Time To Bet Against Bad Banks--Now That The Bank Term Funding Program Has Expired And Fed Rate Cuts Are On Hold
Time To Bet Against Bad Banks--Now That The Bank Term Funding Program Has Expired And Fed Rate Cuts Are On Hold
Why Bet Against Banks Now?
爲什麼現在要押注銀行?
Two main reasons. First, the Federal Reserve's new, post Silicon Valley Bank collapse assistance program, The Bank Term Funding Program (BTFP), has expired. And second, the Fed's first rate cut—initially expected in the first quarter of this year—has been pushed off indefinitely due to persistent inflation. So banks still have to compete for depositors with higher yielding money market funds.
兩個主要原因。首先,聯儲局在硅谷銀行倒閉後的新援助計劃,即銀行定期融資計劃(BTFP)已經到期。其次,由於持續的通貨膨脹,聯儲局的首次降息——最初預計在今年第一季度——已被無限期推遲。因此,銀行仍然必須爭奪收益率更高的貨幣市場基金的存款人。
A Simpler And Cheaper Approach
一種更簡單、更便宜的方法
Last year around this time, I used a banking expert's approach to try to figure out which regional banks were most likely to go bust. I made money betting against Bank of Hawaii Corporation (NYSE:BOH) and First Foundation, Inc. (NYSE:FFWM), and added more bearish positions after the crashes of PacWest Bancorp (now Banc of California) (NASDAQ:PACW) and Western Alliance Bancorporation (NYSE:WAL),
去年大約這個時候,我用銀行專家的方法試圖弄清楚哪些地區銀行最有可能破產。我押注夏威夷銀行公司(紐約證券交易所代碼:BOH)和第一基金會公司(紐約證券交易所代碼:FFWM)賺了錢,在PacWest Bancorp(現爲加利福尼亞銀行)(納斯達克股票代碼:PACW)和西方聯盟銀行(紐約證券交易所代碼:WAL)暴跌後,我增加了更多看跌頭寸,
Betting Against More Regional Banks In the wake of the $PACW and $WAL crashes, And after exiting bets against $BOH and $FFWM for gains of 80% and 200%, respectively. pic.twitter.com/UCdAoq8Kfv
— Portfolio Armor (@PortfolioArmor) May 4, 2023
押注更多地區銀行在$PACW和$WAL暴跌之後,在退出對BOH和$FFWM的押注之後,分別獲得了80%和200%的漲幅。pic.twitter.com/ucdaoq8KFV
— Portfolio Armor (@PortfolioArmor) 2023 年 5 月 4 日
I was going to pay the same analyst I used to update the spreadsheet we came up with with the latest data, but before doing so, I looked at the half dozen or so names that were ranked as the "worst" banks according to the banking expert's methodology, and checked how their share prices did over the last 12 months.
我本來要付錢給我以前更新電子表格的同一位分析師,但在這樣做之前,我查看了根據銀行業專家的方法被評爲 “最差” 銀行的六家左右的公司,並查看了它們的股價在過去12個月中的表現。
A couple had gone bust, but those were ones that were already in obvious trouble when we put the spreadsheet together. The others were all up significantly over the last 12 months. Apparently, they hadn't exhausted the BTFP after all.
一對夫婦破產了,但是當我們整理電子表格時,這些人已經遇到了明顯的麻煩。在過去的12個月中,其他所有股均大幅上漲。顯然,他們畢竟沒有用盡BTFP。
So here's what I did instead. I went to Chartmill and ran this screen:
所以我改爲這樣做了。我去了 Chartmill 運行了這個屏幕:
-
GICS: Financial.
-
Has options
-
U.S. only.
-
Health Rating: < 2 (on a scale from 0-10).
-
Piotroski F-Score: 2 or less (on a scale from 0-9).
-
Technical Rating: 4 or less (on a scale of 0-10).
-
GICS:金融。
-
有選項
-
僅限美國。
-
生命值等級:
-
皮奧特羅斯基 F 分數:2 或以下(以 0-9 爲標準)。
-
技術評級:4 或以下(以 0-10 爲標準)。
Then I did a bit of research on the names that came up, to see if there were any potential bullish indicators on these banks that the screens missed.
然後我對出現的名字做了一些研究,看看屏幕上是否有任何潛在的看漲指標。
An Ill-Fated Insider Purchase
一次命運不佳的內幕收購
There was a $25k insider purchase on one of these banks in March, but:
三月份,其中一家銀行進行了2.5萬美元的內幕收購,但是:
-
The shares are down ~28% since then.
-
And the bank missed its earnings in April.
-
自那時以來,該股下跌了約28%。
-
而且該銀行未能在4月份實現收益。
So this insider doesn't appear to know much. And we've got two banks that look like real dogs for us to bet against.
因此,這位內部人士似乎知之甚少。而且我們有兩家看起來像真狗的銀行可供我們下注。
Read the rest here.
在這裏閱讀其餘內容。
If you want to stay in touch.
如果你想保持聯繫。
You can scan for optimal hedges for individual securities, find our current top ten names, and create hedged portfolios on our website. You can also follow Portfolio Armor on X here, or become a free subscriber to our trading Substack using the link below (we're using that for our occasional emails now).
您可以掃描個別證券的最佳套期保值,找到我們目前排名前十的股票,並在我們的網站上創建對沖投資組合。你也可以在此處的X上關注Portfolio Armor,或者使用下面的鏈接成爲我們的交易Substack的免費訂閱者(我們現在偶爾會用它來發送電子郵件)。
This article is from an unpaid external contributor. It does not represent Benzinga's reporting and has not been edited for content or accuracy.
本文來自一位未付費的外部撰稿人。它不代表 Benzinga 的舉報,也未就內容或準確性進行過編輯。