Thursday, July 21, 2016

The Number of Problem CUs Fell; But Shares and Assets Increased at Problem CUs

The National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) reported today that the number of problem credit unions fell during the second quarter; but share and assets at problem credit unions grew during the quarter.

At the end of the second quarter, there were 209 problem credit unions. In comparison, there were 218 problem credit unions at the end of the first quarter of 2016 and 258 credit unions at the end of the second quarter of 2015.

A problem credit union has a composite CAMEL rating of 4 or 5.

During the second quarter both total shares (deposits) and assets in problem credit unions rose. Shares in problem credit unions increased from $7.5 billion as of March 31, 2016 to $8.4 billion as of June 30. Over the same time period, assets in problem credit unions rose from $7.8 billion to $9.5 billion. A year earlier, problem credit unions held $10.2 billion in shares and $11.4 billion in assets.

According to NCUA, 0.85 percent of total insured shares and 0.8 percent of industry assets were in problem credit unions at the end of the second quarter.

NCUA reported that 1 credit union with at least $1 billion in assets was a problem credit union as of June 30, 2016 (this credit union was most likely Melrose Credit Union in Briarwood, NY). The number of problem credit unions with between $500 million and $1 billion in assets was unchanged during the quarter at 2 credit unions. The number of problem credit unions with between $100 million and $500 million in assets was unchanged at 14 at the end of the second quarter of 2016. Only credit unions with less than $10 million in assets saw a decrease in the number of problem credit unions by 12 during the quarter to 114 credit unions.
Posted by at
Labels: ,

1 comment:

  1. AnonymousJuly 25, 2016 at 6:43 AM

    I had to laugh. Read your piece first, then CUNA's on the same topic. CUNA said the opposite, that everything is better. Then I realized they were comparing to the same quarter last year. Since it was news from the board meeting, I had to look and see what NCUA reported. That matched what you reported. CUNA's report wasn't incorrect, but misleading. They should report what NCUA said first, then add their comparison to the previous year if they want.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
 

The content is provided for educational purposes only, with the understanding that neither the authors, contributors, nor the publishers of this site are engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other expert or professional services. If legal or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.

Comments appearing in response to articles appearing on this site do not necessarily reflect the views of the ABA. ABA makes no representations regarding the truth or accuracy of commentary or opinions that may be posted in response to the articles that appear on this website.

The inclusion herein of any link to a website, either in the text of an article or in a comment, does not denote any approval, sponsorship, or endorsement by the ABA, and ABA is not responsible for the content or opinions expressed on those linked websites or related commentary. This content is not licensed to third parties sites and is not affiliated with any third party site. Any reference to the author or this content on any third party site on the Internet is not authorized by the ABA.

It is the policy of the American Bankers Association to comply fully with all antitrust laws. Certain discussions should be considered off-limits, including those that contain competitively sensitive data such as price and cost information, or statements that could be construed as reflecting an attempt or desire to control or influence a particular market or markets. Future pricing or other prospective competitive information should never be shared.