@steve_hanke: the US bond rout has pushed rates up and damaged bank balance sheets; US banks face $326.7 billion of unrealized losses, up for 2 straight quarters.
See original
The US bond market rout has sent bond prices down, interest rates up, and damaged bank balance sheets big time.
https://x.com/Barchart/status/2110542951038210078?s=20
Reasoning: Macro · Medium term
@PeterSchiff: mortgage lenders will lose more than in the GFC, when realized losses were about $450 billion; $8.3 trillion of fixed rate mortgages average 4.6% with 25 years left, and with rates at 7.5% mark to market losses are already about $2 trillion.
See original
Mortgage lenders will lose far more during the developing mortgage crisis than they did during all of the GFC. From 2007–2010, realized losses on defaulted mortgages totaled about $450 billion.
There is currently about $8.3 trillion in outstanding fixed-rate mortgages with an average rate of 4.6% and 25 years left to maturity. Given that current rates are 7.5%, the mark-to-market losses on those mortgages are already about $2 trillion. When rates rise to 8.5%, the loss will rise to $3 trillion!
That means even without a single default, on paper mortgage lenders have already lost over four times more than they lost during the GFC. That loss will grow to nearly seven times as much when mortgage rates hit 8.5%.
Worse, during the GFC, since mortgage rates plunged, lenders had mark-to-market gains on all the outstanding mortgages that did not default. Since only 10% of the mortgages defaulted, those unrealized gains totaled about $1.75 trillion. That provided a huge cushion that today's mortgage lenders no longer have. In fact, when mark-to-market gains were taken into account, mortgage lenders actually made $1.3 trillion during the GFC.
The current situation is therefore orders of magnitude worse. The impending disaster was created by the Federal Reserve holding interest rates so low for so long, and the FHA and GSEs guaranteeing 30-year fixed-rate mortgages, which allowed borrowers to lock in such low rates for such long durations. That sowed the seeds for the perfect storm
Reasoning: Macro · Medium term
@scottmelker quotes Jim Cramer: it's strange to see universally negative reactions to bank quarters that contained plenty of positives.
See original
JIM CRAMER ON BANK EARNINGS: "FRANKLY, IT’S STRANGE TO SEE SUCH UNIVERSALLY NEGATIVE REACTIONS TO A SET OF QUARTERS THAT CONTAINED PLENTY OF POSITIVES."
Reasoning: Fundamentals · Short term
Daily end-of-day video promo for X subscribers covering $SPY $QQQ $IWM $SMH $TLT Bitcoin $GLD $XLF $XLE.
See original
I do an end of day video like this (and a lot more) every day for X subscribers for just $10/month
$SPY $QQQ $IWM $SMH $TLT #Bitcoin $GLD #GC_F $XLF $XLE
https://x.com/alphatrends/creator-subscriptions/subscribe
Image 1 ↗
Reasoning: Not tagged by analyst
@LukeGromen: consumers under 49 owe $10T in consumer debt and are most exposed to AI income disruption; 10% losses would be $1T, about 40% of US bank equity capital (~$2.6T).
See original
Consumers <49 years old owe $10T in consumer debt (IMO <49 most likely to have incomes disintermediated by AI).
If AI does what its proponents say it will, 10% losses on that $10T = $1T = ~40% of total equity capital of the US banking industry (~$2.6T).
via K@Kathleen_Tyson_
Reasoning: Macro · Long term
@DiMartinoBooth quotes A@AdamJJosephson: banks' credit loss provisions and net charge offs as a % of loans have fallen for 2 years, but concluding credit quality is good ignores possibly ongoing loan modifications.
See original
Wise words A@AdamJJosephson "Banks’ provisions for credit losses have been falling as % of total loans for 2 yrs as have net charge-offs leading some to conclude that credit quality is good even though such analysis ignores what’s happening w/(possibly ongoing) loan modifications"
Reasoning: Fundamentals · Medium term
Fund flows or trade records mentioned in posts reflect only the account’s own claims, are marked “Per the post” and are unverified.