Share the article
twitter-iconcopy-link-iconprint-icon
share-icon
BrackenOctober 4 2009

An investor's perspective

The Bracken column is named after Brendan Bracken, the founding editor of The Banker in 1926 and chairman of the modern-day Financial Times from 1945 to 1958.During the past two years, investors have faced one of the most challenging environments in living memory. When confidence in banks falters and markets crash, equity and debt investors are left asking: what will aid recovery and help prevent another crisis? We would argue that changes to financial disclosure and reporting are required. Specifically, investing in banks continues to be complicated by inconsistent accounting rules, fragmented regulation and less confidence in management to deliver.
Share the article
twitter-iconcopy-link-iconprint-icon
share-icon

It used to be that banks were allowed to 'smooth' profits, by increasing provisions for future losses during the good years, and reducing them in the bad. Assets were largely valued on an accrual basis rather than fair or market value.

International Financial Reporting Standards all but brought an end to this from 2005. For banks, the revolution was the concept of fair value accounting for a far broader set of assets. The sweetener was that the adoption coincided with increasing asset values. The three new categories of assets - hold to maturity, available for sale and trading - saw the latter two valuing assets at market prices. At the time, there were solid philosophical arguments in favour of banks being assessed on a 'truer' market value of assets basis. Transparency may optically have improved, but comparability was still blurred by different asset categorisations.

To continue reading, join our community and benefit from

  • In-depth coverage across key markets
  • Comments from financial leaders and policymakers worldwide
  • Regional/country bank rankings and awards
Activate your free trial