Q2–1H Debt-Fueled PSEi 30 Performance Disconnects from GDP—What Could Go Wrong

A lack of transparency results in distrust and a deep sense of insecurity — Dalai Lama 

In this issue

Q2–1H Debt-Fueled PSEi 30 Performance Disconnects from GDP—What Could Go Wrong

I. PSEi 30 Q2 2025: The Illusion of Resilience

IA. Q2 GDP at 5.5%: Headline Growth vs. Corporate Stagnation

IB. Structural Downtrend and Policy Transmission Breakdown

IC. Real Value Output in Decline, Political Optics and GDP Credibility

ID. Meralco’s Electricity Consumption Story: A Broken Proxy

II. Real Estate: The Recovery That Wasn’t

IIA. Overton Window vs. Market Reality

IIB. Property Developer Falling Revenues, Debt Surge and Liquidity Strain

IIC. Downstream Demand Weakness: Home Improvement & Construction Retail

III. Retail and Food Services: Mixed Signals

IIIA. Retail: Consumer Strain Amid Policy Sweet Spot

IIIB. Divergence Between Store Expansion and Organic Demand, Retail Growth vs. GDP Trends

IIIC. Food Services: Jollibee’s Dominance and Sector’s Growth Deceleration

IV. Banking Revenues and Income: A Stalling Engine

IVA. Banking Sector: Credit Surge, Revenue Stall

V. The PSEi 30 Net Income Story

VA. Earnings Breakdown: SMC’s Income Dominance, Accounting Prestidigitation?

VB. SMC’s Financial Engineering? Escalating Systemic Risk

VI. Debt and Liquidity: The Structural Bind

VIA. Mounting Liquidity Stress: Soaring Debt and The Deepening Leverage Trap

VIB. Transparency Concerns, Desperate Calls for Easing, Cash Reserves Under Pressure

VII. Conclusion: The Illusion of Resilience: As the Liquidity Tide Recedes, Who’s Swimming Naked? 

____

Q2–1H Debt-Fueled PSEi 30 Performance Disconnects from GDP—What Could Go Wrong 

Beneath headline growth lies a fragile mix of policy stimulus, rising leverage, and mounting stagnation—masking systemic fragility. 

I. PSEi 30 Q2 2025: The Illusion of Resilience 

Nota Bene:

PSEi 30 data contains redundancies, as consolidated reporting includes both parent firms and their subsidiaries.

Chart Notes:

1A: Based on same year index members; may include revisions to past data

1B: Historical comparison; includes only members present during the end of each respective period; based on unaudited releases

IA. Q2 GDP at 5.5%: Headline Growth vs. Corporate Stagnation

Q2 GDP at 5.5%?   

On paper, that should have translated into strong corporate earnings—especially when juxtaposed with the financial pulse of the PSEi 30. 

Yet that headline growth masks a deeper dissonance: These firms, positioned as frontline beneficiaries of BSP’s easing cycle and historic deficit spending, should have reflected the policy tailwinds.

Figure 1

Instead, the disconnect is glaring: while nominal GDP surged 7.2% in Q2 and 7.4% in H1, aggregate revenues of the PSEi 30 contracted by 0.3% in Q2 and barely budged at 1.7% for the first half. (Figure 1, upper graph) 

IB. Structural Downtrend and Policy Transmission Breakdown 

More troubling, this isn’t a one-off anomaly. 

2025’s performance merely extends a structural downtrend that peaked in 2022—raising uncomfortable questions about transmission mechanisms, institutional fragility, and the real beneficiaries of expansionary policy. 

Consider this: Universal bank credit hit a historic high in June 2025, with 12.63% growth, the fastest pace since 2022. Yet PSEi 30 revenue growth in H1 limped to just +1.7%. The juxtaposition is telling. (Figure 1, lower window) 

Rather than fueling productive consumption or corporate expansion, credit appears channeled into asset churn and balance sheet patchwork—rolling debt, patching liquidity gaps, gaming duration mismatches. It’s a kinetic mirage, where velocity substitutes for vitality—hallmarks of overleveraging and diminishing returns. 

The very tools meant to stimulate growth now signal policy transmission failure, where liquidity flows but impact stalls. 

IC. Real Value Output in Decline, Political Optics and GDP Credibility 

Worst still, when adjusted using the same deflators applied to GDP, the PSEi 30’s real output doesn’t just stagnate—it slips into quasi-recession. Both Q2 and H1 figures turn negative, ≈ -2% and -.4%, exposing a structural rot beneath the nominal gloss. (Note 1)

Figure 2 

And this isn’t a statistical fluke. 

A full third of the index—10 out of 30 firms—posted revenue contractions, led by holding firms San Miguel, Alliance Global, and Aboitiz Equity. These aren’t fringe players—they’re positional market leaders. (Figure 2, upper table) 

As a side note, AGI’s revenue decline was partly driven by the deconsolidation of Golden Arches Development Corp, following its reclassification as an associate in March 2025 (Note 2) 

The gap is too wide, too persistent a trend, to be dismissed as cyclical noise. 

Was the PSEi 30 shortfall simply papered over by government spending, with a boost from external trade? 

Or was GDP itself inflated for political ends—to justify lower interest rates, defend the proposed Php 6.793 trillion 2026 budget (+7.4% YoY), and tighten the administration’s grip on power? 

Most likely, the truth lies in some combination of both. 

ID. Meralco’s Electricity Consumption Story: A Broken Proxy 

That’s not all. 

Meralco’s electricity sales volume contracted −0.33% YoY in Q2, dragging H1 growth down to a mere +0.51%. This isn’t just a soft patch—it’s historic: 

• First Q2 contraction since Q1 2021,
• First negative H1 since 2020, —both periods marked by pandemic-induced recession. 

More tellingly, Meralco’s quarterly GWh chart—once a reliable proxy for real GDP—has broken correlation. The divergence, which began in Q1 2024, has now widened into a chasm. (Figure 2, lower chart) 

To compound this, peso electricity peso sales shrank by 1.74% in Q2, and Meralco’s topline declines—both in pesos and GWh—dovetailed with the 8% sales slump in aircon market leader Concepcion Industries Corporation, as we discussed in an earlier post. (see references) 

When electricity consumption decouples from GDP, it raises uncomfortable questions: 

• Is real consumption being overstated? 
• Are headline figures engineered to justify policy optics—lower rates, ballooning budgets, and political consolidation? 

The numbers suggest more than statistical noise. They hint at a manufactured narrative, where growth is declared, but not felt. 

II. Real Estate: The Recovery That Wasn’t 

IIA. Overton Window vs. Market Reality 

There’s more. The public has recently been bombarded with official-consensus messaging about a supposed real estate ‘recovery.’ 

 The BSP even revised its property benchmark to show consistently rising prices—curiously, at a time of record vacancies. (see references) By that logic, the laws of supply and demand no longer apply. 

To reinforce the recovery echo chamber, authorities published modest Q2 and H1 NGDP/RGDP figures of 5.7% and 5.4%, respectively. 

IIB. Property Developer Falling Revenues, Debt Surge and Liquidity Strain 

Figure 3

Yet the hard numbers tell another story: stagnation gripped the top 5 publicly listed property developers—SMPH, ALI, MEG, RLC, and VLL—whose aggregate Q2 revenues grew by a paltry 1.23% YoY. (Figure 3 topmost image)

Adjusted for GDP deflators, that’s a real contraction. In effect, published rent and real estate sales may be teetering on the brink of recession.

The relevance is clear: these five developers accounted for nearly 30% of the sector’s Q2 GDP, meaning their results are a critical proxy for actual conditions—assuming their disclosures are accurate.

Yet, if there’s one metric that’s consistently rising, it’s debt.

Published liabilities surged 5.5% or Php 53.924 billion, reaching a record Php 1.032 trillion in Q2. Meanwhile, cash reserves plunged to their lowest level since 2019. (Figure 3, middle chart)

And yet, net income rose 11.15% to Php 35.4 billion—a figure that invites scrutiny, given flat revenues, rising leverage, and tightening liquidity.

In reality, developers appear forced to draw down cash to sustain operations and patch liquidity gaps, a fragile foundation to prop up the GDP consensus.

IIC. Downstream Demand Weakness: Home Improvement & Construction Retail

Worse, the sector’s downstream segment remains mired in doldrums.

Sales of publicly listed market leaders in home improvement and construction supplies—Wilcon and AllHome—fell -1.95% and -22.1% in Q2, respectively. Both chains have been struggling since Q2 2023, but the latest data are striking: despite no store expansion, AllHome reported a -28% collapse in same-store sales, while Wilcon’s growth lagged despite opening new outlets in 2024–2025, underscoring weak organic demand and the record vacancies. (Figure 3, lowest visual)

Strip away the official spin, and the underlying pattern emerges: insufficient revenues, surging debt, and shrinking liquidity. Overlay this with record-high employment statistics, historic credit expansion and fiscal stimulus—what happens when these falters? 

Consumers are already struggling to sustain retail and property demand. Yet, embracing the ‘build-and-they-will-come’ dogma, developers continue to expand supply, worsening the malinvestment cycle: supply gluts, strained revenues, debt build-up, and thinning cash buffers—a crucible for a future real estate debt crisis. 

III. Retail and Food Services: Mixed Signals 

IIIA. Retail: Consumer Strain Amid Policy Sweet Spot 

It’s not all bad news for consumers. 

Some segments gained traction from the “sweet spot” of easy money and fiscal stimulus—manifested in record bank credit and near all-time high employment rates. 

Figure 4

The most notable beneficiaries were non-construction retail chains, where expanded selling space (malls, outlets, stores) lifted revenues. The combined sales of the six listed majors—SM, Puregold, Robinsons Retail, Philippine Seven, SSI, and Metro Retail—rose 8.6% in Q2, their strongest showing since Q2 2023. (Figure 4, topmost graph) 

Still, signals remain mixed. In Q2, retail NGDP slipped to its lowest level since Q1 2021, while real consumer GDP bounced to 5.5%, its highest since Q1 2023. 

Company results reflected this divergence:

• SM: +8.9% YoY (best since Q4 2023)
• PGOLD: +12.3%
• RRHI: +5.9%
• SEVN: +8.6%
• SSI: −1.6%
• MRSGI: +6.6%

IIIB. Divergence Between Store Expansion and Organic Demand, Retail Growth vs. GDP Trends 

Interestingly, while Philippine Seven [PSE: SEVN] continues to boost headline growth via new store openings, same-store sales have operated in negative territory from Q4 2024 to Q2 2025. This divergence reveals how money at the fringes conceals internal vulnerabilities—weakening demand paired with oversupply. Once the benefit of new outlets erodes, excess capacity will magnify sales pressure, likely translating into eventual losses. (Figure 4, middle pane) 

Even as listed non-construction retail firms outpaced retail NGDP (6.8%) and RGDP (6.15%), their performance only partially resonates with the real GDP dynamic. 

Yet, the embedded trend across retail sales, consumer GDP, and retail NGDP remains conspicuously downward. 

IIIC. Food Services: Jollibee’s Dominance and Sector’s Growth Deceleration 

The food service industry echoes this entropy. Jollibee’s domestic sales grew 10.13% in Q2, pulling aggregate revenue growth of the four listed food chains—JFC, PIZZA, MAXS, FRUIT—to 9.6%, still below the 10.7% NGDP and 8.34% RGDP for the sector. The growth trajectory, led by JFC, continues to decelerate. (Figure 4, lowest diagram) 

Notably, JFC accounted for 86% of aggregate listed food service sales, yet only 54% of Q2 Food Services GDP—a testament to its PACMAN strategy of horizontal expansion—an approach I first described in 2019—enabled by easy-money leverage in its pursuit of market dominance (see references) 

Unfortunately, visibility on the sector is now diminished. Since AGI reclassified Golden Arches (McDonald’s Philippines) as a non-core segment, its performance is no longer disclosed. For reference, McDonald’s sales plunged 11.5% in Q1 2025. 

Losing this datapoint is regrettable, given McDonald’s is Jollibee’s closest competitor and a critical indicator of industry health. 

IV. Banking Revenues and Income: A Stalling Engine 

IVA. Banking Sector: Credit Surge, Revenue Stall 

Finally, despite all-time high loan volumes, bank revenues slowed sharply in Q2—an unexpected deceleration given the credit surge. The top three PSEi 30 banks—BDO, BPI, and MBT—posted a modest 7.02% revenue increase, dragging 1H growth down to 7.99%. For context, Q1 2025 revenues rose by 9%, while Q2 2024 saw a robust 21.8% jump. Full-year 2024 growth stood at 20.5%, making Q2 2025’s performance less than half of the prior year’s pace. 

We dissected the worsening conditions of the banking sector in depth last week (see reference section) 

V. The PSEi 30 Net Income Story 

VA. Earnings Breakdown: SMC’s Income Dominance, Accounting Prestidigitation? 

For the PSEi 30, if revenue stagnation already stands out, net income tells a similar story.

Figure 5 

Q2 2025 net income rose by 11.5% (Php 28.7 billion), pulling down 1H income growth to 13.8% (Php 68.6 billion). While Q2 gross net income was the highest since 2020, its marginal increase and subdued growth rates marked the second slowest since 2021. (Figure 5, upper chart) 

The devil, of course, lies in the details. 

The biggest contributor to the PSEi 30’s net income growth in Q2 and 1H 2025 was San Miguel Corp. Its net increase of Php 18.7 billion in Q2 and Php 53.19 billion in H1 accounted for a staggering 65.2% and 77.54% of the total PSEi 30 net income growth, respectively—despite comprising just 8.5% and 11.8% of the index’s gross net income. (Figure 5, lower table) 

In effect, SMC was not merely a contributor but the primary engine behind the index’s earnings rebound.

Yet this dominance raises more questions than it answers.

Despite a sharp revenue slowdown and only marginal improvements in profit margins—still below pre-pandemic levels—SMC reported a substantial jump in cash holdings and a deceleration in debt accumulation. But this apparent financial strength stems not from operational resilience, but from non-core gains: fair value revaluations, FX translation effects, and dividends from associates.

The result is a balance sheet that appears healthier than it is, with cash levels inflated by accounting maneuvers rather than organic surplus.

VB. SMC’s Financial Engineering? Escalating Systemic Risk

Beneath the surface, SMC’s debt dynamics resemble quasi-Ponzi finance—borrowing Php 681 billion to repay Php 727 billion in 1H 2025, while plugging the gap with preferred share issuance and asset monetization. The latter includes the deconsolidation and valuation uplift of its residual stakes in the Ilijan power facility and Excellent Energy Resources Inc. (EERI), as well as the $3.3 billion LNG deal with Meralco and AboitizPower in Batangas. Though framed as strategic partnerships, these transactions involved asset transfers that contributed heavily to the surge in reported profits.

The simulacrum of deleveraging—from Php 1.56 trillion in Q4 2024 to Php 1.506 trillion in Q2/1H 2025—appears to be a product of financial engineering, not structural improvement. This disconnect between reported profitability and underlying liquidity mechanics raises concerns about transparency and sustainability.

In a market where banks, corporates, and individuals hold significant exposure to SMC debt (estimated at 4.3% of June 2025’s total financial resources), the company’s accounting-driven cash buildup may signal escalating systemic fragility—a risk that the recent equity selloff seems to be pricing in ahead of the curve.

Stripped of SMC’s potentially inflated income, Q2 and H1 net income for the PSEi 30 would rank as the second-lowest and lowest since 2021, respectively—underscoring the fragility behind the headline performance.

At the same time, and with curious timing, SMC announced its intent to undertake large-scale flood control across Metro Manila and Laguna—"at no cost to the government or the Filipino people". Whether this reflects a genuine civic gesture or a strategic bid to accumulate political capital remains unclear. But the optics are unmistakable: as SMC’s earnings distort the index’s headline strength, it simultaneously positions itself as a public benefactor.

Yet, is this narrative groundwork for a future bailout, or a preemptive reframing of corporate rescue as national service?

VI. Debt and Liquidity: The Structural Bind

VIA. Mounting Liquidity Stress: Soaring Debt and The Deepening Leverage Trap 

Finally, let us move on to the PSEi 30’s liquidity metrics: debt and cash. 

If there’s one structurally entrenched dynamic in the PSEi 30, it’s borrowing.

Figure 6

Published short- and long-term debt of the non-financial PSEi 30 surged to an all-time high of Php 5.95 trillion in 1H 2025—up 7.66% year-on-year. (Figure 6, topmost chart) 

The net increase of Php 423 billion amounted to 74.7% of the gross net income and a staggering 617% of the YoY net income increase. 

Including the bills payable of the four PSEi 30 banks—Php 859.7 billion, excluding bonds—total leverage rises to Php 6.8 trillion—with net borrowing gains of Php 760.5 billion, overshadowing declared net income of Php 566.7 billion. 

In short, the PSEi 30 borrowed Php 1.34 to generate every Php 1 in profit—assuming SMC’s profits are genuine. 

And this borrowing binge wasn’t isolated. Among the 26 non-financial firms, 18 increased their debt in 1H 2025. 

On average, debt now accounts for 27% of assets—or total liabilities plus equity. 

SMC, once the poster child of corporate borrowing, ceded the title this period to Meralco, Ayala Corp, and Aboitiz Equity Ventures. (Figure 6, middle table) 

Notably, MER and AEV’s borrowing spree coincides with their asset transfer deals with SMC. Whether this reflects strategic alignment or a quiet effort to absorb or ‘share’ SMC’s financial burden to deflect public scrutiny—such optics suggest a coordinated dance. 

If true, good luck to them—financial kabuki always yields to economic gravity. 

VIB. Transparency Concerns, Desperate Calls for Easing, Cash Reserves Under Pressure 

The thing is, transparency remains a persistent concern, especially in periods of mounting financial stress or pre-crisis fragility. 

First, there’s no assurance that published debt figures reflect full exposure. Some firms may be masking liabilities through other liabilities (leases, trade payables) or off-balance sheet arrangements. 

Second, asset valuations underpinning declared balance sheets may be unreliable. Accounting ratios offer little comfort when market liquidity evaporates—see the 2023 U.S. bank crisis or China’s ongoing property implosion. 

Despite historic borrowing and declared profits, PSEi 30 cash reserves barely budged—up just 0.96% YoY, with a net increase of Php 14.07 billion following two years of retrenchment. Cash levels have been on a steady decline since their 2020 peak. We suspect that recent upticks in cash are not in spite of borrowing, but because of it. 

This growing debt-income-revenue mismatch explains the establishment’s increasingly desperate calls for “MOAR easing” and declarations of a real estate “recovery.” 

VII. Conclusion: The Illusion of Resilience: As the Liquidity Tide Recedes, Who’s Swimming Naked? 

The PSEi 30’s revenue stagnation belies the optics of headline GDP growth. Even in the supposed “sweet spot”—BSP easing, FX soft-peg subsidies, and record stimulus—consumer strain cuts across sectors.

Stimulus may persist, but its marginal impact is fading—manifesting the law of diminishing returns. The disconnect between policy effort and real economy traction is widening.

Q2 and H1 income growth seem to increasingly reflect on balance sheet theatrics driven more by financial engineering and accounting acrobatics than by operational reality.

When earnings are staged rather than earned, the gap between corporate performance and macro reality doesn’t just widen—it exposes a deepening structural mismatch. 

Deepening leverage also anchors the PSEi 30’s fundamentals. On both the demand and supply sides, debt props up activity while cash thins. The same fragility echoes through the banking system and money supply mechanics. 

This is not resilience—it’s choreography. And when liquidity recedes, the performance ends. 

As Buffett warned: "when the liquidity tide goes out, we’ll see who’s been swimming naked" We might be hosting a nudist festival. 

___ 

Notes: 

Note 1 While GDP measures value-added and corporate revenues reflect gross turnover, applying the same deflators provides a reasonable proxy for real comparison. 

Note 2: Alliance Global 17 Q August 18, 2025: Effective March 17, 2025, GADC was deconsolidated and ceased to be a business segment as it becomes an associate from that date, yet the Group’s ownership interest over GADC has not changed p.2 

References 

Prudent Investor Newsletter, Q1 2025 PSEi 30 Performance: Deepening Debt-Driven Gains Amid Slowing Economic Momentum, June 01, 2025 (Substack) 

Prudent Investor Newsletter, Concepcion Industries Cools Off—And So Might GDP and the PLUS-Bound PSEi 30 (or Not?) July 28, 2025 

Prudent Investor Newsletter, The Confidence Illusion: BSP’s Property Index Statistical Playbook to Reflate Property Bubble and Conceal Financial Fragility, July 13, 2025(Substack) 

Prudent Investor Newsletter, Jollibee’s Fantastic Paradigm Shift: From Consumer Value to Aggressive Debt-Financed Pacman Strategy March 3, 2019 

Prudent Investor Newsletter, Philippine Banks: June’s Financial Losses and Liquidity Strains Expose Late-Cycle Fragility, August 17, 2025 (Substack)

  

Philippine Banks: June’s Financial Losses and Liquidity Strains Expose Late-Cycle Fragility

Debt-fueled booms all too often provide false affirmation of a government’s poli­cies, a financial institution’s ability to make outsized profits, or a country’s standard of living. Most of these booms end badly—Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff 

Philippine Banks: June’s Financial Losses and Liquidity Strains Expose Late-Cycle Fragility 

In this issue: 

Part 1: Earnings Erosion and the Mask of Stability

1.A NPLs Fall, But Provisions Rise: A Tale of Two Signals

1.B Philippine Bank’s Profit Growth Falters: Q2 Deficit Breaks the Streak

1.C Universal and Commercial Banks Lead the Weakness; PSE Listed Banks Echo the Slowdown

1.D Income Breakdown: Lending Boom Masks Structural Risk

1.E CMEPA’s Gambit: Taxing Time Deposits to Diversify Bank Income

1.F The Real Culprit: Exploding Losses on Financial Assets

1.G San Miguel’s Share Plunge: A Canary in the Credit Mine? Beneath the Surface: Banks Signal Stress

1.H The NPL Illusion: Velocity Masks Vulnerability

1.I Benchmark Kabuki: When Benchmark-ism Meets Market Reality

Part 2: Liquidity Strains and the Architecture of Intervention

2.A Behind the RRR Cuts: Extraordinary Bank Dependence on BSP

2.B RRR Infusions: Liquidity Metrics Rebound; Weak Money Creation Amid Record Deficit Spending

2.C Rising Borrowings Reinforce Funding Strains, Crowding Out Intensifies, Record HTM Assets

2.D Divergence: Bank Profits, GDP and the PSE’s Financial Index; Market Concentration

2.E OFCs and the Financial Index: A Coordinated Lift?

2.F Triple Liquidity Drain; Rescue Template Risks: Inflation, Stagflation, Crisis; Fiscal Reflex: Keynesian Response Looms

2.G Finale: Classic Symptoms of Late-Cycle Fragility 

Philippine Banks: June’s Financial Losses and Liquidity Strains Expose Late-Cycle Fragility 

From earnings erosion to monetary theatrics, June’s data shows a banking system caught in late-cycle strain.

Part 1: Earnings Erosion and the Mask of Stability 

1.A NPLs Fall, But Provisions Rise: A Tale of Two Signals 

Inquirer.net August Bad loans in the Philippine banking system fell to a three-month low in June, helped by the central bank’s ongoing interest rate cuts, which could ease debt servicing burden. However, lenders remain cautious and have increased their provisions to cover possible credit losses. Latest data from the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) showed nonperforming loans (NPL), or debts that are 90 days late on a payment and at risk of default, cornered 3.34 percent of the local banking industry’s total lending portfolio. That figure, called the gross NPL ratio, was the lowest since March 2025, when the ratio stood at 3.30 percent. 

But the NPL ratio masks a deeper tension: gross NPLs rose 5.5% year-on-year to Php 530.29 billion, while total loans expanded 10.93% to Php 15.88 trillion. The ratio fell not because bad loans shrank, but because credit growth outpaced them. 

Loan loss reserves rose 5.5% to Php 505.91 billion, and the NPL coverage ratio ticked up to 95.4%. Past due loans climbed 9.17% to Php 670.5 billion, and restructured loans rose 6.27%. Provisioning for credit losses ballooned to Php 84.19 billion in 1H 2025, with Php 43.78 billion booked in Q2 alone—the largest since Q4 2020’s pandemic-era spike. 

So, while the establishment cites falling NPL ratios to reassure the public, banks are quietly bracing for defaults and valuation hits—likely tied to large corporate exposures. The provisioning surge is a tacit admission: risk is rising, even if it hasn’t yet surfaced in headline metrics.

1.B Philippine Bank’s Profit Growth Falters: Q2 Deficit Breaks the Streak

Figure 1

Philippine banks posted their first quarterly profit contraction in Q2 2025, down -1.96% YoY—a sharp reversal from Q1’s 10.64% growth and Q2 2024’s 5.21%. This marks the first decline since Q3 2023’s -11.75%. (Figure 1, upper window) 

Even more telling, since the BSP’s historic rescue of the banking system in Q2 2021, net profit growth has been trending downward. Peso profits etched a record in Q1 2025, but fell in Q2. 

The Q2 slump dragged down 1H performance: bank profit growth slipped to 4.14%, compared to 2H 2024’s 9.77%, though slightly higher than 1H 2024’s 4.1%. 

1.C Universal and Commercial Banks Lead the Weakness; PSE Listed Banks Echo the Slowdown 

Earnings growth of universal-commercial (UC) banks sank from 8.6% in Q1 2025 to a -2.11% deficit in Q2. 

UC bank profits grew 6.33% in Q2 2024. Still, UC banks eked out a 3.1% gain in 1H 2025 versus 5.3% in the same period last year. UC banks accounted for 93.1% of total banking system profits in 1H 2025—underscoring their dominance or concentration but also their vulnerability. 

PSE listed banks partially echoed BSP data. (Figure 1, Lower Table) 

Aggregate earnings growth for all listed banks hit 6.08% in Q2 and 6.77% in 1H—down from 10.43% and 9.95% in the same periods last year. The top three banks in the PSEi 30 (BDO, BPI, MBT) reported combined earnings growth of 4.3% in Q2 and 5.31% in 1H 2025, substantially lower compared to 13.71% and 15.4% in 2024. 

The discrepancy between BSP and listed bank data likely stems from government, foreign, and unlisted UC banks—whose performance may be masking broader stress. 

1.D Income Breakdown: Lending Boom Masks Structural Risk 

What explains the sharp profit downturn?

Figure 2

Net interest income rose 11.74% in Q2, while non-interest income increased 14.7%—slightly higher than Q1’s 11.7% and 14.5%, respectively. However, net interest income was lower than Q2 2024’s 14.74%, while non-interest income rebounded from -5.71% in the same period. (Figure 2, topmost chart) 

In 1H 2025, net interest income grew 11.7%, and non-interest income rose 14.6%, compared to 15.53% and -8.83% in 1H 2024. Net interest income now accounts for 82.5% of total bank profits—a fresh high, reflecting the lending boom regardless of BSP’s rate levels. 

This share has reversed course since 2013, rising from ~60% to 77% by end-2024—driven by BSP’s easy money policy and historic pandemic-era rescue efforts. Banks’ income structure resembles a Pareto distribution: highly concentrated, and extremely susceptible to duration and credit risks. 

BSP’s easing cycle has not only failed to improve banks’ core business, but actively contributed to its decay.

1.E CMEPA’s Gambit: Taxing Time Deposits to Diversify Bank Income 

The government’s response has been the Capital Market Efficiency Promotion Act (CMEPA). CMEPA, effective July 2025, imposes a flat 20% final withholding tax on all deposit interest income, including long-term placements. 

By taxing time deposits, policymakers aim to push savers into capital markets, boosting bank non-interest income through fees, trading, and commissions. But in reality, this is financial engineering. (Figure 2, middle graph) 

With weak household savings and low financial literacy, deposit outflows will likely shrink banks’ funding base rather than diversify their revenues. 

It would increase time preferences, leading the public to needlessly take risks or gamble—further eroding savings. 

Or, instead of reducing fragility, CMEPA risks layering volatile market income on top of an already over-concentrated interest income model. 

We’ve previously addressed CMEPA—refer to earlier posts for context (see below) 

1.F The Real Culprit: Exploding Losses on Financial Assets 

Beyond this structural weakness, the real culprit behind the downturn was losses on financial assets. 

In Q2 2025, banks posted Php 43.78 billion in losses—the largest since the pandemic recession in Q4 2020—driven by Php 49.3 billion in provisions for credit losses!  (Figure 2, lowest image) 

For 1H 2025, losses ballooned 64% to Php 73.6 billion, with provisions reaching Php 84.19 billion. 

Once again, this provisioning surge is a tacit admission: while officials cite falling NPL ratios, banks themselves are bracing for valuation hits and potential defaults, likely tied to concentrated corporate exposures. 

1.G San Miguel’s Share Plunge: A Canary in the Credit Mine? Beneath the Surface: Banks Signal Stress

Figure 3

Could this be linked to the recent collapse in San Miguel [PSE: SMC] shares? 

SMC plunged 14.54% WoW (Week on Week) as of August 15th, compounding its YTD losses to 35.4%. (Figure 3, upper diagram) 

And this share waterfall happened before its Q2 17Q 2025 release, which showed debt slipping slightly from Php 1.511 trillion in Q1 to Php 1.504 trillion in 1H—suggesting that the intensifying selloff may have been driven by deeper concerns. (Figure 3, lower visual) 

SMC’s Q2 (17Q) report reveals increasingly opaque cash generation, aggressive financial engineering, and unclear asset quality and debt servicing capacity. 

Yet, paradoxically, Treasury yields softened across the curve—hinting at either covert BSP intervention through its institutional cartel, a dangerous underestimation of contagion risk, or market complacency—a lull before the credit repricing storm. 

If SMC’s debt is marked at par or held to maturity, deterioration in its credit profile wouldn’t show up as market losses—but would require provisioning. This provisioning surge is a tacit admission: banks are seeing heightened risk, even if it’s not yet reflected in NPL ratios or market pricing. 

We saw this coming. Prior breakdowns on SMC are archived below. 

Of course, this SMC–banking sector inference linkage still requires corroborating evidence or forensic validation—time will tell.

Still, one thing is clear: banks are exhibiting mounting stress—underscoring the BSP’s resolve to intensify its easing cycle through rate cuts, RRR reductions, deposit insurance hikes, and a soft USDPHP peg. The ‘Marcos-nomics’ debt-financed deficit spending adds fiscal fuel to this monetary response. 

1.H The NPL Illusion: Velocity Masks Vulnerability

Figure 4

NPLs can be a deceptive measure of bank health. Residual regulatory reliefs from the pandemic era may still distort classifications, and the ratio itself reflects the relative velocity of bad loans versus credit expansion. 

Both gross NPLs and total loans hit record highs in peso terms in June—Php 530.29 billion and Php 15.88 trillion, respectively—but credit growth outpaced defaults, keeping the NPL ratio artificially low at 3.34%. (Figure 4, topmost pane) 

The logic is simple: to suppress the NPL ratio, loan velocity must accelerate faster than the accumulation of bad debt. Once credit expansion stalls, the entire kabuki collapses—and latent systemic stress will surface. 

1.I Benchmark Kabuki: When Benchmark-ism Meets Market Reality 

This is where benchmark-ism hits the road—and skids. The system’s metrics, once propped up by interventionist theatrics, are now showing signs of exhaustion. 

These are not isolated anomalies, but worsening symptoms of prior rescues—now overrun by the law of diminishing returns. 

And yet, the response is more of the same: fresh interventions to mask the decay of earlier ones. Theatrics, once effective at shaping perception, are now being challenged by markets that no longer play along. 

The system’s health doesn’t hinge on ratios—it hinges on velocity. Velocity of credit, of confidence, of liquidity. When that velocity falters, the metrics unravel. 

And beneath the unraveling lies a fragility that no benchmark can disguise. 

Part 2: Liquidity Strains and the Architecture of Intervention

2.A Behind the RRR Cuts: Extraordinary Bank Dependence on BSP 

There are few signs that the public grasps the magnitude of developments unfolding in Philippine banks. 

The aggregate 450 basis point Reserve Requirement Ratio (RRR) cuts in October 2024 and March 2025 mark the most aggressive liquidity release in BSP history—surpassing even its pandemic-era response. (Figure 4, middle chart) 

Unlike previous easing cycles (2018–2019, 2020), where banks barely tapped BSP liquidity, the current drawdown has been dramatic. 

As of July, banks had pulled Php 463 billion since October 2024 from the BSP (Claims on Other Depository Corporations)—Php 84.6 billion since March and Php 189.2 billion in June. Notably, 40.9% of the Php 463 billion liquidity drawdown occurred in July alone. 

This surge coincides with mounting losses on financial assets and record peso NPLs—masked by rapid credit expansion, which may be a euphemism for refinancing deteriorating debt. Banks’ lending to bad borrowers to prevent NPL classification is a familiar maneuver. 

When banks incur significant financial losses—whether from rising NPLs, credit impairments, or mark-to-market declines—the immediate impact is not just weaker earnings but a widening hole in their funding structure. The December 2020 episode, when the system booked its largest financial losses, highlighted how such shocks create a liquidity vacuum: instead of recycling liquidity through lending and market channels, banks are forced to patch internal shortfalls, draining capital buffers and eroding interbank trust. 

Into this vacuum steps the BSP. Reserve requirement cuts, while framed as policy easing, have functioned less as a growth stimulus and more as a liquidity lifeline. By drawing on their balances with the BSP, banks convert regulatory reserves into working liquidity—filling gaps left by financial losses. The outcome is growing dependence on central bank support: what appears as easing is in fact the manifestation of extraordinary support, with liquidity migrating from market sources to the BSP’s balance sheet. 

This hidden dependence underscores how financial repression has hollowed out market-based liquidity, leaving the BSP as the primary lender of first resort 

2.B RRR Infusions: Liquidity Metrics Rebound; Weak Money Creation Amid Record Deficit Spending

The liquidity drawdown has filtered into banks’ cash positions. As of June, peso cash reserves rebounded—though still down 19.8% year-on-year. Cash-to-deposit ratios rose from 9.87% in May to 10.67% in June, while liquid assets-to-deposits climbed from 47.29% to 49.24%. (Figure 4, lowest image)

Figure 5

RRR-driven cash infusions also lifted deposits. Total deposit growth rebounded from 4.96% in May to 5.91% in June, led by peso deposits (3.96% to 6.3%) and supported by FX deposits (4.42% to 6.8%). (Figure 5, topmost graph) 

Yet paradoxically, despite a 10.9% expansion in Total Loan Portfolio and ODC drawdown, deposits only managed modest growth—suggesting a liquidity black hole. CMEPA’s impact may deepen this imbalance. 

Despite record deficit spending in 1H 2025, BSP currency issuance/currency in circulation growth slowed from 9% in June to 8.1% in July, after peaking at 14.7% in May during election spending. Substantial money creation has not translated into higher CPI or GDP, and the slowdown suggests a growing demand problem. (Figure 5, middle diagram) 

Even with July’s massive ODC drawdown, BSP’s cash in circulation suggests a financial cesspool has been absorbing liquidity—offsetting whatever expansionary efforts are underway. 

2.C Rising Borrowings Reinforce Funding Strains, Crowding Out Intensifies, Record HTM Assets 

After a brief slowdown in May, bank borrowings surged anew by 24% in June to Php 1.85 trillion, nearing the March record of Php 1.91 trillion. Escalating liquidity strains are pushing banks to increase funding from capital markets. (Figure 5, lowest pane) 

This intensifies the crowding-out effect, as banks compete with the government and private sector for access to public savings.

Figure 6

Meanwhile, as predicted, record-high public debt has translated to greater bank financing of government via Net Claims on the Central Government, showing up in banks’ record-high Held-to-Maturity (HTM) assets. HTM assets have become a prime contributor to tightening liquidity strains in the banking system. (Figure 6, topmost graph) 

2.D Divergence: Bank Profits, GDP and the PSE’s Financial Index; Market Concentration 

Despite slowing profit growth, the PSE’s Financial Index—composed of 7 banks (BDO, BPI, MBT, CBC, AUB, PNB, SECB) plus the PSE—hit a historic high in Q1 2025, before dipping slightly in Q2. (Figure 6, middle visual)

Meanwhile, the sector’s real GDP partially echoed profits, reinforcing the case of a downturn. 

Financial GDP dropped sharply from 6.9% in Q1 2025 and 8% in Q2 2024 to 5.6% in Q2 2025. It accounted for 10.4% of national GDP in Q2, down from the all-time high of 11.7% in Q1—signaling deeper financialization of the economy. (Figure 6, lowest chart)

Figure 7

Bank GDP slowed to 3.7% in Q2 from 4.9% in Q1 2025, far below the 10.2% growth of Q2 2024. Since Q1 2015, bank GDP has averaged nearly half (49.9%) of the sector’s GDP. (Figure 7, topmost window) 

Thanks to the BSP’s historic rescue, the free-float market cap weight of the top three banks (BDO, BPI, MBT) in the PSEi 30 rose from 12.76% in August 2020 to 24.37% by mid-April 2025. As of August 15, their share stood at 21.8%, rising to 23.2% when CBC is included. (Figure 7, middle chart) 

This concentration has cushioned the PSEi 30 from broader declines—suggesting possible non-market interventions in bank share prices, while amplifying concentration risk. 

2.E OFCs and the Financial Index: A Coordinated Lift? 

BSP data on Other Financial Corporations (OFCs) reveals a dovetailing of ODC activity with the Financial Index. OFCs—comprising non-money market funds, financial auxiliaries, insurance firms, pension funds, and money lenders—appear to be accumulating bank shares, possibly at BSP’s implicit behest. 

In Q1 2024, BSP noted: "the sector’s claims on depository corporations rose amid the increase in its deposits with banks and holdings of bank-issued equity shares." 

This suggests a coordinated effort to prop up bank share prices—masking underlying stress. (Figure 7, lowest graph) 

Once a bear market strikes key bank shares and the financial index, losses will add to liquidity stress. Economic reality will eventually expose the choreography propping up both the PSEi 30 and banks. 

2.F Triple Liquidity Drain; Rescue Template Risks: Inflation, Stagflation, Crisis; Fiscal Reflex: Keynesian Response Looms 

In short, three sources of liquidity strain now pressure Philippine banks:

• Record holdings of Held-to-Maturity assets
• Rising Financial losses
• All-time high non-performing loans 

If BSP resorts to its 2020–2021 pandemic rescue template, expect the USDPHP to soar, inflation to spike, and rates to rise—ushering in stagflation or even possibly a debt crisis. 

With the private sector under duress from mounting bad credit, authorities—guided by top-down Keynesian ideology—are likely to resort to fiscal stimulus to boost GDP and ramp up revenue efforts. 

2.G Finale: Classic Symptoms of Late-Cycle Fragility 

The Philippine banking system is showing unmistakable signs of late-cycle fragility.

Velocity-dependent metrics are poised to unravel once credit growth stalls. Liquidity dependence is paraded as resilience. Market support mechanisms blur price discovery. Policy reflexes recycle past interventions while ignoring structural cracks. 

Losses are being papered over with liquidity, fiscal deficits are substituting for private demand, and the veneer of stability rests on central bank backstops. This choreography cannot hold indefinitely. If current trajectories persist, the risks are stark: stagflation, currency instability, and a potential debt spiral. 

The metrics are clear. The real story lies in the erosion of velocity and the quiet migration from market discipline to state lifelines. What appears resilient today may be revealed tomorrow as fragility sustained on borrowed time. 

As the saying goes: we live in interesting times. 

____

Prudent Investor Newsletter Archives: 

1 San Miguel

• Is San Miguel’s Ever-Growing Debt the "Sword of Damocles" Hanging over the Philippine Economy and the PSE? December 02, 2024 (substack)
• Escalating Systemic Risk: As Cash Reserves Plummeted, San Miguel’s 9M Debt Zoomed to an Astonishing Php 1.405 TRILLION! November 20, 2023 (substack)

Just among the many…

2 CMEPA

• The CMEPA Delusion: How Fallacious Arguments Conceal the Risk of Systemic Blowback July 27, 2025 (substack)
• The Seen, the Unseen, and the Taxed: CMEPA as Financial Repression by Design July 20,2025 (substack)