Shockwaves rippled through the markets over the past week due to the collapse pf Silicon Valley Bank (SVB). This situation remains fluid but, I wanted to provide some insight on the Silicon Valley Bank problem.
First and most importantly of all, only your Mackenzie US Small-Mid Cap Growth Fund has exposure to Signature Bank but its immaterial at about 0.78% as of last Friday and you have no direct exposure to Silicon Valley Bank. This is just one of the reasons why I do extensive due diligence, selection, and continuously monitor top quality portfolio managers to look after your money. The managers I select help minimize risk and choose the best companies to invest in based on certain fundamentals and styles. They don’t mimic an index or simply buy everything like Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) do.
Now as some background, like all banks, Silicon Valley Bank has illiquid assets (loans) and liquid liabilities (deposits). Unlike other banks, start-ups were a significant segment of SVB’s depositor base and was never a big lender. Furthermore, SVB’s deposits were concentrated in the technology sector, making it more vulnerable to sudden withdrawal than would be the case for more liability diversified banks.
Investments in SVB’s securities book had unrealized losses following the recent increase in bond yields. These don’t impact the bank’s capital and/or liquidity as long as they are held to maturity; unrealized losses go away as bonds mature. Problems may arise when assets in the investment portfolio are sold before maturity, because it crystallizes the loss thereby impairing capital ratios.
Last year, venture activity slowed and start-ups began to see their funding dry up. Not getting additional funding through venture capital financing and with their need for cash, start-ups had to withdraw their deposits from SVB at a faster rate.
To meet that demand for cash, SVB was forced to sell its holdings of US Treasuries. Given the sharp rise in interest rates and fall in bond prices over the past year, those sales resulted in significant losses for SVB. When those were revealed to be $2 billion, it caused accelerated outflows which then required the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to step in.
Based on my communication with several portfolio managers, so far, the likelihood of current events evolving into a broader systemic risk is low.
It’s difficult, however, to anticipate how the short-term markets will react as these events caused the markets to be driven by sentiment, not fundamentals. Despite periods of volatility like this, in the medium and long-term markets are driven by fundamentals. Whether it short, medium or long-term, in all times, having trusted professional advice can definitely help you reach out goals.