We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Secure Trust Bank Plc | LSE:STB | London | Ordinary Share | GB00B6TKHP66 | ORD 40P |
| Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -2.00 | -0.56% | 356.00 | 46,671 | 16:35:07 |
| Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 355.00 | 365.00 | 363.00 | 357.00 | 359.00 | |
| Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Commercial Banks, Nec | 185.5M | 24.3M | 1.2742 | 2.81 | 68.28M |
| Last Trade Time | Trade Type | Trade Size | Trade Price | Currency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16:35:07 | UT | 2,603 | 356.00 | GBX |
| Date | Time | Source | Headline |
|---|---|---|---|
| 13/12/2024 | 15:14 | UK RNS | Secure Trust Bank PLC Appointment of Remuneration Committee Chairman |
| 11/12/2024 | 11:42 | ALNC |  Close Brothers can appeal Hopcraft case, UK Supreme Court says |
| 06/12/2024 | 17:07 | UK RNS | Secure Trust Bank PLC Holding(s) in Company |
| 02/12/2024 | 13:47 | UK RNS | Secure Trust Bank PLC Director/PDMR Shareholding |
| 19/11/2024 | 16:19 | UK RNS | Secure Trust Bank PLC Holding(s) in Company |
| 13/11/2024 | 16:50 | UK RNS | Secure Trust Bank PLC Director/PDMR Shareholding |
| 13/11/2024 | 07:00 | UK RNS | Secure Trust Bank PLC Capital Markets Event |
| 08/11/2024 | 13:15 | UK RNS | Secure Trust Bank PLC Holding(s) in Company |
| 01/11/2024 | 15:51 | UK RNS | Secure Trust Bank PLC Holding(s) in Company |
| 01/11/2024 | 15:15 | UK RNS | Secure Trust Bank PLC Director/PDMR Shareholding |
Secure Trust Bank (STB) Share Charts1 Year Secure Trust Bank Chart |
|
1 Month Secure Trust Bank Chart |
Intraday Secure Trust Bank Chart |
| Date | Time | Title | Posts |
|---|---|---|---|
| 12/12/2024 | 12:21 | Secure Trust | 1,051 |
| 23/10/2019 | 07:34 | Secure Trust Bank | - |
| Trade Time | Trade Price | Trade Size | Trade Value | Trade Type |
|---|
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 08/12/2024 22:26 by apple53 Thanks Red. 1m share trade at 3.46 on 5th. I haven't worked out what % hit on its funds Unicorn will have taken (assuming they bought £6-10), presumably not immense and so they preferred the hit over later being criticised for holding car finance stocks through the crisis.The good news is someone was on the other side of this block trade. Does the absence of an other RNS mean that it was sold to a number of different institutions? Does that make £3.46 the floor? And btw does the implied hit taken by STB mean CBG would be bust on the same basis? Should you short a modest amount of Close Bros to hedge STB? |
Posted at 02/12/2024 18:22 by red ninja A vote of confidence in STB :-Secure Trust Bank PLC ("STB" or the "Company") announces that on 29 November 2024 Mary Hartley, a person closely associated ("PCA") to Julian Hartley, a PDMR of the Company, purchased a total of 6,520 Ordinary Shares of 40p each ("Shares") in the Company at a price of £3.814 per share. |
Posted at 24/11/2024 17:17 by chabuddy STB's January 2024 Trading Update stated that between 2014 and 2017, a "mid-single digit proportion of [their] new vehicle finance loans included [discretionary commission arrangements]".Each FY earnings between 2014 and 2017 confirms that the majority of new business lending was for used rather than new cars. Assuming that 'mid-single digit proportion' = 7% (higher to be conservative), that 50% of new business lending went to new cars (will be less than this, but trying to be conservative), and that they used discretionary commission arrangements for the full year in 2017 rather than only half the year (and the same in 2014, given STB provided no clarity on this; this is conservative given that Moneyway — one of STB's motor finance lending platforms — stated that they stopped using these arrangements in June 2017), I estimate that ~ £15.6m was lent that involved the use of discretionary commission. Redress doesn't equal full refund, and even after applying prejudgment interest I think £15.6m can be seen as the upper bound for the discretionary commission arrangements (the actual figure likely less than half of this). STB's market cap decline of > £80m post-judgment seems to suggest that the market views a risk of redress for non-discretionary commission arrangements as well, with a consumer rights head saying that "anyone who has already been told by their finance provider they didn’t have discretionary commission on their loan should now be asking if any commission at all was applied." Clearly the FCA have sh*t the bed on this one, but if significant redress only applies to discretionary arrangements then it looks like STB will be fine. If it applies to non-discretionary arrangements, this will have wide-sweeping consequences across the entire economy, and won't be just limited to motor finance firms. I personally think at ~£3.5/share, this is increasingly looking like a really good punt, given that pre-judgment sell-side consensus implies that at the current share price it would be trading at < 1.5 P/E within 2 years! |
Posted at 20/11/2024 22:08 by red ninja Article in Times today states Moody’s putting the size of this scandal now at £30 billion. STB not mentioned in article.Note, the size of the impact if any on STB still not known. RNS from yesterday shows Farringdon capital has sold 1.5% of STB. |
Posted at 01/11/2024 14:02 by red ninja That's the thing if the Supreme court rejects the Appeal court ruling then the current share price should recover. However, if the Supreme court back the Appeal court rulingthen it's going to be difficult. In the Times yesterday a former regulator slammed the FCA for providing a lack of clarity in it's rules which let in this Appeal court judgement. |
Posted at 01/11/2024 07:35 by cfro Doesn't look like the bottom yet - more problems in the vehicle finance division. I am assuming though that this has to be linked with the recent court ruling, so perhaps the management are acting prudent on this and kitchen sinking the probable upfront costs.You could argue that most of this extra cost is now already built into the share price anyway.. |
Posted at 16/10/2024 13:15 by smithie6 a comparison of STB shares with the shares of another lender, MFX.========= btw another company doing lending in the UK, lse:stb ..it has a p/e of ~6, double the p/e of 3 for MFX. I guess that MFX perhaps deserves a lower p/e because with a cap. value of only £18m many institutions/fund surely are not able to own any shares in MFX, (& some PIs avoid companies with such a small cap. value) whereas STB has a cap. value of ~£150m, where many institutions/funds are allowed by their own rules to invest. but being half price in comparison, that looks way overdone imo. ------ How do STB & MFX compare for growth 2019 & 2023. Revenue (data taken from financial summary page of advfn) STB. £165m. £185m. % increase = 1.1 MFX £26.7m. £53.3m % increase = 2.0 (revenue 2023/revenue 2019) (MFX. doubling the revenue in 4 years, impressive) For revenue growth MFX wipes the floor with STB, yet the p/e of MFX is half that of STB ! Doesn't make sense imo. imo either STB is too expensive or MFX is too cheap ! |
Posted at 14/8/2024 11:36 by apple53 STB's cost income ratio isn't that high, but it does run a relatively high margin and high cost-of-risk balance sheet, so its pre-tax margin is not that big (relative to revenues). It is therefore susceptible (much more so than OSB) to a relatively modest 'exceptional' variation (normally bad-debt-related) in any period.In H1 last year, it was the commercial finance write-off. This half year, it's the vehicle finance loan re-classification. If you are happy to believe the company's statements, this is temporary, and automatically follows from the pause and review of repayments. Remarkably, STB says there has been no deterioration in the underlying book, ie that customers are not likely to take advantage of the FCA-created turmoil to default. The hit is around £13m (ie the approx increase in stock of provisions vs December). Add this back and profit is c. 75% higher (nearly 120p) and RoE close to 13%. We don't need to worry about when the £13m will be written back, or perhaps even if it won't all be released (though there is a risk to management credibility if most of it isn't), as long as there is no on-going extra provisioning in this space. One small concern is the small number of ancient loans which may have involved discretionary commissions. Presumably this should cost less than £13m. More importantly, looking at the underlying eps, the 2025 forecast on marketscreener, recently raised to 270p, doesn't look stupid, though I wouldn't look for upgrades. Even if we double underlying H1 eps and use a PE of 7 we're still looking at a share price of over £16, so we don't need eps upgrades to drive the story. NB Not that long ago banks traded at 10x forward earnings...... I haven't done a review of how much covid funding still impacts margins (anyone?) and you might point out that if there is an exceptional hit most half years then maybe they aren't THAT exceptional. I've left a cheeky order on to buy more, hoping that the optically poor results take us down a bit more, but I am already up to my gills, having bought back, below £8, much of what I sold in the recent spike. |
Posted at 02/3/2024 19:56 by apple53 MrScruff,I agree this is a great opportunity for investors. I don't agree with your view on rates or growth etc., and I wrote the following to remind myself of history and the investment case for these banks. Higher rates tend to benefit earnings, though much higher rates are typically thought likely to increase bad debt charges. Materially higher rates and a high recession risk is normally enough to hit multiples. [it is important you don't have silly regulators that require you to buy reams of government bonds at low interest rates - this is what killed SVB and, arguably, First Republic]. Overall, though, there isn't really any correlation between rates and multiples. 'Any growth' doesn't tend to drive the share price violently up. Balance sheet growth requires capital, and more than it used to under Basel 1/2. In the case of STB the drive for rapid growth probably hit the share price, as it required a dividend cut, and also because some shareholders are rightly scared of rapid growth in bank balance sheets. One of the clearest correlations (with causation) in banking is rapid growth and subsequent high (sometimes disastrous) bad debts. Bank investors 'normally' like modest balance sheet growth, faster growth in fee income, a low level of dealing income and an expectation of a falling cost income ratio. Historically, banks have traded at 8-15x forward eps. It is only in the past few years that 5x earnings has been considered normal, and this in Europe, but not the US, where 9-12x is more typical. What is doubly weird about the ridiculously low multiples is that UK banks are much much safer than they used to be. Equity capital ratios are 2.5-4x higher than in the noughties. [There is a downside to this - RoEs are lower, and incremental growth needs more incremental capital]. They are also encouraged to ex-ante provision (which is good as it helps to smooth provisioning across the cycle). Overall CoE should be lower. None of this means that banks are immune to property market collapses. Some (US) banks are over-exposed to commercial property (NYCB). This has been the cause of most bad debt crises (as opposed to the liquidity crisis post-Lehman). Resi mortgages are also at risk from a big increase in unemployment, double digit interest rates, 40% falls in value (each in isolation) or a milder combination of the 3. The other risk to banks is social media, which magnifies problems that used to swept under the carpet, such that issues which might have been manageable with a couple of year's retained earnings can now be enough to cause a run. STB is probably the weirdest example (and could be the cheapest bank in the developed world), but OSB stands out even more. STB is tiny; OSB merely small. STB is building a growth track record; OSB already has one. STB is modestly profitable; OSB is very profitable (for a modern bank). STB is modestly at risk from an increase in bad debts; OSB is highly cushioned - it has SUCH a low cost income ratio that its leverage to an increase in bad debts is almost the lowest in the industry. If it was 10x the size and based in the US it would trade at twice the valuation or more. I have no idea when this situation will 'normalise', but in the mean time these banks need to buy back their stock (and I would happily forgo some yield to fund this). |
Posted at 29/3/2023 11:03 by 1tx Whilst recent market sentiment to banks & consumer lenders has not helped matters.The major reason for the fall in STB share price was the dismal results for the first half of the 22 financial year announced in early August.The decision to have a four times covered dividend did not help matters either.Virtually everybody who has held STB for any period longer than a few months has lost money and those institutions who bought shares when it was floated out of Arbuthnot ARBB & in subsequent placings of ARBB's remaining holdings have made a massive loss.Most still hold the stock they bought,it is not easy to sell in large amounts unless there is a willing buyer.STB may be a bit undervalued but there is in my opinion a problem with the company.STB is not "connected" to its shareholders with smallcap companies you need directors who have a meaningful interest in the company & are interested in maintaining & improving value for shareholders.STB is run by managers for managers. |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
