ReportWire

Tag: credit

  • ‘San Francisco is not dead’: Not everyone is shunning the city’s reeling office market

    ‘San Francisco is not dead’: Not everyone is shunning the city’s reeling office market

    [ad_1]

    Barry DiRaimondo, chief of SteelWave, a West Coast property developer that in the past half-century has partnering with many of the biggest names in commercial real estate, is looking for diamonds in the rough, distressed office properties located in the American city that many have given up on.

    Others may be shunning San Francisco while it’s down on its luck, but DiRaimondo sees better days ahead, despite the city’s threat of a growing deficit, its fentanyl crisis, homelessness and a reluctant return of office workers to its financial core.

    “Not much is coming up right now,” DiRaimondo said of buying opportunities, while speaking from his office in the heart of San Francisco’s financial district. But he was eager to point out several nearby buildings that could be candidates to buy, at the right price.

    “I think over the next 12 to 18 months, you’re going to see a tsunami,” of distressed office properties, DiRaimondo said.

    Like in many big cities, a wave of office buildings bought at peak prices before the pandemic now have a pile of debt coming due, at much higher rates. But San Francisco’s financial core only recently has begun to show flickers of hope in its weak recovery post-COVID.

    “Whether it’s San Francisco, Oakland or anywhere here, and your debt is rolling, you’re having a conversation with your lender,” DiRaimondo said. “There’s either a restructuring going on or a foreclosure going on.”

    A number of high-profile property owners this year surrendered local properties to lenders, including Westfield’s namesake shopping center downtown and a string of well-known hotels, a blow to the city’s comeback efforts.

    Still, DiRaimondo expects the bulk of property ownership transfers in this boom-and-bust cycle to take place quietly, behind the scenes, often through a building’s debt changing hands. It’s a familiar playbook for veteran real-estate developers like SteelWave and its partners, especially when San Francisco office property values tumble and new loans remains expensive and hard to come by.

    “Office is a nasty word, right now. Especially tech office,” he said. “We are doing something that’s a bit different.”

    Booms, busts

    San Francisco’s history as a boom-and-bust town perhaps is best suited for real-estate developers able to take a bunch of lemons and make lemonade.

    That has been SteelWave’s signature move in the notoriously rough-and-tumble commercial real-estate industry, through its ups and downs. It has bought over $17.5 billion in properties and developments in the past five decades, first under the Legacy Partners Commercial brand before it was renamed in 2015.

    It has partnered with some of the biggest names in commercial real estate, including with Angelo Gordon & Co. in 2021 on two Silicon Valley office buildings, but also distressed debt titans that include Rialto Capital, and with Chenco, one of the largest Chinese-owned U.S. real-estate investment firms.

    Its stronghold is the Bay Area and DiRaimondo is now looking to raise a $500 million fund to buy distressed buildings, including in downtown San Francisco, a place major Wall Street lenders have been backing away from for months.

    “It’s hard to raise equity to buy this stuff right now,” he said, but argues his strategy, which includes expanding its reach to potential investors in the U.A.E., Israel and parts of Europe, will pan out.

    SteelWave’s model of buying a property includes a final tally of costs often three to four times the initial purchase price, due to extensive overhauls.

    “Typically, what we do is buy something, tear it apart, put it back together, lease it, sell it,” DiRaimondo said.

    It’s niche in the distressed world that’s already produced overhauls of buildings from Seattle to Colorado to Los Angeles, places the tech industry wants to lease.

    In the southern California town of Costa Mesa, that meant partnering with Invesco to turn an old newsroom and printing press for the Los Angeles Times into a creative work campus. An opinion piece in 2022 from the newspaper described the revamp as turning, “the glum newspaper architecture into something inviting.”

    Forget being a ‘rent bandit’

    “In New York, people rushed back and refilled the apartments, streets, and subways. Restaurants and stores flooded with customers again,” a team from Moody’s analytics wrote in a recent “tale of two cities” report. “San Francisco, on the other end, battled safety concerns, homelessness, and population exodus which existed before but only became more obvious with barren neighborhoods.”

    SteelWave thinks the old days of landlords raking in top-dollar commercial rents in San Francisco, while adding little back to office buildings, are a thing of the past.

    “You have to have owners who want to create cool work environments to attract people back into the city,” DiRaimondo said of downtown San Francisco’s long slog back from the brink.

    That means buying properties at low prices, but also risking putting money down for major improvements. He isn’t a distressed investors looking to become a “rent bandit,” he says, because the strategy will fail to get quality tenants.

    Like the Moody’s team, DiRaimondo thinks San Francisco eventually will bounce back, but he thinks not before reality hits older office properties.

    Take a “commodity” building downtown, often older and midblock with generic features, that previously might have been worth $750 to $800 a square foot. It now looks worth less than $300 a square foot, he said.

    The early stages of fire-sales have begun already, with the 22-story tower at 350 California, nearby to DiRaimondo’s office, reportedly fetching $200 to $225 a square foot.

    “San Francisco is not dead,” DiRaimondo said. “I think there are opportunities in San Francisco.”

    See: San Francisco’s office market erases all gains since 2017 as prices sag nationally

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ‘San Francisco is not dead’: Not everyone is shunning the city’s reeling office market

    ‘San Francisco is not dead’: Not everyone is shunning the city’s reeling office market

    [ad_1]

    Barry DiRaimondo, chief of SteelWave, a West Coast property developer that in the past half-century has partnering with many of the biggest names in commercial real estate, is looking for diamonds in the rough, distressed office properties located in the American city that many have given up on.

    Others may be shunning San Francisco while it’s down on its luck, but DiRaimondo sees better days ahead, despite the city’s threat of a growing deficit, its fentanyl crisis, homelessness and a reluctant return of office workers to its financial core.

    “Not much is coming up right now,” DiRaimondo said of buying opportunities, while speaking from his office in the heart of San Francisco’s financial district. But he was eager to point out several nearby buildings that could be candidates to buy, at the right price.

    “I think over the next 12 to 18 months, you’re going to see a tsunami,” of distressed office properties, DiRaimondo said.

    Like in many big cities, a wave of office buildings bought at peak prices before the pandemic now have a pile of debt coming due, at much higher rates. But San Francisco’s financial core only recently has begun to show flickers of hope in its weak recovery post-COVID.

    “Whether it’s San Francisco, Oakland or anywhere here, and your debt is rolling, you’re having a conversation with your lender,” DiRaimondo said. “There’s either a restructuring going on or a foreclosure going on.”

    A number of high-profile property owners this year surrendered local properties to lenders, including Westfield’s namesake shopping center downtown and a string of well-known hotels, a blow to the city’s comeback efforts.

    Still, DiRaimondo expects the bulk of property ownership transfers in this boom-and-bust cycle to take place quietly, behind the scenes, often through a building’s debt changing hands. It’s a familiar playbook for veteran real-estate developers like SteelWave and its partners, especially when San Francisco office property values tumble and new loans remains expensive and hard to come by.

    “Office is a nasty word, right now. Especially tech office,” he said. “We are doing something that’s a bit different.”

    Booms, busts

    San Francisco’s history as a boom-and-bust town perhaps is best suited for real-estate developers able to take a bunch of lemons and make lemonade.

    That has been SteelWave’s signature move in the notoriously rough-and-tumble commercial real-estate industry, through its ups and downs. It has bought over $17.5 billion in properties and developments in the past five decades, first under the Legacy Partners Commercial brand before it was renamed in 2015.

    It has partnered with some of the biggest names in commercial real estate, including with Angelo Gordon & Co. in 2021 on two Silicon Valley office buildings, but also distressed debt titans that include Rialto Capital, and with Chenco, one of the largest Chinese-owned U.S. real-estate investment firms.

    Its stronghold is the Bay Area and DiRaimondo is now looking to raise a $500 million fund to buy distressed buildings, including in downtown San Francisco, a place major Wall Street lenders have been backing away from for months.

    “It’s hard to raise equity to buy this stuff right now,” he said, but argues his strategy, which includes expanding its reach to potential investors in the U.A.E., Israel and parts of Europe, will pan out.

    SteelWave’s model of buying a property includes a final tally of costs often three to four times the initial purchase price, due to extensive overhauls.

    “Typically, what we do is buy something, tear it apart, put it back together, lease it, sell it,” DiRaimondo said.

    It’s niche in the distressed world that’s already produced overhauls of buildings from Seattle to Colorado to Los Angeles, places the tech industry wants to lease.

    In the southern California town of Costa Mesa, that meant partnering with Invesco to turn an old newsroom and printing press for the Los Angeles Times into a creative work campus. An opinion piece in 2022 from the newspaper described the revamp as turning, “the glum newspaper architecture into something inviting.”

    Forget being a ‘rent bandit’

    “In New York, people rushed back and refilled the apartments, streets, and subways. Restaurants and stores flooded with customers again,” a team from Moody’s analytics wrote in a recent “tale of two cities” report. “San Francisco, on the other end, battled safety concerns, homelessness, and population exodus which existed before but only became more obvious with barren neighborhoods.”

    SteelWave thinks the old days of landlords raking in top-dollar commercial rents in San Francisco, while adding little back to office buildings, are a thing of the past.

    “You have to have owners who want to create cool work environments to attract people back into the city,” DiRaimondo said of downtown San Francisco’s long slog back from the brink.

    That means buying properties at low prices, but also risking putting money down for major improvements. He isn’t a distressed investors looking to become a “rent bandit,” he says, because the strategy will fail to get quality tenants.

    Like the Moody’s team, DiRaimondo thinks San Francisco eventually will bounce back, but he thinks not before reality hits older office properties.

    Take a “commodity” building downtown, often older and midblock with generic features, that previously might have been worth $750 to $800 a square foot. It now looks worth less than $300 a square foot, he said.

    The early stages of fire-sales have begun already, with the 22-story tower at 350 California, nearby to DiRaimondo’s office, reportedly fetching $200 to $225 a square foot.

    “San Francisco is not dead,” DiRaimondo said. “I think there are opportunities in San Francisco.”

    See: San Francisco’s office market erases all gains since 2017 as prices sag nationally

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Hate to spoil the party but there’s a new risk in town — a ‘no landing’ economy

    Hate to spoil the party but there’s a new risk in town — a ‘no landing’ economy

    [ad_1]

    For the last 18 months, all you’ve heard from the markets is that the U.S. economy is three months away from a recession. Now, the popular analysis is that that inflation is on a smooth glidepath down and the economy will never have a downturn again.

    Worries about a recession have evaporated, and all the talk is about a “soft landing,” with the Federal Reserve not having to hike interest rates more than once more, at most.

    But behind the scenes, in some economic circles, there is growing concern about another risk for the economy, dubbed a “no landing” scenario.

    What does “no landing” mean? Essentially it’s marked by economic growth that’s too strong to allow inflation to fall all the way to 2%, where the Federal Reserve aims for it to be, and therefore an economy that will need more Fed rate hikes, according to Chris Low, chief economist at FHN Financial.

    So instead of the U.S. central bank starting to cut rates early next year, there may be more rate hikes in store.

    “There is still considerable work to do before the inflation beast is fully tamed,” Low said.

    Former Fed Vice Chair Richard Clarida described the risk in crystal-clear terms. “If the Fed finds itself  in March 2024 with an unemployment rate of 4% and an inflation rate of 4% with some of that temporary good news behind them, they are in a very tough spot,” Clarida said in a recent interview with Bloomberg News.

    “It is a risk. It is not the base case. But if I was still there [at the Fed], I would be assessing it,” he added.

    So why does this matter? Why would the Fed be in such a tough spot? Two words: presidential election.

    A Fed that is dedicated to bringing inflation down might have to slam the brakes on the economy forcefully to get the job done. That gets tough during an election year, especially one that already seems poised to be filled with acrimony.

    “The Fed does not play politics with monetary policy. The FOMC will do what is right for the economy, election year or not. Nevertheless, FOMC participants are already sensitive to triggering a recession. Doing it in an overt way when Congress, a third of the Senate, and the White House are up for grabs would be reckless,” Low said.

    Andrew Levin, professor of economics at Dartmouth College and a former top Fed staffer, said “raising interest rates sharply in the midst of an election cycle could be a delicate matter. Even the vaunted inflation fighter, Paul Volcker [the Fed’s chairman from 1979 to 1987], decided to ease off the brakes midway through the 1980 presidential campaign.”

    Ray Fair, a Yale economics professor, thinks that, whether or not the Fed successfully lowers consumer-price inflation to the vicinity of 2% will be what really matters for the 2024 presidential election. If inflation does not go gently and the Fed is still fighting next year, it would likely be negative for President Joe Biden and the Democratic Party, he said.

    See: Inflation could rebound later this year. And that might be a good thing.

    To avoid hiking rates next year, the Fed, in Low’s view, will raise interest rates to 6% by the end of this year. That is an out-of-consensus call. Financial markets think the Fed is done hiking with its benchmark policy interest rate in a range of 5.25% to 5.5%.

    Many economist and the financial markets are talking more about prospective Fed rate cuts in early 2024 than any more hikes.

    Asked during a recent radio interview if he thought a “no landing” scenario was taking shape, Philadelphia Fed President Patrick Harker replied: “I don’t think so.”

    Harker said the economy was likely on track to return to the low-interest-rate and low-inflation environment of 2012-19.

    “I think about this a lot, and I asked myself what’s different fundamentally about the U.S. economy now then the way it was before the pandemic,” Harker said. He concluded that there wasn’t much difference.

    The big trend Harker mentioned was demographics, with baby boomers still moving in large numbers into retirement. “I don’t think we have to stay in a high-inflation regime. I think we can get back to where we were,” he said.

    Steve Blitz, chief U.S. economist at research firm GlobalData.TSLombard, said he puts the probability of a “no landing” scenario at about 35%.

    Blitz added it was a common mistake for economists, policy makers, traders and journalists “to presume that the expansion to come is going to look like the expansion that was.”

    “At least in the United States, that was never the case,” he added.

    Blitz said that if the U.S. economy were growing at a rate below 2% with an inflation rate higher than 3%, the Fed would have to raise the policy rate to about 6.5%. But if the economy is humming along with 3% growth and inflation over 3%, that would be a trickier spot. “Does the Fed really want to slow that down?” he asked.

    See: The U.S. economy is aiming for a three-peat: 2% GDP growth

    The range of possible outcomes for the economy remains wide. Some economists still believe that a recession early next is the most likely outcome.

    Other economists, like Michelle Meyer, chief U.S. economist at Mastercard, think the economy will continue to grow, with inflation coming down. Meyer described that outcome as “a soft landing with bumps.”

    Stephen Stanley, chief economist at Santander U.S., said he thinks the U.S. economy will “muddle through” next year with subpar growth in the range of 1% for several quarters and inflation slowing gradually.

    “Obviously, that optimism melts away if we’re back to readings of 0.4% and 0.5% on core CPI in three months or six months,” Stanley said.

    Economic calendar: See what’s on the U.S. economic-data docket in the coming week

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Founder of failed crypto exchange FTX, Bankman-Fried, jailed in New York

    Founder of failed crypto exchange FTX, Bankman-Fried, jailed in New York

    [ad_1]

    FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried was sent to jail Friday to await trial after a bail hearing for the fallen cryptocurrency wiz left a judge convinced that he had repeatedly tried to influence witnesses against him.

    U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan ordered Bankman-Fried’s bail revoked after prosecutors said he’d tried to harass a key witness in his fraud case last month when he showed a journalist her private writings and in January when he reached out to the general counsel for FTX with an encrypted communication.

    His lawyers insisted he shouldn’t be jailed for trying to protect his reputation against a barrage of unfavorable news stories.

    Kaplan said he had concluded there was probable cause to believe Bankman-Fried had tried to “tamper with witnesses at least twice” since his December arrest.

    A defense lawyer said an appeal of the incarceration order would be filed and asked for an immediate stay of the order.

    The 31-year-old has been under house arrest at his parents’ home in Palo Alto, California, since his December extradition from the Bahamas on charges that he defrauded investors in his businesses and illegally diverted millions of dollars’ worth of cryptocurrency from customers using his FTX exchange.

    Bankman-Fried’s $250 million bail package severely restricts his internet and phone usage.

    Two weeks ago, prosecutors surprised Bankman-Fried’s attorneys by demanding his incarceration, saying he violated those rules by giving The New York Times the private writings of Caroline Ellison, his former girlfriend and the ex-CEO of Alameda Research, a cryptocurrency trading hedge fund that was one of his businesses.

    Prosecutors maintained he was trying to sully her reputation and influence prospective jurors who might be summoned for his October trial.

    Ellison pleaded guilty in December to criminal charges carrying a potential penalty of 110 years in prison. She has agreed to testify against Bankman-Fried as part of a deal that could lead to a more lenient sentence.

    Bankman-Fried’s lawyers argued he probably failed in a quest to defend his reputation because the article cast Ellison in a sympathetic light. They also said prosecutors exaggerated the role Bankman-Fried had in the article.

    They said prosecutors were trying to get their client locked up by offering evidence consisting of “innuendo, speculation, and scant facts.”

    Since prosecutors made their detention request, Kaplan has imposed a gag order barring public comments by people participating in the trial, including Bankman-Fried.

    David McCraw, a lawyer for the Times, had written to the judge, noting the First Amendment implications of any blanket gag order, as well as public interest in Ellison and her cryptocurrency trading firm.

    Ellison confessed to a central role in a scheme defrauding investors of billions of dollars that went undetected, McGraw said.

    “It is not surprising that the public wants to know more about who she is and what she did and that news organizations would seek to provide to the public timely, pertinent, and fairly reported information about her, as The Times did in its story,” McGraw said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • $1.8 million to retire? Are you kidding?

    $1.8 million to retire? Are you kidding?

    [ad_1]

    This time it’s in the latest Charles Schwab Retirement Survey. Among 1,000 people surveyed, the average respondent figured he or she needed to save $1.8 million to retire. (That figure is up from $1.7 million in the same survey a year earlier.)

    Touchingly, 86% also told Schwab they were either “somewhat” or “very” likely to achieve their goals.

    Er, no.

    If the numbers show anything, it’s that most people don’t understand math, don’t understand finance and are wildly out of touch with reality.

    Some simple calculations will show that these figures are all wrong.

    First, let’s start with the bad news. There is no way 86% of people should be “very” or “somewhat” confident that they are going to hit that $1.8 million target, or anything like it. Let alone that 37% think they are “very” likely to hit it.

    Median retirement-account balance at the moment? Try $27,000 and change, says 401(k) giant Vanguard.

    Even that’s overstating the picture. The Federal Reserve’s most recent triennial Survey of Consumer Finances says the median American household has $26,000 in total financial assets, including savings accounts, life insurance, 401(k) plan and the like. Among those aged 45 to 54, the figure is $37,000, and among those 55 to 64 it’s $47,000. How anyone thinks they are getting from there to $1.8 million by retirement age is a mystery. Magic carpets? Magic beans?

    Granted, the survey is from 2019, but the intervening pandemic period won’t have changed the picture that much — in either direction.

    It’s not clear from the survey whether those polled included the value of the equity in their homes. Throw that in, and the median household’s total net worth rises to $122,000. Among those aged 45 to 54 it rises to $169,000, and among those 55 to 64 to $213,000. COVID policies helped drive up average U.S. home prices by about 30%, so those figures will have risen since 2019.

    But again we are not nearing $1.8 million.

    Not even close.

    The good news, though, is that you don’t actually need this amount or anything like it to retire.

    Naturally if someone hasn’t figured life out by the time they retire, and they still think that buying yet more stuff is the route to happiness, no amount is going to be enough.

    How much we’d like and how much we need are very different things.

    A $1.8 million balance would buy a 65-year-old couple an immediate annuity paying a guaranteed lifetime income of $9,500 a month, or just over $110,000 a year.

    The average Social Security benefit on top of that for a retired couple is just under $3,000 a month, or $36,000 a year. So in total you’d be on about $146,000 a year. What are these people planning to do in retirement?

    Even with a 3% annual rise, to account for inflation risk, that annuity will pay out $83,000 a year, and that’s for a couple, not just for one person. The money continues until both of you have gone.

    How much do we really need? Well, while acknowledging that each person and each person’s situation is going to be different, let’s do some simple math.

    Actual seniors are living on median annual incomes of around $45,000 to $50,000, says the Federal Reserve. And most of them say they are either reasonably satisfied with retirement or actually happy. So, at least, they tell Gallup and the Employee Benefit Research Institute.

    Meanwhile, a new survey from Schroders finds that the average person thinks a comfortable retirement can be had on around $5,000 a month, or $60,000 a year.

    The average Social Security benefit for a retired couple is $36,000 a year. To bring that income up to $50,000 you’d need an annuity paying $14,000 a year.

    Current cost in the annuities market: $225,000.

    To bring that up to $60,000 the annuity would cost $385,000.

    For $350,000 you can get an income of $18,000 with a 3% annual increase to deal with inflation.

    For $800,000 you can double your Social Security income, bringing in another $36,000 a year — with a 3% annual increase to deal with inflation.

    The cost of housing is a major component for retirees. No, someone doesn’t have to move to Iowa to be able to retire in comfort. But they can move the dial by cashing in their home in an expensive neighborhood — especially the kind of location they may have moved to for a high-paying job or the best schools — and moving somewhere cheaper. Away from coastal California or the “Acela” corridor in the Northeast, a lot of U.S. homes are really cheap.

    Retirement savings generally are grossly inadequate, and many people face genuine hardship in their senior years. And, of course, pretty much everyone could use more money. On the other hand, you can retire in comfort with a lot less than $1.8 million.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Upstart stock sinks as tough lending landscape drives downbeat earnings outlook

    Upstart stock sinks as tough lending landscape drives downbeat earnings outlook

    [ad_1]

    Upstart Holdings Inc. has struggled to contend with a tougher lending environment, and the company indicated Tuesday that its challenges are expected to continue.

    The financial-technology company, which uses artificial intelligence to inform lending decisions, delivered a lower-than-expected forecast for the current quarter, as Chief Executive David Girouard called out high interest rates and “an environment where banks continue to be super cautious about lending.”

    For the third quarter, Upstart
    UPST,
    -0.42%

    expects $140 million in revenue, while analysts had been anticipating $155 million. The company also models $5 million in adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (Ebitda), while analysts were looking for $9.6 million in adjusted Ebitda.

    Upstart shares tumbled more than 19% in Tuesday’s after-hours action.

    See also: Marqeta scores long-awaited Cash App renewal, and its stock is surging

    Chief Financial Officer Sanjay Datta, meanwhile, explained that the “ongoing supply of loans on offer in the secondary markets by sellers anxious for liquidity contributes to a challenging market dynamic, with loan books being sold at bargain prices and creating no shortage of buying opportunities for selected investors.”

    “Our view is that it will take some time for the market to work its way through this surplus of cheap available yield,” he said. “Despite this, we continue to pursue a number of promising discussions with prospective funding partners, aimed at bringing more committed capital to the platform, and believe that we will be well positioned once the loan market returns to a more traditional state of pricing equilibrium.”

    Though Datta said Upstart moved in a “promising direction this past quarter,” he also acknowledged there’s “much work to be done to restore our business to the scale and growth that we aspire to.”

    Read: Toast’s stock heats up after earnings as company hits a milestone

    The company reported a second-quarter net loss of $28.2 million, or 34 cents a share, compared with a loss of $29.9 million, or 36 cents a share, in the year-earlier period. On an adjusted basis, Upstart earned 6 cents a share, whereas analysts tracked by FactSet were modeling a 7-cent loss per share.

    Revenue fell to $136 million from $228.2 million. The FactSet consensus was for $135.2 million. The company generated $144 million in fee revenue, compared with the $131 million that analysts were expecting.

    Upstart’s lending partners originated 109,447 loans across its platform in the second quarter, totaling $1.2 billion. Conversion on rate requests was 9%, down from 13% in the same period a year prior.

    Though Upstart beat on adjusted earnings, it “signaled that macro pressure is not set to abate in Q3, with credit performance and the funding markets still buffeted by a challenging economic environment,” Barclays analyst Ramsey El-Assal wrote in a note to clients Tuesday. “With a new Q3 guide that came in below Street estimates, we expect shares to be down in tomorrow’s tape.”

    Shares of Upstart have rocketed 291% so far in 2023, through Tuesday’s close, as the S&P 500
    SPX
    has risen 17%.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway swings to Q2 profit, operating earnings up 6%

    Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway swings to Q2 profit, operating earnings up 6%

    [ad_1]

    Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway swung to a profit in the second quarter owed to its investment portfolio and insurance holdings, according to a release out Saturday. 

    The holding company with businesses that range from insurer Geico and railroad BNSF Railway to Dairy Queen restaurants and its own energy division posted net income of $35.9 billion, or $24,775 a class A share equivalent. That compared with a loss of $43.8 billion, or $29,754 a class A share equivalent, a year earlier. 

    Berkshire’s
    BRK.A,
    -1.37%

    BRK.B,
    -1.08%

    after-tax operating earnings, a figure Warren Buffett wants shareholders to and which excludes some investment results, rose 6% to just over $10 billion from $9.3 billion a year earlier. Regulations do require Berkshire to include unrealized gains and losses from its investment portfolio when it reports its net income. 

    Berkshire’s stock repurchases totaled $1.4 billion in the second quarter, compared with $4.4 billion in the first quarter and $1 billion for the year-earlier period. The Q2 repurchases were below an estimate of $2.2 billion from UBS analyst Brian Meredith.

    Reduced buybacks did come alongside appreciation in Berkshire stock, which was up 10% in the second quarter.

    Berkshire ended the second quarter with $147.4 billion in cash and cash equivalents, compared with $105.4 billion in the same period a year ago. 

    Berkshire’s Class A shares have been hovering near all-time highs, up 21% over the past year and bringing the company’s market value to roughly $780 billion. 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • FDA approves first-ever pill for postpartum depression in new mothers

    FDA approves first-ever pill for postpartum depression in new mothers

    [ad_1]

    The Food and Drug Administration late Friday approved the first-ever pill that can be taken at home for postpartum depression.

    The medication, called zuranolone, and jointly developed by pharmaceutical companies Biogen Inc.
    BIIB,
    +0.44%

    and Sage Therapeutics
    SAGE,
    +0.25%
    ,
    is taken daily for two weeks, the FDA said in its release.

    In a pair of clinical trials involving women who experienced severe depression after having a baby, the drug improved symptoms including anxiety, trouble sleeping, loss of pleasure, low energy, guilt or social withdrawal as soon as three days after the first pill.

    “Postpartum depression is a serious and potentially life-threatening condition in which women experience sadness, guilt, worthlessness — even, in severe cases, thoughts of harming themselves or their child,” said Tiffany Farchione, M.D., director of the Division of Psychiatry in the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.

    ”And, because postpartum depression can disrupt the maternal-infant bond, it can also have consequences for the child’s physical and emotional development,” she said.

    Women who are breastfeeding or had mild or moderate depression weren’t included in the trials.

    Until now, the only available option for this condition has been an intravenous injection that the FDA approved in 2019. It requires patients to stay in a hospital for two-and-a-half days.

    Postpartum depression affects one in eight new mothers in the U.S., according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Researchers suggest the actual rate may be higher and that half of such cases go undiagnosed. 

    Research finds that postpartum depression is more intense and lasts longer than the typical worries, sadness or tiredness that many women experience after giving birth. The condition can make it harder for mothers to bond with their babies and may increase the likelihood of developmental delays in infants.

    Drug overdoses and suicides are leading causes of maternal death in the U.S., contributing to nearly one in four pregnancy-related deaths, according to the CDC. 

    Zuranolone stimulates a brain receptor called GABA that slows down the brain and helps control anxiety and stress. The drug, through trials, is thought to calm women suffering from postpartum depression enough to allow them to rest, which also improves symptoms.

    Shares of Biogen are up 23% over the past year, and Sage has lost 14%, while the S&P 500
    SPX
    is up 8% over the same time.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Stocks close lower, S&P and Dow post first weekly loss in 3 weeks after historic U.S. downgrade

    Stocks close lower, S&P and Dow post first weekly loss in 3 weeks after historic U.S. downgrade

    [ad_1]

    US. stocks closed lower Friday, capping off a volatile week that finished with losses after Fitch took away its top AAA ratings for the U.S. and government bond yields embarked on a wild ride. The Dow Jones Industrial Average
    DJIA,
    -0.43%

    fell about 150 points, or 0.4% on Friday, ending near 35,065, according to preliminary FactSet data. The S&P 500 index
    SPX,
    -0.53%

    shed 0.5% and the Nasdaq Composite Index closed 0.4% lower. For the week, the Dow posted a 1.1% decline, the S&P 500 a 2.3% drop and the Nasdaq shed 2.9% since Monday, according to FactSet. Investors were focused on July jobs data released on Friday for clues to the health of the economy and potential next moves by the Federal Reserve on rates. The 10-year Treasury yield
    TMUBMUSD10Y,
    4.045%

    swung almost 13 basis points lower on Friday to 4.06%, after briefly climbing to about 4.2% earlier in the week, according to FactSet data.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Shopify makes progress on free cash flow, but stock moves lower after earnings

    Shopify makes progress on free cash flow, but stock moves lower after earnings

    [ad_1]

    Shopify Inc. easily topped adjusted profit expectations for its latest quarter, though shares of the e-commerce marketplace were headed lower in Wednesday’s after-hours action.

    The e-commerce company reported a comprehensive loss of $1.30 billion, or $1.02 a share, whereas it logged a loss of $1.21 billion, or 95 cents a share, in the year-earlier period.

    On an adjusted basis, Shopify
    SHOP,
    -7.44%

    earned 14 cents a share, whereas analysts tracked by FactSet were anticipating 6 cents a share.

    Don’t miss: Mastercard earnings bring latest signal of healthy spending

    Revenue jumped to $1.69 billion from $1.30 billion a year prior, while the FactSet consensus was for $1.63 billion.

    Gross merchandise volume, or the dollar value of orders facilitated through Shopify’s platform, came in at $53.5 billion. Analysts had been modeling $55.0 billion. The company also posted $31.7 billion in gross payments volume.

    See also: Apple appears to be making rapid inroads in buy-now-pay-later

    For the third quarter, Shopify anticipates a revenue growth percentage in the low-20s on a year-over-year basis. The company also expects free cash flow in the third quarter to exceed the first-half total.

    Shopify generated $97 million in free cash flow during the second quarter, beating the $27 million FactSet consensus and bringing its first-half haul to $183 million. Analysts were expecting $96 million in free cash flow for the third quarter.

    “We’re not just shipping products faster, but we are also expanding our global merchant base, all while improving our ability to generate greater free cash flow,” President Harley Finkelstein said in a release.

    More from MarketWatch: PayPal’s stock falls as earnings beat, but a margin metric misses

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • PayPal’s stock falls as earnings beat, but a margin metric misses

    PayPal’s stock falls as earnings beat, but a margin metric misses

    [ad_1]

    PayPal Holdings Inc. edged above expectations with its quarterly revenue and earnings outlook Wednesday, though the company fell short of a margin metric and disappointed Wall Street with its take rate.

    Shares of PayPal
    PYPL,
    -3.08%

    fell 7% in after-hours trading after the payment-technology company reported an adjusted operating margin of 21.4% for the second quarter, below the 22% outlook that the company had given previously.

    In its investor deck, the company attributed the shortfall to its credit portfolio, where PayPal generated less revenue than it had anticipated and increased its loss provisions.

    “There’s no other items that really contributed to that miss,” Acting Chief Financial Officer Gabrielle Rabinovitch said on the earnings call, noting that PayPal specifically saw pressure related to business loans.

    Don’t miss: Mastercard earnings bring latest signal of healthy spending

    Analysts also flagged concerns about PayPal’s transaction take rate, which came in at 1.74%, while consensus expectations were for about 1.9%.

    PayPal’s revenue for the second quarter increased to $7.29 billion from $6.81 billion, whereas analysts were modeling $7.27 billion. But Wolfe Research analyst Darrin Peller noted that while revenue was up 7%, gross profit increased only 1%.

    “We believe investor focus will remain on gross-profit growth dynamics given the mismatch [between] revenue and gross-profit growth,” he wrote in a note to clients.

    Rabinovitch said on the earnings call that PayPal expects continued pressure on transaction-margin performance in the third quarter before conditions improve in the fourth quarter. Over the long haul, she anticipates that PayPal’s transaction margins “will certainly be benefited” by factors such as accelerations in branded checkout and e-commerce growth, improved cross-border trends, and new value-added services.

    The payments company reported second-quarter net income of $1.03 billion, or 92 cents a share, whereas it recorded a net loss of $341 million, or 29 cents a share, in the year-earlier period. On an adjusted basis, PayPal earned $1.16 a share, up from 93 cents a share a year prior, while the FactSet consensus was for $1.15 a share.

    PayPal logged $376.5 billion in total payment volume for the period, while analysts had been expecting $368.9 billion.

    Chief Executive Dan Schulman told MarketWatch that PayPal was seeing encouraging spending trends throughout the business and in the industry, as e-commerce growth picks up, discretionary purchasing improves and consumers start to rebalance their preferences once again after dramatically weighting their dollars more toward travel and services when the economy initially reopened.

    A better balance of spending on goods versus services helps drives e-commerce growth, and “any uptick in e-commerce is going to accelerate our growth as well,” Schulman said.

    Amid concerns from some corners of Wall Street about Apple Pay’s advancement, Schulman was confident in the state of PayPal’s branded checkout business.

    “In our view we would expect that our branded checkout would be at or above the growth of e-commerce levels going forward,” he said.

    See also: Apple appears to be making rapid inroads in buy-now-pay-later

    PayPal still expects to drive at least 100 basis points of operating-margin expansion for the full year, and it also continues to anticipate about $4.95 in adjusted EPS for 2023. PayPal expects second-half revenue to at least match its first-quarter revenue total.

    For the third quarter, PayPal expects $1.22 to $1.24 in adjusted earnings per share, along with revenue of about $7.4 billion. The FactSet consensus was for $1.21 in adjusted EPS and $7.3 billion in revenue.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • S&P 500 books biggest drop since April after U.S. loses AAA ratings for a second time

    S&P 500 books biggest drop since April after U.S. loses AAA ratings for a second time

    [ad_1]

    Stocks fell on Wednesday, a day after Fitch Ratings lowered its U.S. debt ratings to AA+ from the top AAA category, pointing to its growing debt burden and “erosion of governance” over the past two decades. The S&P 500
    SPX,
    -1.38%

    fell about 63 points, or 1.4%, ending near 4,513, booking its biggest daily percentage decline since April 25, according to preliminary Dow Jones Market Data. The Dow Jones Industrial Average
    DJIA,
    -0.98%

    shed about 1%, while the Nasdaq Composite Index
    COMP,
    -2.17%

    closed 2.2% lower. Stocks already had been taking a breather from their march toward record levels when Fitch on Tuesday evening made good on a threat to downgrade its U.S. debt rating a notch to AA+. Longer-dated Treasury yields rose Wednesday, with the 10-year Treasury rate
    TMUBMUSD10Y,
    4.105%

    touching 4.07%, according to FactSet. Treasurys and other haven assets are viewed as likely to benefit from a flight to safety in a scenario where investors get more jittery about the U.S. economic outlook.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Wells Fargo, Bank of America to pay FDIC up to $3.7 billion combined for bank failure special assessment

    Wells Fargo, Bank of America to pay FDIC up to $3.7 billion combined for bank failure special assessment

    [ad_1]

    Wells Fargo & Co.
    WFC,
    -1.56%

    said it will pay up to $1.8 billion to the Federal Deposit Insurance Co.’s deposit insurance fund as part of the government’s special assessment following the regional-bank crisis earlier this year. Wells Fargo said it will expense the entire amount upon the FDIC’s finalization of the rule. “The proposed rule may be changed prior to finalization and any changes may affect the timing or amount of the special assessment,” Wells Fargo said in a filing late Tuesday. Bank of America Corp.
    BAC,
    -1.49%

    estimated its cost for the same effort would be $1.9 billion, according to a Monday filing.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fitch slashes U.S. credit ratings to AA+ from AAA, points to ‘erosion’ of governance

    Fitch slashes U.S. credit ratings to AA+ from AAA, points to ‘erosion’ of governance

    [ad_1]

    Fitch Ratings cut its top U.S. credit rating to AA+ from AAA on Tuesday, pointing to “erosion” of governance and the nation’s expected fiscal deterioration over the next three years.

    Fitch said eroding governance in the U.S. over the past two decades was among the factors for its downgrade, in a Tuesday evening statement. It also said it expected the general government deficit to climb to 6.3% of gross domestic product in 2023, from 3.7% in 2022, on weaker federal revenues, new spending initiatives and a higher interest burden.

    “In Fitch’s view, there has been a steady deterioration in standards of governance over the last 20 years, including on fiscal and debt matters, notwithstanding the June bipartisan agreement to suspend the debt limit until January 2025,” Fitch said.

    “The repeated debt-limit political standoffs and last-minute resolutions have eroded confidence in fiscal management. In addition, the government lacks a medium-term fiscal framework, unlike most peers, and has a complex budgeting process.”

    Fitch warned in May that it might cut the U.S.’s AAA ratings as the latest debt-ceiling fight was dragging on for months without a resolution.

    Borrowing costs have climbed as the Treasury Department has unleashed a flood of Treasury issuance since its June debt-ceiling deal to restock it coffers. The 1-month Treasury yield was at 5.36% on Tuesday, while auctions of other Treasury bills maturing in one year often kick off yields north of 5%.

    See: ‘Eye-popping’ $1 trillion third-quarter borrowing need from U.S. Treasury raises risk of buyers’ fatigue

    Stocks ended trade Tuesday nearing record levels, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average
    DJIA,
    +0.20%

    and S&P 500 index
    SPX,
    -0.27%

    both less than 5% off their highest closing levels from early 2022.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Puzzled by the stock-market surge? Overshoots are the new normal, Bank of America strategist says

    Puzzled by the stock-market surge? Overshoots are the new normal, Bank of America strategist says

    [ad_1]

    Stocks have surged this year without really anything going right, besides the rolling out of error-prone artificial intellligence chatbots. Interest rates have surged to a 22-year high, earnings are down from last year, and pandemic-era savings are being drawn down if not entirely exhausted.

    Read more: Those extra pandemic savings are now wiped out, Fed study finds.

    Strategists at Bank of America led by Michael Hartnett have an interesting theory.

    “Asset price overshoots [are] the new normal,” they say.

    Consider:

    • Oil
      CL00,
      -0.37%

      went from -$37 in April 2020 to $123 in March 2022, then down to $67 the following 12 months.

    • Bitcoin
      BTCUSD,
      +0.32%

      went from $5,000 in January 2020 to $68,000 in November 2021, down to $16,000 a year later, and up to $29,000 now.

    • The S&P 500 went from 3300 to 2200 to 4800 to 3500 to 4600 thus far in 2020s.

    “AI is simply the new overshoot,” they say.

    The S&P 500
    SPX,
    +0.67%

    has gained 18% this year as the Nasdaq Composite
    COMP,
    +1.53%

    has rallied by 34%.

    Hartnett and team noted that real retail sales — that is, adjusted for inflation — fell at a 1.6% year-over-year clip, which has coincided with recessions since 1967. Real retail sales falls in excess of 3% are associated with hard recessions.

    Historically, a 2-3 point rise in the savings rate also is recessionary, and already it’s risen from 3% to 4.6%. The unemployment rate so far hasn’t risen, though a 0.5 point to 1 point rise in the jobless rate also is typically recessionary.

    “It would be so ‘2020s’ for the economy to hit a brick wall just as everyone punts ‘soft landing’ into 2024,” they say.

    They like emerging market/commodities as summer upside plays and credit and tech as autumn downside plays.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Why U.S. stocks and bonds stumbled on talk of a Bank of Japan policy tweak

    Why U.S. stocks and bonds stumbled on talk of a Bank of Japan policy tweak

    [ad_1]

    Worries about a possible policy tweak by the Bank of Japan threw a wet blanket on a stretched U.S. stock-market rally Thursday, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average snapping its longest winning streak since 1987 after the 10-year Treasury yield surged back above the 4% level.

    The Japanese yen also strengthened after a news report said policy makers on Friday would discuss a possible tweak to the Bank of Japan’s so-called yield-curve control policy that would loosen the cap on long-dated government bond yields.

    Nikkei, without citing sources, reported that BOJ officials would talk about the matter at Friday’s policy meeting and that the potential change would allow the yield on the 10-year Japanese government bond
    TMBMKJP-10Y,
    0.440%

    to trade above its cap of 0.5% “to some degree.”

    ‘Ultimate fear’

    Why is that a negative for U.S. Treasurys and, in turn, U.S. stocks?

    The “ultimate fear” is that Japanese investors, who have vast holdings of U.S. fixed income, including Treasury notes and other securities, “begin to see a higher level of yields in their own backyard,” Torsten Slok, chief economist at Apollo Global Management, told MarketWatch in a phone interview. That could prompt heavy liquidation of those U.S. positions as investors repatriate holdings to reinvest the proceeds at home.

    That dynamic explains the knee-jerk reaction that saw the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield
    TMUBMUSD10Y,
    4.004%

    surge more than 16 basis points to end above 4%, he said. Yields rise as debt prices fall.

    The surge in yields, in turn, saw stocks give up early gains, with U.S. indexes ending lower across the board.

    What is yield curve control?

    The Bank of Japan began implementing yield curve control, or YCC, in 2016, a policy that aims to keep government bond yields low while ensuring an upward-sloping yield curve. Under YCC, the BOJ buys whatever amount of JGBs is necessary to ensure the 10-year yield remains below 0.5%.

    Nikkei said a possible tweak would allow gradual increases in the yield above 0.5%, but would clamp down on any sudden spikes, allowing the BOJ to rein in fluctuations driven by speculators.

    Global market participants are sensitive to changes in YCC. The BOJ sent shock waves through markets in December when it lifted the cap from 0.25% to 0.5%. Investors were rattled by the prospect of the Bank of Japan giving up its role as the remaining low-rate anchor among major central banks.

    BOJ Gov. Kazuo Ueda in May said the bank would start shrinking its balance sheet and end its yield-curve control policy if a 2% inflation looks achievable and sustainable after many years of undershooting.

    Yen rallies

    The yield on the 10-year JGB has traded above 0.4%, but remained below the 0.5% cap. Continued interest rate rises by the Federal Reserve and other major central banks in the past year have raised worries that the 10-year JGB yield could test the limit, Nikkei reported. Those rate hikes, meanwhile, have added pressure to the yen, whose weakness is seen contributing to inflation pressures.

    The yen
    USDJPY,
    -0.02%

    strengthened following the report. The U.S. dollar was off 0.5% versus the currency, fetching 139.48 yen.

    The Dow Jones Industrial Average
    DJIA,
    -0.67%

    ended the day down nearly 240 points, or 0.7%, snapping a 13-day winning streak, while the S&P 500
    SPX,
    -0.64%

    declined 0.6% and the Nasdaq Composite
    COMP,
    -0.55%

    lost 0.5%.

    Japanese stocks have solidly outpaced strong gains for U.S. equities in 2023, with the Nikkei 225
    NIK,
    +0.68%

    up 26% so far this year versus an 18.7% rise for the S&P 500.

    See: Japan’s stock market is roaring 25% higher. These 4 things could keep the rally going.

    What’s next

    Investors are waiting to see what the Bank of Japan actually has to say.

    While the Nikkei report helped “exaggerate” a selloff in Treasurys, the market may be inoculated against bigger swings after the BOJ’s December adjustment to the rate band, said Ian Lyngen and Benjamin Jeffery, rates strategists at BMO Capital Markets, in a note.

    The analysts said they expect that “the magnitude of the follow through repricing in U.S. rates will be comparatively more contained than would otherwise be expected.”

    More recently, the weak yen has raised the cost of hedging long Treasury positions for Japanese investors. So a stronger yen resulting from a shift toward tighter policy would help make hedging costs for owning Treasurys less onerous for Japanese investors as well, Lyngen and Jeffery wrote, “which over the longer term may begin to make Treasurys more attractive to Japanese buyers and add to the list of sources for duration demand.”

    That could make U.S. debt more attractive to new Japanese buyers, Slok agreed.

    But that’s oveshadowed by the near-term worry, Slok said, that existing Japanese investors will be inclined to sell Treasurys. Flow data will be very much in focus if the Bank of Japan follows through on the apparent trial balloon floated in the Nikkei report.

    Investors will be watching, he said, to see “if the train is leaving the station.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Former Fed official Clarida backs another interest-rate hike this year

    Former Fed official Clarida backs another interest-rate hike this year

    [ad_1]

    Former Federal Reserve Vice Chair Richard Clarida on Thursday said he thinks another interest-rate hike this year would be a wise move by the U.S. central bank.

    In an interview on Bloomberg, Clarida said the biggest risk for the Fed is to declare “mission accomplished” too early and having to restart rate hikes next year.

    “So if I were there, it would skew me to getting in that additional hike this year, and I think some members of the Fed will see it that way,” Clarida said.

    Fed Chair Jerome Powell said Wednesday that the Fed will decide what to do about interest rates on a “meeting-by-meeting” basis.

    Read: Fed no longer foresees a U.S. recession, highlights from Powell presser

    The Fed is forecasting that the unemployment rate will rise to 4.5% by the end of 2024 from 3.6% in June.

    That is still a forecast for recession because under the Sahm rule, created by former top Fed staffer Claudia Sahm, the start of a recession is signaled when the three-month moving average on the unemployment rate rises by 0.5 percentage points or more from its low during the past year.

    But Clarida said the Fed faces an alternative scenario where inflation picks up again early next year after slowing later this year.

    “If the Fed finds itself in March of 2024 with an unemployment rate of 4% and and inflation rate of 4% with some of that temporary good news [on inflation] behind them, they’re in a very tough spot,” he said.

    “I do think that’s a risk. It’s not the base case,” he said.

    The Dow Industrial Average
    DJIA,
    -0.61%

    was trading slightly lower on Thursday after 13 straight sessions in the green.

    The yield on the 10-year Treasury yield
    TMUBMUSD10Y,
    4.016%

    has risen to 3.97%, the highest level in two weeks.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Banc of California is expected to keep leading regional banks higher as PacWest deal ignites sector

    Banc of California is expected to keep leading regional banks higher as PacWest deal ignites sector

    [ad_1]

    Banc of California Inc.’s proposed agreement to acquire PacWest Bancorp. helped send regional-bank stocks considerably higher on Wednesday. But even after a two-day increase of 12% for its shares, the acquiring bank remains the favorite name among analysts covering regional players in the U.S.

    The merger agreement was announced after the market close on Tuesday, but the rumor mill had already sent Banc of California’s
    BANC,
    +0.62%

    stock up by 11% that day. Then on Wednesday, shares of PacWest Bancorp
    PACW,
    +26.92%

    shot up 27% to $9.76, which was above the estimated takeout value of $9.60 a share when the deal was announced. The merger deal, if approved by both banks’ shareholders, will also include a $400 million investment from Warburg Pincus LLC and Centerbridge Partners L.P.

    A screen of regional banks by rating and stock-price target is below.

    Deal coverage:

    With PacWest closing above the initial per-share deal valuation, it is fair to wonder whether or not its shareholders will vote to approve the agreement. In a note to clients on Wednesday, Wedbush analyst David Chiaverini called Banc of California’s offer “fair, but not overwhelmingly attractive,” and wrote that PacWest was “a likely seller before the mini banking crisis occurred in March.”

    While Chiaverini went on to predict the deal’s approval by PacWest’s shareholders, he added that he “wouldn’t be surprised if there were some dissent among a minority of shareholders [which could] possibly open the door to the potential emergence of a third-party bid.”

    More broadly, Odeon Capital analyst Dick Bove wrote to clients on Wednesday that the merger deal, along with increasing involvement of private-equity firms in lending businesses, the expected enhancement of regulatory capital requirements for banks and other factors could lead to more consolidation among smaller banks.

    He went on to write that we might be entering a period for the banking industry similar to the 1990s, “when rules were being changed and acquisitions were rampant,” which “created new investment opportunities.”

    The SPDR S&P Regional Banking exchange-traded fund
    KRE,
    +4.74%

    rose 5% on Wednesday but was still down 17% for 2023, while the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust
    SPY,
    +0.02%

    was up 19%, both excluding dividends.

    KRE holds 139 stocks, with 98 covered by at least five analysts working for brokerage firms polled by FactSet. Out of those 98 banks, 45 have majority “buy” ratings among the analysts. Among those 45, here are the 10 with the most upside potential over the next 12 months, implied by consensus price targets:

    Bank

    Ticker

    City

    Total assets ($mil)

    July 26 price change

    Share buy ratings

    July 26 closing price

    Consensus price target

    Implied 12-month upside potential

    Banc of California Inc.

    BANC,
    +0.62%
    Santa Ana, Calif.

    $9,370

    1%

    71%

    $14.71

    $18.58

    26%

    Enterprise Financial Services Corp.

    EFSC,
    +1.83%
    Clayton, Mo.

    $13,871

    2%

    80%

    $41.75

    $49.25

    18%

    First Merchants Corp.

    FRME,
    +3.52%
    Muncie, Ind.

    $17,968

    4%

    100%

    $32.38

    $37.33

    15%

    Amerant Bancorp Inc. Class A

    AMTB,
    +3.47%
    Coral Gables, Fla.

    $9,520

    3%

    60%

    $20.26

    $23.30

    15%

    Old Second Bancorp Inc.

    OSBC,
    +3.39%
    Aurora, Ill.

    $5,884

    3%

    100%

    $16.15

    $18.50

    15%

    F.N.B. Corp.

    FNB,
    +2.87%
    Pittsburgh

    $44,778

    3%

    75%

    $12.91

    $14.50

    12%

    Columbia Banking System Inc.

    COLB,
    +3.95%
    Tacoma, Wash.

    $53,592

    4%

    55%

    $22.63

    $25.32

    12%

    Wintrust Financial Corp.

    WTFC,
    +3.43%
    Rosemont, Ill.

    $54,286

    3%

    92%

    $86.05

    $95.33

    11%

    Synovus Financial Corp.

    SNV,
    +6.01%
    Columbus, Ga.

    $60,656

    6%

    75%

    $34.06

    $37.73

    11%

    Home BancShares Inc.

    HOMB,
    +4.56%
    Conway, Ark.

    $22,126

    5%

    57%

    $24.09

    $26.67

    11%

    Source: FactSet

    Click on the tickers for more about each bank.

    Click here for Tomi Kilgore’s detailed guide to the wealth of information available for free on the MarketWatch quote page.

    Any stock screen can only be a starting point when considering whether or not to invest. If you see any stocks of interest here, you should do your own research to form your own opinion.

    Don’t miss: How you can profit in the stock market from an incredible financial-services trend over the next 20 years

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • PacWest stock rockets nearly 40% after Banc of California confirms plan to buy troubled bank

    PacWest stock rockets nearly 40% after Banc of California confirms plan to buy troubled bank

    [ad_1]

    PacWest Bancorp’s stock jumped more than 38% in after-hours trading Tuesday after the company said it had agreed to be acquired by Banc of California Inc. in an all-stock merger backed by two private-equity firms. The merger comes as PacWest looks to put a rocky period behind it.

    Under the terms of the merger agreement, PacWest
    PACW,
    -27.04%

    stockholders will receive 0.6569 of a share of Banc of California common stock for each share of PacWest common stock. Based on closing prices on Tuesday, the deal values PacWest at $9.60 a share, a premium over its closing price of $7.67 a share on Tuesday.

    Warburg Pincus and Centerbridge will provide $400 million in equity.

    PacWest stockholders will own 47% of the outstanding shares of the combined company, while the private-equity investors will own 19% and Banc of California shareholders will have 34%.

    PacWest said that it is the company being acquired and that it will change its name to Banc of California. PacWest said it will be the “accounting acquirer,” with fair-value accounting applied to Banc of California’s balance sheet at closing.

    Banc of California CEO Jared Wolff will retain the same role at the combined company.

    The combined company will repay about $13 billion in wholesale borrowings to be funded by the sale of assets, “which are fully marked as a result of the transaction, and excess cash,” the companies said.

    The merged company is currently projecting about $36.1 billion in assets, $25.3 billion in total loans, $30.5 billion in total deposits and more than 70 branches in California.

    John Eggemeyer, the independent lead director at PacWest, will be chair of the board of the combined company following the merger.

    The board of directors of the combined company will consist of 12 directors: eight from the existing Banc of California board, three from the existing PacWest board and one from the pair of private-equity firms led by Warburg Pincus.

    Citing sources close to the deal, the Wall Street Journal had reported earlier that a tie-up was imminent.

    In regular trading Tuesday, PacWest’s stock ended 27% down; trading was halted for volatility following the report of the deal.

    Banc of California’s stock rose 11% but was later halted for news pending as well. The stock rose more than 9% in after-hours trading on Tuesday.

    At last check, PacWest’s market capitalization was about $1.2 billion, while Banc of California’s was about $764 million. Combined, the business would be worth about $2 billion.

    PacWest’s big share-price move on Tuesday marks the latest in a volatile few months for the Beverly Hills, Calif., bank, which was founded in 1999.

    Investors had speculated that the bank could be the next to fail after Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank failed in March and First Republic Bank was taken over by JPMorgan.

    Also on Tuesday, PacWest said it lost $207.4 million, or $1.75 a share, in its second quarter, as it got a hit from items related to loan sales and restructuring of its lending unit Civic. The loss contrasts with earnings of $122 million, or $1.02 a share, in the year-ago period.

    Analysts polled by FactSet expected the bank to report a loss of 58 cents a share in the quarter.

    PacWest disclosed in recent months that it was exploring strategic alternatives while it sold off parts of its business to raise cash to strengthen its balance sheet. It sold a loan portfolio to Ares Management Corp.
    ARES,
    +0.92%

    in a move to generate $2 billion.

    Also read: PacWest sells loan portfolio to Ares Management in deal that generates $2 billion ‘to improve liquidity’

    It also sold a portfolio of loans to Kennedy-Wilson Holdings Inc.
    KW,
    -1.70%
    ,
    which then sold part of the portfolio to Canada’s Fairfax Financial Holdings Ltd.
    FFH,
    +1.07%
    .

    Also read: PacWest sparks regional-bank rally after unveiling plan to sell loans worth $2.6 billion

    In May, PacWest sold its real-estate lending portfolio to Roc360.

    Also in May, PacWest’s stock dropped more than 20% after it said it had lost 9.5% of its deposits amid market volatility.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • F5, Logitech, Cadence Design, GE, GM, Microsoft, Alphabet, and More Stock Market Movers

    F5, Logitech, Cadence Design, GE, GM, Microsoft, Alphabet, and More Stock Market Movers

    [ad_1]


    • Order Reprints

    • Print Article

    [ad_2]

    Source link