|
The Asia
Pacific Loan Markets Association
Wednesday,
9 July 2003
The Hong
Kong banking sector: performance and outlook
Speech
by
David Carse
Deputy Chief Executive
Hong Kong Monetary Authority
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I have had the privilege of
speaking to the Association on two previous occasions, beginning at
its inaugural lunch five years ago. I am pleased to have the
opportunity to do so again, particularly since the fifth anniversary
of the Association marks another milestone in its presence in Hong
Kong. During this time, the Association has done much to promote the
development of the syndicated loan market in Hong Kong and in the
region more generally. As I noted in my speech to the Association
last year, its work in establishing common standards for
documentation has been particularly commendable.
I want to use this occasion to
talk about the current state of the Hong Kong banking sector and
about its prospects. This is something whose significance extends
beyond the interests of those, such as yourselves, who are directly
involved with the industry. The banking sector plays a vital role in
the service-based economy of Hong Kong, and its profitability is
something in which all of us have a stake. A profitable banking
sector is better able to withstand negative shocks, and this helps
to preserve the stability of the financial system.
The last few years have been
challenging times for Hong Kong and for the banks that operate
within it. So far 2003 has shown no signs of being an exception to
this. Indeed, the environment in the first half of the year has been
more than usually turbulent. Attention at the beginning of the year
was focussed on geopolitical uncertainties, and in particular on the
implications of the war in Iraq for both the global and the local
economy. No sooner had concerns eased on this score - for the time
being at least - than we were confronted with the escalating impact
of the SARS epidemic.
Hong Kong banks are used to
dealing with unexpected shocks, but the threat of disease is
something new in modern times. The immediate need for the banks was
to keep their business going and to protect the health of their
customers and staff. Business continuity plans were therefore
activated, including the setting up of command centres to monitor
the situation and the formation of plans to deal with confirmed or
suspected cases of infection among staff. Critical to this process
was the creation of back-up teams of staff who could man key
operations in an emergency from separate offices or even from home.
Face-to-face meetings among staff and with customers or clients had
to be curtailed. Teleconferencing helped to keep things going,
including in the syndicated loan market.
The need for such arrangements
demonstrated that banks must be able to react quickly and flexibly
to unexpected situations. While they were able to cope with the
impact of SARS without major disruption, a certain amount of
improvisation had to take place, and lessons were learned that
should be incorporated into business continuity plans for the
future. But the main point is that the banks did meet the immediate
test posed by SARS, and for that management and staff deserve our
congratulations.
The banks have now been able to
wind down their emergency arrangements, but the effects of SARS on
their financial performance in 2003 will linger for a bit longer,
albeit the impact is now much more muted than at the height of the
outbreak.
Despite the underlying economic
difficulties, the banks actually managed to turn in quite a good
performance in the first quarter of the year. Profits of the retail
banks in aggregate rose compared with the same period of 2002,
helped by increased fee income, higher treasury profits, reduced
operating costs and a lower bad debt charge. Towards the end of the
quarter, and going into April, SARS began to have an impact of
increasing intensity. The demand for bank loans, which was already
not very buoyant, slumped even further; credit card spending
plummeted as consumers cut back on shopping and entertainment and
tourists disappeared; and branch traffic dried up, hampering the
efforts of the banks to market their products. Asset quality also
began to show initial signs of deterioration as would be expected
given the fall in property prices and the increased strain put upon
the cash flow of the affected companies and their employees.
From mid-May however the
operating environment of the banks improved as SARS was brought
under control. It would be premature to say that the SARS effect has
dissipated entirely. In particular, the full effects on asset
quality may take some time to show through. But most of the banks
that we have talked to are now saying that the impact of the
specific factor of SARS on their results for 2003 is expected to be
relatively mild.
However, the underlying problems
in the economy, which SARS helped to magnify, are still with us.
Thus, while the balance sheets of the banks remain strong, the
earnings outlook for 2003 remains uncertain; and the banks continue
to face a number of challenges.
One of these is the state of the
property market. The heavy reliance of the banks on property lending
is well known: residential mortgage lending, in particular, accounts
for 35% of the total domestic loans of the retail banks. Property
prices have fallen sharply since the Asian Crisis, and the effect of
SARS was to produce a further downward spiral. In the three months
from March to May, property prices are estimated to have fallen by
8%. It is not surprising therefore that the figures for negative
equity reported to the HKMA by the banks have shown a significant
increase from the 83,000 cases (representing $135 billion of loans)
recorded at the end of March.
The negative equity problem
affects the banks in various ways. Most obviously, it poses an
increased credit risk since loans in negative equity have a greater
tendency to go into default; and if they do, the banks will suffer a
loss since the loans are no longer fully covered by the value of
collateral. Negative equity also has a deterrent effect on the
demand for new loans since it makes property a less attractive asset
to hold, and by locking in existing homeowners reduces market
turnover. More generally, it has a pervasively depressing impact on
consumer confidence and is thus a drag on the economy and on loan
demand as a whole.
What is encouraging however is
that despite the current difficulties faced by homeowners most of
them have made every effort to continue to service their loans.
Although the overall mortgage delinquency ratio has edged up in
recent months, it remained at a relatively comfortable 1.16% at
end-May. The arrears for loans in negative equity are higher, as you
would expect, but even so the delinquency ratio of around 2.5% is
reasonable under the circumstances.
Nonetheless banks need to keep a
watchful eye on the situation, and adopt a proactive and helpful
approach to restructuring mortgage loans when borrowers start to
exhibit signs of financial distress. What they should be trying to
avoid is a repeat of the problems with credit cards, where many
borrowers chose bankruptcy as a way out of their problems. The
dynamics of the two products are different, but the warning signs
are there.
As might have been expected,
credit card charge-offs did increase during the SARS crisis as
rising unemployment prompted a renewed increase in bankruptcy
petitions. But the latest news on this front is somewhat more
encouraging. The number of petitions continued to rise going into
the first week of June, but has since fallen back and the daily
average for June as a whole was back to around the levels that we
saw before the SARS outbreak. If this improvement can be sustained,
it would have a positive impact on profitability in 2003.
Asset quality is an important
factor in explaining changes in profitability across banks and over
time. But it is certainly not the only factor and not necessarily
the most important in the long term. To generalise, changes in bank
profitability depend on both macroeconomic influences and a variety
of bank-specific determinants. The Research Department of the HKMA
has recently been doing some work in this area based on published
data of 14 banks that account for about half the market in Hong
Kong. I would like to share with you some of the preliminary
findings of the research since it casts an interesting light on how
the performance of the industry might evolve over the next few
years.
If we look at the performance of
the banking industry over the last decade, the Asian financial
crisis clearly marks a watershed. Between 1992 and 1996 our research
indicates that the profitability of the average bank in our sample,
measured by return on assets, improved by around 0.7 percentage
points. It appears that this performance owed little to the
macroeconomic environment of the time. Rather, it was due to
improved performance at the individual bank level, driven by
bank-specific factors such as more efficient operations and
improving asset quality.
In contrast, between 1997 and
2002 the average return on assets declined by more than 0.7
percentage points. This deterioration was largely driven by
macroeconomic variables, with deflation contributing most to the
worsening profitability. Bank-specific factors were less significant
during this period in explaining both average performance and
variations in performance across banks.
It may seem somewhat obvious to
say that the lower profitability of the banks over the last few
years has been largely due to the poor economic environment.
Certainly, as participants in the syndicated loan market, you will
be well aware of the impact of the current sluggish state of the
economy on loan demand and margins. But the conclusion does have
important implications if we look to the future. If the
profitability of the banks has gone down with the economy, equally
it should go up with the economy as it improves. And this would
benefit the banks in general, not just the select few with a large
market share.
In fact, our research indicates
that with reasonably conservative assumptions regarding growth and
inflation over the three years from 2003 to 2005, the profitability
for the average bank in our sample would get back to the average
return on assets over the past ten years by around 2005. Obviously,
the improvement in the economy would need to materialise for this to
happen - and I cannot predict whether it will or not. But at least
the banks can take comfort from the fact that the current difficult
operating environment may to a large extent be due to cyclical
factors, which should eventually reverse.
I would stress that this does
not mean that banks should simply sit back and wait for the rising
tide of the economy to lift them up, or that they should ignore the
opportunities that may arise from merger and acquisition.
Bank-specific factors will still matter in terms of explaining
variations in performance across banks, even if their relative
importance was less pronounced after the Asian crisis.
Among these bank-specific
factors, operational efficiency, as measured by the ratio of
non-interest expense to total assets plays the most significant role
in determining profitability, at least for the banks in our sample.
Surprisingly, the effect of credit quality seems to have diminished
over time, perhaps reflecting improvements in the banks' ability to
manage credit risk. But income diversification has become more
important, with banks increasingly having to develop their
fee-generating businesses to be more profitable. We are seeing this
particularly in the move by a number of banks into wealth
management, such as securities, unit trusts, insurance, pensions and
private banking.
A further opportunity for
business diversification for the medium-size banks will come from
the ability to branch into Mainland following the relaxation of the
asset size criterion under CEPA. The eight banks that will benefit
from this would, according to our calculations, have the scope to
open a total of as many as 20 branches in the Mainland over the next
three years. This would be a significant addition to the 40 or so
branches that banks from Hong Kong already have on the Mainland. We
should certainly not regard Mainland access as a panacea, and the
benefits will take time to come through. But the important point is
that the medium-size banks now have an alternative avenue to grow
their business outside the Hong Kong market.
Indeed, more generally, banks in
Hong Kong will benefit from the increasing financial and economic
integration with the Mainland. In the syndicated loan market, we can
see this in the growing trend towards Mainland-linked borrowers. One
development of this trend is likely to be the growth of the
syndicated loan market in RMB. This should create opportunities for
foreign as well as domestic banks within the Mainland.
Let me summarise the argument I
have been making. Banks of all shapes and sizes have the opportunity
to benefit from the recovery in the Hong Kong economy when it comes.
Some banks will however do better than others, and our research
indicates that a more efficiently operated and diversified bank will
achieve higher profits. I hope that all the banks sitting here today
will be among those that fall into this category.
Hong Kong Monetary Authority
9 July 2003
|