Trade Finance Services:

Transcription

1 Trade Finance Services: Current Environment & Recommendations: Wave 3 A Survey Among Banks Assessing the Current Trade Finance Environment Sponsored by The International Monetary Fund BAFT-IFSA April 2010

2 Study Overview & Methodology This study is the continuation of a research initiative conducted in March and July 2009 to assess the current market environment for global trade finance. As in 2009, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and BAFT-IFSA have commissioned FImetrix to conduct this worldwide survey using an Internet-based questionnaire developed jointly by the IMF, BAFT-IFSA, and FImetrix. It was administered March 15 th through April 20 th, 2010 using a sample of banks from the IMF, BAFT-IFSA, and FImetrix. Senior level executives representing 93 banks in 53 countries completed the questionnaire. There was a near-even distribution of small, medium and large banks that participated in the survey, with a wide geographic distribution of countries. A general composition of participants can be found below. Group of Countries Where: Trade Trade Finance Global HQ Department Activities is Located is Located are Focused Industrialized Countries 45% 51% 69% Latin America 24% 40% 42% Southeast Europe & Central Asia 10% 24% 27% Emerging Asia, (incl. China, India) 5% 29% 74% Emerging Europe 5% 20% 30% Developing Asia 5% 17% 23% Middle East; Maghreb 4% 15% 25% Sub-Sahara Africa 1% 5% 9% Total Worldwide Assets of Respondent Banks Expressed in US Dollars Large: $100 bil + 32% Medium: $5 bil - $99.9 bil Small: Under $5 bil 33% Participating Countries Afganistan Germany Philippines Argentina Greece Poland Australia Guatemala Portugal Austria Hong Kong Romania Azerbaijan Honduras Russia Bolivia India Singapore Brazil Indonesia South Africa Cambodia Israel Spain Canada Macedonia Sweden Chile Mexico Thailand China Moldova Turkey Colombia Mongolia Ukraine Czech Republic Nepal United Kingdom Denmark Netherlands Unted States Dominican Republic Nicaragua Uruguay Ecuador Panama Venezuela El Salvador Paraguay Vietnam France Peru Page 1

3 Key Findings Trade finance activities seem to be stabilizing, based on the survey findings. Total trade finance activities fell slightly on average (-1 percent) during 2009Q4 compared with 2008Q4 but this is a substantial improvement from -11 percent in the 2009Q2 vs. 2008Q4 comparison indicated in the last survey. The recovery seems to be particularly strong in Emerging Asia where trade activities in general are improving. Trade finance activities continue to be demand-driven, as in previous surveys. Larger banks seem to have been more affected by credit-constraints than smaller banks. The change in pricing is mixed, but among factors affecting pricing, institutions own increased cost of funds seem to have become less of a factor. Compared to the last survey, more banks seem to have been adversely affected by Basel II and other capital requirements, particularly large banks in industrialized countries. The outlook for the rest of the year is improving, particularly for Emerging Asia and also for trade-related working capital lending. Larger banks tend to be more optimistic than smaller banks, yet they seem to be more cautious in expanding trade finance activities. Official sector responses to the crisis were perceived positively by responding banks, particularly larger banks. Page 2

4 Changes in Value of Trade Finance Survey participants were first asked how the value of their total trade finance activities has changed over two specific quarterly time periods: the 4 th Quarter 2008 to the 4 th Quarter 2007 (Qtr4 08 vs. Qtr4 07) and the 4 th Quarter 2009 to the 4 th Quarter 2008 (Qtr4 09 vs. Qtr4 08). Comparing Qtr4 08 to Qtr4 07 the banks responding to this survey reported a slight increase in the overall value of their trade finance activities (+4%). However, trade activity for the first half of 2009 showed a sharp decline (as reported in the July, 2009 study) before rebounding in the second half of the year. At year end, respondents to the current study reported an average decline of -1% comparing Qtr 4 09 vs. Qtr Of the banks responding to the current study Total Trade Finance Activities Decreased Qtr4 08 vs. Qtr4 07 4% Qtr2 09 vs. Qtr % Qtr4 09 vs. Qtr4 08 1% 41% 11% vs 62% 10% 28% Qtr2'09 vs. * No Change 13% 39% Qtr4'09 vs. Increased about half of them () indicated a decrease in value between the two time periods being compared. This is an improvement of +14 points from the July measurement period when over 6 out of 10 banks (62%) reported a decline in trade finance activity. Changes in Value of Trade Finance by Selected Product Lines Qtr4 08 vs. Qtr4 07 0% Qtr4 09 vs. Qtr4 08 1% Qtr4 08 vs. Qtr4 07 1% Qtr4 09 vs. Qtr4 08 0% *Data collected July 7 August 14, 2009 Looking at selected trade finance products for the same quarterly comparisons, the value has remained virtually unchanged between 2008 and 2009, an early indication of market stabilization. Short-term Export Letters of Credit Export Credit Insurance Working Capital Qtr4 08 vs. Qtr4 07 3% Qtr4 08 0% 15% 19% 25% 29% 12% 9% 62% 55% 36% 40% 43% 23% 26% 40% vs vs vs Page 3

5 Reasons for Changes in Value Reasons for Decreases in Value As found in earlier measurement periods, when there was a drop in the value of trade transactions in a given region it is largely due to a fall in the demand for trade finance versus a lack of credit availability or price. This is even more pronounced in this latest study, where the percent who cite credit availability and price as reasons is now less than one-third while the percent who cite a fall in the demand for trade activity remains at over 8 out of 10. In the current measurement period there is a noteworthy increase in the percent who say that a shift toward open account and cash-in-advance transactions are reasons for the decline in value. Both are mentioned nearly twice as much as during the July 2009 measurement period. Where value of transactions has declined, is this due to...? March 09* July 09** April 10*** A fall in the demand for trade activities 73% 86% 83% A fall in the price of transactions 43% 47% 31% Less credit availability at your own institution 57% 41% 31% Less credit availability at your counterparty banks 57% 40% 25% A shift toward open account transactions 14% 11% 23% A shift toward cash-in-advance transactions 14% 9% 17% A decline in support from Export Credit Agencies - - 8% A decline in credit from multilateral institutions - - 2% Other 11% 13% 15% Examining responses by bank assets reveals that while most (79%) of the large banks are experiencing a decline in value because of a decline in demand, they are also more likely than small and medium banks to be affected by less credit available at their counterparty banks as well as at their own institutions. Furthermore, they are significantly more likely than smaller banks to have experienced a drop in the price of transactions. * Data collected March 10 March 23, 2009 **Data collected July 7 August 14, 2009 ***Data collected March 15 April 20, 2010 Page 4