BSP’s Fourth Rate Cut: Who Benefits, and at What Cost?

 

A country does not choose its banking system: rather it gets a banking system consistent with the institutions that govern its distribution of political power—Charles Calomiris and Stephen Haber

In this issue

BSP’s Fourth Rate Cut: Who Benefits, and at What Cost?

I. Introduction: BSP’s Easing Cycle, Fourth Interest Rate Cut

II. The Primary Beneficiaries of BSP’s Policies

III. The Impact of the BSP Monetary Policy Rates on MSMEs

IV. The Inflation Story—Suppressed CPI as a Justification? Yield Curve Analysis

V. Logical Contradictions in the Philippine Banking Data

VI. Slowing Bank Asset Growth

VII. Booming Bank Lending—Magnified by the Easing Cycle

VIII. Economic Paradoxes from the BSP’s Easing Cycle

IX. Plateauing Investments and Rising Losses

X. Mounting Liquidity Challenges in the Banking System

XI. Conclusion: Unmasking the BSP’s Easing Cycle: A Rescue Mission with Hidden Costs 

BSP’s Fourth Rate Cut: Who Benefits, and at What Cost? 

As part of its ongoing easing cycle, the BSP cut rates for the fourth time in April 2025. The key question: who benefits? Clues point to trickle-down policies at work. 

I. Introduction: BSP’s Easing Cycle, Fourth Interest Rate Cut 

The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) initiated its easing cycle in the second half of 2024, implementing three rate cuts and reducing the banking system’s Reserve Requirement Ratio (RRR) in October 2024. 

This was followed by a second RRR reduction in March 2025, complemented by the doubling of deposit insurance by the Philippine Deposit Insurance Corporation (PDIC), a BSP-affiliated agency, in the same month. 

The latter was likely intended to boost depositor confidence in the banking system, given the rapid decline in banks’ reserves amid heightened lending and liquidity pressures. (previously discussed) 

Last week, the BSP announced its fourth rate cut—the first for 2025—bringing the policy rate to 5.5%. 

The BSP justified this latest cut by citing the easing of inflation risks and a "more challenging external environment, which could dampen global GDP growth and pose downside risks to domestic economic activity." 

But who truly benefits from these policies? 

Or, we ask: Cui bono? 

The answer naturally points to the largest borrowers: the Philippine government, elite-owned conglomerates, and the banking system. 

Let’s examine the beneficiaries and question whether the broader economy is truly being served. 

II. The Primary Beneficiaries of BSP’s Policies 

The BSP’s easing measures disproportionately favor the following:

Figure 1

A. The Philippine Government: Public debt surged by Php 319.26 billion to a record PHP 16.632 trillion in February 2025.  Debt-to-GDP ratio increased to 60.72% in 2024, up from 60.1% in 2023. (Figure 1, topmost image) 

While debt servicing data for the first two months of 2025 appears subdued, it accounted for 7.64% of nominal GDP in 2024—a steady increase from its 2017 low of 4.11%. Between 2022 and 2024, the debt servicing-to-GDP ratio accelerated from 5.87% to 7.64%, reflecting the growing burden of rising debt.

Lower interest rates directly reduce the government’s borrowing costs, providing fiscal relief at a time of record-high debt, but they also encourage more debt-financed spending, a key factor contributing to this all-time high.

B. Elite-Owned Conglomerates: Major corporations controlled by the country’s elites have also seen their debt levels soar. 

For instance, San Miguel Corporation’s 2024 debt increased by Php 154.535 billion to a record Php 1.56 trillion, while Ayala Corporation’s debt rose by PHP 76.92 billion to PHP 666.76 billion. 

Other member firms of the PSEi 30 have yet to release their annual reports, but Q3 2024 data shows that the non-financial debt of the PSEi 30 companies grew by Php 208 billion, or 3.92%, to PHP 5.52 trillion—equivalent to 16.6% of Total Financial Resources (Q3).

These conglomerates benefit from lower borrowing costs, enabling them to refinance existing debt or fund expansion at cheaper rates, but similar to the government, their mounting loan exposure diverts financial resources away from the rest of the economy, exacerbating credit constraints for smaller firms. 

C. The Philippine Banking System: The banking sector itself is a significant beneficiary. 

In February 2025, aggregate bonds and bills payable surged by Php 560.2 billion—the fourth-highest increase on record—pushing outstanding bank borrowings to PHP 1.776 trillion, the second-highest level ever, just below January 2025’s all-time high of PHP 1.78 trillion. (Figure 1, middle pane)

Ideally, lower rates and RRR cuts provide banks with cheaper funding and more lendable funds, boosting their profitability while easing liquidity pressures. But have they? 

These figures reveal the primary beneficiaries of the BSP’s policies: the government, elite conglomerates, and the banking system.

III. The Impact of the BSP Monetary Policy Rates on MSMEs

But what about the broader economy, particularly the micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) that form its backbone?

Republic Act 9501, the Magna Carta for MSMEs, mandates that banks allocate at least 8% of their total loan portfolio to micro and small enterprises (MSEs) and 2% to medium enterprises (MEs), based on their balance sheets from the previous quarter.

However, a recent report by Foxmont Capital Partners and Boston Consulting Group (BCG), cited by BusinessWorld, highlights a stark mismatch: despite MSMEs comprising 99.6% of all businesses in the Philippines, generating 67% of total employment, and contributing up to 40% of GDP, they accounted for only 4.1% of total bank lending in 2023—a sharp decline from 8% in 2010.

As of Q3 2024, the BSP reported a total compliance rate with the Magna Carta for MSMEs stood at just 4.6%. (Figure 1, lower graph)

Despite a boom in bank lending, many banks opt to pay penalties for non-compliance rather than extend credit to MSMEs.

This underscores a harsh reality: bank lending remains concentrated among a select few—large corporations and the government—while MSMEs continue to be underserved.

All told, the BSP's policies have minimal impact on MSMEs, highlighting their distortive distributional effects

The report further echoes a "trickle-down" monetary policy critique we’ve long emphasized: the Philippine banking system is increasingly concentrated. Over 90% of banking assets are held by just 20 large banks, while more than 1,800 smaller institutions, primarily serving rural areas, collectively control only 9% of total assets!

Figure 2

This concentration is evident in the universal and commercial banks’ share of total financial resources, which stood at 77.7% in January 2025, slightly down from a historic high of 77.9% in December 2024. (Figure 2, topmost diagram)

If the BSP’s policies primarily benefit the government, banks, and elite conglomerates rather than the broader economy, why is the central bank pushing so hard to continue its easing cycle? And what have been the effects of its previous measures?

IV. The Inflation Story—Suppressed CPI as a Justification? Yield Curve Analysis

One of the BSP’s stated reasons for the April 2025 rate cut was a decline in the Consumer Price Index (CPI), with March headline CPI at 1.8%.

However, authorities have done little to explain to the public the critical role that Maximum Suggested Retail Prices (MSRPs)—essentially price controls—played in shaping this decline.

First, the government imposed MSRPs on imported rice on January 20, 2025, despite rice prices already contracting by 2.3% that month. (Figure 2 middle chart)

The second phase of rice MSRPs was implemented on March 31, despite rice prices deflating.

Second, pork MSRPs were introduced on March 10, 2025.

Pork inflation, which peaked at 8.5% in February, slipped to 8.2% in March, despite a reported compliance rate of only 25% in the National Capital Region (NCR).

Notably, pork sold in supermarkets and hypermarkets was exempt from these controls, revealing an inherent bias of policymakers against MSMEs. Were authorities acting as tacit sales agents for the former?

Third, since the introduction of these quasi-price controls, headline CPI has declined faster than core CPI (which excludes volatile food and energy prices), which printed 2.2% in March. (Figure 2, lowest window)

Food CPI, with a 34.78% weighting in the CPI basket, has likely been a significant driver of this decline, more so than core CPI.

This divergence suggests that price controls artificially suppressed headline inflation, masking underlying price pressures.

Meanwhile, the falling core CPI points to weak consumer demand, a concerning trend given the Philippines’ near-record employment rates.

Figure 3

Finally, the Philippine treasury market appears to challenge the BSP’s narrative of controlled inflation at 1.8% in March 2025.

Yield data shows a subtle flattening in the mid-to-long section of the curve: yields for 2- to 5-year maturities dipped slightly (e.g., the 5-year yield fell by 2.8 basis points from February 28 to March 31), while the 10-year yield rose by 6.75 basis points, and long-term yields, such as the 25-year, declined by 3.15 basis points. (Figure 3, topmost image)

This flattening—driven by a narrowing spread between medium- and long-term yields—may reflect market concerns about economic growth and banking system liquidity.

Despite this, the overall yield curve remains steep last March, signaling that the market anticipates inflation risks in the future.

This suggests that Treasury investors doubt the sustainability of the BSP’s inflation management.

We suspect that authorities leveraged price controls to justify the rate cut, using the suppressed CPI as a convenient metric rather than a true reflection of economic conditions.

This raises questions about the BSP’s transparency and the real motivations behind its easing cycle.

V. Logical Contradictions in the Philippine Banking Data

When you make a successful lending transaction, you get back not only your capital but the interest with it. Less costs, this income represents your profits and adds to your liquidity (savings or capital).

When you make a successful investment transaction, you get back not only your capital but the dividend or capital gains with it. Less costs, this income also represents your profits and adds to your liquidity (savings or capital).

Applied to the banking system, under these ideal circumstances, declared profits should align with liquidity conditions, but why does this depart from this premise?

Let us dig into the details. 

VI. Slowing Bank Asset Growth 

Bank total assets grew by 8% year-over-year (YoY) in February 2025 to PHP 26.95 trillion, slightly below December 2024’s historic high of PHP 27.4 trillion.  (Figure 3, middle pane)

Despite the BSP’s easing cycle, the growth in bank assets has been slowing, a downtrend that has persisted since 2013. This decline in the growth of bank assets has mirrored the falling share of cash reserves.

The changes in the share distribution of assets illustrate the structural evolution of the Philippine banking system.

As of February 2025, lending, investments, and cash represented the largest share, totaling 92.6%, broken down into 54.5%, 28.8%, and 8.8%, respectively. (Figure 3, lowest visual)

Since 2013, the share of cash reserves has been declining, bank loans broke out of their consolidation phase in July 2024 (pre-easing cycle), while the investment share appears to be peaking.

VII. Booming Bank Lending—Magnified by the Easing Cycle

The Total Loan Portfolio (inclusive of Interbank Loans (IBL) and Reverse Repurchase Agreements (RRP)) grew by 12.3% in February 2025, slightly down from 13.7% in January.

Since the BSP’s historic rescue during the pandemic recession, bank lending growth has been surging, regardless of interest rate and Reserve Requirement Ratio (RRR) levels. The recent interest rate and RRR cuts have only amplified these developments.

Figure 4

Notably, bank lending growth has become structurally focused on consumer lending, with the Universal-Commercial share of consumer loans rising to an all-time high as of February 2025. (Figure 4, topmost graph)

This shift is partly due to credit card subsidies introduced during the pandemic recession. This evolution in the banks’ business model also points to an inherent proclivity toward structural inflation: producers are receiving less financing (leading to reduced production and more imports), while consumers have been supplementing their purchasing power, likely to keep up with cumulative inflation.

In short, this strategic shift toward consumption lending underlines the axiom of "too much money chasing too few goods."

The rising loan-to-deposit ratio further shows that bank lending has not only outperformed asset growth, but ironically, these loans have not translated into deposits. (Figure 4, middle chart)

Total deposit liabilities growth slowed from 6.83% in January to 5.6% in February, driven by a slowdown in peso deposits (from 6.97% to 6.3%) and a sharp plunge in foreign exchange (FX) deposit growth (from 6.14% to 2.84%). (Figure 4, lowest window)

Peso deposits accounted for 82.7% of total deposit liabilities. Ironically, despite the USD-PHP exchange rate drifting near the BSP’s ‘upper band limit’ or its ‘Maginot Line’, FX deposit growth has materially slowed.

VIII. Economic Paradoxes from the BSP’s Easing Cycle 

Paradoxically, despite near-record employment levels (96.2% as of February 2025) and stratospheric loan growth propelled by consumers, the GDP has been stalling, with Q3 and Q4 2024 underperforming at 5.2% and 5.3%, respectively.

Real estate vacancies have been soaring—even the most optimistic analysts acknowledge this—and Core CPI has been plunging (2.2% in March 2025, as mentioned above).

Figure 5

Meanwhile, social indicators paint a grim picture: SWS hunger rates in March have hit near-pandemic milestones, and self-rated poverty, affecting 52% of families, has rebounded in March after dropping in January 2025 to 50% from a 21-year high of 63% recorded in December 2024. (Figure 5, topmost image) 

In a nutshell, where has all the fiat money created via loans flowed? What is the black hole consuming these supposedly profitable undertakings? 

IX. Plateauing Investments and Rising Losses 

The plateauing of investments is highlighted by their slowing growth rates. 

Total Investments (Net) decelerated from 5.85% in January to 4.86% in February 2025. This slowdown comes in the face of elevated market losses, which remained at PHP 26.4 billion in February, down from PHP 38.1 billion a month ago. (Figure 5, middle diagram) 

Held-to-Maturity (HTM) securities accounted for the largest share of Total Investments at 52.22%, followed by Available-for-Sale (AFS) securities at 38.5%, and Financial Assets Held for Trading (HFT) at 5.6%. 

Despite the CPI’s sharp decline, backed by the BSP’s easing, elevated Treasury rates—such as the 25-year yield at 6.3%—combined with losses in trading positions at the PSE (despite coordinated buying by the "national team" which likely includes some banks—to prop up the PSEi 30 index) have led to losses in banks’ trading accounts. 

Clearly, this is one reason behind the BSP’s easing cycle.

Yet, HTM securities remain the largest source of bank investments.

In early March 2025, we warned that the spike in banks’ funding of the government via Net Claims on Central Government (NCoCG) would filter into HTM assets: 

"Valued at amortized cost, HTM securities mask unrealized losses, potentially straining liquidity. Overexposure to long-duration HTMs amplifies these risks, while rising government debt holdings heighten banks’ sensitivity to sovereign risk. 

With NCoCG at a record high, this tells us that banks' HTMs are about to carve out another fresh milestone in the near future. 

In short, losses from market placements and ballooning HTMs have offset the liquidity surge from a lending boom, undermining the BSP’s easing efforts." (Prudent Investor, March 2025)

Indeed, the NCoCG spike to a record PHP 5.54 trillion in December 2024 pushed banks’ HTM holdings above their previous high of PHP 4.017 trillion in October 2023, breaking the implicit two-year ceiling of PHP 4 trillion to set a fresh record of PHP 4.051 trillion in February 2025. (Figure 5, lowest pane) 

This increase raised the HTM share of assets from 14.7% in January to 15.03% in February. 

X. Mounting Liquidity Challenges in the Banking System

Figure 6

This new all-time high in HTM securities led to a fresh all-time low in the cash-to-deposit ratio, meaning that despite the RRR cuts, cash reserves dropped more than the slowdown in deposit growth would suggest. (Figure 6, topmost chart)

The banking system’s cash and due from banks fell 2.94% in February to PHP 2.37 trillion, its lowest level since June 2019, effectively erasing all of the BSP’s unprecedented PHP 2.3 trillion cash injection in 2020-21. (Figure 6, middle graph)

Moreover, the liquid assets-to-deposits ratio, another bank liquidity indicator, dropped to June 2020 levels. (Figure 6, lowest visual)

The BSP cut the RRR in October 2024, yet liquidity challenges continue to mount. What, then, will the March 2025 RRR cut achieve? While the BSP notes that bank credit delinquency measures—such as gross non-performing loans (NPLs), net NPLs, and distressed assets—have remained stable, it’s doubtful that HTM securities are the sole contributor to the liquidity challenges faced by the banking system.

Improving mark-to-market losses are part of the story, but with record credit expansion (in pesos) and an all-time high in financial leverage amid a slowing GDP, it’s likely that the banks’ unpublished NPLs are another factor involved.

Figure 7

Additionally, banks have increasingly relied on borrowing, with bills payable accounting for 67% of their outstanding debt. (Figure 7, upper graph)

Though banks have reduced their repo exposure with the BSP, interbank repos set a record high in February 2025, providing further signs of liquidity strains. (Figure 7, lower chart)

Banks have been aggressively lending, particularly to high-risk sectors such as consumers, real estate, and trade, to raise liquidity to fund the government.

However, this has led to a build-up of HTM securities and sustained mark-to-market losses for HFT and AFS assets.

Additionally, lending to high-risk sectors like consumers and real estate increases the risk of defaults, particularly in a slowing economy, which can strain liquidity if these loans become non-performing.

Moreover, this lending exacerbates maturity mismatches—for instance, when short-term deposits are used to fund longer-term real estate loans—amplifying the liquidity challenges as banks face immediate funding demands with potentially impaired assets.

While the BSP’s “relief measures” may understate the true risk exposures of the industry, the mounting liquidity challenges and the increasing scale and frequency of their combined easing policies have provided clues about the extent of these risks.

Borrowing from our conclusion in March 2025:

"The BSP’s easing cycle has fueled a lending boom, masked NPL risks, and propped up government debt holdings, yet liquidity remains elusive. Cash reserves are shrinking, deposit growth is faltering, and banks are borrowing heavily to stay afloat.

...

As contradictions mount, a critical question persists: can this stealth loose financial environment sustain itself, or is it a prelude to a deeper crisis?" (Prudent Investor March 2025)

Under these conditions, the true beneficiaries of the BSP’s easing cycle become clear: it is primarily a rescue of the elite owned-banking system. 

XI. Conclusion: Unmasking the BSP’s Easing Cycle: A Rescue Mission with Hidden Costs 

The BSP has used inflation and external challenges to justify its fourth rate cut in April 2025, part of an easing cycle that began in the second half of 2024. 

The sharp decline in the March CPI rate to 1.8%—potentially understated due to price controls through Maximum Suggested Retail Prices (MSRPs)—may have provided a convenient rationale. 

However, the data suggests a different story: increasing leverage in the public sector, elite firms, and the banking system appears to be the real driver behind the BSP’s easing cycle, which also includes RRR reductions and the PDIC’s doubling of deposit insurance. 

The evidence points to a banking system under strain—record-low cash reserves, a lending boom that fails to translate into deposits, and economic paradoxes like stalling GDP growth despite near-record employment. 

When the BSP cites a "more challenging external environment, which would dampen global GDP growth and pose a downside risk to domestic economic activity," it is really more concerned about the impact on the government’s fiscal conditions, the health of the elite-owned banking system, and elite-owned, too-big-to-fail corporations. 

This focus comes at the expense of the broader economy, as MSMEs remain underserved and systemic risks, such as unpublished NPLs and overexposure to government debt, continue to mount. 

As the BSP prioritizes a rescue mission for its favored few, one must ask: at what cost to the Philippine economy, and can this trajectory avoid a deeper crisis?

 

 

 

Philippine PSEi 30’s Crash: Worst January Performance Since 2008 and Asia’s Laggard — A Liquidity-Driven Meltdown?

The stock market's job is to always make you feel like you are missing out on something. The stock market's job is to always make you feel like you should be doing something. The stock market's job is to get you to do the wrong thing at the wrong time—Ian Cassel

In this issue 

Philippine PSEi 30’s Crash: Worst January Performance Since 2008 and Asia’s Laggard — A Liquidity-Driven Meltdown?

I. A Lowly Voice in the Wilderness

II. January as Template for 2025 Performance

III. Double Top Pattern?

IV. Was The Selloff Driven By Escalating Liquidity Strains? San Miguel: The Canary in the Coal Mine?

V. Price Distortions from the Changes in PSE’s Membership Amplified the Market’s Volatility

VI. Summary and Conclusion

Philippine PSEi 30’s Crash: Worst January Performance Since 2008 and Asia’s Laggard — A Liquidity-Driven Meltdown?

The Philippine equity benchmark plummeted 10.2% in January, making it the worst performer in Asia. It was also the largest loss in the history of January since 2008. Could escalating liquidity strains be the driving force?

I. A Lowly Voice in the Wilderness 

First, the appetizer. 

Let’s revisit a few quotes from our previous posts when everyone was predicting a new bull market for the PSEi 30, with expectations of it reaching 7,500 in October. (bold and italics original) 

In the backdrop of lethargic volume, concentrated activities, and a rising share of foreign participation, a continuation of global de-risking and deleveraging translates to more liquidations here and abroad, which could expose many skeletons in the closet of the Philippine financial system. August 4, 2024 

...

The public has been largely unaware of the buildup of risks associated with pumping the PSEi 30, driven by a significant concentration in trading activities and market internals 

The market breadth exhibits that since only a few or a select number of issues have benefited from this liquidity-driven shindig, the invested public has likely been confused by the dismal returns of their portfolios and the cheerleading of media and the establishment. September 15, 2024

... 

Bottom line: The levels reached by the PSEi 30 and its outsized returns attained over a few months barely support general market activities, which remain heavily concentrated on the actions of the national team and volatile foreign fund flows.  

Instead, the present melt-up represents an onrush of speculative fervor driven by the BSP’s stealth liquidity easing measures, even before their rate cut. Moreover, real economic activities hardly support this melt-up. October 7, 2024 

...

Given the current global and domestic economic imbalances, the Year of the Snake may again usher in another period of heightened risk and potential volatility. January 19, 2025 

Next, the main course.

II. January as Template for 2025 Performance

The Philippines' main equity benchmark, the PSEi 30, plunged by 4.01% on the last trading day of January, dragging its weekly return to -6.9%, marking its fourth consecutive week of decline.

Figure 1

For the month, the PSEi 30 suffered a 10.2% loss Month on Month (MoM), its most significant monthly decline since the 12.8% crash in September 2022. Annually, it was down by 11.8%.

January is supposed to be the best month for the PSE, rising 9 times in 13 years, with an average return of 0.94%, including 2025.

Yet, returns have been declining both monthly and annually for the past decade and so. (Figure 1, upper window) 

True to the volatility of the Snake Year, 2025's 10.2% plunge on January 10 was the worst since 2008, during the Great Financial Crisis, which resulted in a 48% decline and the lowest PSEi 30 level since 2012. (Figure 1, lower image) 

Yet, if history were to rhyme, and if January’s performance serves as a template for 2025, it wouldn’t be surprising if the PSEi 30 faces a substantial setback.

Figure 2

As a result of this week’s thrashing, the Philippine PSEi 30 was the worst-performing Asian bourse. Ten of 19 national indices were down, one remained unchanged, with average returns at -0.41%. (Figure 2, topmost graph)

For January, with 10 of 19 national indices down and a YTD change of -0.5%, the Philippine PSEi 30 was the region's laggard. (Figure 2, middle chart)

Major ASEAN bourses, such as Thailand’s SET and Malaysia’s KLCI, were the weakest links in both weekly and monthly outcomes. (Figure 2, lowest diagram)

Could these be emerging signs of an Asian Financial Crisis 2.0?

III. Double Top Pattern? 

This week’s meltdown breached two minor support levels and now seems poised to challenge the October 2022 low.

Figure 3

From a technical analysis standpoint, the PSEi 30 is facing the potential of a 'double top' pattern, where a breakdown below the October low could lead to a retest of the March 2020 level. (Figure 3, upper image)

The panic selling suggests that a significant oversold rebound might be imminent, though the durability of this recovery could be suspect.

IV. Was The Selloff Driven By Escalating Liquidity Strains? San Miguel: The Canary in the Coal Mine?

Mainstream explanations for the selloff have often been influenced by the availability bias or "when people overweight new information or recent events" (Investopedia)

Could the recent sell-offs be attributed to the substantial shortfall in Q4 and 2024 GDP (a development we had anticipated)? 

Was it influenced by Trump's tariff threats or the Federal Reserve's pause in their easing cycle? 

Or might domestic politics play a role? Specifically, the threat by the BBM administration to shut down the government if the Supreme Court rules in favor of appellants challenging the constitutionality of their controversial budget, or the impending Food Emergency Security measure on rice, set to be implemented on February 4, 2025. 

Our best guess is that while these factors might have some influence, a more critical driver of the market turmoil could be the escalating pressures on financial liquidity. 

Unlike the 2022 episode, where inflation and rising interest rates were significant factors, the current scenario mirrors the dynamics of the pandemic recession—where the PSEi 30 declines despite monetary easing aimed at combating a recession. (Figure 3, lower graph)

Currently, the GDP growth rate has been decelerating.

Figure 4

Moreover, bank liquidity has been worsening as of November, due to investments in Held-to-Maturity (HTM) assets and undisclosed Non-Performing Loans (NPLs). The cash-to-deposits and liquid assets-to-deposits ratios have been on a long-term downtrend, with the former at its lowest level in over a decade. (Figure 4, topmost graph) 

As a reminder, the BSP cut official rates in August, October, and December. It also reduced RRR rates in October, while the aggregate fiscal spending in 11-months reached all-time highs (ATHs), signaling massive stimulus. 

Contrary to mainstream expectations, the BSP’s accommodative monetary policy has led to an increase in Treasury bond yields rather than a decrease. (Figure 4, middle image) 

This rise is influenced not only by the Federal Reserve's policies but also by domestic inflation, which has been incrementally rising. 

Additionally, the yield curve for local Treasuries has steepened significantly, indicating heightened inflation risks. (Figure 4, lowest chart) 

Lastly, San Miguel’s deviation from the recent market uptrend might have served as the canary in the coal mine, signaling potential broader market distress. 

Also from last October 7, 2024 

Finally, SMC share prices continue to move diametrically opposite to the sizzling hot PSEi 30. (Figure 7, lowest graph)  

What gives? Will SMC’s debt breach the Php 1.5 trillion barrier in Q3?    

Have SMC’s larger shareholders been pricing in developing liquidity concerns? If so, why are bank shares skyrocketing, when some of them are SMC’s biggest creditors?

Figure 5

San Miguel’s share price was one of the biggest casualties, diving below the panic levels of March 2020.  (Figure 5, upper window) 

Its market capitalization plunged to Php 155 billion while grappling with a debt of Php 1.477 trillion. Falling equity and rising debt—what could go wrong? 

Could there be domestic funds facing liquidity constraints, forced to raise cash quickly by selling at any price?  And has this liquidation exacerbated San Miguel’s financial dilemma?

V. Price Distortions from the Changes in PSE’s Membership Amplified the Market’s Volatility

Lastly, the reconstitution of the PSEi 30 has contributed to market volatility.

The inclusion of AREIT and China Banking Corporation (CBC), which will replace Wilcon (WLCON) and Nickel Asia (NIKL) effective February 4, 2025, resulted in steep declines for the outgoing stocks: WLCON fell 10.16%, and NIKL plummeted 30.2%. (Figure 5, lower graph)

Meanwhile, funds tracking the PSEi 30 rotated into CBC (+33.81%) and AREIT (+4.74%).

Figure 6

Fundamentals hardly explain the irrational share price behavior of the affected firms. 

CBC’s parabolic move has turned it into a meme stock or crypto, even as the share prices of its peers have tumbled.

In the meantime, it also doesn't explain the sharp drop in NIKL's price. Although nickel prices have been on a downtrend, they have not collapsed. (Figure 6 topmost pane)

Shares of competitors FNI and MARC were down 1.96% and 8.96%, respectively, WoW. (Figure 6, middle graph)

In short, the PSE's proclivity to chase top performers while discarding laggards has only amplified the price distortions within the PSEi 30. 

VI. Summary and Conclusion

The January 2025 meltdown has brought to light the deteriorating fundamentals underlying the Philippine financial markets and economy. 

This crisis is not isolated to the Philippine Stock Exchange (PSE) but also resonates with some ASEAN counterparts. Could this be emerging signs of Asian Crisis 2.0? 

If historical trends of January and the volatility associated with the Year of the Snake are to repeat themselves, and if the double top pattern materializes, this suggests a significant deficit or loss for the PSEi 30 by the end of 2025. 

Could the recent turmoil in the PSEi 30 be indicative of escalating liquidity pressures among domestic fund managers? 

If this is the case, future stress could manifest in the treasury market and influence the US dollar-Philippine peso exchange rate $USDPHP. 

Certainly, given that the PSEi 30 has become heavily oversold, a notable rebound might be anticipated. However, this scenario presents not an opportunity for accumulation but rather for liquidation. 

Unless one is an expert in scalping, short-term trades involve significant risks (Figure 6, lowest chart)

Remember, cash remains the best defense against a bear market—whether through foreign exchange (FX) accounts or Treasury bills (T-bills).

___ 

Disclosure: The author holds a small position in NIKL as of the time of writing.

Is San Miguel’s Ever-Growing Debt the "Sword of Damocles" Hanging over the Philippine Economy and the PSE?

 

Every Ponzi is sold as a non-zero sum store of value. Every Ponzi investor believes the investment is a non-zero sum store of value—Nassim Nicolas Taleb

Is San Miguel’s Ever-Growing Debt the "Sword of Damocles" Hanging over the Philippine Economy and the PSE? 

San Miguel’s Q3 and nine-month sales performance validated the signs of a weakening economy. However, while the company reduced its debt from Php 1.484 trillion to Php 1.477 trillion, its practices exhibit symptoms of Minsky’s Ponzi finance.

I. San Miguel’s Slowing Sales Resonated with the Economy 

San Miguel’s 9-month sales performance demonstrates the weakening of the Philippine economy which was not limited to consumers.  

Given the current loose economic conditions, supported by the first BSP rate cut and the "Marcos-nomics" stimulus, it is surprising to see a contraction in cement and real estate revenues, as well as a downturn in infrastructure sales growth. For a company that has shifted its business model to rely heavily on political projects or enterprises, this downturn should be a cause for concern. 

Additionally, the consumer spending slowdown was pronounced in the context of declining food and packaging sales—which eked out marginal growth. 

SMC reported a Q3 revenue increase of only 3.9%—which would be flat once adjusted for inflation! 

Q3 sales pulled down the 9-month revenue growth, which clocked in at 11.2%.

In any case, despite a slight drop in margins, SMC reported income growth of 18.9%, amounting to Php 37.1 billion.

Despite this income growth, SMC’s outstanding debt fell only by Php 7.43 billion to Php 1.477 trillion from its 1H historic high of Php 1.485 trillion. 

II. San Miguel’s Incredible Short-term Debt Recycling, Deeper Signs of Ponzi Financing? 

However, this situation appears to be a result of smoke and mirrors, as the heavily leveraged holding firm raised approximately Php 71.4 billion through various preferred share issuances by its subsidiaries to bridge its financing gap. 

The issuance of preferred shares has potential impacts on common shareholders. Preferred shares typically have priority over common shares in receiving dividends and claims to assets. As a result, common shareholders may see reduced dividends, as preferred shareholders must be paid first. In the event of liquidation, preferred shareholders also have a higher claim on assets. 

A closer look at their cash flow statement reveals a striking example of debt recycling, reminiscent of Hyman Minsky’s "Ponzi finance." 

SMC borrowed an additional Php 110 billion in short-term debt, bringing the total to Php 933.794 billion, to pay off a rising Php 898.657 billion in loans. 

Professor Minsky described this as "Borrowing to pay interest or selling assets to pay interest (and even dividends) on common stock lowers the equity of a unit, even as it increases liabilities and the prior commitment of future incomes. A unit that Ponzi finances lowers the margin of safety that it offers the holders of its debts" (Hyman Minsky, 1992) 

Incredible! 

SMC’s Q3 interest payments rose by 10% to Php 25.05 billion, marking its second-highest level.

Although SMC reported a 6% increase in cash, amounting to Php 15.9 billion and totaling Php 281.2 billion, this figure remains significantly lower than its short-term liabilities of Php 383 billion, which raises the firm’s liquidity risks. 

III. Is SMC’s Debt the "Sword of Damocles" Hanging over the Philippine Economy and the PSE? 

To put this in perspective, SMC’s 9-month 2024 Php 1.477 trillion debt is equivalent to 6.6% of the estimated 2024 GDP and 4.5% of total financial resources (Q3). 

It is a telltale sign of the expanding concentration risk in the economy, or the 'too big to fail' phenomenon. What could go wrong? 

Its opportunity costs translate into either productive lending to the broader economy or financing competitiveness among SMEs. 

This also means that even at zero interest rates, the mounting scale of Ponzi finance or debt recycling is virtually unsustainable. 

It would likewise be a blatant mistake to assume that "what happens in SMC stays in SMC." 

As a counterparty to lenders, a liquidity crunch or potential insolvency won’t just affect the health of the banking system, the fixed-income market, or, indirectly, the Treasury markets—it could have broader economic and political repercussions. 

A liquidity squeeze could affect both direct and indirect industry and consumer linkages to SMC’s businesses.

Moreover, a political decision to bail out SMC would likely fuel inflation, which would come at the expense of the Philippine peso.

Sadly, could SMC represent the proverbial "Damocles' Sword" hanging over the Philippine economy, the financial system, and the Philippine Stock Exchange?

Interestingly, SMC share prices appear to have recently behaved like a pegged currency, with entity/ies defending the lower band (price floor) during the 5-minute pre-close period for several days, maintaining the Php 88 level (as of November 29) Previously, the lower band was at around Php 88.7.

___

reference  

Hyman P. Minsky The Financial Instability Hypothesis The Jerome Levy Economics Institute of Bard College May 1992

 

BSP Reduces Banks' Reserve Requirement Ratio (RRR), Fed's 50-bps Rate Cut Sends Philippine Yield Curve into Full Inversion!

 

The short end of the UST curve is highly influenced by the Federal Reserve’s monetary policies while the long end clarifies those policies through the prism of risk/return. A steep yield curve…is one that suggests a low rate, accommodative monetary policy that is likely to work over time. This accounts for the curve’s steepness. A flat and inverted curve is the opposite. Whatever monetary policy is being conducted, the long end is interpreting that policy as well as other conditions as being highly suspect—Jeffrey P Snider 

In this issue:

BSP Reduces Banks' Reserve Requirement Ratio (RRR), Fed's 50-bps Rate Cut Sends Philippine Yield Curve into Full Inversion!

I. 2024 Reserve Requirement Ratio Cuts to Designed to Plug the Banking System’s Worsening Illiquidity

II. Bank Liquidity Drain from Held to Maturity (HTM) and Growing Non-Performing Loans (NPL)

III. Philippine Yield Curve Shifts from an Inverted Belly to a Full Inversion!

IV. Was San Miguel’s September 20th Pre-Closing Dump Related to the Liquidity Strained Yield-Curve Inversion? 

BSP Reduces Banks' Reserve Requirement Ratio (RRR), Fed's 50-bps Rate Cut Sends Philippine Yield Curve into Full Inversion! 

The Philippine yield curve inverts as the BSP significantly reduces the Bank RRR, while the US Fed embarks on a "Not in Crisis" 50-bps rate cut. 

The BSP has been telegraphing cuts to the banking system’s Reserve Requirement Ratio (RRR) since its last reduction in June 2023. 

For instance, Philstar.com, May 18, 2024: The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) is looking at a significant reduction in the level of deposits banks are required to keep with the central bank after it starts cutting interest rates this year, its top official said. BSP Governor Eli Remolona Jr. said the Monetary Board is planning to cut the reserve requirement ratio (RRR) of universal and commercial banks by 450 basis points to five percent from the existing 9.5 percent, the highest in the region. 

Four months later. 

GMANews.com, September 18, 2024: The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) is looking to cut the reserve requirement ratio, the amount of cash a bank must hold in its reserves against deposits, “substantially” this year and reduce it further in 2025. BSP Governor Eli Remolona Jr. said on Wednesday that the cut in the reserve requirement is being considered, with the timing being discussed. He earlier said this can be reduced to 5% from the present 9.5% for big banks. 

Two days after. 

ABSCBNNews.com, September 20, 2024: The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas is reducing the reserve requirement ratio (RRR) for universal and commercial banks by 250 basis points (bps).  This RRR reduction will also apply to non-bank financial institutions with quasi-banking functions, the BSP said… The reduction shall bring the RRRs of universal and commercial banks to 7 percent; digital banks to 4 percent; thrift banks to 1 percent; and rural and cooperative banks to zero percent, the central bank said. The new ratios take effect on October 25 and shall apply to the local currency deposits and deposit substitute liabilities of banks and NBQBs. (bold mine) 

I. 2024 Reserve Requirement Ratio Cuts to Designed to Plug the Banking System’s Worsening Illiquidity 

Bank lending growth has been accelerating, while broad economic liquidity measures have been rising, so why would the BSP opt to inject more liquidity through Reserve Requirement Ratio (RRR) cuts? 

The following data set may provide some answers.

Figure 1

Although lending by Universal and Commercial Banks is at a record high in nominal peso terms, the growth rate remains far below pre-pandemic levels. (Figure 1, topmost image) 

The RRR cuts from 2018 to 2020 appeared to have worked, as the loans-to-deposit ratio rose to an all-time high in February 2020 but the pandemic-induced recession eroded these gains. (Figure 1, middle graph) 

It took a combination of historic BSP policies—record rate cuts, an unprecedented Php 2.3 trillion liquidity injection, and extraordinary relief measures—to reignite the loans-to-deposits ratio. Nonetheless, it still falls short of the 2020 highs. 

A likely, though unpublished, explanation is that bank liquidity continues to decline. 

As of July, the cash and due-to-bank deposits ratio was at its lowest level since at least 2013. The BSP policies of 2020 and subsequent RRR cuts bumped up this ratio from 2020-21, but it resumed its downtrend, which has recently worsened. (Figure 1, lowest chart)

Figure 2

After a brief recovery from the RRR cuts of 2018-2020—further aided by the BSP’s historic rescue measures in 2020—the liquid assets-to-deposits ratio has started to deteriorate again. (Figure 2, topmost pane) 

Additionally, Q2 2024 total bank profit growth has receded to its second-lowest level since Q2 2021. (Figure 2, middle diagram) 

From this perspective, liquidity boost from increased bank lending, RRR cuts, and reported profit growth has been inadequate to stem the cascading trend of cash and liquid assets. 

Furthermore, despite subsidies, relief measures, and a slowing CPI, Non-Performing Loans (NPLs) and distressed assets appear to have bottomed out in the current cycle. (Figure 3, lowest visual) 

Increasing NPLs in the face of a slowing CPI is indicative of demand. Refinancing has taken a greater role in the latest bank credit expansion. 

To wit, rising NPLs contribute significantly to the ongoing drain on the banking system’s liquidity. 

II. Bank Liquidity Drain from Held to Maturity (HTM) and Growing Non-Performing Loans (NPL)

Figure 3

A primary source of the downtrend in the cash-to-deposits ratio has been the banking system's Held-to-Maturity (HTM) securities. (Figure 3 upper image)

Once again, the BSP has acknowledged this. 

Banks face marked-to-market (MtM) losses from rising interest rates. Higher market rates affect trading since existing holders of tradable securities are taking MtM losses as a result. While some banks have resorted to reclassifying their available-for-sale (AFS) securities into held-to-maturity (HTM), some PHP845.8 billion in AFS (as of end-March 2018) are still subject to MtM losses. Furthermore, the shift to HTM would take away market liquidity since these securities could no longer be traded prior to their maturity. [BSP, 2018] (bold mine) 

Even though rates have dropped, HTM (Held-to-Maturity) assets remain at record levels but appear to be plateauing. Falling rates in 2019-2020 barely made a dent in the elevated HTM levels at the time. 

Yet, a principal source of HTMs continues to be the bank's net claims on central government (NCoCG). (Figure 3, lower graph) 

That is, banks continue to finance a substantial portion of the government's deficit spending, which has represented an elementary and major contributor to the deterioration in bank liquidity. 

Why has the BSP been doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results? Some call this "insanity." 

If the goal is to remove distortions—however ambiguously defined—why not eliminate the RRR entirely? 

It seems the BSP is merely buying time, hoping for a magical transformation of unproductive loans into productive lending. Besides, a complete phase-out of the RRR would leave the BSP with fewer "tools," or bluntly speaking, strip them of excuses. 

Thus, they’d rather have banks continue to accumulate unproductive loans in their portfolios and gradually subsidize them with relief from RRR cuts, rate cuts, various subsidies, and later direct injections—a palliative/band-aid treatment. 

III. Philippine Yield Curve Shifts from an Inverted Belly to a Full Inversion! 

Figure 4

Rather than steepening, the Fed's "not in a crisis" panic 50-basis-point cut also helped push the Philippine Treasury yield curve from an "inverted belly" to a "full inversion" on September 20! (Figure 4, tweet)

Figure 5

While yields across the entire curve plunged over the week, T-bill yields declined by a lesser degree relative to medium- and long-term Treasuries. (Figure 5, topmost window)

As a result, yields on Philippine notes and bonds have now fallen below T-bills!

Although one day doesn’t make a trend, this current inversion is the culmination of a process that began with a steep slope, then an inverted belly, and now a full inversion since June 2024. (Figure 5, middle chart)

The spreads between the 10-year bonds and their short-term counterparts are at the lowest level since March 2019! (Figure 5, lowest graph) 

And an inverted curve could serve as a warning signal/alarm bell for the economy.

From Investopedia: 

>An inverted yield curve forms when short-term debt instruments have higher yields than long-term instruments of the same credit risk profile.

>The inverted curve reflects bond investors’ expectations for a decline in longer-term interest rates, a view typically associated with recessions.

Further, it is a sign of tight liquidity: short-term borrowing costs rise or remain elevated, leading to higher yields on short-term debt instruments compared to long-term yields.

Moreover, expectations of slowing growth or economic recessions can also lead to decreased demand for riskier assets and increased demand for safer long-term bonds.

Again, the inverted curve must have resulted from the BSP’s announcement of a sharp reduction in the RRR in October, along with the Fed’s 50-basis point rate cuts.

Bottom line: cuts in the banks’ RRR were meant to address the banking system’s liquidity challenges as manifested in the Philippine treasury markets. The Fed’s 50-bps rate cut has exacerbated these distortions.

IV. Was San Miguel’s September 20th Pre-Closing Dump Related to the Liquidity Strained Yield-Curve Inversion?

Figure 6

Finally, it is interesting to observe that following the PSEi 30's intraday push above 7,300 last Friday, September 20, foreigners sold off or "dumped" SMC’s shares by 5% during the pre-closing five-minute float, contributing to the sharp decline in SMC’s share price and diminishing gains for the PSEi 30. (Figure 6, tweet) 

While we can’t directly attribute this to the inversion of the Philippine term structure of interest rates (yield curve), SMC’s intensifying liquidity challenges—evidenced by deteriorating cash reserves relative to soaring short-term debt in Q2 2024—should eventually influence its slope. (Figure 6, lower chart) 

In sum, as a "too big to fail" institution, SMC’s difficulties will inevitably reflect on the government’s fiscal and monetary health as well as the banks and the economy. 

____

references

FINANCIAL STABILITY COORDINATION COUNCIL, 2017 FINANCIAL STABILITY REPORT, p. 24 June 2018, bsp.gov.ph