Sponsored Links

Exclusive: Deutsche Bank 'horribly undercapitalized' - U.S. regulator

Pedestrians are reflected in a window as they walk in front of the headquarters of Deutsche Bank AG in Frankfurt September 5, 2011. REUTERS/Alex Domanski

Pedestrians are reflected in a window as they walk in front of the headquarters of Deutsche Bank AG in Frankfurt September 5, 2011.

Credit: Reuters/Alex Domanski

WASHINGTON | Fri Jun 14, 2013 6:02pm EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A top U.S. banking regulator called Deutsche Bank's capital levels "horrible" and said it is the worst on a list of global banks based on one measurement of leverage ratios.

"It's horrible, I mean they're horribly undercapitalized," said Federal Deposit Insurance Corp Vice Chairman Thomas Hoenig in an interview. "They have no margin of error."

Hoenig, who is second-in-command at the regulator, said global capital rules, known as the Basel III accord, allow lenders to appear well-capitalized when they are not. That is because the rules allow the banks to use complicated measurements of how risky their loans are to determine the capital they must hold, he said.

But using a tougher leverage ratio measurement - which compares a bank's shareholder equity to its total assets without using risk-weightings - the picture for banks such as Deutsche Bank is very different, he said.

Deutsche Bank this year is almost done raising 5 billion euros ($6.67 billion) in new debt and equity, boosting its core capital ratio to around 9.5 percent, which it says has made it one of the best-capitalized banks among its peers.

"To say that we are undercapitalized is inaccurate because if you look at the Basel framework, we're now one of the best capitalized banks in the world after our capital raise," Deutsche Bank's Chief Financial Officer Stefan Krause told Reuters in an interview, when asked about Hoenig's comments.

"To suggest that leverage puts us in a position to be a risk to the system is incorrect," Krause said, calling the gauge a "misleading measure" when used on its own.

Deutsche's leverage ratio stood at 1.63 percent, according to Hoenig's numbers, which are based on European IFRS accounting rules as of the end of 2012.

Deutsche said the number now stands at 2.1 percent but that it does not look at the gauge. Using U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, the ratio stood at a much more comfortable 4.5 percent, Krause said.

OUTSPOKEN CRITIC

The difference is due to the way derivatives on a bank's books are measured. Neither number directly corresponds to the Basel leverage ratio, which calculates capital in another way and sets a 3 percent minimum.

The FDIC - which guarantees deposits at U.S. banks - stressed that Hoenig was speaking in a personal capacity and that the agency did not comment on individual banks.

Hoenig staked out a reputation as a dissenting voice against the Federal Reserve's loose monetary policy in the immediate aftermath of the financial crisis when he was president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.

He's also an outspoken critic of the Basel III rules - introduced globally after the crisis - which he says do not do enough to reduce the size of the riskiest banks and are easy for them to game.

Other banks with a low ratio, according to Hoenig, are UBS at 2.52 percent, Morgan Stanley at 2.55 percent, Credit Agricole at 2.72 percent and Societe Generale at 2.84 percent.

Detailed rules for Basel III, which other U.S. politicians and regulators have questioned, are expected to come out in the United States in the next few months, well past the January deadline agreed upon internationally.

DESCRIBES "RIDICULOUS" CHANGE

Hoenig pointed to the gain in Deutsche Bank shares in January on the same day it posted a big quarterly loss, because it had improved its Basel III capital ratios by cutting risk-weighted assets.

"My other example with poor Deutsche Bank is that they lose $2 billion and raise their capital ratio. It's - I don't want to say insane, but it's ridiculous," Hoenig said.

A leverage ratio is a better method to show a firm's ability to absorb sudden losses, Hoenig says, and he has floated a plan to raise the ratio to 10 percent. He said the 3 percent leverage hurdle under Basel was a "pretend number."

Opponents of using such a ratio say that it ignores the risk in a bank's loan books, and can make a bank with only healthy borrowers look equally risky as a bank whose clients are less likely to pay back their loans.

It also fails to take into account how easily a bank can sell its assets - so-called liquidity - or whether it is hedged against risk.

Still, equity analysts said that while Deutsche Bank likely will meet regulatory capital requirements, its ratios look weak.

"(The) capital raise was warmly received by the market," Berenberg Bank said in a note this week. "However, we still remain concerned about the leverage in the business."

"To get above the 3 percent level (mandated by Basel), required by 2019, requires four years' worth of profits and, in our view, delays dividends."

($1 = 0.7496 euros)

(Reporting by Emily Stephenson and Douwe Miedema; Editing by Karey Van Hall, Martin Howell and Leslie Gevirtz)

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/
Comments (6)
Curmudgeon wrote:
Excuse me, I’m not a finance person, but I thought Basel III required 8 percent, which still seems to me to be horribly weak. This is another banking train wreck in the making.

Jun 14, 2013 6:54pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
I am no apologist for banks. Yet I think this is an artifact of their Prime Brokerage (as it is for MS, UBS, and CA) and similar liquid-market collateralized financing business such repo, delta-one swaps and so forth).

For example. If a DB customer deposits $100 at DB, and borrows $700 from DB to buy a total of $800 of bonds, DBs equity is unchanged, but both the assets and liabilities on their balance sheet have increased by $800. But the $100 of equity the client has deposited is, to the bank, the equivalent of $100 of equity because under the terms of the loan it is first loss, whilst the bank maintains strict covenants over the type of collateral, minimum required margin in the acct, rights to liquidate under certain conditions, and so forth. But for all such securities companies, it doesn’t show up on the balance sheet except as an asset. No matter that, under the example show, the capital ratio is > than 12%. Hoenig is not the first to scare people with non-apple-to-apple comparisons that misunderstand the nature of these relatively prudent and well-risk-managed financing businessses.

There are lots of legitimate reasons to take aim at the banks, but using a mis-specified capital-to-assets ratio is not one of them.

Jun 15, 2013 2:04pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Why is this a problem? The financial wizards in the Democrat party told us this wasnt a problem with Fanny May and Freddy Mac so why should it be an issue with Deutsche bank?

Jun 17, 2013 3:51pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.