Texas Installment Loans – Uncharted 3 Blog http://uncharted3blog.com/ Mon, 27 Jun 2022 06:29:11 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.9.3 https://uncharted3blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/default.png Texas Installment Loans – Uncharted 3 Blog http://uncharted3blog.com/ 32 32 Head-to-Head Review: BOK Financial (NASDAQ:BOKF) vs. Southern First Bancshares (NASDAQ:SFST) https://uncharted3blog.com/head-to-head-review-bok-financial-nasdaqbokf-vs-southern-first-bancshares-nasdaqsfst/ Mon, 27 Jun 2022 06:29:11 +0000 https://uncharted3blog.com/head-to-head-review-bok-financial-nasdaqbokf-vs-southern-first-bancshares-nasdaqsfst/ BOK Financial (NASDAQ: BOKF – Get a rating) and Southern First Bancshares (NASDAQ:SFST – Get a rating) are both finance companies, but which company is better? We’ll compare the two companies based on the strength of their profitability, risk, institutional ownership, earnings, valuation, dividends and analyst recommendations. Institutional and Insider Ownership 39.1% of BOK Financial […]]]>

BOK Financial (NASDAQ: BOKFGet a rating) and Southern First Bancshares (NASDAQ:SFSTGet a rating) are both finance companies, but which company is better? We’ll compare the two companies based on the strength of their profitability, risk, institutional ownership, earnings, valuation, dividends and analyst recommendations.

Institutional and Insider Ownership

39.1% of BOK Financial shares are held by institutional investors. By comparison, 83.9% of shares in Southern First Bancshares are held by institutional investors. 56.9% of BOK Financial shares are held by insiders of the company. By comparison, 7.3% of shares in Southern First Bancshares are held by insiders of the company. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, large money managers, and hedge funds believe a company is poised for long-term growth.

Profitability

This table compares the net margins, return on equity and return on assets of BOK Financial and Southern First Bancshares.

Net margins Return on equity return on assets
BOK Financial 29.37% 10.19% 1.12%
Southern First Bancshares 40.68% 16.51% 1.55%

Valuation and benefits

This table compares gross revenue, earnings per share (EPS), and valuation of BOK Financial and Southern First Bancshares.

Gross revenue Price/sales ratio Net revenue Earnings per share Price/earnings ratio
BOK Financial $1.85 billion 2.85 $618.12 million $7.76 9.97
Southern First Bancshares $110.27 million 3.17 $46.71 million $5.51 7.94

BOK Financial has higher revenue and profit than Southern First Bancshares. Southern First Bancshares trades at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than BOK Financial, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Analyst Notes

This is a breakdown of recent ratings and target prices for BOK Financial and Southern First Bancshares, as provided by MarketBeat.com.

Sales Ratings Hold odds Buy reviews Strong buy odds Rating
BOK Financial 0 5 1 0 2.17
Southern First Bancshares 0 0 0 0 N / A

BOK Financial currently has a consensus price target of $98.57, indicating a potential upside of 27.40%. Given BOK Financial’s likely higher upside, equity research analysts clearly believe that BOK Financial is more favorable than Southern First Bancshares.

Volatility and risk

BOK Financial has a beta of 1.36, suggesting its stock price is 36% more volatile than the S&P 500. In comparison, Southern First Bancshares has a beta of 0.94, suggesting its stock price is 6 % less volatile than the S&P 500.

Summary

BOK Financial beats Southern First Bancshares on 8 out of 13 factors compared between the two stocks.

BOK Financial Company Profile (Get a rating)

BOK Financial Corporation operates as a financial holding company for BOKF, NA which provides various financial products and services in Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico, Northwest Arkansas, Colorado, Arizona and Kansas/Missouri. It operates through three segments: Commercial Banking, Consumer Banking and Wealth Management. The Commercial Banking segment offers lending, treasury, cash management and commodity risk management products for small business, middle market and large commercial customers, as well as electronic funds transfer network TransFund. The Consumer Banking segment provides loan and deposit services to small businesses through a network of consumer branches; and engages in the origination and management of mortgage loans. The Wealth Management segment offers fiduciary, private banking, insurance and investment advisory services; and brokerage and trading services primarily related to providing liquidity to the mortgage markets through the trading of US government agency mortgage-backed securities and related derivative contracts, as well as the underwriting of securities of State and municipal. The Company also offers commercial loans, such as loans for working capital, acquisition or expansion of facilities, purchase of equipment and other needs of commercial customers; and services, healthcare, manufacturing, wholesale/retail, energy and other sector loans. In addition, it offers commercial real estate loans for the construction of buildings or other improvements to real estate and property held by borrowers for investment purposes; and residential and personal mortgages. In addition, the Company provides automated teller machines (ATMs), call centers, and internet and mobile banking services. As of December 31, 2021, it operated 2,593 TransFund ATMs. The company was founded in 1910 and is based in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Southern First Bancshares Company Profile (Get a rating)

Southern First Bankshares LogoSouthern First Bancshares, Inc. operates as a banking holding company for Southern First Bank which provides various banking products and services to the general public in South Carolina, North Carolina and Georgia. It operates through three segments: Commercial and Retail Banking, Mortgage Banking and Corporate Operations. The Company accepts various deposit products, including checking accounts, business checking accounts and savings accounts, as well as other term deposits, including daily money market accounts and long-term certificates of deposit. Its loan portfolio includes commercial real estate loans; real estate construction loans; business enterprise loans for various industries, such as manufacturing, service industry and professional services fields; consumer real estate loans and home equity loans; and other consumer loans, including secured and unsecured installment loans and revolving lines of credit. In addition, the Company provides other banking services, such as internet banking, cash management, safe deposit boxes, direct deposit, automatic drafts, bill payment and mobile banking. It operates through eight retail offices located in Greenville, Charleston and Columbia; three retail offices located in the Raleigh, Greensboro and Charlotte markets; and a retail office located in Atlanta. The company was incorporated in 1999 and is headquartered in Greenville, South Carolina.



Get news and reviews for BOK Financial Daily – Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of breaking news and analyst notes for BOK Financial and related companies with MarketBeat.com’s free daily email newsletter.

]]>
Head-to-Head Review: First Foundation (NASDAQ:FFWM) vs. Investar (NASDAQ:ISTR) https://uncharted3blog.com/head-to-head-review-first-foundation-nasdaqffwm-vs-investar-nasdaqistr/ Sun, 26 Jun 2022 05:33:26 +0000 https://uncharted3blog.com/head-to-head-review-first-foundation-nasdaqffwm-vs-investar-nasdaqistr/ First Foundation (NASDAQ: FFWM – Get a rating) and Invest (NASDAQ: ISTR – Get a rating) are both small cap finance companies, but which is the better investment? We’ll compare the two companies based on the strength of their dividends, earnings, risk, institutional ownership, profitability, analyst recommendations and valuation. Benefits and evaluation This table compares […]]]>

First Foundation (NASDAQ: FFWMGet a rating) and Invest (NASDAQ: ISTRGet a rating) are both small cap finance companies, but which is the better investment? We’ll compare the two companies based on the strength of their dividends, earnings, risk, institutional ownership, profitability, analyst recommendations and valuation.

Benefits and evaluation

This table compares the revenue, earnings per share and valuation of First Foundation and Investar.

Gross revenue Price/sales ratio Net revenue Earnings per share Price/earnings ratio
First Foundation $317.67 million 3.75 $109.51 million $2.47 8.53
Invest $107.58 million 2.08 $8.00 million $1.22 17.79

First Foundation has higher revenue and profit than Investar. First Foundation trades at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Investar, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Analyst Notes

This is a summary of the current ratings and price targets for First Foundation and Investar, as provided by MarketBeat.

Sales Ratings Hold odds Buy reviews Strong buy odds Rating
First Foundation 0 0 3 0 3.00
Invest 0 1 0 0 2.00

First Foundation currently has a consensus target price of $31.00, suggesting a potential upside of 47.13%. Investar has a consensus target price of $20.00, suggesting a potential downside of 7.83%. Given First Foundation’s stronger consensus rating and higher possible upside, analysts clearly believe that First Foundation is more favorable than Investor.

Profitability

This table compares the net margins, return on equity and return on assets of First Foundation and Investor.

Net margins Return on equity return on assets
First Foundation 34.58% 12.94% 1.30%
Invest 11.38% 3.10% 0.29%

Dividends

First Foundation pays an annual dividend of $0.44 per share and has a dividend yield of 2.1%. Investar pays an annual dividend of $0.34 per share and has a dividend yield of 1.6%. First Foundation pays 17.8% of its profits as a dividend. Investar pays 27.9% of its profits as a dividend. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings over the next few years. First Foundation has increased its dividend for 3 consecutive years and Investar has increased its dividend for 8 consecutive years. First Foundation is clearly the better dividend-paying stock, given its higher yield and lower payout ratio.

Risk and Volatility

First Foundation has a beta of 1.22, indicating that its stock price is 22% more volatile than the S&P 500. In comparison, Investar has a beta of 0.51, indicating that its stock price is 49% less volatile than the S&P 500.

Insider and Institutional Ownership

60.5% of First Foundation’s shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 56.7% of Investar shares are held by institutional investors. 13.9% of the shares of First Foundation are held by insiders of the company. By comparison, 10.3% of Investar’s stock is held by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership indicates that large money managers, endowments, and hedge funds believe a company is poised for long-term growth.

Summary

First Foundation beats Investar on 15 of the 17 factors compared between the two stocks.

About First Foundation (Get a rating)

First Foundation Inc., through its subsidiaries, provides retail, corporate and private wealth management banking services in the United States. It operates through two segments, Banking and Wealth Management. The Company offers a range of bank deposit products, including personal and business checking accounts, savings accounts, interest-bearing negotiable promissory withdrawal accounts, money market accounts and term deposit certificates; and lending products consisting of multi-family and single-family residential real estate loans, commercial real estate loans and commercial term loans and lines of credit, as well as consumer loans, such as personal installment loans and lines of credit , and home equity lines of credit . It also provides various specialized services including trust services, Internet and mobile banking services, remote deposit collection services, merchant credit card services, ATM cards, Visa debit cards and business transfer accounts, as well as insurance brokerage services and equipment financing solutions. In addition, the company offers investment management and financial planning services; cash management services; advisory and coordination services in the field of estate planning, retirement planning, and charitable and corporate ownership matters; and financial, investment and economic advisory and related services. In addition, it provides support services, including the processing and transmission of financial and economic data for charitable organizations. The company operates through a network of 28 branches and 3 loan origination offices in California, Nevada, Texas and Hawaii. First Foundation Inc. was founded in 1985 and is headquartered in Dallas, Texas.

About Investar (Get a rating)

Investar LogoInvestar Holding Corporation operates as a bank holding company for Investar Bank which provides a range of commercial banking products to individuals and small and medium businesses in South Louisiana. The Company offers various deposit products and services, such as individual savings, checking, money market and retirement accounts, as well as various certificates of deposit; debit cards; and mobile banking. It also offers commercial real estate loans; commercial and industrial loans, including working capital lines of credit and equipment loans; loans for the construction of commercial projects and single-family and multi-family residential properties; one to four family residential real estate loans, such as second mortgages; consumer loans, such as secured and unsecured installment and installment loans, home equity loans and lines of credit, automobile loans, and loans for personal, family and household purposes. In addition, the Company offers cash management products, including remote deposit capture, vault payment processing, virtual vault, e-statements, positive pay, issue and transfer. ACH banking, investment sweep accounts and Internet banking for businesses. In addition, it provides various other banking services, such as cashier’s checks, payroll and social security checks direct deposit, night deposit, mail banking, ATM, ATMs, merchant card and mobile wallet payment services. The company operates through a network of 33 full-service branches. Investar Holding Corporation was founded in 2006 and is headquartered in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.



Get news and reviews for First Foundation Daily – Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of breaking news and analyst ratings for First Foundation and related companies with MarketBeat.com’s free daily email newsletter.

]]>
“Buy now, pay later” becomes a new way to pay for guns https://uncharted3blog.com/buy-now-pay-later-becomes-a-new-way-to-pay-for-guns/ Fri, 24 Jun 2022 18:24:48 +0000 https://uncharted3blog.com/buy-now-pay-later-becomes-a-new-way-to-pay-for-guns/ A few years ago, when American consumers were wooed with “buy now, pay later” loans that allowed them to pay for their online purchases – from makeup to Peloton bikes – in small increments, a start-up had an idea: why not adapt the model to sell outdoor leisure equipment, including firearms? Thus, Credova was born. […]]]>

A few years ago, when American consumers were wooed with “buy now, pay later” loans that allowed them to pay for their online purchases – from makeup to Peloton bikes – in small increments, a start-up had an idea: why not adapt the model to sell outdoor leisure equipment, including firearms?

Thus, Credova was born.

Founded in 2018, the Bozeman, Montana company has positioned itself as a provider of easy online payment plans for hunting, fishing and camping supply customers. But Credova also saw an opportunity to focus on the gun industry, since most big “buy now, pay later” companies don’t fund gun purchases. Credova has since worked with dozens of online gun dealers to provide customers with financing options that make buying firearms — which typically cost between $200 and $900 — more affordable.

Credova’s profile in the firearms industry is rising. He has partnered with the National Rifle Association on at least two occasions, including sponsoring a luncheon at the association’s annual meeting in 2019.

More recently, Credova has drawn attention for offering financing plans to customers of Daniel Defense, the maker of the weapon used by the school attacker in Uvalde, Texas. Credova told Bloomberg that he did not fund the shooter’s purchase of firearms. Investigators said he purchased the weapons with a bank debit card.

Credova “plays a very small role in the legal gun buying ecosystem accounting for less than a tenth of 1% of gun buying funding,” said Elizabeth Locke, a lawyer retained by Credova, in an emailed statement. Most gun purchases are made with credit cards, Ms. Locke said. She added that it would be misleading to describe Credova as focused on gun buyers. (Ms. Locke represented Sarah Palin in her libel suit against The New York Times.)

The company declined to appoint its chief executive, Dusty Wunderlichavailable for interview.

The gun market, particularly how people buy and sell guns, is coming under renewed scrutiny as the country grapples with a spate of mass shootings. Congress passed a bipartisan agreement on Friday on a modest set of gun safety measures, including enhanced background checks for some potential gun buyers under the age of 21.

Online arms sales fueled by extreme advertising and social media have increased, and Credova and other arms finance companies are part of that larger ecosystem, said Adam Skaggs, chief counsel and director of policies of the Giffords Law Center, a gun violence prevention advocacy group backed by former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, herself a victim of gun violence.

“Buy now, pay later” financing can make guns more accessible to people without a credit card, Skaggs said. “Maybe some prefer it because they don’t have to go through the trouble of getting a credit card.”

Buying installment firearms is not new to the firearms industry, just as layaway plans have been around for a long time for all kinds of customers. But as gun sales have moved online, the “buy now, pay later” model – which typically caters to younger buyers who typically don’t have a lot of disposable income or credit cards credit – has become a means of attracting a new generation of customers.

Although online sales represent only a small fraction of the $15 billion gun market, according to IBISWorld, a market research firm, they have increased. IBISWorld expects online arms sales to reach $2.6 billion by 2026, up from $532 million in 2012.

“Credova got into gun financing not just because of the layaway culture in gun retail, but because so many guns are purchased online,” said Mike Weisser, a longtime gun salesman in Massachusetts who has become a consultant to gun control organizations and writes a Blog on ways to reduce gun violence.

Of course, buying firearms and ammunition online is more complicated than a typical Amazon purchase, as they cannot be shipped to a person’s home but must be picked up from a retailer in licensed firearms after the buyer has passed a standard background check. Credova and other gun financiers are not involved in these background checks; they only perform standard credit checks before extending financing to buyers. Credova says on its website that approval takes “seconds” for most customers.

Retailers appreciate the “buy now, pay later” option because it attracts more customers. Customers love it because it’s relatively easy to apply, requiring only a simple credit check. The loans are interest-free and can be repaid in three or four monthly installments. Finance companies make their money by charging retailers a fee for the service. Some companies also charge customers fees and interest if they miss payments.

Even though “buy now, pay later” financing has flourished in the United States, many of the biggest companies, including Affirm, Klarna, Afterpay, PayPal and Zip, explicitly prohibit purchases of firearms and ammunition, thus creating a business opportunity for Credova and other niches. businesses.

Gearfire Capital, an online finance company, started in January with the motto “Gear up, pay later”. Global Check Services offers online gun financing thanks to its ARC90 program. Sezzle, another company that is about to be acquired by Zip, allows gun purchases, but gun sales are only a small part of its business, a spokeswoman for the company said. Sezzle.

Ms Locke, Credova’s lawyer, said the company helped people who weren’t wealthy buy guns to defend themselves. “We believe Credova should not impose restrictions on the trade of legal goods or judge which legal goods should be traded, and this sets a dangerous precedent,” she said in an emailed statement.

Credova markets itself as a finance company for hunting, camping and fishing supplies and equipment for outdoor sports enthusiasts, using the motto “Adventure Now, Pay Later”. It also funds purchases of puppies from pet stores. Last year, Credova was one of of them companies that have set up with Massachusetts regulators following allegations that they illegally rented dogs in the state.

But Credova’s website suggests guns are a big part of its business. Of the roughly 100 retail partners listed on its website, 60 are online retailers of firearms and hunting supplies, according to a New York Times tally on Wednesday. Arms dealers feature prominently on his site. And it is currently organize a raffle in partnership with the US Concealed Carry Association, a gun rights organization, in which the winner can get $15,000 towards the purchase of ammunition or firearms.

Two years ago, Credova was one of six companies who partnered with the lobbying arm of the NRA to raise $1 million to defend the Second Amendment. In 2019, he sponsored a luncheon of business leaders during the NRA’s annual meeting, according to a Press releasewho also said that Credova is owned by staunch gun rights supporters who are “committed to providing financing options for consumers of guns and sporting goods”.

Credova’s app, which debuted in August 2020, has only been downloaded 19,000 times, according to Sensor Tower, a mobile app tracking company. By comparison, the largest “buy now, pay later” companies have had their apps downloaded millions of times.

The availability of easy financing options for weapons raises the possibility of abuse, said Mr. Skaggs of the Giffords center. A potential concern is whether interest-free installment financing can be used by people looking to quickly resell a gun for profit without putting a lot of money aside first, he said. .

Not all Credova customers are happy with the company’s business practices, according to court documents and reviews and complaints submitted to the Better Business Bureau. In particular, some customers have complained about its one-year installment plan, under which customers can end up paying far more than the list price for a firearm if the borrowed amount is not repaid within a 90 days without interest.

Jerry Carver, the general manager of Bullet Ranch in Pataskala, Ohio, was intrigued by Credova because most finance companies shy away from merchant relationships “in the realm of the Second Amendment.” But Mr Carver said some installment contracts were too expensive for some customers. The Bullet Ranch no longer does business with Credova.

Matthew Sheffield of Selma, Ala., used Credova two years ago to pay for a $400 box of ammo he ordered online. He planned to pay for the purchase within the 90-day interest-free period, he said, but was unable to do so. As a result, he said, Credova told him he would have to comply with the more expensive installment contract.

Mr Sheffield, who works as a welding inspector, said he had no plans to use the service again.

In an email, Ms Locke said that if Mr Sheffield had paid the purchase balance ‘within the 90 day window, he would not have had to incur any additional fees or charges’.

On June 15, Credova announced that it would be phasing out the 90-day interest-free payment window and replacing it with a new plan that allows shoppers to pay for their purchases “in four installments, every two weeks, interest-free, at some merchants. »

Ms Locke said less than 1% of Credova customers had complained about her services.

J. David Goodman contributed report. Susan C. Beachy contributed to the research.

]]>
South African leader gets final chapter of corruption report https://uncharted3blog.com/south-african-leader-gets-final-chapter-of-corruption-report/ Wed, 22 Jun 2022 18:27:01 +0000 https://uncharted3blog.com/south-african-leader-gets-final-chapter-of-corruption-report/ JOHANNESBURG (AP) — South African President Cyril Ramaphosa has received the final chapter of a report on a thorough judicial investigation into corruption. Chief Justice Raymond Zondo handed the final part of the report, which is said to be 1,000 pages, to Ramaphosa. The first segments of the report laid bare rampant corruption in government […]]]>

JOHANNESBURG (AP) — South African President Cyril Ramaphosa has received the final chapter of a report on a thorough judicial investigation into corruption.

Chief Justice Raymond Zondo handed the final part of the report, which is said to be 1,000 pages, to Ramaphosa. The first segments of the report laid bare rampant corruption in government and state-owned enterprises during former President Jacob Zuma’s tenure from 2009 to 2018.

Speaking during the delivery of the final chapter, Ramaphosa stressed that he did not know what was in the conclusion, not even the conclusions of the commission on his own testimony.


“Not for once did the Chief Justice even want to discuss the evidence I presented to the commission. And he said he had about a chapter dealing with the evidence that I presented to the commission, but I don’t even know what it is because of the high regard I have for him,” said Ramaphosa.

“He could have made a negative finding against me, which I will accept,” Ramaphosa said.

Ramaphosa has already received four installments of the report which have been made public and contain damning findings against politicians and businessmen linked to his ruling African National Congress party. The first parts of the report recommended that many people be prosecuted.

The final segment of the report is expected to detail corruption within South Africa’s intelligence department, the State Security Agency, which was headed by former intelligence chief Arthur Fraser during Zuma’s tenure.

Fraser was later named the nation’s chief of prisons and controversially endorsed Zuma’s release from prison on medical grounds. Zuma was imprisoned for refusing to testify before the judicial commission chaired by Chief Justice Raymond Zondo.

Fraser is currently at the center of controversy engulfing Ramaphosa because he filed a criminal complaint alleging the president concealed the theft of around $4 million in foreign currency from his Phala Phala game farm in the northern province of Limpopo. .

The scandal – dubbed Phala Phala-gate in South Africa’s buzzing press – tarnished Ramaphosa’s anti-corruption reputation and prompted opposition parties to call for his resignation.

Publication of the final chapter of the report has been delayed as it was originally due to be delivered to Ramaphosa and made public last week, drawing anger from the main opposition Democratic Alliance party.

The report is also expected to address allegations of wrongdoing at the country’s public broadcaster, the South African Broadcasting Corporation.

The institution has already been singled out for wrongdoing by earlier versions of the report which discussed how money flowed from the broadcaster and other state-owned companies to sponsor projects of The New Age newspaper, which was controlled by the controversial Gupta family.

Two brothers, Atul and Rajesh Gupta, were arrested in Dubai two weeks ago in connection with corruption charges brought against them in South Africa. South African authorities are expected to push for their extradition so they can stand trial in South Africa, where some of their associates are already facing corruption charges.

The Guptas reportedly used their close ties to Zuma to influence his cabinet appointments and to win lucrative contracts with ministries and state-owned companies.

]]>
Bank/non-bank partnerships could come under CFPB scrutiny https://uncharted3blog.com/bank-non-bank-partnerships-could-come-under-cfpb-scrutiny/ Mon, 20 Jun 2022 15:53:02 +0000 https://uncharted3blog.com/bank-non-bank-partnerships-could-come-under-cfpb-scrutiny/ Delivery the opening speech Last week at the Consumer Federation of America’s 2022 Consumer Assembly, CFPB Deputy Director Zixta Martinez said the CFPB is “looking closely” at rent-a-bank programs. Assistant manager Martinez said that “[s]some lenders attempt to use [relationships with banks] to evade state interest rate caps and licensing laws by pretending that the […]]]>

Delivery the opening speech Last week at the Consumer Federation of America’s 2022 Consumer Assembly, CFPB Deputy Director Zixta Martinez said the CFPB is “looking closely” at rent-a-bank programs.

Assistant manager Martinez said that “[s]some lenders attempt to use [relationships with banks] to evade state interest rate caps and licensing laws by pretending that the bank, rather than the non-bank, is the lender. She said “lenders employing bank leasing programs have unusually high default rates, raising questions about whether their products fail borrowers.” She said the CFPB’s consumer complaints database “reveals a range of other significant consumer protection issues with certain loans associated with banking partnerships.”

To date, the CFPB’s enforcement action has only raised “renting a charter” issues in the context of tribal lending, notably in its enforcement action against CashCall. The CFPB lawsuit broke ground by asserting UDAAP violations based on CashCall’s efforts to collect loans allegedly void in whole or in part under state law. The CFPB complaint alleged that the loans in question, which were made by a tribal-affiliated entity, were void in whole or in part under state law because, based on the substance of the transactions , CashCall was the “de facto” or “true” lender and as such charged excessive interest and/or failed to obtain the required license.

The district court agreed with the CFPB that since CashCall was the “true lender” on the loans, the tribe affiliated with the loans did not have a sufficient relationship with the loans for the court to enforce the tribal choice provision. of the law in loan agreements. and there was no other reasonable basis for the choice of tribal laws. As a result, the district court found that CashCall engaged in a deceptive practice within the meaning of the CFPA when servicing and collecting the loans by creating the false impression that the loans were enforceable and borrowers were obligated to repay. loans in accordance with the terms of their loan agreements.

On appeal, the Ninth Circuit ruled that the district court was correct in refusing both to give effect to the choice of law provision and to apply the law of the borrowers’ home states, thereby resulting in the invalidity of loans. He described the role of the tribal entity in the transactions as “economically non-existent” and having “no purpose other than to give the impression that the transactions were related to the tribe”. According to the Ninth Circuit, “the only reason the parties chose to [tribal] right [in the loan agreements] was to pursue CashCall’s plan to avoid state usury and licensing laws.

It should be noted, however, that the Ninth Circuit expressly rejected the use of a “genuine lender” theory as the basis for its decision. In response to CashCall’s objection to the district court’s finding that it was the “true lender” of the loans, the Ninth Circuit said that “[t]To the extent that CashCall invokes cases involving banks, we note that banks present different considerations because federal law prevents certain state restrictions on the interest rates charged by banks. Commenting that “[w]We do not consider how the result here might differ if [the tribal entity] had been a bank”, the Ninth Circuit said that “we need not employ the concept of ‘genuine lender’, much less establish a general test for identifying a ‘genuine lender’. “In his view, for the purposes of the choice of law issue, it was sufficient to consider the “economic reality” of loans which “reveal[ed] that the tribe had no substantial connection to the transactions.

More importantly, the Ninth Circuit rejected CashCall’s argument that a finding of deceptive practice under the CFPA could not be based on deception about state law. She found no support for the CFPA’s argument and noted that while the CFPA prohibits the establishment of a national attrition rate, the CFPB had not done so in Call for funds because each state’s usury and licensing laws still applied.

Ms. Martinez’s comments raise the possibility that the CFPB is now trying to use the UDAAP outside the tribal context to challenge non-banks involved in banking partnerships alleging violations of state usury and laws on licensing based on the theory that the partnership is a “rent-banking scheme. However, since many of the banks involved in such partnerships are smaller banks over which the CFPB has no authority supervisory or enforcement (i.e. banks with $10 billion or less in assets), the CFPB should manage potential concerns that the FDIC, the primary federal banking regulator, might have if the CFPB had to challenge such partnerships.

Non-bank/bank partnerships are currently under siege in several directions. Four Democratic members of the California state legislature recently sent a letter to the FDIC urging the agency to take action against FDIC-supervised banks that partner with non-bank lenders to offer installment loans. at high cost. On June 1, 2022, a class action lawsuit was filed against fintech lender Opportunity Financial, LLC (OppFi) in a federal district court in Texas in which the named plaintiff alleges that OppFi engaged in a “rent- a-bank” with a state-chartered bank to provide loans at rates higher than allowed by Texas law. OppFi is also engaged in litigation in California state court where the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation is trying to apply California usury law to loans made under the partnership of OppFi with a state-chartered bank alleging that OppFi is the “true lender” on the loans.

]]>
Critical Survey: Heartland BancCorp (OTCMKTS: HLAN) and Comerica (NYSE: CMA) https://uncharted3blog.com/critical-survey-heartland-banccorp-otcmkts-hlan-and-comerica-nyse-cma/ Fri, 17 Jun 2022 06:21:22 +0000 https://uncharted3blog.com/critical-survey-heartland-banccorp-otcmkts-hlan-and-comerica-nyse-cma/ Heartland Bank Corp (OTCMKTS: HLAN – Get a rating) and Comeric (NYSE: CMA – Get a rating) are both finance companies, but which company is superior? We’ll compare the two companies based on their dividend strength, institutional ownership, valuation, earnings, analyst recommendations, risk and return. Volatility and risk Heartland BancCorp has a beta of 0.68, […]]]>

Heartland Bank Corp (OTCMKTS: HLANGet a rating) and Comeric (NYSE: CMAGet a rating) are both finance companies, but which company is superior? We’ll compare the two companies based on their dividend strength, institutional ownership, valuation, earnings, analyst recommendations, risk and return.

Volatility and risk

Heartland BancCorp has a beta of 0.68, suggesting its stock price is 32% less volatile than the S&P 500. In comparison, Comerica has a beta of 1.33, suggesting its stock price is 33% more volatile than the S&P 500.

Analyst Notes

This is a summary of recent recommendations for Heartland BancCorp and Comerica, as provided by MarketBeat.

Sales Ratings Hold odds Buy reviews Strong buy odds Rating
Heartland BancCorp 0 1 1 0 2.50
Comedy 2 6 12 0 2.50

Heartland BancCorp currently has a consensus target price of $97.00, suggesting a potential upside of 7.24%. Comerica has a consensus target price of $99.10, suggesting a potential upside of 34.37%. Given Comerica’s likely higher upside, analysts clearly believe Comerica is more favorable than Heartland BancCorp.

Profitability

This table compares the net margins, return on equity and return on assets of Heartland BancCorp and Comerica.

Net margins Return on equity return on assets
Heartland BancCorp 26.00% N / A N / A
Comedy 33.48% 13.85% 1.10%

Dividends

Heartland BancCorp pays an annual dividend of $2.76 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.1%. Comerica pays an annual dividend of $2.72 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.7%. Heartland BancCorp pays 31.1% of its profits as a dividend. Comerica pays 37.5% of its profits as a dividend. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings over the next few years.

Valuation and benefits

This table compares the revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation of Heartland BancCorp and Comerica.

Gross revenue Price/sales ratio Net revenue Earnings per share Price/earnings ratio
Heartland BancCorp $69.81 million 2.60 $18.59 million $8.87 10:20 a.m.
Comedy $3.02 billion 3.19 $1.17 billion $7.25 10.17

Comerica has higher revenues and profits than Heartland BancCorp. Comerica trades at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Heartland BancCorp, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Institutional and insider ownership

1.6% of Heartland BancCorp shares are held by institutional investors. By comparison, 80.1% of Comerica’s shares are held by institutional investors. 22.7% of Heartland BancCorp shares are held by insiders. By comparison, 0.8% of Comerica shares are held by insiders. Strong institutional ownership indicates that hedge funds, endowments, and large fund managers believe a stock is poised for long-term growth.

Summary

Comerica beats Heartland BancCorp on 11 out of 15 factors compared between the two stocks.

Heartland BancCorp Company Profile (Get a rating)

Heartland BancCorp operates as a bank holding company for Heartland Bank which provides various banking and financial services to individuals and businesses. The company offers personal and business checking and savings accounts. It also offers various lending solutions including home mortgages; personal loans, such as home loans and unsecured personal loans, as well as loans for automobiles, boats, motorcycles, motor sports vehicles, recreational vehicles and trailers; commercial and residential real estate loans, construction loans, small business administration loans and working capital lines of credit and equipment financing; equity loans; financial solutions for various markets; and lending solutions for agribusiness. In addition, the company offers credit and debit cards, wire transfers, overnight deposit, safety deposit boxes, cashiers checks, notary services, overdraft protection, cash management, retirement and education planning, wealth management, mobile wallet and online banking, and insurance products and services. It operates through a network of 18 full-service banking offices in central Ohio and northern Kentucky. The company was founded in 1911 and is based in Whitehall, Ohio.

Comerica Company Profile (Get a rating)

Comedica logoComerica Incorporated, through its subsidiaries, offers various financial products and services. It operates through commercial banking, retail banking, wealth management and finance segments. The Commercial Banking segment offers various products and services, including commercial loans and lines of credit, deposits, cash management, capital market products, international trade finance, letters of credit, management services foreign exchange and loan syndication services for small and medium market businesses. , multinational corporations and government entities. The Retail Banking segment provides personal financial services, such as consumer loans, collection of consumer deposits and origination of mortgage loans. This segment also offers various consumer products, including deposit accounts, installment loans, credit cards, student loans, home equity lines of credit and residential mortgages, as well as commercial products and services to micro-enterprises. The Wealth Management segment provides products and services comprising trust, private banking, retirement, investment management and advisory, and investment banking and brokerage. This segment also sells annuity products, as well as life, disability and long-term care insurance products. The Finance segment is engaged in securities portfolio and asset and liability management business. It operates in Texas, California, Michigan, Arizona, Florida, Canada and Mexico. The company was formerly known as DETROITBANK Corporation and changed its name to Comerica Incorporated in July 1982. Comerica Incorporated was founded in 1849 and is headquartered in Dallas, Texas.



Get news and reviews for Heartland BancCorp Daily – Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analyst ratings for Heartland BancCorp and related companies with MarketBeat.com’s FREE daily newsletter.

]]>
Critical Review of Guaranty Bancshares (NASDAQ:GNTY) vs. Evans Bancorp (NYSE:EVBN) https://uncharted3blog.com/critical-review-of-guaranty-bancshares-nasdaqgnty-vs-evans-bancorp-nyseevbn/ Thu, 16 Jun 2022 05:17:02 +0000 https://uncharted3blog.com/critical-review-of-guaranty-bancshares-nasdaqgnty-vs-evans-bancorp-nyseevbn/ Bancshares Guarantee (NASDAQ: GNTY – Get a rating) and Evans Bancorp (NYSE: EVBN – Get a rating) are both small cap finance companies, but which stock is superior? We’ll compare the two companies based on institutional ownership strength, risk, earnings, dividends, valuation, profitability, and analyst recommendations. Analyst Recommendations This is a summary of the current […]]]>

Bancshares Guarantee (NASDAQ: GNTYGet a rating) and Evans Bancorp (NYSE: EVBNGet a rating) are both small cap finance companies, but which stock is superior? We’ll compare the two companies based on institutional ownership strength, risk, earnings, dividends, valuation, profitability, and analyst recommendations.

Analyst Recommendations

This is a summary of the current ratings and recommendations for Guaranty Bancshares and Evans Bancorp, as provided by MarketBeat.

Sales Ratings Hold odds Buy reviews Strong buy odds Rating
Bancshares Guarantee 0 0 2 0 3.00
Evans Bancorp 0 0 0 0 N / A

Guaranty Bancshares currently has a consensus target price of $43.50, suggesting a potential upside of 20.77%. Given the higher possible upside of Guaranty Bancshares, stock analysts clearly believe that Guaranty Bancshares is more favorable than Evans Bancorp.

Profitability

This table compares the net margins, return on equity and return on assets of Guaranty Bancshares and Evans Bancorp.

Net margins Return on equity return on assets
Bancshares Guarantee 31.20% 13.59% 1.34%
Evans Bancorp 24.98% 13.53% 1.09%

Dividends

Guaranty Bancshares pays an annual dividend of $0.88 per share and has a dividend yield of 2.4%. Evans Bancorp pays an annual dividend of $1.24 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.6%. Guaranty Bancshares pays 27.2% of its earnings as a dividend. Evans Bancorp pays 28.6% of its profits as a dividend. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings over the next few years. Guaranty Bancshares has increased its dividend for 5 consecutive years and Evans Bancorp has increased its dividend for 12 consecutive years. Evans Bancorp is clearly the better dividend-paying stock, given its higher yield and longer track record of dividend growth.

Insider and Institutional Ownership

22.2% of Guaranty Bancshares shares are held by institutional investors. By comparison, 61.8% of Evans Bancorp’s shares are held by institutional investors. 26.6% of Guaranty Bancshares shares are held by insiders. By comparison, 6.3% of Evans Bancorp’s shares are held by insiders. Strong institutional ownership indicates that large money managers, endowments, and hedge funds believe a company is poised for long-term growth.

Valuation and benefits

This chart compares the gross earnings, earnings per share (EPS), and valuation of Guaranty Bancshares and Evans Bancorp.

Gross revenue Price/sales ratio Net revenue Earnings per share Price/earnings ratio
Bancshares Guarantee $127.13 million 3.42 $39.81 million $3.24 11.12
Evans Bancorp $96.43 million 1.95 $24.04 million $4.34 7.84

Guaranty Bancshares has higher revenue and earnings than Evans Bancorp. Evans Bancorp trades at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Guaranty Bancshares, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Volatility and risk

Guaranty Bancshares has a beta of 0.47, which means its stock price is 53% less volatile than the S&P 500. In comparison, Evans Bancorp has a beta of 0.98, which means its stock price is 2% less volatile than the S&P 500.

Summary

Guaranty Bancshares beats Evans Bancorp on 11 of the 16 factors compared between the two stocks.

Guaranty Bancshares Company Profile (Get a rating)

Guaranty Bancshares, Inc. operates as a bank holding company for Guaranty Bank & Trust, NA which provides a range of commercial and consumer banking products and services for small and medium businesses, professionals and individuals. The company offers checking and savings, money market and business accounts, as well as certificates of deposit; and commercial and industrial, construction and development, 1-4 family residential, commercial real estate, farm and farmland, multi-family residential and consumer loans. It also provides trustee, custodial and escrow, investment management, pension plan, ATM, night deposit, direct deposit and cashier’s check services, as well as online banking services. , mobile and telephone; debit cards; letter of credit; and cash management services, including wire transfers, positive payments, remote deposit capture and automated clearinghouse services. As of December 31, 2021, it operated 32 full-service banking locations in East Texas, Central Texas, Dallas/Fort Worth Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), and Houston MSA. The company was founded in 1913 and is headquartered in Addison, Texas.

Evans Bancorp Company Profile (Get a rating)

Evans Bancorp logoEvans Bancorp, Inc. operates primarily as a financial holding company for Evans Bank, NA which provides a range of banking products and services to consumer and business customers in Western New York and the Finger Lakes region of the state from New York. It operates in two segments, banking business and insurance agency business. The Company offers deposit products, which include checking accounts and negotiable withdrawal orders, savings accounts and certificates of deposit. It also offers residential mortgages; commercial and multi-family mortgages and commercial construction loans; home equity, such as home equity lines of credit and second mortgages; commercial and industrial loans including term loans and lines of credit; consumer loans, including direct auto loans, recreational vehicles, boats, home improvement and personal loans; other loans comprised of cash reserves, overdrafts and loan clearing accounts; and installment loans. In addition, the company sells various premium-based insurance policies, including business and personal insurance, employee benefits, bonding, risk management, life insurance, disability and care. long-term, as well as claims services to various insurance companies. ; and non-deposit investment products, such as annuities and mutual funds. It operates through a total of 21 full-service banking offices in Erie County, Niagara County, Monroe County and Chautauqua County, New York. Evans Bancorp, Inc. was founded in 1920 and is based in Williamsville, New York.



Receive daily news and reviews for Guaranty Bancshares – Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analyst ratings for Guaranty Bancshares and related companies with MarketBeat.com’s FREE daily newsletter.

]]>
Washington Federal (NASDAQ:WAFD) and National Park (NYSE:PRK) Direct Inquiry https://uncharted3blog.com/washington-federal-nasdaqwafd-and-national-park-nyseprk-direct-inquiry/ Mon, 13 Jun 2022 20:35:56 +0000 https://uncharted3blog.com/washington-federal-nasdaqwafd-and-national-park-nyseprk-direct-inquiry/ Washington Federal (NASDAQ:WAFD – Get a rating) and National Park (NYSE:PRK – Get a rating) are both small-cap finance companies, but which stock is superior? We’ll compare the two companies based on the strength of their profitability, risk, valuation, earnings, institutional ownership, analyst recommendations and dividends. Analyst Recommendations This is a breakdown of recent ratings […]]]>

Washington Federal (NASDAQ:WAFDGet a rating) and National Park (NYSE:PRKGet a rating) are both small-cap finance companies, but which stock is superior? We’ll compare the two companies based on the strength of their profitability, risk, valuation, earnings, institutional ownership, analyst recommendations and dividends.

Analyst Recommendations

This is a breakdown of recent ratings and price targets for Washington Federal and Park National, as provided by MarketBeat.com.

Sales Ratings Hold odds Buy reviews Strong buy odds Rating
Washington Federal 0 0 1 0 3.00
National Park 0 0 0 0 N / A

Washington Federal currently has a consensus price target of $40.00, indicating a potential upside of 31.32%. Given Washington Federal’s possible higher upside, analysts clearly believe that Washington Federal is more favorable than Park National.

Profitability

This table compares the net margins, return on equity, and return on assets of Washington Federal and Park National.

Net margins Return on equity return on assets
Washington Federal 29.95% 10.65% 1.00%
National Park 31.96% 13.66% 1.51%

Insider and Institutional Ownership

80.5% of Washington Federal’s stock is held by institutional investors. In comparison, 60.9% of National Park shares are held by institutional investors. 1.6% of Washington Federal stock is held by insiders of the company. By comparison, 2.5% of Park National’s stock is held by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership indicates that large fund managers, hedge funds, and endowments believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

Dividends

Washington Federal pays an annual dividend of $0.96 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.1%. Park National pays an annual dividend of $4.16 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.6%. Washington Federal pays 35.0% of its profits as a dividend. Park National pays 45.5% of its profits as a dividend. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings over the next few years. Washington Federal has increased its dividend for 13 consecutive years and Park National has increased its dividend for 5 consecutive years.

Risk and Volatility

Washington Federal has a beta of 0.76, which means its stock price is 24% less volatile than the S&P 500. By comparison, Park National has a beta of 0.79, which means its stock price is 21% less volatile than the S&P 500.

Benefits and evaluation

This chart compares Washington Federal and Park National’s revenue, earnings per share, and valuation.

Gross revenue Price/sales ratio Net revenue Earnings per share Price/earnings ratio
Washington Federal $652.17 million 3.07 $183.62 million $2.74 11.17
National Park $475.80 million 3.99 $153.95 million $9.15 12.78

Washington Federal has higher revenues and profits than Park National. Washington Federal is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Park National, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Summary

Park National beats Washington Federal on 9 of 16 factors compared between the two stocks.

About the Federal Government of Washington (Get a rating)

Washington Federal, Inc. operates as a bank holding company for Washington Federal Bank, National Association, which provides lending, deposit, insurance, and other banking services in the United States. The Company offers deposit products, including business and personal checking accounts, term deposit certificates, as well as money market accounts and passbook savings accounts. It also offers single-family residences, land construction, acquisition and development, consumer land, multi-family residences, commercial and industrial buildings, commercial real estate, home loans, business loans and to consumption. Additionally, the Company offers insurance brokerage services, such as personal and business insurance policies; owns and markets real estate; mobile and internet banking; and debit and credit cards, and acts as trustee. It serves consumers, medium and large businesses, and commercial real estate owners and developers. As of September 30, 2021, the company had 219 branches located in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, New Mexico and Texas. Washington Federal, Inc. was founded in 1917 and is headquartered in Seattle, Washington.

About the national park (Get a rating)

National park logoPark National Corporation operates as a bank holding company for Park National Bank which provides commercial and trust banking services in small and medium population areas. The company offers deposits for current, savings and term accounts; trust and wealth management services; cash management services; vault operations; electronic funds transfers; Internet and mobile banking solutions with bill payment service; credit card; and various ancillary banking-related services for individuals. It also provides commercial lending, including industrial and commercial property financing, equipment, inventory and accounts receivable financing, acquisition financing and commercial leasing, as well as for the consumption ; commercial real estate loans including mortgage loans to developers and owners of commercial real estate; consumer loans, such as auto loans and leases; consumer credit services; home equity lines of credit; and residential real estate and construction loans, as well as installment loans and commercial loans. In addition, the company offers aircraft financing and asset management services. As of December 31, 2021, it operated 96 financial services offices and a network of 116 ATMs in 26 counties in Ohio, 1 county in Kentucky, 3 counties in North Carolina and 4 counties in South Carolina. The company was founded in 1908 and is based in Newark, Ohio.



Get news and reviews for the Washington Federal Daily – Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of breaking news and analyst ratings for Washington Federal and related companies with MarketBeat.com’s FREE daily email newsletter.

]]>
Head-to-head comparison: Hilltop (NYSE: HTH) and Peoples Financial (OTCMKTS: PFBX) https://uncharted3blog.com/head-to-head-comparison-hilltop-nyse-hth-and-peoples-financial-otcmkts-pfbx/ Sat, 11 Jun 2022 10:17:17 +0000 https://uncharted3blog.com/head-to-head-comparison-hilltop-nyse-hth-and-peoples-financial-otcmkts-pfbx/ Hill (NYSE: HTH – Get a rating) and Peoples Financial (OTCMKTS: PFBX – Get a rating) are both finance companies, but which is the better stock? We will compare the two companies based on the strength of their analyst recommendations, profitability, earnings, risk, institutional ownership, dividends and valuation. Analyst Notes This is a summary of […]]]>

Hill (NYSE: HTHGet a rating) and Peoples Financial (OTCMKTS: PFBXGet a rating) are both finance companies, but which is the better stock? We will compare the two companies based on the strength of their analyst recommendations, profitability, earnings, risk, institutional ownership, dividends and valuation.

Analyst Notes

This is a summary of the current ratings for Hilltop and Peoples Financial, as provided by MarketBeat.com.

Sales Ratings Hold odds Buy reviews Strong buy odds Rating
Hill 0 2 0 0 2.00
Peoples Financial 0 0 0 0 N / A

Hilltop currently has a consensus price target of $31.89, indicating a potential upside of 13.41%. Considering Hilltop’s possible higher upside, stock analysts clearly believe that Hilltop is more favorable than Peoples Financial.

Volatility and risk

Hilltop has a beta of 1.09, suggesting its stock price is 9% more volatile than the S&P 500. In comparison, Peoples Financial has a beta of 0.54, suggesting its stock price is 46% less volatile than the S&P 500.

Dividends

Hilltop pays an annual dividend of $0.60 per share and has a dividend yield of 2.1%. Peoples Financial pays an annual dividend of $0.18 per share and has a dividend yield of 1.1%. Hilltop pays 17.5% of its earnings as a dividend. Peoples Financial pays 16.8% of its profits in the form of dividends. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings over the next few years. Hilltop has increased its dividend for 5 consecutive years and Peoples Financial has increased its dividend for 2 consecutive years. Hilltop is clearly the better dividend-paying stock, given its higher yield and longer track record of dividend growth.

Profitability

This table compares the net margins, return on equity and return on assets of Hilltop and Peoples Financial.

Net margins Return on equity return on assets
Hill 16.15% 11.01% 1.52%
Peoples Financial 19.02% 5.79% 0.61%

Institutional and Insider Ownership

63.5% of Hilltop shares are held by institutional investors. By comparison, 11.4% of Peoples Financial’s stock is held by institutional investors. 22.3% of Hilltop shares are held by insiders. By comparison, 28.1% of Peoples Financial’s stock is held by insiders. Strong institutional ownership indicates that large fund managers, hedge funds, and endowments believe a stock will outperform the market over the long term.

Benefits and evaluation

This chart compares the revenue, earnings per share, and valuation of Hilltop and Peoples Financial.

Gross revenue Price/sales ratio Net revenue Earnings per share Price/earnings ratio
Hill $1.94 billion 1.15 $374.49 million $3.42 8.22
Peoples Financial $26.76 million 2.80 $8.58 million $1.07 14.94

Hilltop has higher revenue and profit than Peoples Financial. Hilltop trades at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Peoples Financial, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Summary

Hilltop beats Peoples Financial on 10 out of 15 factors compared between the two stocks.

About Hilltop (Get a rating)

Hilltop Holdings Inc. provides corporate and personal banking, financial products and services. It operates through three segments: Banking, Broker-Dealer and Mortgage Origination. The Banking segment offers savings, checking, interest-bearing checking and money market accounts; certificates of deposit; lines and letters of credit, home improvement and equity loans, securities purchase and transportation loans, equipment loans and leases, agricultural and commercial real estate loans and other loans; and commercial and industrial loans, and term and construction financing. This segment also provides cash management, wealth management, asset management, check card, safety deposit box, online banking, bill payment, trust and overdraft services; and estate planning, management and administration, management of investment portfolios, employee benefit accounts and individual retirement accounts, and automated teller machines. The Broker-Dealer segment offers public finance services that assist public entities in creating, syndicating and distributing securities of municipalities and political subdivisions; specialized advisory and investment banking services; advice and guidance on arbitrage rebate compliance, portfolio management and local government investment pool administration; structured finance services, which include advisory services for derivatives and commodities; sells, trades and supports US government and agency bonds, corporate bonds and municipal bonds, as well as mortgage, asset and commercial mortgage-backed securities and products structured. This segment also provides asset and liability management advisory, clearing, retail and securities lending services. The Mortgage Origination segment offers mortgage, jumbo, Federal Housing Administration, Veterans Affairs and United States Department of Agriculture loans. Hilltop Holdings Inc. was founded in 1998 and is headquartered in Dallas, Texas.

About Peoples Financial (Get a rating)

Peoples Financial logoPeoples Financial Corporation operates as a bank holding company for The Peoples Bank which provides banking, financial and trust services to government entities, individuals and small businesses and commercial enterprises in Mississippi. It accepts various deposits, such as interest-bearing and interest-free checking accounts, savings accounts, certificates of deposit, and individual retirement accounts (IRAs). The company also offers business, commercial, real estate, construction, personal and installment loans; and personal trust, estate agencies and services, including living and testamentary trusts, executors, guardianships and guardianships. Additionally, it provides self-directed IRAs; and managing escrow, stock transfer and bond payment agency accounts to corporate clients. In addition, the Company offers various other services including safe deposit box rental, wire transfers, night deposit facilities, collection, cash management and internet banking. As of December 31, 2021, the company operated through 17 branches located in Harrison, Hancock, Jackson and Stone counties. It also has 28 ATMs in its branches, as well as other offsite and non-proprietary locations. The company was founded in 1896 and is based in Biloxi, Mississippi.



Get news and reviews for Hilltop Daily – Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of breaking news and analyst ratings for Hilltop and related companies with MarketBeat.com’s FREE daily newsletter.

]]>
Meet the “Banker of the Week” https://uncharted3blog.com/meet-the-banker-of-the-week/ Thu, 09 Jun 2022 23:31:37 +0000 https://uncharted3blog.com/meet-the-banker-of-the-week/ It’s Friday. Bravo Wall Streeters, you have come to the end of the… the day before you open your laptops to work on Saturday. I’m your host, Aaron Weinman. To lighten things up, I’m rolling out Insider’s first “Banker of the Week” segment. The BoW highlights rainmakers, important new hires, or someone taking significant initiative […]]]>

It’s Friday. Bravo Wall Streeters, you have come to the end of the… the day before you open your laptops to work on Saturday.

I’m your host, Aaron Weinman. To lighten things up, I’m rolling out Insider’s first “Banker of the Week” segment. The BoW highlights rainmakers, important new hires, or someone taking significant initiative in their business.

Do you have any idea who should be next week’s banker? You can email me at aweinman@insider.com or tweet me @aaronw11.

By the way, get your headphones ready: I’m on This Morning’s Refresh from Insider talking about SPACs – listen to my segment here and check out the full episode here.

Now let’s go.


If this was forwarded to you, register here. Download the Insider app here.


Harold Butler, Citi

Harold Butler, Head of Citi’s Diversified Financial Institutions Group

Town


1. Our first Board of Directors: Harold Butler, who leads Citi’s Diversified Financial Institutions Group. After 17 years at Citi, he is known for his ties to the US Treasury and the


Federal Reserve

.

Butler — a big advocate for greater fairness on Wall Street — was appointed to lead Citi’s new group of diversified financial institutions in February. The team aims to expand Citi’s capital markets business with minority-owned brokers and asset managers, and oversees the bank’s investments in minority-owned depository institutions (MDIs) .

A few years before being asked to lead that team, however, Butler sowed the seeds for a rotation program designed to cultivate ties between Citi and other MDIs. In the summer of 2020, while having dinner with Kase Lawal, president of Unity Bank in Texas, the only black-owned bank in the Lone Star StateButler was asked if Citi would consider a grant to help Unity secure new markets


tax credit

Company.

Butler reflected on this and realized a rotation program that not only strengthened relationships with MDIs, but provided minority-owned financial institutions with access to Wall Street talent, services and technology.

The rotation initiative, like a secondment, integrates Citi bankers with MDIs for a short duration.

Thanks in part to Butler, Citi launched the rotation program last year. His the first detached was Gina Nisbethdirector of Citi’s commercial division, who spent the last year working with Unity National Bank of Houston.

And last month, Citi named three secondments for the second tranche of rotations:

  • Sandy Furlow is on a year-long assignment with the African-American-owned Industrial Bank.
  • Abhijit Bhattacharya provides advisory services to Optus Bank.
  • Valerie Scruggs has joined M&F Bank, where she will work in advisory services.

Meet seven other Wall Street bankers plying their trades in minority-owned institutions.


Ken Griffin, Citadel Founder, 2018

Kenneth C. Griffin, Founder and CEO of Citadel, at the CNBC Institutional Investor Delivering Alpha conference on July 18 in New York City

Heidi Gutman/CNBC/NBCU Photo Bank via Getty Images


2. Citadel Securities is hiring 25% more interns than in the past two years. The fund/market maker’s underling class includes sharp individuals, including students who won the Putnam math contest, NASA researchers, and special ops soldiers.

3. Stay on the Citadel, a the former cabinet analyst was sentenced to prison for scamming millions of dollars in Covid relief loans, according to Bloomberg. This person left the Citadel in 2018, some two years before these crimes relating to his incarceration.

4. Sotheby’s goes one-on-one with private banks on loans. Here’s how the auction house issues loans against luxury purchases like Patek Philippe watches.

5. Federal prosecutors have opened a criminal investigation into Wells Fargo’s hiring practices, according to the New York Times. The investigation comes after Wells paused a policy that a former employee said led to “bogus” job interviews.

6. Franchise Group is targeting more than $2 billion to back its $8 billion deal with retailer Kohl’s. Store operator turns to Apollo Global Management for the money, people told the New York Post. Meanwhile, Apollo has also teamed up with Indian conglomerate Reliance to make a binding offer for UK drugstore Walgreens Boots, Bloomberg reports.

7. Citigroup suffered a technical payment issue at the height of market stress in March 2020. According to the Financial Times, the issue – which meant Citi was late to respond to a margin call – left the bank relying on the grace of a clearinghouse to prevent it. failure to pay margin for derivative contracts.

8. Apple won’t use Goldman Sachs’ balance sheet to issue loans for its new Apple Pay Later service. The tech giant will instead do the short-term loans through a wholly owned subsidiary called Apple Financing LLC.

9. Blockchain.com CEO says a beleaguered crypto market seems “normal”. Here is the latest news from Money20/20 Europe.

10. A former Capital One executive landed $60 million for this fintech. Here are 23 slides on how Tandym, a startup reinventing store credit cards, secured funding from investors like Gradient Ventures.


Moves down the street:

  • CIFC Asset Management, an alternative credit specialist with approximately $40 billion in assets under management, has hired Conor Daly as Head of European Credit. He previously ran European credit for another structured finance store Onex Credit.
  • General Atlantic conducted a $90 million financing round at Klara fintech platform in Mexico.

Invitation to the event: The fourth installment in Insider’s “Financing a Sustainable Future” series takes place on Tuesday, June 14 at noon EST. This event, in partnership with Bank of America, focuses on corporate governance, perhaps the most challenging measure of ESG reporting. Discover the previous three events and register for next week here.


Organized by Aaron Weinman in New York. Tips? E-mail aweinman@insider.com or tweet @aweinman11. Edited by Hallam Bullock (tweet @hallam_bullock) in London.

]]>