Unraveling The Regional Banking Crisis Amid Skyrocketing Interest Rates

According to the official rules of Monopoly, the bank can never run out of money.

Obviously, that’s not always the case in the real world. We’ve already seen three regional banks fail in the U.S. so far this year, and we may see more as depositors continue to move cash from smaller institutions to those perceived to be safer.

To make depositors whole, these smaller banks must sell interest rate-sensitive securities at a loss, which cuts further into their bottom line. A March report by Moody’s showed that, compared to banks in the United Kingdom and European Union, U.S. banks are far more exposed to the potential impact of higher interest rates on the valuation of their available-for-sale and held-to-maturity securities. They also keep the lowest percentage of cash balances relative to their assets.

The consequence is that the regional banking crisis is already worse than the global financial crisis—by one metric, anyway. More than half a trillion dollars in assets have been wiped out this year from the failures of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), Signature Bank and First Republic Bank. That significantly exceeds the amount that was disrupted in 2008, when 25 U.S. banks went under.

And we may be headed for more pain, as indicated by the whipsaw volatility of banking stocks. The KBW Regional Banking Index has lost nearly a third of its value year-to-date, with Los Angeles-based PacWest Bancorp leading the rout with a decline of 75%.

Speaking to Bloomberg this week, former Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas President Robert Kaplan said that the “banking situation may well be more serious than we currently understand.” He added that he supported a “hawkish pause” in interest rate hikes—which, alas, didn’t happen. In a unanimous vote, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) agreed to raise the federal funds rate to a target range of 5.00% – 5.25%. That’s the highest range since 2007, shortly before the financial crisis.