UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ
|
|
Quarterly Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
|
For the quarterly period ended:
June 30, 2011
|
|
|
o
|
|
Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
|
For the transition period from
to
Commission File Number: 0-26001
Hudson City Bancorp, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
22-3640393
|
|
|
|
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
|
|
|
|
West 80 Century Road
Paramus, New Jersey
|
|
07652
|
|
|
|
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)
|
|
(Zip Code)
|
(201) 967-1900
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed
by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or
for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
Yes
þ
No
o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its
corporate web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months
(or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
Yes
þ
No
o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated
filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of large
accelerated filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer
þ
|
|
Accelerated filer
o
|
|
Non-accelerated filer
o
|
|
Smaller reporting company
o
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act).
Yes
o
No
þ
As of
August 3, 2011, the registrant had 527,502,943 shares of common stock, $0.01 par value,
outstanding.
Forward-Looking Statements
This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q contains certain forward looking statements within the
meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 which may be identified by the use
of such words as may, believe, expect, anticipate, should, plan, estimate, predict,
continue, and potential or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology.
Examples of forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, estimates with respect to
the financial condition, results of operations and business of Hudson City Bancorp, Inc. These
statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to risks, uncertainties and
other factors (many of which are beyond our control) that could cause actual results to differ
materially from future results expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. These
factors include, but are not limited to:
|
|
the timing and occurrence or non-occurrence of events may be subject to circumstances
beyond our control;
|
|
|
there may be increases in competitive pressure among financial institutions or from
non-financial institutions;
|
|
|
changes in the interest rate environment may reduce interest margins or affect the value of
our investments;
|
|
|
changes in deposit flows, loan demand or real estate values may adversely affect our
business;
|
|
|
changes in accounting principles, policies or guidelines may cause our financial condition
to be perceived differently;
|
|
|
general economic conditions, including unemployment rates, either nationally or locally in
some or all of the areas in which we do business, or conditions in the securities markets or
the banking industry may be less favorable than we currently anticipate;
|
|
|
legislative or regulatory changes including, without limitation, the provisions of the
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, may adversely affect our business;
|
|
|
enhanced regulatory scrutiny may adversely affect our business and increase our cost of
operation;
|
|
|
applicable technological changes may be more difficult or expensive than we anticipate;
|
|
|
success or consummation of new business initiatives may be more difficult or expensive than
we anticipate;
|
|
|
litigation or matters before regulatory agencies, whether currently existing or commencing
in the future, may delay the occurrence or non-occurrence of events longer than we anticipate;
|
|
|
|
the risks associated with adverse changes to credit quality, including changes in the level
of loan delinquencies and non-performing assets and charge-offs, the length of time our
non-performing assets remain in our portfolio and changes in estimates of the adequacy of the
allowance for loan losses;
|
|
|
difficulties associated with achieving or predicting expected future financial results;
|
|
|
our ability to diversify our funding sources and to continue to access the wholesale
borrowing market and the capital markets;
|
|
|
our ability to comply with the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding; and
|
|
|
the risk of a continued economic slowdown that would adversely affect credit quality and
loan originations.
|
Our ability to predict results or the actual effects of our plans or strategies is inherently
uncertain. As such, forward-looking statements can be affected by inaccurate assumptions we might
make or by known or unknown risks and uncertainties. Consequently, no forward-looking statement
can be guaranteed. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking
statements, which speak only as of the date of this filing. We do not intend to update any of the
forward-looking statements after the date of this Form 10-Q or to conform these statements to
actual events.
As used in this Form 10-Q, unless we specify otherwise, Hudson City Bancorp, Company, we,
us, and our refer to Hudson City Bancorp, Inc., a Delaware corporation. Hudson City Savings
and Bank refer to Hudson City Savings Bank, a federal stock savings bank and the wholly-owned
subsidiary of Hudson City Bancorp.
Page 3
PART I FINANCIAL INFORMATION
|
|
|
Item 1.
|
|
Financial Statements
|
Hudson City Bancorp, Inc. and Subsidiary
Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
(In thousands, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and due from banks
|
|
$
|
146,701
|
|
|
$
|
175,769
|
|
Federal funds sold and other overnight deposits
|
|
|
566,950
|
|
|
|
493,628
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
713,651
|
|
|
|
669,397
|
|
Securities available for sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities
|
|
|
10,484,264
|
|
|
|
18,120,537
|
|
Investment securities
|
|
|
7,221
|
|
|
|
89,795
|
|
Securities held to maturity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities (fair value of $5,175,111 at June 30, 2011
and $6,199,507 at December 31, 2010)
|
|
|
4,896,216
|
|
|
|
5,914,372
|
|
Investment securities (fair value of $3,601,261 at June 30, 2011
and $3,867,488 at December 31, 2010)
|
|
|
3,638,950
|
|
|
|
3,939,006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total securities
|
|
|
19,026,651
|
|
|
|
28,063,710
|
|
Loans
|
|
|
30,373,476
|
|
|
|
30,923,897
|
|
Net deferred loan costs
|
|
|
92,026
|
|
|
|
86,633
|
|
Allowance for loan losses
|
|
|
(262,306
|
)
|
|
|
(236,574
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loans
|
|
|
30,203,196
|
|
|
|
30,773,956
|
|
Federal Home Loan Bank of New York stock
|
|
|
767,064
|
|
|
|
871,940
|
|
Foreclosed real estate, net
|
|
|
38,364
|
|
|
|
45,693
|
|
Accrued interest receivable
|
|
|
211,541
|
|
|
|
245,546
|
|
Banking premises and equipment, net
|
|
|
70,970
|
|
|
|
69,444
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
152,109
|
|
|
|
152,109
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
595,093
|
|
|
|
274,238
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets
|
|
$
|
51,778,639
|
|
|
$
|
61,166,033
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Shareholders Equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing
|
|
$
|
24,969,778
|
|
|
$
|
24,605,896
|
|
Noninterest-bearing
|
|
|
584,823
|
|
|
|
567,230
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits
|
|
|
25,554,601
|
|
|
|
25,173,126
|
|
Repurchase agreements
|
|
|
7,700,000
|
|
|
|
14,800,000
|
|
Federal Home Loan Bank of New York advances
|
|
|
13,425,000
|
|
|
|
14,875,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total borrowed funds
|
|
|
21,125,000
|
|
|
|
29,675,000
|
|
Due to brokers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
538,200
|
|
Accrued expenses and other liabilities
|
|
|
211,079
|
|
|
|
269,469
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
46,890,680
|
|
|
|
55,655,795
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.01 par value, 3,200,000,000 shares authorized;
741,466,555 shares issued; 526,707,577 shares outstanding
at June 30, 2011 and 526,718,310 shares outstanding
at December 31, 2010
|
|
|
7,415
|
|
|
|
7,415
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
4,713,474
|
|
|
|
4,705,255
|
|
Retained earnings
|
|
|
2,069,138
|
|
|
|
2,642,338
|
|
Treasury stock, at cost; 214,758,978 shares at June 30, 2011 and
214,748,245 shares outstanding at December 31, 2010
|
|
|
(1,726,057
|
)
|
|
|
(1,725,946
|
)
|
Unallocated common stock held by the employee stock ownership plan
|
|
|
(201,227
|
)
|
|
|
(204,230
|
)
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income, net of tax
|
|
|
25,216
|
|
|
|
85,406
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity
|
|
|
4,887,959
|
|
|
|
5,510,238
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities and Shareholders Equity
|
|
$
|
51,778,639
|
|
|
$
|
61,166,033
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to unaudited consolidated financial statements
Page 4
Hudson City Bancorp, Inc. and Subsidiary
Consolidated Statements of Income
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Three Months
|
|
|
For the Six Months
|
|
|
|
Ended June 30,
|
|
|
Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
Interest and Dividend Income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First mortgage loans
|
|
$
|
380,375
|
|
|
$
|
426,244
|
|
|
$
|
763,328
|
|
|
$
|
854,405
|
|
Consumer and other loans
|
|
|
4,077
|
|
|
|
4,654
|
|
|
|
8,225
|
|
|
|
9,413
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities held to maturity
|
|
|
55,761
|
|
|
|
92,319
|
|
|
|
116,977
|
|
|
|
202,445
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities available for sale
|
|
|
69,415
|
|
|
|
129,790
|
|
|
|
191,507
|
|
|
|
251,382
|
|
Investment securities held to maturity
|
|
|
32,708
|
|
|
|
49,627
|
|
|
|
65,535
|
|
|
|
96,691
|
|
Investment securities available for sale
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
5,203
|
|
|
|
832
|
|
|
|
15,549
|
|
Dividends on Federal Home Loan Bank of New York stock
|
|
|
9,632
|
|
|
|
9,167
|
|
|
|
22,433
|
|
|
|
21,540
|
|
Federal funds sold
|
|
|
707
|
|
|
|
576
|
|
|
|
1,418
|
|
|
|
1,025
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest and dividend income
|
|
|
552,732
|
|
|
|
717,580
|
|
|
|
1,170,255
|
|
|
|
1,452,450
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Expense:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits
|
|
|
84,360
|
|
|
|
95,670
|
|
|
|
168,678
|
|
|
|
199,589
|
|
Borrowed funds
|
|
|
195,463
|
|
|
|
304,396
|
|
|
|
472,267
|
|
|
|
604,202
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest expense
|
|
|
279,823
|
|
|
|
400,066
|
|
|
|
640,945
|
|
|
|
803,791
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income
|
|
|
272,909
|
|
|
|
317,514
|
|
|
|
529,310
|
|
|
|
648,659
|
|
Provision for Loan Losses
|
|
|
30,000
|
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
|
|
70,000
|
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income after provision for loan losses
|
|
|
242,909
|
|
|
|
267,514
|
|
|
|
459,310
|
|
|
|
548,659
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Interest Income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service charges and other income
|
|
|
2,732
|
|
|
|
2,584
|
|
|
|
5,471
|
|
|
|
4,814
|
|
Gain on securities transactions, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,626
|
|
|
|
102,468
|
|
|
|
61,394
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-interest income
|
|
|
2,732
|
|
|
|
33,210
|
|
|
|
107,939
|
|
|
|
66,208
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Interest Expense:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation and employee benefits
|
|
|
29,889
|
|
|
|
32,789
|
|
|
|
60,773
|
|
|
|
66,951
|
|
Net occupancy expense
|
|
|
8,030
|
|
|
|
7,924
|
|
|
|
16,455
|
|
|
|
16,271
|
|
Federal deposit insurance assessment
|
|
|
33,198
|
|
|
|
13,300
|
|
|
|
49,528
|
|
|
|
25,927
|
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,172,092
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other expense
|
|
|
14,720
|
|
|
|
10,583
|
|
|
|
27,557
|
|
|
|
21,978
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-interest expense
|
|
|
85,837
|
|
|
|
64,596
|
|
|
|
1,326,405
|
|
|
|
131,127
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income tax expense (benefit)
|
|
|
159,804
|
|
|
|
236,128
|
|
|
|
(759,156
|
)
|
|
|
483,740
|
|
Income Tax Expense (Benefit)
|
|
|
63,796
|
|
|
|
93,537
|
|
|
|
(299,500
|
)
|
|
|
192,264
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
96,008
|
|
|
$
|
142,591
|
|
|
$
|
(459,656
|
)
|
|
$
|
291,476
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic Earnings (Loss) Per Share
|
|
$
|
0.19
|
|
|
$
|
0.29
|
|
|
$
|
(0.93
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.59
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted Earnings (Loss) Per Share
|
|
$
|
0.19
|
|
|
$
|
0.29
|
|
|
$
|
(0.93
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.59
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average Number of Common Shares Outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
494,137,888
|
|
|
|
492,888,447
|
|
|
|
493,993,685
|
|
|
|
492,728,025
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
494,751,960
|
|
|
|
494,406,802
|
|
|
|
493,993,685
|
|
|
|
494,807,046
|
|
See accompanying notes to unaudited consolidated financial statements
Page 5
Hudson City Bancorp, Inc. and Subsidiary
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders Equity
(Unaudited
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Six Months
|
|
|
|
Ended June 30 ,
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock
|
|
$
|
7,415
|
|
|
$
|
7,415
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of year
|
|
|
4,705,255
|
|
|
|
4,683,414
|
|
Stock plan expense
|
|
|
4,464
|
|
|
|
5,156
|
|
Tax benefit from stock plans
|
|
|
172
|
|
|
|
300
|
|
Allocation of ESOP stock
|
|
|
1,844
|
|
|
|
3,450
|
|
RRP stock granted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(145
|
)
|
Vesting of RRP stock
|
|
|
1,739
|
|
|
|
2,060
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period
|
|
|
4,713,474
|
|
|
|
4,694,235
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retained earnings:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of year
|
|
|
2,642,338
|
|
|
|
2,401,606
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
|
(459,656
|
)
|
|
|
291,476
|
|
Dividends paid on common stock ($0.23 and $0.30 per share, respectively)
|
|
|
(113,531
|
)
|
|
|
(147,876
|
)
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
|
|
(219
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period
|
|
|
2,069,138
|
|
|
|
2,544,987
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Treasury stock:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of year
|
|
|
(1,725,946
|
)
|
|
|
(1,727,579
|
)
|
Purchase of common stock
|
|
|
(163
|
)
|
|
|
(464
|
)
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
1,090
|
|
RRP stock granted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
145
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period
|
|
|
(1,726,057
|
)
|
|
|
(1,726,808
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unallocated common stock held by the ESOP:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of year
|
|
|
(204,230
|
)
|
|
|
(210,237
|
)
|
Allocation of ESOP stock
|
|
|
3,003
|
|
|
|
3,003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period
|
|
|
(201,227
|
)
|
|
|
(207,234
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income(loss):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of year
|
|
|
85,406
|
|
|
|
184,533
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains on securities available for sale arising during period,
net of tax expense of $415 and $56,577 in 2011 and 2010, respectively
|
|
|
601
|
|
|
|
81,922
|
|
Reclassification
adjustment for gains in net (loss) income, net of tax of expense of
$40,526 and $25,079 in 2011 and 2010, respectively
|
|
|
(61,942
|
)
|
|
|
(36,314
|
)
|
Pension and other postretirement benefits adjustment, net of tax expense of
$795 and $359 for 2011 and 2010, respectively
|
|
|
1,151
|
|
|
|
520
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive (loss) income, net of tax
|
|
|
(60,190
|
)
|
|
|
46,128
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period
|
|
|
25,216
|
|
|
|
230,661
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity
|
|
$
|
4,887,959
|
|
|
$
|
5,543,256
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary of comprehensive (loss) income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$
|
(459,656
|
)
|
|
$
|
291,476
|
|
Other comprehensive (loss) income, net of tax
|
|
|
(60,190
|
)
|
|
|
46,128
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive (loss) income
|
|
$
|
(519,846
|
)
|
|
$
|
337,604
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to unaudited consolidated financial statements.
Page 6
Hudson City Bancorp, Inc. and Subsidiary
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Six Months
|
|
|
|
Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Cash Flows from Operating Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$
|
(459,656
|
)
|
|
$
|
291,476
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided
by operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation, accretion and amortization expense
|
|
|
62,096
|
|
|
|
44,547
|
|
Provision for loan losses
|
|
|
70,000
|
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
Gains on securities transactions, net
|
|
|
(102,468
|
)
|
|
|
(61,394
|
)
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
1,172,092
|
|
|
|
|
|
Share-based compensation, including committed ESOP shares
|
|
|
11,050
|
|
|
|
13,669
|
|
Deferred tax benefit
|
|
|
(187,429
|
)
|
|
|
(25,499
|
)
|
Decrease in accrued interest receivable
|
|
|
34,005
|
|
|
|
20,541
|
|
(Increase) decrease in other assets
|
|
|
(90,655
|
)
|
|
|
9,917
|
|
Decrease in accrued expenses and other liabilities
|
|
|
(58,390
|
)
|
|
|
(28,627
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities
|
|
|
450,645
|
|
|
|
364,630
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Investing Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originations of loans
|
|
|
(2,696,323
|
)
|
|
|
(2,830,953
|
)
|
Purchases of loans
|
|
|
(290,544
|
)
|
|
|
(542,218
|
)
|
Principal payments on loans
|
|
|
3,461,917
|
|
|
|
2,903,774
|
|
Principal collection of mortgage-backed securities held to maturity
|
|
|
1,012,516
|
|
|
|
2,502,695
|
|
Purchases of mortgage-backed securities held to maturity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(172,434
|
)
|
Principal collection of mortgage-backed securities available for sale
|
|
|
1,500,411
|
|
|
|
2,078,875
|
|
Purchases of mortgage-backed securities available for sale
|
|
|
(3,508,207
|
)
|
|
|
(5,838,155
|
)
|
Proceeds from sales of mortgage backed securities available for sale
|
|
|
9,064,379
|
|
|
|
1,150,318
|
|
Proceeds from maturities and calls of investment securities held to maturity
|
|
|
300,000
|
|
|
|
1,950,005
|
|
Purchases of investment securities held to maturity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,002,011
|
)
|
Proceeds from maturities and calls of investment securities available for sale
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
750,000
|
|
Proceeds from sales of investment securities available for sale
|
|
|
82,475
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of Federal Home Loan Bank of New York stock
|
|
|
(16,624
|
)
|
|
|
(8,422
|
)
|
Redemption of Federal Home Loan Bank of New York stock
|
|
|
121,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of premises and equipment, net
|
|
|
(5,678
|
)
|
|
|
(4,928
|
)
|
Net proceeds from sale of foreclosed real estate
|
|
|
21,887
|
|
|
|
13,379
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Investment Activities
|
|
|
9,047,709
|
|
|
|
(1,050,075
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Financing Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in deposits
|
|
|
381,475
|
|
|
|
590,417
|
|
Proceeds from borrowed funds
|
|
|
6,500,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal payments on borrowed funds
|
|
|
(16,222,092
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends paid
|
|
|
(113,531
|
)
|
|
|
(147,876
|
)
|
Purchases of treasury stock
|
|
|
(163
|
)
|
|
|
(464
|
)
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
871
|
|
Tax benefit from stock plans
|
|
|
172
|
|
|
|
300
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash (Used in) Provided by Financing Activities
|
|
|
(9,454,100
|
)
|
|
|
443,248
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash and Cash Equivalents
|
|
|
44,254
|
|
|
|
(242,197
|
)
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Year
|
|
|
669,397
|
|
|
|
561,201
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Period
|
|
$
|
713,651
|
|
|
$
|
319,004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental Disclosures:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest paid
|
|
$
|
694,772
|
|
|
$
|
799,321
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans transferred to foreclosed real estate
|
|
$
|
25,911
|
|
|
$
|
25,038
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax payments
|
|
$
|
16,902
|
|
|
$
|
263,987
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to unaudited consolidated financial statements.
Page 7
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
1. Organization
Hudson City Bancorp, Inc. (Hudson City Bancorp or the Company) is a Delaware corporation and is
the savings and loan holding company for Hudson City Savings Bank and its subsidiaries (Hudson
City Savings or the Bank).
On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection
Act (the Reform Act). Pursuant to the Reform Act, the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS)
effectively merged into the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), with the OCC
assuming all functions and authority from the OTS relating to federally chartered savings banks,
and the Federal Reserve Board (the FRB) assuming all functions and authority from the OTS
relating to savings and loan holding companies. Hudson City Savings is now regulated by the OCC
and the Company is now regulated by the FRB.
2. Basis of Presentation
The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Hudson City Bancorp and
its wholly-owned subsidiary, Hudson City Savings.
In our opinion, all the adjustments (consisting of normal and recurring adjustments) necessary for
a fair presentation of the consolidated financial condition and consolidated results of operations
for the unaudited periods presented have been included. The results of operations and other data
presented for the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2011 are not necessarily indicative of
the results of operations that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2011. In preparing
the consolidated financial statements, management is required to make estimates and assumptions
that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities as of the date of the statements of
financial condition and the results of operations for the period. Actual results could differ from
these estimates. The allowance for loan losses (ALL) is a material estimate that is particularly
susceptible to near-term change. The current economic environment has increased the degree of
uncertainty inherent in this material estimate. In addition, bank regulators, as an integral part
of their supervisory function, periodically review our ALL. These regulatory agencies have the
ability to require us, as they can require all banks, to increase our provision for loan losses or
to recognize further charge-offs based upon their judgments, which may be different from ours. Any
increase in the ALL required by these regulatory agencies could adversely affect our financial
condition and results of operations.
Certain information and note disclosures usually included in financial statements prepared in
accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles have been condensed or omitted
pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for the
preparation of the Form 10-Q. The consolidated financial statements presented should be read in
conjunction with Hudson City Bancorps audited consolidated financial statements and notes to
consolidated financial statements included in Hudson City Bancorps 2010 Annual Report to
Shareholders and incorporated by reference into Hudson City Bancorps 2010 Annual Report on Form
10-K.
Page 8
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
3. Earnings Per Share
The following is a summary of our earnings per share calculations and reconciliation of basic to
diluted earnings (loss) per share.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Three Months Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Share
|
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
96,008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
142,591
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income available to
common stockholders
|
|
$
|
96,008
|
|
|
|
494,138
|
|
|
$
|
0.19
|
|
|
$
|
142,591
|
|
|
|
492,888
|
|
|
$
|
0.29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of dilutive common
stock equivalents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
614
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,519
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income available to
common stockholders
|
|
$
|
96,008
|
|
|
|
494,752
|
|
|
$
|
0.19
|
|
|
$
|
142,591
|
|
|
|
494,407
|
|
|
$
|
0.29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Six Months Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Share
|
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$
|
(459,656
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
291,476
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic (loss) earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income available to
common stockholders
|
|
$
|
(459,656
|
)
|
|
|
493,994
|
|
|
$
|
(0.93
|
)
|
|
$
|
291,476
|
|
|
|
492,728
|
|
|
$
|
0.59
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of dilutive common
stock equivalents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,079
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted (loss) earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income available to
common stockholders
|
|
$
|
(459,656
|
)
|
|
|
493,994
|
|
|
$
|
(0.93
|
)
|
|
$
|
291,476
|
|
|
|
494,807
|
|
|
$
|
0.59
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 9
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
4. Securities
The amortized cost and estimated fair market value of investment securities and mortgage-backed
securities available-for-sale at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Fair Market
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
June 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment Securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities
|
|
$
|
6,767
|
|
|
$
|
454
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
7,221
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities available for sale
|
|
|
6,767
|
|
|
|
454
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,221
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GNMA pass-through certificates
|
|
|
1,138,860
|
|
|
|
15,874
|
|
|
|
(1,114
|
)
|
|
|
1,153,620
|
|
FNMA pass-through certificates
|
|
|
5,152,251
|
|
|
|
37,098
|
|
|
|
(5,270
|
)
|
|
|
5,184,079
|
|
FHLMC pass-through certificates
|
|
|
4,006,482
|
|
|
|
48,234
|
|
|
|
(1,896
|
)
|
|
|
4,052,820
|
|
FHLMC and FNMA REMICs
|
|
|
92,549
|
|
|
|
1,196
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
93,745
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total mortgage-backed securities available for sale
|
|
$
|
10,390,142
|
|
|
$
|
102,402
|
|
|
$
|
(8,280
|
)
|
|
$
|
10,484,264
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States government
-sponsored enterprises debt
|
|
$
|
80,000
|
|
|
$
|
2,647
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
82,647
|
|
Equity securities
|
|
|
6,767
|
|
|
|
381
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,148
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities available for sale
|
|
|
86,767
|
|
|
|
3,028
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
89,795
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GNMA pass-through certificates
|
|
|
1,560,755
|
|
|
|
27,214
|
|
|
|
(7,487
|
)
|
|
|
1,580,482
|
|
FNMA pass-through certificates
|
|
|
10,333,033
|
|
|
|
122,305
|
|
|
|
(57,550
|
)
|
|
|
10,397,788
|
|
FHLMC pass-through certificates
|
|
|
5,521,741
|
|
|
|
129,547
|
|
|
|
(32,116
|
)
|
|
|
5,619,172
|
|
FHLMC and FNMA REMICs
|
|
|
509,755
|
|
|
|
13,340
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
523,095
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total mortgage-backed securities available for sale
|
|
$
|
17,925,284
|
|
|
$
|
292,406
|
|
|
$
|
(97,153
|
)
|
|
$
|
18,120,537
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 10
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
The amortized cost and estimated fair market value of investment securities and
mortgage-backed securities held to maturity at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Fair Market
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
June 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States government
-sponsored enterprises debt
|
|
$
|
3,638,950
|
|
|
$
|
3,913
|
|
|
$
|
(41,602
|
)
|
|
$
|
3,601,261
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
held to maturity
|
|
|
3,638,950
|
|
|
|
3,913
|
|
|
|
(41,602
|
)
|
|
|
3,601,261
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GNMA pass-through certificates
|
|
|
93,571
|
|
|
|
3,375
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
96,946
|
|
FNMA pass-through certificates
|
|
|
1,379,845
|
|
|
|
85,863
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
1,465,705
|
|
FHLMC pass-through certificates
|
|
|
2,482,825
|
|
|
|
142,010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,624,835
|
|
FHLMC and FNMA REMICs
|
|
|
939,975
|
|
|
|
47,650
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
987,625
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total mortgage-backed securities
held to maturity
|
|
$
|
4,896,216
|
|
|
$
|
278,898
|
|
|
$
|
(3
|
)
|
|
$
|
5,175,111
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States government
-sponsored enterprises debt
|
|
$
|
3,939,006
|
|
|
$
|
3,698
|
|
|
$
|
(75,216
|
)
|
|
$
|
3,867,488
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
held to maturity
|
|
|
3,939,006
|
|
|
|
3,698
|
|
|
|
(75,216
|
)
|
|
|
3,867,488
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GNMA pass-through certificates
|
|
|
98,887
|
|
|
|
2,802
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
101,689
|
|
FNMA pass-through certificates
|
|
|
1,622,994
|
|
|
|
87,271
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,710,265
|
|
FHLMC pass-through certificates
|
|
|
2,943,565
|
|
|
|
148,248
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,091,813
|
|
FHLMC and FNMA REMICs
|
|
|
1,248,926
|
|
|
|
46,846
|
|
|
|
(32
|
)
|
|
|
1,295,740
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total mortgage-backed securities
held to maturity
|
|
$
|
5,914,372
|
|
|
$
|
285,167
|
|
|
$
|
(32
|
)
|
|
$
|
6,199,507
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 11
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
The following table shows the gross unrealized losses and fair value of the Companys
investments with unrealized losses that are deemed to be temporarily impaired, aggregated by
investment category and length of time that individual securities have been in a continuous
unrealized loss position at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less Than 12 Months
|
|
|
12 Months or Longer
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
June 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held to maturity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States government
-sponsored enterprises debt
|
|
$
|
2,908,340
|
|
|
$
|
(41,602
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,908,340
|
|
|
$
|
(41,602
|
)
|
FNMA pass-through certificates
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total temporarily impaired
securities held to maturity
|
|
|
2,908,484
|
|
|
|
(41,605
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,908,484
|
|
|
|
(41,605
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available for sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GNMA pass-through certificates
|
|
|
403,749
|
|
|
|
(1,114
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
403,749
|
|
|
|
(1,114
|
)
|
FNMA pass-through certificates
|
|
|
1,727,381
|
|
|
|
(5,270
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,727,381
|
|
|
|
(5,270
|
)
|
FHLMC pass-through certificates
|
|
|
731,941
|
|
|
|
(1,896
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
731,941
|
|
|
|
(1,896
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total temporarily impaired
securities available for sale
|
|
|
2,863,071
|
|
|
|
(8,280
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,863,071
|
|
|
|
(8,280
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
5,771,555
|
|
|
$
|
(49,885
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
5,771,555
|
|
|
$
|
(49,885
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held to maturity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States government
-sponsored enterprises debt
|
|
$
|
3,524,781
|
|
|
|
(75,216
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,524,781
|
|
|
$
|
(75,216
|
)
|
FHLMC and FNMA REMICs
|
|
|
7,373
|
|
|
|
(24
|
)
|
|
|
3,163
|
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
|
|
10,536
|
|
|
|
(32
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total temporarily impaired
securities held to maturity
|
|
|
3,532,154
|
|
|
|
(75,240
|
)
|
|
|
3,163
|
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
|
|
3,535,317
|
|
|
|
(75,248
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available for sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GNMA pass-through certificates
|
|
|
424,575
|
|
|
|
(7,487
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
424,575
|
|
|
|
(7,487
|
)
|
FNMA pass-through certificates
|
|
|
4,375,620
|
|
|
|
(57,550
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,375,620
|
|
|
|
(57,550
|
)
|
FHLMC pass-through certificates
|
|
|
2,425,458
|
|
|
|
(32,116
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,425,458
|
|
|
|
(32,116
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total temporarily impaired
securities available for sale
|
|
|
7,225,653
|
|
|
|
(97,153
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,225,653
|
|
|
|
(97,153
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
10,757,807
|
|
|
$
|
(172,393
|
)
|
|
$
|
3,163
|
|
|
$
|
(8
|
)
|
|
$
|
10,760,970
|
|
|
$
|
(172,401
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The unrealized losses are primarily due to the changes in market interest rates subsequent to
purchase. We only purchase securities issued by U.S. government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) and
do not own any unrated or private label securities or other high-risk securities such as those
backed by sub-prime loans. We do not consider these investments to be other-than-temporarily
impaired at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 since the
decline in market value is primarily attributable
to changes in interest rates and not credit quality. In addition, the Company does not intend to
sell and does not believe that it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell these
investments until there is a full recovery of the unrealized loss, which may be at maturity. As a
result no impairment loss was recognized during the six months ended June 30, 2011 or for the year
ended December 31, 2010.
Page 12
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
The amortized cost and estimated fair market value of our securities held to maturity and
available-for-sale at June 30, 2011, by contractual maturity, are shown below. The table does not
include the effect of prepayments or scheduled principal amortization. The expected maturity may
differ from the contractual maturity because issuers may have the right to call or prepay
obligations. Equity securities have been excluded from this table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized Cost
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed
|
|
|
Investment
|
|
|
Fair Market
|
|
|
|
securities
|
|
|
securities
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
June 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held to Maturity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due in one year or less
|
|
$
|
6
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
6
|
|
Due after one year through five years
|
|
|
1,657
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,810
|
|
Due after five years through ten years
|
|
|
9,288
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,965
|
|
Due after ten years
|
|
|
4,885,265
|
|
|
|
3,638,950
|
|
|
|
8,764,591
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total held to maturity
|
|
$
|
4,896,216
|
|
|
$
|
3,638,950
|
|
|
$
|
8,776,372
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available for Sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due after ten years
|
|
$
|
10,390,142
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
10,484,264
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total available for sale
|
|
$
|
10,390,142
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
10,484,264
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales of mortgage-backed securities available-for-sale amounted to $8.96 billion and $1.09
billion for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, resulting in realized gains
of $100.0 million and $61.4 million for the same respective periods. There were sales of $80.0
million of investment securities available-for-sale during the six months ended June 30, 2011.
There were no sales of investment securities available-for-sale or held to maturity during the six
months ended June 30, 2010. Gross realized gains on sales and calls of investment securities
available-for-sale were $2.5 million during the first six months of 2011. Gains and
losses on the sale of all securities are determined using the specific identification method.
5. Stock Repurchase Programs
We have previously announced several stock repurchase programs. Under our stock repurchase
programs, shares of Hudson City Bancorp common stock may be purchased in the open market or through
other privately negotiated transactions, depending on market conditions. The repurchased shares
are held as
treasury stock for general corporate use. We did not purchase any of our common shares pursuant to
the repurchase programs during the six months ended June 30, 2011. Included in treasury stock are
vested shares related to stock awards that were surrendered for withholding taxes. These shares
are included in treasury stock purchases in the consolidated statements of cash flows and amounted
to 17,145 and 34,293 shares for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively. As of
June 30, 2011, there remained 50,123,550 shares that may be purchased under the existing stock
repurchase programs.
Page 13
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
6. Loans and Allowance for Loan Losses
Loans at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 are summarized as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2011
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
First mortgage loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One- to four-family
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortizing
|
|
$
|
24,238,748
|
|
|
$
|
24,912,935
|
|
Interest-only
|
|
|
5,065,540
|
|
|
|
5,136,463
|
|
FHA/VA
|
|
|
718,204
|
|
|
|
499,724
|
|
Multi-family and commercial
|
|
|
42,460
|
|
|
|
48,067
|
|
Construction
|
|
|
8,368
|
|
|
|
9,081
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total first mortgage loans
|
|
|
30,073,320
|
|
|
|
30,606,270
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer and other loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixedrate second mortgages
|
|
|
144,746
|
|
|
|
160,896
|
|
Home equity credit lines
|
|
|
134,688
|
|
|
|
137,467
|
|
Other
|
|
|
20,722
|
|
|
|
19,264
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer and other loans
|
|
|
300,156
|
|
|
|
317,627
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans
|
|
$
|
30,373,476
|
|
|
$
|
30,923,897
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following tables present the composition of our loan portfolio by credit quality indicator
at the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit Risk Profile based on Payment Activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to four- family
|
|
|
Other first
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
first mortgage loans
|
|
|
Mortgages
|
|
|
Consumer and Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multi-family
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
second
|
|
|
Home Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Amortizing
|
|
|
Interest-only
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
Construction
|
|
|
mortgages
|
|
|
credit lines
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
June 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performing
|
|
$
|
24,246,317
|
|
|
$
|
4,873,257
|
|
|
$
|
41,929
|
|
|
$
|
1,366
|
|
|
$
|
144,284
|
|
|
$
|
131,422
|
|
|
$
|
20,662
|
|
|
$
|
29,459,237
|
|
Non-performing
|
|
|
710,635
|
|
|
|
192,283
|
|
|
|
531
|
|
|
|
7,002
|
|
|
|
462
|
|
|
|
3,266
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
914,239
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
24,956,952
|
|
|
$
|
5,065,540
|
|
|
$
|
42,460
|
|
|
$
|
8,368
|
|
|
$
|
144,746
|
|
|
$
|
134,688
|
|
|
$
|
20,722
|
|
|
$
|
30,373,476
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performing
|
|
$
|
24,733,745
|
|
|
$
|
4,957,115
|
|
|
$
|
46,950
|
|
|
$
|
1,521
|
|
|
$
|
160,456
|
|
|
$
|
135,111
|
|
|
$
|
17,740
|
|
|
$
|
30,052,638
|
|
Non-performing
|
|
|
678,914
|
|
|
|
179,348
|
|
|
|
1,117
|
|
|
|
7,560
|
|
|
|
440
|
|
|
|
2,356
|
|
|
|
1,524
|
|
|
|
871,259
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
25,412,659
|
|
|
$
|
5,136,463
|
|
|
$
|
48,067
|
|
|
$
|
9,081
|
|
|
$
|
160,896
|
|
|
$
|
137,467
|
|
|
$
|
19,264
|
|
|
$
|
30,923,897
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 14
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit Risk Profile by Internally Assigned Grade
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to four- family
|
|
|
Other first
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
first mortgage loans
|
|
|
Mortgages
|
|
|
Consumer and Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multi-family
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
second
|
|
|
Home Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortizing
|
|
|
Interest-only
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
Construction
|
|
|
mortgages
|
|
|
credit lines
|
|
|
Other
|
|
June 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pass
|
|
$
|
24,190,053
|
|
|
$
|
4,846,639
|
|
|
$
|
25,705
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
144,067
|
|
|
$
|
130,833
|
|
|
$
|
19,848
|
|
Special mention
|
|
|
131,009
|
|
|
|
26,618
|
|
|
|
3,480
|
|
|
|
1,366
|
|
|
|
217
|
|
|
|
589
|
|
|
|
814
|
|
Substandard
|
|
|
635,290
|
|
|
|
192,283
|
|
|
|
4,228
|
|
|
|
5,302
|
|
|
|
462
|
|
|
|
3,174
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
Doubtful
|
|
|
600
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,047
|
|
|
|
1,700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
24,956,952
|
|
|
$
|
5,065,540
|
|
|
$
|
42,460
|
|
|
$
|
8,368
|
|
|
$
|
144,746
|
|
|
$
|
134,688
|
|
|
$
|
20,722
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pass
|
|
|
24,646,101
|
|
|
$
|
$4,927,545
|
|
|
$
|
37,697
|
|
|
$
|
1,521
|
|
|
$
|
160,216
|
|
|
$
|
134,408
|
|
|
$
|
17,737
|
|
Special mention
|
|
|
151,800
|
|
|
|
29,570
|
|
|
|
1,199
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
240
|
|
|
|
703
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
Substandard
|
|
|
614,758
|
|
|
|
179,348
|
|
|
|
1,117
|
|
|
|
7,560
|
|
|
|
440
|
|
|
|
2,356
|
|
|
|
1,524
|
|
Doubtful
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,054
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
25,412,659
|
|
|
$
|
5,136,463
|
|
|
$
|
48,067
|
|
|
$
|
9,081
|
|
|
$
|
160,896
|
|
|
$
|
137,467
|
|
|
$
|
19,264
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan classifications are defined as follows:
|
|
|
Pass These loans are protected by the current net
worth, payment status and paying capacity of the
obligor (or guarantors, if any) or by the fair value, less cost to acquire and sell, of any
underlying collateral in a timely manner.
|
|
|
|
|
Special Mention These loans have potential weaknesses that deserve managements close
attention. If left uncorrected, these potential weaknesses may result in deterioration of
repayment prospects.
|
|
|
|
|
Substandard These loans are inadequately protected by the current net worth and
paying capacity of the obligor or by the collateral pledged, if any. Assets so classified
must have a well-defined weakness, or weaknesses that jeopardize the liquidation of the
debt. They are characterized by the distinct possibility that we will sustain some loss if
the deficiencies are not corrected.
|
|
|
|
|
Doubtful These loans have all the weaknesses inherent in a loan classified
substandard with the added characteristic that the weaknesses make the full recovery of our
principal balance highly questionable and improbable on the basis of currently known facts,
conditions, and values. The
likelihood of a loss on an asset or portion of an asset classified Doubtful is high. Its
classification as Loss is not appropriate, however, because pending events are expected to
materially affect the amount of loss.
|
|
|
|
|
Loss These loans are considered uncollectible and of such little value that a
charge-off is warranted. This classification does not necessarily mean that an asset has no
recovery or salvage value; but rather, there is much doubt about whether, how much, or when
the recovery will occur.
|
We evaluate the classification of our one-to four- family mortgage loans, consumer loans and other
loans primarily on a pooled basis by delinquency. Loans that are past due 60 to 89 days are
classified as special mention and loans that are past due 90 days or more are classified as
substandard. We generally obtain updated valuations for one- to four- family mortgage loans by the
time a loan becomes 180 days past due. If necessary, we charge-off an amount to reduce the
carrying value of the loan to the value of the underlying property, less estimated selling costs.
Since we record the charge-off when we receive the updated valuation, we typically do not have any
residential first mortgages classified as doubtful or loss. We evaluate multi-
Page 15
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
family, commercial
and construction loans individually and base our classification on the debt service capability of
the underlying property as well as secondary sources of repayment such as the borrowers and any
guarantors ability and willingness to provide debt service.
Originating loans secured by residential real estate is our primary business. Our financial
results may be adversely affected by changes in prevailing economic conditions, either nationally
or in our local New Jersey and metropolitan New York market areas, including decreases in real
estate values, adverse employment conditions, the monetary and fiscal policies of the federal and
state government and other significant external events. As a result of our lending practices, we
have a concentration of loans secured by real property located primarily in New Jersey, New York
and Connecticut. At June 30, 2011 approximately 79.9% of our total loans are in the New York
metropolitan area.
Included in our loan portfolio at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 are $5.07 billion and $5.14
billion, respectively, of interest-only loans. These loans are originated as adjustable-rate
mortgage (ARM) loans with initial terms of five, seven or ten years with the interest-only
portion of the payment based upon the initial loan term, or offered on a 30-year fixed-rate loan
with interest-only payments for the first 10 years of the obligation. At the end of the initial 5-,
7- or 10-year interest-only period, the loan payment will adjust to include both principal and
interest and will amortize over the remaining term so the loan will be repaid at the end of its
original life. We had $192.3 million and $179.3 million of non-performing interest-only loans at
June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively.
In addition to our full documentation loan program, we originate loans to certain eligible
borrowers as limited documentation loans. We have originated these types of loans for over 15
years. Loans eligible for limited documentation processing are ARM loans, interest-only first
mortgage loans and 10-, 15-, 20-, 30- and 40-year fixed-rate loans to owner-occupied primary and
second home applicants. These loans are available in amounts up to 70% of the lower of the
appraised value or purchase price of the property. Generally the maximum loan amount for limited
documentation loans is $750,000 and these loans are subject to higher interest rates than our full
documentation loan products. We also allow certain borrowers to obtain mortgage loans without
verification of income. However, in these cases, we do verify the borrowers assets. These loans
are subject to somewhat higher interest rates than our regular products, and are generally limited
to a maximum loan-to-value ratio of 60%. Limited documentation and no income verification loans
have an inherently higher level of risk compared to loans with full
documentation.
Included in our loan
portfolio at June 30, 2011 are $3.70 billion of originated
amortizing limited documentation loans and $971.8 million of
originated limited documentation interest-only loans. Non-performing
loans at June 30, 2011 include $112.4 million of originated
amortizing limited documentation loans and $62.6 million of
originated interest-only limited documentation loans. Included in our
loan portfolio at December 31, 2010 are $3.38 billion of
originated amortizing limited documentation loans and
$938.8 million of originated limited documentation interest-only
loans. Non-performing loans at December 31, 2010 include
$91.5 million of originated amortizing limited documentation
loans and $58.3 million of originated interest-only limited
documentation loans.
Page 16
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
The following table is a comparison of our delinquent loans by class as of the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
90 Days
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
90 Days
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
or more
|
|
|
|
30-59 Days
|
|
|
60-89 Days
|
|
|
or more
|
|
|
Past Due
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
|
accruing
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
At June 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One- to four-family first mortgages:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortizing
|
|
$
|
338,590
|
|
|
$
|
141,260
|
|
|
$
|
710,635
|
|
|
$
|
1,190,485
|
|
|
$
|
23,766,467
|
|
|
$
|
24,956,952
|
|
|
$
|
75,345
|
|
Interest-only
|
|
|
65,416
|
|
|
|
26,618
|
|
|
|
192,283
|
|
|
|
284,317
|
|
|
|
4,781,223
|
|
|
|
5,065,540
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multi-family and commercial mortgages
|
|
|
1,334
|
|
|
|
1,717
|
|
|
|
531
|
|
|
|
3,582
|
|
|
|
38,878
|
|
|
|
42,460
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,002
|
|
|
|
7,002
|
|
|
|
1,366
|
|
|
|
8,368
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer and other loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-rate second mortgages
|
|
|
832
|
|
|
|
217
|
|
|
|
462
|
|
|
|
1,511
|
|
|
|
143,235
|
|
|
|
144,746
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity lines of credit
|
|
|
1,739
|
|
|
|
589
|
|
|
|
3,266
|
|
|
|
5,594
|
|
|
|
129,094
|
|
|
|
134,688
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
625
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
725
|
|
|
|
19,997
|
|
|
|
20,722
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
408,536
|
|
|
$
|
170,441
|
|
|
$
|
914,239
|
|
|
$
|
1,493,216
|
|
|
$
|
28,880,260
|
|
|
$
|
30,373,476
|
|
|
$
|
75,345
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One- to four-family first mortgages:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortizing
|
|
$
|
363,583
|
|
|
$
|
161,530
|
|
|
$
|
678,914
|
|
|
$
|
1,204,027
|
|
|
$
|
24,208,632
|
|
|
$
|
25,412,659
|
|
|
$
|
64,156
|
|
Interest-only
|
|
|
47,479
|
|
|
|
29,570
|
|
|
|
179,348
|
|
|
|
256,397
|
|
|
|
4,880,066
|
|
|
|
5,136,463
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multi-family and commercial mortgages
|
|
|
3,199
|
|
|
|
1,199
|
|
|
|
1,117
|
|
|
|
5,515
|
|
|
|
42,552
|
|
|
|
48,067
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,560
|
|
|
|
7,560
|
|
|
|
1,521
|
|
|
|
9,081
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer and other loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-rate second mortgages
|
|
|
896
|
|
|
|
240
|
|
|
|
440
|
|
|
|
1,576
|
|
|
|
159,320
|
|
|
|
160,896
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity lines of credit
|
|
|
2,419
|
|
|
|
703
|
|
|
|
2,356
|
|
|
|
5,478
|
|
|
|
131,989
|
|
|
|
137,467
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
1,330
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
1,524
|
|
|
|
2,857
|
|
|
|
16,407
|
|
|
|
19,264
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
418,906
|
|
|
$
|
193,245
|
|
|
$
|
871,259
|
|
|
$
|
1,483,410
|
|
|
$
|
29,440,487
|
|
|
$
|
30,923,897
|
|
|
$
|
64,156
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans that are past due 90 days or more and still accruing interest are loans that are insured
by the FHA.
We adopted
Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2011-02 on April 1, 2011 which provides
additional guidance to creditors for evaluating whether a modification or restructuring of a
receivable is a troubled debt restructuring. In evaluating whether a restructuring constitutes a
troubled debt restructuring, a creditor must separately conclude that the restructuring constitutes
a concession and the borrower is experiencing financial difficulties. As a result of our adoption
of ASU No. 2011-02, we determined that approximately $26.2 million of residential mortgage loans
were troubled debt restructurings that were not previously considered as such.
Loans modified in a troubled debt restructuring totaled $41.8 million at June 30, 2011 of which
$1.9 million are 30 days past due, $1.8 million are 60-89 days past due and $2.6 million are 90
days or more past due. The remaining loans modified were current at the time of the restructuring
and have complied with the terms of their restructure agreement. At December 31, 2010, loans
modified in a troubled debt restructuring totaled $11.1 million. These loans were current at the
time of their restructuring and were in compliance with the terms of their restructure agreement at
December 31, 2010.
Page 17
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
Loans that
were modified in a troubled debt restructuring primarily represent
loans that have been in a deferred payment plan for an extended
period of time, generally in excess of six months, and loans that
have had past due amounts capitalized as part of the loan balance.
These loans are individually evaluated for impairment to determine if
the carrying value of the loan is in excess of the fair value of the
collateral. Since these loans are secured by real estate, fair value
is estimated through current appraisals. As a result of our
impairment evaluation, we charged-off $875,000 during the six months
ended June 30, 2011 and established an ALL of $4.9 million for loans
classified as troubled debt restructurings.
The following table is a comparison of our troubled debt restructuring by class as of the date
indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2011
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-restructuring
|
|
|
Post-restructuring
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-restructuring
|
|
|
Post-restructuring
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
|
of
|
|
|
Recorded
|
|
|
Recorded
|
|
|
of
|
|
|
Recorded
|
|
|
Recorded
|
|
|
|
Contracts
|
|
|
Investment
|
|
|
Investment
|
|
|
Contracts
|
|
|
Investment
|
|
|
Investment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Troubled debt restructurings:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to-four family
first mortgages:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortizing
|
|
|
79
|
|
|
$
|
31,876
|
|
|
$
|
30,797
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
$
|
2,014
|
|
|
$
|
2,031
|
|
Interest-only
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
3,077
|
|
|
|
3,086
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1,093
|
|
|
|
1,103
|
|
Multi-family and
commercial mortgages
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
7,911
|
|
|
|
7,911
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
7,911
|
|
|
|
7,911
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
$
|
42,864
|
|
|
$
|
41,794
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
$
|
11,018
|
|
|
$
|
11,045
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Upon request, we will generally agree to a short-term payment plan for certain residential
mortgage loan borrowers. Many of these customers are current as to their mortgage payments, but
may be anticipating a short-term cash flow need and want to protect their credit history. The
extent of these plans is generally limited to a six-month deferral of principal payments. Pursuant
to these short-term payment plans, we do not modify mortgage notes, recast legal documents, extend
maturities or reduce interest rates. We also do not forgive any interest or principal. These
loans have not been classified as troubled debt restructurings since we collect all principal and
interest, the deferral period is short and any reduction in the present value of cash flows is due
to the insignificant delay in the timing of principal payments. As a result, these restructurings
did not meet the requirements in ASU No. 2011-02 to be considered a troubled debt restructuring.
The principal balance of loans with payment plans at June 30, 2011 amounted to $27.9 million,
including $20.5 million of loans that are current, $2.5 million that are 30 to 59 days past due,
$2.9 million that are 60 to 89 days past due and $2.0 million that are 90 days or more past due.
The principal balance of loans with payment plans at December 31, 2010 amounted to $81.3 million,
including loans that were determined to be troubled debt restructurings as a result of our adoption
of ASU No. 2011-02. Of the $81.3 million of loans in payment plans at December 31, 2010, $54.4
million were current, $13.9 million were 30 to 59 days past due, $4.7 million were 60 to 89 days
past due and $8.3 million were 90 days or more past due.
Page 18
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
The following table presents the geographic distribution of our loan portfolio as a percentage of
total loans and of our non-performing loans as a percentage of total non-performing loans.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At June 30, 2011
|
|
|
At December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-performing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-performing
|
|
|
|
Total loans
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
|
Total loans
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
New Jersey
|
|
|
43.9
|
%
|
|
|
48.0
|
%
|
|
|
44.0
|
%
|
|
|
45.7
|
%
|
New York
|
|
|
21.0
|
|
|
|
18.3
|
|
|
|
19.9
|
|
|
|
18.7
|
|
Connecticut
|
|
|
15.0
|
|
|
|
6.4
|
|
|
|
14.5
|
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total New York metropolitan area
|
|
|
79.9
|
|
|
|
72.7
|
|
|
|
78.4
|
|
|
|
70.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pennsylvania
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
Virginia
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
Illinois
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
Maryland
|
|
|
2.3
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
All others
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
|
|
13.2
|
|
|
|
9.3
|
|
|
|
14.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total outside New York metropolitan area
|
|
|
20.1
|
|
|
|
27.3
|
|
|
|
21.6
|
|
|
|
29.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The ultimate ability to collect the loan portfolio is subject to changes in the real estate
market and future economic conditions. Since 2009, there has been a decline in house prices, both
nationally and locally. Housing market conditions in our lending market areas weakened during this
period as evidenced by reduced levels of sales, increasing inventories of houses on the market,
declining house prices and an increase in the length of time houses remain on the market.
Although we believe that we have established and maintained the ALL at adequate levels,
additions may be necessary if future economic and other conditions differ substantially from the
current operating environment. While we continue to adhere to prudent underwriting standards, we
are geographically concentrated in the New York metropolitan area of the United States and,
therefore, are not immune to negative consequences arising from overall economic weakness and, in
particular, a sharp downturn in the housing industry. Continued decreases in real estate values
could adversely affect the value of property used as collateral for our loans. No assurance can be
given in any particular case that our loan-to-value ratios will provide full protection in the
event of borrower default. Adverse changes in the economy and increases in the unemployment rate
may have a negative effect on the ability of our borrowers to make timely loan payments, which
would have an adverse impact on our earnings. A further increase in loan delinquencies would
decrease our net interest income and may adversely impact our loss experience on non-performing
loans which may result in an increase in the loss factors used in our quantitative analysis of the
ALL, causing increases in our provision and ALL. Although we use the best information available,
the level of the ALL remains an estimate that is subject to significant judgment and short-term
change.
We generally obtain new collateral values by the time a loan becomes 180 days delinquent. If the
estimated fair value of the collateral (less estimated selling costs) is less than the recorded
investment in the loan, we charge-off an amount to reduce the loan to the fair value of the
collateral less estimated selling costs. As a result, certain losses inherent in our
non-performing loans are being recognized as charge-offs which may result in a lower ratio of the
ALL to non-performing loans. Net charge-offs amounted to $44.3 million for the first six months of
2011 as compared to $47.1 million for the first six months of 2010. These charge-offs were
primarily due to the results of our reappraisal process for our non-performing residential first
mortgage loans. We disposed of 74 loans through the foreclosure process during 2011 with a final
net gain on sale (after previous charge-offs of $8.2 million) of approximately $822,000.
Write-downs on foreclosed real
Page 19
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
estate amounted to $3.7 million for the first six months of 2011. The results of our reappraisal
process and our recent charge-off history are also considered in the determination of the ALL. At
June 30, 2011 the average loan-to-value (LTV) ratio (using appraised values at the time of
origination) of our non-performing one- to four-family mortgage loans was 74.9% and was 60.8% for
our total mortgage loan portfolio. Thus, the ratio of the ALL to non-performing loans needs to be
viewed in the context of the underlying LTV ratios of the non-performing loans and the relative
decline in home values.
As part of our estimation of the ALL, we monitor changes in the values of homes in each market
using indices published by various organizations including the Federal Housing Finance Agency
(FHFA) and Case-Shiller. Our Asset Quality Committee uses these indices and a stratification of
our loan portfolio by state as part of its quarterly determination of the ALL. We generally obtain
updated collateral values by the time a loan becomes 180 days delinquent which we believe
identifies potential charge-offs more accurately than a house price index that is based on a wide
geographic area and includes many different types of houses. However, we use the house price
indices to identify geographic areas experiencing weaknesses in housing markets to determine if an
overall adjustment to the ALL is required based on loans we have in those geographic areas and to
determine if changes in the loss factors used in the ALL quantitative analysis are necessary. Our
quantitative analysis of the ALL accounts for increases in non-performing loans by applying
progressively higher risk factors to loans as they become more delinquent. Based on our recent
loss experience on non-performing loans, we increased certain loss factors used in our quantitative
analysis of the ALL for our one- to four- family first mortgage loans during the second quarter of
2011. The recent adjustment in our loss factors did not have a material effect on the ultimate
level of our ALL or on our provision for loan losses. If our future loss experience requires
additional increases in our loss factors, this may result in increased levels of loan loss
provisions.
In addition to our quantitative systematic methodology, we also use qualitative analyses to
determine the adequacy of our ALL. Our qualitative analyses include further evaluation of economic
factors, such as trends in the unemployment rate, as well as a ratio analysis to evaluate the
overall measurement of the ALL. This analysis includes a review of delinquency ratios, net
charge-off ratios and the ratio of the ALL to both non-performing loans and total loans. This
qualitative review is used to reassess the overall determination of the ALL and to ensure that
directional changes in the ALL and the provision for loan losses are supported by relevant internal
and external data.
We consider the average LTV ratio of our non-performing loans and our total portfolio in relation
to the overall changes in house prices in our lending markets when determining the ALL. This
provides us with a macro indication of the severity of potential losses that might be expected.
Since substantially all our portfolio consists of first mortgage loans on residential properties,
the LTV ratio is particularly important to us when a loan becomes non-performing. The weighted
average LTV ratio in our one- to four-family mortgage loan portfolio at June 30, 2011 was 60.8%,
using appraised values at the time of origination. The weighted average LTV ratio of our
non-performing loans was 74.9% at June 30, 2011, using appraised values at the time of origination.
Based on the valuation indices, house prices have declined in the New York metropolitan area,
where 72.7% of our non-performing loans were located at June 30, 2011, by approximately 23% from
the peak of the market in 2006 through April 2011 and by 32% nationwide during that period.
Changes in house values may affect our loss experience which may require that we change the loss
factors used in our quantitative analysis of the ALL. There can be no assurance whether
significant further declines in house values may occur and result in higher loss experience and
increased levels of charge-offs and loan loss provisions.
There were no loans held for sale at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010.
Page 20
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
The following is a summary of loans, by class, on which the accrual of income has been discontinued
and loans that are contractually past due 90 days or more but have not been classified as
non-accrual at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2011
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Non-accrual loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to four-family amortizing loans
|
|
$
|
635,290
|
|
|
$
|
614,758
|
|
One-to four-family interest-only loans
|
|
|
192,283
|
|
|
|
179,348
|
|
Multi-family and commercial mortgages
|
|
|
531
|
|
|
|
1,117
|
|
Construction loans
|
|
|
7,002
|
|
|
|
7,560
|
|
Fixed-rate second mortgages
|
|
|
462
|
|
|
|
440
|
|
Home equity lines of credit
|
|
|
3,266
|
|
|
|
2,356
|
|
Other loans
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
1,524
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-accrual loans
|
|
|
838,894
|
|
|
|
807,103
|
|
Accruing loans delinquent 90 days or more
|
|
|
75,345
|
|
|
|
64,156
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-performing loans
|
|
$
|
914,239
|
|
|
$
|
871,259
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The total amount of interest income on non-accrual loans that would have been recognized
during the first six months of 2011, if interest on all such loans had been recorded based upon
original contract terms amounted to approximately $26.1 million. The total amount of interest
income received during the first six months of 2011 on non-accrual loans was immaterial. The Bank
is not obligated to lend additional funds to borrowers on non-accrual status.
Loans
evaluated for impairment include loans classified as troubled debt
restructurings and non-performing multi-family, commercial and
construction loans. The following table presents our loans evaluated for impairment by class at the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unpaid
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
|
Recorded
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Related
|
|
|
Recorded
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
|
Investment
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
Allowance
|
|
|
Investment
|
|
|
Recognized
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to four-family amortizing loans
|
|
$
|
30,797
|
|
|
$
|
31,832
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
31,345
|
|
|
$
|
793
|
|
One-to four-family interest-only loans
|
|
|
3,086
|
|
|
|
3,086
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,086
|
|
|
|
64
|
|
Multi-family and commercial mortgages
|
|
|
5,285
|
|
|
|
8,578
|
|
|
|
3,293
|
|
|
|
5,306
|
|
|
|
243
|
|
Construction loans
|
|
|
5,388
|
|
|
|
7,002
|
|
|
|
1,614
|
|
|
|
5,626
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
44,556
|
|
|
$
|
50,498
|
|
|
$
|
4,907
|
|
|
$
|
45,363
|
|
|
$
|
1,100
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to four-family amortizing loans
|
|
$
|
2,031
|
|
|
$
|
2,031
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,031
|
|
|
$
|
106
|
|
One-to four-family interest-only loans
|
|
|
1,104
|
|
|
|
1,104
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,104
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
Multi-family and commercial mortgages
|
|
|
5,712
|
|
|
|
9,161
|
|
|
|
3,449
|
|
|
|
9,159
|
|
|
|
485
|
|
Construction loans
|
|
|
5,863
|
|
|
|
7,560
|
|
|
|
1,697
|
|
|
|
6,949
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
14,710
|
|
|
$
|
19,856
|
|
|
$
|
5,146
|
|
|
$
|
19,243
|
|
|
$
|
646
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 21
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
The following table presents the activity in our ALL for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Three Months Ended June 30,
|
|
|
For the Six Months Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of period
|
|
$
|
255,283
|
|
|
$
|
165,829
|
|
|
$
|
236,574
|
|
|
$
|
140,074
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charge-offs
|
|
|
(28,551
|
)
|
|
|
(24,156
|
)
|
|
|
(51,997
|
)
|
|
|
(49,027
|
)
|
Recoveries
|
|
|
5,574
|
|
|
|
1,310
|
|
|
|
7,729
|
|
|
|
1,936
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net charge-offs
|
|
|
(22,977
|
)
|
|
|
(22,846
|
)
|
|
|
(44,268
|
)
|
|
|
(47,091
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan losses
|
|
|
30,000
|
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
|
|
70,000
|
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period
|
|
$
|
262,306
|
|
|
$
|
192,983
|
|
|
$
|
262,306
|
|
|
$
|
192,983
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table presents the activity in our ALL by portfolio segment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to four-
|
|
|
Multi-family
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Family
|
|
|
and Commercial
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgages
|
|
|
Mortgages
|
|
|
Construction
|
|
|
Other Loans
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2010
|
|
$
|
227,224
|
|
|
$
|
4,419
|
|
|
$
|
1,728
|
|
|
$
|
3,203
|
|
|
$
|
236,574
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan losses
|
|
|
70,429
|
|
|
|
(298
|
)
|
|
|
(87
|
)
|
|
|
(44
|
)
|
|
|
70,000
|
|
Charge-offs
|
|
|
(51,852
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(145
|
)
|
|
|
(51,997
|
)
|
Recoveries
|
|
|
7,728
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
7,729
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net charge-offs
|
|
|
(44,124
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(144
|
)
|
|
|
(44,268
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at June 30, 2011
|
|
$
|
253,529
|
|
|
$
|
4,121
|
|
|
$
|
1,641
|
|
|
$
|
3,015
|
|
|
$
|
262,306
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan portfolio:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at June 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individually evaluated for impairment
|
|
$
|
33,883
|
|
|
$
|
8,578
|
|
|
$
|
7,002
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
49,463
|
|
Collectively evaluated for impairment
|
|
|
29,988,609
|
|
|
|
33,882
|
|
|
|
1,366
|
|
|
|
300,156
|
|
|
|
30,324,013
|
|
Page 22
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
7. Borrowed Funds
Borrowed funds at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 are summarized as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2011
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Rate
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FHLB
|
|
$
|
1,200,000
|
|
|
|
4.47
|
%
|
|
$
|
2,150,000
|
|
|
|
4.29
|
%
|
Other brokers
|
|
|
6,500,000
|
|
|
|
4.44
|
|
|
|
12,650,000
|
|
|
|
4.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total securities sold under agreements to repurchase
|
|
|
7,700,000
|
|
|
|
4.44
|
|
|
|
14,800,000
|
|
|
|
4.04
|
|
Advances from the FHLB
|
|
|
13,425,000
|
|
|
|
3.28
|
|
|
|
14,875,000
|
|
|
|
3.99
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total borrowed funds
|
|
$
|
21,125,000
|
|
|
|
3.71
|
%
|
|
$
|
29,675,000
|
|
|
|
4.02
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued interest payable
|
|
$
|
98,097
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
151,215
|
|
|
|
|
|
The average balances of borrowings and the maximum amount outstanding at any month-end are as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2011
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Repurchase Agreements:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average balance outstanding during the period
|
|
$
|
10,687,277
|
|
|
$
|
15,034,110
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum balance outstanding at any month-end
during the period
|
|
$
|
14,750,000
|
|
|
$
|
15,100,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average rate during the period
|
|
|
4.27
|
%
|
|
|
4.10
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FHLB Advances:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average balance outstanding during the period
|
|
$
|
14,447,292
|
|
|
$
|
14,875,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum balance outstanding at any month-end
during the period
|
|
$
|
15,175,000
|
|
|
$
|
14,875,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average rate during the period
|
|
|
3.43
|
%
|
|
|
4.04
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 23
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
At June 30, 2011, $12.33 billion of our borrowed funds may be put back to us at the discretion
of the lender as compared to $29.08 billion at December 31, 2010. The remaining $8.80 billion of
borrowed funds at June 30, 2011 are fixed-rate, fixed-maturity borrowings. At June 30, 2011,
borrowed funds had scheduled maturities and potential put dates as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings by Scheduled
|
|
|
Borrowings by Earlier of Scheduled
|
|
|
|
Maturity Date
|
|
|
Maturity or Next Potential Put Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
Year
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Rate
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
$
|
1,650,000
|
|
|
|
0.76
|
%
|
|
$
|
8,025,000
|
|
|
|
3.56
|
%
|
2012
|
|
|
2,900,000
|
|
|
|
0.88
|
|
|
|
3,600,000
|
|
|
|
1.57
|
|
2013
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
|
|
5.46
|
|
|
|
1,325,000
|
|
|
|
4.69
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,725,000
|
|
|
|
4.47
|
|
2015
|
|
|
225,000
|
|
|
|
4.23
|
|
|
|
275,000
|
|
|
|
4.10
|
|
2016
|
|
|
4,525,000
|
|
|
|
4.82
|
|
|
|
3,925,000
|
|
|
|
4.92
|
|
2017
|
|
|
5,875,000
|
|
|
|
4.30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018
|
|
|
850,000
|
|
|
|
3.62
|
|
|
|
250,000
|
|
|
|
3.10
|
|
2019
|
|
|
1,725,000
|
|
|
|
4.62
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020
|
|
|
3,275,000
|
|
|
|
4.53
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
21,125,000
|
|
|
|
3.71
|
%
|
|
$
|
21,125,000
|
|
|
|
3.71
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the
first quarter of 2011, the Company completed a restructuring of its
balance sheet (referred to as the Restructuring Transaction). The Restructuring Transaction is
part of our ongoing strategy to reduce interest rate risk and realign our funding mix. The
Restructuring Transaction included the extinguishment of $12.50 billion of structured borrowings.
The borrowings extinguished were structured putable borrowings with a weighted average rate of
3.56% and consisted of borrowings with the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York (FHLB) and some of
the larger banks in the industry. The extinguishments were funded by proceeds from the sales
of $8.58 billion of mortgage-backed securities available for sale and $80.0 million of investment
securities available for sale, and the use of $5.00 billion of fixed-rate, fixed-maturity
borrowings with a weighted average rate of 0.66%. These new borrowings have monthly maturities of
$250.0 million beginning in April 2011 and concluding in November 2012. The extinguishment of debt
resulted in a pre-tax charge of $1.17 billion which was recorded
in non-interest expense in the first quarter of 2011.
During the six months ended June 30, 2011, the Company modified $4.00 billion of putable borrowings
to fixed-maturity borrowings thereby eliminating the put option and further reducing our interest
rate risk all of which took place in the second quarter.
8. Fair Value Measurements
a) Fair Value Measurements
The Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 820,
Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures,
defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value and expands disclosures about
fair value
Page 24
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
measurements. ASC Topic 820 applies only to fair value measurements already required or permitted
by other accounting standards and does not impose requirements for additional fair value measures.
ASC Topic 820 was issued to increase consistency and comparability in reporting fair values.
We use fair value measurements to record fair value adjustments to certain assets and to determine
fair value disclosures. We did not have any liabilities that were measured at fair value at June
30, 2011 and December 31, 2010. Our securities available-for-sale are recorded at fair value on a
recurring basis. Additionally, from time to time, we may be required to record at fair value other
assets or liabilities on a non-recurring basis, such as foreclosed real estate owned, certain
impaired loans and goodwill. These non-recurring fair value adjustments generally involve the
write-down of individual assets due to impairment losses.
In accordance with ASC Topic 820, we group our assets at fair value in three levels, based on the
markets in which the assets are traded and the reliability of the assumptions used to determine
fair value. These levels are:
Level 1 Valuation is based upon quoted prices for identical instruments traded in active
markets.
Level 2 Valuation is based upon quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets,
quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active and model-based
valuation techniques for which all significant assumptions are observable in the market.
Level 3 Valuation is generated from model-based techniques that use significant assumptions
not observable in the market. These unobservable assumptions reflect our own estimates of
assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. Valuation
techniques include the use of option pricing models, discounted cash flow models and similar
techniques. The results cannot be determined with precision and may not be realized in an actual
sale or immediate settlement of the asset or liability.
We base our fair values on the price that would be received to sell an asset in an orderly
transaction between market participants at the measurement date. ASC Topic 820 requires us to
maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring
fair value.
Assets that we measure on a recurring basis are limited to our available-for-sale securities
portfolio. Our available-for-sale portfolio is carried at estimated fair value with any unrealized
gains and losses, net of taxes, reported as accumulated other comprehensive income or loss in
shareholders equity. Substantially all of our available-for-sale portfolio consists of
mortgage-backed securities and investment securities issued by GSEs. The fair values for
substantially all of these securities are obtained monthly from an independent nationally
recognized pricing service. On a monthly basis, we assess the reasonableness of the fair values
obtained by reference to a second independent nationally recognized pricing service. Based on the
nature of our securities, our independent pricing service provides us with prices which are
categorized as Level 2 since quoted prices in active markets for identical assets are generally not
available for the majority of securities in our portfolio. Various modeling techniques are used to
determine pricing for our mortgage-backed securities, including option pricing and discounted cash
flow models. The inputs to these models include benchmark yields, reported trades, broker/dealer
quotes, issuer spreads, two-sided markets, benchmark securities, bids, offers and reference data.
We also own equity securities with a carrying value of $7.2 million and $7.1 million at June 30,
2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively, for which fair values are obtained from quoted market
prices in active markets and, as such, are classified as Level 1.
Page 25
The following table provides the level of valuation assumptions used to determine the carrying
value of our assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis at June 30, 2011 and December 31,
2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value at June 30, 2011 using
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in Active
|
|
|
Significant Other
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Markets for Identical
|
|
|
Observable Inputs
|
|
|
Unobservable Inputs
|
|
Description
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Assets (Level 1)
|
|
|
(Level 2)
|
|
|
(Level 3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available for sale debt securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities
|
|
$
|
10,484,264
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
10,484,264
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total available for sale
debt securities
|
|
|
10,484,264
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
10,484,264
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available for sale equity securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial services industry
|
|
$
|
7,221
|
|
|
$
|
7,221
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total available for sale
equity securities
|
|
|
7,221
|
|
|
|
7,221
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total available for sale securities
|
|
$
|
10,491,485
|
|
|
$
|
7,221
|
|
|
$
|
10,484,264
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value at December 31, 2010 using
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in Active
|
|
|
Significant Other
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Markets for Identical
|
|
|
Observable Inputs
|
|
|
Unobservable Inputs
|
|
Description
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Assets (Level 1)
|
|
|
(Level 2)
|
|
|
(Level 3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available for sale debt securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities
|
|
$
|
18,120,537
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
18,120,537
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
U.S. government-sponsored
enterprises debt
|
|
|
82,647
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
82,647
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total available for sale
debt securities
|
|
|
18,203,184
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,203,184
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available for sale equity securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial services industry
|
|
$
|
7,148
|
|
|
$
|
7,148
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total available for sale
equity securities
|
|
|
7,148
|
|
|
|
7,148
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total available for sale securities
|
|
$
|
18,210,332
|
|
|
$
|
7,148
|
|
|
$
|
18,203,184
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets that were measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis at June 30, 2011 were
impaired loans (which included non-performing commercial and construction loans and loans classified
as troubled debt restructurings all of which are collateral dependent) and foreclosed real estate.
Loans evaluated for impairment in accordance with FASB guidance
amounted to $49.5 million and $16.7 million at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively.
Based on this evaluation, we established an ALL of $4.9 million and $5.1 million for those
respective periods. The provision for loan losses related to these loans amounted to $0 and
$659,000 for the first six months of 2011 and 2010, respectively. These impaired loans are
individually assessed to determine that the loans carrying value is not in excess of the fair
value of the collateral, less estimated selling costs. Since all of our impaired loans at June 30,
2011 are secured by real estate, fair value is estimated through current appraisals, where
practical, or an inspection and a comparison
Page 26
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
of the property securing the loan with similar properties in the area by either a licensed
appraiser or real estate broker and, as such, are classified as Level 3.
Foreclosed real estate represents real estate acquired as a result of foreclosure or by deed in
lieu of foreclosure and is carried at the lower of cost or fair value less estimated selling costs.
Fair value is estimated through current appraisals, where practical, or an inspection and a
comparison of the property securing the loan with similar properties in the area by either a
licensed appraiser or real estate broker and, as such, foreclosed real estate properties are
classified as Level 3. Foreclosed real estate at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 amounted to
$38.4 million and $45.7 million, respectively. During the first six months of 2011 and
2010, charge-offs to the ALL related to loans that were transferred to foreclosed real estate
amounted to $1.9 million and $2.8 million, respectively. Write downs and net gains or losses on sale related
to foreclosed real estate that were charged to non-interest expense amounted to $2.8 million and
$1.5 million for those same respective periods.
The following table provides the level of valuation assumptions used to determine the carrying
value of our assets measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis at June 30, 2011 and December
31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements at June 30, 2011 using
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in Active
|
|
Significant Other
|
|
Significant
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Markets for Identical
|
|
Observable Inputs
|
|
Unobservable Inputs
|
|
Gains
|
Description
|
|
Assets (Level 1)
|
|
(Level 2)
|
|
(Level 3)
|
|
(Losses)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impaired loans
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
49,463
|
|
|
$
|
(875
|
)
|
Foreclosed real estate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,364
|
|
|
|
(2,829
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements at December 31, 2010 using
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in Active
|
|
Significant Other
|
|
Significant
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Markets for Identical
|
|
Observable Inputs
|
|
Unobservable Inputs
|
|
Gains
|
Description
|
|
Assets (Level 1)
|
|
(Level 2)
|
|
(Level 3)
|
|
(Losses)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impaired loans
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
16,721
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Foreclosed real estate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45,693
|
|
|
|
(2,739
|
)
|
The following table provides a reconciliation of assets measured at fair value on a
non-recurring basis at June 30, 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Using
|
|
|
|
Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
Foreclosed
|
|
|
Impaired
|
|
|
|
Real Estate
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
Beginning balance at December 31, 2010
|
|
$
|
45,693
|
|
|
$
|
16,721
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
(2,829
|
)
|
|
|
(875
|
)
|
Net transfers in (out)
|
|
|
(4,500
|
)
|
|
|
33,617
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance at June 30, 2011
|
|
$
|
38,364
|
|
|
$
|
49,463
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 27
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
b) Fair Value Disclosures
The fair value of financial instruments represents the estimated amounts at which the asset or
liability could be exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties, other than in a
forced liquidation sale. These estimates are subjective in nature, involve uncertainties and
matters of judgment and, therefore, cannot be determined with precision. Changes in assumptions
could significantly affect the estimates. Further, certain tax implications related to the
realization of the unrealized gains and losses could have a substantial impact on these fair value
estimates and have not been incorporated into any of the estimates.
Carrying amounts of cash, due from banks and federal funds sold are considered to approximate fair
value. The carrying value of FHLB stock equals cost. The fair value of FHLB stock is based on
redemption at par value.
The fair value of one- to four-family mortgages and home equity loans are generally estimated using
the present value of expected future cash flows, assuming future prepayments and using market rates
for new loans with comparable credit risk. This method of estimating fair value does not
incorporate the exit-price concept of fair value prescribed by ASC Topic 820.
For time deposits and fixed-maturity borrowed funds, the fair value is estimated by discounting
estimated future cash flows using currently offered rates. Structured borrowed funds are valued
using an option valuation model which uses assumptions for anticipated calls of borrowings based on
market interest rates and weighted-average life. For deposit liabilities payable on demand, the
fair value is the carrying value at the reporting date. There is no material difference between
the fair value and the carrying amounts recognized with respect to our off-balance sheet
commitments.
Other important elements that are not deemed to be financial assets or liabilities and, therefore,
not considered in these estimates include the value of Hudson City Bancorps retail branch delivery
system, its existing core deposit base and banking premises and equipment.
The estimated fair value of Hudson City Bancorps financial instruments are summarized as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2011
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
Estimated
|
|
Carrying
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Amount
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and due from banks
|
|
$
|
146,701
|
|
|
$
|
146,701
|
|
|
$
|
175,769
|
|
|
$
|
175,769
|
|
Federal funds sold
|
|
|
566,950
|
|
|
|
566,950
|
|
|
|
493,628
|
|
|
|
493,628
|
|
Investment securities held to maturity
|
|
|
3,638,950
|
|
|
|
3,601,261
|
|
|
|
3,939,006
|
|
|
|
3,867,488
|
|
Investment securities available for sale
|
|
|
7,221
|
|
|
|
7,221
|
|
|
|
89,795
|
|
|
|
89,795
|
|
Federal Home Loan Bank of New York stock
|
|
|
767,064
|
|
|
|
767,064
|
|
|
|
871,940
|
|
|
|
871,940
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities held to maturity
|
|
|
4,896,216
|
|
|
|
5,175,111
|
|
|
|
5,914,372
|
|
|
|
6,199,507
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities available for sale
|
|
|
10,484,264
|
|
|
|
10,484,264
|
|
|
|
18,120,537
|
|
|
|
18,120,537
|
|
Loans
|
|
|
30,203,196
|
|
|
|
32,376,816
|
|
|
|
30,773,956
|
|
|
|
32,328,933
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits
|
|
|
25,554,601
|
|
|
|
25,856,280
|
|
|
|
25,173,126
|
|
|
|
25,584,478
|
|
Borrowed funds
|
|
|
21,125,000
|
|
|
|
23,510,566
|
|
|
|
29,675,000
|
|
|
|
32,975,633
|
|
Page 28
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
9. Postretirement Benefit Plans
We maintain non-contributory retirement and post-retirement plans to cover employees hired prior to
August 1, 2005, including retired employees, who have met the eligibility requirements of the
plans. Benefits under the qualified and non-qualified defined benefit retirement plans are based
primarily on years of service and compensation. Funding of the qualified retirement plan is
actuarially determined on an annual basis. It is our policy to fund the qualified retirement plan
sufficiently to meet the minimum requirements set forth in the Employee Retirement Income Security
Act of 1974. The non-qualified retirement plan, which is maintained for certain employees, is
unfunded.
In 2005, we limited participation in the non-contributory retirement plan and the post-retirement
benefit plan to those employees hired on or before July 31, 2005. We also placed a cap on paid
medical expenses at the 2007 rate, beginning in 2008, for those eligible employees who retire after
December 31, 2005. As part of our acquisition of Sound Federal Bancorp, Inc. (Sound Federal) in
2006, participation in the Sound Federal retirement plans and the accrual of benefits for such
plans were frozen as of the acquisition date.
The components of the net periodic expense for the plans were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Three Months Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
Retirement Plans
|
|
|
Other Benefits
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service cost
|
|
$
|
1,123
|
|
|
$
|
1,018
|
|
|
$
|
250
|
|
|
$
|
152
|
|
Interest cost
|
|
|
2,190
|
|
|
|
2,076
|
|
|
|
646
|
|
|
|
476
|
|
Expected return on assets
|
|
|
(3,080
|
)
|
|
|
(2,914
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
945
|
|
|
|
680
|
|
|
|
332
|
|
|
|
66
|
|
Unrecognized prior service cost
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
85
|
|
|
|
(391
|
)
|
|
|
(391
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net periodic benefit cost
|
|
$
|
1,265
|
|
|
$
|
945
|
|
|
$
|
837
|
|
|
$
|
303
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Six Months Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
Retirement Plans
|
|
|
Other Benefits
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service cost
|
|
$
|
2,246
|
|
|
$
|
2,036
|
|
|
$
|
501
|
|
|
$
|
304
|
|
Interest cost
|
|
|
4,380
|
|
|
|
4,152
|
|
|
|
1,292
|
|
|
|
952
|
|
Expected return on assets
|
|
|
(6,160
|
)
|
|
|
(5,828
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
1,890
|
|
|
|
1,360
|
|
|
|
664
|
|
|
|
132
|
|
Unrecognized prior service cost
|
|
|
174
|
|
|
|
170
|
|
|
|
(783
|
)
|
|
|
(782
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net periodic benefit cost
|
|
$
|
2,530
|
|
|
$
|
1,890
|
|
|
$
|
1,675
|
|
|
$
|
606
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We made no contributions to the pension plans during the first six months of 2011 or 2010.
Page 29
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
10. Stock-Based Compensation
Stock Option Plans
A summary of the changes in outstanding stock options is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Six Months Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
Options
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
Options
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
Outstanding at beginning of period
|
|
|
28,129,885
|
|
|
$
|
12.68
|
|
|
|
24,262,692
|
|
|
$
|
12.51
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
1,567,119
|
|
|
|
9.53
|
|
|
|
4,195,000
|
|
|
|
13.13
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(6,412
|
)
|
|
|
5.96
|
|
|
|
(126,387
|
)
|
|
|
6.53
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(7,500
|
)
|
|
|
12.76
|
|
|
|
(47,500
|
)
|
|
|
14.79
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at end of period
|
|
|
29,683,092
|
|
|
$
|
12.51
|
|
|
|
28,283,805
|
|
|
$
|
12.63
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In June 2006, our shareholders approved the Hudson City Bancorp, Inc. 2006 Stock Incentive
Plan (the SIP) authorizing us to grant up to 30,000,000 shares of common stock. In July 2006, the
Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Hudson City Bancorp (the Committee),
authorized grants to each non-employee director, executive officers and other employees to purchase
shares of the Companys common stock, pursuant to the 2006 SIP. Grants of stock options made
through December 31, 2010 pursuant to the 2006 SIP amounted to 23,120,000 options at an exercise
price equal to the fair value of our common stock on the grant date, based on quoted market prices.
Of these options, 6,067,500 have vesting periods ranging from one to five years and an expiration
period of ten years. The remaining 17,052,500 shares have vesting periods ranging from two to
three years if certain financial performance measures are met. The financial performance measures
for each of these awards, other than the performance stock options granted in 2010 (2010 grants),
have either been met, or are considered, subject to review and verification of the Committee,
probable to be met, so we have recorded compensation expenses for these awards accordingly. The
Company has determined that it is more likely than not that one of the two performance measures
related to the 2010 option grants will not be met. As a result, the Company expects that half of
the 2010 option grants will vest and the expense for these options has been adjusted accordingly.
In April 2011, our shareholders approved the Hudson City Bancorp, Inc. Amended and Restated 2011
Stock Incentive Plan (the 2011 SIP) authorizing us to grant up to 28,750,000 shares of common
stock including the 2,070,000 shares remaining under the 2006 SIP. During 2011, the Committee
authorized stock option grants (the 2011 option grants) pursuant to the 2011 SIP for 1,567,119
options at an exercise price equal to the fair value of our common stock on the grant date, based
on quoted market prices. Of these options, 1,256,700 will vest in April 2014 if certain financial
performance measures are met and employment continues through the vesting date (the 2011
Performance Options). The remaining 310,419 options will vest in April 2012 (the 2011 Retention
Options). The 2011 option grants have an expiration period of ten years. We have determined that
it is probable these performance measures for the 2011 Performance Options will be met and have
recorded compensation expense for the those grants accordingly.
The fair value of the 2011 option grants was estimated as of the date of grant using the
Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the following weighted average assumptions
.
The dividend
yield assumption for the
Page 30
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
2011 option grants was based on our current declared dividend as a percentage of the stock price on
the grant date. The expected volatility assumption was calculated based on the weighting of our
historical and rolling volatility for the expected term of the option grants. The risk-free
interest rate was determined by reference to the continuously compounded yield on Treasury
obligations for the expected term. The expected option life was based on historic optionee behavior
for prior option grant awards.
As a result of low employee turnover, the assumption regarding the forfeiture rate of option grants
had no effect on the fair value estimate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
2011
|
|
|
Retention Options
|
|
Performance Options
|
Expected dividend yield
|
|
|
3.37
|
%
|
|
|
3.37
|
%
|
Expected volatility
|
|
|
43.54
|
%
|
|
|
36.93
|
%
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
1.06
|
%
|
|
|
2.01
|
%
|
Expected option life
|
|
3 years
|
|
5 years
|
Fair value of options granted
|
|
$
|
2.32
|
|
|
$
|
2.39
|
|
Compensation expense related to our outstanding stock options amounted to $2.3 million and
$2.6 million for the three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively and $4.5 million and
$5.2 million, for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
Stock Awards
During 2009, the Committee granted performance-based stock awards (the 2009 stock awards)
pursuant to the 2006 SIP for 847,750 shares of our common stock. These shares were issued from
treasury stock and will vest in annual installments over a three-year period if certain performance
measures are met and employment continues through the vesting date. None of the unvested shares
may be sold or transferred before their January 2012 vesting date. We have determined that it is
probable these performance measures will be met and have therefore recorded compensation expense
for the 2009 stock awards. Expense for the 2009 stock awards is recognized over the vesting period
and is based on the fair value of the shares on the grant date which was $12.03. In addition to
the 2009 stock awards, grants were made in 2010 (the 2010 stock awards) pursuant to the 2006 SIP
for 18,000 shares of our common stock. Expense for the 2010 stock awards is recognized over the
vesting period of three years and is based on the fair value of the shares on the grant date which
was $13.12. Total compensation expense for stock awards amounted to $870,000 for both the three
months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and $1.7 million and $2.0 million, for the six
months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
Stock Unit Awards
Hudson City Bancorp granted stock unit awards to a newly appointed member of the Board of Directors
in July 2010. These awards were for a value of $250,000 which was converted to common stock
equivalents (stock units) of 20,661 shares. These units vest annually over a three-year period if
service continues through the vesting dates. Vested units will be settled in shares of our common
stock following the directors departure from the Board of Directors. Stock unit awards were also
made in 2011 (the 2011 stock unit awards) pursuant to the 2011 SIP for a total value of $9.4
million, or stock units of 968,130 shares. 2011 stock unit awards to employees vest if service
continues through the third anniversary of the awards, and will be settled, if vested, in shares of
our common stock on the third and fifth anniversaries of the awards. 2011 stock unit awards to
directors vest if service continues through the first anniversary of the award, and are settled in
shares of our common stock following the directors departure from the Board of Directors. Expense
for the stock unit awards is recognized over their vesting period and is based on the fair
Page 31
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
value of our common stock on each stock unit grant date, based on quoted market prices. Total
compensation expense for stock unit awards amounted to $914,000 and $976,000 for the three and six
month periods ended June 30, 2011. There was no compensation expense related to stock unit awards
for the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2010.
11. Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In June 2011, FASB issued ASU No. 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Presentation of
Comprehensive Income. This update allows an entity the option to present the total of comprehensive
income, the components of net income, and the components of other comprehensive income either in a
single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements.
In either option, an entity is required to present each component of net income along with total
net income, each component of other comprehensive income along with a total for other comprehensive
income, and a total amount for comprehensive income. This update eliminates the presentation of
other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in shareholders equity. The
amendments in this update do not change the items reported in other comprehensive income or when an
item of other comprehensive income must be reclassified to net income. This guidance is effective
for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2011. We do
not expect this ASU will have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operations
or financial statement disclosures.
In April 2011, FASB issued ASU No. 2011-04, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Amendments to
Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and International
Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs). The amendments in this update result in common fair value
measurement and disclosure requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs which include (1) application of the
highest and best use and valuation premise concepts. The amendments specify that the concepts of
highest and best use and valuation premise in a fair value measurement are relevant only when
measuring the fair value of nonfinancial assets; (2) include requirements specific to
measuring the fair value of those instruments, such as equity interests issued as consideration in
a business combination; (3) clarify that a reporting entity should disclose quantitative
information about the unobservable inputs used in a fair value measurement that is categorized
within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy; (4) permit an exception to the requirements in
Topic 820 for measuring fair value when a reporting entity manages its financial instruments on the
basis of its net exposure, rather than its gross exposure, to those risks. The exception permits a
reporting entity to measure the fair value of such financial assets and financial liabilities at
the price that would be received to sell a net asset position for a particular risk or to transfer
a net liability position for a particular risk in an orderly transaction between market
participants at the measurement date; and (5) expanded disclosures about fair value measurements
for recurring Level 3 fair value measurements to include the valuation processes used by the
reporting entity and the sensitivity of the fair value measurement to changes in unobservable
inputs and the interrelationships between those unobservable inputs. In addition, reporting
entities must categorize by level of the fair value hierarchy for items that are not measured at
fair value in the statement of financial position but for which the fair value is required to be
disclosed. This guidance is effective for interim periods beginning after December 15, 2011. We do
not expect this ASU will have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operations
or financial statement disclosures.
In April 2011, FASB issued ASU No. 2011-03, Transfers and Servicing (Topic 860): Reconsideration of
Effective Control for Repurchase Agreements. This ASU addresses the criteria used to determine
whether a repurchase agreement should be accounted for as a sale or as a secured borrowing. The
amendment in this ASU remove from the assessment of effective control the criterion requiring the
transferors ability to repurchase or redeem the financial assets on substantially the agreed
terms, even in the event of default by the transferee. The amendments also eliminate the
requirement to demonstrate that the transferor possesses
Page 32
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
adequate collateral to fund substantially all the cost of purchasing replacement financial assets.
Other criteria applicable to the assessment of effective control are not changed by the amendments
in this ASU. The new guidance is effective for the first interim or annual period beginning on or
after December 15, 2011. The guidance is to be applied prospectively to transactions or
modification of existing transactions that occur on or after the effective date. Early adoption is
not permitted. We do not expect this ASU will have a material impact on our financial condition,
results of operations or financial statement disclosures.
In April 2011, FASB issued ASU No. 2011-02, Receivables (Topic 310): A Creditors Determination of
Whether a Restructuring Is a Troubled Debt Restructuring. This ASU amends Topic 310 and provides
additional guidance to creditors for evaluating whether a modification or restructuring of a
receivable is a troubled debt restructuring. The amendments in this update are effective for the
first interim or annual period beginning on or after June 15, 2011 and should be applied
retrospectively to the beginning of the annual period of adoption. The new guidance will require
creditors to evaluate modifications and restructurings of receivables using a more principles-based
approach, which may result in more modifications and restructurings being considered troubled debt
restructurings. For purposes of measuring impairment of these receivables, an entity should apply
the amendments prospectively for the first interim or annual period beginning on or after June 15,
2011. Early adoption is permitted. We adopted this accounting standards update on April 1, 2011.
The adoption of ASU No. 2011-02 did not have a material impact on our financial condition or
results of operations. The financial statement disclosures are included in footnote 6 to the
unaudited consolidated financial statements.
In January 2010, FASB issued an accounting standards update regarding disclosure requirements for
fair value measurement. This update provides amendments to fair value measurement that require new
disclosures related to transfers in and out of Levels 1 and 2 and activity in Level 3 fair value
measurements. The update also provides amendments clarifying level of disaggregation and
disclosures about inputs and valuation techniques along with conforming amendments to the guidance
on employers disclosures about postretirement benefit plan assets. This update is effective for
interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2009, except for the disclosures
about purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements in the rollforward of activity in Level 3 fair
value measurements which are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010, and for
interim periods within those fiscal years. This accounting standards update did not have a
material impact on our financial condition or results of operations. The financial statement
disclosures are included in footnote 8 to the unaudited consolidated financial statements.
Page 33
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
Executive Summary
We continue to focus on our traditional consumer-oriented business model by growing our franchise
through the origination and purchase of one- to four-family mortgage loans. We have traditionally
funded this loan production with customer deposits and borrowings.
During the first quarter of 2011, the Bank completed a restructuring of its balance sheet (referred
to as the Restructuring Transaction) which involved the extinguishment of $12.5 billion of
structured putable borrowings with an average cost of 3.56%. The extinguishment of the borrowings
was funded by the sale of $8.66 billion of securities with an average yield of 3.20% and $5.00
billion of new short-term fixed-maturity borrowings with an average cost of 0.66%. The
Restructuring Transaction reduced after-tax earnings by $649.3 million. The Restructuring
Transaction is part of our ongoing strategy to reduce interest rate risk and realign our funding
mix and had the beneficial effect of increasing our net interest margin from the fourth quarter of
2010. We decided to complete the Restructuring Transaction because recent market events, the
unprecedented involvement of the U.S. government and the GSEs in the mortgage market and the
continuance of historically low market interest rates, resulted in an environment in which our
balance sheet as a whole and our assets in particular became less responsive to current market
conditions. The extended low interest rate environment caused accelerated prepayment speeds on our
mortgage-related assets resulting in reinvestment in these instruments at the current low market
interest rates. These lower-yielding assets and higher-cost borrowings, which did not reprice
during this extended low rate environment, caused interest rate risk and margin compression
concerns for us. Accordingly, we undertook the Restructuring Transaction at a time when market
interest rates were beginning to increase with the intent of preserving our shareholders equity as
much as reasonably possible and yet executing a trade that we believed would increase our forward
earnings potential. We chose to extinguish structured quarterly putable borrowings to address
interest rate risk and liquidity concerns that this extended low interest rate environment
exacerbated. We expect that this transaction will position us to eventually return to our core
strategy of measured balance sheet growth funded with appropriately matched liabilities. As a
result of this transaction, we should be properly positioned to do this when the market conditions
change. When the anticipated GSE reform is enacted and a substantial portion of the mortgage market
is returned to the private sector, we believe we will be able to capture a greater share of this
market more profitably. In the second quarter of 2011 we modified $4.0 billion of the remaining
structured putable borrowings to reduce our exposure to interest rate movements by eliminating the
put options. The weighted average cost of the borrowings modified increased by approximately 48
basis points.
Net income amounted to $96.0 million for the second quarter of 2011, as compared to $142.6 million
for the second quarter of 2010. Primarily as a result of the Restructuring Transaction, we had a
net loss of $459.7 million for the first six months of 2011, as compared to net income of
$291.5 million for the first six months of 2010.
Our results of operations depend primarily on net interest income, which in part, is a direct
result of the market interest rate environment. Net interest income is the difference between the
interest income we earn on our interest-earning assets, primarily mortgage loans, mortgage-backed
securities and investment securities, and the interest we pay on our interest-bearing liabilities,
primarily time deposits, interest-bearing transaction accounts and borrowed funds. Net interest
income is affected by the shape of the market yield curve, the timing of the placement and
repricing of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities on our balance sheet, the
prepayment rate on our mortgage-related assets and the puts of
Page 34
our borrowings. Our results of operations may also be affected significantly by national and local
economic and competitive conditions, particularly those with respect to changes in market interest
rates, credit quality, government policies and actions of regulatory authorities. Our results are
also affected by the market price of our stock, as the expense of our employee stock ownership plan
is related to the current price of our common stock.
The Federal Open Market Committee of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the
FOMC) noted that the economic recovery is continuing at a moderate pace, though somewhat more
slowly than the FOMC expected. The FOMC also expressed concerns regarding recent labor market
indicators which have been weaker than anticipated. The FOMC noted that household spending and
business investment in equipment and software continue to expand. However, investment in
non-residential structures is still weak, and the housing sector continues to be depressed. The
national unemployment rate remains elevated and increased to 9.2% in June from 8.8% in March and
was slightly lower than the 9.4% unemployment rate in December 2010. The FOMC decided to maintain
the overnight lending rate at zero to 0.25% during the second quarter of 2011. As a result,
short-term market interest rates have remained at low levels during the first six months of 2011.
The yields on mortgage-related assets have also remained at low levels during that same quarter
and, as a result, prepayments of mortgage-related assets continued at elevated levels.
Net interest income decreased $44.6 million, or 14.1%, to $272.9 million for the second quarter of
2011 as compared to $317.5 million for the second quarter of 2010. Our net interest rate spread
increased to 1.94% for the second quarter of 2011 as compared to 1.50% for the first quarter of
2011 and 1.89% for the second quarter of 2010. Our net interest margin increased to 2.14% for the
second quarter of 2011 as compared to 1.72% for the linked first quarter of 2011 and 2.13% for the
second quarter of 2010. These increases were due primarily to the effects of the Restructuring
Transaction which included the extinguishment of $12.5 billion of structured putable borrowings
with an average cost of 3.56%. The extinguishment of the borrowings was funded by the sale of $8.66
billion of securities with an average yield of 3.20% and $5.00 billion of new short-term
fixed-maturity borrowings with an average cost of 0.66%.
Net interest income decreased $119.4 million, or 18.4%, to $529.3 million for the first six months
of 2011 as compared to $648.7 million for the first six months of 2010. During the first six
months of 2011, our net interest rate spread decreased 22 basis points to 1.71% and our net
interest margin decreased 25 basis points to 1.92% as compared to 2.17% for the same period in
2010. Mortgage-related assets represented 88.8% of our average interest-earning assets during the
2011 second quarter.
Market interest rates on mortgage-related assets remained at near-historic lows primarily due to
the FRBs program to purchase mortgage-backed securities to keep mortgage rates low and provide
stimulus to the housing markets. In addition, over the past few years, we have faced increased
competition for mortgage loans due to the unprecedented involvement of the GSEs in the mortgage
market as a result of the economic crisis. The GSEs involvement is also an attempt to provide
stimulus to the housing markets and has caused the interest rates for thirty year fixed rate
mortgage loans that conform to the GSEs guidelines for purchase to remain artificially low. We
originate such conforming loans and retain them in our portfolio. The United States Congress has
extended to September 2011 the time period within which the GSEs may purchase loans under an
expanded limit on principal balances that qualify as conforming loans. Further, we have no
indication that the FOMC is likely to increase rates in the near
future. We expect
this adverse environment for portfolio lending to continue, with the likely result that we will
continue to experience compression of our net interest margin from
its new higher level that resulted
Page 35
from the
Restructuring Transaction. We expect that this compression in net
interest margin, along with the reduction in the size of our
balance sheet from the Restructuring Transaction, will result in a reduction of net interest income.
The provision for loan losses amounted to $30.0 million and $70.0 million for the three and six
month periods ended June 30, 2011 as compared to $50.0 million and $100.0 million for the three and
six month periods ended June 30, 2010. The decrease in our provision for loan losses during the
first six months of 2011 as compared to the same period in 2010 was a result of a stabilization in
both the level of net charge-offs and the growth rate of non-performing loans as well as a decrease
in the size of the loan portfolio. Non-performing loans, defined as non-accruing loans and
accruing loans delinquent 90 days or more, amounted to $914.2 million at June 30, 2011 compared
with $871.3 million at December 31, 2010. The ratio of non-performing loans to total loans was
3.01% at June 30, 2011 compared with 2.82% at December 31, 2010. The highly publicized foreclosure
issues that have recently affected the nations largest mortgage loan servicers have resulted in
greater bank regulatory, court and state attorney general scrutiny. As a result, our foreclosure
process and the time to complete a foreclosure have been delayed. We are now experiencing a time
frame to repayment or foreclosure ranging from 30 to 36 months from the initial non-performing
period. This protracted foreclosure process delays our ability to resolve non-performing loans
through the sale of the underlying collateral and our ability to maximize any recoveries.
Total non-interest income was $2.7 million for the second quarter 2011 as compared to $33.2 million
for the same quarter in 2010. Included in non-interest income for the second quarter of 2010 were
net gains on securities transactions of $30.6 million which resulted from the sale of $515.2
million of mortgage-backed securities available-for-sale. There were no security sales during the
three months ended June 30, 2011.
Total non-interest income was $107.9 million for the six months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to
$66.2 million for the same period in 2010. Included in non-interest income for the six months ended
June 30, 2011 were net gains on securities transactions of $102.5 million which resulted from the
sale of $9.04 billion of securities available-for-sale. Substantially all of the proceeds from the
sale of securities were used to repay borrowings as part of the Restructuring Transaction.
Included in non-interest income for the six months ended June 30, 2010 were net gains on securities
transactions of $61.4 million which resulted from the sale of $1.09 billion of mortgage-backed
securities available-for-sale.
Total non-interest expense amounted to $85.8 million for the second quarter of 2011 as compared to
$64.6 million for the second quarter of 2010. This increase was due primarily to a $19.9 million
increase in Federal deposit insurance assessments and a $4.1 million increase in other non-interest
expense, partially offset by a $2.9 million decrease in compensation and employee benefits.
Total non-interest expense amounted to $1.33 billion for the six months ended June 30, 2011 as
compared to $131.1 million for the six months ended June 30, 2010. Included in total non-interest
expense for the first six months of 2011 was a $1.17 billion loss on the extinguishment of debt
related to the Restructuring Transaction. Compensation and employee benefit costs decreased $6.2
million primarily due to a $10.5 million decrease in expense related to our stock benefit plans.
Federal deposit insurance expense increased $23.6 million and other expense increased $5.6 million.
Our assets decreased by $9.39 billion, or 15.4%, to $51.78 billion at June 30, 2011 from $61.17
billion at December 31, 2010. The decrease was due primarily to the Restructuring Transaction
which resulted in an $8.65 billion reduction in total mortgage-backed securities.
Page 36
Loans decreased $570.8 million to $30.20 billion at June 30, 2011 from $30.77 billion at December
31, 2010. Our loan production was $2.99 billion for the six months ended June 30, 2011 offset by
$3.46 billion in principal repayments. For the six months ended June 30, 2010, our loan production
was $3.37 billion and principal repayments amounted to $2.90 billion. The decrease in loans was
due to the lower
loan production in 2011 as compared to the same period in 2010 and the increased levels of
repayments due primarily to elevated levels of refinancing activity caused by low market interest
rates.
Total securities decreased $9.03 billion to $19.03 billion at June 30, 2011 from $28.06 billion at
December 31, 2010. The decrease in securities was primarily due to sales of mortgage-backed and
investment securities of $8.96 billion and $80.0 million, respectively, and principal collections
on mortgage-backed securities of $2.51 billion. The sales of securities during the first six
months of 2011 were primarily used to help fund the extinguishment of $12.5 billion of borrowed
funds as part of the Restructuring Transaction. These decreases were partially offset by purchases
of $2.97 billion of mortgage-backed securities issued by GSEs.
Recent Developments
On June 24, 2011, the Bank entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the OTS (the MOU),
which was reviewed and approved by the Banks Board of Directors (the Bank MOU). In accordance
with the Bank MOU, the Bank has adopted and has implemented enhanced operating policies and
procedures, that will enable us to continue to (a) reduce our level
of interest rate risk, (b) reduce our funding concentration, (c) diversify our funding sources, (d)
enhance our liquidity position, (e) monitor and manage loan modifications and (f) maintain our
capital position in accordance with our existing capital plan. In addition, we agreed to implement an
increased governance structure over compliance and risk management practices including the
establishment of a Risk Committee of the Board of Directors.
The Company also entered into a separate MOU with the OTS (the Company MOU). In accordance with
the Company MOU, the Company must, among other things support the Banks compliance with the Bank
MOU. The Company MOU also requires the Company to: (a) provide notice to the regulators in
accordance with published regulatory guidance prior to declaring a dividend to shareholders and (b)
provide notice to and obtain written non-objection from the regulators prior to the Company
incurring any debt outside the ordinary course of business. The Company MOU does not affect our
dividend policy and our current dividend to shareholders is consistent with our capital plan.
These agreements will remain in effect until modified or terminated by the OCC (with respect to the Bank MOU) and the FRB (with respect to the Company MOU), the successors to the OTS. We have been
updating and revising policies and implementing programs to comply with the provisions of the Bank
MOU and Company MOU, and as to many of the provisions, we believe that the Company and the Bank are
already in substantial compliance and have already taken many of the steps contemplated by the
MOUs.
Among our recent actions has been hiring a new Chief Risk Officer and a new Chief Compliance
Officer, establishing an enterprise risk management department, reorganizing and centralizing our
compliance function, enhancing our technology function and risk assessment capabilities and
continuing to manage our balance sheet, capital, liquidity and interest rate risk positions
consistent with the initiatives undertaken earlier this year.
Page 37
Comparison of Financial Condition at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010
Total assets decreased $9.39 billion, or 15.4%, to $51.78 billion at June 30, 2011 from $61.17
billion at December 31, 2010. The decrease in total assets reflected an $8.65 billion decrease in
total mortgage-backed securities, a $570.8 million decrease in net loans and a $382.6 million decrease in total
investment securities. Total assets decreased primarily as a result of the Restructuring
Transaction completed in March 2011.
Our net loans decreased $570.8 million during the first six months of 2011 to $30.20 billion. The
decrease in loans primarily reflects the elevated levels of loan repayments during the first six
months of 2011 as a result of continued low market interest rates and a decrease in our loan
production. Historically our focus has been on loan portfolio growth through the origination of
one- to four-family first mortgage loans in New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and Connecticut and,
to a lesser extent, the purchases of mortgage loans. For the first six months of 2011, we
originated $2.70 billion and purchased $290.5 million of loans, compared to originations of $2.83
billion and purchases of $542.2 million for the first six months of 2010. The originations and
purchases of loans were offset by principal repayments of $3.46 billion for the first six months of
2011, as compared to $2.90 billion for the first six months of 2010.
Loan originations declined slightly for the first six months of 2011 as compared to the same period
in 2010 as the low yields on mortgage loans caused us to restrain our growth. In addition,
elevated levels of refinancing activity caused by low market interest rates have caused increased
levels of repayments to continue during the first six months of 2011. Our loan purchase activity
has also declined as sellers from whom we have historically purchased loans are either retaining
these loans in their own portfolios or selling them to the government-sponsored entities (GSEs).
The GSEs have been actively purchasing loans as part of their efforts to keep mortgage rates low to
support the housing market during the recent economic recession. We expect that the amount of loan
purchases by the Bank will continue to be at reduced levels for the near-term.
Our first mortgage loan originations and purchases during the first six months of 2011 were
substantially all in one- to four-family mortgage loans. Approximately 41.0% of mortgage loan
originations for the first six months of 2011 were variable-rate loans as compared to approximately
58.0% for the comparable period in 2010. Approximately 94.1% of mortgage loans purchased during
the six months ended June 30, 2011 were fixed-rate mortgage loans. Fixed-rate mortgage loans
accounted for 67.0% of our first mortgage loan portfolio at June 30, 2011 and 66.8% at December 31,
2010.
Non-performing loans amounted to $914.2 million, or 3.01%, of total loans at June 30, 2011 as
compared to $871.3 million, or 2.82%, of total loans at December 31, 2010.
Total mortgage-backed securities decreased $8.65 billion during the first six months of 2011 to
$15.38 billion. The decrease was due primarily to the sale of $8.96 billion of mortgage-backed
securities, substantially all of which were sold as part of the Restructuring Transaction. The
decrease in mortgage-backed securities also reflected repayments of $2.51 billion which were offset
by purchases of $2.97 billion of mortgage-backed securities issued by GSEs. At June 30, 2011,
variable-rate mortgage-backed securities accounted for 84.2% of our portfolio compared with 85.9%
at December 31, 2010. The purchase of variable-rate mortgage-backed securities is a component of
our interest rate risk management strategy. Since our loan portfolio includes a concentration of
fixed-rate mortgage loans, the purchase of variable-rate mortgage-backed securities provides us
with an asset that reduces our exposure to interest rate fluctuations.
Page 38
Total investment securities decreased $382.6 million to $3.65 billion at June 30, 2011 as compared
to $4.03 billion at December 31, 2010. The decrease in investment securities is primarily due to
calls of $300.0 million and the sales of investment securities of $80.0 million as part of the
Restructuring Transaction.
Total cash and cash equivalents increased $44.3 million to $713.7 million at June 30, 2011 as
compared to $669.4 million at December 31, 2010. Other assets increased $320.9 million to $595.1
million at June 30, 2011 as compared to $274.2 million at December 31, 2010. The increase in other
assets is due to an increase in accrued tax assets of $366.2 million. The increase in accrued tax
benefit is due primarily to the Restructuring Transaction which reduced pre-tax earnings by $1.07
billion and resulted in an income tax benefit of $424.5 million.
Total liabilities decreased $8.77 billion, or 15.8%, to $46.89 billion at June 30, 2011 from $55.66
billion at December 31, 2010. The decrease in total liabilities reflected an $8.55 billion
decrease in borrowed funds partially offset by a $381.5 million increase in total deposits.
Total deposits increased $381.5 million, or 1.5%, to $25.55 billion at June 30, 2011 as compared to
$25.17 billion at December 31, 2010. The increase in total deposits reflected a $1.87 billion
increase in our money market accounts. These increases were partially offset by a decrease of $1.33
billion in our time deposits and a $184.9 million decrease in interest-bearing transaction accounts. The increase in our money market accounts is primarily due to our offering a
highly competitive rate which is comparable to the rates being offered on time deposits with
maturities of up to thirteen months. Deposit flows are typically affected by the level of market
interest rates, the interest rates and products offered by competitors, the volatility of equity
markets, and other factors. We had 135 branches at both June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010.
Borrowings amounted to $21.13 billion at June 30, 2011 as compared to $22.03 billion at March 31,
2011 and $29.68 billion at December 31, 2010. As part of the Restructuring Transaction, we paid
off $12.5 billion of structured putable borrowings and re-borrowed $5.0 billion of new short-term
fixed-maturity borrowings which began to mature in April 2011 and continuing through November 2012
at a rate of $250.0 million per month. It is our intention to repay these borrowings as they
mature. The extinguishment of structured putable borrowings was a necessary step in our efforts to
reduce our interest rate risk and eliminate some of the liquidity uncertainties of borrowings that
are putable at the discretion of the lender. During the six months ended June 30, 2011, we
modified $4.0 billion of structured putable borrowings to eliminate the put option thereby further
reducing our interest rate risk. All of these modifications took place during the second quarter
of 2011. The weighted average cost of the borrowings modified increased by approximately 48 basis
points.
Page 39
Borrowings at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 consisted of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2011
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Rate
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Rate
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Structured borrowings:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarterly put option
|
|
$
|
7,725,000
|
|
|
|
4.31
|
%
|
|
$
|
24,125,000
|
|
|
|
3.94
|
%
|
One-time put option
|
|
|
4,600,000
|
|
|
|
4.52
|
|
|
|
4,950,000
|
|
|
|
4.44
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,325,000
|
|
|
|
4.39
|
|
|
|
29,075,000
|
|
|
|
4.03
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-rate/fixed-maturity borrowings
|
|
|
8,800,000
|
|
|
|
2.76
|
|
|
|
600,000
|
|
|
|
3.47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total borrowed funds
|
|
$
|
21,125,000
|
|
|
|
3.71
|
%
|
|
$
|
29,675,000
|
|
|
|
4.02
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At June 30, 2011, we had $6.58 billion of borrowed funds with put dates within one year. If
interest rates were to decrease, or remain consistent with current rates, we believe these
borrowings would probably not be put back and our average cost of existing borrowings would not
decrease even as market interest rates decrease. Conversely, if interest rates increase above the
market interest rate for similar borrowings, we believe these borrowings would likely be put back
at their next put date and our cost to replace these borrowings would increase. However, we
believe, given current market conditions, that the likelihood that a significant portion of these
borrowings would be put back will not increase substantially unless interest rates were to increase
by at least 300 basis points.
The Company has two collateralized borrowings in the form of repurchase agreements totaling $100.0
million with Lehman Brothers, Inc. Lehman Brothers, Inc. is currently in liquidation under the
Securities Industry Protection Act. Mortgage-backed securities with an amortized cost of
approximately $114.2 million are pledged as collateral for these borrowings and we have demanded
the return of this collateral. We believe that we have the legal right to setoff our obligation to
repay the borrowings against our right to the return of the mortgage-backed securities pledged as
collateral. As a result, we believe that our potential economic loss from Lehman Brothers failure
to return the collateral is limited to the excess market value of the collateral over the $100
million repurchase price. We intend to pursue full recovery of the pledged collateral in
accordance with the contractual terms of the repurchase agreements. There can be no assurances
that the final settlement of this transaction will result in the full recovery of the collateral or
the full amount of the claim. We have not recognized a loss in our financial statements related to
these repurchase agreements as we have concluded that a loss is neither probable or estimable at
June 30, 2011.
Other liabilities decreased to $211.1 million at June 30, 2011 from $269.5 million at December
31, 2010. The decrease is primarily the result of a decrease in accrued interest payable on
borrowed funds of $53.1 million. The decrease in accrued interest payable on borrowed funds is due
to the $8.55 billion decrease in borrowed funds to $21.13 billion at June 30, 2011.
Total shareholders equity decreased $622.3 million to $4.89 billion at June 30, 2011 from $5.51
billion at December 31, 2010. The decrease was primarily due to the net loss of $459.7 million for
the six months ended June 30, 2011. The decrease was also due to cash dividends paid to common
shareholders of $113.5 million and a $60.2 million decrease in accumulated other comprehensive
income.
Page 40
The accumulated other comprehensive income of $25.2 million at June 30, 2011 included a $55.9
million after-tax net unrealized gain on securities available for sale ($94.6 million pre-tax) and
a $30.7 million after-tax accumulated other comprehensive loss related to the funded status of our
employee benefit plans. The accumulated other comprehensive income of $85.4 million at December
31, 2010 included a $117.3 million after-tax net unrealized gain on securities available for sale
($198.3 million pre-tax), partially offset by a $31.9 million after-tax accumulated other
comprehensive loss related to the funded status of our employee benefit plans. The change in the
unrealized loss on securities available-for sale was due primarily to the sale of securities in the
first quarter of 2011 which resulted in pre-tax realized gains of $102.5 million. We do not
consider the investments in an unrealized loss position at June 30, 2011 to be
other-than-temporarily impaired since the decline in market value is attributable to changes in
interest rates and not credit quality and the Company does not intend to sell and does not believe
that it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell these investments until there is a
full recovery of the unrealized loss, which may be at maturity.
As of June 30, 2011, there remained 50,123,550 shares that may be purchased under our existing
stock repurchase programs. We did not repurchase any shares of our common stock during the first
six months of 2011 pursuant to our repurchase programs. We did purchase 17,145 shares that were
surrendered by employees for withholding taxes related to vesting stock awards. Our capital ratios
remain in excess of the regulatory requirements for a well-capitalized bank. See Liquidity and
Capital Resources.
At June 30, 2011, our shareholders equity to asset ratio was 9.44% compared with 9.01% at December
31, 2010. The ratio of average shareholders equity to average assets was 9.09% for the six months
ended June 30, 2011 as compared to 8.96% for the six months ended June 30, 2010. Our book value per
share, using the period-end number of outstanding shares, less purchased but unallocated employee
stock ownership plan shares and less purchased but unvested recognition and retention plan shares,
was $9.89 at June 30, 2011 and $11.16 at December 31, 2010. Our tangible book value per share,
calculated by deducting goodwill and the core deposit intangible from shareholders equity, was
$9.58 as of June 30, 2011 and $10.85 at December 31, 2010. The decreases in our book value per
share and tangible book value per share were primarily due to the charge to income as a result of
the Restructuring Transaction and, to a lesser extent, the $60.2 million decrease in accumulated
other comprehensive income. Although our shareholders equity declined significantly due to the
charge to income as a result of the Restructuring Transaction, the decline in assets from the
Restructuring Transaction resulted in the ratio of shareholdersequity to total assets and the
ratio of average shareholders equity to average assets increasing slightly.
Page 41
Comparison of Operating Results for the Three-Month Periods Ended June 30, 2011 and 2010
Average Balance Sheet.
The following table presents the average balance sheets, average yields
and costs and certain other information for the three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010. The
table presents the annualized average yield on interest-earning assets and the annualized average
cost of interest-bearing liabilities. We derived the yields and costs by dividing annualized
income or expense by the average balance of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing
liabilities, respectively, for the periods shown. We derived average balances from daily balances
over the periods indicated. Interest income includes fees that we considered to be adjustments to
yields. Yields on tax-exempt obligations were not computed on a tax equivalent basis. Nonaccrual
loans were included in the computation of average balances and therefore have a zero yield. The
yields set forth below include the effect of deferred loan origination fees and costs, and purchase
discounts and premiums that are amortized or accreted to interest income.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Three Months Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yield/
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yield/
|
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-earnings assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First mortgage loans, net (1)
|
|
$
|
29,845,530
|
|
|
$
|
380,375
|
|
|
|
5.10
|
%
|
|
$
|
31,614,795
|
|
|
$
|
426,244
|
|
|
|
5.39
|
%
|
Consumer and other loans
|
|
|
313,139
|
|
|
|
4,077
|
|
|
|
5.21
|
|
|
|
349,749
|
|
|
|
4,654
|
|
|
|
5.32
|
|
Federal funds sold and other overnight deposits
|
|
|
480,382
|
|
|
|
707
|
|
|
|
0.29
|
|
|
|
886,378
|
|
|
|
576
|
|
|
|
0.26
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities at amortized cost
|
|
|
15,427,817
|
|
|
|
125,176
|
|
|
|
3.25
|
|
|
|
20,570,629
|
|
|
|
222,109
|
|
|
|
4.32
|
|
Federal Home Loan Bank stock
|
|
|
788,405
|
|
|
|
9,632
|
|
|
|
4.89
|
|
|
|
882,819
|
|
|
|
9,167
|
|
|
|
4.15
|
|
Investment securities, at amortized cost
|
|
|
3,919,585
|
|
|
|
32,765
|
|
|
|
3.34
|
|
|
|
5,109,046
|
|
|
|
54,830
|
|
|
|
4.29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest-earning assets
|
|
|
50,774,858
|
|
|
|
552,732
|
|
|
|
4.35
|
|
|
|
59,413,416
|
|
|
|
717,580
|
|
|
|
4.83
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noninterest-earnings assets (4)
|
|
|
1,390,039
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,600,216
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets
|
|
$
|
52,164,897
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
61,013,632
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Shareholders Equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Savings accounts
|
|
$
|
867,141
|
|
|
|
1,399
|
|
|
|
0.65
|
|
|
$
|
834,784
|
|
|
|
1,555
|
|
|
|
0.75
|
|
Interest-bearing transaction accounts
|
|
|
2,016,548
|
|
|
|
4,013
|
|
|
|
0.80
|
|
|
|
2,374,298
|
|
|
|
6,288
|
|
|
|
1.06
|
|
Money market accounts
|
|
|
7,914,933
|
|
|
|
20,689
|
|
|
|
1.05
|
|
|
|
5,179,001
|
|
|
|
12,958
|
|
|
|
1.00
|
|
Time deposits
|
|
|
14,169,657
|
|
|
|
58,259
|
|
|
|
1.65
|
|
|
|
16,302,646
|
|
|
|
74,869
|
|
|
|
1.84
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest-bearing deposits
|
|
|
24,968,279
|
|
|
|
84,360
|
|
|
|
1.36
|
|
|
|
24,690,729
|
|
|
|
95,670
|
|
|
|
1.55
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase agreements
|
|
|
7,720,330
|
|
|
|
86,795
|
|
|
|
4.51
|
|
|
|
15,100,000
|
|
|
|
154,992
|
|
|
|
4.12
|
|
Federal Home Loan Bank of New York advances
|
|
|
13,881,044
|
|
|
|
108,668
|
|
|
|
3.14
|
|
|
|
14,875,000
|
|
|
|
149,404
|
|
|
|
4.03
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total borrowed funds
|
|
|
21,601,374
|
|
|
|
195,463
|
|
|
|
3.63
|
|
|
|
29,975,000
|
|
|
|
304,396
|
|
|
|
4.07
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest-bearing liabilities
|
|
|
46,569,653
|
|
|
|
279,823
|
|
|
|
2.41
|
|
|
|
54,665,729
|
|
|
|
400,066
|
|
|
|
2.94
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noninterest-bearing liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noninterest-bearing deposits
|
|
|
577,051
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
594,131
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other noninterest-bearing liabilities
|
|
|
216,418
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
278,876
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest-bearing liabilities
|
|
|
793,469
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
873,007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
47,363,122
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55,538,736
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity
|
|
|
4,801,775
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,474,896
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities and Shareholders Equity
|
|
$
|
52,164,897
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
61,013,632
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income/net interest rate spread (2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
272,909
|
|
|
|
1.94
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
317,514
|
|
|
|
1.89
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest-earning assets/net interest margin (3)
|
|
$
|
4,205,205
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.14
|
%
|
|
$
|
4,747,687
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.13
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ratio of interest-earning assets to
interest-bearing liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.09 x
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.09
|
x
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Amount includes deferred loan costs and non-performing loans and is net of the allowance
for loan losses.
|
|
(2)
|
|
Determined by subtracting the annualized weighted average cost of total interest-bearing
liabilities from the annualized weighted average yield on total interest-earning assets.
|
|
(3)
|
|
Determined by dividing annualized net interest income by total average interest-earning assets.
|
|
(4)
|
|
Includes the average balance of principal receivable related to FHLMC mortgage-backed
securities of $133.0 million and $397.8 million for the quarters ended June 30, 2011 and 2010,
respectively.
|
Page 42
General.
Net income was $96.0 million for the second quarter of 2011, a decrease of $46.6
million, or 32.7%, compared with net income of $142.6 million for the second quarter of 2010. Both
basic and diluted earnings per common share were $0.19 for the second quarter of 2011 as compared
to basic and diluted earnings per share of $0.29, for the second quarter of 2010. For the second
quarter of 2011, our annualized return on average shareholders equity was 8.00%, compared with
10.42% for the corresponding period in 2010. Our annualized return on average assets for the second
quarter of 2011 was 0.74% as compared to 0.93% for the second quarter of 2010. The decrease in the
annualized return on average equity and assets is primarily due to the decrease in net income
during the second quarter of 2011.
Interest and Dividend Income.
Total interest and dividend income for the second quarter of 2011
decreased $164.9 million, or 23.0%, to $552.7 million from $717.6 million for the second quarter of
2010. The decrease in total interest and dividend income was due to a decrease of 48 basis points
in the annualized weighted-average yield on total interest-earning assets to 4.35% for the second
quarter of 2011 from 4.83% for the same quarter in 2010. The decrease in total interest and
dividend income was also due to a decrease in the average balance of total interest-earning assets
of $8.64 billion, or 14.5%, to $50.77 billion for the second quarter of 2011 as compared to $59.41
billion for the second quarter of 2010. The decrease in the average balance of total
interest-earning assets was due primarily to the Restructuring Transaction.
Interest on first mortgage loans decreased $45.8 million to $380.4 million for the second quarter
of 2011 as compared to $426.2 million for the second quarter of 2010. This was primarily due to a
$1.76 billion decrease in the average balance of first mortgage loans to $29.85 billion for the
second quarter of 2011 from $31.61 billion for the same quarter in 2010. During the first six
months of 2011 our mortgage loan portfolio decreased as refinancing activity resulted in continued
elevated levels of loan repayments.
The decrease in interest income on mortgage loans was also due to a 29 basis point decrease in the
weighted-average yield to 5.10% for the 2011 second quarter from 5.39% for the 2010 second quarter.
The decrease in the average yield earned was due to lower market interest rates on mortgage
products and also due to the continued mortgage refinancing activity. During the first six months
of 2011, existing mortgage customers refinanced or recast approximately $1.11 billion in mortgage
loans with a weighted average rate of 5.71% to a new weighted average rate of 4.68%. During the
first six months of 2010, existing mortgage customers refinanced or recast approximately $1.14
billion in mortgage loans with a weighted average rate of 5.93% to a new weighted average rate of
5.10%.
Interest on consumer and other loans decreased $577,000 to $4.1 million for the second quarter of
2011 from $4.7 million for the second quarter of 2010. The average balance of consumer and other
loans decreased $36.6 million to $313.1 million for the second quarter of 2011 as compared to
$349.7 million for the second quarter of 2010 and the average yield earned decreased 11 basis
points to 5.21% from 5.32% for the same respective periods.
Interest on mortgage-backed securities decreased $96.9 million to $125.2 million for the second
quarter of 2011 as compared to $222.1 million for the second quarter of 2010. This decrease was
due primarily to a $5.14 billion decrease in the average balance of mortgage-backed securities to
$15.43 billion during the second quarter of 2011 as compared to $20.57 billion for the second
quarter of 2010. The decrease in interest on mortgage-backed securities was also due to a 107 basis
point decrease in the weighted-average yield to 3.25% for the second quarter of 2011 from 4.32% for
the second quarter of 2010. The decrease
Page 43
in the average balance of mortgage-backed securities was due primarily to the effects of the
Restructuring Transaction.
The decrease in the weighted average yield on mortgage-backed securities is a result of lower
yields on securities purchased during 2010 when market interest rates were lower than the yield
earned on the existing portfolio.
Interest on investment securities decreased $22.0 million to $32.8 million for the second quarter
of 2011 as compared to $54.8 million for the second quarter of 2010. This decrease was due
primarily to a $1.19 billion decrease in the average balance of investment securities to $3.92
billion for the second quarter of 2011 from $5.11 billion for the second quarter of 2010. In
addition, the average yield earned on investment securities decreased 95 basis points to 3.34% for
the second quarter of 2011 as compared to 4.29% for the second quarter of 2010. The decrease in
the average yield earned reflects current market interest rates.
Dividends on FHLB stock increased $465,000, or 5.1%, to $9.6 million for the second quarter of 2011
as compared to $9.2 million for the second quarter of 2010. This increase was due primarily to a
74 basis point increase in the average dividend yield earned to 4.89% as compared to 4.15% for the
second quarter of 2010. The effect of the increase in the average dividend yield was partially
offset by a $94.4 million decrease in the average balance of FHLB stock to $788.4 million for the
second quarter of 2011 as compared to $882.8 million for the second quarter of 2010.
Interest on Federal funds sold amounted to $707,000 for the second quarter of 2011 as compared to
$576,000 for the second quarter of 2010. The average balance of Federal funds sold amounted to
$480.4 million for the second quarter of 2011 as compared to $886.4 million for the second quarter
of 2010. The yield earned on Federal funds sold was 0.29% for the 2011 second quarter and 0.26%
for the 2010 second quarter. The decrease in the average balance of Federal funds sold is
primarily a result of the repayment of short-term borrowings which were used to help fund the
Restructuring Transaction.
Interest Expense.
Total interest expense for the quarter ended June 30, 2011 decreased $120.3
million, or 30.1%, to $279.8 million from $400.1 million for the quarter ended June 30, 2010. This
decrease was primarily due to an $8.10 billion, or 14.8%, decrease in the average balance of total
interest-bearing liabilities to $46.57 billion for the quarter ended June 30, 2011 compared with
$54.67 billion for the second quarter of 2010. The decrease was also due to a 53 basis point
decrease in the weighted-average cost of total interest-bearing liabilities to 2.41% for the
quarter ended June 30, 2011 compared with 2.94% for the quarter ended June 30, 2010. The decrease
in the average balance of total interest-bearing liabilities was due to the reduction of total
borrowings as part of the Restructuring Transaction.
Interest expense on our time deposit accounts decreased $16.6 million to $58.3 million for the
second quarter of 2011 as compared to $74.9 million for the second quarter of 2010. This decrease
was due to a $2.13 billion decrease in the average balance of time deposit accounts to $14.17
billion for the second quarter of 2011 from $16.30 billion for the second quarter of 2010 as a
portion of our maturing time deposits transferred to our money market account. During the second
quarter of 2011, we were offering a highly competitive rate on our money market account which was
comparable to the rates being offered on time deposits with maturities of up to thirteen months.
The decrease in interest expense on time deposits was also due to a 19 basis point decrease in the
annualized weighted-average cost to 1.65% for the second quarter of 2011 compared with 1.84% for
the second quarter of 2010 as maturing time deposits were renewed or replaced by new time deposits
at lower rates. Interest expense on money market accounts increased $7.7 million to $20.7 million
for the second quarter of 2011 as compared to $13.0 million for
Page 44
the same period in 2010. This
increase was due to an increase in the average balance of $2.73 billion to
$7.91 billion for the second quarter of 2011 as compared to $5.18 billion for the second quarter of
2010. This increase was also due to an increase in the annualized weighted-average cost of 5 basis
points to 1.05% for the second quarter of 2011 compared with 1.00% for the second quarter of 2010.
Interest expense on our interest-bearing transaction accounts decreased $2.3 million to $4.0
million for the second quarter of 2011 from $6.3 million for the same period in 2010. The decrease
is due to a 26 basis point decrease in the annualized weighted-average cost to 0.80%, and a $357.8
million decrease in the average balance to $2.02 billion for the second quarter of 2011 as compared
to $2.37 billion for the second quarter of 2010.
The decrease in the average cost of deposits during 2011 reflected lower market interest rates and
our decision to lower deposit rates to slow deposit growth. At June 30, 2011, time deposits
scheduled to mature within one year totaled $9.21 billion with an average cost of 1.27%. These
time deposits are scheduled to mature as follows: $3.46 billion with an average cost of 1.02% in
the third quarter of 2011, $2.76 billion with an average cost of 1.39% in the fourth quarter of
2011, $1.76 billion with an average cost of 1.59% in the first quarter of 2012 and $1.23 billion
with an average cost of 1.24% in the second quarter of 2012. Based on our deposit retention
experience and current pricing strategy, we anticipate that a significant portion of these time
deposits will remain with us as renewed time deposits or as transfers to other deposit products at
the prevailing rate.
Interest expense on borrowed funds decreased $108.9 million to $195.5 million for the second
quarter of 2011 as compared to $304.4 million for the second quarter of 2010. This decrease was
primarily due to an $8.38 billion decrease in the average balance of borrowed funds to $21.60
billion for the second quarter of 2011 as compared to $29.98 billion for the second quarter of
2010. This decrease was also due to a 44 basis point decrease in the weighted-average cost of
borrowed funds to 3.63% for the second quarter of 2011 as compared to 4.07% for the second quarter
of 2010. The decrease in the average balance and cost of our borrowings is due to the effects of
the Restructuring Transaction. The Restructuring Transaction involved the re-borrowing of $5.00
billion of short-term fixed-rate/fixed-maturity funds with an average cost of 0.66%. These
borrowings mature at a rate of $250.0 million per month from April 2011 through November 2012. As
these borrowings mature we intend to repay them with deposit growth or with excess cash flows
received from the repayment of mortgage loans and mortgage-backed securities. Borrowings scheduled
to mature over the next 12 months are as follows: $900.0 million with an average cost of 0.94% in
the third quarter of 2011, $750.0 million with an average cost of 0.55% in the fourth quarter of
2011, $900.0 million with an average cost of 0.98% in the first quarter of 2012 and $750.0 million
with an average cost of 0.74% in the second quarter of 2012. During the first six months of 2011,
we modified $4.00 billion of structured putable borrowings to eliminate the put option thereby
further reducing our interest rate risk.
At June 30, 2011, we had $6.58 billion of borrowings with put dates within one year as compared to
$22.83 billion at December 31, 2010. We believe, given current market conditions, that the
likelihood that a significant portion of these borrowings would be put back will not increase
substantially unless interest rates were to increase by at least 300 basis points. See
Liquidity and Capital Resources.
Net Interest Income.
Net interest income decreased $44.6 million, or 14.1%, to $272.9 million
for the second quarter of 2011 as compared to $317.5 million for the second quarter of 2010. Our
net interest rate spread increased to 1.94% for the second quarter of 2011 as compared to 1.50% for
the first quarter of 2011 and 1.89% for the second quarter of 2010. Our net interest margin
increased to 2.14% for the second quarter of 2011 as compared to 1.72% for the linked first quarter
of 2011 and 2.13% for the
Page 45
second quarter of 2010. These increases were due primarily to the
effects of the Restructuring Transaction.
Provision for Loan Losses.
The provision for loan losses amounted to $30.0 million for the
quarter ended June 30, 2011 as compared to $50.0 million for the quarter ended June 30, 2010. The
ALL amounted to $262.3 million at June 30, 2011 and $236.6 million at December 31, 2010. The
decrease in the provision for loan losses for the quarter ended June 30, 2011 was due primarily to
the stabilization in both the level of net charge-offs and the growth rate of non-performing loans,
the reduction in early stage delinquencies and a decrease in the size of the loan portfolio. These
factors were tempered by the continued decline in home prices, although at a slower rate than
during the recent recessionary cycle, and continued elevated levels of unemployment. We recorded
our provision for loan losses during the first six months of 2011 based on our ALL methodology that
considers a number of quantitative and qualitative factors, including the amount of non-performing
loans, the loss experience of our non-performing loans, recent collateral valuations, conditions in
the real estate and housing markets, current economic conditions, particularly continued elevated
levels of unemployment, and growth or shrinkage in the loan portfolio. See Critical Accounting
Policies Allowance for Loan Losses.
Our primary lending emphasis is the origination and purchase of one- to four-family first mortgage
loans on residential properties and, to a lesser extent, second mortgage loans on one- to
four-family residential properties. Our loan growth is primarily concentrated in one- to
four-family mortgage loans with original LTV ratios of less than 80%. The average LTV ratio of our
2011 first mortgage loan originations and our total first mortgage loan portfolio were 66.8% and
60.8%, respectively, using the appraised value at the time of origination. The value of the
property used as collateral for our loans is dependent upon local market conditions. As part of our
estimation of the ALL, we monitor changes in the values of homes in each market using indices
published by various organizations. Based on our analysis of the data for the second quarter of
2011, we concluded that home values in our lending markets continued to decline from 2010 levels,
as evidenced by reduced levels of sales, increasing inventories of houses on the market, declining
house prices and an increase in the length of time houses remain on the market.
The national economy was in a recessionary cycle during 2009 and 2010 with the housing and real
estate markets suffering significant losses in value. Economic conditions have improved but at a
slower pace than anticipated during the second quarter of 2011. Home sale activity and real estate
valuations have remained at reduced levels during the second quarter of 2011 and unemployment,
while improving, remained at elevated levels. We continue to closely monitor the local and
national real estate markets and other factors related to risks inherent in our loan portfolio.
Non-performing loans amounted to $914.2 million at June 30, 2011 as compared to $871.3 million at
December 31, 2010 and $790.1 million at June 30, 2010. Non-performing loans at June 30, 2011
included $902.9 million of one- to four-family first mortgage loans as compared to $858.3 million
at December 31, 2010. The ratio of non-performing loans to total loans was 3.01% at June 30, 2011
compared with 2.82% at December 31, 2010 and 2.46% at June 30, 2010. Loans delinquent 30 to 59
days amounted to $408.5 million at June 30, 2011 as compared to $418.9 million at December 31, 2010
and $396.5 million at June 30, 2010. Loans delinquent 60 to 89 days amounted to $170.4 million at
June 30, 2011 as compared to $193.2 million at December 31, 2010 and $168.6 million at June 30,
2010. Accordingly, total early stage delinquencies (loans 30 to 89 days past due) declined $33.1
million to $579.0 million at June 30, 2011 from $612.1 million at December 31, 2010. Foreclosed
real estate amounted to $38.4 million at June 30, 2011 as compared to $45.7 million at December 31,
2010. As a result of our underwriting policies, our borrowers typically have a significant amount
of equity, at the time of origination, in the underlying real estate that we use as collateral for
our loans. Due to the steady
Page 46
deterioration of real estate values in recent years, the LTV ratios
based on appraisals obtained at time of origination do not necessarily indicate the extent to which
we may incur a loss on any given loan that may go into foreclosure. However, our lower average LTV
ratios have helped to moderate our charge-offs.
At June 30, 2011, the ratio of the ALL to non-performing loans was 28.69% as compared to 27.15% at
December 31, 2010 and 24.42% at June 30, 2010. The ratio of the ALL to total loans was 0.86% at
June 30, 2011 as compared to 0.77% at December 31, 2010 and 0.60% at June 30, 2010. Changes in the
ratio of the ALL to non-performing loans is not, absent other factors, an indication of the
adequacy of the ALL since there is not necessarily a direct relationship between changes in various
asset quality ratios and changes in the ALL and non-performing loans. In the current economic
environment, a loan generally becomes non-performing when the borrower experiences financial
difficulty. In many cases, the borrower also has a second mortgage or home equity loan on the
property. In substantially all of these cases, we do not hold the second mortgage or home equity
loan as this is not a business we have actively pursued.
We generally obtain new collateral values by the time a loan becomes 180 days past due. If the
estimated fair value of the collateral (less estimated selling costs) is less than the recorded
investment in the loan, we charge-off an amount to reduce the loan to the fair value of the
collateral less estimated selling costs. As a result, certain losses inherent in our
non-performing loans are being recognized as charge-offs which may result in a lower ratio of the
ALL to non-performing loans. Charge-offs amounted to $28.6 million for the second quarter of 2011
as compared to $23.4 million for the first quarter of 2011 and $24.2 million for the second quarter
of 2010. These charge-offs were primarily due to the results of our reappraisal process for our
non-performing residential first mortgage loans with 74 loans disposed of through the foreclosure
process during the first six months of 2011 with a final realized gain on sale (after previous
charge-offs and write-downs of $8.2 million) of approximately $822,000. Recoveries of amounts
previously charged-off amounted to $5.6 million for the second quarter of 2011 as compared to $2.2
million for the first quarter of 2011 and $1.3 million for the second quarter of 2010. Write-downs
on foreclosed real estate amounted to $3.7 million for the first six months of 2011. The results
of our reappraisal process and our recent charge-off history are also considered in the
determination of the ALL.
As part of our estimation of the ALL, we monitor changes in the values of homes in each market
using indices published by various organizations including the FHFA. Our Asset Quality Committee
(AQC) uses these indices and a stratification of our loan portfolio by state as part of its
quarterly determination of the ALL. We do not apply different loss factors based on geographic
locations since, at June 30, 2011, 79.9% of our loan portfolio and 72.7% of our non-performing
loans are located in the New York metropolitan area. We generally obtain updated collateral values
by the time a loan becomes 180 days past due which we believe identifies potential charge-offs more
accurately than a house price index that is based on a wide geographic area and includes many
different types of houses. However, we use the house price indices to identify geographic areas
experiencing weaknesses in housing markets to determine if an overall adjustment to the ALL is
required based on loans we have in those geographic areas and to determine if changes in the loss
factors used in the ALL quantitative analysis are necessary. Our quantitative analysis of the ALL
accounts for increases in non-performing loans by applying progressively higher risk factors to
loans as they become more delinquent.
Due to the nature of our loan portfolio, our evaluation of the adequacy of our ALL is performed
primarily on a pooled basis. Each month we prepare an analysis which categorizes the entire loan
portfolio by certain risk characteristics such as loan type (one- to four-family, multi-family,
commercial, construction, etc.), loan source (originated or purchased) and payment status (i.e.,
current or number of days delinquent). Loans with known potential losses are categorized
separately. We assign estimated loss factors to the
Page 47
payment status categories on the basis of our
assessment of the potential risk inherent in each loan type. These factors are periodically
reviewed for appropriateness giving consideration to charge-off history, delinquency trends,
portfolio growth and the status of the regional economy and housing market, in order to ascertain
that the loss factors cover probable and estimable losses inherent in the portfolio. Based on our
recent loss experience on non-performing loans, we increased certain loss factors used in our
quantitative analysis of the ALL for one- to four- family mortgage loans during the first six
months of 2011. We define our loss experience on non-performing loans as the ratio of the excess of
the loan balance (including selling costs) over the updated collateral value to the principal
balance of loans for which we have updated valuations. We generally obtain updated collateral
values by the time a loan becomes 180 days past due. Based on our analysis, our loss experience on
our non-performing one- to four-family first mortgage loans was approximately 13.1% at June 30,
2011 and was approximately 13.3% at December 31, 2010. Our one- to four- family mortgage loans
represent 98.8% of our total loans. The recent adjustment in our loss factors did not have a
material effect on the ultimate level of our ALL or on our provision for loan losses. If our
future loss experience requires additional increases in our loss factors, this may result in
increased levels of loan loss provisions.
In addition to our quantitative systematic methodology, we also use qualitative analyses to
determine the adequacy of our ALL. Our qualitative analyses include further evaluation of economic
factors, such as trends in the unemployment rate, as well as a ratio analysis to evaluate the
overall measurement of the ALL. This analysis includes a review of delinquency ratios, net
charge-off ratios and the ratio of the ALL to both non-performing loans and total loans. This
qualitative review is used to reassess the overall determination of the ALL and to ensure that
directional changes in the ALL and the provision for loan losses are supported by relevant internal
and external data.
We consider the average LTV ratio of our non-performing loans and our total portfolio in relation
to the overall changes in house prices in our lending markets when determining the ALL. This
provides us with a macro indication of the severity of potential losses that might be expected.
Since substantially all of our portfolio consists of first mortgage loans on residential
properties, the LTV ratio is particularly important to us when a loan becomes non-performing. The
weighted average LTV ratio in our one- to four-family mortgage loan portfolio at June 30, 2011 was
60.8%, using appraised values at the time of origination. The average LTV ratio of our
non-performing loans, using appraised values at the time of origination, was 74.9% at June 30,
2011. Based on the valuation indices, house prices have declined in the New York metropolitan
area, where 72.7% of our non-performing loans were located at June 30, 2011, by approximately 23%
from the peak of the market in 2006 through April 2011 and by 32% nationwide during that period.
Changes in house values may affect our loss experience which may require that we change the loss
factors used in our quantitative analysis of the allowance for loan losses. There can be no
assurance whether significant further declines in house values may occur and result in a higher
loss experience and increased levels of charge-offs and loan loss provisions. Further, no
assurance can be given in any particular case that our LTV ratios will provide full protection in
the event of borrower default.
Net charge-offs amounted to $23.0 million for the second quarter of 2011 as compared to net
charge-offs of $22.8 million for the corresponding period in 2010. Our charge-offs on
non-performing loans have historically been low due to the amount of underlying equity in the
properties collateralizing our first mortgage loans. Until the recent recessionary cycle, it was
our experience that as a non-performing loan approached foreclosure, the borrower sold the
underlying property or, if there was a second mortgage or other subordinated lien, the subordinated
lien holder would purchase the property to protect their interest thereby resulting in the full
payment of principal and interest to Hudson City Savings. This process normally took approximately
12 months. However, due to the unprecedented level of foreclosures and
Page 48
the desire by most states
to slow the foreclosure process, we are now experiencing a time frame to repayment or foreclosure
ranging from 30 to 36 months from the initial non-performing period. These delays have impacted
our level of non-performing loans as these loans take longer to migrate to real estate owned and
ultimate disposition. In addition, the highly publicized foreclosure issues that have recently
affected the nations largest mortgage loan servicers has resulted in greater court and state
attorney general scrutiny, and our foreclosure process and timing to completion of foreclosures may
be further
delayed. If real estate prices do not improve or continue to decline, this extended time may
result in further charge-offs. In addition, current conditions in the housing market have made it
more difficult for borrowers to sell homes to satisfy the mortgage and second lien holders are less
likely to repay our loan if the value of the property is not enough to satisfy their loan. We
continue to closely monitor the property values underlying our non-performing loans during this
timeframe and take appropriate charge-offs when the loan balances exceed the underlying property
values.
At June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, commercial and construction loans evaluated for impairment
in accordance with FASB guidance amounted to $15.6 million and $16.7 million, respectively. Based
on this evaluation, we established an ALL of $4.9 million for loans classified as impaired at June
30, 2011 compared to $5.1 million at December 31, 2010.
Although we believe that we have established and maintained the ALL at adequate levels, additions
may be necessary if future economic and other conditions differ substantially from the current
operating environment. Changes in our loss experience on non-performing loans, the loss factors
used in our quantitative analysis of the ALL and continued increases in overall loan delinquencies
can have a significant impact on our need for increased levels of loan loss provisions in the
future. Although we use the best information available, the level of the ALL remains an estimate
that is subject to significant judgment and short-term change. See Critical Accounting Policies.
Non-Interest Income.
Total non-interest income was $2.7 million for the second quarter 2011 as
compared to $33.2 million for the same quarter in 2010. Included in non-interest income for the
second quarter of 2010 were net gains on securities transactions of $30.6 million which resulted
from the sale of $515.2 million of mortgage-backed securities available-for-sale. There were no
security sales during the three months ended June 30, 2011.
Non-Interest Expense.
Total non-interest expense amounted to $85.8 million for the second
quarter of 2011 as compared to $64.6 million for the second quarter of 2010. This increase was due
primarily to a $19.9 million increase in Federal deposit insurance assessments and a $4.1 million
increase in other non-interest expense, partially offset by a $2.9 million decrease in compensation
and employee benefits.
Compensation and employee benefit costs decreased $2.9 million, or 8.8%, to $29.9 million for the
second quarter of 2011 as compared to $32.8 million for the same period in 2010. This decrease was
primarily due to a $4.7 million decrease in expense related to
our stock benefit plans due primarily to decreases in the market
price of our common stock. This
decrease was partially offset by a $687,000 increase in medical expenses, a $379,000 increase in
pension costs and a $749,000 increase in compensation costs. The increase in compensation costs
was due primarily to normal increases in salary as well as additional full time employees. At June
30, 2011, we had 1,577 full-time equivalent employees as compared to 1,562 at December 31, 2010 and
1,557 at June 30, 2010. A portion of the increased staffing is in the areas of compliance and risk
management. We have increased and expect to further increase staffing in those areas in connection
with our transition to the OCC as our primary regulator and the requirements of the MOU. This will
result in a continued increase in compensation costs that is likely to increase our non-interest
expense.
Page 49
Federal deposit insurance expense increased $19.9 million, or 149.6%, to $33.2 million for the
second quarter of 2011 from $13.3 million for the second quarter of 2010. This increase was due
primarily to the new deposit assessment methodology adopted by the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation that became effective on April 1, 2011 and which redefined the assessment base as
average consolidated total assets minus average tangible equity. Previously, deposit insurance
assessments were based on the amount of deposits.
Included in other expense for the second quarter of 2011 were write-downs on foreclosed real estate
and net losses on the sale of foreclosed real estate of $2.1 million as compared to $173,000 for
the second quarter of 2010. This increase was due primarily to increased activity in foreclosed
real estate. We sold 45 properties during the second quarter of 2011 and had 123 properties in
foreclosed real estate, 54 of which were under contract to sell as of June 30, 2011. For the
second quarter of 2010, we sold 8 properties and had 52 properties in foreclosed real estate, of
which 9 were under contract to sell as of June 30, 2010.
Income Taxes.
Income tax expense amounted to $63.8 million for the second quarter of 2011
compared with income tax expense $93.5 million for the same quarter in 2010. Our effective tax
rate for the second quarter of 2011 was 39.92% compared with 39.61% for the second quarter of 2010.
Page 50
Comparison of Operating Results for the Six Months Ended June 30, 2011 and 2010
Average Balance Sheet.
The following table presents the average balance sheets, average yields
and costs and certain other information for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010. The table
presents the annualized average yield on interest-earning assets and the annualized average cost of
interest-bearing liabilities. We derived the yields and costs by dividing annualized income or
expense by the average balance of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities,
respectively, for the periods shown. We derived average balances from daily balances over the
periods indicated. Interest income includes fees that we considered to be adjustments to yields.
Yields on tax-exempt obligations were not computed on a tax equivalent basis. Nonaccrual loans were
included in the computation of average balances and therefore have a zero yield. The yields set
forth below include the effect of deferred loan origination fees and costs, and purchase discounts
and premiums that are amortized or accreted to interest income.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Six Months Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yield/
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yield/
|
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-earnings assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First mortgage loans, net (1)
|
|
$
|
29,947,703
|
|
|
$
|
763,328
|
|
|
|
5.10
|
%
|
|
$
|
31,555,931
|
|
|
$
|
854,405
|
|
|
|
5.42
|
%
|
Consumer and other loans
|
|
|
317,250
|
|
|
|
8,225
|
|
|
|
5.19
|
|
|
|
354,169
|
|
|
|
9,413
|
|
|
|
5.32
|
|
Federal funds sold and other overnight deposits
|
|
|
1,007,679
|
|
|
|
1,418
|
|
|
|
0.28
|
|
|
|
838,112
|
|
|
|
1,025
|
|
|
|
0.25
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities at amortized cost
|
|
|
18,455,170
|
|
|
|
308,484
|
|
|
|
3.34
|
|
|
|
20,417,100
|
|
|
|
453,827
|
|
|
|
4.45
|
|
Federal Home Loan Bank stock
|
|
|
828,288
|
|
|
|
22,433
|
|
|
|
5.42
|
|
|
|
878,816
|
|
|
|
21,540
|
|
|
|
4.90
|
|
Investment securities, at amortized cost
|
|
|
3,958,925
|
|
|
|
66,367
|
|
|
|
3.35
|
|
|
|
5,205,697
|
|
|
|
112,240
|
|
|
|
4.31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest-earning assets
|
|
|
54,515,015
|
|
|
|
1,170,255
|
|
|
|
4.29
|
|
|
|
59,249,825
|
|
|
|
1,452,450
|
|
|
|
4.90
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noninterest-earnings assets (4)
|
|
|
1,358,562
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,617,883
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets
|
|
$
|
55,873,577
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
60,867,708
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Shareholders Equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Savings accounts
|
|
$
|
863,895
|
|
|
|
2,772
|
|
|
|
0.65
|
|
|
$
|
815,904
|
|
|
|
3,022
|
|
|
|
0.75
|
|
Interest-bearing transaction accounts
|
|
|
2,064,324
|
|
|
|
8,159
|
|
|
|
0.80
|
|
|
|
2,289,876
|
|
|
|
13,797
|
|
|
|
1.22
|
|
Money market accounts
|
|
|
7,451,303
|
|
|
|
38,556
|
|
|
|
1.04
|
|
|
|
5,221,284
|
|
|
|
29,688
|
|
|
|
1.15
|
|
Time deposits
|
|
|
14,522,391
|
|
|
|
119,191
|
|
|
|
1.66
|
|
|
|
16,270,803
|
|
|
|
153,082
|
|
|
|
1.90
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest-bearing deposits
|
|
|
24,901,913
|
|
|
|
168,678
|
|
|
|
1.37
|
|
|
|
24,597,867
|
|
|
|
199,589
|
|
|
|
1.64
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase agreements
|
|
|
10,687,277
|
|
|
|
226,488
|
|
|
|
4.27
|
|
|
|
15,100,000
|
|
|
|
306,421
|
|
|
|
4.09
|
|
Federal Home Loan Bank of New York advances
|
|
|
14,447,292
|
|
|
|
245,779
|
|
|
|
3.43
|
|
|
|
14,875,000
|
|
|
|
297,781
|
|
|
|
4.04
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total borrowed funds
|
|
|
25,134,569
|
|
|
|
472,267
|
|
|
|
3.79
|
|
|
|
29,975,000
|
|
|
|
604,202
|
|
|
|
4.06
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest-bearing liabilities
|
|
|
50,036,482
|
|
|
|
640,945
|
|
|
|
2.58
|
|
|
|
54,572,867
|
|
|
|
803,791
|
|
|
|
2.97
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noninterest-bearing liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noninterest-bearing deposits
|
|
|
518,199
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
537,283
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other noninterest-bearing liabilities
|
|
|
240,871
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
304,347
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest-bearing
liabilities
|
|
|
759,070
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
841,630
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
50,795,552
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55,414,497
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity
|
|
|
5,078,025
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,453,211
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities and
Shareholders Equity
|
|
$
|
55,873,577
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
60,867,708
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income/net interest rate spread (2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
529,310
|
|
|
|
1.71
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
648,659
|
|
|
|
1.93
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest-earning assets/net interest margin (3)
|
|
$
|
4,478,533
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.92
|
%
|
|
$
|
4,676,958
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.17
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ratio of interest-earning assets to
interest-bearing liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.09
|
x
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.09
|
x
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Amount includes deferred loan costs and non-performing loans and is net of the allowance for
loan losses.
|
|
(2)
|
|
Determined by subtracting the annualized weighted average cost of total interest-bearing
liabilities from the annualized weighted average yield on total interest-earning assets.
|
|
(3)
|
|
Determined by dividing annualized net interest income by total average interest-earning assets.
|
|
(4)
|
|
Includes the average balance of principal receivable related to FHLMC mortgage-backed
securities of $166.5 million and $381.7 million for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
|
Page 51
General.
Net loss was $459.7 million for the first six months of 2011, a decrease of
$751.2 million, or 257.7%, compared with net income of $291.5 million for the first six months of
2010. Both basic and diluted loss per common share were $0.93 for the first six months of 2011 as
compared to $0.59 for both basic and diluted earnings per share for the first six months of 2010.
For the first six months of 2011, our annualized return on average shareholders equity was
(18.10)%, compared with 10.69% for the corresponding period in 2010. Our annualized return on
average assets for the first six months of 2011 was (1.65)% as compared to 0.96% for the first six
months of 2010. The decrease in the annualized return on average equity and assets is primarily due
to the net loss in the first six months of 2011 due to the Restructuring Transaction completed in
March 2011.
Interest and Dividend Income.
Total interest and dividend income for the six months ended June
30, 2011 decreased $282.2 million, or 19.4%, to $1.17 billion from $1.45 billion for the six months
ended June 30, 2010. The decrease in total interest and dividend income was primarily due to a
decrease of 61 basis points in the annualized weighted-average yield on total interest-earning
assets to 4.29% for the second quarter of 2011 from 4.90% for the same quarter in 2010. The
decrease in total interest and dividend income was also due to a decrease in the average balance of
total interest-earning assets of $4.73 billion, or 8.0%, to $54.52 billion for the second quarter
of 2011 as compared to $59.25 billion for the second quarter of 2010. The decrease in the average
balance of total interest-earning assets was due primarily to the effects of the Restructuring
Transaction.
For the six months ended June 30, 2011, interest on first mortgage loans decreased $91.1 million,
or 10.7%, to $763.3 million as compared to $854.4 million for the six months ended June 30, 2010.
This was primarily due to a 32 basis point decrease in the weighted-average yield to 5.10% for the
six months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to 5.42% for the same period in 2010. The decrease in
interest income on mortgage loans was also due to a $1.61 billion decrease in the average balance
of first mortgage loans to $29.95 billion for the six months ended June 30, 2011 from $31.56
billion for the same period in 2010. Refinancing activity, which resulted in continued elevated
levels of loan repayments, also had an impact on the average balance of our first mortgage loans
during the first six months of 2011. During the first six months of 2011, existing mortgage
customers refinanced or recast approximately $1.11 billion in mortgage loans with a weighted
average rate of 5.71% to a new weighted average rate of 4.68%.
Interest on consumer and other loans decreased $1.2 million to $8.2 million for the first six
months of 2011 from $9.4 million for the first six months of 2010. The average balance of consumer
and other loans decreased $36.9 million to $317.3 million for the first six months of 2011 as
compared to $354.2 million for the first six months of 2010 and the average yield earned decreased
13 basis points to 5.19% from 5.32% for the same respective periods.
Interest on mortgage-backed securities decreased $145.3 million to $308.5 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to $453.8 million for the six months ended June 30, 2010.
This decrease was due primarily to a 111 basis point decrease in the weighted-average yield to
3.34% for the first six months of 2011 from 4.45% for the first six months of 2010. The decrease in
interest income on mortgage-backed securities was also due to a $1.96 billion decrease in the
average balance of mortgage-backed securities to $18.46 billion during the first six months of 2011
as compared to $20.42 billion for the same period in 2010. The decrease in the average balance of
mortgage-backed securities was due primarily to the effects of the Restructuring Transaction. The
decrease in the weighted average yield on mortgage-backed securities is a result of lower yields on
securities purchased during 2010 when market interest rates were lower than the yield earned on the
existing portfolio.
Page 52
For the six months ended June 30, 2011 interest on investment securities decreased $45.8 million to
$66.4 million as compared to $112.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2010. This decrease
was due to a $1.25 billion decrease in the average balance of investment securities to
$3.96 billion for the first six months of 2011 from $5.21 billion for the first six months of 2010.
In addition, the average yield of investment securities decreased 96 basis points to 3.35% for the
first six months of 2011 as compared to 4.31% for the same period in 2010. The decrease in the
average yield earned reflects current market interest rates.
Dividends on FHLB stock increased $893,000, or 4.1%, to $22.4 million for the six months ended June
30, 2011 as compared to $21.5 million for the comparable period in 2010. This increase was due
primarily to a 52 basis point increase in the average dividend yield earned to 5.42% as compared to
4.90% for the first six months of 2010. The effect of the increase in the average dividend yield
was partially offset by a $50.5 million decrease in the average balance of FHLB stock to $828.3
million for the first six months of 2011 as compared to $878.8 million for the same period in 2010.
Interest on Federal funds sold amounted to $1.4 million for the six months ended June 30, 2011 as
compared to $1.0 million for the first six months of 2010. The average balance of Federal funds
sold amounted to $1.01 billion for the first six months of 2011 as compared to $838.1 million for
the same period in 2010. The yield earned on Federal funds sold was 0.28% for the six months ended
June 30, 2011 and 0.25% for the six months ended June 30, 2010. The increase in the average balance
of Federal funds sold is primarily a result of the timing of the debt extinguishments and the
proceeds from securities sales and new borrowings in the Restructuring Transaction.
Interest Expense.
Total interest expense for the six months ended June 30, 2011 decreased
$162.9 million, or 20.3%, to $640.9 million from $803.8 million for the six months ended June 30,
2010. This decrease was primarily due to a 39 basis point decrease in the weighted-average cost of
total interest-bearing liabilities to 2.58% for the six months ended June 30, 2011 compared with
2.97% for the six months ended June 30, 2010. The decrease was also due to a $4.53 billion, or
8.3%, decrease in the average balance of total interest-bearing liabilities to $50.04 billion for
the six months ended June 30, 2011 compared with $54.57 billion for the six months ended June 30,
2010. The decrease in the average balance of total interest-bearing liabilities was due to the
reduction of total borrowings as part of the Restructuring Transaction.
Interest expense on our time deposit accounts decreased $33.9 million to $119.2 million for the
first six months of 2011 as compared to $153.1 million for the first six months of 2010. This
decrease was due to a 24 basis point decrease in the annualized weighted-average cost to 1.66% for
the first six months of 2011 compared with 1.90% for the first six months of 2010 as maturing time
deposits were renewed or replaced by new time deposits at lower rates. This decrease was also due
to a $1.75 billion decrease in the average balance of time deposit accounts to $14.52 billion for
the first six months of 2011 from $16.27 billion for the first six months of 2010. Interest
expense on money market accounts increased $8.9 million to $38.6 million for the first six months
of 2011 as compared to $29.7 million for the same period in 2010. This increase was due to an
increase in the average balance of money market accounts from $2.23 billion to $7.45 billion for
the first six months of 2011 as compared to $5.22 billion for the first six months of 2010. This
increase was partially offset by a decrease in the annualized weighted-average cost of 11 basis
points to 1.04% for the first six months of 2011 compared with 1.15% for the first six months of
2010. Interest expense on our interest-bearing transaction accounts decreased $5.6 million to $8.2
million for the first six months of 2011 from $13.8 million for the same period in 2010. The
decrease is due to a 42 basis point decrease in the annualized weighted-average cost to 0.80%, and
a $225.6 million
Page 53
decrease in the average balance to $2.06 billion for the first six months of 2011 as compared to
$2.29 billion for the first six months of 2010.
The decrease in the average cost of deposits during 2011 reflected lower market interest rates and
our decision to lower deposit rates to slow deposit growth.
Interest expense on borrowed funds decreased $131.9 million to $472.3 million for the six months
ended June 30, 2011 as compared to $604.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2010. This
decrease was primarily due to a $4.85 billion decrease in the average balance of borrowed funds to
$25.13 billion for the first six months of 2011 as compared to $29.98 billion for the first six
months of 2010. This decrease was also due to a 27 basis point decrease in the weighted-average
cost of borrowed funds to 3.79% for the first six months of 2011 as compared to 4.06% for the first
six months of 2010. The decrease in the average balance and cost of our borrowings is due to the
effects of the Restructuring Transaction. Borrowings amounted to $21.13 billion at June 30, 2011
with an average cost of 3.71%. During the first six months of 2011, we modified $4.00 billion of
structured putable borrowings to eliminate the put option thereby further reducing our interest
rate risk.
At June 30, 2011, we had $6.58 billion of borrowings with put dates within one year as compared to
$22.83 billion at December 31, 2010. We believe, given current market conditions, that the
likelihood that a significant portion of these borrowings would be put back will not increase
substantially unless interest rates were to increase by at least 300 basis points. See
Liquidity and Capital Resources.
Net Interest Income.
Net interest income decreased $119.4 million, or 18.4%, to $529.3 million
for the first six months of 2011 as compared to $648.7 million for the first six months of 2010.
During the first six months of 2011, our net interest rate spread decreased 22 basis points to
1.71% and our net interest margin decreased 25 basis points to 1.92% as compared to 2.17% for the
same period in 2010. The decrease in our net interest rate spread and net interest margin was due
primarily to the low market interest rates that resulted in lower yields on our mortgage-related
interest-earning assets as customers refinanced to lower mortgage rates and our new loan production
and asset purchases were at the current low market interest rates. Mortgage-related assets
represented 88.8% of our average interest-earning assets during the first six months of 2011.
Provision for Loan Losses.
The provision for loan losses amounted to $70.0 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to $100.0 million for the six months ended June 30, 2010.
The ALL amounted to $262.3 million at June 30, 2011 and $236.6 million at December 31, 2010. The
decrease in the provision for loan losses for the quarter ended June 30, 2011 was a result of a
stabilization in both the level of net charge-offs and the growth rate of non-performing loans as
well as a decrease in the size of the loan portfolio. These factors were tempered by the continued
decline in home prices although at a slower rate than during the recent recessionary cycle. We
recorded our provision for loan losses during the first six months of 2011 based on our ALL
methodology that considers a number of quantitative and qualitative factors, including the amount
of non-performing loans, the loss experience of our non-performing loans, recent collateral
valuations, conditions in the real estate and housing markets, current economic conditions,
particularly continued elevated levels of unemployment, and growth or shrinkage in the loan
portfolio. See Comparison of Operating Results for the Three Months Ended June 30, 2011 and 2010
Provision for Loan Losses.
Non-Interest Income.
Total non-interest income was $107.9 million for the six months ended June
30, 2011 as compared to $66.2 million for the same period in 2010. Included in non-interest income
for the six months ended June 30, 2011 were net gains on securities transactions of $102.5 million which
resulted
Page 54
from the sale of $9.04 billion of securities available-for-sale. Substantially all of the
proceeds from the sale of securities were used to repay borrowings as part of the Restructuring
Transaction. Included in non-interest income for the six months ended June 30, 2010 were net gains
on securities transactions of $61.4 million which resulted from the sale of $1.09 billion of
mortgage-backed securities available-for-sale.
Non-Interest Expense.
Total non-interest expense amounted to $1.33 billion for the six months
ended June 30, 2011 as compared to $131.1 million for the six months ended June 30, 2010. Included
in total non-interest expense for the first six months of 2011 was a $1.17 billion loss on the
extinguishment of debt related to the Restructuring Transaction.
Compensation and employee benefit costs decreased $6.2 million, or 9.2%, to $60.8 million for the
first six months of 2011 as compared to $67.0 million for the same period in 2010. The decrease in
compensation costs is primarily due to a $10.5 million decrease in expense related to our stock
benefit plans due primarily to decreases in the market price of our common stock. This decrease was partially offset by an increase in medical expenses of $2.3
million and a $1.7 million increase in compensation costs due primarily to normal increases in
salary as well as additional full time employees.
For the six months ended June 30, 2011 Federal deposit insurance increased $23.6 million, or 91.1%,
to $49.5 million from $25.9 million for the six months ended June 30, 2010.
Included in other non-interest expense for the six months ended June 30, 2011 were write-downs on
foreclosed real estate and net losses on the sale of foreclosed real estate, of $2.8 million as
compared to $1.5 million for the comparable period in 2010. We sold 74 properties during the first
six months of 2011 as compared to 38 properties for the same period in 2010.
Income Taxes.
Income tax benefit amounted to $299.5 million for the first six months of 2011
compared with income tax expense $192.3 million for the same quarter in 2010. Our effective tax
rate for the first six months of 2011 was 39.45% compared with 39.75% for the first six months of
2010. The income tax benefit in the first six months of 2011 was due to the loss before income
taxes of $759.2 million.
Page 55
Asset Quality
Credit Quality
Our primary lending emphasis is the origination and purchase of one- to four-family first mortgage
loans on residential properties. Our lending market areas generally consists of those states that
are east of the Mississippi River and as far south as South Carolina.
The following table presents the composition of our loan portfolio in dollar amounts and in
percentages of the total portfolio at the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2011
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
of Total
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
of Total
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
First mortgage loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One- to four-family:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortizing
|
|
$
|
24,238,748
|
|
|
|
79.80
|
%
|
|
$
|
24,912,935
|
|
|
|
80.56
|
%
|
Interest-only
|
|
|
5,065,540
|
|
|
|
16.68
|
|
|
|
5,136,463
|
|
|
|
16.61
|
|
FHA/VA
|
|
|
718,204
|
|
|
|
2.36
|
|
|
|
499,724
|
|
|
|
1.62
|
|
Multi-family and commercial
|
|
|
42,460
|
|
|
|
0.14
|
|
|
|
48,067
|
|
|
|
0.16
|
|
Construction
|
|
|
8,368
|
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
|
9,081
|
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total first mortgage loans
|
|
|
30,073,320
|
|
|
|
99.01
|
|
|
|
30,606,270
|
|
|
|
98.98
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer and other loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-rate second mortgages
|
|
|
144,746
|
|
|
|
0.48
|
|
|
|
160,896
|
|
|
|
0.52
|
|
Home equity credit lines
|
|
|
134,688
|
|
|
|
0.44
|
|
|
|
137,467
|
|
|
|
0.44
|
|
Other
|
|
|
20,722
|
|
|
|
0.07
|
|
|
|
19,264
|
|
|
|
0.06
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer and other loans
|
|
|
300,156
|
|
|
|
0.99
|
|
|
|
317,627
|
|
|
|
1.02
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans
|
|
|
30,373,476
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
|
30,923,897
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred loan costs
|
|
|
92,026
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
86,633
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan losses
|
|
|
(262,306
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(236,574
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loans
|
|
$
|
30,203,196
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
30,773,956
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At June 30, 2011, first mortgage loans secured by one-to four-family properties accounted for
98.8% of total loans. Fixed-rate mortgage loans represent 67.0% of our first mortgage loans.
Compared to adjustable-rate loans, fixed-rate loans possess less inherent credit risk since loan
payments do not change in response to changes in interest rates. In addition, we do not originate
or purchase loans with payment options, negative amortization loans or sub-prime loans.
We believe our loans, when made, were amply collateralized and otherwise conformed to our
prime lending standards.
Included in our loan portfolio at June 30, 2011 are interest-only loans of approximately $5.07
billion, or 16.7%, of total loans as compared to $5.14 billion, or 16.6%, of total loans at
December 31, 2010. These loans are originated as adjustable rate mortgage loans with initial terms
of five, seven or ten years with the interest-only portion of the payment based upon the initial
loan term, or offered on a 30-year fixed-rate loan, with interest-only payments for the first 10
years of the obligation. At the end of the initial 5-, 7- or 10-year interest-only period, the loan payment will adjust to include both principal and interest
and will amortize over the remaining term so the loan will be repaid at the end of its original
life. These loans are underwritten using the fully-amortizing payment amount. Non-performing
interest-only loans amounted
Page 56
to $192.3 million, or 21.0%, of non-performing loans at June 30, 2011
as compared to non-performing interest-only loans of $179.3 million, or 20.6%, of non-performing
loans at December 31, 2010.
In addition to our full documentation loan program, we originate and purchase loans to certain
eligible borrowers as limited documentation loans. Generally the maximum loan amount for limited
documentation loans is $750,000 and these loans are subject to higher interest rates than our full
documentation loan products. We require applicants for limited documentation loans to complete a
FreddieMac/FannieMae loan application and request income, asset and credit history information from
the borrower. Additionally, we verify asset holdings and obtain credit reports from outside vendors
on all borrowers to ascertain the credit history of the borrower. Applicants with delinquent credit
histories usually do not qualify for the limited documentation processing, although delinquencies
that are adequately explained will not prohibit processing as a limited documentation loan. We
reserve the right to verify income and do require asset verification but we may elect not to verify
or corroborate certain income information where we believe circumstances warrant. We also allow
certain borrowers to obtain mortgage loans without disclosing income levels and without any
verification of income. In these cases, we require verification of the borrowers assets. We are
able to provide data relating to limited documentation loans that we originate. Originated loans
overall represent 67.2% of our one- to four- family first mortgage loans. As part of our wholesale
loan program, we allow sellers to include limited documentation loans in each pool of purchased
mortgage loans but limit the amount of these loans to be no more than 10% of the principal balance
of the purchased pool. In addition, these loans must have a maximum LTV ratio of 60% and meet
other characteristics such as maximum loan size. However, we have not tracked wholesale limited
documentation loans on our mortgage loan system. Included in our loan portfolio at June 30, 2011
are $3.72 billion of originated amortizing limited documentation loans and $971.8 million of
originated limited documentation interest-only loans. Non-performing loans at June 30, 2011
include $112.4 million of originated amortizing limited documentation loans and $62.6 million of
originated interest-only limited documentation loans as compared to $91.5 million and $58.3
million, respectively, at December 31, 2010.
The following table presents the geographic distribution of our total loan portfolio, as well as
the geographic distribution of our non-performing loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At June 30, 2011
|
|
|
At December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-performing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-performing
|
|
|
|
Total loans
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
|
Total loans
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
New Jersey
|
|
|
43.9
|
%
|
|
|
48.0
|
%
|
|
|
44.0
|
%
|
|
|
45.7
|
%
|
New York
|
|
|
21.0
|
|
|
|
18.3
|
|
|
|
19.9
|
|
|
|
18.7
|
|
Connecticut
|
|
|
15.0
|
|
|
|
6.4
|
|
|
|
14.5
|
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total New York
metropolitan area
|
|
|
79.9
|
|
|
|
72.7
|
|
|
|
78.4
|
|
|
|
70.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pennsylvania
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
Virginia
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
Illinois
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
Maryland
|
|
|
2.3
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
All others
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
|
|
13.2
|
|
|
|
9.3
|
|
|
|
14.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Outside New York
metropolitan area
|
|
|
20.1
|
|
|
|
27.3
|
|
|
|
21.6
|
|
|
|
29.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 57
Non-Performing Assets
The following table presents information regarding non-performing assets as of the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2011
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Non-accrual loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortizing residential first mortgage loans
|
|
$
|
632,726
|
|
|
$
|
614,758
|
|
Interest-only residential first mortgage loans
|
|
|
192,283
|
|
|
|
179,348
|
|
Troubled debt restructurings
|
|
|
2,564
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multi-family and commercial mortgages
|
|
|
531
|
|
|
|
1,117
|
|
Construction loans
|
|
|
7,002
|
|
|
|
7,560
|
|
Consumer and other loans
|
|
|
3,788
|
|
|
|
4,320
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-accrual loans
|
|
|
838,894
|
|
|
|
807,103
|
|
Accruing loans delinquent 90 days or more
|
|
|
75,345
|
|
|
|
64,156
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-performing loans
|
|
|
914,239
|
|
|
|
871,259
|
|
Foreclosed real estate, net
|
|
|
38,364
|
|
|
|
45,693
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-performing assets
|
|
$
|
952,603
|
|
|
$
|
916,952
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-performing loans to total loans
|
|
|
3.01
|
%
|
|
|
2.82
|
%
|
Loans that are past due 90 days or more and still accruing interest are loans that are
insured by the FHA.
The following table is a comparison of our delinquent loans at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30-59 Days
|
|
|
60-89 Days
|
|
|
90 Days or More
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
|
of
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
of
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
of
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
|
of Loans
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
|
of Loans
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
|
of Loans
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
At June 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One- to four- family first
mortgages:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortizing
|
|
|
879
|
|
|
$
|
316,774
|
|
|
|
357
|
|
|
$
|
130,720
|
|
|
|
2,113
|
|
|
$
|
635,290
|
|
Interest-only
|
|
|
110
|
|
|
|
65,416
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
26,618
|
|
|
|
188
|
|
|
|
192,283
|
|
FHA/VA first mortgages
|
|
|
103
|
|
|
|
21,816
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
10,540
|
|
|
|
281
|
|
|
|
75,345
|
|
Multi-family and commercial
mortgages
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
1,334
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
1,717
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
531
|
|
Construction loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
7,002
|
|
Consumer and other loans
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
3,196
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
846
|
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
|
3,788
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
1,133
|
|
|
$
|
408,536
|
|
|
|
465
|
|
|
$
|
170,441
|
|
|
|
2,627
|
|
|
$
|
914,239
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Delinquent loans to total loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.35
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.56
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.01
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One- to four- family first
mortgages:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortizing
|
|
|
940
|
|
|
$
|
342,990
|
|
|
|
415
|
|
|
$
|
151,800
|
|
|
|
1,839
|
|
|
$
|
614,758
|
|
Interest-only
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
47,479
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
29,570
|
|
|
|
305
|
|
|
|
179,348
|
|
FHA/VA first mortgages
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
20,594
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
9,730
|
|
|
|
234
|
|
|
|
64,156
|
|
Multi-family and commercial
mortgages
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
3,199
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
1,199
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
1,117
|
|
Construction loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
7,560
|
|
Consumer and other loans
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
4,644
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
946
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
4,320
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
1,157
|
|
|
$
|
418,906
|
|
|
|
516
|
|
|
$
|
193,245
|
|
|
|
2,430
|
|
|
$
|
871,259
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Delinquent loans to total loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.35
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.62
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.82
|
%
|
Page 58
We adopted Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2011-02 on April 1, 2011 which provides
additional guidance to creditors for evaluating whether a modification or restructuring of a
receivable is a troubled debt restructuring. In evaluating whether a restructuring constitutes a
troubled debt restructuring, a creditor must separately conclude that the restructuring constitutes
a concession and the borrower is experiencing financial difficulties. As a result of our adoption
of ASU No. 2011-02, we determined that approximately $26.2 million of residential mortgage loans
were troubled debt restructurings that were not previously considered as such.
Loans modified in a troubled debt restructuring totaled $41.8 million at June 30, 2011 of which
$1.9 million are 30 days past due, $1.8 million are 60-89 days past due and $2.6 million are 90
days or more past due. The remaining loans modified were current at the time of the restructuring
and have complied with the terms of their restructure agreement. At December 31, 2010, loans
modified in a troubled debt restructuring totaled $11.1 million. These loans were current at the
time of their restructuring and were in compliance with the terms of their restructure agreement at
December 31, 2010.
Upon request, we will generally agree to a short-term payment plan for certain residential mortgage
loan borrowers. Many of these customers are current as to their mortgage payments, but may be
anticipating a short-term cash flow need and want to protect their credit history. The extent of
these plans is generally limited to a six-month deferral of principal payments. Pursuant to these
short-term payment plans, we do not modify mortgage notes, recast legal documents, extend
maturities or reduce interest rates. We also do not forgive any interest or principal. These
loans have not been classified as troubled debt restructurings since we collect all principal and
interest, the deferral period is short and any reduction in the present value of cash flows is due
to the insignificant delay in the timing of principal payments. As a result, these restructurings
did not meet the requirements in ASU No. 2011-02 to be considered a troubled debt restructuring.
The principal balance of loans with payment plans at June 30, 2011 amounted to $27.9 million,
including $20.5 million of loans that are current, $2.5 million that are 30 to 59 days past due,
$2.9 million that are 60 to 89 days past due and $2.0 million that are 90 days or more past due.
The principal balance of loans with payment plans at December 31, 2010 amounted to $81.3 million,
including loans that were determined to be troubled debt restructurings as a result of our adoption
of ASU No. 2011-02. Of the $81.3 million of loans in payment plans at December 31, 2010, $54.4
million were current, $13.9 million were 30 to 59 days past due, $4.7 million were 60 to 89 days
past due and $8.3 million were 90 days or more past due.
Page 59
The following table presents our loan classifications:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit Risk Profile by Internally Assigned Grade
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
One-to four- family
|
|
|
Other first
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
first mortgage loans
|
|
|
Mortgages
|
|
|
Consumer and Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multi-family
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
second
|
|
|
Home Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortizing
|
|
|
Interest-only
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
Construction
|
|
|
mortgages
|
|
|
credit lines
|
|
|
Other
|
|
June 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pass
|
|
$
|
24,190,053
|
|
|
$
|
4,846,639
|
|
|
$
|
25,705
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
144,067
|
|
|
$
|
130,833
|
|
|
$
|
19,848
|
|
Special mention
|
|
|
131,009
|
|
|
|
26,618
|
|
|
|
3,480
|
|
|
|
1,366
|
|
|
|
217
|
|
|
|
589
|
|
|
|
814
|
|
Substandard
|
|
|
635,290
|
|
|
|
192,283
|
|
|
|
4,228
|
|
|
|
5,302
|
|
|
|
462
|
|
|
|
3,174
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
Doubtful
|
|
|
600
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,047
|
|
|
|
1,700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
24,956,952
|
|
|
$
|
5,065,540
|
|
|
$
|
42,460
|
|
|
$
|
8,368
|
|
|
$
|
144,746
|
|
|
$
|
134,688
|
|
|
$
|
20,722
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pass
|
|
$
|
24,646,101
|
|
|
$
|
4,927,545
|
|
|
$
|
37,697
|
|
|
$
|
1,521
|
|
|
$
|
160,216
|
|
|
$
|
134,408
|
|
|
$
|
17,737
|
|
Special mention
|
|
|
151,800
|
|
|
|
29,570
|
|
|
|
1,199
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
240
|
|
|
|
703
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
Substandard
|
|
|
614,758
|
|
|
|
179,348
|
|
|
|
1,117
|
|
|
|
7,560
|
|
|
|
440
|
|
|
|
2,356
|
|
|
|
1,524
|
|
Doubtful
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,054
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
25,412,659
|
|
|
$
|
5,136,463
|
|
|
$
|
48,067
|
|
|
$
|
9,081
|
|
|
$
|
160,896
|
|
|
$
|
137,467
|
|
|
$
|
19,264
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan classifications are defined as follows:
|
|
|
Pass These loans are protected by the current net worth, payment status and paying capacity of the
obligor (or guarantors, if any) or by the fair value, less cost to acquire and sell, of any
underlying collateral in a timely manner.
|
|
|
|
|
Special Mention These loans have potential weaknesses that deserve managements close
attention. If left uncorrected, these potential weaknesses may result in deterioration of
repayment prospects.
|
|
|
|
|
Substandard These loans are inadequately protected by the current net worth and
paying capacity of the obligor or by the collateral pledged, if any. Assets so classified
must have a well-defined weakness, or weaknesses that jeopardize the liquidation of the
debt. They are characterized by the distinct possibility that we will sustain some loss if
the deficiencies are not corrected.
|
|
|
|
|
Doubtful These loans have all the weaknesses inherent in a loan classified
substandard with the added characteristic that the weaknesses make the full recovery of our
principal balance highly questionable and improbable on the basis of currently known facts,
conditions, and values. The likelihood of a loss on an asset or portion of an asset
classified Doubtful is high. Its classification as Loss is not appropriate, however,
because pending events are expected to materially affect the amount of loss.
|
|
|
|
|
Loss These loans are considered uncollectible and of such little value that a
charge-off is warranted. This classification does not necessarily mean that an asset has no
recovery or salvage value; but rather, there is much doubt about whether, how much, or when
the recovery will occur.
|
We evaluate the classification of our one-to four- family mortgage loans, consumer loans and other
loans primarily on a pooled basis by delinquency. Loans that are past due 60 to 89 days are
classified as special mention and loans that are past due 90 days or more are classified as
substandard. We generally obtain updated valuations for one- to four- family mortgage loans by the
time a loan becomes 180 days past due. If necessary, we charge-off an amount to reduce the
carrying value of the loan to the value of the underlying property, less estimated selling costs.
Since we record the charge-off when we receive the
Page 60
updated valuation, we typically do not have any residential first mortgages classified as
doubtful or loss. We evaluate multi-family, commercial and construction loans individually and
base our classification on the debt service capability of the underlying property as well as
secondary sources of repayment such as the borrowers and any guarantors ability and willingness
to provide debt service.
Allowance for Loan Losses
The following table presents the activity in our allowance for loan losses at or for the dates
indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Three Months
|
|
|
For the Six Months
|
|
|
|
Ended
June 30,
|
|
|
Ended
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Balance at beginning of period
|
|
$
|
255,283
|
|
|
$
|
165,829
|
|
|
$
|
236,574
|
|
|
$
|
140,074
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan losses
|
|
|
30,000
|
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
|
|
70,000
|
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
Charge-offs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First mortgage loans
|
|
|
(28,495
|
)
|
|
|
(24,103
|
)
|
|
|
(51,852
|
)
|
|
|
(48,944
|
)
|
Consumer and other loans
|
|
|
(56
|
)
|
|
|
(53
|
)
|
|
|
(145
|
)
|
|
|
(83
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total charge-offs
|
|
|
(28,551
|
)
|
|
|
(24,156
|
)
|
|
|
(51,997
|
)
|
|
|
(49,027
|
)
|
Recoveries
|
|
|
5,574
|
|
|
|
1,310
|
|
|
|
7,729
|
|
|
|
1,936
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net charge-offs
|
|
|
(22,977
|
)
|
|
|
(22,846
|
)
|
|
|
(44,268
|
)
|
|
|
(47,091
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period
|
|
$
|
262,306
|
|
|
$
|
192,983
|
|
|
$
|
262,306
|
|
|
$
|
192,983
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan losses to total loans
|
|
|
0.86
|
%
|
|
|
0.60
|
%
|
|
|
0.86
|
%
|
|
|
0.60
|
|
Allowance for loan losses to non-performing loans
|
|
|
28.69
|
|
|
|
24.42
|
|
|
|
28.69
|
|
|
|
24.42
|
|
Net charge-offs as a percentage of average loans (1)
|
|
|
0.30
|
|
|
|
0.29
|
|
|
|
0.29
|
|
|
|
0.30
|
|
The following table presents our allocation of the ALL by loan category and the percentage of
loans in each category to total loans at the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At June 30, 2011
|
|
|
At December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of Loans in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of Loans in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Category to
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Category to
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Total Loans
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Total Loans
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
First mortgage loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One- to four-family
|
|
$
|
253,529
|
|
|
|
98.84
|
%
|
|
$
|
227,224
|
|
|
|
98.79
|
%
|
Other first mortgages
|
|
|
5,762
|
|
|
|
0.17
|
|
|
|
6,147
|
|
|
|
0.19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total first mortgage loans
|
|
|
259,291
|
|
|
|
99.01
|
|
|
|
233,371
|
|
|
|
98.98
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer and other loans
|
|
|
3,015
|
|
|
|
0.99
|
|
|
|
3,203
|
|
|
|
1.02
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total allowance for loan losses
|
|
$
|
262,306
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
236,574
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 61
Investments
We invest primarily in mortgage-backed securities issued by Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,
as well as other securities issued by GSEs. These securities account for substantially all of our
securities. We do not purchase unrated or private label mortgage-backed securities or other higher
risk securities such as those backed by sub-prime loans. There were no debt securities past due or
securities for which the Company currently believes it is not probable that it will collect all
amounts due according to the contractual terms of the security.
The Company has two collateralized borrowings in the form of repurchase agreements totaling $100.0
million with Lehman Brothers, Inc. Lehman Brothers, Inc. is currently in liquidation under the
Securities Industry Protection Act. Mortgage-backed securities with an amortized cost of
approximately $114.2 million are pledged as collateral for these borrowings and we have
demanded the return of this collateral. We believe that we have the legal right to setoff our
obligation to repay the borrowings against our right to the return of the mortgage-backed
securities pledged as collateral. As a result, we believe that our potential economic loss from
Lehman Brothers failure to return the collateral is limited to the excess market value of the
collateral over the $100 million repurchase price. We intend to pursue full recovery of the
pledged collateral in accordance with the contractual terms of the repurchase agreements. There
can be no assurances that the final settlement of this transaction will result in the full recovery
of the collateral or the full amount of the claim. We have not recognized a loss in our financial
statements related to these repurchase agreements as we have concluded that a loss is neither
probable nor estimable at June 30, 2011.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
The term liquidity refers to our ability to generate adequate amounts of cash to fund loan
originations, loan and security purchases, deposit withdrawals, repayment of borrowings and
operating expenses. Our primary sources of funds are deposits, borrowings, the proceeds from
principal and interest payments on loans and mortgage-backed securities, the maturities and calls
of investment securities and funds provided by our operations. Deposit flows, calls of investment
securities and borrowed funds, and prepayments of loans and mortgage-backed securities are strongly
influenced by interest rates, national and local economic conditions and competition in the
marketplace. These factors reduce the predictability of the receipt of these sources of funds. Our
membership in the FHLB provides us access to additional sources of borrowed funds. We also have
the ability to access the capital markets, depending on market conditions.
Our primary investing activities are the origination and purchase of one-to four-family real estate
loans and consumer and other loans, the purchase of mortgage-backed securities, and the purchase of
investment securities. These activities are funded primarily by borrowings, deposit growth and the
proceeds from principal and interest payments on loans, mortgage-backed securities and investment
securities. We originated $2.70 billion and purchased $290.5 million of loans during the first six
months of 2011 as compared to $2.83 billion and $542.2 million during the first six months of 2010.
Our loan purchase activity has significantly declined as the GSEs have been actively purchasing
loans as part of their efforts to keep mortgage rates low to support the housing market during the
recent economic recession. As a result, the sellers from whom we have historically purchased
loans are either selling to the GSEs or retaining these loans in their own portfolios. We expect
that the amount of loan purchases may continue to be at reduced levels for the near-term.
Principal repayments on loans amounted to $3.46 billion for the first six months of 2011 as
compared to $2.90 billion for the same period in 2010. Elevated levels of refinancing activity
caused by low market interest rates have caused increased levels of
Page 62
repayments to continue during the first six months of 2011. At June 30, 2011, commitments to
originate mortgage loans amounted to $492.9 million as compared to $470.1 million at June 30, 2010.
At June 30, 2011, commitments to purchase mortgage loans amounted to $140,000 as compared to $50.6
million at June 30, 2010.
Purchases of mortgage-backed securities during the first six months of 2011 were $3.51 billion as
compared to $6.01 billion during the first six months of 2010. Principal repayments on
mortgage-backed securities amounted to $2.51 billion for the first six months of 2011 as compared
to $4.58 billion for the same period in 2010. The decrease in principal repayments was due
primarily to the Restructuring Transaction which reduced the balance of our mortgage-backed
securities. We sold $8.96 billion of mortgage-backed securities during the first quarter of 2011,
resulting in a gain of $100.0 million. Substantially all of the proceeds from the sales of
mortgage-backed securities were used to repay borrowings as part of the Restructuring Transaction.
We sold $1.09 billion of mortgage-backed securities during the
six months ended June 30, 2010, resulting in
a gain of $61.4 million.
We did not purchase investment securities during the first six months of 2011. We purchased $3.00
billion of investment securities during the first six months of 2010. There were $300 million of calls of
investment securities during the first six months of 2011 as compared to $2.70 billion for the
first six months of 2010. We sold $80.0 million of investment securities during the six months
ended June 30, 2011, all of which occurred in the first quarter, resulting in a gain of $2.5
million.
At June 30, 2011, we had mortgage-backed securities and investment securities with an amortized
cost of $9.22 billion that were used as collateral for securities sold under agreements to
repurchase and at that date we had $9.71 billion of unencumbered securities.
As part of the membership requirements of the FHLB, we are required to hold a certain dollar amount
of FHLB common stock based on our mortgage-related assets and borrowings from the FHLB. During the
first six months of 2011, we had net redemptions of $104.9 million of FHLB common stock. During the
first six months of 2010, we had net purchases of $8.4 million of FHLB common stock.
Our primary financing activities consist of gathering deposits, engaging in wholesale borrowings,
repurchases of our common stock and the payment of dividends.
Total deposits increased $381.50 million during the first six months of 2011 as compared to $590.4
million for the first six months of 2010. Deposit flows are typically affected by the level of
market interest rates, the interest rates and products offered by competitors, the volatility of
equity markets, and other factors. We lowered our deposit rates during 2010 to slow our deposit
growth from the 2009 levels since the low yields that are available to us for mortgage-related
assets and investment securities have made a growth strategy less prudent until market conditions
improve. At June 30, 2011, time deposits scheduled to mature within one year totaled $9.21 billion
with an average cost of 1.27%. These time deposits are scheduled to mature as follows: $3.46
billion with an average cost of 1.02% in the third quarter of 2011, $2.76 billion with an average
cost of 1.39% in the fourth quarter of 2011, $1.76 billion with an average cost of 1.59% in the
first quarter of 2012 and $1.23 billion with an average cost of 1.24% in the second quarter of
2012. We anticipate that we will have sufficient resources to meet this current funding
commitment. Based on our deposit retention experience and current pricing strategy, we anticipate
that a significant portion of these time deposits will remain with us as renewed time deposits or
as transfers to other deposit products at the prevailing interest rate.
Page 63
We have, in the past, primarily used wholesale borrowings to fund our investing activities. During
the first six months of 2011 we completed the Restructuring Transaction which reduced our reliance
on structured putable borrowings for funding purposes and as part of our overall interest rate risk
strategy. The Restructuring Transaction included the sale of approximately $8.60 billion of
variable-rate/hybrid mortgage-backed securities and the re-borrowing $5.00 billion of short-term
fixed-rate/fixed-maturity funds. These borrowings will mature at a rate of $250.0 million per
month from April 2011 through November 2012. It is our intention to repay these borrowings as they
mature to further reduce our concentration in FHLB borrowings. The Restructuring Transaction has
improved our overall liquidity position by significantly reducing our reliance on structured
putable borrowings. At June 30, 2011, we had $12.33 billion of structured putable borrowings with
a weighted-average rate of 4.39% as compared to $29.08 billion of structured putable borrowings
with a weighted average cost of 4.03% at December 31, 2010. Structured putable borrowings with put
dates within one year amounted to $6.58 billion at June 30, 2011 as compared to $22.83 billion at
December 31, 2010. We anticipate that none of these borrowings will be put back assuming current
market interest rates remain stable. We believe, given current market conditions, that the
likelihood that a significant portion of these borrowings would be put back will not increase
substantially unless interest rates were to increase by at least 300 basis points. At June 30,
2011, $5.88 billion or 53.1% of our structured putable borrowings are with the FHLB. Our borrowing
agreement with the FHLB requires the FHLB to offer another lending product, which we would expect
would be at prevailing market interest rates, to replace any borrowings that were put back. In the
event our structured borrowings are put back, we anticipate that we will have sufficient resources
to meet this funding commitment by borrowing new funds at the prevailing market interest rate as
the market for reverse repurchase agreements remains active and the FHLB is obligated to offer
replacement financing for any borrowing it may put back. Our remaining borrowings are fixed-rate,
fixed maturity borrowings of $8.80 billion with a weighted-average rate of 2.76%. Borrowings
scheduled to mature over the next 12 months are as follows: $900.0 million with an average cost of
0.94% in the third quarter of 2011, $750.0 million with an average cost of 0.55% in the fourth
quarter of 2011, $900.0 million with an average cost of 0.98% in the first quarter of 2012 and
$750.0 million with an average cost of 0.74% in the second quarter of 2012. In future quarters, we
may further modify or hedge certain of the remaining structured putable borrowings to reduce
our exposure to interest rate movements.
Our liquidity management process is structured to meet our daily funding needs and cover both
expected and unexpected deviations from normal daily operations. The primary tools we use for
measuring and managing liquidity risk include cash flow projections, diversified funding sources,
stress testing, a cushion of liquid assets, and a formal, well developed contingency funding plan.
Cash dividends paid during the first six months of 2011 were $113.5 million. We have not purchased
any of our common shares during the six months ended June 30, 2011 pursuant to our repurchase
programs. At June 30, 2011, there remained 50,123,550 shares available for purchase under existing
stock repurchase programs.
The primary source of liquidity for Hudson City Bancorp, the holding company of Hudson City
Savings, is capital distributions from Hudson City Savings. The primary use of these funds is the
payment of dividends to our shareholders and, when appropriate as part of our capital management
strategy, the repurchase of our outstanding common stock. Hudson City Bancorps ability to
continue these activities is dependent upon capital distributions from Hudson City Savings.
Applicable federal law, regulations and regulatory actions may limit the amount of capital
distributions Hudson City Savings may make. Currently, Hudson City Savings must seek approval from
the OCC for future capital distributions. In accordance with the Company MOU, Hudson City Bancorp
is required to: (a) provide notice to the regulators in accordance with published regulatory
guidance prior to declaring a dividend to shareholders
Page 64
and (b) provide notice to and obtain non-objection from regulators prior to Hudson City Bancorp
incurring any debt outside the ordinary course of business. At June 30, 2011, Hudson City Bancorp
had total cash and due from banks of $130.9 million.
On December 16, 2009, we filed an automatic shelf registration statement on Form S-3 with the SEC,
which was declared effective immediately upon filing. This shelf registration statement allows us
to periodically offer and sell, from time to time, in one or more offerings, individually or in any
combination, common stock, preferred stock, debt securities, capital securities, guarantees,
warrants to purchase common stock or preferred stock and units consisting of one or more of the
foregoing. The shelf registration statement provides us with greater capital management
flexibility and enables us to readily access the capital markets in order to pursue growth
opportunities that may become available to us in the future or should there be any changes in the
regulatory environment that call for increased capital requirements. Although the shelf
registration statement does not limit the amount of the foregoing items that we may offer and sell
pursuant to the shelf registration statement, our ability and any decision to do so is subject to
market conditions and our capital needs. In addition, our ability to issue debt through the
capital markets may also be dependent on our ability to obtain an acceptable credit rating from one
or more nationally recognized credit rating agencies.
At June 30, 2011, Hudson City Savings exceeded all regulatory capital requirements. Hudson City
Savings tangible capital ratio, leverage (core) capital ratio and total risk-based capital ratio
were 8.44%, 8.44% and 20.27%, respectively. We have agreed in the Bank MOU not to materially
deviate from the capital plan without regulatory approval.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements and Contractual Obligations
Hudson City Bancorp is a party to certain off-balance sheet arrangements, which occur in the normal
course of our business, to meet the credit needs of our customers and the growth initiatives of the
Bank. These arrangements are primarily commitments to originate and purchase mortgage loans, and
to purchase mortgage-backed securities. We are also obligated under a number of non-cancellable
operating leases.
The following table reports the amounts of our contractual obligations as of June 30, 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due By Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less Than
|
|
|
One Year to
|
|
|
Three Years to
|
|
|
More Than
|
|
Contractual Obligation
|
|
Total
|
|
|
One Year
|
|
|
Three Years
|
|
|
Five Years
|
|
|
Five Years
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Mortgage loan originations
|
|
$
|
492,893
|
|
|
$
|
492,893
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Mortgage loan purchases
|
|
|
140
|
|
|
|
140
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed security purchases
|
|
|
25,000
|
|
|
|
25,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayment of borrowed funds
|
|
|
21,125,000
|
|
|
|
3,300,000
|
|
|
|
1,350,000
|
|
|
|
2,075,000
|
|
|
|
14,400,000
|
|
Operating leases
|
|
|
156,358
|
|
|
|
9,893
|
|
|
|
20,274
|
|
|
|
19,627
|
|
|
|
106,564
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
21,799,391
|
|
|
$
|
3,827,926
|
|
|
$
|
1,370,274
|
|
|
$
|
2,094,627
|
|
|
$
|
14,506,564
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend money to a customer as long as there is no
violation of any condition established in the contract. Commitments to fund first mortgage loans
generally have fixed expiration dates of approximately 90 days and other termination clauses. Since
some commitments are expected to expire without being drawn upon, the total commitment amounts do
not necessarily represent future cash requirements. Hudson City Savings evaluates each customers
credit-worthiness on a
Page 65
case-by-case basis. Additionally, we have available home equity, commercial
lines of credit, and overdraft lines of credit, which do not have fixed expiration dates, of
approximately $187.0 million, $8.6 million, and $2.7 million. We are not obligated to advance
further amounts on credit lines if the customer is delinquent, or otherwise in violation of the
agreement. The commitments to purchase first mortgage loans and mortgage-backed securities had a
normal period from trade date to settlement date of approximately 90 days and 60 days,
respectively.
Critical Accounting Policies
Note 2 to our Audited Consolidated Financial Statements, included in our 2010 Annual Report to
Shareholders and incorporated by reference into our 2010 Annual Report on Form 10-K, contains a
summary of our significant accounting policies. We believe our policies with respect to the
methodology for our determination of the ALL, the measurement of stock-based compensation expense,
the impairment of securities, the impairment of goodwill and the measurement of the funded status
and cost of our pension and other post-retirement benefit plans involve a higher degree of
complexity and require management to make difficult and subjective judgments which often require
assumptions or estimates about highly uncertain matters. Changes in these judgments, assumptions or
estimates could cause reported results to differ materially. These critical policies and their
application are continually reviewed by management, and are periodically reviewed with the Audit
Committee and our Board of Directors.
Allowance for Loan Losses
The ALL has been determined in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, under
which we are required to maintain an adequate ALL at June 30, 2011. We are responsible for the
timely and periodic determination of the amount of the allowance required. We believe that our ALL
is adequate to cover specifically identifiable loan losses, as well as estimated losses inherent in
our portfolio for which certain losses are probable but not specifically identifiable.
Our primary lending emphasis is the origination and purchase of one- to four-family first mortgage
loans on residential properties and, to a lesser extent, second mortgage loans on one- to
four-family residential properties resulting in a loan concentration in residential first mortgage
loans at June 30, 2011. As a result of our lending practices, we also have a concentration of loans
secured by real property located primarily in New Jersey, New York and Connecticut. At June 30,
2011, approximately 79.9% of our total loans are in the New York metropolitan area. Additionally,
the states of Pennsylvania, Virginia, Illinois and Maryland, accounted for 4.1%, 3.1%, 2.6%, and
2.3%, respectively of total loans. The remaining 8.0% of the loan portfolio is secured by real
estate primarily in the remainder of our lending markets. Based on the composition of our loan
portfolio and the growth in our loan portfolio, we believe the primary risks inherent in our
portfolio are the continued weakened economic conditions due to the recent U.S. recession,
continued high levels of unemployment, rising interest rates in the markets we lend and a
continuing decline in real estate market values. Any one or a combination of these adverse trends
may adversely affect our loan portfolio resulting in increased delinquencies, non-performing
assets, loan losses
and future levels of loan loss provisions. We consider these trends in market conditions in
determining the ALL.
Due to the nature of our loan portfolio, our evaluation of the adequacy of our ALL is performed
primarily on a pooled basis. Each month we prepare an analysis which categorizes the entire
loan portfolio by certain risk characteristics such as loan type (one- to four-family,
multi-family, commercial, construction, etc.), loan source (originated or purchased) and payment
status (i.e., current or number of
Page 66
days delinquent). Loans with known potential losses are
categorized separately. We assign potential loss factors to the payment status categories on the
basis of our assessment of the potential risk inherent in each loan type. These factors are
periodically reviewed for appropriateness giving consideration to charge-off history, delinquency
trends, portfolio growth and the status of the regional economy and housing market, in order to
ascertain that the loss factors cover probable and estimable losses inherent in the portfolio.
Based on our recent loss experience on non-performing loans, we changed certain loss factors used
in our quantitative analysis of the ALL for one- to four- family first mortgage loans during the
second quarter of 2011. This adjustment in our loss factors did not have a material effect on the
ultimate level of our ALL or on our provision for loan losses. We use this analysis, as a tool,
together with principal balances and delinquency reports, to evaluate the adequacy of the ALL.
Other key factors we consider in this process are current real estate market conditions in
geographic areas where our loans are located, changes in the trend of non-performing loans, the
results of our foreclosed property transactions, the current state of the local and national
economy, changes in interest rates and loan portfolio growth. Any one or a combination of these
adverse trends may adversely affect our loan portfolio resulting in increased delinquencies, loan
losses and future levels of provisions.
We maintain the ALL through provisions for loan losses that we charge to income. We charge losses
on loans against the ALL when we believe the collection of loan principal is unlikely. We establish
the provision for loan losses after considering the results of our review as described above. We
apply this process and methodology in a consistent manner and we reassess and modify the estimation
methods and assumptions used in response to changing conditions. Such changes, if any, are approved
by our AQC each quarter.
Hudson City Savings defines the population of potential impaired loans to be all non-accrual
construction, commercial real estate and multi-family loans. Impaired loans are individually
assessed to determine that the loans carrying value is not in excess of the fair value of the
collateral or the present value of the loans expected future cash flows. Smaller balance
homogeneous loans that are collectively evaluated for impairment, such as residential mortgage
loans and consumer loans, are specifically excluded from the impaired loan analysis.
We believe that we have established and maintained the ALL at adequate levels. Additions may be
necessary if future economic and other conditions differ substantially from the current operating
environment. Although management uses the best information available, the level of the ALL remains
an estimate that is subject to significant judgment and short-term change.
Stock-Based Compensation
We recognize the cost of employee services received in exchange for awards of equity instruments
based on the grant-date fair value for all awards granted, modified, repurchased or cancelled after
January 1, 2006 and for the portion of outstanding awards for which the requisite service was not
rendered as of January 1, 2006, in accordance with accounting guidance. We have made annual grants
of performance-based stock options since 2006 that vest if certain financial performance measures
are met. In accordance
with accounting guidance, we assess the probability of achieving these financial performance
measures and recognize the cost of these performance-based grants if it is probable that the
financial performance measures will be met. This probability assessment is subjective in nature and
may change over the assessment period for the performance measures.
We estimate the per share fair value of option grants on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes
option pricing model using assumptions for the expected dividend yield, expected stock price
volatility, risk-free
Page 67
interest rate and expected option term. These assumptions are based on our
analysis of our historical option exercise experience and our judgments regarding future option
exercise experience and market conditions. These assumptions are subjective in nature, involve
uncertainties and, therefore, cannot be determined with precision. The Black-Scholes option pricing
model also contains certain inherent limitations when applied to options that are not traded on
public markets.
The per share fair value of options is highly sensitive to changes in assumptions. In general, the
per share fair value of options will move in the same direction as changes in the expected stock
price volatility, risk-free interest rate and expected option term, and in the opposite direction
of changes in the expected dividend yield. For example, the per share fair value of options will
generally increase as expected stock price volatility increases, risk-free interest rate increases,
expected option term increases and expected dividend yield decreases. The use of different
assumptions or different option pricing models could result in materially different per share fair
values of options.
Pension and Other Post-Retirement Benefit Assumptions
Non-contributory retirement and post-retirement defined benefit plans are maintained for certain
employees, including retired employees hired on or before July 31, 2005 who have met other
eligibility requirements of the plans. We have adopted ASC 715,
Retirement Benefits
. This ASC
requires an employer to: (a) recognize in its statement of financial condition an asset for a
plans overfunded status or a liability for a plans underfunded status; (b) measure a plans
assets and its obligations that determine its funded status as of the end of the employers fiscal
year; and (c) recognize, in comprehensive income, changes in the funded status of a defined benefit
post-retirement plan in the year in which the changes occur.
We provide our actuary with certain rate assumptions used in measuring our benefit obligation. We
monitor these rates in relation to the current market interest rate environment and update our
actuarial analysis accordingly. The most significant of these is the discount rate used to
calculate the period-end present value of the benefit obligations and the expense to be included in
the following years financial statements. A lower discount rate will result in a higher benefit
obligation and expense, while a higher discount rate will result in a lower benefit obligation and
expense. The discount rate assumption was determined based on a cash flow/yield curve model
specific to our pension and post-retirement plans. We compare this rate to certain market indices,
such as long-term treasury bonds, or the Moodys bond indices, for reasonableness. A discount rate
of 5.75% was selected for the December 31, 2010 measurement date and the 2011 expense calculation.
For our pension plan, we also assumed an annual rate of salary increase of 4.00% for future
periods. This rate is corresponding to actual salary increases experienced over prior years. We
assumed a return on plan assets of 8.25% for future periods. We actuarially determine the return on
plan assets based on actual plan experience over the previous ten years. The actual return on plan
assets was 8.5% for 2010 and 12.9% for 2009. The assumed return on plan assets of 8.25% is based on
expected returns in future periods. There
can be no assurances with respect to actual return on plan assets in the future. We continually
review and evaluate all actuarial assumptions affecting the pension plan, including assumed return
on assets.
For our post-retirement benefit plan, the assumed health care cost trend rate used to measure the
expected cost of other benefits for 2010 was 8.50%. The rate was assumed to decrease gradually to
4.75% for 2016 and remain at that level thereafter. Changes to the assumed health care cost trend
rate are expected to have an immaterial impact as we capped our obligations to contribute to the
premium cost of coverage to the post-retirement health benefit plan at the 2007 premium level.
Page 68
Securities Impairment
Our available-for-sale securities portfolio is carried at estimated fair value with any unrealized
gains and losses, net of taxes, reported as accumulated other comprehensive income/loss in
shareholders equity. Debt securities which we have the positive intent and ability to hold to
maturity are classified as held-to-maturity and are carried at amortized cost. The fair values for
our securities are obtained from an independent nationally recognized pricing service.
Substantially all of our securities portfolio is comprised of mortgage-backed securities and debt
securities issued by a GSE. The fair value of these securities is primarily impacted by changes in
interest rates. We generally view changes in fair value caused by changes in interest rates as
temporary, which is consistent with our experience.
In April 2009, the FASB issued guidance which changes the method for determining whether an
other-than-temporary impairment exists for debt securities and the amount of the impairment to be
recognized in earnings. This guidance requires that an entity assess whether an impairment of a
debt security is other-than-temporary and, as part of that assessment, determine its intent and
ability to hold the security. If the entity intends to sell the debt security, an
other-than-temporary impairment shall be considered to have occurred. In addition, an
other-than-temporary impairment shall be considered to have occurred if it is more likely than not
that it will be required to sell the security before recovery of its amortized cost.
We conduct a periodic review and evaluation of the securities portfolio to determine if a decline
in the fair value of any security below its cost basis is other-than-temporary. Our evaluation of
other-than-temporary impairment considers the duration and severity of the impairment, our intent
and ability to hold the securities and our assessments of the reason for the decline in value and
the likelihood of a near-term recovery. The unrealized losses on securities in our portfolio were
due primarily to changes in market interest rates subsequent to purchase. In addition, we only
purchase securities issued by GSEs. As a result, the unrealized losses on our securities were not
considered to be other-than-temporary and, accordingly, no impairment loss was recognized during
the first six months of 2011.
Impairment of Goodwill
FASB guidance requires that goodwill and intangible assets with indefinite useful lives no longer
be amortized, but instead be tested for impairment at least annually using a fair-value based
two-step approach. Goodwill and other intangible assets amounted to $156.7 million and were
recorded as a result of Hudson City Bancorps acquisition of Sound Federal Bancorp, Inc. in 2006.
The first step (Step 1) used to identify potential impairment involves comparing each reporting
units estimated fair value to its carrying amount, including goodwill. As a community-oriented
bank, substantially all of the Companys operations involve the delivery of loan and deposit
products to
customers and these operations constitute the Companys only segment for financial reporting
purposes. If the estimated fair value of a reporting unit exceeds its carrying amount, goodwill is
not considered to be impaired. If the carrying amount exceeds the estimated fair value, there is an
indication of potential impairment and the second step (Step 2) is performed to measure the
amount. Step 2 involves calculating an implied fair value of goodwill for each reporting unit for
which impairment was indicated in Step 1. The implied fair value of goodwill is determined in a
manner similar to the amount of goodwill calculated in a business combination by measuring the
excess of the estimated fair value of the reporting unit, as determined in Step 1, over the
aggregate estimated fair values of the individual assets, liabilities,
Page 69
and identifiable
intangibles, as if the reporting unit was being acquired at the impairment test date. Subsequent
reversal of goodwill impairment losses is not permitted.
Quoted market prices in active markets are the best evidence of fair value and are used as the
basis for measurement, when available. Other acceptable valuation methods include present-value
measurements based on multiples of earnings or revenues, or similar performance measures. We
utilize quoted market prices as of our impairment test dates as well as control premiums in
determining the estimated fair value of our reporting unit. We also use market multiples based on
recent acquisition activity to calculate our estimated fair value. In determining the appropriate
control premium, management considers, among other factors, control premiums used in comparable
transactions. As a result of our analysis we have concluded that the fair value of goodwill, for
purposes of the goodwill impairment analysis, is in excess of its carrying amount. Therefore, we
did not recognize any impairment of goodwill or other intangible assets during the second quarter
of 2011 and for the year ended December 31, 2010.
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Quantitative and qualitative disclosure about market risk is presented as of December 31, 2010 in
Hudson City Bancorps 2010 Annual Report on Form 10-K. The following is an update of the discussion
provided therein.
General
As a financial institution, our primary component of market risk is interest rate volatility. Our
net income is primarily based on net interest income, and fluctuations in interest rates will
ultimately impact the level of both income and expense recorded on a large portion of our assets
and liabilities. Fluctuations in interest rates will also affect the market value of all
interest-earning assets, other than those that possess a short term to maturity. Due to the nature
of our operations, we are not subject to foreign currency exchange or commodity price risk. We do
not own any trading assets. We did not engage in any hedging transactions that use derivative
instruments (such as interest rate swaps and caps) during the first six months of 2011 and did not
have any such hedging transactions in place at June 30, 2011 although we may elect to do so in the
future as part of our overall interest rate risk management strategy. Our mortgage loan and
mortgage-backed security portfolios, which comprise 87.8% of our balance sheet, are subject to
risks associated with the economy in the New York metropolitan area, the general economy of the
United States and the continuing pressure on housing prices. We continually analyze our asset
quality and believe our ALL is adequate to cover known and potential losses.
The difference between rates on the yield curve, or the shape of the yield curve, impacts our net
interest income. The FOMC noted that the economic recovery is continuing at a moderate pace, though
somewhat more slowly than the FOMC expected. The FOMC also expressed concerns regarding recent
labor market indicators which have been weaker than anticipated. The FOMC noted that household
spending and business investment in equipment and software continue to expand. However, investment
in non-residential structures is still weak, and the housing sector continues to be depressed. The
national unemployment rate remains elevated and increased to 9.2% in June from 8.8% in March and
was slightly lower than the 9.4% unemployment rate in December 2010. In light of these items, the
FOMC decided to maintain the overnight lending rate at zero to 0.25% during the second quarter of
2011 and to continue purchases of securities using the quantitative easing program, which expired
at the end of the second quarter. In addition, the government-sponsored enterprises involved in the
mortgage market have actively purchased loans in an effort to keep mortgage rates down and support
the housing market, resulting in continued downward pressure on longer-term market interest rates.
Page 70
As a result, both short-term and long-term market interest rates have remained at low levels during
the first six months of 2011. During 2010 both shorter-term and longer-term interest decreased, but
the longer-term market rates decreased more than the shorter-term, thus flattening the market yield
curve. The current interest rate environment has allowed us to continue to re-price lower our
short-term time and non-maturity deposits, thereby reducing our cost of funds, and has also allowed
us to price medium-term time deposits (2-5 year maturities) at lower rates and extend the
weighted-average remaining maturity on this portfolio. The overall lower longer-term market
interest rates resulted in lower rates on our primary investments of mortgage loans and
mortgage-backed securities. In addition, the low market interest rates resulted in accelerated
prepayment speeds on these assets as customers sought to refinance their current debt to the lower
market rates.
During March 2011, the Bank executed a Restructuring Transaction that involved the extinguishment
of $12.50 billion of putable borrowings funded by the sale of approximately $8.66 billion of
variable-rate/hybrid mortgage-backed securities and the re-borrowing of $5.00 billion of short-term
fixed-rate/fixed-maturity funds. The securities sold were lower-yielding securities purchased by us
primarily during the recent low interest rate cycle. The $5.00 billion of borrowings placed on the
balance sheet had a weighted-average rate of 0.68% and maturities of $250.0 million per month
through November 2012. It was our belief that the net interest margin would increase by as much as
40 basis points in the second quarter of 2011 as a result of the Restructuring Transaction. The
result on our performance ratios due to this rate environment and the Restructuring Transaction was
an increase of our net interest rate spread to 1.94% for the second quarter of 2011 as compared to
1.50% for the linked first quarter of 2011 and 1.89% for the second quarter of 2010. Our net
interest margin also increased, to 2.14% for the second quarter of 2011 as compared to 1.72% for
the linked first quarter of 2011 and 2.13% for the second quarter of 2010. However, we expect
margin compression going forward from this higher net interest margin level.
Due to our investment and financing decisions, the more positive the slope of the yield curve the
more favorable the environment is for our ability to generate net interest income. Our
interest-bearing liabilities generally reflect movements in short- and intermediate-term rates,
while our interest-earning assets, a majority of which have initial terms to maturity or repricing
greater than one year, generally reflect movements in intermediate- and long-term interest rates. A
positive slope of the yield curve allows us to invest in interest-earning assets at a wider spread
to the cost of interest-bearing liabilities. However, though the market yield curve is still
relatively steep, we experienced during 2010 a more stable short-term rate environment as compared
to a declining long-term rate environment, resulting in a flatter market yield curve. This curve
has continued through the first six months of 2011. This flatter market yield has resulted in the
reported decreases in our net interest rate spread and net interest margin over the past several
quarters.
Also impacting our net interest income and net interest rate spread is the level of prepayment
activity on our interest-sensitive assets. The actual amount of time before mortgage loans and
mortgage-backed securities are repaid can be significantly impacted by changes in market interest
rates and mortgage prepayment rates. Mortgage prepayment rates will vary due to a number of
factors, including the regional economy in the area where the underlying mortgages were originated,
availability of credit, seasonal factors and demographic variables. However, the major factors
affecting prepayment rates are prevailing interest rates, related mortgage refinancing
opportunities and competition. Generally, the level of prepayment activity directly affects the
yield earned on those assets, as the payments received on the interest-earning assets will be
reinvested at the prevailing lower market interest rate. Prepayment rates are generally inversely
related to the prevailing market interest rate, thus, as market interest rates increase, prepayment
rates tend to decrease. Prepayment rates on our mortgage-related assets increased during 2010 and
have continued at these elevated levels through the first six months of 2011. We have been
Page 71
experiencing a decrease in prepayment activity during the past three months from the previous higher
rates, but if market interest rates remain at the current low levels, the prepayment activity may increase
or remain relatively high. Accordingly, we have used relatively high levels of prepayment activity in our
interest rate risk modeling presented below, but a lower level of prepayment activity than in prior periods
based on the recent experience of our portfolios. However, though the rate of prepayment speeds has
generally remained elevated, the actual dollars received on our mortgage-backed securities has decreased
due to the sale of $8.66 billion of securities as a result of the Restructuring Transaction.
Calls of investment securities and borrowed funds are also impacted by the level of market interest rates.
The level of calls of investment securities are generally inversely related to the prevailing market interest
rates, meaning as rates decrease the likelihood of a security being called would increase. The level of call
activity generally affects the yield earned on these assets, as the payment received on the security would
be reinvested at the prevailing lower market interest rate. During 2010, we saw an increase in call activity
on our investment securities as short-term market interest rates remained at low levels and long-term
market rates decreased during the first three quarters of the year. The slight rate increases during the
fourth quarter of 2010 decreased the amount of call activity on our investment securities. Market interest
rates during the first six months of 2011 did not decrease enough to cause a significant increase in call
activity. We did have $300 million of agency securities called during the second quarter of 2011. We do
not anticipate significant levels of calls of investment securities due to the anticipated higher levels of
longer-term market interest rates and the significant turnover of our portfolio during 2010 to instruments
with lower interest rates. Accordingly, we have limited amounts of calls reflected in the interest rate risk
modeling presented below.
Our borrowings have traditionally consisted of structured putable borrowings with ten year final
maturities and initial non-put periods of one to five years. The likelihood of a borrowing being put back is
directly related to the current market interest rates, meaning the higher that interest rates move, the more
likely the borrowing would be put back. The level of put activity generally affects the cost of our
borrowed funds, as the put of a borrowing would generally necessitate the re-borrowing of the funds or
deposit growth at the higher current market interest rates. During 2010 and the first six months of 2011
we experienced no put activity on our borrowed funds due to the continued low levels of short-term
market interest rates. Currently we have approximately $6.38 billion of putable borrowings that could be
put back to the Bank within the next three months. This amount has significantly decreased from
December 31, 2010 due to the $12.50 billion of quarterly putable borrowings extinguished as part of the
Restructuring Transaction and the $4.00 billion of quarterly putable borrowings that were modified into
fixed-rate/fixed-maturity borrowings during the second quarter of 2011. The weighted-average cost of
those borrowings modified increased by approximately 48 basis points. The $6.38 billion of quarterly
putable borrowings have a weighted-average rate of 4.29% and we do not believe a significant amount of
these borrowings will be put back to us unless rates increase in excess of 300 basis points.
The Restructuring Transaction had an immediate benefit on our net interest margin and improved our net
present value of equity ratios in the various shock scenarios we analyze. However, the Restructuring
Transaction by itself did not alleviate our interest rate risk position under a rising interest rate
environment as the basis point difference between the net present value of equity measures increased. The
Bank modified $4.00 billion of once quarterly putable borrowings into fixed-rate/fixed-maturity
borrowings which causes the price changes in the various shock scenarios to be similar to those for our
mortgage-related asset portfolio. We estimate that the modification from putable to bullet borrowings
improved our sensitivity in the plus 300 basis point shock scenario by approximately 35 to 40 basis
points. We continually monitor our interest rate risk position and are continuing to developing strategies
such as further modifications (maintaining the borrowing with adjusted terms, primarily repurchasing the
Page 72
put
option) or hedging certain borrowings to improve our sensitivity measures and further improve our
interest rate risk position. We may also diversify certain funding sources to decrease the overall
sensitivity of our liabilities to market rate changes.
We intend to continue focusing on funding any future asset growth primarily with customer deposits.
We also intend to use customer deposits to payoff certain borrowings as they mature. Using customer
deposits in this manner will allow us to achieve a greater balance between deposits and borrowings.
During 2009 and 2010, we were able to fund our asset growth and payments on maturing borrowings in
this manner. This growth was primarily in non-maturity money market accounts. For our interest rate
risk modeling, time deposits are presented at their maturity date, while non-maturity deposits are
presented based on a decay rate calculated from our experience. We may use borrowed funds as a
supplemental funding source for short-term liquidity if deposit growth decreases. These borrowings
would be a combination of short-term borrowings with maturities of three to six months and
longer-term fixed-maturity borrowings with terms of two to five years. Borrowings are presented at
maturity date, with the price or potential cash flow adjusted for potential puts, as applicable.
Simulation
Model.
We use our internal simulation models as our primary means to calculate and monitor the
interest rate risk inherent in our portfolio. These models report changes to net interest income
and the net present value of equity in different interest rate environments, assuming either an
incremental or instantaneous and permanent interest rate shock to all interest rate-sensitive
assets and liabilities. We assume maturing or called instruments are reinvested into the same type
of product, with the rate earned or paid reset to our currently offered rate for loans and
deposits, or the current market rate for securities and borrowed funds. We have not reported the
minus 200 or minus 300 basis point interest rate shock scenarios in either of our simulation model
analyses, as we believe, given the current interest rate environment and historical interest rate
levels, the resulting information would not be meaningful.
Net Interest Income.
As a primary means of managing interest rate risk, we monitor the impact of
interest rate changes on our net interest income over the next twelve-month period. This model does
not purport to provide estimates of net interest income over the next twelve-month period, but
attempts to assess the impact of interest rate changes on our net interest income. The following
table reports the changes to our net interest income over the next 12 months ending June 30, 2011
assuming either incremental or instantaneous changes in interest rates for the given rate shock
scenarios. The incremental interest rate changes occur over a 12 month period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in
|
|
Percent Change in Net Interest Income
|
Interest Rates
|
|
Incremental Change
|
|
Instantaneous Change
|
(Basis points)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
300
|
|
|
(2.51)
|
%
|
|
|
(12.37)
|
%
|
200
|
|
|
(1.72
|
)
|
|
|
(6.57
|
)
|
100
|
|
|
(0.95
|
)
|
|
|
(2.29
|
)
|
50
|
|
|
(0.49
|
)
|
|
|
(0.78
|
)
|
(50)
|
|
|
0.52
|
|
|
|
(4.77
|
)
|
(100)
|
|
|
0.12
|
|
|
|
(9.35
|
)
|
Of note in the positive shock scenarios:
|
|
|
the negative change to net interest income is primarily due to our interest-bearing
liabilities, particularly the $4.25 billion remaining short-term borrowings executed during
the Restructuring Transaction, resetting to higher rates faster than our interest-earning
assets, as the prepayment
|
Page 73
|
|
|
speeds on our mortgage-related assets and potential calls of
investment securities will both decrease as market rates increase, and
|
|
|
|
|
the lesser impact in the incremental analysis, particularly in the plus 300 basis point
analysis, is primarily due to less additional expense on our interest-bearing liabilities,
particularly the $4.25 billion of short-term borrowings, not immediately resetting to the
higher interest rates.
|
Of note in the negative shock scenarios:
|
|
|
the decrease in net interest income in the instantaneous shock analysis is due to the
accelerated prepayment speeds on our mortgage-related assets and the re-investment of the
proceeds into lower yielding instruments, and
|
|
|
|
|
the decrease is also due to the lack of change in the cost of the $6.38 billion of
quarterly putable borrowed funds, as they will not be put back in the lower interest rate
environment and will extend to maturity.
|
Of note in comparison to December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
the larger negative changes in the positive 200 basis point shock scenario (December 31,
2010 reported (0.65)% in the incremental change analysis and (4.02)% in the instantaneous
change analysis) were primarily due to the extinguishment of $12.50 billion of putable
borrowings and replacing $5.00 billion of these with short-term borrowings ($4.25 billion
remaining as of June 30, 2011), whose rate will reset at maturity.
|
Net Present Value of Equity.
We also monitor our interest rate risk by monitoring changes in the
net present value of equity in the different rate environments. The net present value of equity is
the difference between the estimated fair value of interest rate-sensitive assets and liabilities.
The changes in the market value of assets and liabilities due to changes in interest rates reflect
the interest sensitivity of those assets and liabilities. Their values are derived from the
characteristics of the asset or liability (i.e., fixed-rate, adjustable-rate, caps, floors)
relative to the current interest rate environment. For example, in a rising interest rate
environment the fair market value of a fixed-rate asset will decline, whereas the fair market value
of an adjustable-rate asset, depending on its repricing characteristics, may not decline. Increases
in the market value of assets will increase the present value of equity whereas decreases in the
market value of assets will decrease the present value of equity. Conversely, increases in the
market value of liabilities will decrease the present value of equity whereas decreases in the
market value of liabilities will increase the present value of equity.
Page 74
The following table presents the estimated net present value of equity over a range of interest
rate change scenarios at June 30, 2011. The present value ratio shown in the table is the net
present value of equity as a percent of the present value of total assets in each of the different
rate environments. Our current policy sets a minimum ratio of the net present value of equity to
the fair value of assets in the current interest rate environment (no rate shock) of 7.00% and a
minimum present value ratio of 5.00% in the plus 200 basis point interest rate shock scenario.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in
|
|
Present
|
|
Basis Point
|
Interest Rates
|
|
Value Ratio
|
|
Change
|
(Basis points)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
300
|
|
|
4.40
|
%
|
|
|
(400
|
)
|
200
|
|
|
6.58
|
|
|
|
(182
|
)
|
100
|
|
|
8.05
|
|
|
|
(35
|
)
|
50
|
|
|
8.40
|
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
8.40
|
|
|
|
|
|
(50)
|
|
|
7.93
|
|
|
|
(47
|
)
|
(100)
|
|
|
7.04
|
|
|
|
(136
|
)
|
Of note in the positive shock scenarios:
|
|
|
the decreases in the net present value ratio and the sensitivity measure reflect the
decrease in the value of our mortgage-related assets to below par as the prepayment speeds
will slow on this portfolio, and
|
|
|
|
the decrease also reflects that the value of our $12.33 billion putable borrowing
portfolio will remain above par due to put options.
|
Of note in the negative shock scenarios:
|
|
|
the decrease in the present value ratio in the negative basis point change was primarily
due to higher pricing of our putable borrowed funds as the structures will increase in
duration, and
|
|
|
|
the value of our mortgage-related assets will remain closer to par than the borrowings
as the prepayment speeds increase thus shortening the duration of these portfolios.
|
Of note in comparison to December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
the higher net present value of equity ratio in the base case (6.23% as of December 31,
2010) primarily reflects the extinguishment of higher priced putable borrowings when
compared to the price of the securities sold and the $5.00 billion of re-borrowed funds.
|
The methods we use in simulation modeling are inherently imprecise. This type of modeling requires
that we make assumptions that may not reflect the manner in which actual yields and costs respond
to changes in market interest rates. For example, we assume the composition of the interest
rate-sensitive assets and liabilities will remain constant over the period being measured and that
all interest rate shocks will be uniformly reflected across the yield curve, regardless of the
duration to maturity or repricing. The table assumes that we will take no action in response to the
changes in interest rates. In addition, prepayment estimates and other assumptions within the model
are subjective in nature, involve uncertainties, and, therefore, cannot be determined with
precision. Accordingly, although the previous two tables may provide an estimate of our interest
rate risk at a particular point in time, such measurements are not
Page 75
intended to and do not provide a
precise forecast of the effect of changes in interest rates on our net interest income or present
value of equity.
GAP Analysis.
The following table presents the amounts of our interest-earning assets and interest-bearing
liabilities outstanding at June 30, 2011, which we anticipate to reprice or mature in each of the
future time periods shown. Except for prepayment or call activity and non-maturity deposit decay rates,
we determined the amounts of assets and liabilities that reprice or mature during a particular period in
accordance with the earlier of the term to rate reset or the contractual maturity of the asset or liability.
Assumptions used for decay rates are based on the Banks experience with the particular deposit type.
Prepayment speeds on our mortgage-related assets are based on recent experience, but slowed to reflect
anticipated rate increase and product run-off. Callable investment securities and putable borrowed funds
are reported at the anticipated call or put date, for those that are callable within one year and that we
believe will be called or put based on current market interest rates. Otherwise they are reported at their
contractual maturity date. Investment securities with step-up features, totaling $3.60 billion, are reported
at the earlier of their next step-up date or anticipated call date. We reported none of our investment
securities at their anticipated call date. We have reported no borrowings at their anticipated put date due to
the current low interest rate environment. We have excluded non-accrual mortgage loans of $835.1
million and non-accrual other loans of $3.8 million from the table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At June 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More than
|
|
|
More than
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More than
|
|
|
More than
|
|
|
two years
|
|
|
three years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months
|
|
|
six months
|
|
|
one year to
|
|
|
to three
|
|
|
to five
|
|
|
More than
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
or less
|
|
|
to one year
|
|
|
two years
|
|
|
years
|
|
|
years
|
|
|
five years
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Interest-earning assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First mortgage loans
|
|
$
|
3,216,972
|
|
|
$
|
2,638,228
|
|
|
$
|
4,097,820
|
|
|
$
|
4,086,814
|
|
|
$
|
4,804,691
|
|
|
$
|
10,393,726
|
|
|
$
|
29,238,251
|
|
Consumer and other loans
|
|
|
101,491
|
|
|
|
2,868
|
|
|
|
14,504
|
|
|
|
36,993
|
|
|
|
11,125
|
|
|
|
129,350
|
|
|
|
296,331
|
|
Federal funds sold
|
|
|
566,950
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
566,950
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities
|
|
|
3,617,007
|
|
|
|
1,698,966
|
|
|
|
2,437,885
|
|
|
|
2,095,850
|
|
|
|
2,364,125
|
|
|
|
3,166,647
|
|
|
|
15,380,480
|
|
FHLB stock
|
|
|
767,064
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
767,064
|
|
Investment securities
|
|
|
7,221
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,750,000
|
|
|
|
850,000
|
|
|
|
1,000,000
|
|
|
|
38,950
|
|
|
|
3,646,171
|
|
|
Total interest-earning assets
|
|
|
8,276,705
|
|
|
|
4,340,062
|
|
|
|
8,300,209
|
|
|
|
7,069,657
|
|
|
|
8,179,941
|
|
|
|
13,728,673
|
|
|
|
49,895,247
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Savings accounts
|
|
|
65,073
|
|
|
|
65,073
|
|
|
|
86,763
|
|
|
|
86,763
|
|
|
|
216,909
|
|
|
|
347,053
|
|
|
|
867,634
|
|
Interest-bearing demand accounts
|
|
|
191,425
|
|
|
|
191,425
|
|
|
|
284,474
|
|
|
|
284,474
|
|
|
|
491,882
|
|
|
|
523,845
|
|
|
|
1,967,525
|
|
Money market accounts
|
|
|
818,231
|
|
|
|
818,232
|
|
|
|
1,636,464
|
|
|
|
1,636,464
|
|
|
|
2,863,811
|
|
|
|
409,116
|
|
|
|
8,182,318
|
|
Time deposits
|
|
|
6,214,473
|
|
|
|
2,992,826
|
|
|
|
2,518,131
|
|
|
|
361,425
|
|
|
|
1,865,446
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,952,301
|
|
Borrowed funds
|
|
|
1,650,000
|
|
|
|
1,650,000
|
|
|
|
1,350,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,075,000
|
|
|
|
14,400,000
|
|
|
|
21,125,000
|
|
|
Total interest-bearing liabilities
|
|
|
8,939,202
|
|
|
|
5,717,556
|
|
|
|
5,875,832
|
|
|
|
2,369,126
|
|
|
|
7,513,048
|
|
|
|
15,680,014
|
|
|
|
46,094,778
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate sensitivity gap
|
|
$
|
(662,497
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,377,494
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,424,377
|
|
|
$
|
4,700,531
|
|
|
$
|
666,893
|
|
|
$
|
(1,951,341
|
)
|
|
$
|
3,800,469
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative interest rate sensitivity gap
|
|
$
|
(662,497
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2,039,991
|
)
|
|
$
|
384,386
|
|
|
$
|
5,084,917
|
|
|
$
|
5,751,810
|
|
|
$
|
3,800,469
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative interest rate sensitivity gap
as a percent of total assets
|
|
|
(1.28
|
)%
|
|
|
(3.94
|
)%
|
|
|
0.74
|
%
|
|
|
9.82
|
%
|
|
|
11.11
|
%
|
|
|
7.34
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative interest-earning assets
as a percent of interest-bearing
liabilities
|
|
|
92.59
|
%
|
|
|
86.08
|
%
|
|
|
101.87
|
%
|
|
|
122.20
|
%
|
|
|
118.91
|
%
|
|
|
108.24
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Page 76
The cumulative one-year gap as a percent of total assets was negative 3.94% at June 30, 2011
compared with positive 7.21% at December 31, 2010. The change to a negative cumulative one-year gap
primarily reflects the $4.25 billion remaining of short-term fixed-rate/fixed-maturity borrowings
placed on the balance sheet as a result of the Restructuring Transaction. The decrease in the
cumulative one-year gap also reflects the sale of $8.60 billion of primarily variable-rate/hybrid
mortgage-backed securities which reduced the amounts reported in the shorter-term periods and the
reduction of mortgage-related asset prepayment speeds due to recent experience.
The methods used in the gap table are also inherently imprecise. For example, although certain
assets and liabilities may have similar maturities or periods to repricing, they may react in
different degrees to changes in market interest rates. Interest rates on certain types of assets
and liabilities may fluctuate in advance of changes in market interest rates, while interest rates
on other types may lag behind changes in market rates. Certain assets, such as adjustable-rate
loans and mortgage-backed securities, have features that limit changes in interest rates on a
short-term basis and over the life of the loan. If interest rates change, prepayment and early
withdrawal levels would likely deviate from those assumed in calculating the table. Finally, the
ability of borrowers to make payments on their adjustable-rate loans may decrease if interest rates
increase.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
Ronald E. Hermance, Jr., our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and James C. Kranz, our
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness
of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the
Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended) as of June 30, 2011. Based upon their evaluation, they each found that our
disclosure controls and procedures were effective to ensure that information required to be
disclosed in the reports that we file and submit under the Exchange Act was recorded, processed,
summarized and reported as and when required and that such information was accumulated and
communicated to our management as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required
disclosures.
There was no change in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
period covered by this report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
PART II OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
We are not involved in any pending legal proceedings other than routine legal proceedings occurring
in the ordinary course of business. We believe that these routine legal proceedings, in the
aggregate, are immaterial to our financial condition and results of operations.
Page 77
Item 1A. Risk Factors
For a summary of risk factors relevant to our operations, please see Part I, Item 1A in our 2010
Annual Report on Form 10-K and our March 31, 2011 Form 10-Q. There has been no material change in
risk factors since March 31, 2011 except as noted below.
We are required to comply with the terms of the Bank MOU and the Company MOU that we have entered
into with our regulators, and lack of compliance could result in additional regulatory enforcement
actions.
The Bank and the Company each entered into a MOU with our former regulator, the OTS on June 24,
2011. In accordance with the Bank MOU, the Bank has adopted and has
implemented enhanced operating
policies and procedures, that will enable us to continue to (a)
reduce our level of interest rate risk, (b) reduce our funding concentration, (c) diversify our
funding sources, (d) enhance our liquidity position, (e) monitor and manage loan modifications and
(f) maintain our capital position in accordance with our existing capital plan. In addition, we agreed to
implement an increased governance structure over compliance and risk management practices including
the establishment of a Risk Committee of the Board of Directors.
In accordance with the Company MOU, the Company must, among other things support the Banks
compliance with the Bank MOU. The Company MOU also requires the Company to: (a) provide notice to
the regulators in accordance with published regulatory guidance prior to declaring a dividend to
shareholders and (b) provide notice to and obtain written non-objection from the regulators prior
to the Company incurring any debt outside the ordinary course of business.
The Board and management believe that the Company and the Bank are currently in
compliance with all of the material terms of the agreements. However,
a finding by our regulators that the
Company or the Bank failed to comply with the MOU could result in additional regulatory scrutiny,
constraints on our business, or formal enforcement action. Any of those events could have a
material adverse effect on our future operations, financial condition, growth or other aspects of
our business.
Page 78
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
The following table reports information regarding repurchases of our common stock during the second
quarter of 2011 and the stock repurchase plans approved by our Board of Directors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Number of
|
|
|
Number of Shares
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Purchased
|
|
|
that May Yet Be
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
as Part of Publicly
|
|
|
Purchased Under
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Price Paid
|
|
|
Announced Plans
|
|
|
the Plans or
|
|
Period
|
|
Purchased
|
|
|
per Share
|
|
|
or Programs
|
|
|
Programs (1)
|
|
April 1-April 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,123,550
|
|
May 1-May 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,123,550
|
|
June 1-June 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,123,550
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
On July 25, 2007, Hudson City Bancorp announced the adoption of its eighth Stock Repurchase Program, which authorized the repurchase of up to 51,400,000 shares of common stock. This program has no expiration date.
|
Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities
Not applicable.
Item 4. (Removed and Reserved)
Item 5. Other Information
Not applicable.
Page 79
Item 6. Exhibits
|
|
|
Exhibit Number
|
|
Exhibit
|
10.39
|
|
Form of Hudson City Bancorp, Inc. 2006 Stock Incentive
Plan Deferred Stock Unit Award Notice Employees
|
|
|
|
10.40
|
|
Form of Hudson City Bancorp, Inc. 2006 Stock Incentive
Plan Deferred Stock Unit Award Notice Non-employee
Directors
|
|
|
|
31.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
|
31.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer
|
|
|
|
32.1
|
|
Written Statement of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer furnished pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. *
|
|
|
|
101
|
|
The following information from the Companys Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011,
filed with the SEC on August 5, 2011, has been formatted
in eXtensible Business Reporting Language: (i)
Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition at June
30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, (ii) Consolidated
Statements of Income for the three and six months ended
June 30, 2011 and 2010, (iii) Consolidated Statements of
Changes in Shareholders Equity for the six months ended
June 30, 2011 and 2010 , (iv) Consolidated Statements of
Cash Flows for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and
2010 and (v) Notes to the Unaudited Consolidated
Financial Statements (detail tagged). *
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Pursuant to SEC rules, this exhibit will not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18
of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to the liability of that section.
|
Page 80
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hudson City Bancorp, Inc.
|
|
Date: August 5, 2011
|
|
By:
|
/s/ Ronald E. Hermance, Jr.
|
|
|
|
|
Ronald E. Hermance, Jr.
|
|
|
|
|
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
|
|
|
Date: August 5, 2011
|
|
By:
|
/s/ Anthony J. Fabiano
|
|
|
|
|
Anthony J. Fabiano
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Vice President
(Principal Accounting Officer)
|
|
|
Page 81
Hudson City Bancorp (NASDAQ:HCBK)
Historical Stock Chart
From Aug 2024 to Sep 2024
Hudson City Bancorp (NASDAQ:HCBK)
Historical Stock Chart
From Sep 2023 to Sep 2024