View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

Shared National Credits Program
2013 Review

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
Washington, D.C.
September 2013

Shared National Credits Review for 2013

Contents
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................... 3
About the SNC Review ............................................................................................................... 4
PART I: SNC Credit Quality ...................................................................................................... 6
Overall SNC Portfolio................................................................................................................. 6
Overall SNC Credit Quality and Trends ..................................................................................... 6
PART 2: SNC Loan Distribution................................................................................................ 7
Loan Distribution by Volume ..................................................................................................... 7
Loan Distribution by Credit Quality ........................................................................................... 7
PART 3: Leveraged Lending Trends ......................................................................................... 8
PART 4: Syndicated Loan Underwriting Trends ..................................................................... 8
PART 5: SNC Portfolio – Maturity Profile ............................................................................... 9
Appendix A: Committed and Outstanding Balances ............................................................... 10
Appendix B: SNC Industry Trends by Sector.......................................................................... 11
Appendix C: Exposure by Entity Type .................................................................................... 11

Index of Figures and Tables
Figure 1: Overall Credit Facilities and Commitment Trends ........................................................ 6
Figure 2: Overall Criticized Volume and Percentage Trends ........................................................ 7
Table 1: Distribution of SNC Commitments by Lender Type ....................................................... 7
Figure 3: SNC Portfolio—Maturity Schedule ............................................................................... 9

-2-

Shared National Credits Review for 2013

Executive Summary
The interagency Shared National Credits (SNC) Review for 2013 indicates that credit quality of
syndicated loans remains broadly unchanged from last year’s review for large syndicated corporate loans
and loan commitments held by U.S. bank organizations, foreign bank organizations (FBO), and
nonbanks, such as securitization pools, hedge funds, insurance companies, and pension funds. Criticized
and classified assets remain at elevated levels at 10.0 percent and 6.2 percent respectively. The volume of
criticized assets increased 2.4 percent to $302 billion but as a percentage of total commitments the
criticized asset rate fell from the prior year as the overall SNC portfolio grew more rapidly than did weak
assets. A criticized asset is rated special mention, substandard, doubtful, or loss.
The 2013 SNC portfolio is comprised of a significant volume of leveraged loans that totaled $545 billion
and accounted for $227 billion or 75 percent of criticized SNC assets. Forty-two percent of the leveraged
loan portfolio was criticized by examiners. A focused review of leveraged loans found material
widespread weaknesses in underwriting practices, including excessive leverage, inability to amortize debt
over a reasonable period, and lack of meaningful financial covenants. Excluding leveraged loans from
the SNC portfolio, the criticized rate drops to a relatively benign 3.1 percent.
The federal banking agencies issued updated leveraged lending supervisory guidance on March 21, 2013.
This guidance outlines principles related to safe and sound leveraged lending activities, including the
expectation that banks and thrifts originate leveraged loans using prudent underwriting standards,
regardless of their intent to hold or distribute them. In addition, each lender should independently
evaluate all participations purchased, including SNCs. While leveraged lending activity declined after the
most recent financial crisis, volumes have since increased significantly.
The 2013 review included an evaluation of underwriting standards on SNCs that were originated in 2012.
Examiners noted an increased frequency of weak underwriting during the past year, and this trend
heightens the agencies’ concern. Agent banks issued a high volume of syndicated leveraged loans to
borrowers that may not have capacity to repay and de-lever to a sustainable level over a reasonable
period. Borrowers also found it easier to increase leverage through dividend recapitalization transactions.
As explained in the updated guidance, the agencies expect financial institutions to properly evaluate and
monitor underwritten risk in leveraged loans, and ensure borrowers have sustainable capital structures.
Nonbank entities continue to be the primary buyers of riskier, leveraged loans. Nonbank entities hold a
disproportionate share of classified assets compared to their overall ownership of the SNC portfolio.
Nonbank entities own1 $125 billion, or 67.0 percent of all SNC classified credits. A classified asset is
rated substandard, doubtful or loss.
Near-term refinancing risk remains low in the SNC portfolio with only 15 percent of SNC commitments
scheduled to mature in 2013 and 2014 compared to 60 percent which are scheduled to mature in 2016 and
2017. During 2012 and into 2013, borrowers continued to refinance and modify loan agreements to
extend maturities. These transactions had the effect of relieving near-term refinancing risk, but may not
improve borrowers’ ability to repay their debts in the longer term.
Other findings from the 2013 SNC Review include:


Total SNC commitments increased by $219 billion to $3.01 trillion, or 7.8 percent from the 2012
review. Total SNCs outstanding increased $119 billion to $1.36 trillion, an increase of 9.6 percent.

1

Ownership of SNCs results from retention of a portion of SNCs originated for distribution and/or purchase of SNC
loan participations.

-3-

Shared National Credits Review for 2013



Criticized assets, which include assets rated special mention, substandard, doubtful, and loss,
increased from $295 billion to $302 billion, representing 10.0 percent of the SNC portfolio, compared
with 10.6 percent in 2012. Criticized dollar volume increased 2.4 percent from the 2012 level.



Classified assets, which include assets rated substandard, doubtful, and loss, declined from
$196 billion to $187 billion, representing 6.2 percent of the portfolio, compared with 7.0 percent in
2012. Classified dollar volume fell 4.5 percent from the 2012 level.



Credits rated special mention, which exhibit potential weakness and could result in further
deterioration if uncorrected, increased from $99 billion to $115 billion, representing 3.8 percent of the
portfolio, compared with 3.6 percent in 2012. Special mention dollar volume increased 15.8 percent
from the 2012 level.



The overall severity of classifications declined, with credits rated as doubtful decreasing from $29
billion to $14 billion and assets rated as loss increasing slightly from $5 billion to $8 billion. Loans
that are rated either doubtful or loss account for 0.7 percent of the portfolio, compared with 1.2
percent in the prior review. Adjusted for losses, nonaccrual loans declined from $82 billion to
$61 billion, a 25.8 percent reduction. Appendix C reflects nonaccrual loans inclusive of loss
dispositions.



The distribution of credits across entity types—U.S. bank organizations, FBOs, and nonbanks—
remained relatively unchanged. U.S. bank organizations owned 44.4 percent of total SNC loan
commitments, FBOs owned 35.8 percent, and nonbanks owned 19.7 percent. Nonbanks continued to
own a larger share of classified (67.0 percent) and nonaccrual (72.3 percent) assets than their total
share of the SNC portfolio (19.7 percent). Institutions insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation (FDIC) owned 12.2 percent of classified assets and 7.2 percent of nonaccrual loans.

About the SNC Review
The SNC program, governed by an interagency agreement among the Board of Governors of the Federal
Reserve System, the FDIC, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (the agencies) is designed
to review and assess risk in the largest and most complex credits shared by multiple financial institutions.
The program provides uniform treatment of, and increased efficiency in, the risk analysis and
classification of shared credits.
The annual SNC Review results are prepared and released jointly by the agencies. The 2013 SNC
Review included examination of $800 billion in credit commitments covering 26.6 percent of the $3.01
trillion SNC portfolio. The sample was weighted toward noninvestment grade and criticized credits with
93.3 percent of all special mention and classified credits reviewed. Results of the review are based on
analyses prepared in the second quarter of 2013, using credit-related data provided by federally
supervised institutions as of December 31, 2012, and March 31, 2013.

-4-

Shared National Credits Review for 2013

Definitions


Credit Facilities—Credit facilities include syndicated loans and loan commitments, letters of credit,
and commercial leases, and other forms of credit. Commitment amounts include both drawn and
undrawn portions of the loans, or facilities. The SNC review reports only the par amounts of
commitments, which may differ from the amounts at which loans are carried by investors.



Criticized and Classified Assets—Criticized assets include all assets rated special mention,
substandard, doubtful, and loss. Classified assets include assets rated substandard, doubtful, and loss.
The agencies’ uniform loan classification standards and examination manuals define these risk rating
classifications.



Doubtful—Doubtful assets have all the weaknesses of assets classified as substandard and when the
weaknesses make collection or liquidation in full, on the basis of available current information, highly
questionable or improbable.



Loss—Assets classified as loss are considered uncollectible and of so little value that their
continuance as bankable assets is not warranted. Amounts classified as loss should be promptly
charged off. This classification does not mean that there is no recovery or salvage value, but rather
that it is not practical or desirable to defer writing off these assets, even though some value may be
recovered in the future.



Nonaccrual—Nonaccrual loans are defined for regulatory reporting purposes as loans and lease
financing receivables that are required to be reported on a nonaccrual basis because (a) they are
maintained on a cash basis owing to a deterioration in the financial position of the borrower,
(b) payment in full of interest or principal is not expected, or (c) principal or interest has been in
default for 90 days or longer, unless the obligation is both well secured and in the process of
collection.



Pass—A shared national credit that is in good standing and is not criticized in any way.



Shared National Credit (SNC)—A shared national credit is any loan or formal loan commitment,
and any asset such as real estate, stocks, notes, bonds, and debentures taken as debts previously
contracted, extended to borrowers by a federally supervised institution, its subsidiaries, and affiliates,
that aggregates to $20 million or more and is shared by three or more unaffiliated federally supervised
institutions, or a portion of which is sold to two or more unaffiliated federally supervised institutions.
The threshold of $20 million has remained unchanged since the first report in 1977.



Special Mention—Special mention assets have potential weaknesses that deserve management’s
close attention. If left uncorrected, these potential weaknesses could result in further deterioration of
the repayment prospects, or in the institutions’ credit position in the future. Special mention assets
are not adversely rated and do not expose institutions to sufficient risk to warrant adverse rating.



Substandard—Substandard assets are inadequately protected by the current sound worth and paying
capacity of the obligor, or of the collateral pledged, if any. Assets so rated have well-defined
weaknesses that jeopardize the liquidation of the debt and present the distinct possibility that the
institution will sustain some loss if deficiencies are not corrected.

-5-

Shared National Credits Review for 2013

PART I: SNC Credit Quality
Overall SNC Portfolio
The 2013 SNC portfolio totaled $3.01 trillion, with over 9,300 credit facilities to approximately 5,800
borrowers (see Figure 1). The commitment amount rose by $219 billion, or 7.8 percent, from 2012, while
the outstanding dollar volume of the portfolio increased by $119 billion, or 9.6 percent (see Appendix A),
and the number of credits increased by 590, or 6.8 percent. Appendix B contains a breakout of SNC
results by major industry group.2

Billions

Figure 1: Overall Credit Facilities and Commitment Trends
$3,500

12000

$3,000

10000

$2,500

8000

$2,000
6000
$1,500
4000

$1,000

2000

$500

Utilized Exposure

Unfunded Exposure

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

0

1993

$0
Number of Credits

Overall SNC Credit Quality and Trends
The percentages of criticized and classified assets remain elevated at 10.0 percent and 6.2 percent
compared with 10.6 percent and 7.0 percent in 2012, respectively3. Asset quality improvement
experienced during the past three SNC cycles stalled in 2013. This is particularly troubling given the
current economic environment and low interest rates. The criticized asset ratio remains double that of the
pre-crisis period. This year’s reduction in the criticized rate is primarily a result of the 7.8 percent
increase in the overall SNC portfolio; and does not reflect a dollar commitment reduction of criticized
assets. Criticized assets increased by $7 billion to $302 billion (see Figure 2), a 2.4 percent increase from
last year. Credits rated special mention increased by $16 billion to $115 billion, a 15.8 percent increase.
Special mention credits represented 3.8 percent of the portfolio, compared with 3.6 percent in 2012.
Borrowers in some segments were assigned improved regulatory ratings due to improved operating

2

The agencies introduced industry data in 2008 that presented industries vertically along product origination and
distribution lines. The review places credits in seven primary sectors, largely following the outline of the 2007 U.S.
Census Bureau North American Industry Classification System codes (see Appendix B). The seven primary sectors
are further dissected into 24 industry groups constructed from 93 subgroups. The analysis in this report uses the 24
industry groups.

3

The criticized credits and related ratios do not include the effects of hedging or other techniques that organizations
may use to mitigate risk.

-6-

Shared National Credits Review for 2013

performance. In particular, criticized credits in the commercial real estate market showed marked
improvement. Classified credits declined by $9 billion to $187 billion, a 4.5 percent decrease. The
volume of nonaccrual loans net of loss dispositions declined from $82 billion to $61 billion, a
25.8 percent decrease, and represented 2.0 percent of the portfolio, down from 2.9 percent in 2012.

Billions

Figure 2: Overall Criticized Volume and Percentage Trends
$700

25%

$600

20%

$500
$400

15%

$300

10%

$200
5%

$100

Special Mention $

Classified $

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

0%

1993

$0

Criticized %

PART 2: SNC Loan Distribution
Loan Distribution by Volume
Table 1 lists the dollar volume and percentage of the SNC portfolio by lender type. The percentage of
SNC commitments owned by U.S. banking organizations increased slightly from 43.2 percent to
44.4 percent. The percentage of SNC commitments owned by FBOs declined slightly from 36.9 percent
to 35.8 percent and commitments for nonbanks remained virtually unchanged from 19.8 percent to 19.7
percent of the portfolio. Nonbanks included securitization pools, hedge funds, insurance companies, and
pension funds. FDIC-insured institutions’ share of the SNC portfolio increased slightly from 44.9 percent
to 47.3 percent (see Appendix C).
Table 1: Distribution of SNC Commitments by Lender Type
2012 Total
2013 Total
Lender Type
Commitments
Commitments
($ Trillion)
($ Trillion)
U.S. Banks
FBOs
Nonbanks
Total

$1.21
$1.03
$0.55
$2.79

$1.34
$1.08
$0.59
$3.01

2012% Total
Commitments
43.2%
36.9%
19.8%
100.0%

2013% Total
Commitments
44.4%
35.8%
19.7%
100.0%

Loan Distribution by Credit Quality
While nonbank entities owned the smallest share of SNC commitments (19.8 percent), they owned 67.0
percent of classified assets (see Appendix C). U.S. banks owned 15.6 percent of classified assets, and
FBOs owned 17.3 percent. In addition, 21.1 percent of nonbank assets were classified, compared with 2.2
percent of the U.S. bank portfolio and 3.0 percent of the FBO portfolio. FDIC-insured institutions owned
$23 billion of classified assets, a classified percentage of 1.6 percent, down from 2.1 percent in 2012. Of

-7-

Shared National Credits Review for 2013

nonaccrual loans, nonbank institutions owned 72.3 percent, or $50 billion; FDIC-insured institutions
owned only $5 billion, or 7.2 percent.
Classified credits declined for U.S. Banks and FBOs, but increased for nonbanks over the past year.
Classified credits held by nonbanks increased by $3 billion, or 2.6 percent, to $125 billion; U.S. bank
classified credits decreased by $7 billion, or 18.4 percent, to $29 billion; and FBO classified credits
decreased by $5 billion, or 14.1 percent, to $32 billion (see Appendix C).

PART 3: Leveraged Lending Trends
The 2013 SNC review included a review of 496 leveraged obligors, with $429 billion in commitments
(approximately 53.6 percent of reviewed SNC commitments). The review identified a high level of risk
associated with this subset of the portfolio. The criticized rate, at 42 percent, was substantially higher
than the overall portfolio criticized rate of 10.0 percent. Twenty-six percent of the leveraged loan
portfolio is classified, compared with only 6.2 percent of all SNCs. Further, 34 percent of recently
originated transaction structures were cited as weak due largely to a combination of high leverage and
absence of financial covenants. Other weak characteristics observed include minimal equity and minimal
demonstration of deleveraging capacity. In addition, covenant protection weakened as evidenced by the
reduced number of financial maintenance covenants, the use of net debt in many leverage covenants, and
various provisions that allow increased debt above starting leverage and the dilution of senior secured
positions.
The agencies recognize that leveraged lending is an important type of financing for the U.S. and global
economies, and the U.S. banking system plays a key role in making credit available by syndicating credit
to investors. Leveraged loan transactions should be structured to reflect a sound business premise,
including an appropriate capital structure, reasonable cash flow, and reasonable balance sheet leverage.
Such structures should clearly support a borrower’s capacity to repay and to de-lever to a sustainable level
over a reasonable period, whether underwritten to hold or distribute.
Banks should ensure they do not unnecessarily heighten risk by originating poorly underwritten and low
quality loans. Poorly underwritten or low quality leveraged loans, including those that are pooled with
other loans or participated with other institutions, may generate risks for the financial system.
The Interagency Guidance on Leveraged Lending issued on March 21, 2013 addresses the basis of the
agencies’ supervisory focus and heightened expectations for underwriting and other risk management
practices of supervised financial institutions involved in leveraged lending. Institutions that participate in
this lending activity but do not implement strong risk management processes consistent with this
guidance will be criticized by the appropriate agency.

PART 4: Syndicated Loan Underwriting Trends
This is the seventh consecutive SNC Review in which examiners conducted an analysis of syndicated
loan underwriting standards. The 2013 review included an evaluation of underwriting standards on 714
SNCs originated in 2012 compared to 830 in 2011. Underwriting assessments covered 21 percent of the
number of loans underwritten in 2012 and 19 percent of the dollar volume. The review evaluated
structure, repayment terms, pricing, collateral, and loan agreements.
Of the 9,276 SNC reported facilities, 3,338 or 36 percent have 2012 origination dates. The quality of
2012 originations slightly improved from 2011 originations as more transactions were reported as
investment grade. The SNC examination noted weak underwriting standards in 24 percent of the loan
transactions sampled. This percentage compares unfavorably to 2011, 2010 and 2009 percentages of 19

-8-

Shared National Credits Review for 2013

percent, 16 percent and 13 percent, respectively. Leveraged lending transactions are the primary driver of
this deterioration. The most frequently cited underwriting deficiencies identified during the 2013 SNC
Review were minimal or no loan covenants, liberal repayment terms, repayment dependent on
refinancing, and inadequate collateral valuations. The weak underwriting structures are in part
attributable to aggressive competition and market liquidity.

PART 5: SNC Portfolio – Maturity Profile
Refinancing risk has declined in the SNC portfolio as only 15 percent of SNC commitments will mature
over the next two years compared with 23 percent for the same time frame in the 2012 SNC Review.
During 2012 and into 2013, syndicators continued to refinance and modify loan agreements to extend
maturities. These transactions had the effect of relieving near-term refinancing risk, but may not improve
borrowers’ ability to repay their debts in the longer term. Bank management should ensure such loan
modification strategies are not used to substitute for realistic debt repayment, or to avoid recognizing
problem loans.

$1,000
$900
$800
$700
$600
$500

$400
$300
$200
$100

Pass $

Special Mention $

-9-

Classified $

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

$0

2013

Billions

Figure 3: SNC Portfolio—Maturity Schedule

Appendix A: Committed and Outstanding Balances

Committed and Outstanding Balances
(Dollars in Billions )

Year

Special
Mention

SubStandard

Doubtful

Loss

Total
Total
Total
Total
Classified Criticized Committed Outstanding

1989

24.0

18.5

3.5

0.9

22.9

46.9

692

245

1990

43.1

50.8

5.8

1.8

58.4

101.5

769

321

1991

49.2

65.5

10.8

3.5

79.8

129.0

806

361

1992

50.4

56.4

12.8

3.3

72.5

122.9

798

357

1993

31.7

50.4

6.7

3.5

60.6

92.3

806

332

1994

31.4

31.1

2.7

2.3

36.1

67.5

893

298

1995

18.8

25.0

1.7

1.5

28.2

47.0

1,063

343

1996

16.8

23.1

2.6

1.4

27.1

43.9

1,200

372

1997

19.6

19.4

1.9

0.9

22.2

41.8

1,435

423

17.6

3.5

0.9

22.0

44.7

1,759

562

1998

22.7

1999

30.8

31.0

4.9

1.5

37.4

68.2

1,829

628

2000

36.0

47.9

10.7

4.7

63.3

99.3

1,951

705

2001

75.4

87.0

22.5

8.0

117.5

192.8

2,049

769

2002

79.0

112.0

26.1

19.1

157.1

236.1

1,871

692

2003

55.2

112.1

29.3

10.7

152.2

207.4

1,644

600

2004

32.8

55.1

12.5

6.4

74.0

106.8

1,545

500

2005

25.9

44.2

5.6

2.7

52.5

78.3

1,627

522

2006

33.4

58.1

2.5

1.2

61.8

95.2

1,874

626

2007

42.5

69.6

1.2

0.8

71.6

114.1

2,275

835

2008

210.4

154.9

5.5

2.6

163.1

373.4

2,789

1,208

2009

195.3

337.1

56.4

53.3

446.8

642.1

2,881

1,563

32.6

15.4

304.5

447.2

2,519

1,210

2010

142.7

256.4

2011

106.4

190.7

14.0

9.9

214.6

321.0

2,524

1,118

2012

99.3

161.7

29.5

4.6

195.8

295.1

2,792

1,243

2013

115.0

164.5

14.5

8.0

187.0

302.0

3,011

1,362

Note: Figures may not add to totals due to rounding

Appendix B: SNC Industry Trends by Sector
(In Billions of D o l l a r s )

Industry

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

821.2

Services
Commitment

407.6

377.1

401.6

464.0

589.3

779.0

820.1

735.4

701.3

784.9

Clas s ified

51.9

21.6

24.0

20.1

18.1

45.0

156.5

120.1

92.3

92.8

86.2

Special M e n t i o n

11.9

12.7

5.7

13.3

14.3

106.6

81.5

73.1

57.3

43.2

47.3

12.7%

5.7%

6.0%

4.3%

3.1%

5.8%

19.1%

16.3%

13.2%

11.8%

10.5%

2.9%

3.4%

1.4%

2.9%

2.4%

13.7%

9.9%

9.9%

8.2%

5.5%

5.8%

709.5

% Classified
% Special M e n t i o n

Commodities
Commitment

345.7

312.0

325.6

364.1

439.6

578.1

658.8

592.3

593.0

665.0

Clas s ified

55.3

32.7

18.0

18.3

10.7

12.7

77.8

57.7

42.5

34.8

39.4

Special M e n t i o n

26.7

15.2

8.9

7.6

7.0

53.6

34.9

20.4

14.0

22.4

27.7

16.0%

10.5%

5.5%

5.0%

2.4%

2.2%

11.8%

9.7%

7.2%

5.2%

5.6%

7.7%

4.9%

2.7%

2.1%

1.6%

9.3%

5.3%

3.4%

2.4%

3.4%

3.9%

% Classified
% Special M e n t i o n
Financial
Commitment

381.6

372.7

363.2

431.1

506.3

541.0

470.9

391.3

435.4

462.6

521.9

Clas s ified

9.5

4.2

0.9

2.1

19.2

32.5

60.4

32.6

27.6

24.7

25.3

Special M e n t i o n

3.7

0.6

0.5

2.9

3.3

13.7

28.0

17.7

9.6

9.6

12.1

% Classified

2.5%

1.1%

0.3%

0.5%

3.8%

6.0%

12.8%

8.3%

6.3%

5.3%

4.8%

% Special M e n t i o n

1.0%

0.2%

0.1%

0.7%

0.7%

2.5%

5.9%

4.5%

2.2%

2.1%

2.3%

283.8

261.7

271.9

289.4

339.4

405.0

436.6

368.4

385.2

431.4

480.1

27.9

11.6

7.3

18.8

18.8

39.8

78.4

27.2

17.0

16.6

15.7

8.7

2.6

9.6

8.1

10.8

13.2

16.3

7.6

4.3

7.7

13.0

% Classified

9.8%

4.4%

2.7%

6.5%

5.5%

9.8%

18.0%

7.4%

4.4%

3.9%

3.3%

% Special M e n t i o n

3.1%

1.0%

3.5%

2.8%

3.2%

3.3%

3.7%

2.1%

1.1%

1.8%

2.7%

171.9

Manufacturers
Commitment
Clas s ified
Special M e n t i o n

Real Estate
Commitment

97.9

99.5

122.9

159.2

203.6

241.6

244.4

198.2

164.8

164.8

Clas s ified

2.3

1.6

0.6

0.6

2.9

25.3

49.2

45.9

23.7

14.4

5.1

Special M e n t i o n

1.6

0.9

0.2

0.5

2.2

9.2

22.3

15.3

11.4

6.9

2.1

% Classified

2.4%

1.6%

0.5%

0.4%

1.4%

10.5%

20.1%

23.1%

14.4%

8.8%

3.0%

% Special M e n t i o n

1.6%

0.9%

0.1%

0.3%

1.1%

3.8%

9.1%

7.7%

6.9%

4.2%

1.2%

Distribution
112.0

108.7

122.3

146.1

175.7

216.0

220.5

199.0

225.9

268.7

291.3

Clas s ified

5.4

2.2

1.7

1.5

1.9

7.7

23.2

19.6

10.0

10.7

11.8

Special M e n t i o n

2.6

0.9

1.0

0.9

4.7

13.9

12.1

8.4

9.8

8.9

12.4

% Classified

4.8%

2.0%

1.4%

1.0%

1.1%

3.6%

10.5%

9.9%

4.4%

4.0%

4.1%

% Special M e n t i o n

2.3%

0.8%

0.8%

0.6%

2.7%

6.4%

5.5%

4.2%

4.4%

3.3%

4.3%

Commitment

Government
Commitment

18.4

14.3

19.1

20.1

21.6

28.6

29.9

34.0

18.5

14.6

15.3

Clas s ified

0.2

0.0

0.0

0.4

0.1

0.0

1.2

1.5

1.5

1.6

3.4

Special M e n t i o n

0.1

0.1

0.0

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.1

0.0

0.5

0.3

% Classified

0.8%

0.3%

0.1%

1.8%

0.5%

0.0%

4.0%

4.3%

8.4%

11.0%

22.4%

% Special M e n t i o n

0.5%

0.6%

0.0%

0.4%

0.2%

0.4%

0.7%

0.4%

0.0%

3.4%

2.1%

1,647.0

1,546.1

1,626.6

1,873.9

2,275.4

2,789.2

2,881.2

2,518.5

2,524.2

2,792.0

3,011.1

152.4

74.0

52.5

61.8

71.7

163.1

446.8

304.5

214.6

195.8

187.0

55.3

32.8

25.9

33.4

42.4

210.4

195.3

142.7

106.4

99.3

115.0

% Classified

9.3%

4.8%

3.2%

3.3%

3.2%

5.8%

15.5%

12.1%

8.5%

7.0%

6.2%

% Special M e n t i o n

3.4%

2.1%

1.6%

1.8%

1.9%

7.5%

6.8%

5.7%

4.2%

3.6%

3.8%

All Industries (Total)
Commitment
Clas s ified
Special M e n t i o n

N o t e : Figures m a y n o t add t o t o t a l s due t o r o u n d i n g

Appendix C: Exposure by Entity Type

Share of Total Commitments (%)
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

US Banking Institutions

45.4

46.5

44.8

44.3

42.7

41.1

40.8

40.8

41.5

43.2

44.4

Insured

42.5

43.4

41.5

40.8

38.9

37.4

35.0

36.4

36.3

38.6

40.3

Uninsured(*)

2.9

3.1

3.3

3.5

3.8

3.7

5.8

4.4

5.3

4.7

4.1

43.8

41.6

42.1

41.5

41.4

39.0

38.0

37.9

38.3

36.9

35.8

FBOs
Insured

5.4

5.5

6.0

6.2

6.4

5.1

5.8

5.8

5.7

6.3

6.8

Uninsured

38.4

36.1

36.1

35.3

35.0

33.9

32.2

32.1

32.6

30.6

29.0

10.8

12.0

13.1

14.3

15.9

19.9

21.2

21.3

20.2

19.8

19.7

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

US Banking Institutions

43.6

18.8

11.9

13.1

19.2

47.2

134.8

81.6

49.4

35.8

29.2

Insured

37.8

16.0

8.6

9.0

13.2

38.3

96.3

57.9

31.2

22.3

19.1

Uninsured(*)

5.8

2.8

3.2

4.1

6.0

9.0

38.6

23.8

18.2

13.5

10.1

65.0

31.3

15.5

17.3

17.6

45.9

101.8

62.0

41.7

37.8

32.4

Nonbanks

Total Classifications ($ billion)

FBOs
Insured

6.8

2.8

1.5

1.6

2.3

5.1

11.7

11.2

5.2

4.0

3.4

Uninsured

58.3

28.5

14.0

15.7

15.4

40.8

90.1

50.8

36.5

33.8

29.0

43.6

24.0

25.0

31.5

34.8

70.0

210.2

160.9

123.5

122.2

125.4

152.2

74.2

52.5

61.8

71.6

163.1

446.8

304.5

214.6

195.8

187.0

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

US Banking Institutions

5.8

2.6

1.6

1.6

2.0

4.1

11.5

7.9

4.7

3.0

2.2

Insured

5.1

2.2

1.2

1.1

1.4

3.3

8.2

5.6

3.0

1.8

1.4

Uninsured(*)

0.8

0.4

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.8

3.3

2.3

1.7

1.1

0.8

Nonbanks
Totals

Classifieds as % of Commitments

FBOs

9.0

4.9

2.3

2.2

1.9

4.2

9.3

6.0

4.3

3.7

3.0

Insured

0.9

0.4

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.5

1.1

1.1

0.5

0.4

0.3

Uninsured

8.1

4.4

2.0

2.0

1.6

3.7

8.2

4.9

3.8

3.3

2.7

24.5

13.0

11.7

11.8

9.6

12.6

34.4

30.0

24.3

22.1

21.1

9.3

4.8

3.2

3.3

3.1

5.8

15.5

12.1

8.5

7.0

6.2

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

US Banking Institutions

18.4

7.7

3.9

2.8

0.8

7.4

46.8

35.6

22.0

12.9

7.9

Insured

16.5

0.1

3.1

1.8

0.5

6.3

35.5

24.2

12.8

7.1

4.2

Uninsured(*)

1.9

7.6

0.8

1.0

0.3

1.1

11.3

11.4

9.2

5.8

3.7

29.5

17.6

9.0

4.7

0.9

5.6

35.5

28.6

18.1

15.9

11.2

-

0.4

0.4

0.2

1.0

3.6

3.1

2.0

1.1

0.7

8.6

4.3

0.7

4.6

31.9

25.5

16.1

14.8

10.5

Nonbanks
Totals

Total Nonaccrual Commitments ($ billion)

FBOs
Insured

3.2

Uninsured

26.3

17.6

Nonbanks

20.5

12.3

11.9

10.2

2.2

9.3

89.8

87.0

61.0

56.9

49.7

Totals

68.4

37.6

24.8

17.7

3.9

22.3

172.1

151.2

101.1

85.6

68.8

(*)Uninsured refers to organizations that do not take consumer deposits s u c h as holding companies,
brokerage firms, finance companies, etc.
Note: Figures may n o t add to totals due to rounding