Live data from Hacker News

Credit Suisse Takes $4.7B Hit on Archegos Meltdown

wsj.com

1–10 of 92 posts

Re: Credit Suisse Takes $4.7B Hit on Archegos Meltdown

#6
"Archegos was a fund run by and managing the personal fortune of Bill Hwang, an investor who had built up large positions in companies worth billions of pounds, despite a previous insider trading conviction."

"Credit Suisse’s investment bank under Chin acted as prime broker to Archegos funds, lending it large sums of money to allow it to build up bigger positions in the shareholdings of quoted companies. Hwang had placed big bets that certain stocks, including Chinese technology company Baidu and US media group ViacomCBS, would see their share prices rise. When the stocks fell, both Hwang and his lending banks suffered heavy losses."

This reads as if Credit Suisse was bankrolling a maverick fund manager's speculative investments.

Strikes me as a rather unhealthy disregard for risk, and completely goes against the spirit of capital preservation.

That's four thousand seven hundred million dollars down the drain - by one of the world's most prestigious banks.

Leaves a bitter taste in my working class mouth.

Re: Credit Suisse Takes $4.7B Hit on Archegos Meltdown

#7
post #5
post #4

In 2019 they reported ~$20B profit. So this is like one quarter's profit. You win some, you lose some. https://www.credit-suisse.com/media/assets/corporate/docs/ab...

You mean they reported ~$20B in revenue . Profit was $3.4bn.

Correct! I don't spend a lot of time reading annual reports.

Re: Credit Suisse Takes $4.7B Hit on Archegos Meltdown

#8
As someone who has worked in the Investment Banking industry for a while, I'm always amazed that risk professionals get paid significantly less than the front office guys. This in turn attracts less talented people in risk, who can then be outsmarted by the whipper snappers in the front office teams.

If IBs don't want to lose bucket loads of money every so often, pay your risk guys a bit more so you hire the same calibre of individual that would otherwise end up on the trading/structuring/quant desks.

Re: Credit Suisse Takes $4.7B Hit on Archegos Meltdown

#9

"Archegos was a fund run by and managing the personal fortune of Bill Hwang, an investor who had built up large positions in companies worth billions of pounds, despite a previous insider trading conviction." "Credit Suisse’s investment bank under Chin acted as prime broker to Archegos funds, lending it large sums of money to allow it to build up bigger positions in the shareholdings of quoted companies. Hwang had pl…

A casual reading of that may make it sound like Credit Suisse made some sort of conscious decision to lend money, but from what I see in the financial industry, lending is handed out like candy on Halloween, almost right down to the bowl left out on the street that says "Take Two" and uses the honor system. It's just "leverage". It came with the account and they used it, and it's likely very minimal oversight was ever exerted beyond basic automated checks asserting that sufficient assets were in place to be margin called if necessary.

I see a lot of people calling this the "everything bubble", but to my mind, history may record this as the "leverage bubble". With such low interest rates and free money being shoveled out of the helicopter as fast as it can with more than a whiff of desperation about the whole exercise, there's leverage everywhere, and leverage stacked on that leverage, and leveraged assets being held up as collateral for levered leverage. It seems, at least for today, that this was not The Great Deleveraging, but at some point in the not-too-distant future one seems inevitable to me.

(Subject to the usual "the market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent" timing issues, in that I wouldn't dream of trying to call a date on this, but I can't help but think The Great Deleveraging is inevitably coming, when something somewhere pops like this, and the act of margin calling to make up for it pushes down other assets in value, which causes more margin calling and assets getting automatically sold, which pushes down other assets in value, which causes more margin calling and asset selloffs, and it just doesn't stop until there's hardly a speck of leverage left in the market and valuations are a smoking crater, along with every account that was based on leverage. A basic understanding of differential equations would suggest that it's likely the market will at some point experience a phase transition, where we don't gradually go from this being impossible, to kinda happening more and more as leverage increases, but instead we can go in very short time from this being essentially impossible to completely inevitable, and nobody actually knows when this threshold will be crossed.)

Re: Credit Suisse Takes $4.7B Hit on Archegos Meltdown

#10
Reg T is very loosely applied, and there are all sorts of work-arounds (TRR swaps, etc) and the regulators just don't seem to care that Reg T is being violated in spirit if not in letter.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/regulationt.asp

I interviewed for am equity swaps trading position many years ago, in full disclosure to me the prospective employer let me know that applying Reg T to derivatives transactions would be very bad for their business.

Post reply on HN