Biz, Life, Economy, Sex, Computers

The US has been at the heart of the financial crisis. Of total losses of $1040.7bn in the financial sector worldwide, the US accounts for more than half, at $582.6bn. Of the top 10 worst losses during the crisis, six of them are from the US. Between them, banks in the top 10 of the North American ranking have lost a staggering $473.66bn since the crisis began. In 2008, the 152 US banks present in the Top 1000 made a pre-tax loss $91,078m.

It may seem ironic, then, that the top three biggest banks in the world are from the US, and that the Top 25 banks in North America by Tier 1 capital remains remarkably stable. Four out of the five same banks as in 2008 continue to jockey for the top slot.

This year JPMorgan is at number one, courtesy of its acquisitions of Bear Stearns and Washington Mutual, which boosted its Tier 1 capital by 53%, making it almost twice as big as China's ICBC.

Bank of America may be struggling to digest its acquisition of Merrill Lynch, but the deal has increased its capital by 45%, keeping it at second place in North America and pushing it up from fifth to second globally. Wells Fargo's acquisition of Wachovia (19th in last year's global ranking) increases its capital base by a whopping 136% and propels it from 23rd globally last year to sixth, and from fifth to fourth in North America.

However, US bank size is not matched by profitability. After years of being among the leaders in terms of pre-tax profit, this year there is not one US bank in the top 10. This instead is composed of Chinese (led by ICBC and China Construction Bank), Spanish, UK and Italian banks. Only two US banks make it into the top 25: Bank of America at 22 and US Bancorp at 25.

Canadian banks are faring better, with Royal Bank of Canada the world's 10th most profitable bank by pre-tax profits, and Toronto Dominion at 24. RBC's success highlights the disparate fortunes of the US and Canada during the crisis. Canadian banks, prevented from overleveraging by their regulatory environment, have avoided the worst of the financial meltdown. On aggregate, Canada's banks generated profit on capital of 12.91%, versus the US's -2.59%.

Bank of America and Citigroup, giants that have come to symbolize the troubles plaguing the nation’s banking industry, announced Friday that they were once again turning handsome profits. Bank of America reported a $3.2 billion profit for the second quarter. Citigroup said it earned $4.3 billionduring the period.

But behind the figures was a sober reality: Those happy results were driven by billions of dollars in one-time gains — in the case of Bank of America, by a profit from the sale of a stake in a big Chinese bank and, in the case of Citigroup, by a bonanza from a new joint venture for its Smith Barney division. Without those one-offs, the banks, despite two taxpayer-financed bailout dollars apiece, would have lost billions.

Like Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase, which stunned Wall Street earlier this week with robust earnings reports, Bank of America and Citigroup got big increases from their trading operations.Still, the results exceeded analysts’ expectations. Bank of America announced earnings of 33 cents a share, and Citigroup reported earnings of 49 cents a share. The results at Citigroup far outstripped the loss of 18 cents a share that analysts had predicted.

Still, analysts said before the report that Bank of America might need to buttress its capital further. The bank said that its global card business lost $1.6 billion in the second quarter due to “weakening economies in the U.S., Europe and Canada.” “I think they will need to build billions of dollars of loan loss reserves this quarter,” said Jeff Harte, a banking analyst at Sandler O’Neill before the report was released. “It’s going to cost them significantly.”

The bank’s chief executive, Kenneth D. Lewis, acknowledged in a statement that “difficult challenges lie ahead from continued weakness in the global economy.”

At Citigroup, the chief executive, Vikram S. Pandit, echoed that view. “Our most significant challenge now remains consumer credit,” Mr. Pandit said in a statement. “Losses in our consumer businesses have been growing for some time, but we see positive signs of moderation in those loss trends.”

Both executives are widely seen being under considerable pressure. Controversy continues to swirl over Mr. Lewis’s decision to buy Merrill Lynch last December, a move he has said he was urged to make at the behest of federal officials. Mr. Pandit, meantime, has worked to mend strained relationships with federal regulators.

Both banks are deeply entrenched in traditional services like consumer and commercial lending, and as unemployment and wage numbers continue to worsen and households fall behind on bills, loan and credit card losses are piling up. Small corporations are increasingly defaulting on loans as the business environment remains stagnant — as evidenced by the turmoil at the commercial lender CIT. The outlook is murkiest at Citigroup, long considered to be in the worst shape among the major banks.

Further bumps are at the end of the month, when Citigroup is expected to convert preferred shares to common stock, raising the government’s stake in the bank to 34 percent. Existing shareholders will be heavily diluted.