Risk

The failures of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank sent a shockwave through the financial system. Even if the worst is behind us, the event will have enormous consequences for banking regulation and supervision for years to come.

The company is adding fixed income securities to its offering while interest rates rise and the U.S. equities market continues to modernize

Regulators had their priorities backward when it came to overseeing SVB and allowed an obvious danger to go unmitigated.

Subordinated debt issuances and asset-backed securities have helped institutions of all asset sizes weather recent market uncertainties and fuel campaigns for growth, according to executives and investment experts.

Regional banks will need to implement holistic, sophisticated data and risk analysis technology following last month's bank runs, experts say.

In his new role as chief operating officer, Selva will take the reins of a multiyear initiative to improve internal controls. Those efforts, which followed regulatory scrutiny, were previously led by longtime banker Karen Peetz, who plans to retire in May.

Institutions can borrow against par-valued securities that they would otherwise have to sell at a loss when there's a run on deposits, and it could have effectiveness beyond its actual usage.

There were many red flags before the California bank failed last week. Now the questions are: How did federal and state regulators assess the risks, and what actions did they take in response?

The FDIC named Greg Carmichael, who retired last year as CEO of Fifth Third Bancorp, to run a bridge bank that will hold Signature's deposits and most of its assets.