Categories: FinanceWorld

Exclusive: U.S. regulator seeks sale of Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank portfolios, sources say

 The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) has retained advisers to sell the securities portfolios that the new owners of failed Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank rejected, according to people familiar with the matter.

The portfolios are comprised of low-yielding assets, such as Treasuries and U.S. government agency-backed securities, that the two regional banks amassed while interest rates were close to zero.

If First Citizens Bancshares Inc, the new owner of Silicon Valley Bank, or New York Community Bancorp Inc, which acquired Signature Bank, had assumed the assets, they would have had to realize losses given that interest rates are now much higher than the yield of these assets.

Silicon Valley Bank’s and Signature Bank’s securities portfolios carry a face value of around $90 billion and $26 billion, respectively, according to regulatory filings and statements by government officials.

The sources spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss confidential information about the sale process. The FDIC declined to comment.

It is unclear how much the FDIC’s deposit fund stands to lose on the sale of the portfolios. The fund, used to guarantee deposits at failed lenders, is replenished by a levy on all U.S. banks that are members of the FDIC’s deposit insurance scheme.

The FDIC estimates the sale of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank will cost the deposit fund $20 billion and $2.5 billion, respectively. It will release final figures once sales of the loan books of the banks and their securities portfolios are complete.

Some of the loans were passed on to First Citizens and New York Community with backstops from the FDIC, while others are up for sale separately. The FDIC has hired Newmark Group Inc to sell about $60 billion of Signature Bank’s loans it retained, Reuters reported this week.

Silicon Valley Bank gave a sense of the potential losses in its securities portfolio on March 8, two days before it failed, when it sold $21.5 billion of it to meet customer withdrawals, realizing a $1.8 billion loss. The portfolio was yielding an average 1.79%, far below the 10-year Treasury yield that at the time was around 3.9%.

Source : Reuters

GLOBAL BUSINESS AND FINANCE MAGAZINE

Recent Posts

Less focus on poverty reduction? An evaluation of the EU 2028-2034 development aid plan

European Union development aid is emphasising poverty reduction less and directing attention to other geopolitical…

19 hours ago

The impact of the US exit from free trade on trade cooperation elsewhere in the world

The large US tariffs announced in April 2025 led other countries to debate the best…

19 hours ago

Measuring organisational capital from employee reviews

The way firms coordinate activities, motivate employees, accumulate knowledge, and adapt to changing environments evolves…

19 hours ago

When central banks over-deliver, markets listen differently

Financial markets pay close attention to monetary policy, and surprise policy decisions can strongly affect…

19 hours ago

The impact of global versus regional energy shocks on the EU

Not all energy shocks are alike. This column uses a multi-country, multi-sector DSGE model with…

19 hours ago

Regulating platform work where informality matters: The Chilean case

Chile’s 2022 Platform Work Law was the first reform to address concerns about independent contractors…

19 hours ago