything looks rosy.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  dtj
Charts show history. As far as I know, the past does NOT predict the future.
There is one exception. The farther the price (of anything) is from the long-term trend, the greater is the ‘pressure’ to return to (and override) the trend, unless the underlying fundamentals have permanently changed.
MarkraD
MarkraD
1 year ago
Reply to  dtj
I’m almost inclined to agree, while folks are ranting about ongoing inflation, commodity charts sing a different tune, barring real estate, which is a matter of labor supply… maybe carpenters wages will exceed lawyers in coming years.
.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  MarkraD
Plumbers before electricians, then maybe carpenters.
hmk
hmk
1 year ago
This made me wonder about brokerage firm accounts which I never really thought about. My understanding is that only 500k of securities are insured by the SIPC and 250k in cash. I think the cash is included in that 500k figure. So it sounds like even if you own treasuries in your account only up to 500k is covered if the brokerage goes bankrupt. WTF this never occured to me until today. Is this accurate? Now I am wondereing about splitting my accouts up also.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  hmk
The expectation is that, in the event of bankruptcy, investment accounts are placed with another brokerage firm, not consumed by the brokerage firm in its bankruptcy. There would/might be a period of time in the interim when accounts are not available for transactions. Schwab, for example, is a case in point. Bankruptcy would first consume the assets of the company, which should be ample to cover any ‘run’ problems without forced selling of hold-to-maturity assets. Despite that, its share price was clobbered for a while this morning. At $7 trillion +/- in accounts, it is huge.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  hmk
hmk
hmk
1 year ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
Thanks for the link. Reading through the whole site it sounds like the SIPC has only a $5 billion fund. What happens when that runs out? Also , yes my concerns are valid, only 500k in total is covered with only up to 250k in cash included in that total. I don’t understand how an account with securites and treasuries could be lost in a bk of a brokerage. Aren’t these sequestered ? Not like banking where there is leverage on deposits as well as assests to liquidate in times of need.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  hmk
What happens?
The same thing that happens to your cancer therapy when drug expenditures zoom past your insurance’s 2 million dollar lifetime limit.
MarkraD
MarkraD
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
“You must be terminated, you are no longer a profitable citizen.” (In best Dalek voice)
mrutkaus
mrutkaus
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
You get better?
hmk
hmk
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
THink about it 5 billion is a drop in the bucket with a brokerage like Charles Schwab. It might be better to split accounts up.
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
1 year ago
Reply to  hmk
I believe they are held ‘in your name’ only inside the brokerage accounting books.
In other words if you and I use Schwabb and we both have 100 shares of Amazon what I believe happens is that as far as the market is concerned, Schwabb has 200 shares of Amazon. Then internally Schwabb denotes that 100 are mine and 100 are yours.
That’s why if Schwabb fails we could lose our shares since they are only known within Schwabb.
hmk
hmk
1 year ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
Okay that makes sense. I am wondering if I am just getting overly concerned about a nothing burger. We always made sure to have under the FDIC limit in banks but never gave it a thought for brokerage accounts. Am I the only one here paranoid about this?
vanderlyn
vanderlyn
1 year ago
Reply to  hmk
your shares and bonds will be just transferred to new brokerage firm which takes over if trouble. perhaps a few days delay, and new account number assigned. but other person correct the total brokerage firm has millions of shares of apple and denotes you own 1000. don’t worry too much. impossible not to worry a little of course. been through a few defunct brokerage firms as a client and a broker in my decades. i always slept best having a huge amount of gold outside of this fiat computer system. slept like a baby during panic of 2007 and 2008, even with bear stearns clearing all my small fund’s accounts.
vanderlyn
vanderlyn
1 year ago
Reply to  hmk
yes. if you own tbills and stocks, it will just be taken over by the broker that buys yours. happened to my fund at bear stearns. i was so happy to be bought by jpmorgan. i considered the biggest gangster in the land. better to be a gambino or mex cartel than some hick town football team gang members.
hmk
hmk
1 year ago
Reply to  vanderlyn
Okay, thanks.
Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
1 year ago
“Could it be that the banking sector is so feeble and has so much risk of contagion that the Fed felt forced to do a bailout?”
I see no problem. Show me where shareholders / bondholders have gotten relief.
The Federal Reserve is LENDING (not purchasing) against collateral ALREADY backstopped by US taxpayer:
Eligible Collateral: Eligible collateral includes any collateral eligible for purchase by the Federal Reserve
Banks in open market operations (see 12 CFR 201.108(b)), provided that such collateral was owned by
the borrower as of March 12, 2023.
The rub is that only big banks have plenty of “eligible collateral” … the small / medium banks instead have plenty of business / CRE loans … they will be the ones in trouble … and gobbled up by the big banks soon enough.
Is that The Plan?
HippyDippy
HippyDippy
1 year ago
Reply to  Tony Bennett
Gee, you mean more consolidation? Probably not the plan, but it sure works out in favor of the big banks. As usual.
Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  HippyDippy
Yes.
Just ask yourself would Jamie Dimon prefer to take over a bank on EXTREMELY favorable terms … or have taxpayer come in and save it?
I wouldn’t bet against JD.
HippyDippy
HippyDippy
1 year ago
Reply to  Tony Bennett
I wouldn’t either. Smart and connected. Not a good idea to bet against that combo!
Remember the sweet deals of the S&L crisis? Aww, the good old days!
WTFUSA
WTFUSA
1 year ago
Reply to  HippyDippy
But it is not just the big banks anymore. The USG can’t (won’t?) let any banks fail as they don’t have a clue as to what the collateral fallout will be across the banking system due to derivative exposure.
It is hard to envision how the S&L fiasco would have worked out if this same approach had been used at that time. Equally difficult to imagine what the US would be like today had that happened…
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  WTFUSA
Like Argentina, Brazil, Yugoslavia, Bolivia, Zimbabwe, et al.?
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
1 year ago
Reply to  Tony Bennett
This was a deposit run, not bad loans defaulting.
The banks in trouble are those with large deposits to loans ratio. The opposite of what happened in 08.
Mish
Mish
1 year ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
Yes, Fed-sponsored of course
Zero reserves on deposits
Zero reserves on “risk free” long-duration treasuries
SVB plowed in
Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
1 year ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
I know.
What you are forgetting is that banks are holding current loans not marked to market. Small / medium banks will be forced to sell these loans at market prices (and not pledged as collateral with FR). How big unrealized losses?
“Additional short–term interest rate increases combined with longer asset maturities may also affect bank balance sheets in coming quarters. Unrealized losses on available–for–sale and held–to–maturity securities remained elevated at $620 billion.”
Matt3
Matt3
1 year ago
Reply to  Tony Bennett
Yep. It’s hard to mark the loans to market and if they did, it might look like the bond portfolio. It’s hard to know as The difference is that the banks we are seeing now are the ones with the big bond portfolios that are either marked to market as ‘available for sale” or noted in the balance sheet with the market value but carried at cost and listed as “held to maturity. This is a time issue not a poor collateral issue.
I lot of the banks without big bond portfolios have 70 -80% of assets in loans that are not marked to market or even noted as to what the estimated market value would be.
So the first group of banks with large bond portfolios show up now with large losses either on the financials or at least noted.
The next group of banks with large loan portfolios will remain with hidden loses. I’m not even sure where to look for these. In loans, you will have both time issues (lower rate fixed loans) and loans that may go bad.
I think the loan side has more risk.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
This was bad risk analysis and judgement.
Same as always.

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk

You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.