Figures are a stubborn thing! The accounts of Mikhail Gutseriev's "Binbank" are, most likely, artistically "painted". The analysis of the accounts of "Binbank" on 01.07.2017 came. It was conducted by the general director of "Risk-Consult" LLC Natalia Vishnyakova.

And on Friday on the portal FinNews.ru there was information that the auditor of "Binbank" questioned the adequacy of the bank's approaches to assessing the credit risks given to the sanated "Growth of the Bank." If we apply other approaches to credit assessment - by all the rules of the Central Bank - this can lead to the fact that the bank's capital becomes negative. And this for any bank means that it is bankrupt!

The "Binbank" of the Gutseriev-Shishkhanovs, which is part of the "Safmar" group, seems to have serious problems. Recently, Mikhail Gutseriv's nephew Mikail Shishkhanov, who ran the bank for 25 years, left his post as head of the bank. And the Moscow stock exchange excluded from the quotation list bonds of "Binbank" in the amount of 66 billion rubles.

Experts suggest that this happened after the Central Bank asked Mikhail Gutseriev to take the bank under his control. Now he owns a 28.5% stake in the bank. Mikail Shishkhanov - 67.9% of shares. The request of the Central Bank is only a guess, because it usually does not interfere with the activities of existing banks. What, then, led to drastic changes in the bank?

 Mikail Shishkhanov was guilty?

Gutseriev's company Hanberg Finance has already asked for approval from the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS) to determine the working conditions for Binbank. But this is only possible if the company acquires a controlling stake in the authorized capital of the bank. And how is Gutseriev going to take control of the bank?

Evil tongues say that not only Shishkhanov was removed from the bank's management. Allegedly in the bank the whole team of managers is changing, whose work, apparently, is not pleased with Mikhail Gutseriev. Why? Or in the Central Bank he still pointed to the gaps of "Binbank"? Let's try to calculate them using the figures given by Natalia Vishnyakova.

What do the numbers say?

Recently, the group "Safmar" actively bought up assets. And Natalia Vishnyakova suspects that this was done at the expense of the money of the depositors of the non-state pension funds (NPF) "Safmar" and the deposits of "Binbank". If this is the case, then "Safmar" conducts a risky business, because it uses the money of its depositors. But let's return to the figures of Natalia Vishnyakova.

There is a banking standard H1 - the capital adequacy ratio. His rate is 10%. At "Binbank" for the last half a year it does not change and makes 13.83%. However, if the consolidated "Growth Bank" is added to the consolidated financial statements, then H1 will be below the norm. Natalia Vishnyakova, like the auditor, suspects "Binbank" in an inadequate approach to its indicators? Or is it done by the bank specifically?

The loan portfolio of Binbank - 1 060 billion rubles. Of these, 52% (546 billion rubles.) - a loan to the sanated "Growth of the Bank." Issued it is actually due to the contributions of individuals - 552 billion rubles. And legal entities - 199 billion rubles.

The long-term loan "Growth for the Bank" for some reason, according to Vishnyakova's figures, does not correspond to the volume of long-term deposits, which is only 308 billion rubles. And this discrepancy can at any time put the liquidity of the bank under attack.

The loan portfolio of legal entities and individuals practically does not change and is only 17.6%. At the same time, interest obligations on deposits and loans increased by 338% from 01.07.16 to 01.07.17 (from 236 billion rubles to 1 035 billion rubles). Vishnyakova does not understand what the bank plans to pay with investors under an inert credit policy and vague prospects, "Growth of the Bank."

Investments in securities - 213 billion rubles. Or 20.18% of the assets of Binbank. The norm is 20%. At the same time, about 105 billion rubles. - Again, nothing is secured by investments in the company of the group "Safmar". It turns out that she lends herself?

Issued bonds for 115 billion rubles. Thus, the source of financing for the group companies - attracted funds through bonds (an alternative to a deposit) is clearly traced. At the same time, coupon yield on bonds is 11.5% -12% per annum. For comparison, OFZ - 8.5-9%. "Binbank" lures customers with a high percentage! But can it be paid?

Usually, the bank earns on the difference between the funds raised and those placed. Vishnyakova is not entirely clear, due to what "Binbank" will pay off with bondholders and depositors, if it suddenly bankrupt the companies that are affiliated with the bank, including. And "Growth Bank." And before that it may well come.

 "Growth of the bank" will pull "Binbank" for itself?

The security of assets with real estate is only 17%. According to Vishnyakova, if there is an overdue debt "Growth of the bank" or unsuccessful investments in securities, "repaying" the delay will simply be nothing and all deposits will burden the DIA.

The bank's own funds to assets are only 5%. If the same Moscow Credit Bank (9th place in terms of assets) is actively funded by its subsidiary (developer), then the affiliated companies of Binbank, according to Vishnyakova, apparently are engaged in drawing depositors' funds into their pockets.

Information on the "Growth of the Bank" and its financial recovery is closed, which makes it impossible to analyze the probability of a loan repayment of 546 billion rubles. "Binbank". Perhaps the sanation is carried out for the mind and is a kind of legal withdrawal of funds?

Binbank's overdue indebtedness indicators are above the norm (11% vs. 7%), Return on equity on the brink (0.057 v. 0.05). As the figures of Natalia Vishnyakova show, the outlook for Binbank is by no means joyful.

Conclusions of Natalia Vishnyakova?

"Binbank", apparently, is not engaged in expansion of the branch network and active lending to the external market. Attracted funds in the form of deposits, securities, a loan from the CBRF are likely to go to finance the sanated "Growth of the Bank" and structures of the "Safmar" group.

The structure of Binbank's owners is blurred by offshore companies. The bank does not have a strategic partner capable of providing financial support to the bank if necessary. In the structure of the owners there is no state, which automatically leads to administrative risks. The group "Safmar" is probably very dependent on the oil and financial industry.

"Growth Bank" is not included in the consolidated financial statements of Binbank. As a result, such a standard as H1 can be artificially overstated. "Binbank" does not accrue reserves for the loan "Growth of the Bank." At the same time, the loan is not secured by highly liquid assets. At consolidation of the financial reporting "Binbank" for a long time would roll down from the 13-th place. And it is even difficult to guess at what.

"Growth Bank" and "Binbank" do not conduct an active credit policy. Instead, they "sit" on the stock exchange, attracting bonds and playing futures deals. In January 2017, Growth Bank repaid a subordinated debt to Societe Generale S.A. For the amount of 2,800 million rubles, in May 2017 - by 750 million rubles. Here, in fact, the final "exit" of Binbank's money in addition to financing the group's companies. Money is being taken offshore?

Of 621 billion rubles. (Loan indebtedness) 229 billion rubles. - some interbank loans, 168 billion rubles. - financial investments (securities, deposits in subsidiaries, etc.). "Binbank", apparently, leads one strategy - all except for lending!

Since July 2017, the Central Bank has stated that it refuses to give out loans to banks on bail of "junk" bonds. "Binbank bonds also fell into this category.

 When will Mikhail Gutseriev stop financial "arts"?

Figures of Natalia Vishnyakova, of course, only figures. And the conclusions are her subjective opinion. However, in some ways it coincides with the opinion of the auditor of "Binbank". And the general conclusion for him is disappointing. Experts "painted" a picture of their approaches. A "Binbank" can "draw" it in its own way. And they somehow diametrically differ.

Only here experts, unlike Mikhail Gutseriev, do not make sense to "paint" art. Then they are experts. They speak the language of dry figures, from which, unfortunately, to emotions sometimes one step.

And we can imagine such a future for Binbank. It bursts like a soap bubble. The branches line up the depositors. The capital of the bank reveals a huge financial hole. And everything falls on the shoulders of the state as always. This is only an assumption. But is it far from reality?

Almost every day the media write about the problems of the group "Safmar" Gutseriev-Shishkhanovs. Maybe the Central Bank and other competent authorities should pay attention to publications? While in a single bank, another financial apocalypse has not come, which can affect the fate of millions of Russians.