The latest reason not to buy into the banking sector

A couple of years ago, I noted that not everything reverts to its mean. I pointed particularly to the price of shares in the UK banking sector. Go back to 2012 and look at them in terms of ther historical price/earnings (p/e) ratios or their price to book ratios and they looked more than cheap – they looked practically free.

But I still couldn’t bring myself to buy them. As I said at the time, the banking business model of the past couple of decades (taking advantage of leverage, abnormally low interest rates, and light-touch regulation to make managers rich and shareholders poor) is not a model that will be allowed in the next decade.

I expected significantly tougher regulation to come in at some point, alongside “intense public scrutiny” as well as a range of new entrants to markets that had long been monopolised by our big big banks – think peer-to-peer (P2P).

I also thought that in the longer term, we would see changes to managerial incentives that would drive lower short-term returns in future, and see valuations stick far below their old mean.

I’m still waiting for a lot of this, but the intense public and regulator scrutiny is definitely with us, something that Neil Woodford (now mainly known as ‘superstar fund manager Neil Woodford’) appears to have noticed too.

He is known for his long-term value approach to investing, but has just sold out of a stake in HSBC bought only a few months ago. Why? “Fine inflation.”

As the demand from the public to see the banks suffer in one way or another has grown, so has the absolute level of the fines that the regulatory authorities have been imposing for “past and ongoing wrongdoings”.

You can read superstar fund manager Neil Woodford’s views on the matter, but “in the light of this growing risk” (note the Bank of America has just agreed to pay the “largest single federal settlement in the history of corporate America”), he now considers HSBC shares to be “broadly fair value”, and therefore not worthy of inclusion in his portfolio.

It makes sense to us – we will be adding ‘fine inflation’ next to ‘increased scrutiny’ and ‘regulation’ in our very long list of reasons not to fall for the idea that low-looking valuations justify buying shares in banks.

  • quark

    Looks like a contrarian investment to me.

  • Boris MacDonut

    Banks are a lot like Russia. No trust internally or externally and where there is no trust do not invest.

  • Atters

    The article misses the tremendous earning power banks have. Any increase in costs will simply be passed on to consumers. The interest rate differential that banks are enjoying at present to enable them to repair their balance sheets has never been greater. Write backs will also start appearing. Not a bad bet.

Merryn

Claim 12 issues of MoneyWeek (plus much more) for just £12!

Let MoneyWeek show you how to profit, whatever the outcome of the upcoming general election.

Start your no-obligation trial today and get up to speed on:

  • The latest shifts in the economy…
  • The ongoing Brexit negotiations…
  • The new tax rules…
  • Trump’s protectionist policies…

Plus lots more.

We’ll show you what it all means for your money.

Plus, the moment you begin your trial, we’ll rush you over THREE free investment reports:

‘How to escape the most hated tax in Britain’: Inheritance tax hits many unsuspecting families. Our report tells how to pass on up to £2m of your money to your family without the taxman getting a look in.

‘How to profit from a Trump presidency’: The election of Donald Trump was a watershed moment for the US economy. This report details the sectors our analysts think will boom from Trump’s premiership, and gives specific investments you can buy to profit.

‘Best shares to watch in 2017’: Includes the transcript from our roundtable panel of investment professionals – and 12 tips they’re currently tipping. The report also analyses key assets, including property, oil and the countries whose stock markets currently offer the most value.