Federal Reserve Economic Data

Each week, the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors publishes the H.8 Release, which details aggregate balance sheet data (assets and liabilities) for all commercial banks in the United States. And each week, the data can be found in FRED. In this first of three related posts, we examine recent trends in selected assets and liabilities of large and small domestically chartered commercial banks.

Although we aren’t providing a comprehensive examination of recent developments in the US banking sector, the FRED graph above does plot total bank assets for large and small commercial banks since the week ending January 7, 2015. This 8-year period encompasses the previous FOMC tightening cycle (2015-2018), the pandemic recession in early 2020, and the current economic recovery and current FOMC tightening period since March 2022. The values below were calculated as of March 15, 2023:

• Assets at large commercial banks increased from $9.1 trillion to $13.2 trillion, or by 44.8%.
• Assets at small commercial banks increased from $3.6 trillion to $7 trillion, or by 94.5%.
• On January 7, 2015, the ratio of total assets at large banks vs. small banks was 2.56. By March 15, 2023, that ratio had declined to 1.90.

So, there’s been a modest shift in total assets away from the 25 largest commercial banks to small commercial banks. (The H.8 Release also includes foreign-related institutions active in the United States and shows their assets increased from $2.5 trillion to $3.1 trillion, or by 22.7%, over this period.)

Large commercial banks are defined in the H.8 as the 25 largest commercial banks in terms of domestic assets, and small commercial banks are those not in the top 25 but with at least $300 million in assets. The bulleted details below are based on the commercial bank call report data ending December 31, 2022:

The 25 largest banks:

• These banks had total domestic assets of $13.43 trillion, or a little more than 51% of nominal GDP.
• The largest bank, JPMorgan Chase, had assets of $2.48 trillion.
• The 25th largest bank had assets of $155.4 billion.
• Before it failed on March 10, 2023, Silicon Valley Bank was the 16th largest bank, with assets of $194.51 billion.

The 2,099 other (small) banks:

• Signature Bank, which failed on March 12, was the 29th largest bank and had assets of $110.36 billion.
• Domestic assets of these small banks totaled $6.4 trillion, with an average of $3.05 billion.
• A majority of these banks (1,312, or 61.8%) had assets of less than $1 billion.

The full list of commercial banks and their assets as of December 31, 2022, can be found here,

Recently, many financial market participants have worried about the financial health of the US banking sector. This had led to sharp declines in stock prices of many “regional banks.” In response, the Federal Reserve, the FDIC, and US Treasury have taken actions to calm the fears of both depositors and investors. Nevertheless, while Federal Reserve and Treasury officials continue to stress that the commercial banking sector is “sound and resilient, with strong capital and liquidity…events of the last few weeks raise questions about evolving risks.” (Governor Michael Barr, Congressional testimony)

Our next related blog post will look at recent trends in securities held on commercial bank balance sheets, and the related post after that will look at trends in loans and leases and deposits, which has garnered attention lately. FRED users interested in monitoring the US commercial banking sector can do so by analyzing weekly trends in commercial banks’ balance sheets found in these H.8 data.

How this graph was created: Search FRED for and select “total assets large banks.” Click on “Edit Graph,” open the “Add Line” tab, and search for and select “total assets small banks.” Start the graph on 2015-01-01.

Suggested by Kevin Kliesen and Cassie Marks.

Earlier this month, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System announced it was making available additional funding to eligible depository institutions through a new Bank Term Funding Program. FRED quickly added four series with those data.

The program provides liquidity to US banks, saving associations, and credit unions to ensure those financial institutions have funding at hand to meet the needs of all their depositors. Borrowers pledge US Treasuries, agency debt and mortgage-backed securities, and other qualifying assets as collateral. If needed, the Department of the Treasury would provide $25 billion as credit protection, or backstop, to the Fed.

The FRED graph above shows the dollar amount borrowed through that term program during its first two weeks of operation. The complete time series of data is contained on the FRED series page, which updates automatically whenever new data become available.

Now, this is called a term program because the lending window is finite and, specifically, is set to close on March 11, 2024. After that date, when the Federal Reserve Banks are paid back, the FRED series will stop updating and include the label “DISCONTINUED.”

The Fed establishes these term programs to alleviate short-term pressures in financial markets. One earlier example is described in this Economic Synopses essay by David Wheelock on the workings of the Term Auction Facility between December 2007 and February 2008.

How this graph was created: Search FRED for “Assets: Liquidity and Credit Facilities: Loans: Bank Term Funding Program, Net: Wednesday Level.”

Suggested by Diego Mendez-Carbajo.

In our previous blog post, we discussed how the interpretation of data can be strongly influenced by the price index you choose to deflate those data—that is, when you want nominal measurements in real terms.

The FRED graph above shows the three price indexes that were used in that previous post. When you look at them over several decades, you notice that they show stark differences. First, the consumer price index (CPI) has increased significantly more than the GDP deflator since the early 1970s, opening a gap of almost 30%. The producer price index (PPI) fluctuates strongly between the two, being generally closer to the GDP deflator.

Why these large differences? Well, they do measure different things…

• The CPI measures the evolution of the prices for a basket of goods a typical urban household would consume.
• The GDP deflator measures the overall price of all that is produced in the economy.
• The PPI measures the price that producers are getting for their wares.

At first glance, they seem to be measuring essentially the same things—all that is consumed, produced, and sold. A closer look reveals some important differences. The CPI, by definition, includes only consumption goods and services. So, it includes imports but not exports. The other two indexes include exports but not imports. The GDP deflator also includes investment goods and public expenses. The PPI covers goods but not services.

How the prices of these included or excluded categories have evolved over the decades since the 1970s can generate gaps. For example, there are now much more exports and imports than there were 50 years ago. Energy is much more expensive and factors-in differently for the three indexes. The proportion of services in consumption and output has increased a lot, too. And that’s why this FRED graph looks the way it does.

How this graph was created: Search FRED for CPI, click on “Edit Graph,” open the “Add Line” tab, add “GDP deflator, then “PPI.” Choose units index 100 as of 1970-01-01, click “Apply to All,” and start the data on 1947-01-01.

Suggested by Christian Zimmermann.