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.

66% off newsstand price

12 issues (and much more) for just £12

That’s right. We’ll give you 12 issues of MoneyWeek magazine, complete access to our exclusive web articles, our latest wealth building reports and videos as well as our subscriber-only email… for just £12.

That’s just £1 per week for Britain’s best-selling financial magazine.

Click here to take advantage of our offer

Britain is leaving the European Union. Donald Trump is reducing America’s role in global markets. Both will have profound consequences for you as an investor.

MoneyWeek analyses the critical issues facing British investors on a weekly basis. And, unlike other publications, we provide you with the solutions to help you turn a situation to your financial advantage.

Take up our offer today, and we’ll send you three of our most important investment reports:

All three of these reports are yours when you take up our 12 issues for £12 offer today.

MoneyWeek has been advising private British investors on what to do with their money since 2000. Our calls over that period have enabled our readers to both make and save a great deal of money – hence our position as the UK’s most-trusted investment publication.

Click here to subscribe for just £12