Possibly a few hours late (not sure about that, but I trust they have confirmed it with APRA) the ANZ have got their numbers out. Like the CBA when they first came out they are not yet on their website, but, in compliance with Rule 3.1 of the ASX, they are on the ASX’s website. See here. Once they are up on the ANZ site I will try to find them and post a link.
Remember, the clock only stops ticking when they are on the website, so the ANZ had better not take the same 4 days the CBA did.
The only thing that the formats of all the disclosures have in common is that they have obviously not looked at each others’ as yet and more or less agreed on a common format. Maybe that will happen over the next year. Let’s hope so. The following comparison is based on my aggregation of the numbers to try to get them roughly right. If I have made any errors, please let me know.
On to the numbers in brief.
The ANZ’s capital position is the best of the three – matching the CBA on total capital, but with more of the ANZ’s being tier one (the best sort). Their book is (as you would expect) a little more weighted towards the corporate market than the CBA or WBC – and this shows up well in the impairment numbers.
The ANZ’s Basel II program looks to be the most advanced of the four, with less than 8.5% of the book left in the Standardised category. I will need to do some decent ratio analysis before I can see exactly why this is, but my first impression is that this is because they have managed to get more of their “Sovereign” and “Other Retail” into the AIRB than either CBA or WBC (NAB has to be ignored here, with more of their assets across the book in Standardised).
The ANZ, however, may need some of that big capital base they have. While their loans over 90dpd number is mid-field (in fact, the second best after the WBC), their impaired numbers are the worst of the big four, with the “Corporate” number alone being roughly as big as the total impaired by the NAB, the next worst1.
The rest of their impaired book is lineball with the WBC and NAB – the CBA is therefore the outlier (but in a good way).
Over the next few days I am aiming to do some more detailed comparisons of the numbers and, if I have time, the qualitative disclosures. They may be interesting if the banks actually say what their real attitudes are.
1. This is not directly comparable, which is why I have to hedge. The ANZ has broken the impaired book up slightly differently to the others, making this number hard to get to. The “Other” figure in their table I have guessed is mostly “Other Retail”, so I have put it all there, but some of it will be assets the others have included in “Corporate” and “Other”.
Numbers are now on the ANZ website – and they get their own, dedicated, page. Look ank">here.