September 13, 2017 / 1:07 AM / a year ago

Fitch: China Supporting Liquidity, Some Banks Exposed to Squeeze

(The following statement was released by the rating agency) Link to Fitch Ratings' Report: China Banks: Funding and Liquidity here SHANGHAI/SINGAPORE, September 12 (Fitch) The Chinese authorities continue to provide the liquidity to financial institutions necessary to maintain stability in the financial system following the tightening of financial regulations this year, says Fitch Ratings. Nevertheless, a weakening of banks' liquidity and funding profiles has made some of them more vulnerable to a policy misstep or loss of market confidence that triggers a liquidity crunch. The PBOC has been pumping liquidity into the system in increasing volumes and with greater frequency to make up temporary cash-flow shortages among China's banks. There is increasing evidence of ordinary support through formal channels, such as central bank facilities and interbank lending, aimed at managing financial system risk and controlling financing costs for the real economy. The People's Bank of China's (PBOC) balance sheet claims on depository institutions - banks, credit cooperatives and finance companies - was over CNY9 trillion (USD1.4 trillion) at end-July 2017, six times that at end-3Q14, when the central bank announced significant easing of monetary policy and introduced a raft of new policy tools to manage system liquidity. Deterioration in banks' liquidity profiles in the last few years has necessitated a rise in liquidity support. The big four state banks and Postal Savings Bank are still net providers of liquidity to the interbank system, but to a smaller extent than a few years ago. All other Fitch-rated mid-tier commercial banks now appear to be net liquidity takers. In 2013, all Fitch-rated commercial banks were net liquidity providers. Liquidity positions have weakened partly as a result of inefficient lending, which has caused a drop in lenders' net operating cash inflows relative to outflows. China has also moved away from having limited investment alternatives, strict caps on deposit rates and loan-to-deposit ratios, as well as very high economic growth - all of which contributed to banks being flush with deposits in the past. The widening gap between assets and deposits has been filled chiefly by off-balance-sheet wealth management products (WMPs) and interbank borrowing. Mid-tier banks are especially reliant on these sources of funding. We estimate that off-balance-sheet WMPs and interbank borrowing made up 43% of mid-tier banks' funding as of end-1H17, compared with 19% at state-banks, contributing to their asset-liability mismatches. WMPs and interbank liabilities, both of which have extremely short maturities, are the most likely triggers for market dislocation, even though the authorities have ensured there have so far been few instances of funding disruption. Systemic stress could also come from a system-wide tightening of liquidity, perhaps as a result of a policy misstep or major event that shakes confidence, such as a large and sustained resurgence in net capital outflows. In a limited stress scenario, the mid-tier banks that rely most heavily on non-deposit funding and that are net liquidity takers would be more vulnerable to liquidity shortages. The state banks are likely to benefit from a flight to safety, supporting their Viability Ratings. The authorities have demonstrated their willingness to provide ordinary support to the banking sector through recent liquidity injections, and they still have substantial resources to address deterioration in the banking sector. For instance, liquidity shortages within banks could also be alleviated by drawing down the CNY22 trillion in deposit reserves placed at the central bank. However, the large and increasing size of the banking system means that the cost of support could be substantial relative to even the sovereign's considerable resources. Further information can be found in Fitch's report titled "China Banks: Funding and Liquidity". The report can be accessed on or by clicking the link above. Contact: Jack Yuan Associate Director Financial Institutions +86 21 5097 3038 Fitch Ratings (Beijing) Ltd. Shanghai Branch 3401, 34/F, Shanghai Tower No. 479, Lujiazuihuan Road Shanghai, 200120, China Dan Martin Senior Analyst Fitch Wire +65 6796 7232 The above article originally appeared as a post on the Fitch Wire credit market commentary page. The original article can be accessed at All opinions expressed are those of Fitch Ratings. Media Relations: Wai-Lun Wan, Hong Kong, Tel: +852 2263 9935, Email: Additional information is available on ALL FITCH CREDIT RATINGS ARE SUBJECT TO CERTAIN LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS. PLEASE READ THESE LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS BY FOLLOWING THIS LINK: here. IN ADDITION, RATING DEFINITIONS AND THE TERMS OF USE OF SUCH RATINGS ARE AVAILABLE ON THE AGENCY'S PUBLIC WEB SITE AT WWW.FITCHRATINGS.COM. PUBLISHED RATINGS, CRITERIA, AND METHODOLOGIES ARE AVAILABLE FROM THIS SITE AT ALL TIMES. FITCH'S CODE OF CONDUCT, CONFIDENTIALITY, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, AFFILIATE FIREWALL, COMPLIANCE, AND OTHER RELEVANT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES ARE ALSO AVAILABLE FROM THE CODE OF CONDUCT SECTION OF THIS SITE. DIRECTORS AND SHAREHOLDERS RELEVANT INTERESTS ARE AVAILABLE here. FITCH MAY HAVE PROVIDED ANOTHER PERMISSIBLE SERVICE TO THE RATED ENTITY OR ITS RELATED THIRD PARTIES. DETAILS OF THIS SERVICE FOR RATINGS FOR WHICH THE LEAD ANALYST IS BASED IN AN EU-REGISTERED ENTITY CAN BE FOUND ON THE ENTITY SUMMARY PAGE FOR THIS ISSUER ON THE FITCH WEBSITE. Copyright © 2017 by Fitch Ratings, Inc., Fitch Ratings Ltd. and its subsidiaries. 33 Whitehall Street, NY, NY 10004. Telephone: 1-800-753-4824, (212) 908-0500. Fax: (212) 480-4435. Reproduction or retransmission in whole or in part is prohibited except by permission. All rights reserved. In issuing and maintaining its ratings and in making other reports (including forecast information), Fitch relies on factual information it receives from issuers and underwriters and from other sources Fitch believes to be credible. Fitch conducts a reasonable investigation of the factual information relied upon by it in accordance with its ratings methodology, and obtains reasonable verification of that information from independent sources, to the extent such sources are available for a given security or in a given jurisdiction. The manner of Fitch’s factual investigation and the scope of the third-party verification it obtains will vary depending on the nature of the rated security and its issuer, the requirements and practices in the jurisdiction in which the rated security is offered and sold and/or the issuer is located, the availability and nature of relevant public information, access to the management of the issuer and its advisers, the availability of pre-existing third-party verifications such as audit reports, agreed-upon procedures letters, appraisals, actuarial reports, engineering reports, legal opinions and other reports provided by third parties, the availability of independent and competent third- party verification sources with respect to the particular security or in the particular jurisdiction of the issuer, and a variety of other factors. Users of Fitch’s ratings and reports should understand that neither an enhanced factual investigation nor any third-party verification can ensure that all of the information Fitch relies on in connection with a rating or a report will be accurate and complete. Ultimately, the issuer and its advisers are responsible for the accuracy of the information they provide to Fitch and to the market in offering documents and other reports. In issuing its ratings and its reports, Fitch must rely on the work of experts, including independent auditors with respect to financial statements and attorneys with respect to legal and tax matters. Further, ratings and forecasts of financial and other information are inherently forward-looking and embody assumptions and predictions about future events that by their nature cannot be verified as facts. As a result, despite any verification of current facts, ratings and forecasts can be affected by future events or conditions that were not anticipated at the time a rating or forecast was issued or affirmed. The information in this report is provided “as is” without any representation or warranty of any kind, and Fitch does not represent or warrant that the report or any of its contents will meet any of the requirements of a recipient of the report. A Fitch rating is an opinion as to the creditworthiness of a security. This opinion and reports made by Fitch are based on established criteria and methodologies that Fitch is continuously evaluating and updating. Therefore, ratings and reports are the collective work product of Fitch and no individual, or group of individuals, is solely responsible for a rating or a report. The rating does not address the risk of loss due to risks other than credit risk, unless such risk is specifically mentioned. Fitch is not engaged in the offer or sale of any security. All Fitch reports have shared authorship. Individuals identified in a Fitch report were involved in, but are not solely responsible for, the opinions stated therein. The individuals are named for contact purposes only. A report providing a Fitch rating is neither a prospectus nor a substitute for the information assembled, verified and presented to investors by the issuer and its agents in connection with the sale of the securities. Ratings may be changed or withdrawn at any time for any reason in the sole discretion of Fitch. Fitch does not provide investment advice of any sort. Ratings are not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Ratings do not comment on the adequacy of market price, the suitability of any security for a particular investor, or the tax-exempt nature or taxability of payments made in respect to any security. Fitch receives fees from issuers, insurers, guarantors, other obligors, and underwriters for rating securities. Such fees generally vary from US$1,000 to US$750,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent) per issue. In certain cases, Fitch will rate all or a number of issues issued by a particular issuer, or insured or guaranteed by a particular insurer or guarantor, for a single annual fee. Such fees are expected to vary from US$10,000 to US$1,500,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent). The assignment, publication, or dissemination of a rating by Fitch shall not constitute a consent by Fitch to use its name as an expert in connection with any registration statement filed under the United States securities laws, the Financial Services and Markets Act of 2000 of the United Kingdom, or the securities laws of any particular jurisdiction. Due to the relative efficiency of electronic publishing and distribution, Fitch research may be available to electronic subscribers up to three days earlier than to print subscribers. For Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan and South Korea only: Fitch Australia Pty Ltd holds an Australian financial services license (AFS license no. 337123) which authorizes it to provide credit ratings to wholesale clients only. Credit ratings information published by Fitch is not intended to be used by persons who are retail clients within the meaning of the Corporations Act 2001

0 : 0
  • narrow-browser-and-phone
  • medium-browser-and-portrait-tablet
  • landscape-tablet
  • medium-wide-browser
  • wide-browser-and-larger
  • medium-browser-and-landscape-tablet
  • medium-wide-browser-and-larger
  • above-phone
  • portrait-tablet-and-above
  • above-portrait-tablet
  • landscape-tablet-and-above
  • landscape-tablet-and-medium-wide-browser
  • portrait-tablet-and-below
  • landscape-tablet-and-below