社区银行外文文献翻译

文献出处：Martin, David L. Needed: A New Community Bank Model [J], Bank Accounting & Finance, 2009:21-29.

原文

Needed: A New Community Bank Model

Martin, David L.

Community banks need to find a new business model. Why? Because the old one doesn’t work anymore.The evidence is a large and widening gap in profitability between community banks and larger banks, a gap that didn’t exist 10 years ago.

Having been involved with community banks for the past 20 years, I believe that many of the smallest banks are using largely the same business model today that they were 10 or 20 years ago; but today’s new competitive, legislative and operating environ- ment is radically different from the 1980s and early 1990s. By one CEO’s description, many community banks are generating expense in multiple business models and generating revenue in only one, and an old one at that.

■What happened during the decade?

■Why did smaller banks lose ground?

■What’s the outlook for small banks?

In this article, I’ll try to answer all three questions. The views expressed here are based on personal observation and numerous contacts with community bankers. The evidence, therefore, is anecdotal, but industry operating results support these observations.

Community Bank Profitability in Decline

Community banking profitability suffered in the past decade. Exhibits 1 and 2 show the changed picture: In 1996, all of the asset size groups had a return on average assets (ROAA) above 1.00 percent, and there was no apparent correlation between size and profitability. By 2006, the smallest banks’ ROAA had dropped below 1.00

percent and only the largest banks gained ground during the decade. Moreover, the ascending bars in the right-hand graph suggest a strong positive correlation between size and profit- ability that wasn’t apparent earlier.

The smallest banks lost profitability not only in absolute terms, but also in relation to the larger asset size groups. Exhibit 3 shows both the 10-year change in profitability for each asset size group and each grou p’s change relative to the next-larger size group, in other words, the growth in the gap. In 1996, the smallest banks, those with assets under $500 million, earned 1.13 percent on assets; the larger banks—all four size groups—earned slightly more. By 2006, the smallest banks had lost 21 basis points (bps) in profitability, the next three groups lost slightly less, and the largest banks actually improved their operating profitability by 18 bps. I’ve used 2006 numbers because 2007 results for all five groups reflect the beginnings of the current credit crisis and tend to exaggerate or obscure the underlying operating trends.

For All Banks, Net-Interest Margin Under Pressure

The profitability gap developed against the backdrop of a persistent decline in net-interest margin. The ta ble in Exhibit 4 shows the deterioration in net-interest margin for all banks from 1996 through 2006. The drop in net-interest margin was uneven across the five asset size groups, with the smallest and largest banks losing the most. Exhibit 4 shows that the small- est banks lost not only 83 bps in net-interest margin but also most of their margin advantage vis-à-vis the larger banks. In 1996, their net-interest margin of 5.02 percent was 23 bps better than the 4.79-percent mar- gin for banks in the next-larger size group. By 2006, that 23 bps advantage had shrunk to seven bps.

Banks’ main defense against the falling net-interest margin was improved efficiency and, as shown in Exhibit 5, banks in all five groups improved their operating efficiency as measured by net operating expense (NOE) as a percentage of average assets. 3 But, as foreshadowed in the ROAA graphs in Exhibits 1 and 2, only the largest banks were able to improve efficiency enough to significantly offset their loss in net-interest margin.