The purpose of all trade strategies is to identify conditions with a high probability outcome and acceptable capital exposure. quote from "High Probability Trade"
http://www.phil.frb.org/consumer-credit-and-payments/statistics/ Consumer Debt Aggregate Indebtedness of Consumers Total consumer credit outstanding is broken down into two categories in the G.19 report: revolving and nonrevolving credit. The G.19, a Federal Reserve report covering consumer credit, is released around the fifth business day of each month. The G.19 report contains statistics for the amounts of outstanding credit among several major holders of consumer credit. Also included are the terms of credit across a variety of institutions and types of loans. Access at: http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/g19/current/g19.htm Consumer Credit (G.19) (EOP, SA, Bil.$) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Q3 2012 Q4 Total Outstanding $2,361.8 $2,506.3 $2,525.9 $2,420.2 $2,522.2 $2,615.7 $2,723.8 $2,768.2 Revolving $924.9 $1,002.9 $1,005.2 $917.2 $840.7 $842.5 $845.1 $845.8 Nonrevolving $1,436.9 $1,503.4 $1,520.7 $1,503.0 $1,681.5 $1,773.2 $1,878.6 $1,922.4 Notes: Consumer credit covers most short- and intermediate-term credit extended to individuals. It includes revolving credit (credit card credit and balances outstanding on unsecured revolving lines of credit) and nonrevolving credit (such as secured and unsecured credit for automobiles, mobile homes, trailers, durable goods, vacations, and other purposes). Consumer credit excludes loans secured by real estate (such as mortgage loans, home equity loans, and home equity lines of credit). EOP = end of period, SA = seasonally adjusted Consumer Debt Composition The data used to show consumer debt composition come from two subsections of the Federal Reserve Flow of Funds Accounts (Z.1) . These subsections (Tables D.1 and D.3) measure debt growth and debt outstanding in several sectors. The Federal Reserve Board of Governors releases these statistics during the second week of March, June, September, and December. Access at: http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/ under "Debt growth, borrowing and debt outstanding tables." Consumer Debt Composition and Growth 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Q3.12 Q4.12 Debt Outstanding (SA, $ Bil) Credit Market $12,856.0 $13,711.5 $13,688.0 $13,410.1 $13,073.7 $12,869.4 $12,755.1 $12,830.8 Home Mortgages $9,896.5 $10,579.7 $10,519.1 $10,368.1 $9,889.8 $9,660.7 $9,449.3 $9,430.5 Consumer Credit $2,385.0 $2,528.8 $2,548.9 $2,438.7 $2,541.6 $2,627.4 $2,733.8 $2,779.2 Growth Rate (SAAR, %) Credit Market 9.62 6.41 -0.19 -1.71 -2.23 -1.60 -1.95 2.45 Home Mortgage 10.79 6.64 -0.60 -1.42 -2.98 -2.33 -3.09 -0.80 Consumer Credit 4.94 5.79 0.81 -4.62 -1.25 3.35 4.20 6.65 Notes: Home mortgages and consumer credit will not add up to total household debt because the other four components are unpublished. The four unpublished components are municipal securities, bank loans nec, other loans and advances, and commercial mortgages SA = seasonally adjusted, SAAR = seasonally adjusted annual rate Data are on an end-of-period basis and may differ from monthly average statistics in the Board's H.6 release. Credit Performance Loan Charge-Offs The charge-off statistics released by the Federal Reserve Credit Performance Loan Charge-Offs The charge-off statistics released by the Federal Reserve Board are calculated from data available in the Report of Condition and Income (Call Report), filed each quarter by all commercial banks. Charge-off rates for any category of loan are defined as the flow of a bank's net charge-offs (gross charge-offs minus recoveries) during a quarter divided by the average level of its loans outstanding over that quarter. Data for each calendar quarter become available approximately 60 days after the end of the quarter. Access at: http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/chargeoff/ Loan Charge-Offs 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Q3.12 Q4.12 Charge-Off Rate1 (SAAR, %) Consumer Loans 2.01 2.50 3.53 5.49 5.88 3.62 2.47 2.50 Credit Cards 3.54 4.00 5.52 9.40 9.34 5.68 3.86 4.06 Residential Real Estate Loans2 0.10 0.26 1.28 2.36 2.12 1.58 1.74 1.08 Net Charge-Offs3 (NSA, $ Mil) Consumer Loans $16,314 $21,987 $34,190 $52,961 $74,345 $43,010 $7,305 $7,558 Credit Cards $11,007 $13,339 $19,950 $34,883 $61,886 $35,017 $5,788 $5,906 Residential Real Estate Loans2 $1,835 $5,036 $25,513 $49,540 $44,273 $32,155 $9,058 $5,669 Source: Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council. FRB Call Report. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Notes: SAAR = seasonally adjusted annual rate, NSA = not seasonally adjusted 1 Charge-off rate is the flow of a bank's net charge-offs (gross charge-offs minus recoveries) during a quarter divided by the average level of its loan outstanding over that quarter multiplied by 400 to express the ratio as an annual percentage rate. Charged-off loans are reported on schedule RI-B and the average levels of loans on schedule RC-K. 2 Residential real estate loans include loans secured by one- to four-family properties, including home equity lines of credit. 3 Charge-offs are the value of loans and leases removed from the books and charged against loss reserves. Credit Card Charge-Offs: Managed Assets Basis* This chart is derived from data available in the Report of Condition and Income (Call Report), filed each quarter by all commercial banks. The charge-off rate is calculated by dividing the sum of on- and off-balance-sheet credit card net charge-offs (gross charge-offs minus recoveries) during a quarter by the on- and off-balance-sheet total amount outstanding for the end of the previous quarter. *The charge-off rate presented here may vary slightly from measures reported by the Board because the Board’s charge-off rate is calculated on the basis of average quarterly credit card assets. ( http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/chargeoff/ ) Source: Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council. FRB Call Report. Note: The on-balance-sheet net charge-offs calculation comes from the aggregation of variables RIADB514 (gross charge-offs) and RIADB515 (recoveries) from the Call Report. The total amount outstanding for on-balance-sheet assets comes from the aggregation of variable RCFDB538 from the Call Report. For off-balance-sheet assets, the calculation of net charge-offs comes from the aggregation of variables RIADB749 (gross charge-offs) and RIADB756 (recoveries) from the Call Report. The total amount outstanding for off-balance-sheet assets comes from the aggregation of variable RCFDB707 from the Call Report. The bars depict on- and off-balance-sheet charge-offs in the quarter in which they occurred. The charge-off rate is the ratio of net charge-offs realized in the quarter divided by the sum of on- and off-balance-sheet credit card assets from the end of the previous quarter. Loan Delinquencies The delinquency statistics presented on the Federal Reserve Board's website are calculated from data available in the Report of Condition and Income (Call Report), filed each quarter by all commercial banks. The delinquency rate for any loan category is the ratio of the dollar amount of a bank's delinquent loans in that category to the dollar amount of total loans outstanding in that category. Data for each calendar quarter become available approximately 60 days after the end of the quarter. Access at: http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/chargeoff/ Loan Delinquencies 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Q3.12 Q4.12 Delinquency Rate1 (SAAR, %) Consumer Loans 2.90 3.13 3.76 4.70 4.15 3.23 2.77 2.62 Credit Cards 4.01 4.25 5.03 6.53 4.90 3.54 2.82 2.73 Residential Real Estate Loans2 1.73 2.54 4.99 9.14 10.84 10.41 10.60 10.07 Delinquencies3 (NSA, EOP, $ Mil) Consumer Loans $26,104 $33,737 $44,007 $46,140 $46,064 $38,573 $33,554 $33,684 Credit Cards $13,738 $17,376 $22,935 $24,368 $27,489 $20,950 $17,295 $17,563 Residential Real Estate Loans2 $39,925 $65,942 $145,024 $232,739 $220,389 $217,754 $221,307 $215,039 Source: Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council. FRB Call Report. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Notes: NSA = not seasonally adjusted, EOP = end of period 1 "Delinquency Rate" is delinquent loan/lease as a percent of end-of-period loan/lease balance 2 Residential real estate loans include loans secured by one- to four-family properties, including home equity lines of credit. 3 Delinquent loans include those past due 30 days or more and still accruing interest, as well as those on nonaccrual status. Bankruptcy The statistics used to measure bankruptcy filings come from the Administrative Office of the United States Courts. Included are bankruptcy filings by both business and nonbusiness entities. It is also important to note the surge of bankruptcies in 2005 due to the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (BAPCPA), which took effect on October 17, 2005. Access at: http://www.uscourts.gov/bnkrpctystats/bankruptcystats.htm Bankruptcy Filings 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Q3.12 Q4.12 Total 621,349 849,412 1,115,813 1,472,238 1,592,669 1,410,918 298,310 273,878 Nonbusiness 601,535 821,275 1,072,952 1,411,708 1,536,623 1,363,015 288,995 264,647 Source: Administrative Office of the United States Courts Note: Annual data aggregated from the monthly and quarterly series do not match the annual series because the annual series includes revisions, while the monthly and quarterly series do not. Credit Standards and the Demand for Credit The data used to describe banks’ credit standards and demand for consumer loans come from two questions asked by the Senior Loan Officer Opinion Survey (SLOOS). This survey covers approximately 60 large domestic banks and 24 U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks. The Federal Reserve generally conducts the survey quarterly, timing it so that results are available for the January/February, April/May, August, and October/November meetings of the Federal Open Market Committee. Questions cover changes in the standards and terms of the banks' lending and the state of business and household demand for loans, or occasionally specific topics of current interest. Access at: http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/snloansurvey/ Note: The height of the line in the above graph is the net percentage of banks tightening credit standards for new credit card applicants. Note: The height of the line in the above graph is the net percentage of banks with strengthening demand for consumer loans. Credit at the Family Level The data used to describe the revolving credit of families come from the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF). The SCF is a triennial survey of the balance sheet, pension, income, and other demographic characteristics of U.S. families. The survey also gathers information on the use of financial institutions. Access at: http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/oss/oss2/scfindex.html Percent of Families with a Transaction Account (%) 92 95 98 01 04 07 10 All Families 86.9 87.4 90.6 91.4 91.3 92.1 92.5 Income Percentile Less than 20% 62.5 63.2 68.8 71.6 75.5 74.9 76.2 20-39.9% 83.9 85.2 90.3 90.3 87.3 90.1 91.1 40-59.9% 91.7 92.0 95.4 96.6 95.9 96.3 96.4 60-79.9% 97.6 97.3 98.9 99.1 98.4 99.3 98.9 80-89.9% 98.8 98.7 99.6 99.7 99.1 100.0 99.8 90-100% 98.7 99.8 100.0 99.2 100.0 100.0 99.9 Age of Family Head 35 or Younger 81.3 80.9 84.7 81.7 86.4 87.3 89.0 35-44 86.8 87.6 90.5 91.1 90.8 91.2 90.6 45-54 88.9 89.2 94.1 92.7 91.8 91.7 92.5 55-64 90.2 88.8 93.9 93.8 93.2 96.4 94.2 65-74 88.9 91.7 94.1 93.8 93.9 94.6 95.8 75 or Older 91.8 93.2 90.0 93.7 96.4 95.3 96.4 Housing Status Homeowner 94.0 95.3 96.4 96.7 96.0 97.3 97.4 Renter or Not Homeowner 74.3 72.9 79.4 80.3 80.9 80.8 82.4 Median Value of Transaction Accounts for Families with Holdings (2010 dollars) 92 95 98 01 04 07 10 All Families 3,500 3,000 4,000 4,800 4,300 4,200 3,500 Income Percentile Less than 20% 800 1,000 900 1,100 700 800 700 20-39.9% 1,700 1,800 2,000 2,200 1,700 1,700 1,500 40-59.9% 3,000 2,300 3,000 3,400 3,500 2,900 2,800 60-79.9% 4,200 3,500 5,700 6,400 7,500 6,300 5,300 80-89.9% 7,300 6,100 10,000 11,600 12,700 13,500 11,100 90-100% 23,500 18,800 24,000 31,900 32,200 38,400 35,000 Age of Family Head 35 or younger 2,000 1,700 2,000 2,100 2,100 2,500 2,100 35-44 3,100 2,800 3,800 4,200 3,500 3,600 2,500 45-54 4,500 4,200 5,900 5,600 5,500 5,200 3,500 55-64 4,500 4,400 5,400 6,700 7,700 5,400 5,000 65-74 5,800 4,600 7,500 9,800 6,300 8,100 5,700 75 or Older 6,100 7,100 8,000 8,900 7,400 6,400 7,200 Housing Status Homeowner 5,200 4,200 6,500 7,100 6,900 6,500 5,800 Renter or Not Homeowner 1,500 1,600 1,500 1,500 1,300 1,300 1,000 Percent of Households with a Credit Card Balance (%) 92 95 98 01 04 07 10 All Families 43.7 47.3 44.1 44.4 46.2 46.1 39.4 Income Percentile Less than 20% 23.4 26.0 24.5 30.3 28.8 25.7 23.2 20-39.9% 41.9 43.2 40.9 44.5 42.9 39.5 33.4 40-59.9% 51.9 52.9 50.1 52.8 55.1 54.8 45.0 60-79.9% 55.6 60.0 57.4 52.6 56.1 62.1 53.1 80-89.9% 53.6 61.0 53.1 50.3 57.6 55.8 51.0 90-100% 37.9 47.3 42.1 33.1 38.5 40.6 33.6 Age of Family Head 35 or Younger 51.8 54.7 50.7 49.6 47.5 48.5 38.7 35-44 50.9 55.9 51.3 54.1 58.8 51.7 45.6 45-54 48.9 56.4 52.5 50.4 54.0 53.6 46.2 55-64 37.2 43.2 45.7 41.6 42.1 49.9 41.3 65-74 32.1 30.5 29.2 30.0 31.9 37.0 31.9 75 or Older 20.1 17.5 11.2 18.4 23.5 18.8 21.7 Housing Status Homeowner 46.6 51.1 46.2 44.4 48.8 50.1 43.1 Renter or Not Homeowner 38.6 40.3 40.0 44.3 40.4 37.3 31.8 Median Value of Credit Card Balances for Households with Holdings (2010 dollars) 92 95 98 01 04 07 10 All Families 1,500 2,100 2,300 2,300 2,500 3,100 2,600 Income Percentile Less than 20% 800 1,000 1,300 1,200 1,200 1,000 1,000 20-39.9% 1,200 1,700 1,600 1,500 2,100 1,900 1,500 40-59.9% 1,4000 2,100 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,200 60-79.9% 2,200 2,200 2,900 2,800 3,500 4,200 3,100 80-89.9% 2,300 2,800 2,700 4,600 3,100 5,800 5,900 90-100% 3,400 4,000 4,000 3,400 4,600 7,900 8,000 Age of Family Head 35 or younger 1,400 1,800 2,000 2,500 1,700 1,900 1,600 35-44 1,800 2,700 2,700 2,500 2,900 3,700 3,500 45-54 2,300 2,800 2,400 2,800 3,300 3,800 3,500 55-64 1,500 1,800 2,700 2,300 2,500 3,800 2,800 65-74 1,200 1,100 1,500 1,200 2,500 3,100 2,200 75 or Older 800 500 900 900 1,200 800 1,800 Housing Status Homeowner 1,700 2,100 2,700 2,600 2,900 3,800 3,400 Renter or Not Homeowner 1,400 1,700 1,700 1,500 1,700 1,400 1,300 Debtors with Payment-to-Income Ratio Greater Than 40 Percent (%) 92 95 98 01 04 07 10 All Families 11.4 11.7 13.6 11.8 12.3 14.8 13.8 Income Percentile Less than 20% 27.1 27.4 29.8 29.3 26.8 26.9 26.1 20-39.9% 16.0 18.0 18.3 16.6 18.6 19.5 18.6 40-59.9% 10.8 9.9 15.9 12.3 13.8 14.5 15.4 60-79.9% 8.2 7.7 9.8 6.5 7.3 12.9 11.0 80-89.9% 3.5 4.7 3.5 3.5 2.6 8.2 5.3 90-100% 2.4 2.3 2.8 2.0 1.5 3.8 2.9 Age of Family Head 35 or Younger 11.1 12.1 12.9 12.0 12.8 15.1 11.6 35-44 12.2 9.9 12.5 10.1 12.4 12.8 16.4 45-54 10.5 12.3 12.8 11.6 13.3 16.3 15.5 55-64 14.6 15.1 14.0 12.3 10.3 14.5 13.0 65-74 7.4 11.3 18.1 14.7 11.6 15.6 12.1 75 or Older 12.0 7.4 21.4 14.6 10.7 13.9 11.9 Housing Status Owner 14.5 14.3 16.5 14.7 15.0 18.1 17.1 Renter or Not Homeowner 4.9 5.8 6.5 4.2 4.3 5.4 5.0 Note: The payment-to-income ratio reflects the sum of family debt payments divided by the household income. Debtors with Any Payment Past Due 60 Days or More (%) 92 95 98 01 04 07 10 All Families 6.0 7.1 8.1 7.0 8.9 7.1 10.8 Percentile of income Less than 20% 11.0 10.4 13.0 13.4 15.9 15.1 21.2 20-39.9% 9.3 10.2 12.4 11.7 13.8 11.5 15.2 40-59.9% 6.9 8.8 10.0 7.9 10.4 8.3 10.2 60-79.9% 4.4 6.6 5.9 4.0 7.1 4.1 8.8 80-89.9% 1.8 2.8 3.9 2.6 2.3 2.1 5.4 90-100% 1.0 1.0 1.6 1.3 0.3 0.2 2.1 Age of Family Head 35 or Younger 8.3 8.8 11.1 11.9 13.7 9.4 10.4 35-44 6.8 7.7 8.4 5.9 11.7 8.6 15.7 45-54 5.4 7.4 7.4 6.2 7.6 7.3 12.6 55-64 4.7 3.2 7.5 7.1 4.2 4.9 8.4 65-74 1.0 5.3 3.1 1.5 3.4 4.4 6.1 75 or Older 1.8 5.4 1.1 0.8 3.9 1.1 3.2 Housing status Owner 3.6 5.1 6.1 4.3 5.6 4.8 8.7 Renter or Not Homeowner 11.2 11.6 12.9 14.0 18.6 13.5 16.6 Maps of Local Credit Quality The Federal Reserve Bank of New York publishes regional information on consumer credit conditions addressing mortgage delinquency and foreclosure issues. The U.S. Credit Conditions section offers interactive maps and data on auto and student loan delinquencies and mortgage "roll" rates. These features complement existing maps and spreadsheets on mortgage foreclosures and delinquencies, measures of subprime and alt-A mortgages, and bank credit card delinquencies. The data are available at the state and county level. Access at: http://data.newyorkfed.org/creditconditions/ Noncash Payments Checks Credit Cards Debit Cards Prepaid ACH Adoption of Payments SCPC Noncash Payments The data used to describe noncash payments come from the 2007 and 2010 editions of the Federal Reserve Payments Studies. The Federal Reserve Payments Study is a triennial survey of the payments industry first conducted in 2001. These studies are part of a Federal Reserve System effort to track noncash payments in the United States, and they reflect the efforts of hundreds of organizations across the country. Access at: http://www.frbservices.org/files/communications/pdf/research/2010_payments_study.pdf Noncash Payments 2003 2006 2009 Volume (Bil) Value ($ Tril) Volume (Bil) Value ($ Tril) Volume (Bil) Value ($ Tril) Total Noncash Payments 81.4 $67.6 95.2 $75.7 109.0 $72.2 Checks (paid)1 37.3 $41.1 30.5 $41.6 24.5 $31.6 Debit Card 15.6 $0.6 25.0 $1.0 37.9 $1.4 Signature 10.3 $0.4 15.7 $0.6 23.4 $0.9 PIN 5.3 $0.2 9.4 $0.4 14.5 $0.6 Prepaid Card2 3.3 $0.08 6.0 $0.14 EBT2 0.8 * 1.1 $0.03 2.0 $0.05 Credit Card 19.0 $1.7 21.7 $2.1 21.6 $1.9 ACH 8.8 $24.1 14.6 $31.0 19.1 $37.6 Source: 2007 and 2010 Federal Reserve Payments Studies 1 Nominal values of checks (paid) increased (displayed in the table). However, in constant dollars the value of checks (paid) showed a growth rate of -2.5 percent per year. 2 Revisions made to the 2007 and 2010 studies re-categorized prepaid cards so as not to include them with debit card estimates *Values too small to display. The value of EBT payments was $22 billion in 2003 and $30 billion in 2006. Checks The data used to describe checks come from the 2007 and the 2010 Federal Reserve Payments Studies and the 2010 Federal Reserve Check Sample Study. The Federal Reserve Payments Study is a triennial survey of the payments industry first conducted in 2001. These studies are part of a Federal Reserve System effort to track noncash payments in the United States, and they reflect the activities of financial institutions, networks, and other providers of payment services across the country. The 2010 Depository Institution Study is a random sample of depository institutions that collects the number and value of different types of payments and contributes to the estimates of total checks written. The 2010 Check Sample Study is a random sample of checks processed by 11 large commercial banks used to estimate the distribution of checks among various counterparties. Access at: http://www.frbservices.org/files/communications/pdf/research/2010_payments_study.pdf Checks Paid by Type of Depository Institution 2003 2006 2009 Number (Bil) Value ($ Tril) Number (Bil) Value ($ Tril) Number (Bil) Value ($ Tril) Total 37.3 $41.1 30.5 $41.6 24.5 $31.6 Commercial Banks 29.7 $38.4 25.0 $39.0 20.7 $29.2 Credit Unions 4.2 $0.9 2.8 $0.8 2.1 $0.7 Savings Institutions 3.0 $1.5 2.3 $1.6 1.3 $1.3 Source: 2007 and 2010 Federal Reserve Payments Studies Distribution of Checks by Dollar Amount Dollar Amount Range Distribution $0.01-$50 31% $50.01-$100 16% $100.01-$500 32% $500.01-$1000 9% $1000.01-$2500 6% $2500.01-$5000 2% $5000.01 + 3% Source: 2010 Federal Reserve Check Sample Study Notes: The distributions have up to a 0.5% margin of error and may not add to 100 percent Distribution of the Number of Checks by Counterparty Counterparty Distribution C2B 44.3% C2C 10.1% B2B 27.1% B2C 18.3% Unknown* 0.1% *Unknown includes all counterparty combinations where either the payer, payee, or both the payer and payee are an unknown/indeterminate classification. Distribution of the Value of Checks by Counterparty Counterparty Distribution C2B 13.1% C2C 4.1% B2B 66.4% B2C 16.4% Unknown* 0.0% *Unknown includes all counterparty combinations where either the payer, payee, or both the payer and payee are an unknown/indeterminate classification. Credit Cards The data used to describe credit cards come from the 2007 and the 2010 Federal Reserve Payments Studies and The Nilson Report , a twice-monthly newsletter based in Carpinteria, California. The Federal Reserve Payments Study is a triennial survey of the payments industry first conducted in 2001. These studies are part of a Federal Reserve System effort to track noncash payments in the United States, and they reflect the efforts of hundreds of organizations across the country. Nilson kindly permits some of its data to be included in tabulations that appear in the U.S. Census Bureau’s Statistical Abstract of the U.S. We include data from the 2009 edition here. More recent data should be obtained directly from Nilson. Access at: The 2010 Federal Reserve Payments Study U.S Census Bureau: Banking, Finance, Insurance: Payment Systems, Consumer Credit, Mortgage Debt Credit Card Volume, Value and Average Value 2003 2006 2009 Volume (Bil) Value ($ Tril) Avg Value ($) Volume (Bil) Value ($ Tril) Avg Value ($) Volume (Bil) Value ($ Tril) Avg Value ($) Total 19.0 $1.7 $89 21.7 $2.1 $98 21.6 $1.9 $89 General Purpose 15.2 $1.4 $93 19.0 $1.9 $99 19.9 $1.7 $86 Private Label 3.8 $0.3 $76 2.8 $0.3 $92 1.7 $0.2 $121 Source: 2007 and 2010 Federal Reserve Payments Studies Figures may not add due to rounding. Distribution of General Purpose Credit Card Payments Number (Bil) % of Total Value (Bil) % of Total $5 2.1 10.7% $4 0.3% $5.00-$14.99 3.7 18.5% $36 2.1% $15-$24.99 2.9 14.5% $57 3.3% $25+ 11.2 56.3% $1,624 94.4% Source: 2010 Federal Reserve Payments Studies Credit Cardholders and Number of Cards Type of Card 2000 2009 2012 proj. Cardholders1 (Mil) Cards (Mil) Cardholders1(Mil) Cards (Mil) Cardholders1(Mil) Cards (Mil) Total 159 1,425 156 1,245 160 1,167 Visa 93 255 100 270 107 261 MasterCard 86 200 80 203 84 174 Discover/Amex 59 83 74 103 80 111 Store 114 597 100 470 96 455 Oil Company 76 98 58 61 56 60 Other2 133 192 105 370 81 106 Source: The Nilson Report , Carpinteria, CA, twice-monthly newsletter. (Used with permission.) 1 Cardholders may hold more than one type of card. 2 Includes Universal Air Travel Plan (UATP), phone cards, automobile rental, and miscellaneous cards; credit card purchase volume excludes phone cards. Credit Card Rates The data used to describe credit card interest rates and the rates of return to credit card banks come from the Report to Congress on the Profitability of Credit Card Operations of Depository Institutions provided by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. This report is transmitted to Congress annually and is based mainly on the Call Report, the Quarterly Report of Credit Card Interest Rates, and the Survey of Terms of Credit Card Plans. The Board released the data in this report in June. Access at: http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/reports_other.htm (see "Profitability of Credit Card Operations of Depository Institutions") Interest Rate on Revolving Credit Cards (%) Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Avg 2003 12.85% 12.82% 13.11% 12.91% 12.92% 2004 12.41% 12.93% 13.60% 13.92% 13.22% 2005 14.13% 14.81% 14.75% 14.48% 14.54% 2006 14.38% 14.77% 14.67% 15.09% 14.73% 2007 14.64% 14.47% 15.24% 14.35% 14.68% 2008 13.77% 13.51% 13.64% 13.36% 13.57% 2009 13.54% 14.43% 14.90% 14.37% 14.31% 2010 14.67% 14.48% 14.22% 13.67% 14.26% 2011 13.44% 13.06% 13.08% 12.78% 13.09% Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Quarterly Report of Credit Card Interest Rates Return on Assets at Large U.S. Credit Card Banks (%) Year Return 2001 3.24 2002 3.28 2003 3.66 2004 3.55 2005 2.85 2006 3.34 2007 2.75 2008 1.43 2009 -3.01 2010 2.36 2011 5.25 Note: Credit card banks are commercial banks with average managed assets (loans to individuals, including securitizations) greater than or equal to $200 million with a minimum 50 percent of assets in consumer lending and 90 percent of consumer lending in the form of revolving credit. Profitability of credit card banks is measured as net pretax income as a percentage of average quarterly outstanding balances. Source: Report of Condition and Income (Call Report) Debit Cards The data used to describe debit cards come from the 2007 and 2010 Federal Reserve Payments Studies and The Nilson Report , a twice-monthly newsletter based in Carpinteria, California. The Federal Reserve Payments Study is a triennial survey of the payments industry first conducted in 2001. These studies are part of a Federal Reserve System effort to track noncash payments in the United States, and they reflect the efforts of hundreds of organizations across the country. Nilson kindly permits some of its data to be included in tabulations that appear in the U.S. Census Bureau’s Statistical Abstract of the U.S. We include data from the 2009 edition here. More recent data should be obtained directly from Nilson. Access at: The 2010 Federal Reserve Payments Study U.S Census Bureau: Banking, Finance, Insurance: Payment Systems, Consumer Credit, Mortgage Debt Debit Card Volume, Value, and Average Value 2003 2006 2009 Number (Bil) Value ($ Bil) Avg Value ($) Number (Bil) Value ($ Bil) Avg Value ($) Number (Bil) Value ($ Bil) Avg Value ($) Total 15.6 $600 $40 25.0 $1,000 $39 37.9 $1,400 $38 Signature 10.3 $400 $42 15.7 $600 $40 23.4 $900 $37 PIN 5.3 $200 $38 9.4 $300 $37 14.5 $600 $39 Source: 2007 and 2010 Federal Reserve Payments Studies Figures may not add due to rounding. Distribution of General Purpose Signature Debit Card Payments Number (Bil) % of Total Value (Bil) % of Total $5 3.6 15.4% $10 1.1% $5.00-$14.99 7.3 31.3% $70 7.9% $15-$24.99 4.0 17.3% $80 9.1% $25+ 8.4 36.0% $700 81.9% Source: 2010 Federal Reserve Payments Studies Distribution of General Purpose PIN Debit Card Payments Number (Bil) % of Total Value (Bil) % of Total $5 1.3 8.7% $4 0.7% $5.00-$14.99 3.5 24.1% $34 5.6% $15-$24.99 2.6 17.7% $51 8.4% $25+ 7.2 49.5% $512 85.3% Source: 2010 Federal Reserve Payments Studies Debit Card Holders and Number of Cards Type of Card 2000 2008 2012 proj. Holders1 (Mil) Cards (Mil) Holders1(Mil) Cards (Mil) Holders1 (Mil) Cards (Mil) Total 160 235 181 491 191 530 Signature2 137 137 160 449 165 484 PIN3 159 223 180 276 189 291 Other4 11 11 12 12 14 14 Source: The Nilson Report , a twice-monthly newsletter based in Carpinteria, CA. (Used with permission.) 1 Cardholders may hold more than one type of card. Bank cards and EFT cards are the same pieces of plastic that carry multiple brands. The total card figure shown does not include any duplication. 2 “Signature Debit” is defined by Nilson as bank cards or Visa and MasterCard debit cards. For 2006 and later, Nilson includes Interlink Master Card PIN debit. 3 “PIN Debit” is defined by Nilson as EFT cards issued by financial institution members of regional and national switches such as Star, Interlink, Pulse, Nyce, etc. 4 Retail cards such as those issued by supermarkets Prepaid The data used to describe prepaid cards come from the 2007 and 2010 Federal Reserve Payments Studies. The Federal Reserve Payments Study is a triennial survey of the payments industry first conducted in 2001. These studies are part of a Federal Reserve System effort to track noncash payments in the United States, and they reflect the efforts of hundreds of organizations across the country. Access at: http://www.frbservices.org/files/communications/pdf/research/2010_payments_study.pdf Prepaid Card Volume, Value, and Average Value 2006 2009 Number (Bil) Value ($ Bil) Avg Value ($) Number (Bil) Value ($ Bil) Avg Value ($) Total 3.3 $80 $23 6.0 $140 $24 Private Label 1.9 $30 $18 2.7 $40 $17 General Purpose 0.3 $10 $41 1.3 $40 $33 EBT 1.1 $30 $27 2.0 $50 $28 Source: 2010 Federal Reserve Payments Studies Figures may not add due to rounding. Distribution of Open Loop Prepaid Card Payments Number (Bil) % of Total Value (Bil) % of Total $5 0.2 18.8% $1 1.6% $5.00-$14.99 0.4 32.4% $4 8.9% $15-$24.99 0.2 15.9% $4 9.3% $25+ 0.4 32.9% $34 80.2% Source: 2010 Federal Reserve Payments Studies. ACH The data used to describe automated clearing house (ACH) payments come from quarterly statistical reports published publicly by NACHA, the Electronic Payments Association. NACHA is a non-for-profit that oversees the ACH network. In NACHA’s quarterly reports, it publishes the breakdown of ACH transactions from the previous quarter and tracks growth. Access at: http://www.nacha.org/c/ACHntwkstats.cfm ACH Transactions and Dollar Value (not including “on-us” transactions) (Mil) 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 CIE1 121 138 133 127 119 138 156 PPD Debits2 2,332 2,498 2,611 2,741 2,770 2,833 2,933 PPD Credits3 3,557 3,771 4,021 4,333 4,545 4,710 4,879 RCK4 22 21 20 16 12 8 7 TEL5 239 292 335 347 344 354 367 WEB6 1,006 1,364 1,737 2,078 2,280 2,449 2,680 Total ACH Transactions (Mil)7 10,696 12,323 13,972 14,961 15,257 15,617 16,079 Total ACH Value ($ Tril) $24.00 $26.15 $28.54 $26.90 $29.59 $31.70 $33.90 Source: NACHA, the Electronic Payments Association 1 CIE = Customer Initiated Entry: A credit entry is initiated by an individual and is used to pay some sort of obligation 2 PPD Debits = Prearranged Payments and Deposit Debit Application: A transfer of funds into a consumer account at the Receiving Depository Financial Institution 3 PPD Credit = Prearranged Payments and Deposit Credit Application: Authority is granted by the consumer to companies with billing operations to initiate one time or periodic charges to his or her account as bills become due 4 RCK = Re-presented Check: An ACH debit application used by originators to re-present a check that has been processed through the check collections system and returned because of insufficient or uncollected funds 5 TEL = Telephone Authorized Entry: Oral authorization is obtained solely via the telephone 6 WEB = Internet Authorized Entry: Authorization is obtained solely via the Internet 7 The total ACH transactions and value include all commercial inter-bank and government transactions, but not "on-us" transactions, and are larger than the total of the entry types included. *According to the 2010 Federal Reserve Payments Study, “on-us” ACH transactions increased from 2.3 billion in 2006 to 3.7 billion in 2009. Adoption of Payments by Households The data used to describe the adoption of payments by households come from tables in an article by Loretta Mester published in the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia’s Business Review . These tables are based on the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) as well as the author's calculations. The SCF is a triennial survey of the balance sheet, pension, income, and other demographic characteristics of U.S. families. The survey also gathers information on the use of financial institutions. Access at: Changes in the Use of Electronic Means of Payment: 1995-2010 (exhibit 1, parts 1 and 2) Survey of Consumer Finances Adoption of Payments by Households (%) 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 ATM 62.5 67.4 69.8 74.4 79.7 83.4 Debit Card 17.6 33.8 47.0 59.3 67.0 78.4 Direct Deposit 46.7 60.5 67.3 71.2 74.9 75.9 Automatic Bill Paying 21.8 36.0 40.3 47.4 45.5 48.3 Note: The percentages reported are based on the population-weighted figures using the revised Kennickell-Woodburn consistent weights for each year. (For further discussion, see the Survey of Consumer Finances codebooks at www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/oss/oss2/scfindex.html .) This exhibit reports percentages for all households. 1 The questions on ATMs and smart cards asked whether any member of the household had an ATM card or a smart card, not whether the member used it. The other questions asked about usage. The question on smart cards was dropped after the 2001 survey. Survey of Consumer Payment Choice As described on its website, the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston publishes the Survey of Consumer Payment Choice (SCPC), which develops comprehensive, publicly available data on consumer payment behavior. The 2008 SCPC is a nationally representative survey of consumer payment behavior developed by the Consumer Payments Research Center of the Boston Fed and implemented by the RAND Corporation with its American Life Panel. The primary purpose of the 2008 SCPC is to publish and document the aggregate statistics obtained from the data to help researchers learn how consumers choose among payment instruments, including cash. The 2008 SCPC report contains detailed tables providing a view of consumers' behavior regarding paper instruments, payment cards, as well as electronic instruments. The data are based on the half-hour, Internet-based survey administered by the RAND Corporation to a sample of U.S. consumers drawn from its American Life Panel. Access at: http://www.bostonfed.org/economic/ppdp/2011/ppdp1101.htm initTabs('StatsTabs',Array('Consumer Credit Snapshot','Consumer Payments Snapshot'),0,790,'',Array(false,false)); initTabs('CCSTabs',Array('Consumer Debt','Holders of Consumer Debt','Credit Performance','Credit Standards Demand','Credit at Family Level','Maps'),0,770,'',Array(false,false,false,false,false,false)); initTabs('CPSTabs',Array('Noncash Payments','Checks','Credit Cards','Debit Cards','Prepaid','ACH','Adoption of Payments','SCPC'),0,770,'',Array(false,false,false,false,false,false,false,false));
Spot The Bubble: Average New Home Price Soars By Most Ever In One Month To All Time High Submitted by Tyler Durden on 05/23/2013 10:35 -0400 Census Bureau Reality Curious why in yesterday's FOMC minutes the following line " a few participants expressed concern that conditions in certain U.S. financial markets were becoming too buoyant" received special attention? Here is the reason: as the chart below shows, according to the census bureau , the average new home sale price just hit a new all time high, rising by a record 15.4% to a record $330,800. In a country in which real disposable consumer income is flat at best and in reality declining, it only makes sense that the average new home price just hit a level not seen since the prior credit-bubble fueled housing peak. Average new home sale price: And the sequential change in the average new home sale price: Obviously both of the above charts are justified by the average real disposable income per capita in the US: Or maybe not... Average: 4.333335 Your rating: None Average: 4.3 ( 9 votes) Tweet - advertisements - VectorVest Stock Analysis. Find out Whether a Stock is a Buy, Sell or Hold. Get your Free Stock Analysis simply by clicking here! Login or register to post comments 14818 reads Printer-friendly version Send to friend Similar Articles You Might Enjoy: Guest Post: It's Always The Best Time To Buy Guest Post: Will John Paulson Be Wrong This Time? Guest Post: The Unsafe Foundation of Our Housing 'Recovery' New Home Sales Plummet 13% To 284,000 Annualized Rate, 19K Actual Homes Sold Lowest Monthly Ever Public College Tuition Soars By Most Ever (Or Searching For Deflation In All The Wrong Places)
Yen Surges As Japan's Deputy PM Says Excessive Yen Gain "Corrected" Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/08/2013 20:23 -0400 Bond Green Shoots Japan Nikkei Yen The circus continues. For this evening's entertainment, the countrty Deputy PM Taro Aso explains the "excessive JPY gain has been corrected," upon which USDJPY instantly strengthens 40 pips reversing all the post-US0-close JPY weakness. Of course, the market reaction was evidently enough for him to swallow his words and 'retract' his comments mere moments later. At the same time, the BOJ declares: *BOJ MEMBERS AGREED JAPAN'S ECONOMY STOPPED WEAKENING While their optimism is welcome, facts (as they often do) stand tall in the face of their rhetoric as Japan's Macro index and manufacturing new orders (to name just two recent data points) do not even show second-derivative green shoots. And for the third and final act of this evening's early debacle, 30Y JGB yields have slammed 9bps higher (as JGB Futures prices look set for another halt). The Bottom is in? The Bottom is in? What happens when Aso opens his mouth... ruining the 100 target the world had for 2am... (maybe push it back to 3 or 4am)... and it looks like we are set for another JGB Futures halt as long-dated Japanese bond yields are blowing higher once again... and 20Y even more volatile... and just to add to the fun - SGX entire futures exchange down.... Mini JGB's and Nikkei 225 yet to open on SGX... Average: 4.9 Your rating: None Average: 4.9 ( 10 votes) Tweet - advertisements - Login or register to post comments 10547 reads Printer-friendly version Send to friend Similar Articles You Might Enjoy: Rajoy Summarizes Overnight (And Recurring) Sentiment: "There Are No Green Shoots, There Is No Spring" 17 Macro Surprises For 2013 Chris Martenson Interviews Mike Shedlock, Discusses Deflation, The Fed, Gold And Other Subjects VIXterminating, Voluelmess Ramp Left To The US Stock Market For Second Day In A Row Japan Megaquake And Tsunami - Gold Mixed As Yen Surges Against All Currencies
结果不是 jo 186 . ja 2121 a joan 4695 . . 3567 fi joan 4698 m John 5463 accouting 而是 Obs Name empid department 1 Jill 1864 2 Jack 2121 accouting 3 3567 finance 4 Joan 4698 marketing 5 John 5463 accouting 因为指针是按照变量排序移动的 proc import dbms=excel out=one datafile='F:\raw material\_52 of 70_1.xls' replace; run; proc import dbms=excel out=two datafile='F:\raw material\_52 of 70_2.xls' replace; run; data all; merge one(in=o) two(in=d); by empid; if (o and not d) or (d and not o);/*其中有一个数组无效in=.,成立；注意指针下移是按照empid的排序的*/ run; proc print data=all; run;
How The Super-Rich Avoid Paying Taxes Submitted by Tyler Durden on 02/15/2013 20:23 -0500 If you're one of the 1% of Americans who control over 40% of the country's wealth, life is full of choices. Among them - how best to keep all that money away from the government? The U.S. economic system offers no shortage of loopholes allowing the ultra-rich to shortchange Uncle Sam. The following infographic explains how exactly do the super rich hide that much money from the government every year? Source: TopAccountingDegrees.org Average: 5 Your rating: None Average: 5 ( 2 votes) Tweet Login or register to post comments 2123 reads Printer-friendly version Send to friend Similar Articles You Might Enjoy: Super Rich Indians Abandon Super Cars En Masse To Avoid Arrest In Massive Smuggling And Tax Fraud Crack Down Guest Post: Should The Rich Pay More Taxes? The Millionaire Man Exodus: What Obama Can Learn From The UK's "Tax The Rich" Plan Buffett Goes To Britain: Clegg Calls For 'One-Off' Tax On Super Rich Why 'Tax The Rich' Doesn't Solve Anything: It's The Math, Stupid
Here Is How The World's Biggest Bond Funds (And Others, Just Not You) Get Advance Notice Of What The Fed Is About To Do Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/30/2010 14:10 -0400 Bill Gross Bond Borrowing Costs Federal Reserve Gross Domestic Product Hyperinflation Monetary Policy PIMCO Reuters Total Return Fund Reuters has just released a stunning special report detailing how the Fed leaks all important, non-public, and ever so material, information to private parties. From the report : On August 19, just nine days after the U.S. central bank surprised financial markets by deciding to buy more bonds to support a flagging economy, former Fed governor Larry Meyer sent a note to clients of his consulting firm with a breakdown of the policy-setting meeting. The minutes from that same gathering of the powerful Federal Open Market Committee, or FOMC, are made available to the public -- but only after a three-week lag. So Meyer's clients were provided with a glimpse into what the Fed was thinking well ahead of other investors. His note cited the views of "most members" and "many members" as he detailed increasingly sharp divisions among the officials who determine the nation's monetary policy. The inside scoop, which explained how rising mortgage prepayments had prompted renewed central bank action, was simply too detailed to have come from anywhere but the Fed. A respected economist, Meyer charges clients around $75,000 for his product, which includes a popular forecasting service. He frequently shares his research with reporters, though he kept this note out of the public eye. Reuters obtained a copy from a market source. Meyer declined to comment for this story, as did the Federal Reserve. By necessity, the Fed spends a considerable amount of time talking to investment managers, bank economists and market strategists. Doing so helps it gather intelligence about the market and the economy that is invaluable in informing the bank's decisions on borrowing costs and lending programs. But a Reuters investigation has found that the information flow sometimes goes both ways as Fed officials let their guard down with former colleagues and other close private sector contacts. Frankly, we stopped right there, very much disgusted that we have been proven correct yet again when we asked rhetorically if " Bill Gross just confirmed on live TV that he has an "advance look" at non-public fed data ?". Now we know how it is that Bill Gross knew all too well that the Fed would lower its GDP expectations to 2% three weeks ahead of the minutes release. It also explains why PIMCO is ever so precise in going on margin in purchasing either bonds or MBS. **** it. This is beyond disgusting, but that is to what this bull***** country has devolved: leaking the most important decisions made on "behalf of the middle class" so that a few multi-billionaires can make a few extra soon to be worthless dollars. We will indicate if and when Pimco goes on margin next when the Total Return Fund posts its holding distribution next in mid October, telegraphing what the Fed has told it about the November FOMC meeting, but frankly at this point it is irrelevant. It is now obvious that the Fed realizes all too well that all is lost and just feeding its wealthy clients (that's right, these people are the Fed's CLIENTS ) the last remaining scraps before it pulls the hyperinflation switch. 26640 reads Printer-friendly version Send to friend Similar Articles You Might Enjoy: Watch As David Einhorn Makes A Mockery Of One-Man Fed "Expert Network" Larry Meyer Further QE3 Composition Hints As PIMCO Raises MBS Holdings To One And A Half Year High Hoenig Says Fed Should Raise Rate To 1% By End Of Summer PIMCO Treasury Holdings Plunge To Two Year Low, Cash Holdings Surge, Total Return Fund AUM At Lowest Since June 2010 Did Bill Gross Just Confirm On Live TV He Has An "Advance Look" At Non-Public Fed Data?
标签: All经管大学堂：名校名师名课
京公网安备 11010802022788号
论坛法律顾问：王进律师
知识产权保护声明
免责及隐私声明
