Canadian Bank Health Update - 2015.Q2

Go to the most recent report: 2016 Q4

Health of Canadian banks: stable (green)


In these reports, I apply the same analysis techniques that I used when watching the American financial system through 2005-2009. These metrics should show early warning signs of impending bank losses or even a banking crisis, just as they did in the USA. All data comes from public financial reports.

Summary for 2015.Q2

Capital levels and leverage

Big Six Banks: Balance Sheet Health

Definitions: GIL = Gross Impaired Loans, CET1 = Common Equity Tier 1

Full data tables can be seen here

Table A. GIL / gross loans (higher = worse loan book)

This is a rough measure of how bad the loan book is, looking at impaired (non-performing) loans. Before 2008, these values were under 1.0%. Presently, the values are quite low but one must also consider the accounting standards change that started excluding non-performing amounts within packaged loans and debt securities: banks switched to IFRS accounting standards in 2012.Q1 which caused a sudden drop in the impaired loans being reported. It's important to note that impaired loans were stable at this time, and the approx 0.25% decline is due to accounting changes and NOT an improvement in loans. A value of 0.75% today is roughly equivalent to a value of 1.00% under the previous GAAP standards in effect during the 2007-2009 crisis.

Therefore, we watch for the 0.75% level as an important threshold.

Currently, only Scotiabank is over this threshold due to loan deterioration from the international banking segment. The banks, on average, are below the threshold.

Table B. GIL / CET1 capital (higher = more risk)

Similar to the Texas Ratio, a measure of bad loans versus the bank's capital. Around the 100% mark, a bank's capital cushion is no longer adequate to absorb loan losses. This ratio is believed to be an early warning signal for bank failures, though the ratio has to get very high before solvency is threatened.

Currently, the values are extremely low. There is no threat of failure.

Table C. Leverage multiple (higher = more leverage = more risk)

Higher leverage means a bank is more susceptible to sudden shocks, and is less capable of handling losses. High leverage means a bank has less capital; conversely, low leverage means a bank has more capital. We define Leverage = Assets / CET1 capital. This is sometimes stated as N:1 or N x leverage.

Currently, bank leverage is still very high in absolute terms, but has been declining over the years.

Off Balance Sheet Derivative Exposures

Please wait for next quarter

Bankruptcy Statistics

Please wait for next quarter for updated graph. Bankruptcy rates have been declining since 2010.

Perpetual Bull, contact: