Amid very positive economic conditions nationwide, many financial institutions have excess cash and liquidity. At the same time, while economists can only speculate when we might start to see signs of the next recession, banking regulator expectations about liquidity risk management are at an all-time high.
In today’s economic environment, financial institutions of all shapes and sizes need to think long-term about their balance sheet and business decisions. Credit Unions, in particular, are unique in that a large percentage of funding comes from member shares, money markets and Certificates of Deposit. Since deposits are a main source of funding, Credit Unions need to keep in mind the following five factors affecting deposit performance:
The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) did not prescribe a specific approach when it required the Current Expect Credit Loss (CECL) standard, leaving it up to financial institutions to determine the best path forward. Since Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses (ALLL) is no longer an apples-to-apples comparison, how will this impact a financial institution’s ability to compare itself to its peers?
If you have followed the news about MoviePass and its recent financial downfall, you may have read about declining stock prices and angry customers, and made a mental note about what not to do in business. However, there is one critical but less obvious lesson to learn from the MoviePass pandemonium – and it is one that just might keep your financial institution from going down the wrong CECL road.
Yes, we all know cyber security is the top risk facing banks and companies across all industries. However, as financial industry leaders scramble to address cyber risk and security, other banking risk could easily fall under the radar. When assessing business risk in the coming quarter and heading into 2019, keep these sneaky culprits in mind:
Risk management activities for 14 of the largest holders of residential mortgage servicing rights (MSR) produced an average net gain in asset value of 0.4% during the second quarter of 2018, according to the MSR Industry Report released last week by MountainView Financial Solutions, a Situs company. The largest gain among the 14 companies was 4.5%, and the largest loss was 6.8%.
If credit unions want to stay on track for implementing the Current Expected Credit Loss (CECL) standard, they need to have already completed several milestone tasks and to complete several more by the end of the year. Credit unions also need to be sure they have allocated sufficient time to complete the tasks that need to be finished between 2019 and 2022.
Rising values for commercial real estate (CRE) have supported prices for commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) for years. But with increasing talk about a cyclical peak in property values, or even a recession within the next couple of years, CMBS investors as a whole and B-piece investors in particular are starting to think about how they can prepare for the possibility of price declines.
After many quiet years, merger and acquisition (M&A) activity at banks has been on the rise in 2018, and several favorable trends will likely sustain the momentum through the remainder of the year. By the middle of 2019, as banks evaluate acquisition opportunities, they likely will add a new component to their customary due diligence: an exploration and understanding of the target company’s Current Expected Credit Loss (CECL) methodology.
Activity in the secondary market for home equity loans, also known as 2nd lien loans, has ramped up across most market segments in 2018. The spur behind the increased trading has been greater supply driven by higher prices, according to a new report from MountainView Financial Solutions, a Situs company.
Situs, the premier global provider of strategic business solutions for the real estate and financial services industry, today announced a strategic alliance with Radley Associates, creator of the ProMS, a leading cloud-based valuation, risk and portfolio management software for the commercial real estate (CRE) finance industry.
Regulators require the model validation process to ensure that financial institutions are properly modeling for risk. Beyond regulatory compliance, model validation also provides business leaders with confidence in their models and helps to reinforce or reassess business and balance sheet decisions shaped by model outcomes. Considering the importance of model accuracy and effectiveness, it is critical to understand hidden risks in model validation practices. Whether a financial institution develops its financial models internally or works with a third-party model software vendor, it is critical to ensure your model validation partner understands and considers hidden risks in model validation. Some such risks include:
In the residential whole loan market, many non-performing loan (NPL) buyers see an opportunity to rehabilitate borrowers, turn the assets into re-performing loans (RPLs) and eventually sell the assets to an investor that specializes in owning RPLs. The strongest buyers of RPLs are generally institutional buyers that oftentimes securitize the assets.
Changes in driver rate relationships are key influences determining the Interest Rate Risk (IRR) position of most institutions. Today, it is commonplace for financial institutions to incorporate testing for basis risk and yield curve shape risk in their IRR analyses. Three elements are needed for a successful basis risk and yield curve risk analysis solution: Asset Liability Management (ALM) model setup and fine tuning; defining the appropriate rate tests; and effectively communicating the institution’s Net Interest Income (NII) IRR position
“Strong” is an adjective frequently used to describe the prices paid for residential mortgage servicing rights (MSRs) in recent months. Beyond the glimmer, however, is the reality that only specific slices of overall portfolios are trading very well, and a lot of MSRs out there are not going to market, according to advisory firm MountainView Financial Solutions, a Situs company.
Ensuring compliance with key model risk management (MRM) guidelines and regulations requires that risk managers for financial institutions assess and validate all financial models. As economic conditions evolve and regulators demand greater balance sheet transparency, financial institutions are developing and managing more models than ever before. To meet regulatory guidelines, many financial institutions must decide whether a method of financial calculation is considered a financial model or a tool.