• Home
  • Latest
  • Fortune 500
  • Finance
  • Tech
  • Leadership
  • Lifestyle
  • Rankings
  • Multimedia

Trendingnow

1

Ed Sheeran asked Patriots owner Robert Kraft for $2 million aid donation after Macklemore was dropped from his tour for pro-Palestine comments

2

Meet Warren Buffett's son Howard, a former sheriff, war photographer, and now, Berkshire's new chairman

3

Anthropic billionaire cofounder Jack Clark studied literature, not code—and says liberal arts degrees will win in the AI age

1

Ed Sheeran asked Patriots owner Robert Kraft for $2 million aid donation after Macklemore was dropped from his tour for pro-Palestine comments

2

Meet Warren Buffett's son Howard, a former sheriff, war photographer, and now, Berkshire's new chairman

3

Anthropic billionaire cofounder Jack Clark studied literature, not code—and says liberal arts degrees will win in the AI age

Banks: the dumbest investment

By
Colin Barr
Colin Barr
Down Arrow Button Icon
By
Colin Barr
Colin Barr
Down Arrow Button Icon
March 8, 2011, 11:32 AM ET
Google source logo
Add Fortune on Google for similar content.

In the latest tough break for the banks, it turns out that shamelessly ripping off your customers doesn’t necessarily translate into big gains for shareholders.

Or at least, that’s one reading of a survey released this week by Boston Consulting Group. It says investors would have done better over the past five years to put their money in literally any other sector of the equity markets, from basic materials and energy to telecom and technology to lowly health care.



Another sterling performance

Each and every one of them produced a better total shareholder return, or TSR – a measure that combines capital gains and free cash flow yields – than did the banks. Alone among the sectors mentioned, they actually managed to lose investor money over the survey period.

So you can add shareholders to the long list of those aggrieved by the banks. By now that list is populated by just about everyone, ranging from those slapped with silly overdraft fees to those wrongly foreclosed to the saps stuck with the tab for the bailouts of 2008. That is each and every one of us, of course.

The only ones not on this list are the insiders who pocket the billions the banks skim off the economy in a barely recovering, Fed-fueled, zero interest rate economy. It is nice work if you can get it.

And though bankers are fond of saying they are the heart of the economy, you might well note it is not the healthiest patient you’ll ever see. Lending remains depressed, like so much else. Fewer people are in the labor force now than in any year since 1984, and 43 million people are on food stamps. But hey, who’s counting.

So much for the progress that Goldman Sachs (GS) claims is everyone’s business. Forget the way forward that JPMorgan Chase (JPM) is supposedly going to show us. Enough already about the passion to perform at Deutsche Bank (DB). For $514,332, you’d be passionate too – if evidently not quite passionate enough to accomplish anything useful.

Of course, outdoing the banks was made easier by the fact that the banking industry was the only survey among those listed to show a negative average annual return between 2006 and 2010, or minus 1.9% — and even that was artificially boosted by the infusion of taxpayer funds during the 2008 meltdown. U.S . banks, impressively, did even worse, posting an annual average return of negative 6.5%. Well done.

By contrast, investors in basic materials stocks tracking chemical and metals companies, for instance, made 16% annually, and those in consumer goods issues tracking the makers of meat, milk and office supplies got 9%. Other sectors turned in annual gains of 3% to 8%.

The banks trailed behind the average of the other industries in four of the five years, the exception being the government-fueled bounceback year of 2009, when bank stocks returned 47%. But last year, that return dropped to 6% — less than half the industry average.

“The reversal in performance was striking,” the report says. “The banking industry’s TSR went from being the third highest in 2009 to the third lowest in 2010.”

But if the banks have proven anything in recent years, it’s that they can always sink even lower.

Also on Fortune.com:

  • Speculators double down on oil
  • Guns, Roses and convexity
  • GM addicted to discounts
About the Author
By Colin Barr
See full bioRight Arrow Button Icon

Latest in


Most Popular

Fortune Secondary Logo
Rankings
  • 100 Best Companies
  • Fortune 500
  • Global 500
  • Fortune 500 Europe
  • Most Powerful Women
  • World's Most Admired Companies
  • See All Rankings
  • Lists Calendar
Sections
  • Finance
  • Fortune Crypto
  • Features
  • Leadership
  • Health
  • Commentary
  • Success
  • Retail
  • Mpw
  • Tech
  • Lifestyle
  • CEO Initiative
  • Asia
  • Politics
  • Conferences
  • Europe
  • Newsletters
  • Personal Finance
  • Environment
  • Magazine
  • Education
Customer Support
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Customer Service Portal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms Of Use
  • Single Issues For Purchase
  • International Print
Commercial Services
  • Advertising
  • Fortune Brand Studio
  • Fortune Analytics
  • Fortune Conferences
  • Business Development
  • Group Subscriptions
About Us
  • About Us
  • Press Center
  • Work At Fortune
  • Terms And Conditions
  • Site Map
  • About Us
  • Press Center
  • Work At Fortune
  • Terms And Conditions
  • Site Map
  • Facebook icon
  • Twitter icon
  • LinkedIn icon
  • Instagram icon
  • TikTok icon
  • YouTube icon

    Latest in


    Most Popular

    © 2026 Fortune Media IP Limited. All Rights Reserved. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy | CA Notice at Collection and Privacy Notice | Do Not Sell/Share My Personal Information
    FORTUNE is a trademark of Fortune Media IP Limited, registered in the U.S. and other countries. FORTUNE may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website. Offers may be subject to change without notice.