10 Banks That Could Be Next To Go Under

IndyMac bank going under probably has you wondering, is my bank next? Various analysts are predicting that hundreds of small and regional banks could collapse in the next year. Here’s the top 10 list of the nation’s most troubled banks…

The list is determined by dividing the bank’s non-performing loans by the sum of its tangible equity capital and loan loss reserves, what is termed the “Texas-ratio.” Any bank with a ratio higher than 100 means they have more bad loans on the books than money to pay for them. The good news is that all the banks are FDIC-insured, which means that up to the first $100,000 of your deposits are guaranteed by the federal government.

Who’s Next? List of Troubled Banks Worries Wall Street, DC [ABC] (Photo: Getty)


Edit Your Comment

  1. IphtashuFitz says:

    Great, publicizing information like this is likely to cause runs on those banks, which will just make them more likely to fail….

    IndyBank, the one in California that just failed, had a “Texas-ratio” of somewhere in the 50’s, so that should just go to show that these sorts of lists aren’t all they’re cracked up to be.

  2. snazz says:

    i hope that releasing a list like this doesnt induce panic and cause people to withdraw their money from these banks… causing the failure that may not have ever happened in the first place.

  3. sir_eccles says:

    Strictly speaking most banks only go under when some media outlet puts their name on a list of struggling banks which causes people to all withdrawn their money at the same time.

  4. sir_eccles says:


  5. Norcross says:

    Wow…even with the loss due to inflation, putting my money under the mattress seems better and better every day.

  6. MissTicklebritches says:

    I’d want to know if my bank were that mismanaged. Seriously, these banks are going to go under because of their loan practices, not because of being “outed” online.

  7. savvy999 says:

    Why is it called the ‘Texas Ratio’?

    Because it’s god-awful hot?

  8. snoop-blog says:

    What is the banking industries obssesion with putting the word “first” in their name. There’s like 5 in my area alone claiming to be “first blah bank and blah”…

    /end rant

  9. Morac says:

    FDIC only insures the first $100,000 per account which is why it’s a good idea to have multiple accounts if you have more money than that.

    Of course the FDIC only works if the federal government doesn’t go completely broke (collapses). With the amount of money the U.S. is spending on wars, financial bailouts, stimulus packages, etc, the U.S. is going to start need to borrow more and more money from other countries. So basically your bank account is insured by China.

  10. dottat1 says:

    Isn’t there a way to play against the system when you know a bank is going under??

    Perhaps… sell short and buy back when the bank is hosed?

  11. snoop-blog says:

    @snazz: It’s funny didn’t they just run a post about a bank run?

  12. m4ximusprim3 says:

    @Morac: Don’t post that! The last thing we need is a run on the fed!

    Seriously, these lists are about as financially useful as divinig rods. There are a lot of ways to move investments on and off of balance sheets to skew these ratios one way or another. It looks good under a “BRIAN HAMMONDS EXCLUSIVE” banner though.

  13. cashmerewhore says:

    CNN’s breaking headline is Wachovia’s headquarters being raided :/

  14. UTnick says:

    @Morac: actually FDIC insurance is more complicated than just “number of accounts.” it probably has next to nothing to do with it actually. it’s account holders, account TYPES, and beneficiaries that play a role in what determines coverage. FDIC.gov has a great tool to calculate your coverage.

    and yeah. the FDIC doesn’t publish lists like this to avoid runs on the bank. most people don’t ever know they’re bank is being sold or closed until the day of.

  15. Crymson_77 says:

    Unfortunately, this is only a ratio without a quantifier of just how much money was/is involved. Indymac had huge dollar signs involved even if their exposure was on a ratio of 50. 50% of $14 billion is STILL $7 billion…

  16. Landru says:

    For anyone saying “Ohh, you’ll cause a run on that bank”, I bet you would have a very different reaction if the bank where you kept your money were on that list.

    We would hear a swooshing sound, and then the wham of your screen door closing.

    Seriously, folks should pay attention to these lists as well as the FDIC insurance rules. People really lost money in the Indybank closure.

  17. trogam says:

    Wait, there are Americans who have money in the bank?
    Last time I checked, the average American had NEGATIVE savings. Are they putting their money into checking accounts rather than savings?

  18. ColoradoShark says:

    @snoop-blog: My wife agrees completely with you. She refuses to do business with a bank that has the word “First” in their name.

  19. chiieddy says:

    @savvy999: Because the S&L crisis in the 80s was centered around Texas.

  20. MayorBee says:

    @Landru: Maybe they’re saying “don’t post that list” as they’re running out the door.

  21. Etoiles says:

    This list and the accompanying article have been available on abcnews.com for at least two days. I read it earlier this week and thought, “goodness, won’t publishing this lead to a run on those banks?”

    Apparently not.

    That said, it is pretty horrifying when something you’re connected with starts showing up in the news. In the last ten minutes articles have shown up about a raid on Wachovia Securities and although I know that’s separate from the ordinary banking half of Wachovia where my boyfriend does all his banking, it’s still pretty scary.

    (Mine is Bank of America. They may be pure evil but at least they still seem solvent for the time being.)

  22. hexychick says:

    I’m a little confused. My local news said Wachovia was next on the list of potentially flopping. All of the invoices and payments to our vendors as well as paychecks from my company are cut through Wachovia (or direct-deposited) which means with over 500 employees and several million dollar paper checks going out the door, they have to be holding more than $100,000 in their account. (Big duh on that one) I’m completely ignorant about stuff like this so what, if anything, does that mean for me if Wachovia were to pull an IndyMac moment? Does it only apply to savings accounts? Would this affect our business? My paycheck? Again, I’m dumb about this, so please don’t slaughter me in the comments.

  23. lalaland13 says:

    @snoop-blog: @ColoradoShark: Down South, in God’s country, it’s so banks can have dual operations. For instance “First Baptist Church and Bank and Trust of Texas.” And the commercials have people in cowboy hats, because you can always trust people in cowboy hats with your money.

    Luckily, my bank is a larger operation and is not on this list.

  24. Julia789 says:

    You gots to diversifies with yo monies…

  25. DashTheHand says:

    What happens to the outstanding loans when these banks fail? Sorry, never did any research on that. Do they get sold off to other banks/collection agencies (or FDIC) to deal with that or is there something else?

  26. MissTicklebritches says:

    @EtoilePB: if Consumerist really could start a run on a bank, BofA would have been gone a while ago.

  27. backbroken says:

    To everyone who thinks it is a bad idea to publish the list: Are you farking kidding me?

  28. BabyGorilla says:

    Cosmo: Posit: People think a bank might be financially shaky.
    Martin Bishop: Consequence: People start to withdraw their money.
    Cosmo: Result: Pretty soon it is financially shaky.
    Martin Bishop: Conclusion: You can make banks fail.
    Cosmo: Bzzt. I’ve already done that. Maybe you’ve heard about a few? Think bigger.
    Martin Bishop: Stock market?
    Cosmo: Yes.
    Martin Bishop: Currency market?
    Cosmo: Yes.
    Martin Bishop: Commodities market?
    Cosmo: Yes.
    Martin Bishop: Small countries?

  29. BuddyGuyMontag says:

    @backbroken: wrong site.

  30. Ilikenumbers says:

    The Texas Ratio is named when comparing the bad loan ratio of texas banks in the early 80’s recession, although similar results were found when they (RBC) studied New England area banks as well.

    In general I’m all for consumer awareness, but then again, most consumers have not learned the lessons of ’29. Run on banks baaad.


  31. smonkey says:

    Why would anyone keep 100K in a savings account which at best would keep up with the rate of inflation? sure it’s “safe” in so much as you’ll always have a 100k, but what happens when that 100K becomes worth 10K in today’s dollars? Even being in my mid 20’s I remember when you could get a gallon of gas, a cup of coffee and a 2L of soda for under a dollar.

    Inflation is an invisible tax that reduces your purchasing power. Seriously, when did our money become worth less than Canada’s? (No offense to Canada)

  32. Ilikenumbers says:

    Sadly, I think we’ll never learn the lessons of ’29. I just read that IndyMac’s ex-customers withdrew in excess of $1.3 BILLION(!). What bank can survive if knuckleheads don’t understand the FDIC insures all deposits up to $100,00?

  33. ianmac47 says:

    A run on a bank is only bad for the consumers who aren’t first to withdraw their money.

  34. backbroken says:

    A run on a bank is a “tragedy of the commons” scenario. Great idea for the individual. Bad idea on the whole.

  35. TouchMyMonkey says:

    @IphtashuFitz: Then suggesting that my local credit union will likely be the last bank standing would result in a rush of new depositors.

  36. LINIS says:

    @Landru: Yes, people lost money at Indybank because they are complete morons and decided to put more than $100,000 in any one account. You can have multiple deposit accounts that are each insured up to $100,000. Personally, I hope the FDIC doesn’t decide to bail out anyone over the $100,000 – people knew the risk but decided to bet against it and now they’ll pay the price. Don’t be retarded.

  37. dweebster says:

    @savvy999: Probably because it’s where the really BIG failures originate?

  38. snazz says:

    @LINIS: if you had two accounts at IndyMac you would only be insured up to $100,000 total. you would need to open up an account in another FDIC insured bank to be insured for another $100,000. But, yes, people who leave more than $100,000 in an account are stupid.

  39. dweebster says:

    @chiieddy: Phil Gramm, yes?

  40. dweebster says:
  41. Derv says:

    To be honest with you, I wouldn’t be suprised to see the ING Direct go under (the ING Bank in the United States). They pay great interest, but at the same time, charge next to nothing in fees to their customers.

    I overdraft occasionally, and they never charge a fee besides a few few cents for interest (never more than a dollar). They must save a ton of money by not having branches, but again, I wouldn’t be surprised in the least, which is why I made sure it is FDIC insured like a regular bank.

  42. Etoiles says:

    @Ilikenumbers: Knowing that the FDIC will somehow guarantee that your money isn’t lost forever is not the same as knowing that your rent / mortgage check (electric bill, college tuition, etc) will be duly paid and processed from your account into the recipient’s.

    I like to hope that if my bank should go under, I’d (a) be able calmly and rationally to call people / agencies to whom I owe money and explain the situation and (b) be understood and accommodated in case my payments stopped flowing properly, but… well, you read Consumerist. What do you think the chances are of the individual not getting screwed?

    @MissTicklebritches: Ha! So true.

  43. TouchMyMonkey says:

    @MissTicklebritches: THIS. The idea that potential business failures should be some kind of state secret evokes images of Soviet Russia and the Third Reich, not to mention today’s mainland China. Next thing to be not discussed (or else, you traitor) will be what, air quality ratings? Crime rates? School dropout rates? Like you, I WANT to be warned about this kind of stuff, that is, provided it’s real, and not some kind of Chicken Little homeland security color chart crapola.

  44. mariospants says:

    Sorry… but did that say the “State Bank of Lebo”??? Unless this is a WoW in-game bank, the name alone is a good reason it should be taken out back and mercifully shot dead. Seriously: imagine the developers of Grand Theft Auto having a brain-storming session creating names of fictional business based on real-world counterparts. If someone had suggested “The State Bank of Lebo” they all would have had a good laugh and gotten on to developing names people would actually take seriously. “Lebo of the Lost”

  45. mac-phisto says:

    @smonkey: b/c banks are “safe” (as in, you can’t lose your money) vs. stocks/mutual funds that could lose money.

    yeeeeaaaah…well, so much for that idea.

    the truth is, most people are very uneducated when it comes to money. i know quite a few middle-aged folks that blew out their stock investments back in 2001 when the stock market took a serious dive. i kept trying to explain that it wasn’t such a great idea back then, but most people explained “but my stocks lost 1/2 their value overnite!”

    this is why people think banks are “safe”. they deposit $10,000 & they have $10,000 (plus some nominal interest earned). much “safer” than buying $10,000 in stock & seeing that it’s worth $7,000 in a week’s time.

  46. jblack says:


    When economists talk about a negative savings rate, they aren’t referring just to your 0.75% savings account. Savings goes up when you deposit money or pay off debt (like credit cards), with the converse being true as well.

    By increasing credit card debt faster than one’s savings credit, one (in fact, many) people end up with a negative savings rate even though they have more cash in the bank than before.

  47. @snoop-blog:

    What is the banking industries obssesion with putting the word “first” in their name. There’s like 5 in my area alone claiming to be “first blah bank and blah”…

    /end rant

    We have Fifth Third Bank here in Lexington. Weirdest. Name. Ever. What does that even mean?!?

  48. Derv says:

    We have Fifth Third Bank here in Lexington. Weirdest. Name. Ever. What does that even mean?!?

    I do believe that is at top-heavy fraction.

  49. A.W.E.S.O.M.-O says:

    @InfiniTrent: It’s a result of the merger between Fifth National Bank and Third National Bank. Ha! Truth is stranger than fiction.

    @snazz: Wrong, some retirement accounts and POD accounts are insured for much more, so it’s not “stupid” to have a $200,000 IRA in an account at one bank.

  50. BankOnIt says:

    Consumerist, the “Texas ratio” is NOT calculated by comparing assets to non-performing loans. You are correct that it is a calculation to determine coverage of problem loans. However, to be scientific, the ratio is calculated by taking non-performing assets plus loans 90 days+ past due and dividing by tangible equity plus loan loss reserves.

    For the record, IndyMac’s Texas ratio was over 100% at March 31.

    The Texas ratio can be very misleading because it does not account for any recoveries on problem loans and also treats all loans as if they were unsecuritized. Regulators require banks to maintain certain levels of capital adequacy, which should always be analyzed in conjunction with problem asset information. All of this data – on aggregate and by company – is publicly available through the FFIEC.

    Also, you can go to the FDIC’s website for information on how bank receivorships work and an explanation on what would happen to your loans, deposits, etc. if your banking institution failed.

  51. Ilikenumbers says:


    Not a ton, try mega-ton. Consider the price for commercial lease/ownership, rising corp. tax rates, payroll/benefits, blah blah blah. ING and Emigrantdirect were where I held all of my “can safely tuck away but can still wire to my normal checking account within 2 bd” money. In early ’07 I remember being paid out at nearly 5%, plus they showed you the daily interest calculations, neato for a guy like me (read name)


    Don’t take me for a snarky “tough-luck” character, I’m simply remarking on the economic lessons our great-grandfathers/mothers taught us. The positive-feedback loop of bank runs only worsens the market conditions.

    Consumer confidence is one of those oft-irritating realities in economies. What Gramm said, while not altogether wrong, was a bit ham-handed. To your point, I agree our major lenders/creditors are not apt to issue extensions, for much the same reasons the banks are going under – liquidity issues.

  52. AdvocatesDevil says:

    Any credit unions on that list?

  53. mac-phisto says:

    @InfiniTrent: it’s where the first bank was built. meanwhile, 48 blocks up, joey & johnny were sniffing carbona.

  54. Mistrez_Mish says:


  55. camman68 says:

    @m4ximusprim3: What is a divinig rod?

  56. ChuckECheese says:

    @Ilikenumbers: It is already in the news that despite “insurance,” people with accounts at IndyMac are having trouble withdrawing funds and other banks are placing limits on checks written on IndyMac accounts. So, insured or not, if you don’t have access to your money when you need it, insurance is worthless. If the money is indeed insured and safe, people should be able to take out as much of their money whenever they want, right? Since the accounts are insured, the money is available for people to withdraw, right?

    Saying that it is wrong to point out the obvious (banks are failing) is to blame the messenger rather than the bank. I would go on, but @HurtsSoGood: says it well.

  57. Jabberkaty says:

    *raises hand* Stupid question … Where do credit unions stand with the whole FDIC thing?

    Yeah, I know I could do research, but it’s hot.

  58. Pro-Pain says:

    Bank failures FTW! I can’t help but pay attention to what’s happening around me and think how about all the idiots that voted for Bush in the last election. I hate to say I told you so, but I will anyway. You all deserve this.

  59. Legal_Eagle_In_Training says:

    Am I the only one that sees the irony in the third bank on the list being named Integrity Bank?

  60. azntg says:

    @backbroken: Indeed, but you’ll always have people complaining either way:

    If you post: “Why are you posting it? Do you want to spark a bank run? Jerk!”

    If you don’t post: “Why didn’t you post it? Did you have something to hide from us? Jerk!”

    @Derv: Compared to some other depository institution, they pay a pittance interest (not as pittance as a basic Chase, Citibank savings account, etc. But you get the idea).

    Don’t quote me on this, but I think that the Netherlands based ING Group (parent company of ING Direct in the US) are in at least marginally better shape than some US financial companies.

  61. Average_Joe says:

    @ChuckECheese: Insurance is never immediate and no bank is going to give you an interest free loan while waiting for the FDIC to disburse the money.

  62. jswilson64 says:

    Run on the banks? I wish we’d all make a run on credit cards. Max ’em out with cash advances, then call and cancel the card, then refuse to pay. Screw them!!!

  63. Pro-Pain says:

    @jswilson64: Right on!!! Best post I’ve seen here today.

  64. m4ximusprim3 says:

    @camman68: Its a forked stick which is used in “dowsing”.

    Basically, certain people (we’ll call them “batshit insane”) think that if you hold a y shaped stick and walk around and get really “in tune” with the earth, the stick will jump in your hands when it’s over what you’re looking for (water, gold, dead hookers buried in lye, etc).

    Basically, it’s nonsensical sorcery. Much like most of our financial reporting system.

  65. m4ximusprim3 says:

    @camman68: [en.wikipedia.org]

    if you really want to be disappointed in the human race.

  66. razremytuxbuddy says:

    Why would someone put the bank of Lebo on this list??? Lebo is a little town in southeast KS with a population of less than 1000.

  67. SinisterMatt says:

    Cosmo: I might be able to crash the entire system.

    “We are the United States Government. We don’t do that sort of thing.”


  68. WraithSama says:


    I think I recall you mentioning before you’re from Indiana. I used to bank at a place back there called Fifth-Third Bank, which is far more rediculous than first-anything.

  69. gvf says:

    Please don’t forget to say that:

    FDIC insures most Retirement Accounts (Roths, IRAs, Keoghs, etc…)up to $250,000.

    So that IRA CD you got for $200,000 is ok.

  70. m4ximusprim3 says:

    Could Fifth-Third bank be simplified to “First and Second/Third Bank”? That way we could avoid improper fractions.

  71. Landru says:

    I’m thinking of opening a savings account with ING. They seem to be doing all right.
    Look them up on Bankrate.com. HSBC Direct is the one in worse shape.

  72. SAGoon987 says:

    @jswilson64: Yeah because those evil credit card companies instill those bad spending habits in people! Clearly, they’re not just a tool for some people to use wisely and others to completely screw up…

  73. GiselleBeardchen says:

    My heart skipped a beat until I realized—my fortune is in the State Banks of LESBOS! Whew!!!

    /whoops, shitcan me if you must!

  74. harvey_birdman_attorney_at_law says:

    Exactly. The only alternative is to hide this information from the public, which does nobody any good.

  75. harvey_birdman_attorney_at_law says:

    ING doesn’t charge overdraft fees? Is that true?

  76. WachoviaEmployee says:

    Wachovia has over $50 Billion in liquid capital per filing disclosed yesterday. Don’t worry – your money isn’t going anywhere.

    FDIC insurance is not necessarily “per account”, it is based on the titling of the account. Read the coverage rules before splitting your money into 5 personal accounts at the same bank and thinking you’re covered – ’cause you’re not. I believe it’s $100K coverage for one single account, one joint account, one trust account, etc, but read the rules to be sure.

    • jeebussez says:


      IIRC single-name accounts (e.g., just you) at a bank are covered for $100k (that is, the summation of accounts under a single name). Joint accounts (e.g., you and your spouse) are insured for the number of titles on the account ($100k per person), and under the FDIC rules the joint account is separately covered from whatever individual accounts you have. What this means is that if you play it smart, you can wriggle $400k of protection from FDIC insurance per bank by splitting your deposits as such (assuming you and your spouse’s names are John and Jane):

      John (Single) – $100,000
      Jane (Single) – $100,000
      John&Jane (Joint) – $200,000
      Total Coverage: $400,000

      If you’re really lost, the FDIC has a great calculator here: [www.fdic.gov] You just punch in your deposits, who’s on the title, and banks (each bank is considered individually) and it’ll tell you how much you’re covered for.

  77. the_wiggle says:

    @BabyGorilla: BINGO!
    The real faith based program is finances.

    @jswilson64: i don’t think so. you gonna pay their employees living expenses, etc? credit is a tool. learn about it & use it wisely.

    @Jabberkaty: [www.ncua.gov]

    @HurtsSoGood: well said, thank

    @BabyGorilla: beautiful :)

  78. STrRedWolf says:

    Um… that’s incorrect. Eastern’s not in trouble at all, and WMAR-TV in Baltimore had to issue a retraction for the report (being an ABC affiliate).

    Here’s the report on the retraction: [www.baltimoresun.com]

  79. stevejust says:

    “The good news is that all the banks are FDIC-insured, which means that up to the first $100,000 of your deposits are guaranteed by the federal government.”

    Umm… the bad news is that all of us as taxpayers get to foot the bill to bail out the jackasses who loaned blockbuster video store managers $600,000 to buy a house.

    I don’t see how this is good news at all. If Freddie and Fannie go under, the entire US will be bankrupt. I mean all of it. We’re done.

    Scott Adams at MSN has already pointed out that the entire net worth of the United States is equivalent to 400 billion barrels of gasoline– or put another way, the reserves of Saudi Arabia and Iran. Or put another way, Saudi Arabi and Iran have us pwn3d.


  80. Vhalkyrie says:

    I don’t need the media to tell me I need to make a bank run. I just do a little poking around on Bankrate.com. Fortunately, the only bank I have to worry about I have less than $30 in because I moved my money to a higher yield account a couple of years ago anyway.

    Yeah, I want to know if my bank is acting financially irresponsible. I’ve dumped boyfriend’s for this. I’ll definitely start seeing a new bank if I find out they’re buying dumb house loans.

  81. dasunst3r says:

    Aaw, dang… I would be happy to see Bank of America (which ate up Countrywide) and Capital One on that list.

  82. nyaz says:

    @IphtashuFitz: It’s public information retard.

  83. There is a lot more issues in play to cause a bank to fail than just a couple ratios and some witchcraft.

    But media speculation sure doesn’t help.

  84. furseekr says:

    A few things:

    WachoviaEmployee already touched on this, but the $100K insurance limit is per ownership category, NOT per account (and the limit is $250K for retirement accounts).

    Credit unions are insured by the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), which is essentially the same as FDIC.

    Your bank or CU should (actually must, by law) have a brochure available titled something like “Your FDIC (or NCUA) Insured Deposit” which explains in agonizing detail how it all works. The best thing to do if you are concerned about insurance limits is to go and talk to a bank/CU representative. They can explain how the limits work and help you set up your accounts so that all your funds are insured.

    This is COMPLETELY off the top of my head, but IIRC a married couple with 2 children can have funds of $1.4 million insured at a single institution as long as the accounts are set up properly.

    And to the person who said taxpayers pay for the insurance payouts to customers of failed banks, this is not really true. Banks and CUs pay insurance premiums to FDIC or NCUA which cover the losses UNLESS things get really ugly like they did with savings and loans in the 80s. Then a government bailout is required. Older readers may remember the FSLIC which was like FDIC for S&Ls and died along with S&Ls in the 80s.

    Will things get really ugly with banks now and require a government bailout? Probably.

    • jeebussez says:

      A sum of the permutations of:
      Single Accounts: 400k
      Joint Accounts (2 parties): 1,200k
      Joint Accounts (3 parties): 900k
      Joint Accounts (everyone): 400k

      Total coverage: $2,900,000


  85. Nakko says:

    Notice that none of these top-ten banks are located in Texas.
    (I’m sure there are banks in all fifty states that have cruddy mortgages on their books…)

  86. chocogray says:

    #11- The bank formerly known as my wallet

  87. SOhp101 says:

    @IphtashuFitz: Very true. The media should sometimes learn to shut up.

    One of the major reasons why IndyMac Bank went under is because some US Senator published a letter that he sent to a bunch of people that he believed IndyMac Bank was going to go under.

    When you’re in a competitive industry that requires you to have to loan out approximately 90% of your deposits, it will certainly hurt when suddenly you have a line of people who want to withdraw their money.

  88. parrotuya says:

    Hey look, it’s a good old-fashioned bank run! Where’s Jimmy Stewart when you need him?!

  89. Amac says:

    To be honest, Indymac was in real trouble long before anyone put the spotlight on them. You don’t have to be over 100 to be in trouble as a bank.

  90. FMFats says:

    A married couple can have several hundred thousand in deposits at one bank and still be insured by the FDIC through simple trusts for each other and other direct relatives. The FDIC website has its EDIE calculator to show how your accounts can be structured so as to maximize
    FDIC insurance.
    Folks who are managing large sums should investigate Promontory Interfinancial Network’s Certificate of Deposit Account Registry Service (CDARS) program available at about 2,000 banks nationwide (including my bank, Decatur First Bank near Atlanta). CDARS can insure funds up to $50,000,000 by placing deposits in chunks under $100k to its member banks, all FDIC insured, and putting funds from depositors of other member banks back into your home bank. You receive one statement and one 1099, and funds equivalent to your deposit stay in your community for your bank to reinvest. Your CDs have the same interest rate and are available in terms from 4 weeks to 3 years.

  91. zibby says:

    Bitch a little more about JP Morgan being mean to you on the phone or hitting you with a $1.29 charge or whatever, but they’ll be there at the end of the day. Hell, I’ll bet customer service is real personal and friendly at most of the banks on the above list…

    Bottom line, if you have money you can’t afford to lose put it in a bank too big to fail. Actually, make that “banks”.

  92. loganmo says:

    The State Bank of Lebo? That sounds like the bank that holds my winnings from the Nigerian lottery.

  93. mthrndr says:

    @Pro-Pain: what the hell are you talking about? Bush didn’t have anything to do with this. The market is undergoing correction for poor credit practices and the fallout of the subprime bubble. the GSE’s have been run by high-ranking dems for years, and in a free market, you have to look at them, not the president, who doesn’t control the market. Nor do we want him to. Take your partisan vitriol somewhere else.

  94. P_Smith says:

    @savvy999: Why is it called the ‘Texas Ratio’? Because it’s god-awful hot?

    Because “everything’s bigger in Texas” – it’s all about the exaggerations. The banks listed have overstated their loans/assets ratio and now they’re being called on their lies.

  95. kylerr says:

    Just because a bank loans out $100.00 does not mean they have $100.00 in the safe or in liquid assets. Its more like $10.00 in the bank for every $100.00 loaned out.

    So for all your money they are paying you 1, 2, maybe 3% interest on, they are turning around and charging 5 to 20% interest ten times over. Pretty slick, till everybody gets greedy.
    For a very good explanation of how our banking system works check out http://www.scamorbam/bankingscams.html

  96. wilstanton says:

    There are a couple of websites that people should be aware of



    these are calculators that will tell you your coverage for banks and credit unions respectively.

    FWIW, if you have $10.00 or $100k in a bank, if they are mismanaged, you should pull out as much as you can as quickly as you can. Some things that might indicate mismanagement:

    1. Bad business practices (such as lending money to people who obviously can’t afford to pay it back).
    2. Offering services to people who wouldn’t ordinarily qualify for them and looking the other way.
    3. CEO has a smoking hot 29 year old secretary with huge hoots (the biological clock is ticking and he’s not leaving his wife)

  97. physics2010 says:

    Well see. The lists are nice for the people foolishly keeping in excess of $100,000 in the account. Learn your lessons and break it across banks. Break money across banks anyway so that you have enough emergency money in case one goes out and its 8 weeks before you get you money back.
    As far as stock market beating inflation….not right now.

  98. billyakerman says:

    This is why I don’t invest in the financial sector of the market. As for the balance of my bank accounts, I have several of them. All of them with less than $100,000 for that reason.

  99. femmesavante says:

    @GiselleBeardchen: LOL. I saw the same “word.”