For almost 50 years, Plansmith has helped financial institutions become better organizations through improved planning. In that time, we've heard a lot of industry chatter - much of it a load of, dare we say, bologna.
Our budgeting process gives us an idea of where we think we are headed in the next year. Many times, what we think will happen, is not what happens in reality. After all, if we all had a crystal ball at our disposal, you would not be reading this blog right now (I know I would not be writing it!).
True or False
A budget is a once a year process for an institution.
True: A budget is a process typicallydone once a year to establish targets/goals of measure to be used as guidelines throughout the year.
Risk Profile, Strategic Planning, Risk Appetite – all this and more in the Supervisory Insights April 2016 edition and its companion video released in July. Remember when these were all discussed independently? Examining each within the Corporate Governance Program is now the new hot button with regulatory agencies.
In the previous post we explored the concept of funds transfer pricing (FTP), but only on the surface level. Now for the good stuff: how should the FTP rate be assigned? Well, in a number of ways from the simple to the complex. Like a lot of things in life, simple means fast, easy, less data, good enough; whereas complex requires lots of patience and data for a little more accuracy.
"In the 1981 film, "Raiders of the Lost Ark", one particular scene consistently brings the house down: Indiana Jones, having survived an elaborate chase through a casbah, is confronted by a swordsman whipping through a flashy routine with a scimitar. Indy initially squares off against the deadly swordsman bearing only his trademark whip in his hands; then with a look of infinite fatigue and disgust, he casually pulls out his revolver and blows the bad guy away." (Credit for text: Snopes.com)
Yep, the 90s. It was all the rage and I jumped on board like a millennial on the Grateful Dead Fare Thee Well scene – I’m not sure what it’s all about, but I want to say I was there.
“Where is someone that will pay me 1.5X book?; that’s what my Interest Rate Risk model says my bank is worth.” That statement, along with “there is no way this bank could be sold for 1.5X book”, are two comments I’ve heard a few too many times lately from bankers and examiners. While I will let you figure out which group is responsible for each statement, both illustrate a somewhat common misconception that capital values (sometimes called “market value of equity”) from interest rate risk models are meant to reflect actual current and projected institution sales prices.