The_Northern_Light t1_jc7x1g7 wrote

Exactly. It may or may not be criminally negligent but it sure smells like it is.

Saying they were “too safe” when they went so heavy on hold to maturity long duration treasuries when we were at zero overnight rate because “they were treasuries” is just delusional.

They were in the riskiest asset they could be without having additional reserve requirement and they were utterly unhedged. They saw a train coming and tied themselves to the tracks.


The_Northern_Light t1_jc5w65w wrote

> Problem with SVB was that they were too cautious.

absolutely wild take lol can I have some of what you're having?

from Patrick Boyle's video on SVB:

> [...] they basically had no hedges in place at all. To be really clear, this is not just extremely unusual, it is unheard of. All large banks hedge their interest rate risk. They do it because if you don't, you can be wiped out (as we've just seen).

and that's just part of how negligent SVB was