BJ Losch
Analyst · KBW. Please go ahead
Great. Good morning. Thanks everybody and I will start with financial results on slide 8. Year-over-year highlights included strong PPNR, NII growth on strong balance sheet growth and pricing discipline despite Fed tightening higher fixed income revenue and excellent expense management. The NII was up year-over-year due to strong commercial loan growth coupled with solid deposit pricing discipline with the linked quarter decline driven by lower accretion and fewer days in the quarter.Fee income was up from continued strong performance from our fixed income business. Average daily revenues were $1.3 million in the first quarter, an increase of 73% year-over-year and up $200,000 per day 19% linked quarter.Fixed income’s extensive distribution platform remains well positioned to capitalize on its favorable market conditions in today's environment. The implementation of the new CECL loan loss methodology this quarter which as you know is supposed to be an estimate of lifetime losses in the credit portfolio contributed to a much higher provision from $8 million in the fourth quarter to $145 million in the first. Net charge-offs were again very low at only $7 million in the quarter with the additional provision increased driven by future economic factors in the models related to the COVID-19 pandemic. I'll get into more details on the reserve increase in a few minutes.Balance sheet trends were again strong on both the loan and deposit side particularly in the last five weeks of the quarter. As you can see on slide 9, we saw significant increases in our period-end loans with the vast majority of the growth occurring in the last week of the quarter. Linked quarter total period-end loans were up $2.3 billion, about $1.3 billion of the growth was related to loans to mortgage companies. About $750 million of the loan growth associated with line draws and about $300 million was related to organic loan growth across the other commercial and consumer portfolios.So far in April, line draws have abated, loans to mortgage companies balances are down from period end levels and expected to come down about $1.5 billion to $2 billion from period-end levels as purchase and refi volumes decline due to COVID-19 impacts.In this uncertain environment, our job is threefold in terms of lending. Number one, utilize the government programs particularly PPP to get funds into the hands of those who need it. Two, to keep credit flowing to strong creditworthy borrowers and three, protect our balance sheet and capital levels and in this context where we are seeing the majority of our lending are in areas that tick these boxes.Over the next quarter, we expect the majority of new loan growth to be driven by PPP loans which carries 0% risk weightings. We expect loans mortgage companies given the industry dynamics related to COVID-19 impacts to come down meaningfully in the range of $1.5 to $2 billion from March 31 levels and we expect line draws to occur but at lesser rates while new fundings decline and offset those incremental line draws.Turning the deposit trends on slide 10. You see we saw strong deposit inflows toward the end of the quarter with balances up $2 billion linked quarter on a period end basis. The growth was driven by [$1.8 billion] increase in market index deposits. In March, we saw a significant inflow of these balances as customers exited the equity markets and put their cash into FDIC insured accounts. Additionally, we've executed on an additional $1.4 billion of insured network deposit contracts at attractive rates currently between 5 and 30 basis points.We've seen similar trends in April quarter to-date deposits which are out up by about $2 billion or 5% over March 31 levels. The drivers of deposit growth in April are related to organic customer activity, consumers receiving stimulus checks, seasonal public funds and increases in non-interest bearing commercial deposits as customers hold more cash in addition to continued inflows of market index deposits.Moving on to capital on slide 12. As I noted earlier we had strong PPNR in the quarter that led to capital generation that supported the dividends and the increase to the provision. As you can see on this slide the decline in CET1 ratio was due to the increase in risk weighted assets at the end of the month. About 54 basis points was related to commercial loan growth from the period end uptick in loans to mortgage companies in addition to the increased line draws. About 16 basis points of the impact was related to higher market risk assets in our fixed income business. The increase was largely driven by a March large spike in value at risk due to the extreme volatility.Therefore as you all know, capital ratios are calculated on period-end assets not average assets. So even though average assets were roughly $2.8 billion lower than period-end, the capital ratio calculation is sensitive to the spot balance at the end of the quarter. To put the impact of the period-end run-up in assets in perspective, the rule of thumb for us is instead of about a $450 million increase in RWA is equal to about at 10 basis point capital ratio impact. Therefore, that increase in $2.8 billion in period-end assets over the last five weeks of the quarter versus the average assets in the quarter is about a 65 basis point impact to the CET1 ratio.Said a different way, if CET1 was calculated on average risk weighted assets versus period end, our CET1 ratio would have been about 9.2%. As I said earlier when talking about loan growth we expect risk weighted assets to go down in the second quarter as loans to mortgage company balances decline and new loan growth is driven primarily by 0% risk-weighted PPP loans. With the expected reduction in RWA combined with continued strong PPNR, we would expect our stand-alone CET1 ratio to move back more toward the 9% range in the second quarter.Slide 13 shows the drivers of change under CECL adoption. As you know CECL replaces the incurred loss methodology with a life of loan estimate concept. While net charge-offs were only $7 million in the quarter, the initial day one impact and so-called economic factors related to the future economic outlook drove the aggregate increase in our reserves.To put numbers to it, as you can see in the walk forward the ending reserve as of December 31, 2019 was $200 million. We then booked a day 1 impact as of January 1, 2020 of a $106 million and subsequently by quarter end even though we had very little change in portfolio characteristics from things such as charge-offs, grading changes or loan growth in the quarter only $12 million, the economic factors, the associated changes in the future economic outlook lead to an additional $126 million of reserves resulting in an ending loan loss reserve balance at [$444] million as of March 31.We believe this represents a healthy reserve, particularly when compared to both peers and our own severely adverse stress test, which you can see on slide 14.Turning to slide 14, there are several key points that I'd like to highlight here. First, as noted in the top bullet, our total loan portfolio is predominantly commercially oriented at 75% of total loans with a meaningful portion of them about 42% considered investment grade equivalent and within that 20% of those commercial loans at quarter end were loans to mortgage companies, which as we've discussed many times carry minimal credit risk.90% of loan to mortgage company balances are collateralized with government guarantees loans. While these loans are commercial loans and therefore carry 100% risk weighting it held individually on our balance sheet they would be 50% risk weighting. It is a very high quality portfolio.Second, the consumer loans that we have are of high quality as well as evidenced by the high average refreshed FICO scores and the lack of a meaningful higher loss content credit card exposure. Third, about 12% of our total loan portfolio still has $65 million of unamortized loan mark, in addition to $42 million of reserves which provides additional loss absorption capacity.And finally, as you can see on the right-hand side of this slide, our reserve coverage to total loans and to Q1 annualized net charge-offs are very healthy relative to peers and we have prudently built reserves that equate to 74% of our severely adverse modeled losses well above the peer averages. And if you add in the additional $65 million of unamortized loan mark, we are at approximately 85% of our severely adverse modeled losses, a very healthy number.Turning to slide 15, since this is both the first quarter using the new CECL methodology and the factors related to the future economic outlook are such large drivers of both the size of the aggregate loan loss reserve and the first quarter provision, we thought it might be helpful to give you some details on our economic assumptions.As to other regional banks, we utilize various Moody's scenarios and wait them to arrive at our quantitative model outputs. We then use more severe scenarios on specific portfolios as warranted to come up with additional qualitative overlays to the model results. So as you can see on this slide 15 in the upper left, our most heavily weighted baseline scenario had the following characteristics. It considers the COVID-19 pandemic impacts including the CARES Act; the Fed stimulus including the open-ended quantitative easing as well as the various announced liquidity and credit facility programs. It assumes a fourth stimulus in 4Q ’20, the recession starting already in the first half of this year with only a partial bounce-back in the third quarter then slow growth with acceleration of GDP growth not occurring until later in 2021 and no return to full employment until 2023.For certain select portfolios, we felt might have more stress such as the aspects of the restaurant franchise finance or hospitality portfolios, we used more severe Moody's scenarios with characteristics such as in the upper right. At the bottom we also laid out for you the epidemiological assumptions that corresponded with our various weighted scenarios.Then on slide 16, we thought it might be helpful to graph out some of the key economic assumptions driving the loss estimates and compare them to our stress test assumptions. On each of these graphs you have five lines. The lighter dotted lines are the individual upside baseline and downside scenarios utilized. The heavy blue line is the weighted average of the scenarios we utilize across our portfolios and the heavy gray line is the 2019 stress test assumptions. Few observations that I’d make here.First on rates assumptions such as for the three-month treasury yield and Fed funds they're very similar. On both GDP and unemployment, the current weighted scenario shows the deeper GDP drop and steeper spike in unemployment initially, but over the following 18 months severely adverse assumptions are worse for longer.And for key price indexes such as CRE or home prices or the Dow index for equity markets, the stress test assumptions are worse both near and longer-term. While the outlook obviously remains uncertain, a key difference between the stress test assumptions in the current environment to be determined is the ultimate effectiveness of the massive Federal reserve liquidity programs and the unprecedented financial stimulus programs via the CARES Act regardless with our reserves at the March 31 at 74% of our severely adverse modeled stress test losses, we believe we have been proactive in building healthy loan loss reserves for an uncertain environment.Wrapping up this section on slide 17, wanted to remind you of our stress test results to show the resiliency of our business. First our PPNR earnings power remains strong due to our accounting countercyclical business and fixed income and we are seeing that counteryclicality play out currently and second the lower loss content mix of our credit portfolio with the meaningful portion of C&I and very low risk loans to mortgage companies and underweight CRE portfolio and a de minims credit card portfolio should serve us well in the stress environment.With that I will turn it over to Susan to give you a little bit more color on our credit portfolio.