Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Top Ten Challenges for Investment Banks 2015: Restructuring: Challenge 4

Read a report from Accenture Capital Markets on repurposed IB and redesigning an investment bank to support the group.

Related Books

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all

Comments are closed

  • Be the first to comment

Top Ten Challenges for Investment Banks 2015: Restructuring: Challenge 4

  1. 1. Repurposed Investment Banking: Redesigning an investment bank to support the Group Top Ten Challenges for Investment Banks 2015 04 RepurposedInvestmentBanking: Redesigninganinvestmentbank tosupporttheGroup
  2. 2. 04 Repurposed Investment Banking: Redesigning an investment bank to support the Group Difficult decisions surrounding participation in products and markets by the investment bank have defined the past few years. For those whose strategy is solidified, executing on these choices and coordinating with other business lines to ensure that the Group becomes greater than the sum of its parts will now become the priority. For others, increasing capital requirements and the need to generate shareholder returns mean these decisions cannot be delayed. As the experience of the leaders is starting to show, aligning this internal focus on returns in the investment bank with the services of the broader Group will be the differentiating factor in the coming year. But the challenge here is twofold: executing restructuring effectively; and maintaining profitability during redefinition. The restructuring imperative These participation choices are framed by imperatives making the investment bank accountable to its Group. The ongoing profitability challenges, cost of regulatory conformance, threats of fines and volatility all place significant pressure on justifying participation in investment banking activities. However, it is decreasing revenue pools in the investment bank (see Fig. 1) that now seem to be driving restructuring and repurposing. These downward pressures on revenue, when set against increasing Group capital requirements (see Fig. 2), increase the drag on increasingly constrained capital. The investment bank can no longer run as a siloed entity. 2 The shift of focus from investment bank to Group capital position requires such restructuring to shift to highe returning business lines.
  3. 3. 3 Regulatory headwinds make this accountability explicit. Increased CET1 requirements as part of CRDIV mean investment banking’s higher Risk- Weighted Assets (RWAs) may impair the Group’s capital position; that this capital is now held at Group level makes the investment bank’s return on capital a material matter for the Group’s position. Unless commensurate profit is generated, a disproportionate drag on the Group’s increasingly constrained capital levels will force a reordering of activities. We have seen notable efforts to confront this. Credit Suisse’s non-core run-off, alongside an increase of CHF15-20bn in Private Banking and Wealth Management RWAs, is instructive: the Private Banking and Wealth Management businesses reported a return on capital of 32% in Q1 of 2014; the investment bank, 14% (source: Credit Suisse, Goldman Sachs Conference 2014). The shift of focus from investment bank to Group capital position requires such restructuring to shift to higher returning business lines. However, not all investment banks have defined their offering from this Group perspective. Credit Suisse, along with UBS, is advanced in restructuring to complement the Group’s offering. Other central European players, for instance, are still grappling with key participation decisions, including how to manage their FICC offering. The positive market reaction to UBS’s and Credit Suisse’s efforts demonstrate that repurposing toward higher returning Group businesses not necessarily in IB and committing to shareholder returns are two key imperatives in the short to medium term. Internal restructuring On a standalone basis, investment banking activities need to meet their cost of capital and generate sufficient RoE to return shareholder value proportionate to their position within the Group. The top line strategic choices we have seen made in the past few years by market leaders contribute to the broad return to positive RoE (see Fig. 3), indicating that the most painful stages of restructuring have passed. Divestments to aid the Group’s position are coming to fruition, with a decline in the past Figure 1: Declining total revenue in IB activities • Unicredit • Commerzbank • Nomura • Credit Agricole • BNP Paribas • SocGen • Santander • Deutsche Bank • Credit Suisse • UBS • Standard Chartered • RBS • HSBC • Barclays IB • RBC • BoA • Citi • JP Morgan • Morgan Stanley • Goldman Sachs Figure 2: Increasing Group capital requirements- CRDIV (Basel III) 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 350,000 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 -50,000 Source: Banks, Accenture Research Source: Accenture Research Until 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 From 2019 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% • CET 1 capital • Capital conservation buffer • Additional Tier 1 capital • Countercyclical capital buffer • Tier 2 capital 4.0% 3.5% 2.5% 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.5% 2.5% 0.625% 1.25% 1.25% 1.875% 1.875% 0.625% 2.0% 1.0% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 2.0% 3.5% 4.0% 4.5% 4.5% (US$ mn)
  4. 4. 4 Figure 3: ROAE % across major investment banks Note: UBS and Credit Suisse do not separate IB revenue as a line item. Though discussed below, they are not included in this graph • Goldman Sachs • Morgan Stanley • JP Morgan • Bank of America • Wells Fargo • Citi • PNC • Charles Schwab Corp • St ifel Financial Corp • Deutsche Bank 40.00 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00 -10.00 -20.00 -30.00 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 financial year (see Fig. 4). However, the restructuring of portfolios to non-core groups and creation of “bad banks”, reducing the strain on capital and mitigating risk whilst maintaining RoE, is still being managed. Certainly, the haircut required in a wind -down makes this a sub-optimal choice, as we have seen in recent efforts to reduce the drag on Group RoE. But with this resettling of RoE and market restructuring, effective alignment and, if necessary, repurposing can now begin. Some have already reacted to this by feeding the appetite of other business lines during restructuring, as seen with Lloyds Banking Group Insurance’s acquisition of £2bn of infrastructure and long-dated assets from the Commercial Bank to match growing annuities liabilities. Where a captive Asset or Wealth Management arm exists, similar opportunities to repurpose productively present themselves – but are yet to be fully realised. From restructuring to repurposing Repurposing can assist in growing the Group’s core revenue from existing market share, whilst aiding client acquisition. UBS is a leader here, in aligning its investment bank to provide market access for its core Wealth Management client base. It achieved significant growth in new investment by defining a “full service offering” around this core, increasing its net money flow to Wealth Management by CHF7bn in Q4 FY13 and shaping its market-accessing products to support this growth. Moreover, Morgan Source: Accenture Research
  5. 5. 5 Figure 4: Total value of disclosed divestments by investment banks ($bn) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Stanley’s pursuit of stock trading, acquiring the Smith Barney brokerage whilst growing the Wealth Management offering has seen impressive returns. Defining a full service offering around the Group’s core client base, moving away from the unsustainable suite of products that previously defined “full service”, is crucial. This offering will vary by Group, and Morgan Stanley’s acquiring Smith Barney from Citi demonstrates that repurposing can benefit by acquiring businesses now deemed non-core by competitors. Of course, repurposing is not without challenges. Detaching legacy technology and operations from the core offering can, due to entrenched complexity, hinder realignment. That the required transformation programmes must justify themselves by becoming self-funding within a year is a further challenge. Yet the standardisation of products, as supervision gathers pace, has combined with a growth in demand to create a significant outsourcing market capable of winding down or managing in a cost-efficient manner. Moreover, rapid transformation can generate these returns by enabling more effective cross-marketing. Growing services such as Transaction Banking for existing FX clients, as Deutsche Bank has done, opens further revenue lines from an investment banking client base. Cost savings can be achieved at the same time as execution risk is moved outside of the bank to third parties, and the enhanced profitability from an existing client base generates the returns that decision makers require. Shifting focus from the Group’s balance sheet to its PL, where differentiated IB platforms and operational capabilities exist, they can be repurposed to have a positive impact on operating expenditure. Furthermore, they reduce the capex required to meet updated regulatory transparency requirements. For example, the scalability provided by platforms designed for a broad offering can assist in meeting reporting requirements elsewhere, driven by Dodd-Frank and EMIR. Credit Suisse is repurposing its differentiated back office reporting functions for their expanded Private Banking and Asset Management division. The tying up of operations, in short, can be productively pursued from the front to the back of the service offering, from products to operations. Successful repurposing, we can see, can take many forms. What will differentiate leaders in 2015 will be the execution of participation choices whilst creating an investment bank in productive partnership with its Group. With a lack of clarity surrounding regulated leverage ratios, the question of profitability remains, and the effective use of capital will continue to be a focus. Some are closer to the repurposing watershed than others. Those still approaching it should apply the lens of the Group, as some leaders have done, and discern how the investment bank would be best positioned to serve its Group’s offering. With a lack of clarity surrounding regulated leverage ratios, the question of profitability remains, and the effective use of capital will continue to be a focus. Source: Accenture Research
  6. 6. About Accenture Accenture is a global management consulting, technology services and outsourcing company, with more than 305,000 people serving clients in more than 120 countries. Combining unparalleled experience, comprehensive capabilities across all industries and business functions, and extensive research on the world’s most successful companies, Accenture collaborates with clients to help them become high-performance businesses and governments. The company generated net revenues of US$30.0 billion for the fiscal year ended Aug. 31, 2014. Its home page is www.accenture.com. Accenture Experts To discuss any of the ideas presented in this paper please contact: Owen Jelf Global Managing Director Capital Markets owen.jelf@accenture.com +44 20 7844 2792 Christopher Hook Capital Markets, London christopher.j.hook@accenture.com +44 20 3335 1373 Tomasz Walkowicz Capital Markets Research, London tomasz.m.walkowicz@accenture.com +44 20 7844 5542 Disclaimer This report has been prepared by and is distributed by Accenture. This document is for information purposes. No part of this document may be reproduced in any manner without the written permission of Accenture. While we take precautions to ensure that the source and the information we base our judgments on is reliable, we do not represent that this information is accurate or complete and it should not be relied upon as such. It is provided with the understanding that Accenture is not acting in a fiduciary capacity. Opinions expressed herein are subject to change without notice. Copyright © 2014 Accenture All rights reserved. Accenture, its logo, and High Performance Delivered are trademarks of Accenture.

×