You are currently viewing our desktop site, do you want to download our app instead?
Moneyweb Android App Moneyweb iOS App Moneyweb Mobile Web App

NEW SENS search and JSE share prices

More about the app

Banking profits plunged by R50bn in 2020

Largely due to the sharp increase in provisions for bad debts.
None of the banks declared interim dividends and some passed on final dividends as well. Image: Mike Hutchings, Reuters

When the major South African banks announced their results over the last two weeks, the management teams of each noted the exceptional challenges of an unprecedented economic environment during 2020.

According to an overview of banks’ results by PwC, aggregate headline earnings for all of the banks declined by more than 48% in 2020 compared to the previous financial year, return on equity more than halved from 17.8% to 8.3%, and provisions for bad debt increased by 2.5 times.

Moneyweb Insider INSIDERGOLD

Subscribe for full access to all our share and unit trust data tools, our award-winning articles, and support quality journalism in the process.

Choose an option:

R63 per month
R630 per year SAVE R126

You will be redirected to a checkout page.
To view all features and options, click here.

A monthly subscription is charged pro rata, based on the day of purchase. This is non-refundable and includes a R5 once-off sign-up fee.
A yearly subscription is refundable within 14 days of purchase and includes a 365-day membership.

Click here for more information.

Looking at the actual figures, the headline earnings of the large retail banks that published their results recently declined by more than R50 billion from nearly R85 billion in 2019 to R43.6 billion last year, with PwC noting that the combined profit of the banks is now lower than in 2013.

The results showed that the major reason for the decline was the increase in provisions for bad debt. In reality, policies and accounting rules pertaining to the provision for bad debt means these provisions are likely to turn out to be real losses, rather than just book entries.

Read: Covid-19 vs the financial crisis: Why the bank bad debts can’t be compared

The figures indicate that thousands of households are facing severe financial difficulties.

The PwC analysis included the annual results of FNB, Nedbank and Standard Bank for the year to end December, while Absa’s interim results for the six month to December were combined with that of the second half of the previous financial year to be able to compare the annual figures. Investec and Capitec were excluded due to a different product mix and different reporting periods.

Costa Natsas, financial services leader of PwC Africa, noted during a presentation of the PwC analysis that the SA economy started 2020 with the lowest economic growth since the 2009 financial crisis, and then it became worse.

“Because financial services, and banking in particular, function at the epicentre of the broader economic context, banks’ financial performance is closely tied to the economies in which they operate,” says Natsas.

“The severe disruptions and risks brought about by the Covid-19 pandemic are clearly evident in the major banks’ results for the year ended 31 December 2020.

“The tragedy of numbers is that they cannot fully capture the dire human, social and economic costs caused by the pandemic.

“When the history books complete the accounting for 2020, [they] will recount a profound period – one that altered the trajectory of lives and livelihoods, societies and economies, businesses and households – on a global scale,” says Natsas.

PwC mentions a few stark truths about the SA economy: “The economy has laboured under structural constraints, deteriorating growth trends, worrying unemployment levels and limited fiscal space that [had] been well documented long before Covid-19.

“Quantifying the domestic economic performance of 2020, as Statistics SA notes, makes for sobering reading. While the 7% contraction in the South African economy in 2020 represents a cardiac arrest driven by crisis conditions, it does not diminish the declining domestic economic trends that have prevailed for more than a decade,” according to the analysis.

The analysts note that inflation-adjusted GDP per capita peaked in 2014 and has been declining since then, which highlights the extent to which struggling economic growth has battled to keep pace with population growth.

They says SA was in some form of lockdown for 279 days during in 2020, with the consequence that GDP per capita decreased to 2005 levels.

Personal finances, as evidenced by the banks’ financial results, took a beating.

PwC identified several common trends in its analysis of the banking sector’s results:

  • Driven by a steep increase in credit impairment charges of 2.5 times against FY19, the major banks’ combined headline earnings and return on equity fell to 2012 levels.
  • The second half of 2020 saw credit performance and business volumes faring relatively better than expected compared to the first half-year as lockdown restrictions eased, but were still far worse than pre-pandemic levels.
  • None of the banks declared interim dividends and some passed on final dividends as well, citing capital preservation and the uncertain earnings outlook as reasons for these decisions.
  • While the extent of credit impairments played out differently across loan portfolios, geographies and industries, the steep increase is both undeniable and unsurprising.
  • On the back of increased impairments, the combined credit loss ratio (credit impairment charge for the reporting period as a percentage of average advances) deteriorated. Non-performing loans increased sharply during 2020, amounting to 5.6% of total loans (4.9% at the end of 2019).
  • However, deposit growth benefitted from cautious household and consumer behaviour, as savings increased amid the uncertain environment and prudent cash management strategies were employed by corporate account holders.

Francois Prinsloo, banking and capital markets leader for PwC Africa, says that while the major banks’ results are reflective of an intensely challenging operating environment, they also reveal SA bank’s resilience.

His take on the analysis brings two aspects to the fore, namely that banks’ technology-enabled and customer-centric strategies will feature prominently going forward, and that SA banks are financially strong.

There is an undeniable flight to digital and mobile banking platforms – a trend that pre-dates the pandemic – and 2020 saw record volumes of banking transactions conducted through lower-cost digital channels across all customer segments, says Prinsloo.

However, he adds that branches are not “dead” and that the major banks recognise that their branch networks will continue to play a central role in their overall distribution strategies in the future, but that the size, scope and configuration of the physical branch network will most likely be different.

When the pandemic started, banks shifted their strategic focus from managing profitability and delivering stakeholder returns to managing operational stability and ensuring balance sheet resilience, says Prinsloo. He says this resulted in both technology infrastructure and customer service levels holding up without major incident despite the sudden increase in digital transaction volumes.

If one looks at the banks individually, the results all show continued increases in the cost of networks and technology while staff costs increased very little.

Prinsloo mentions that all the major banks maintained their capital levels comfortably above regulatory requirements and none needed to make use of any of the relaxations announced by authorities.

Banks did not use relief measures offered by authorities

Source: PwC FY20 SA Major Banks Analysis

Rivaan Roopnarain, PwC Africa banking partner says a key take-away is that SA banks are well managed. “Banks have shown their ability to respond purposefully to crisis conditions.

“For the majority of the major banks’ management teams and their people, 2020 will have been the most difficult and complex year on record,” says Roopnarain.

He took a good look at what the management teams predicted for the future, saying that uncertainty will continue from a public health and from an economic standpoint. “The common consensus is that of more uncertainty ahead.

“Some of the major banks have cautiously indicated in their results announcements that they are hopeful to have seen the bottom from an earnings perspective. Early indicators emanating in the first quarter of 2021 show a sliver of positivity – with increased client activity, retail credit collections and early-stage debt relief showing a few promising trends,” he says.

“The major banks hope that earnings trends return to more business-as-usual levels as impairments stabilise. Consequently, a strong focus on credit collections is likely to be a key theme of activity in 2021.

“Positive indicators come with heavy caution – as some commentators note that there is little to no pent-up demand seen on the immediate horizon: in their view, the economy is simply too weak and unemployment too high to contemplate what a meaningful recovery might look like,” says Roopnarain.

PwC concluded that its analysts expect that it will take a few years for GDP to return to pre-pandemic levels. “Through this crisis, however, the major banks have demonstrated their intent to be part of the solution,” notes the report.

The analysis actually delivers good news in the sense that SA banks survived the battle last year, despite some serious damage – and although we like to criticise banks and bankers, healthy banks are essential.

Please consider contributing as little as R20 in appreciation of our quality independent financial journalism.

AUTHOR PROFILE

COMMENTS   8

Sort by:
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Top voted

You must be signed in to comment.

SIGN IN SIGN UP

To Costa & Adriaan, it was never the Covid plandemic that caused havoc, it was the silly rules/lockdowns and regulations that caused all the damage. Please understand this.
Governments & Politicians were paid lots of money to ensure they collapse the country & economy, in return they can implement various laws(without due process), ensure people are delayed/prevented from an education, greatest wealth transfer from old/sick people when they die & push the socialist agenda (similar to “animal farm”).

Brilliant Comment @eudonkickey.

Who knows what the next excuse will be when their position as a governing party is threatened, they may intentionally cripple the country just out of spite!

Looks like the Standard Bank share has been the worst performer in its sector in the past year.

One can go do the same on many industries. Ironically in a pandemic, even the healthcare industry has a bad year. Travel, tourism, property, car sales, most retail, etc etc

Yet, stock markets especially in the US, are at record multiples of anything you bring me.

If we look at these provisions for bad debt, that reflects on the damage caused to small entrepreneurs and their employees, then we should ask if it is worth it. These losses are the cost of lockdown policies. This is the price we pay for the actions of politicians and academics who received their full salaries. They did not bear the cost of their policies and actions. The rest of us paid for their actions.

We have lost two decades of GDP growth. What did we gain? What did the average citizen get in return for the sacrifice of 20 years of GDP growth per capita?

We are supposed to be a democratic country. If we break down the losses, impairments, writeoffs, lack of growth and the loss of wages and benefits to a cost per citizen, how many people will support lockdown measures? It is clear that lockdown served no purpose and did not prevent the virus from spreading. The virus is active in every town and every hostel and home in the country, but now the added burden of the lack of income and financial support is also present. There are only costs and zero benefits.

People support lockdown measures because they ignore their share of the costs. This is the definition of ignorance.

Sensei : you are perhaps not spotting the opportunity that bankers had.

So covid year, people expect bad (and management has already reset their option scheme) : drain the swamp with journal entries (provision for bad debt are free of cash flow). And in earnest discussion with the auditors, they tend to go with management.

Over next two years relax the provisions as required to meet the performance pay hurdles. Easy game.

I did get that point earlier on but still – they are not allowed to cook the books or provide for more bad loans that can be reasonably expected. Nobody knew how many days of lockdown we would suffer. The losses can still be more than what they provided for.

I do however accept your point and I thank you for making it.

Eish – my comments, she is gone?

End of comments.

LATEST CURRENCIES  

USD / ZAR
GBP / ZAR
EUR / ZAR

Podcasts

INSIDER SUBSCRIPTIONS APP VIDEOS RADIO / LISTEN LIVE SHOP OFFERS WEBINARS NEWSLETTERS TRENDING PORTFOLIO TOOL CPD HUB

Follow us:

Search Articles: Advanced Search
Click a Company: