Ranked: The World’s Most Valuable Bank Brands (2019-2023)
Connect with us

Markets

Ranked: The World’s Most Valuable Bank Brands (2019-2023)

Published

on

most valuable bank brands

The World’s Most Valuable Bank Brands (2019-2023)

Since 2019, Chinese banks have held the top four spots on Brand Finance’s Banking 500 —an annual ranking of the most valuable bank brands.

Brand value in this context is a measure of the “value of the trade mark and associated marketing IP within the branded business”. In other words, it measures the value of intangible marketing assets, and not the overall worth of the business itself.

In this infographic, we’ve visualized the Banking 500’s top 10 brands since 2019 to show you how the ranking has evolved (or stayed the same).

Top Bank Brands of 2023

The 10 most valuable bank brands of 2023 are evenly split between China and the United States. In terms of combined brand value, China leads with $262 billion to America’s $165 billion.

Rank Bank Brand Value (USD billions)
1 🇨🇳 ICBC $69.5
2 🇨🇳 China Construction Bank $62.7
3 🇨🇳 Agricultural Bank of China $57.7
4 🇨🇳 Bank of China $47.3
5 🇺🇸 Bank of America $38.6
6 🇺🇸 Wells Fargo $33.0
7 🇺🇸 JP Morgan $31.8
8 🇺🇸 Chase $31.3
9 🇺🇸 Citi $30.6
10 🇨🇳 China Merchants Bank $24.5

Chinese banks have a massive market to serve, which helps to lift the perceived value of their brands. For example, Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) serves over 500 million individuals as well as several million business clients.

It’s worth noting that ICBC is the world’s largest bank in terms of assets under management ($5.5 trillion as of Dec 2021), and in terms of annual revenues ($143 billion as of Dec 2022). The bank was founded just 39 years ago in 1984.

After ICBC, the next three spots are occupied by the rest of China’s “big four” banks, all of which are state-owned.

The fifth to ninth spots on this ranking are occupied by an assortment of America’s largest banks. Despite a string of controversies in recent years, Wells Fargo rose from eighth in 2022 to sixth in 2023. This goes to show that large corporations can often recover from a scandal in a relatively short period of time (e.g. Volkswagen’s Dieselgate).

Coming in tenth is China Merchants Bank , which is China’s first “joint-stock commercial bank wholly owned by corporate legal entities”.

Top Asset Management Brands

Brand Finance’s 2023 ranking also includes a separate category for asset managers.

Rank Asset Manager Brand Value (USD billions)
1 🇨🇦 Brookfield $9.0
2 🇺🇸 Fidelity $8.4
3 🇺🇸 BlackRock $6.6
4 🇺🇸 Blackstone $4.9
5 🇨🇳 Cinda International Holdings Limited $3.2
6 🇺🇸 Vanguard $2.9
7 🇺🇸 Union Investment $2.3
8 🇺🇸 Franklin Templeton Investments $2.1
9 🇺🇸 Ameriprise Financial $2.0
10 🇺🇸 Invesco $1.5

Given America’s leadership in financial markets , it’s no surprise to see eight out of the 10 firms listed here as being based in the United States. The number one spot, however, is held by Canada’s Brookfield . The Canadian alternative asset manager is building a strong brand through its investments in renewable energy and other high-value infrastructure.

Subscribe to Visual Capitalist
Click for Comments

Technology

Timeline: The Shocking Collapse of Silicon Valley Bank

Silicon Valley Bank was shuttered by regulators becoming the largest bank to fail since the height of the Financial Crisis. What happened?

Published

on

Timeline: The Shocking Collapse of Silicon Valley Bank

Just days ago, Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) was still viewed as a highly-respected player in the tech space, counting thousands of U.S. venture capital-backed startups as its customers.

But fast forward to the end of last week, and SVB was shuttered by regulators after a panic-induced bank run.

So, how exactly did this happen? We dig in below.

Road to a Bank Run

SVB and its customers generally thrived during the low interest rate era, but as rates rose, SVB found itself more exposed to risk than a typical bank. Even so, at the end of 2022, the bank’s balance sheet showed no cause for alarm.

Summary of the SVB balance sheet at the end of 2022

As well, the bank was viewed positively in a number of places. Most Wall Street analyst ratings were overwhelmingly positive on the bank’s stock, and Forbes had just added the bank to its Financial All-Stars list .

Outward signs of trouble emerged on Wednesday, March 8th, when SVB surprised investors with news that the bank needed to raise more than $2 billion to shore up its balance sheet.

The reaction from prominent venture capitalists was not positive, with Coatue Management, Union Square Ventures, and Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund moving to limit exposure to the 40-year-old bank. The influence of these firms is believed to have added fuel to the fire, and a bank run ensued.

Also influencing decision making was the fact that SVB had the highest percentage of uninsured domestic deposits of all big banks. These totaled nearly $152 billion, or about 97% of all deposits.

ℹ️ The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) insures up to $250,000 per account, per bank, for depositors.

By the end of the day, customers had tried to withdraw $42 billion in deposits.

What Triggered the SVB Collapse?

While the collapse of SVB took place over the course of 44 hours, its roots trace back to the early pandemic years.

In 2021, U.S. venture capital-backed companies raised a record $330 billion —double the amount seen in 2020. At the time, interest rates were at rock-bottom levels to help buoy the economy.

Matt Levine sums up the situation well: “When interest rates are low everywhere, a dollar in 20 years is about as good as a dollar today, so a startup whose business model is “we will lose money for a decade building artificial intelligence, and then rake in lots of money in the far future” sounds pretty good. When interest rates are higher, a dollar today is better than a dollar tomorrow, so investors want cash flows. When interest rates were low for a long time, and suddenly become high, all the money that was rushing to your customers is suddenly cut off.”

Year U.S. Venture Capital Activity Annual % Change
2021 $330B 98%
2020 $167B 15%
2019 $145B 1%
2018 $144B 64%
2017 $88B 6%
2016 $83B -3%

Source: Pitchbook

Why is this important? During this time, SVB received billions of dollars from these venture-backed clients. In one year alone, their deposits increased 100%. They took these funds and invested them in longer-term bonds. As a result, this created a dangerous trap as the company expected rates would remain low.

During this time, SVB invested in bonds at the top of the market. As interest rates rose higher and bond prices declined, SVB started taking major losses on their long-term bond holdings.

Losses Fueling a Liquidity Crunch

When SVB reported its fourth quarter results in early 2023, Moody’s Investor Service, a credit rating agency took notice . In early March, it said that SVB was at high risk for a downgrade due to its significant unrealized losses.

In response, SVB looked to sell $2 billion of its investments at a loss to help boost liquidity for its struggling balance sheet. Soon, more hedge funds and venture investors realized SVB could be on thin ice. Depositors withdrew funds in droves, spurring a liquidity squeeze and prompting California regulators and the FDIC to step in and shut down the bank.

What Happens Now?

While much of SVB’s activity was focused on the tech sector, the bank’s shocking collapse has rattled a financial sector that is already on edge.

The four biggest U.S. banks lost a combined $52 billion the day before the SVB collapse. On Friday, other banking stocks saw double-digit drops, including Signature Bank (-23%), First Republic (-15%), and Silvergate Capital (-11%).

Name Stock Price Change, March 10 2023 Unrealized Losses / Tangible Equity
SVB Financial -60%* -99%
First Republic Bank -15% -29%
Zions Bancorp -2% -47%
Comerica -5% -47%
U.S. Bancorp -4% -55%
Fifth Third Bancorp -4% -38%
Bank of America -1% -54%
Wells Fargo 1% -33%
JPMorgan -1% -21%

Source: Morningstar Direct. *Represents March 9 data, trading halted on March 10.

When the dust settles, it’s hard to predict the ripple effects that will emerge from this dramatic event. For investors, the Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen announced confidence in the banking system remaining resilient, noting that regulators have the proper tools in response to the issue.

But others have seen trouble brewing as far back as 2020 (or earlier) when commercial banking assets were skyrocketing and banks were buying bonds when rates were low.

The whole sector is in crisis, and the banks and investors that support these assets are going to have to figure out what to do. -Christopher Whalen, The Institutional Risk Analyst

Continue Reading

Subscribe

Popular