![]()
- Three Things the US Can Do To Stop the Dollar's Decline
- Toll Brothers: More Contracts Signed, but Sales Down
- Fed's Lacker: US in a 'Good Place' With Inflation
- Bear Stearn Fund Managers Not Guilty on All Counts
- Commodity ETFs: Returns May Not Match Expectations
- JPMorgan Chase to Hire 1,200 Mortgage Officers
- Ponzi Proceeds: Bidding on Madoff's Toys
- Quiz: Do You Know Your Coca-Cola Myths?
- Zucker to Head New NBCU-Comcast Venture: Sources
- Beware of 'Trampling Effect' When Market Tops: Manager
- Gold Heading to $1150: Art Hogan
- Starbucks Brews Up Growth
- Farr: An Extended Period—No Fat Lady in Sight
- More Upside if S&P Passes This Number: Market Pro
- Murdoch Lashes Out At Google
- Fighting The Flu Vaccine Critics
- Nov. 10: Unusual Volume Leaders
- Shadow Inventory Dwarfs Loan Mods
MOST SHARED
- JPMorgan Chase to Hire 1,200 Mortgage Officers
- Bear Stearn Fund Managers Not Guilty on All Counts
- Oil Tomorrow
- Parsing Treasury's Loan Modification Report
- Adobe Cuts 680 Jobs, to Take Charge
- Gold Heading to $1150: Art Hogan
- Zucker to Head New NBCU-Comcast Venture: Sources
- Toll Brothers: More Contracts Signed, but Sales Down
- Fed's Lacker: US in a 'Good Place' With Inflation
Last year, after the financial crisis, Morgan Stanley made a decision that its biggest rivals avoided: burned by the crisis, it would take far fewer risks in its trading.
That decision is costing it — at least for now.
Unlike earnings at Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase, which quickly returned to profitability
![]() |
As a result, these profits will not be high enough to offset some unusual charges and expenses, and Morgan Stanley is expected to post a loss for the quarter, while its Wall Street rivals post robust quarterly profits.
Analysts say that Morgan Stanley’s expected second-quarter loss is not a cause of major concern, given the circumstances. But the contrast between its performance and others underscores how strategic decisions made during the financial crisis are playing out.
![]() |
The reasons are a combination of lower trading profits than its rivals and higher charges. Those charges include $892 million the bank incurred when it joined its Wall Street brethren in repaying taxpayer support. Much more is likely to be caused by an accounting rule that requires banks to book losses on improvements in credit spreads, which act as an indication of investor confidence in the creditworthiness of a bank.
Now that the financial system is healing, Morgan Stanley and others must record losses as their credit spreads improve because they are deemed more likely to pay off all their debt. That charge at Morgan may be as high as $1.8 billion this quarter, according to Howard Chen, an analyst at Credit Suisse, who wrote in a report this week that Morgan has $4.1 billion in possible charges in future quarters related to its credit spreads alone.
Morgan will not be the only one to take charges related to its credit spreads. Goldman, its perennial rival, is also expected to take such a charge. But analysts say they think that Goldman will still make a profit because its charge will be smaller than Morgan’s and its revenue higher.
Mr. Chen, for instance, estimates that Morgan’s charge for credit spreads will be $1.8 billion, compared to $400 million for Goldman.
Yet the improvement in credit spreads, while costly to earnings, are a “positive signs for franchise health,” Mr. Chen said, because it signals the market has more faith in the bank’s creditworthiness.
Morgan can cover its losses in part because it raised billions in equity just before it returned the bailout money. The company’s executives have described 2009 as a transition year and cautioned against expectations for high profits. There are also likely to be bright spots in Morgan’s results in parts of investment banking, where Morgan is at the top of league tables for equity underwriting and merger and acquisition deals, according to Dealogic.
And over the long term, Morgan Stanley’s decision to pare risk and expand its footprint in wealth management may remake the company and produce long-term, stable profits. Morgan executives acknowledge they have been cautious in areas like fixed income.
But reducing risk can also cut into profits. Mr. Chen estimated that Morgan Stanley would generate $2.3 billion in fixed-income revenue before write-downs. By contrast, he expects Goldman to generate $6.8 billion.
“The rest of the market is going to be booking extremely good fixed-income numbers,” said Brad Hintz, an analyst with Sanford C. Bernstein & Company. “If Morgan Stanley doesn’t book good fixed-income numbers, it tells investors that Morgan is really holding the reins on their traders.”
But the expected second-quarter loss at Morgan may surprise those who saw good days ahead in the bank’s eagerness to repay the government.
“The intuition was that the losses are behind these companies,” said Douglas Elliott, a fellow at the Brookings Institution. “I’m a little surprised that Morgan Stanley would lose money. Among folks in Washington, they seem to have decided that the losses are over.”
Of the 10 large banks that returned the bailout money, Morgan is one of just two that analysts expect to lose money in the quarter, according to Thomson.
The other is Capital One, a regional lender in Virginia with a large credit card book that analysts expect to lose $205 million, or 48 cents a share. A spokeswoman for Capital One declined to comment, but the bank’s executives have said they expect to incur consumer credit losses for quite some time.
There is no indication that Capital One or Morgan Stanley will have to return to the government trough. The government’s stress tests and decisions about how they could repay the bailout money were centered on the banks’ capital levels, not the likelihood that they would profit.
“The government has determined they can stand on their own, that they can sustain their losses on their own without the government money,” said George Allayannis, a professor at the Darden School of Business at the University of Virginia.
- Vote and suggest your own, and remember--there's a fine line between a hero and a zero.
- If you are lucky enough to have money and the time, this is a great time to see America, says CNBC's Jane Wells.
- What’s powering your microwave, fridge and computer? Part of it is fuel from Russian nuclear weapons. The NYT reports.
- One author sees lessons for you in Disney’s recent Makeover of Mickey Mouse: “Nice” doesn’t always win.
- With 123 years of history, slogans and commercials, Coca-Cola is the most recognized brand on earth.
- The opening of a virtual pet store in “World of Warcraft” could prove a cash bonanza for Activision-Blizzard.












