STATE STREET CORP (STT)
SIC breadcrumb: Finance, Insurance, And Real Estate > Depository Institutions > SIC 6022 State Commercial Banks
SEC company page: https://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/?CIK=93751. Latest filing source: 0000093751-26-000124.
Informational only - descriptive public-record data, not investment advice.
Selected Fundamentals
| Metric | Value | Unit | FY | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | 13,944,000,000 | USD | 2025 | 2026-02-19 |
| Net income | 2,945,000,000 | USD | 2025 | 2026-02-19 |
| Assets | 366,047,000,000 | USD | 2025 | 2026-02-19 |
Financials
Annual standardized facts from SEC companyfacts as of latest extracted filing date 2026-02-19. Source: https://data.sec.gov/api/xbrl/companyfacts/CIK0000093751.json. Derived margins, ratios, and free cash flow are computed from the extracted annual SEC facts.
| Metric | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | 10,207,000,000 | 11,266,000,000 | 12,131,000,000 | 11,756,000,000 | 11,703,000,000 | 12,027,000,000 | 12,148,000,000 | 11,945,000,000 | 13,000,000,000 | 13,944,000,000 |
| Net income | 2,143,000,000 | 2,156,000,000 | 2,593,000,000 | 2,242,000,000 | 2,420,000,000 | 2,693,000,000 | 2,774,000,000 | 1,944,000,000 | 2,687,000,000 | 2,945,000,000 |
| Diluted EPS | 4.97 | 5.19 | 6.39 | 5.38 | 6.32 | 7.19 | 7.19 | 5.58 | 8.21 | 9.40 |
| Operating cash flow | 2,290,000,000 | 6,940,000,000 | 10,175,000,000 | 5,690,000,000 | 3,532,000,000 | -6,710,000,000 | 11,954,000,000 | 690,000,000 | -13,210,000,000 | 11,898,000,000 |
| Capital expenditures | 613,000,000 | 637,000,000 | 609,000,000 | 730,000,000 | 560,000,000 | 811,000,000 | 734,000,000 | 816,000,000 | 926,000,000 | 1,055,000,000 |
| Dividends paid | 723,000,000 | 768,000,000 | 828,000,000 | 930,000,000 | 889,000,000 | 866,000,000 | 972,000,000 | 970,000,000 | 1,033,000,000 | 1,120,000,000 |
| Share buybacks | 1,365,000,000 | 1,292,000,000 | 350,000,000 | 1,585,000,000 | 515,000,000 | 900,000,000 | 1,500,000,000 | 3,781,000,000 | 1,319,000,000 | 1,200,000,000 |
| Assets | 242,698,000,000 | 238,425,000,000 | 244,596,000,000 | 245,610,000,000 | 314,706,000,000 | 314,624,000,000 | 301,450,000,000 | 297,258,000,000 | 353,240,000,000 | 366,047,000,000 |
| Liabilities | 221,479,000,000 | 216,108,000,000 | 219,859,000,000 | 221,179,000,000 | 288,506,000,000 | 287,261,000,000 | 276,259,000,000 | 273,459,000,000 | 327,914,000,000 | 338,206,000,000 |
| Stockholders' equity | 21,193,000,000 | 22,270,000,000 | 24,737,000,000 | 24,431,000,000 | 26,200,000,000 | 27,363,000,000 | 25,191,000,000 | 23,799,000,000 | 25,326,000,000 | 27,841,000,000 |
| Free cash flow | 1,677,000,000 | 6,303,000,000 | 9,566,000,000 | 4,960,000,000 | 2,972,000,000 | -7,521,000,000 | 11,220,000,000 | -126,000,000 | -14,136,000,000 | 10,843,000,000 |
Ratios
| Metric | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net margin | 21.00% | 19.14% | 21.37% | 19.07% | 20.68% | 22.39% | 22.84% | 16.27% | 20.67% | 21.12% |
| Return on equity | 10.11% | 9.68% | 10.48% | 9.18% | 9.24% | 9.84% | 11.01% | 8.17% | 10.61% | 10.58% |
| Return on assets | 0.88% | 0.90% | 1.06% | 0.91% | 0.77% | 0.86% | 0.92% | 0.65% | 0.76% | 0.80% |
| Liabilities / equity | 10.45 | 9.70 | 8.89 | 9.05 | 11.01 | 10.50 | 10.97 | 11.49 | 12.95 | 12.15 |
Financial Charts
Quarterly
Quarterly standardized facts from SEC companyfacts as of latest extracted filing date 2026-04-29. Source: https://data.sec.gov/api/xbrl/companyfacts/CIK0000093751.json.
| Quarter | End Date | Revenue | Net Income | Diluted EPS | Method |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-Q2 | 2022-06-30 | 1.91 | reported discrete quarter | ||
| 2022-Q3 | 2022-09-30 | 1.80 | reported discrete quarter | ||
| 2023-Q1 | 2023-03-31 | 1.52 | reported discrete quarter | ||
| 2023-Q2 | 2023-03-31 | 549,000,000 | reported discrete quarter | ||
| 2023-Q2 | 2023-06-30 | 3,110,000,000 | 2.17 | reported discrete quarter | |
| 2023-Q3 | 2023-06-30 | 763,000,000 | reported discrete quarter | ||
| 2023-Q3 | 2023-09-30 | 2,691,000,000 | 1.25 | reported discrete quarter | |
| 2023-Q4 | 2023-12-31 | 3,043,000,000 | 210,000,000 | derived Q4 = FY annual - nine-month YTD | |
| 2024-Q1 | 2024-03-31 | 3,138,000,000 | 463,000,000 | 1.37 | reported discrete quarter |
| 2024-Q2 | 2024-03-31 | 463,000,000 | reported discrete quarter | ||
| 2024-Q2 | 2024-06-30 | 3,191,000,000 | 2.15 | reported discrete quarter | |
| 2024-Q3 | 2024-06-30 | 711,000,000 | reported discrete quarter | ||
| 2024-Q3 | 2024-09-30 | 3,259,000,000 | 2.26 | reported discrete quarter | |
| 2024-Q4 | 2024-12-31 | 3,412,000,000 | 783,000,000 | derived Q4 = FY annual - nine-month YTD | |
| 2025-Q1 | 2025-03-31 | 3,284,000,000 | 644,000,000 | 2.04 | reported discrete quarter |
| 2025-Q2 | 2025-03-31 | 644,000,000 | reported discrete quarter | ||
| 2025-Q2 | 2025-06-30 | 3,448,000,000 | 2.17 | reported discrete quarter | |
| 2025-Q3 | 2025-06-30 | 693,000,000 | reported discrete quarter | ||
| 2025-Q3 | 2025-09-30 | 3,545,000,000 | 2.78 | reported discrete quarter | |
| 2025-Q4 | 2025-12-31 | 3,667,000,000 | 747,000,000 | derived Q4 = FY annual - nine-month YTD | |
| 2026-Q1 | 2026-03-31 | 3,796,000,000 | 764,000,000 | 2.49 | reported discrete quarter |
Quarterly Charts
Macro Cross-References
- CPIAUCSL - Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: All Items in U.S. City Average
- UNRATE - Unemployment Rate
- FEDFUNDS - Federal Funds Effective Rate
- CES0500000003 - Average Hourly Earnings of All Employees, Total Private
- DFEDTARU - Federal Funds Target Range - Upper Limit
- DFEDTARL - Federal Funds Target Range - Lower Limit
- DGS3MO - Market Yield on U.S. Treasury Securities at 3-Month Constant Maturity
- DGS2 - Market Yield on U.S. Treasury Securities at 2-Year Constant Maturity
- DGS10 - Market Yield on U.S. Treasury Securities at 10-Year Constant Maturity
- DGS30 - Market Yield on U.S. Treasury Securities at 30-Year Constant Maturity
- T10Y2Y - 10-Year Treasury Constant Maturity Minus 2-Year Treasury Constant Maturity
- CPILFESL - Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: All Items Less Food and Energy
- CPIUFDSL - Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: Food
- CPIENGSL - Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: Energy
- CUSR0000SAH1 - Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: Shelter
- PCEPI - Personal Consumption Expenditures: Chain-type Price Index
- PCEPILFE - Personal Consumption Expenditures Excluding Food and Energy: Chain-type Price Index
- PPIACO - Producer Price Index by Commodity: All Commodities
- T10YIE - 10-Year Breakeven Inflation Rate
- U6RATE - Total Unemployed, Plus All Marginally Attached Workers Plus Total Employed Part Time for Economic Reasons
- PAYEMS - All Employees, Total Nonfarm
- CIVPART - Labor Force Participation Rate
- EMRATIO - Employment-Population Ratio
- UNEMPLOY - Unemployed
- CE16OV - Employment Level
- ICSA - Initial Claims
- JTSJOL - Job Openings: Total Nonfarm
- JTSQUR - Quits: Total Nonfarm
- GDPC1 - Real Gross Domestic Product
- A191RL1Q225SBEA - Real Gross Domestic Product: Percent Change from Preceding Period
- INDPRO - Industrial Production: Total Index
- TCU - Capacity Utilization: Total Index
- HOUST - New Privately-Owned Housing Units Started: Total Units
- PERMIT - New Privately-Owned Housing Units Authorized in Permit-Issuing Places: Total Units
- RSAFS - Advance Retail Sales: Retail Trade
- PCE - Personal Consumption Expenditures
- DSPIC96 - Real Disposable Personal Income
- PSAVERT - Personal Saving Rate
- M2SL - M2
- BOPGSTB - U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services: Balance
- MSPUS - Median Sales Price of Houses Sold for the United States
- HSN1F - New One Family Houses Sold: United States
- RHORUSQ156N - Homeownership Rate in the United States
- TTLCONS - Total Construction Spending: Total Construction in the United States
- RRVRUSQ156N - Rental Vacancy Rate in the United States
- TOTALSL - Total Consumer Credit Owned and Securitized
- REVOLSL - Revolving Consumer Credit Owned and Securitized
- DRCCLACBS - Delinquency Rate on Credit Card Loans, All Commercial Banks
- GDP - Gross Domestic Product
- GPDI - Gross Private Domestic Investment
- GCE - Government Consumption Expenditures and Gross Investment
- PCEC - Personal Consumption Expenditures
- NETEXP - Net Exports of Goods and Services
- GFDEBTN - Federal Debt: Total Public Debt
- GFDEGDQ188S - Federal Debt: Total Public Debt as Percent of Gross Domestic Product
- FYFSD - Federal Surplus or Deficit
- FGRECPT - Federal Government Current Receipts
- FGEXPND - Federal Government: Current Expenditures
- MANEMP - All Employees, Manufacturing
- USCONS - All Employees, Construction
- USTRADE - All Employees, Retail Trade
- USFIRE - All Employees, Financial Activities
- USGOVT - All Employees, Government
- AWHAETP - Average Weekly Hours of All Employees, Total Private
- DGORDER - Manufacturers' New Orders: Durable Goods
- NEWORDER - Manufacturers' New Orders: Nondefense Capital Goods Excluding Aircraft
- BUSINV - Total Business Inventories
- EXPGS - Exports of Goods and Services
- IMPGS - Imports of Goods and Services
- IR - Import Price Index (End Use): All Commodities
- PPIFIS - Producer Price Index by Commodity: Final Demand
Latest quarter (10-Q)
Latest 10-Q source: 0000093751-26-000196.
ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
GENERAL
State Street Corporation is one of the world’s leading providers of financial services to institutional investors, including investment servicing, markets and financing solutions and investment management. Our clients — asset managers and owners, insurance companies, wealth managers, official institutions, and central banks — rely on us to deliver solutions that support their business objectives across the investment life cycle.
State Street Corporation, referred to as the Parent Company, was organized in 1969 under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and is a bank holding company that has elected to be treated as a financial holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956. The Parent Company is a source of financial and managerial strength to our subsidiaries. Through our subsidiaries, including our principal banking subsidiary, State Street Bank and Trust Company, referred to as State Street Bank, we operate in more than 100 geographic markets worldwide, providing a broad range of financial products and services to institutional investors globally. As of March 31, 2026, we reported $54.52 trillion in AUC/A and $5.62 trillion in AUM.
We had consolidated total assets of $392.17 billion, consolidated total deposits of $293.34 billion, consolidated total shareholders' equity of $27.74 billion and approximately 51,000 employees, as of March 31, 2026.
Our operations are organized into two lines of business, Investment Servicing and Investment Management, which are defined based on products and services provided.
Additional information about our lines of business is provided in "Line of Business Information" in this Management's Discussion and Analysis and Note 17 to the consolidated financial statements in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2026 (Form 10-Q).
Our corporate headquarters is located at One Congress Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02114 (telephone (617) 786-3000). For purposes of this Form 10-Q, unless the context requires otherwise, references to "State Street," "we," "us," "our" or similar terms mean State Street Corporation and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis.
This Management's Discussion and Analysis is part of this Form 10-Q and updates the Management's Discussion and Analysis in our 2025
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2025 previously filed with the SEC (2025 Form 10-K). The financial information contained in this Management's Discussion and Analysis and elsewhere in this Form 10-Q should be read in conjunction with the financial and other information contained in our 2025 Form 10-K. Certain previously reported amounts presented in this Form 10-Q have been reclassified to conform to current-period presentation.
We prepare our consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions in its application of certain accounting policies that materially affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, equity, revenue and expenses.
The significant accounting policies that require us to make judgments, estimates and assumptions that are difficult, subjective or complex, about matters that are uncertain and may change in subsequent periods include:
•Recurring fair value measurements;
•Allowance for credit losses; and
•Contingencies.
These significant accounting policies require the most subjective or complex judgments, and underlying estimates and assumptions could be subject to revision as new information becomes available. For additional information about these significant accounting policies refer to “Significant Accounting Estimates” included under Item 7, Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, in our 2025 Form 10-K. We did not change these significant accounting policies in the first three months of 2026.
Certain financial information provided in this Form 10-Q, including this Management's Discussion and Analysis, is presented using both a U.S. GAAP, or reported basis, and a non-GAAP basis, including certain non-GAAP measures used in the calculation of identified regulatory ratios. We measure and compare certain financial information on a non-GAAP basis, including information that management uses in evaluating our business and activities. Non-GAAP financial information should be considered in addition to, and not as a substitute for or as superior to, financial information prepared in conformity with U.S.
State Street Corporation | 4
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
GAAP. Any non-GAAP financial information presented in this Form 10-Q, including this Management’s Discussion and Analysis, is reconciled to its most directly comparable currently applicable regulatory ratio or U.S. GAAP-basis measure. As part of our non-GAAP-basis measures, we present a fully taxable-equivalent NII that reports non-taxable revenue, such as interest income associated with tax-exempt investment securities, on a fully taxable-equivalent basis, which we believe facilitates an investor's understanding and analysis of our underlying financial performance and trends.
We provide additional disclosures required by applicable bank regulatory standards, including supplemental qualitative and quantitative information with respect to regulatory capital (including market risk associated with our trading activities), the LCR and the NSFR, summary results of annual State Street-run stress tests which we conduct under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act), and recovery and resolution plan disclosures. These additional disclosures are accessible on the "Filings & reports" and "Fixed Income" tabs of our website at investors.statestreet.com.
We have included the website address of State Street (including investors.statestreet.com) and the SEC in this report as an inactive textual reference only. Information on those websites (or any other) is not incorporated by reference in this Form 10-Q.
We use acronyms and other defined terms for certain business terms and abbreviations, as defined in the acronyms list and glossary following the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-Q.
Forward-Looking Statements
This Form 10-Q, as well as other reports and proxy materials submitted by us under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, registration statements filed by us under the Securities Act of 1933, our annual report to shareholders and other public statements we may make, may contain statements (including statements in our Management's Discussion and Analysis included in such reports, as applicable) that are considered “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of U.S. securities laws, including statements about our goals and expectations regarding our business, financial and capital condition, results of operations, strategies, cost savings and transformation initiatives, investment portfolio performance, dividend and stock purchase programs, acquisitions, outcomes of legal proceedings, market growth, joint ventures and divestitures, client growth, new technologies, services and opportunities, sustainability and impact, human capital and climate, as well as industry, governmental, regulatory, economic and market trends, initiatives and
developments, the business environment and other matters that do not relate strictly to historical facts.
Terminology such as “expect,” “outlook,” “will,” “goal,” “target,” “strategy,” “may,” “estimate,” “plan,” “intend,” “objective,” “forecast,” “believe,” “priority,” “anticipate,” “seek,” and “trend,” or similar statements or variations of such terms, are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain such terms.
Forward-looking statements are subject to various risks and uncertainties, which change over time, are based on management's expectations and assumptions at the time the statements are made and are not guarantees of future results. Management's expectations and assumptions, and the continued validity of the forward-looking statements, are subject to change due to a broad range of factors affecting the U.S. and global economies, regulatory environment and the equity, debt, currency and other financial markets, as well as factors specific to State Street and its subsidiaries, including State Street Bank. Factors that could cause changes in the expectations or assumptions on which forward-looking statements are based cannot be foreseen with certainty. Important factors that in the future could cause actual results to differ materially from those envisaged in forward-looking statements, and that in some cases have affected us in the past, include, but are not limited to:
Strategic Risks
•We are subject to intense competition, which could negatively affect our profitability;
•We are subject to significant pricing pressure and variability in our financial results and our AUC/A and AUM;
•Our development and completion of new products and services, including State Street Alpha® and those related to wealth servicing, alternative investment management or digital assets or incorporating artificial intelligence, may impose costs on us, involve dependencies on third parties and may expose us to increased risks;
•Acquisitions, strategic alliances, joint ventures and divestitures, and the integration, retention and development of the benefits of these transactions, pose risks for our business; and
•Competition for qualified members of our workforce is intense, and we may not be able to attract and retain the highly skilled people we need to support our business.
Financial Market Risks
•We could be adversely affected by political, geopolitical, economic and market conditions,
State Street Corporation | 5
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
including, for example, as a result of liquidity or capital deficiencies (actual or perceived) by other financial institutions and related market and government actions, changes in U.S. trade or other policies or those policies of other nations, the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and in the Middle East, major political shifts domestically or internationally (including the potential for retaliatory actions by governments, market participants or clients based on diverging perspectives or otherwise and, separately, the recent shutdown of the U.S. federal government), actions taken by central banks in an attempt to address prevailing economic conditions, changes in monetary policy or periods of significant volatility in the markets for equity, fixed income and other asset classes globally or within specific markets;
•Our investment securities portfolio, consolidated financial condition and consolidated results of operations could be adversely affected by changes in the financial markets, governmental action or monetary policy. For example, among other risks, changes in prevailing interest rates or market conditions have led, and were they to persist or occur in the future could further lead, to decreases in our NII or to portfolio management decisions resulting in reductions in our capital or liquidity ratios;
•Our business activities expose us to interest rate risk;
•We assume significant credit risk of counterparties, who may also have substantial financial dependencies on other financial institutions, and these credit exposures and concentrations could expose us to financial loss;
•Our fee revenue represents a significant portion of our revenue and is subject to and may decline based on, among other factors, market and currency declines, investment activities and preferences of our clients and their business mix, as well as the timing of
[Excerpt truncated for page length; source filing is linked above.]
Latest 10-K MD&A
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
GENERAL
This Management's Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes in this Form 10-K. Certain previously reported amounts presented in this Form 10-K have been reclassified to conform to current-period presentation.
As of December 31, 2025, we had consolidated total assets of $366.05 billion, consolidated total deposits of $274.35 billion, consolidated total shareholders’ equity of $27.84 billion and approximately 52,000 employees. Through our two lines of business, Investment Servicing and Investment Management, we operate in more than 100 geographic markets worldwide, including the United States, Canada, Latin America, Europe, the Middle East and Asia.
For the description of our lines of business, refer to “Lines of Business” in Item 1 in this Form 10-K. For financial and other information about our lines of business, refer to “Line of Business Information” in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis and Note 24 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
We prepare our consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions in its application of certain accounting policies that materially affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, equity, revenue and expenses.
Information about the significant accounting policies that require us to make judgments, estimates and assumptions that are difficult, subjective or complex about matters that are uncertain and may change in subsequent periods is included under “Significant Accounting Estimates” in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis and in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Certain financial information provided in this Form 10-K, including this Management’s Discussion and Analysis, is presented using both a U.S. GAAP, or reported basis, and a non-GAAP basis, including certain non-GAAP measures used in the calculation of identified regulatory ratios. We measure and compare certain financial information on a non-GAAP basis, including information that management uses in evaluating our business and activities. Non-GAAP financial information should be considered in addition to, and not as a substitute for or as superior to,
financial information prepared in conformity with U.S. GAAP. Any non-GAAP financial information presented in this Form 10-K, including this Management’s Discussion and Analysis, is reconciled to its most directly comparable currently applicable regulatory ratio or U.S. GAAP-basis measure. As part of our non-GAAP-basis measures, we present a fully taxable-equivalent NII that reports non-taxable revenue, such as interest income associated with tax-exempt investment securities, on a fully taxable-equivalent basis, which we believe facilitates an investor’s understanding and analysis of our underlying financial performance and trends.
In this Management’s Discussion and Analysis, where we describe the effects of changes in foreign currency translation, those effects are determined by applying applicable weighted average FX rates from the relevant 2024 period to the relevant 2025 period results.
This Management’s Discussion and Analysis contains statements that are considered “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of U.S. securities laws. These forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties which could cause actual results to differ materially. Additional information about forward-looking statements and related risks and uncertainties is provided in “Forward-Looking Statements”, “Risk Factors Summary” and “Risk Factors” in this Form 10-K.
Information regarding additional disclosures and materials available on our website is provided under “Additional Information” in Item 1 in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 59
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
FINANCIAL RESULTS AND HIGHLIGHTS
Summary of Financial Results
| TABLE 1: OVERVIEW OF FINANCIAL RESULTS | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |||||||
| Total fee revenue | $ | 10,980 | $ | 10,156 | $ | 9,480 | ||||
| Net interest income | 2,960 | 2,923 | 2,759 | |||||||
| Total other income | 4 | (79) | (294) | |||||||
| Total revenue | 13,944 | 13,000 | 11,945 | |||||||
| Provision for credit losses | 59 | 75 | 46 | |||||||
| Total expenses | 10,154 | 9,530 | 9,583 | |||||||
| Income before income tax expense | 3,731 | 3,395 | 2,316 | |||||||
| Income tax expense | 786 | 708 | 372 | |||||||
| Net income | $ | 2,945 | $ | 2,687 | $ | 1,944 | ||||
| Adjustments to net income: | ||||||||||
| Dividends on preferred stock(1) | $ | (226) | $ | (202) | $ | (122) | ||||
| Earnings allocated to participating securities(2) | (2) | (2) | (1) | |||||||
| Net income available to common shareholders | $ | 2,717 | $ | 2,483 | $ | 1,821 | ||||
| Earnings per common share: | ||||||||||
| Basic | $ | 9.55 | $ | 8.33 | $ | 5.65 | ||||
| Diluted | 9.40 | 8.21 | 5.58 | |||||||
| Average common shares outstanding (in thousands): | ||||||||||
| Basic | 284,545 | 297,883 | 322,337 | |||||||
| Diluted | 289,019 | 302,226 | 326,568 | |||||||
| Cash dividends declared per common share | $ | 3.20 | $ | 2.90 | $ | 2.64 | ||||
| Return on average common equity | 11.5 | % | 11.1 | % | 8.2 | % | ||||
| Pre-tax margin | 26.8 | 26.1 | 19.4 | |||||||
| Return on average assets | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.7 | |||||||
| Common dividend payout | 34.0 | 35.3 | 47.3 | |||||||
| Average common equity to average total assets | 6.9 | 7.2 | 8.1 |
(1) Additional information about our preferred stock dividends is provided in Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
(2) Represents the portion of net income available to common equity allocated to participating securities, composed of unvested and fully vested SERP (Supplemental executive retirement plans) shares and fully vested deferred director stock awards, which are equity-based awards that contain non-forfeitable rights to dividends, and are considered to participate with the common stock in undistributed earnings.
The following section provides information related to significant events, as well as highlights of our consolidated financial results for the year ended December 31, 2025 presented in Table 1: Overview of Financial Results. More detailed information about our consolidated financial results, including the comparison of our financial results for the year ended December 31, 2025 to those of the year ended December 31, 2024, is provided under “Consolidated Results of Operations”, “Line of Business Information” and “Capital” sections which follow “Financial Results and Highlights”, as well as in our consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
The comparison of our financial results for the year ended December 31, 2024 to those of the years ended December 31, 2023 is included in the Management’s Discussion and Analysis in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 filed with the SEC on February 13, 2025.
2025 Performance Highlights
•Total revenue increased 7% compared to 2024, driven by higher fee revenue and net interest income:
◦Total fee revenue increased 8% compared to 2024, reflecting higher servicing fees, management fees, foreign exchange trading services revenue and securities finance revenue, partially offset by lower other fee revenue.
◦NII increased 1% compared to 2024, primarily driven by 11% growth in average interest-earnings assets, partially offset by a 10 bps decline in NIM.
•Total expenses increased 7% compared to 2024, primarily due to higher business and technology investments, revenue-related costs and higher impact of notables items in the current year, partially offset by productivity and other savings. See “Notable Items” below.
•Pre-tax margin of 26.8% increased from 26.1% in 2024, while return on equity of 11.5% increased from 11.1% in 2024.
•EPS of $9.40, increased from $8.21 in 2024, primarily reflecting higher total revenue, partially offset by higher total expenses, including the higher impact of notable items in the current year, which decreased EPS by net $0.44 relative to 2024.
Notable Items
•Notable items reduced income before income tax expense by $344 million in 2025, including repositioning charges of $326 million and other notable items of $18 million, net.
•In 2024, notable items reduced income before income tax expense by $188 million, including a net loss on sale of investment securities of $81 million related to an investment portfolio repositioning, a deferred compensation expense acceleration of approximately $79 million and other notable items of $30 million, net.
AUC/A and AUM
•AUC/A of $53.80 trillion as of December 31, 2025 increased 16% compared to December 31, 2024, primarily due to higher market levels and client flows. In 2025, newly announced investment servicing mandates totaled approximately $2.12 trillion of AUC/A. We onboarded approximately $2.12 trillion of AUC/A during 2025. Investment servicing
State Street Corporation | 60
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
assets remaining to be installed in future periods totaled approximately $2.50 trillion as of December 31, 2025.
•AUM of $5.67 trillion as of December 31, 2025 increased 20% compared to December 31, 2024, primarily due to higher market levels and net inflows.
Capital
•In 2025, we returned approximately $2.1 billion to our shareholders in the form of common share repurchases and common stock dividends.
◦We declared aggregate common stock dividends of $3.20 per share, totaling $909 million compared to $2.90 per share, totaling $859 million in 2024.
◦We increased the quarterly common stock dividend declared per common share by 11% in the third quarter of 2025.
◦We acquired an aggregate of 11.5 million shares of common stock at an average per share cost of $104.05 and an aggregate cost of approximately $1.2 billion. In 2024, we acquired an aggregate of 15.1 million shares of common stock, at an average per share cost of $85.89 and an aggregate cost of approximately $1.3 billion. These purchases were all conducted under the share repurchase program approved by our Board of Directors.
•Our CET1 capital ratio was 11.6% as of December 31, 2025, compared to 10.9% as of December 31, 2024, primarily due to capital generated from earnings, partially offset by continued capital return. Our Tier 1 leverage ratio increased to 5.5% as of December 31, 2025, compared to 5.2% as of December 31, 2024, mainly driven by capital generated from earnings and higher preferred equity, partially offset by continued capital return and higher average balance sheet levels. Our target ranges for CET1 capital and Tier 1 leverage ratios remain at 10-11% and 5.25-5.75%, respectively. Standardized capital ratios were binding for both periods.
CONSOLIDATED RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
This section discusses our consolidated results of operations for 2025 compared to 2024 and should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Total Revenue
| TABLE 2: TOTAL REVENUE | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2025 vs. 2024 | % Change 2024 vs. 2023 | ||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |||||||||||||||
| Fee revenue: | ||||||||||||||||||
| Servicing fees | $ | 5,324 | $ | 5,016 | $ | 4,922 | 6 | % | 2 | % | ||||||||
| Management fees | 2,398 | 2,124 | 1,876 | 13 | 13 | |||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange trading services | 1,614 | 1,401 | 1,265 | 15 | 11 | |||||||||||||
| Securities finance | 505 | 438 | 426 | 15 | 3 | |||||||||||||
| Front office software and data | 657 | 639 | 580 | 3 | 10 | |||||||||||||
| Lending related and other fees | 246 | 249 | 231 | (1) | 8 | |||||||||||||
| Software and processing fees | 903 | 888 | 811 | 2 | 9 | |||||||||||||
| Other fee revenue | 236 | 289 | 180 | (18) | 61 | |||||||||||||
| Total fee revenue | 10,980 | 10,156 | 9,480 | 8 | 7 | |||||||||||||
| Net interest income: | ||||||||||||||||||
| Interest income | 11,644 | 11,977 | 9,180 | (3) | 30 | |||||||||||||
| Interest expense | 8,684 | 9,054 | 6,421 | (4) | 41 | |||||||||||||
| Net interest income | 2,960 | 2,923 | 2,759 | 1 | 6 | |||||||||||||
| Other income: | ||||||||||||||||||
| Gains (losses) from sales of available-for-sale securities, net | 4 | (79) | (294) | nm | (73) | |||||||||||||
| Total other income | 4 | (79) | (294) | nm | (73) | |||||||||||||
| Total revenue | $ | 13,944 | $ | 13,000 | $ | 11,945 | 7 | 9 |
nm Not meaningful
Fee Revenue
Table 2: Total Revenue, provides the breakout of fee revenue for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023. Servicing and management fees collectively made up approximately 70% of the total fee revenue in both 2025 and 2024, and 72% in 2023.
Servicing Fee Revenue
Servicing fees, as presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, increased 6% in 2025 compared to 2024, primarily reflecting higher average market levels and net new business.
Servicing fees generated outside the United States were approximately 48% of total servicing fees in 2025, compared to approximately 47% of total servicing fees in 2024.
Servicing fee revenue comprises revenue from a range of services provided to our clients, including certain Alpha servicing mandates, consisting of core custody services, accounting, reporting and administration, which we refer to collectively as back office services and middle office services. The nature and mix of services provided and the asset classes for which the services are performed affect our servicing fees. The basis for fees will differ across regions and clients. Generally, our servicing fee revenues are affected by several factors, including changes in market valuations, client activity and asset flows, net new business and the manner in which we price our services. For servicing fees for which we
State Street Corporation | 61
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
have not yet issued an invoice to our clients as of period end, we include an estimate of the impact of changes in market valuations, client activity and flows, net new business and changes in pricing in our revenues.
Changes in Market Valuations
Our servicing fee revenue is impacted by both our levels and the geographic and product mix of our AUC/A. Changes in market valuations have an associated impact on the level of our AUC/A and servicing fee revenues, though the degree of impact will vary depending on asset types and classes, and geography of assets held within our clients’ portfolios. For certain asset classes where the valuation process is more complex, including alternative investments, or where our valuation is dependent on third party information, AUC/A is reported on a time lag, typically one-month. For those asset classes, which represent a significant portion of AUC/A, the impact of market levels on our reported AUC/A, and to a lesser extent servicing fee revenue, does not reflect current period-end market levels.
Over the five years ended December 31, 2025, we estimate that worldwide equity and fixed income market valuations impacted our servicing fees revenue by approximately 3% on average with a range of (4)% to 8% annually and approximately 4% and 5% in 2025 and 2024, respectively.
Assuming that all other factors remain constant, including client activity, asset flows and pricing, we estimate, using relevant information as of December 31, 2025, that a 10% increase or decrease in worldwide equity valuations, on a weighted average basis, over the relevant periods for which our servicing fees are calculated, would result in a corresponding change in our total servicing fee revenues, on average and over multiple quarters, of approximately 3%. We estimate, similarly assuming all other factors remain constant and using relevant information as of December 31, 2025, that changes in worldwide fixed income markets, which on a weighted average basis and over time are typically less volatile than worldwide equity markets, have a smaller
corresponding impact on our servicing fee revenues on average and over time.
Client Activity and Asset Flows
Client activity and asset flows are impacted by the number of transactions we execute on behalf of our clients, including FX settlements, equity and derivative trades, and wire transfer activity, as well as actions by our clients to change the asset class in which their assets are invested. Our servicing fee revenues are impacted by a number of factors, including transaction volumes, asset levels and asset classes in which funds are invested, as well as industry trends associated with these client-related activities.
Our clients may change the asset classes in which their assets are invested, based on their market outlook, risk acceptance tolerance or other considerations. Over the five years ended December 31, 2025, we estimate that client activity and asset flows, together, impacted our servicing fees revenue by approximately (1)% on average with a range of (3)% to 2% annually and approximately 2% and 0% in 2025 and 2024, respectively.
Net New Business
Over the five years ended December 31, 2025, net new business, which includes business both won and lost, has affected our servicing fee revenues by approximately 1% on average with a range of 0% to 2% annually and approximately 2% and 0% in 2025 and 2024, respectively.
Gross investment servicing mandates were $2.12 trillion of AUC/A in 2025 and $2.16 trillion of AUC/A per year on average over the five years ended December 31, 2025, ranging from approximately $904 billion to $3.52 trillion of AUC/A annually in any given year.
Servicing fee revenue associated with new investment servicing mandates is not reflected in our servicing fee revenue until the assets have been installed, and may vary between mandates based on the breadth of services provided, the time required to install the assets, and the types of assets installed.
State Street Corporation | 62
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Our installation timeline in general can range from 6 to 36 months with the average installation timeline being approximately 9 to 12 months over the past two full fiscal years. We expect that our more complex installations, including new State Street Alpha mandates, will generally be on the longer end of the 6 to 36 months range. With respect to the current asset mandates of approximately $2.5 trillion of AUC/A that are yet to be installed as of December 31, 2025, we expect the conversion will mostly occur over the coming 24 months, with approximately 70% expected to be installed in 2026, with the balance expected to be installed largely in 2027. The expected timing of these installations is subject to change due to a variety of factors, including adjusted implementation schedules agreed with clients, scope adjustments, and product and functionality changes.
Pricing
The industry in which we operate has historically faced pricing pressure, and our servicing fee revenues continue to be affected by such pressures today. Consequently, no assumption should be drawn as to future revenue run rate from announced servicing AUC/A wins, as the amount of revenue associated with AUC/A, once installed, can vary materially between mandates.
On average, over the five years ended December 31, 2025, we estimate that pricing pressure with respect to existing clients has impacted our servicing fees by approximately (2)% annually, with the impact ranging from (2)% to (3)% in any given year and approximately (2)% and (3)% in 2025 and 2024, respectively. Pricing concessions can be a part of a contract renegotiation with a client including terms that may benefit us, such as extending the term of our relationship with the client, expanding the scope of services that we provide or reducing our dependency on manual processes through the standardization of the services we provide. The timing of the impact of additional revenue generated by anticipated additional services and the amount of revenue generated may differ from expectations due to the impact of pricing concessions on existing services due to the necessary time required to onboard those new services or process changes, the nature of those services and client investment practices and other factors. These same market pressures also impact the fees we negotiate when we win business from new clients.
Historically, and based on an indicative sample of revenue, we estimate that approximately 65%, on average, of our servicing fee revenues have been variable due to changes in asset valuations including changes in daily average valuations of AUC/A; another approximately 20%, on average, of our servicing fees are impacted by the volume of activity in the funds we serve; and the remaining approximately 15% of our servicing fees tend not to be variable in nature nor impacted by market fluctuations or values.
| TABLE 3: ASSETS UNDER CUSTODY AND/OR ADMINISTRATION BY PRODUCT(1)(2) | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | % Change2025 vs. 2024 | % Change2024 vs. 2023 | ||||||||||||||||
| Collective funds, including ETFs | $ | 17,997 | $ | 15,266 | $ | 14,070 | 18 | % | 9 | % | |||||||||||
| Mutual funds | 13,518 | 12,301 | 11,009 | 10 | 12 | ||||||||||||||||
| Pension products | 10,452 | 9,386 | 8,352 | 11 | 12 | ||||||||||||||||
| Insurance and other products | 11,833 | 9,604 | 8,379 | 23 | 15 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 53,800 | $ | 46,557 | $ | 41,810 | 16 | 11 |
| TABLE 4: ASSETS UNDER CUSTODY AND/OR ADMINISTRATION BY ASSET CLASS(2) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | % Change2025 vs. 2024 | % Change2024 vs. 2023 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Equities | $ | 31,879 | $ | 27,535 | $ | 24,317 | 16 | % | 13 | % | |||||||||||||
| Fixed-income | 13,830 | 11,933 | 11,043 | 16 | 8 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Short-term and other investments | 8,091 | 7,089 | 6,450 | 14 | 10 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 53,800 | $ | 46,557 | $ | 41,810 | 16 | 11 |
| TABLE 5: ASSETS UNDER CUSTODY AND/OR ADMINISTRATION BY GEOGRAPHY(2)(3) | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | % Change2025 vs. 2024 | % Change2024 vs. 2023 | ||||||||||||
| Americas | $ | 37,422 | $ | 33,284 | $ | 29,951 | 12 | % | 11 | % | |||||||
| Europe/Middle East/Africa | 12,918 | 10,179 | 8,913 | 27 | 14 | ||||||||||||
| Asia/Pacific | 3,460 | 3,094 | 2,946 | 12 | 5 | ||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 53,800 | $ | 46,557 | $ | 41,810 | 16 | 11 |
(1) Certain previously reported amounts presented have been reclassified to conform to current-period presentation.
(2) Consistent with past practice, AUC/A values for certain asset classes are based on a lag, typically one-month.
(3) Geographic mix is generally based on the domicile of the entity servicing the funds and is not necessarily representative of the underlying asset mix.
State Street Corporation | 63
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Investment servicing mandates newly announced in 2025 totaled approximately $2.12 trillion of AUC/A. Investment servicing assets remaining to be installed in future periods totaled approximately $2.50 trillion as of December 31, 2025, which will be reflected in AUC/A in future periods after installation and will generate servicing fee revenue in subsequent periods. The full revenue impact of such mandates will be realized as the assets are installed and additional services are added over that period.
New investment servicing mandates, including Alpha servicing mandates, may be subject to completion of definitive agreements, consents or assignments, approval of applicable boards, shareholders and customary regulatory approvals or other conditions, the failure to complete any of which will prevent the relevant mandate from being installed and serviced. New investment servicing mandates and servicing assets remaining to be installed in future periods exclude certain new business which has been contracted, but for which the client has not yet provided permission to publicly disclose or anonymously reference. These excluded assets, which from time to time may be significant, will be included in new investment servicing mandates and reflected in investment servicing assets remaining to be installed in the period in which the client provides its permission. Investment servicing mandates and investment servicing assets remaining to be installed in future periods may include assets associated with acquisitions or structured transactions and are presented on a gross basis based on factors present on or about the time we determine the business to be won by us and are not updated based on subsequent developments, including changes in assets, market valuations, scope and, potentially, termination. Such assets therefore do not include the impact of clients who have notified us during the period of their intent to terminate or reduce their relationship with us, which from time to time may be significant.
With respect to these new investment servicing mandates, once installed we may provide various services, including back office services such as custody and safekeeping, transaction processing and trade settlement, fund administration, reporting and record keeping, security servicing, fund accounting, middle office services such as investment book of records, transaction management, loans, cash derivatives and collateral services, recordkeeping, client reporting and investment analytics, markets services such as FX trading services, liquidity solutions, currency and collateral management and securities finance, and front office services such as portfolio management solutions, risk analytics, scenario analysis, performance and attribution, trade order and execution management, pre-trade compliance and ESG investment tools. Revenues associated with new investment servicing mandates may vary based on the breadth of services provided, the timing of installation, and the types of assets.
Management Fee Revenue
Management fees increased 13% in 2025 compared to 2024, primarily due to higher average market levels and net inflows.
Management fees generated outside the United States were approximately 25% of total management fees in both 2025 and 2024.
Management fees generally are affected by our level of AUM, which we report based on month-end valuations. Management fees for certain components of managed assets, such as ETFs, mutual funds and Undertakings for Collective Investment in Transferable Securities, are affected by daily average valuations of AUM. Management fee revenue is more sensitive to market valuations than servicing fee revenue, as a higher proportion of the underlying services provided, and the associated management fees earned, are dependent on equity and fixed-income security valuations. Additional factors, such as the relative mix of assets managed, may have a significant effect on our management fee revenue. While certain management fees are directly determined by the values of AUM and the investment strategies employed, management fees may reflect other factors, including performance fee arrangements, as well as our relationship pricing for clients.
Asset-based management fees for passively managed products, to which our AUM is currently primarily weighted, are generally charged at a lower fee on AUM than for actively managed products. Actively managed products may also include performance fee arrangements which are recorded when the fee is earned, based on predetermined benchmarks associated with the applicable account’s performance.
In light of the above, we estimate, using relevant information as of December 31, 2025 and assuming that all other factors remain constant, including the impact of business won and lost and client flows, that:
•A 10% increase or decrease in worldwide equity valuations, on a weighted average basis, over the relevant periods for which our management fees are calculated, would result in a corresponding change in our total management fee revenues, on average and over multiple quarters, of approximately 5%; and
•Changes in worldwide fixed income markets, which on a weighted average basis and over time are typically less volatile than worldwide equity markets, will have a significantly smaller corresponding impact on our management fee revenues on average and over time.
State Street Corporation | 64
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 6: ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT BY ASSET CLASS AND INVESTMENT APPROACH | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | % Change2025 vs. 2024 | % Change2024 vs. 2023 | ||||||||||||||||
| Equity: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | $ | 61 | $ | 52 | $ | 47 | 17 | % | 11 | % | |||||||||||
| Passive | 3,528 | 2,955 | 2,466 | 19 | 20 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total equity | 3,589 | 3,007 | 2,513 | 19 | 20 | ||||||||||||||||
| Fixed-income: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | 30 | 31 | 71 | (3) | (56) | ||||||||||||||||
| Passive | 704 | 585 | 538 | 20 | 9 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total fixed-income | 734 | 616 | 609 | 19 | 1 | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash(1) | 570 | 518 | 467 | 10 | 11 | ||||||||||||||||
| Multi-asset-class solutions: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | 29 | 23 | 21 | 26 | 10 | ||||||||||||||||
| Passive | 472 | 351 | 289 | 34 | 21 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total multi-asset-class solutions | 501 | 374 | 310 | 34 | 21 | ||||||||||||||||
| Alternative investments(2): | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | 9 | 10 | 11 | (10) | (9) | ||||||||||||||||
| Passive(3) | 262 | 190 | 192 | 38 | (1) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total alternative investments | 271 | 200 | 203 | 36 | (1) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 5,665 | $ | 4,715 | $ | 4,102 | 20 | 15 |
(1) Includes both floating- and constant-net-asset-value portfolios held in commingled structures or separate accounts.
(2) Includes real estate investment trusts, currency and commodities, including SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust. We are not the investment manager for the SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR®Gold MiniSharesSM Trust, but act as the marketing agent.
(3) AUM for passive alternative investments has been revised from prior presentations.
| TABLE 7: GEOGRAPHIC MIX OF ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT(1) | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | % Change2025 vs. 2024 | % Change2024 vs. 2023 | ||||||||||||
| Americas | $ | 4,155 | $ | 3,468 | $ | 3,028 | 20 | % | 15 | % | |||||||
| Europe/Middle East/Africa(2) | 841 | 713 | 577 | 18 | 24 | ||||||||||||
| Asia/Pacific | 669 | 534 | 497 | 25 | 7 | ||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 5,665 | $ | 4,715 | $ | 4,102 | 20 | 15 |
| (1) Geographic mix is based on client location or fund management location. |
|---|
| (2) AUM for passive alternative investments has been revised from prior presentations. |
| TABLE 8: EXCHANGE - TRADED FUNDS BY ASSET CLASS(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | % Change2025 vs. 2024 | % Change2024 vs. 2023 | |||||||||||||||
| Alternative Investments(2) | $ | 182 | $ | 90 | $ | 73 | nm | 23 | % | |||||||||||
| Equity | 1,572 | 1,310 | 1,038 | 20 | % | 26 | ||||||||||||||
| Fixed-Income | 196 | 177 | 156 | 11 | 13 | |||||||||||||||
| Multi Asset | 1 | 1 | 1 | — | — | |||||||||||||||
| Total Exchange-Traded Funds | $ | 1,951 | $ | 1,578 | $ | 1,268 | 24 | 24 |
(1) ETFs are a component of AUM presented in the preceding table.
(2) Includes real estate investment trusts, currency and commodities, including SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust. We are not the investment manager for the SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR®Gold MiniSharesSM Trust, but act as the marketing agent.
nm Not meaningful
State Street Corporation | 65
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 9: ACTIVITY IN ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT BY PRODUCT CATEGORY | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | Equity | Fixed-Income | Cash(1) | Multi-Asset-Class Solutions | Alternative Investments(2)(4) | Total | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2022 | $ | 2,129 | $ | 554 | $ | 376 | $ | 209 | $ | 213 | $ | 3,481 | ||||||||||
| Long-term institutional flows, net(3) | (98) | 13 | (1) | 65 | (26) | (47) | ||||||||||||||||
| Exchange-traded fund flows, net | 73 | 17 | — | — | (2) | 88 | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash fund flows, net | — | — | 76 | — | — | 76 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total flows, net | (25) | 30 | 75 | 65 | (28) | 117 | ||||||||||||||||
| Market appreciation (depreciation) | 408 | 26 | 16 | 35 | 15 | 500 | ||||||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange impact | 1 | (1) | — | 1 | 3 | 4 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total market/foreign exchange impact | 409 | 25 | 16 | 36 | 18 | 504 | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2023 | 2,513 | 609 | 467 | 310 | 203 | 4,102 | ||||||||||||||||
| Long-term institutional flows, net(3) | (7) | (8) | 1 | 34 | (17) | 3 | ||||||||||||||||
| Exchange-traded fund flows, net | 85 | 24 | — | — | — | 109 | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash fund flows, net | — | — | 32 | — | — | 32 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total flows, net | 78 | 16 | 33 | 34 | (17) | 144 | ||||||||||||||||
| Market appreciation (depreciation) | 457 | 4 | 21 | 32 | 21 | 535 | ||||||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange impact | (41) | (13) | (3) | (2) | (7) | (66) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total market/foreign exchange impact | 416 | (9) | 18 | 30 | 14 | 469 | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2024 | 3,007 | 616 | 518 | 374 | 200 | 4,715 | ||||||||||||||||
| Long-term institutional flows, net(3) | (46) | 61 | — | 56 | (29) | 42 | ||||||||||||||||
| Exchange-traded fund flows, net | 56 | 16 | — | — | 32 | 104 | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash fund flows, net | — | — | 34 | — | — | 34 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total flows, net | 10 | 77 | 34 | 56 | 3 | 180 | ||||||||||||||||
| Market appreciation (depreciation) | 535 | 36 | 15 | 62 | 63 | 711 | ||||||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange impact | 37 | 5 | 3 | 9 | 5 | 59 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total market/foreign exchange impact | 572 | 41 | 18 | 71 | 68 | 770 | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2025 | $ | 3,589 | $ | 734 | $ | 570 | $ | 501 | $ | 271 | $ | 5,665 |
(1) Includes both floating and constant-net-asset-value portfolios held in commingled structures or separate accounts.
(2) Includes real estate investment trusts, currency and commodities, including SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust. We are not the investment manager for the SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR®Gold MiniSharesSM Trust, but act as the marketing agent.
(3) Amounts represent long-term portfolios, excluding ETFs.
(4) AUM for passive alternative investments has been revised from prior presentations.
Foreign Exchange Trading Services
Foreign exchange trading services revenue, as presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, increased 15% in 2025 compared to 2024, primarily due to higher volumes supported by client franchise growth and higher currency volatility in the first half of 2025. Foreign exchange trading services revenue comprises revenue generated by FX trading and revenue generated by brokerage and other trading services, which made up 64% and 36%, respectively, of foreign exchange trading services revenue in 2025, and 63% and 37%, respectively, in 2024.
We primarily earn FX trading revenue by acting as a principal market-maker through both “direct sales and trading” and “indirect FX trading.”
•Direct sales and trading: Represents FX transactions at negotiated rates with clients and investment managers that contact our trading desk directly. Clients are able to choose their own execution time and method, trading by voice or electronically on one of the several available multibank platforms. These principal market-making activities include transactions for funds serviced by third party custodians or prime brokers, as well as those funds under custody with us.
•Indirect FX trading: Represents FX transactions with clients, for which we are the funds’ custodian, or their investment managers, routed to our FX desk through our asset-servicing operation. We execute indirect FX trades as a principal at rates disclosed to our clients. Indirect FX is designed to address FX trades that relate to the purchase, sale or holding of a security where clients chose their execution frequency (either hourly or once per day), allowing us to offer straight-through processing and a fully automated service.
Our clients that utilize indirect FX trading can, in addition to executing their FX transactions through dealers not affiliated with us, transition from indirect FX trading to either direct sales and trading execution, including our “Street FX” service. Street FX, in which we continue to act as a principal market-maker, enables our clients to define their FX execution strategy and automate the FX trade execution process, both for funds under custody with us as well as those under custody at another bank.
State Street Corporation | 66
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
We also earn foreign exchange trading services revenue through “electronic FX services” and “other trading, transition management and brokerage revenue.”
•Electronic FX services: Our clients may choose to execute FX transactions through one of our electronic trading platforms (i.e., FX Connect, Currenex). These transactions generate revenue through a “click” fee.
•Other trading, transition management and brokerage revenue: As our clients look to us to enhance and preserve portfolio values, they may choose to utilize our Transition or Currency Management capabilities or transact with our Equity Trade execution group. These transactions, which are not limited to foreign exchange, generate revenue via commissions charged for trades transacted during the management of these portfolios.
Securities Finance
Securities finance revenue, as presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, increased 15% in 2025 compared to 2024, primarily due to higher client lending balances.
Our securities finance business consists of three components:
(1) an agency lending program for State Street Investment Management managed investment funds with a broad range of investment objectives, which we refer to as the State Street Investment Management lending funds;
(2) an agency lending program for third-party investment managers and asset owners, which we refer to as the agency lending funds; and
(3) security lending transactions which we enter into as principal, which we refer to as our prime services business.
Securities finance revenue earned from our agency lending activities, which is composed of our split of both the spreads related to cash collateral and the fees related to non-cash collateral, is principally a function of the volume of securities on loan, the interest rate spreads and fees earned on the underlying collateral and our share of the fee split.
As principal, our prime services business borrows securities from the lending client or other market participants and then lends such securities to the subsequent borrower, either our client or a broker/dealer. We act as principal when the lending client is unable to, or elects not to, transact directly with the market and execute the transaction and furnish the securities. In our role as principal, we provide support to the transaction through our credit rating. While we source a significant proportion of the securities furnished by us in our role as principal from third parties, we have the ability to source securities through assets under custody from clients who have designated us as an eligible borrower.
Software and Processing Fees
Software and processing fees revenue, as presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, increased 2% in 2025 compared to 2024, primarily due to higher front office software and data revenue associated with CRD.
Software and processing fees revenue includes diverse types of fees and revenue, including fees from software licensing and data maintenance and fees from our structured products business.
Front office software and data revenue, which primarily includes revenue from CRD, Alpha Data Platform and Alpha Data Services, increased 3% in 2025 compared to 2024, primarily due to continued growth in software-enabled revenue, partially offset by lower professional services revenue driven by the impact of a notable item related to an Alpha-related client rescoping in the second quarter of 2025.
Revenue related to the front office solutions provided by CRD is primarily driven by the sale of SaaS and on-premises software licenses, which may include professional services such as consulting and implementation services and software support and maintenance. Revenue for a SaaS-related arrangement is recognized over time as services are provided. Approximately 50%-70% of revenue associated with a sale or renewal of software to be installed on-premises is recognized at a point in time when the customer benefits from obtaining access to and use of the software license, with the percentage varying based on the length of the contract and other contractual terms. The remainder of the revenue for on-premises software licenses is recognized over the length of the contract as maintenance and other services are provided. As a result of these differences in how portions of CRD revenue are accounted for, CRD revenue may vary more than other business units quarter to quarter.
Lending related and other fees decreased 1% in 2025 compared to 2024. Lending related and other fees primarily consists of fee revenue associated with our subscription and fund finance, commercial loans, municipal finance, insurance and stable value wrap businesses.
State Street Corporation | 67
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Other Fee Revenue
Other fee revenue includes bank-owned life insurance income, income associated with equity investments and other market-related adjustments.
Other fee revenue decreased $53 million in 2025, compared to 2024, reflecting the absence of a notable item related to a $66 million gain on sale of an equity investment in the prior year period.
Net Interest Income
See Table 2: Total Revenue, for the breakout of interest income and interest expense for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023.
NII is defined as interest income earned on interest-earning assets less interest expense incurred on interest-bearing liabilities. Interest-earning assets, which principally consist of investment securities, interest-bearing deposits with banks, loans, resale agreements and other liquid assets, are financed primarily by client deposits, short-term borrowings and long-term debt.
NIM represents the relationship between annualized FTE NII and average total interest-earning assets for the period. It is calculated by dividing FTE NII by average interest-earning assets. Revenue that is exempt from income taxes, mainly earned from certain investment securities (state and political subdivisions), is adjusted to an FTE basis using the U.S. federal and state statutory income tax rates.
NII increased 1% in 2025 compared to 2024, primarily driven by 11% growth in average interest-earnings assets, partially offset by a 10 bps decline in NIM.
State Street Corporation | 68
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
See Table 10: Average Balances and Interest Rates - Fully Taxable-Equivalent Basis, for the breakout of NII on a FTE basis for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023.
| TABLE 10: AVERAGE BALANCES AND INTEREST RATES - FULLY TAXABLE-EQUIVALENT BASIS(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions; fully taxable-equivalent basis) | Average Balance | Interest Revenue/Expense | Rate | Average Balance | Interest Revenue/Expense | Rate | Average Balance | Interest Revenue/ Expense | Rate | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Interest-bearing deposits with banks | $ | 93,546 | $ | 2,911 | 3.11 | % | $ | 88,754 | $ | 3,634 | 4.09 | % | $ | 69,883 | $ | 2,869 | 4.11 | % | ||||||||||||||
| Securities purchased under resale agreements(2) | 8,232 | 672 | 8.16 | 6,789 | 686 | 10.10 | 1,764 | 312 | 17.67 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Trading account assets | 807 | 4 | 0.45 | 782 | — | — | 711 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment securities available-for-sale | 67,497 | 2,995 | 4.44 | 53,572 | 2,682 | 5.01 | 42,850 | 1,748 | 4.08 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment securities held-to-maturity | 43,089 | 917 | 2.13 | 51,212 | 1,090 | 2.13 | 62,915 | 1,262 | 2.01 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Investment securities | 110,586 | 3,912 | 3.54 | 104,784 | 3,772 | 3.60 | 105,765 | 3,010 | 2.85 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Loans(3) | 45,789 | 2,287 | 5.00 | 39,660 | 2,272 | 5.73 | 34,800 | 1,863 | 5.35 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other interest-earning assets(4) | 35,754 | 1,859 | 5.20 | 25,300 | 1,616 | 6.39 | 18,098 | 1,131 | 6.25 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Average total interest-earning assets | $ | 294,714 | $ | 11,645 | 3.95 | $ | 266,069 | $ | 11,980 | 4.50 | $ | 231,021 | $ | 9,185 | 3.98 | |||||||||||||||||
| Cash and due from banks | 4,134 | 3,674 | 3,925 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other non-interest-earning assets | 44,657 | 41,980 | 39,750 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total assets | $ | 343,505 | $ | 311,723 | $ | 274,696 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Interest-bearing deposits: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| U.S. | $ | 156,308 | $ | 5,344 | 3.42 | % | $ | 135,898 | $ | 5,532 | 4.07 | % | $ | 110,204 | $ | 3,976 | 3.61 | % | ||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. | 71,904 | 1,038 | 1.44 | 64,144 | 1,095 | 1.71 | 62,689 | 1,015 | 1.62 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total interest-bearing deposits(5)(6) | 228,212 | 6,382 | 2.80 | 200,042 | 6,627 | 3.31 | 172,893 | 4,991 | 2.89 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Securities sold under repurchase agreements | 2,198 | 95 | 4.32 | 3,163 | 156 | 4.93 | 3,904 | 34 | 0.87 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Federal funds purchased | — | — | — | — | — | — | 65 | 3 | 4.82 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other short-term borrowings | 9,590 | 434 | 4.53 | 11,425 | 577 | 5.05 | 1,120 | 40 | 3.60 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Long-term debt | 25,006 | 1,230 | 4.92 | 20,394 | 1,086 | 5.32 | 17,355 | 888 | 5.12 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other interest-bearing liabilities(7) | 4,027 | 543 | 13.47 | 4,826 | 608 | 12.59 | 3,891 | 465 | 11.96 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Average total interest-bearing liabilities | $ | 269,033 | $ | 8,684 | 3.23 | $ | 239,850 | $ | 9,054 | 3.77 | $ | 199,228 | $ | 6,421 | 3.22 | |||||||||||||||||
| Non-interest-bearing deposits(5) | 24,790 | 25,569 | 32,218 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other non-interest-bearing liabilities | 22,621 | 21,192 | 19,073 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Preferred shareholders’ equity | 3,486 | 2,773 | 1,976 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common shareholders’ equity | 23,575 | 22,339 | 22,201 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity | $ | 343,505 | $ | 311,723 | $ | 274,696 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Interest rate spread | 0.72 | % | 0.73 | % | 0.75 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income, fully taxable-equivalent basis | $ | 2,961 | $ | 2,926 | $ | 2,764 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest margin, fully taxable-equivalent basis | 1.00 | % | 1.10 | % | 1.20 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tax-equivalent adjustment | (1) | (3) | (5) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income, GAAP basis | $ | 2,960 | $ | 2,923 | $ | 2,759 |
(1) Rates earned/paid on interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities include the impact of hedge activities associated with our asset and liability management activities where applicable.
(2) Reflects the impact of balance sheet netting under enforceable netting agreements of approximately $242.73 billion, $191.26 billion and $140.36 billion for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023, respectively. Excluding the impact of netting, the average interest rates would be approximately 0.27%, 0.35% and 0.22% for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
(3) Average loans presented on gross basis. Average loans net of expected credit losses was approximately $45.61 billion, $39.52 billion and $34.69 billion for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
(4) Reflects the impact of balance sheet netting under enforceable netting agreements of approximately $8.45 billion, $6.96 billion and $4.94 billion for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023, respectively. Excluding the impact of netting, the average interest rates would be approximately 4.20%, 5.01% and 4.91% for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
(5) Average rate includes the impact of FX swap costs of approximately ($195) million, $(274) million and $54 million for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023, respectively. Average rates for total interest-bearing deposits excluding the impact of FX swap costs were 2.88%, 3.45% and 2.86% for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
(6) Total deposits averaged $253.00 billion, $225.61 billion and $205.11 billion for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
(7) Reflects the impact of balance sheet netting under enforceable netting agreements of approximately $8.01 billion, $6.30 billion and $4.61 billion for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023, respectively. Excluding the impact of netting, the average interest rates would be approximately 4.51%, 5.46% and 5.43% for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
State Street Corporation | 69
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Changes in the components of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities are discussed in more detail below. Additional information about the components of interest income and interest expense is provided in Note 17 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Average total interest-earning assets were $294.71 billion in 2025, compared to $266.07 billion in 2024. The increase is primarily due to higher levels of client deposits and long-term debt.
Interest-bearing deposits with banks averaged $93.55 billion in 2025, compared to $88.75 billion in 2024. These deposits primarily reflect our maintenance of cash balances at the Federal Reserve, the ECB and other non-U.S. central banks. The higher levels of average cash balances reflect higher levels of client deposits and funding levels.
Securities purchased under resale agreements averaged $8.23 billion in 2025, compared to $6.79 billion in 2024, due to an increase in FICC repurchase agreement volumes. As a member of FICC, we may net securities sold under repurchase agreements against those purchased under resale agreements with counterparties that are also members of the clearing organization when specific netting criteria are met. The impact of balance sheet netting was, on average, $242.73 billion and $191.26 billion in 2025 and 2024, respectively.
Average investment securities were $110.59 billion in 2025, compared to $104.78 billion in 2024, primarily driven by growth in U.S. Treasuries.
Average loans increased to $45.79 billion in 2025, compared to $39.66 billion in 2024. Average loans excluding overdrafts, averaged $42.39 billion in 2025, compared to $36.14 billion in 2024, reflecting our efforts to grow the lending portfolio. The increases are primarily due to growth in CLOs, subscription finance and fund finance loans. Additional information is provided under “Loans” in “Financial Condition” in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis and in Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Average other interest-earning assets, largely associated with our prime services business, increased to $35.75 billion in 2025 from $25.30 billion in 2024, primarily driven by an increase in the level of cash collateral posted. Other interest-earning assets primarily reflects prime services assets where cash has been posted to borrow securities from lenders, which are then lent by us, as principal, to borrowers. This cash includes both cash from borrowers and cash utilized from our balance sheet, and is presented on a net basis on the balance sheet where we have enforceable netting agreements. Non-interest earning assets also includes a portion of our prime services assets where we act as lender in a
securities lending transaction and we receive securities as collateral that we are permitted to transfer or re-pledge. Combined with our prime services liabilities, revenue from these activities generates securities finance fee revenue as well as net interest income.
Average total interest-bearing deposits increased to $228.21 billion in 2025 from $200.04 billion in 2024. The increase is driven by market volatility and our active client engagement to support our structural liquidity position and to support business growth on the asset side of the balance sheet. Future interest-bearing deposit levels will be influenced by the underlying investment servicing business, client behavior, the mix of interest-bearing and non-interest-bearing deposits and market conditions, including the general levels of U.S. and non-U.S. interest rates.
Average other short-term borrowings decreased to $9.59 billion in 2025 from $11.43 billion in 2024, due to decreased wholesale funding. The decrease is driven by our response to higher client deposit levels.
Average long-term debt was $25.01 billion in 2025, compared to $20.39 billion in 2024, supporting our businesses and structural liquidity position. These amounts reflect issuances, redemptions and maturities of senior and subordinated debt during the respective periods.
Average other interest-bearing liabilities, largely associated with our prime services business, were $4.03 billion in 2025, compared to $4.83 billion in 2024. Other interest-bearing liabilities is primarily driven by cash received from our custody clients, which is presented on a net basis where we have enforceable netting agreements. Non-interest bearing liabilities also include a portion of our prime services liabilities where client-provided non-cash collateral has been received and we have rehypothecation rights. Securities received as collateral from our custody clients where we have no rehypothecation rights are used as a credit mitigant only and remain off balance sheet.
Based on market conditions and other factors, including regulatory standards, we continue to reinvest the majority of the proceeds from pay-downs and maturities of investment securities in highly-rated U.S. and non-U.S. securities, such as federal agency MBS, sovereign debt securities and U.S. Treasury and agency securities. The pace at which we reinvest, and the types of investment securities purchased will depend on the impact of market conditions, the implementation of regulatory standards, including interpretation of those standards and other factors over time. We expect these factors and the levels of global interest rates to impact our
State Street Corporation | 70
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
reinvestment program and future levels of NII and NIM.
Other Income
Other income included a gain of $4 million in 2025, compared to a loss of $79 million in 2024 reflecting the 2024 loss on sale of investment securities related to the repositioning of the investment portfolio.
Provision for Credit Losses
In 2025, we recorded a $59 million provision for credit losses, primarily reflecting the evolving macroeconomic environment and an increase in loan loss reserves associated with certain commercial real estate and commercial loans.
Additional information is provided under “Loans” in “Financial Condition” in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis and in Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Expenses
Table 11: Expenses, provides the breakout of expenses for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023. Total expenses increased 7% compared to 2024, primarily due to higher business and technology investments, revenue-related costs and higher impact of notables items in the current year, partially offset by productivity and other savings.
| TABLE 11: EXPENSES | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2025 vs. 2024 | % Change 2024 vs. 2023 | |||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | ||||||||||||||
| Compensation and employee benefits | $ | 5,035 | $ | 4,697 | $ | 4,744 | 7 | % | (1) | % | |||||||
| Information systems and communications | 2,094 | 1,829 | 1,703 | 14 | 7 | ||||||||||||
| Transaction processing services | 1,050 | 998 | 957 | 5 | 4 | ||||||||||||
| Occupancy | 487 | 437 | 426 | 11 | 3 | ||||||||||||
| Other: | |||||||||||||||||
| Professional services | 444 | 465 | 428 | (5) | 9 | ||||||||||||
| Other | 1,044 | 1,104 | 1,325 | (5) | (17) | ||||||||||||
| Total other | 1,488 | 1,569 | 1,753 | (5) | (10) | ||||||||||||
| Total expenses | $ | 10,154 | $ | 9,530 | $ | 9,583 | 7 | (1) | |||||||||
| Number of employees at year-end | 51,503 | 52,626 | 46,451 | (2) | 13 |
Notable items reflected in expenses in 2025 included:
•Repositioning charges of $326 million, which included $211 million of compensation and employee benefits expenses related to workforce rationalization, $69 million of occupancy costs associated with real estate footprint optimization, and costs associated with operating model changes of $24 million and $22 million reflected in information systems and communications and other expenses, respectively.
•Other notable items which included an FDIC special assessment release of $60 million, partially offset by $40 million of legal and related costs, both reflected in other expenses, and an Alpha-related client rescoping of $18 million reflected in information systems and communications expenses.
Notable items reflected in expenses in 2024 included:
•Deferred compensation expense acceleration of $79 million.
•Other notable items of $111 million, primarily related to a $99 million increase to the FDIC special assessment, recognized in other expenses.
•Net repositioning release of $2 million, including a $15 million release reflected in compensation and employee benefits expenses, partially offset by $13 million of occupancy charges related to footprint optimization.
Compensation and employee benefits expenses increased 7% in 2025 compared to 2024, primarily due to higher repositioning charges, performance-based incentive compensation as well as merit increases and employee benefit costs which were partially offset by productivity and other savings. The net impact of notable items in the current and prior year periods increased compensation and employee benefits expenses by 2% points in 2025 compared to 2024.
Total headcount decreased 2% as of December 31, 2025 compared to December 31, 2024, primarily driven by our continued efforts to simplify our operations through organization design and technology and automation efforts. These impacts were partially offset by headcount growth in high-cost locations primarily to support clients and revenue generation.
Information systems and communications expenses increased 14% in 2025 compared to 2024, largely driven by higher technology and infrastructure investments and the impact of current year notable items, partially offset by vendor savings.
Transaction processing services expenses increased 5% in 2025 compared to 2024, primarily due to higher broker fees and revenue-related sub-custody and market data costs.
Occupancy expenses increased 11% in 2025 compared to 2024, primarily reflecting the net impact of the repositioning charges in the current and prior year periods.
Other expenses decreased 5% in 2025 compared to 2024, primarily reflecting the net impact of notable items in the current and prior year periods
State Street Corporation | 71
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
which decreased other expenses by 7% points in 2025 as compared to 2024, partially offset by higher marketing costs and other revenue-related expenses.
Repositioning Charges
The following table presents aggregate activity for repositioning charges for the periods indicated:
| TABLE 12: REPOSITIONING CHARGES | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | Employee Related Costs | Other | Total | |||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2022 | $ | 83 | $ | 5 | $ | 88 | ||||||
| Accruals for Repositioning Charges | 182 | 21 | 203 | |||||||||
| Payments and other adjustments | (58) | (25) | (83) | |||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2023 | 207 | 1 | 208 | |||||||||
| Accruals for Repositioning Charges | (15) | 13 | (2) | |||||||||
| Payments and other adjustments | (96) | (14) | (110) | |||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2024 | 96 | — | 96 | |||||||||
| Accruals for Repositioning Charges | 211 | 115 | 326 | |||||||||
| Payments and other adjustments | (99) | (115) | (214) | |||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2025 | $ | 208 | $ | — | $ | 208 |
Income Tax Expense
Income tax expense was $786 million in 2025 compared to $708 million in 2024. Our effective tax rate increased to 21.1% in 2025 compared to 20.8% in 2024.
Additional information regarding income tax expense, including unrecognized tax benefits and tax contingencies, is provided in Notes 13 and 22 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
LINE OF BUSINESS INFORMATION
Our operations are organized into two lines of business: Investment Servicing and Investment Management, which are defined based on products and services provided. The results of operations for these lines of business are not necessarily comparable with those of other companies, including companies in the financial services industry. For the description of our lines of business refer to “Lines of Business” in Item 1 in this Form 10-K. Certain amounts are not allocated to our two lines of business. For further information, please refer to Note 24 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Investment Servicing
| TABLE 13: INVESTMENT SERVICING LINE OF BUSINESS RESULTS | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in millions, except where otherwise noted) | Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2025 vs. 2024 | % Change 2024 vs. 2023 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Servicing fees | $ | 5,324 | $ | 5,016 | $ | 4,922 | 6 | % | 2 | % | |||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange trading services | 1,441 | 1,248 | 1,140 | 15 | 9 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Securities finance | 481 | 415 | 402 | 16 | 3 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Software and processing fees | 927 | 888 | 811 | 4 | 9 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Other fee revenue | 209 | 188 | 145 | 11 | 30 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total fee revenue | 8,382 | 7,755 | 7,420 | 8 | 5 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income | 2,945 | 2,899 | 2,740 | 2 | 6 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total other income | 4 | 2 | — | nm | nm | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total revenue | 11,331 | 10,656 | 10,160 | 6 | 5 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Provision for credit losses | 59 | 75 | 46 | (21) | 63 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total expenses | 8,056 | 7,687 | 7,413 | 5 | 4 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Income before income tax expense | $ | 3,216 | $ | 2,894 | $ | 2,701 | 11 | 7 | |||||||||||||||
| Pre-tax margin | 28 | % | 27 | % | 27 | % | |||||||||||||||||
| Average assets (in billions) | $ | 339.9 | $ | 308.5 | $ | 271.5 |
nm Not meaningful
Servicing Fees
Servicing fees, as presented in Table 13: Investment Servicing Line of Business Results, increased 6% in 2025 compared to 2024, primarily reflecting higher average market levels and net new business.
For additional information about servicing fees and the impact of worldwide equity and fixed-income valuations on our fee revenue, as well as other key drivers of our servicing fee revenue, refer to “Fee Revenue” in “Consolidated Results of Operations” included in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
Expenses
Total expenses for Investment Servicing increased 5% in 2025 compared to 2024, primarily reflecting higher business and technology investments, compensation costs and revenue-related costs, partially offset by productivity and other savings. Additional information about expenses is provided under “Expenses” in “Consolidated Results of Operations” included in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
State Street Corporation | 72
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Investment Management
| TABLE 14: INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT LINE OF BUSINESS RESULTS | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in millions, except where otherwise noted) | Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2025 vs. 2024 | % Change 2024 vs. 2023 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Management fees(1) | $ | 2,398 | $ | 2,124 | $ | 1,876 | 13 | % | 13 | % | |||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange trading services(2) | 170 | 138 | 125 | 23 | 10 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Securities finance | 24 | 23 | 24 | 4 | (4) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Other fee revenue(3) | 27 | 35 | 35 | (23) | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total fee revenue | 2,619 | 2,320 | 2,060 | 13 | 13 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income | 15 | 24 | 19 | (38) | 26 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total revenue | 2,634 | 2,344 | 2,079 | 12 | 13 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total expenses | 1,775 | 1,655 | 1,540 | 7 | 7 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Income before income tax expense | $ | 859 | $ | 689 | $ | 539 | 25 | 28 | |||||||||||||||
| Pre-tax margin | 33 | % | 29 | % | 26 | % | |||||||||||||||||
| Average assets (in billions) | $ | 3.6 | $ | 3.2 | $ | 3.2 |
(1) Includes revenues from SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust AUM where we are not the investment manager but act as the marketing agent.
(2) Includes revenue for reimbursements received for certain ETFs associated with State Street Investment Management where we act as the distribution and marketing agent.
(3) Includes other revenue items that are primarily driven by equity market movements.
Investment Management total revenue increased 12% in 2025 compared to 2024.
Management Fees
Management fees increased 13% in 2025 compared to 2024, primarily due to higher average market levels and net inflows.
For additional information about the impact of worldwide equity and fixed-income valuations, as well as other key drivers of our management fees revenue, refer to “Fee Revenue” in “Consolidated Results of Operations” included in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
Expenses
Total expenses for Investment Management increased 7% in 2025 compared to 2024, as higher business investments and revenue-related fund expenses were partially offset by productivity and other savings.
Additional information about expenses is provided under “Expenses” in “Consolidated Results of Operations” included in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
For additional information about our two lines of business, as well as the revenues, expenses and capital allocation methodologies associated with them, refer to Note 24 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
FINANCIAL CONDITION
The structure of our consolidated statement of condition is primarily driven by the liabilities generated by our Investment Servicing and Investment Management lines of business. Our clients’ needs and our operating objectives determine the volume, mix and currency denomination of our assets and liabilities. As our clients execute their worldwide cash management and investment activities, they utilize deposits and short-term investments that constitute the majority of our liabilities. These liabilities are generally in the form of interest-bearing transaction account deposits, which are denominated in a variety of currencies, and non-interest-bearing demand deposits. Our interest-earning assets consist primarily of securities held in our AFS or HTM portfolios, loans and short-duration financial instruments, such as interest-bearing deposits with banks and securities purchased under resale agreements.
Additional information on our financial condition is presented in Table 10: Average Balances and Interest Rates - Fully Taxable-Equivalent Basis. We believe the average statement of condition is a better measure of the balance sheet trends as period-end balances can be impacted by the timing of client activities including deposits and withdrawals.
State Street Corporation | 73
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Investment Securities
| TABLE 15: CARRYING VALUES OF INVESTMENT SECURITIES | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, | ||||||
| (In millions) | 2025 | 2024 | ||||
| Available-for-sale: | ||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 23,260 | $ | 23,525 | ||
| Mortgage-backed securities(1) | 15,586 | 10,566 | ||||
| Total U.S. Treasury and federal agencies | 38,846 | 34,091 | ||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 2,578 | 2,430 | ||||
| Asset-backed securities(2) | 2,085 | 1,868 | ||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 17,731 | 13,939 | ||||
| Other(3) | 2,826 | 2,821 | ||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 25,220 | 21,058 | ||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||
| Student loans(4) | 64 | 90 | ||||
| Collateralized loan obligations(5) | 2,905 | 3,453 | ||||
| Non-agency CMBS and RMBS(6) | 3 | 4 | ||||
| Other | 91 | 91 | ||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 3,063 | 3,638 | ||||
| State and political subdivisions | 25 | 56 | ||||
| Other U.S. debt securities(7) | — | 52 | ||||
| Total available-for-sale securities(8) | $ | 67,154 | $ | 58,895 | ||
| Held-to-maturity: | ||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 573 | $ | 5,417 | ||
| Mortgage-backed securities(9) | 32,876 | 36,101 | ||||
| Total U.S. Treasury and federal agencies | 33,449 | 41,518 | ||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 2,461 | 3,673 | ||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 2,461 | 3,673 | ||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||
| Student loans(4) | 2,261 | 2,536 | ||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 2,261 | 2,536 | ||||
| Total held-to-maturity securities(8) | $ | 38,171 | $ | 47,727 |
(1) As of December 31, 2025 and 2024, the total fair value included $2.81 billion and $4.36 billion, respectively, of agency CMBS and $12.78 billion and $6.20 billion, respectively, of agency MBS.
(2) As of December 31, 2025 and 2024, the fair value includes non-U.S. collateralized loan obligations of $0.77 billion and $0.70 billion, respectively.
(3) As of December 31, 2025 and 2024, the fair value includes non-U.S. corporate bonds of $2.40 billion and $2.54 billion, respectively.
(4) Primarily comprised of securities guaranteed by the federal government with respect to at least 97% of defaulted principal and accrued interest on the underlying loans.
(5) Excludes CLO loans. Refer to Note 4 for additional information.
(6) Consists entirely of non-agency RMBS as of both December 31, 2025 and 2024.
(7) As of December 31, 2024, the fair value of U.S. corporate bonds was $0.05 billion.
(8) An immaterial amount of accrued interest related to HTM and AFS investment securities was excluded from the amortized cost basis for the period ended December 31, 2025.
(9) As of December 31, 2025 and 2024, the total amortized cost included $5.08 billion and $5.18 billion of agency CMBS, respectively.
Additional information about our investment securities portfolio is provided in Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
We manage our investment securities portfolio by taking into consideration the interest rate and duration characteristics of our client liabilities along with the context of the overall structure of our consolidated statement of condition, and in consideration of the global interest rate environment. We consider a well-diversified, high-credit quality investment securities portfolio to be an important element in the management of our consolidated statement of condition.
Average duration of our investment securities portfolio, including the impact of hedges, was 2.1 years and 2.2 years as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively.
Approximately 97% of the carrying value of the portfolio was rated “AA” or higher as of both December 31, 2025 and 2024, as follows:
| TABLE 16: INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO BY EXTERNAL CREDIT RATING | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | ||||
| AAA(1) | 88 | % | 88 | % | |
| AA | 9 | 9 | |||
| A | 3 | 2 | |||
| BBB | — | 1 | |||
| 100 | % | 100 | % |
(1) Includes U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities that are split-rated, “AAA” by Moody’s Investors Service and “AA+” by Standard & Poor’s and also includes Agency MBS securities which are not explicitly rated but which have an explicit or assumed guarantee from the U.S. government.
The following table presents the diversification of the investment portfolio with respect to asset class composition as of December 31, 2025 and 2024.
| TABLE 17: INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO BY ASSET CLASS | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | ||||
| U.S. Agency Mortgage-backed securities | 39 | % | 35 | % | |
| U.S. Treasuries | 23 | 27 | |||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 19 | 17 | |||
| Asset-backed securities | 9 | 10 | |||
| Other credit | 10 | 11 | |||
| 100 | % | 100 | % |
State Street Corporation | 74
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following table presents the net unamortized purchase premiums or discounts and net premium amortization or discount accretion related to the investment portfolio for the periods indicated:
| TABLE 18: INVESTMENT SECURITIES NET PREMIUM AMORTIZATION (DISCOUNT ACCRETION) | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 2025 | 2024 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | MBS | Non-MBS | Total(1) | MBS | Non-MBS | Total(1) | |||||||||||||||
| Unamortized purchase premiums and (discounts) at period end | $ | 302 | $ | (349) | $ | (47) | $ | 364 | $ | (599) | (235) | ||||||||||
| Net premium amortization (discount accretion) | 60 | (421) | (361) | 66 | (316) | (250) |
(1) Totals exclude premiums or discounts created from the transfer of securities from AFS to HTM.
Non-U.S. Debt Securities
Approximately 26% and 23% of the aggregate carrying value of our investment securities portfolio was non-U.S. debt securities as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively.
| TABLE 19: NON-U.S. DEBT SECURITIES(1) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | December 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | ||||
| Available-for-sale: | ||||||
| Canada | $ | 3,321 | $ | 3,237 | ||
| United Kingdom | 2,310 | 2,702 | ||||
| Australia | 1,756 | 2,055 | ||||
| France | 1,965 | 1,565 | ||||
| Germany | 1,541 | 1,195 | ||||
| Austria | 864 | 382 | ||||
| Spain | 677 | 301 | ||||
| Netherlands | 645 | 446 | ||||
| Finland | 639 | 312 | ||||
| Italy | 350 | 231 | ||||
| Sweden | 271 | 263 | ||||
| Hong Kong | 264 | — | ||||
| Mexico | 263 | 216 | ||||
| Other(2) | 10,354 | 8,153 | ||||
| Total | $ | 25,220 | $ | 21,058 | ||
| Held-to-maturity: | ||||||
| Belgium | $ | 290 | $ | 254 | ||
| Germany | 230 | 201 | ||||
| France | 155 | 206 | ||||
| Finland | 143 | 124 | ||||
| Canada | 117 | 104 | ||||
| Other(2) | 1,526 | 2,784 | ||||
| Total | $ | 2,461 | $ | 3,673 |
(1) Geography is determined primarily based on the domicile of collateral or issuer.
(2) As of December 31, 2025, other non-U.S. investments include $9.31 billion supranational bonds in AFS securities and $1.53 billion supranational bonds in HTM securities.
Approximately 88% and 90% of the aggregate carrying value of these non-U.S. debt securities was
rated “AAA” or “AA” as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. The majority of these securities comprised senior positions within the security structures; these positions have a level of protection provided through subordination and other forms of credit protection. As of December 31, 2025 and 2024, approximately 32% and 29%, respectively, of the aggregate carrying value of these non-U.S. debt securities was floating-rate.
As of December 31, 2025, our non-U.S. debt securities had an average market-to-book ratio of 100.2%, and an aggregate pre-tax net unrealized gain of $62 million, consisting of gross unrealized gains of $130 million and gross unrealized losses of $68 million. These unrealized amounts included:
•a pre-tax net unrealized gain of $89 million, consisting of gross unrealized gains of $126 million and gross unrealized losses of $37 million, associated with non-U.S. AFS debt securities; and
•a pre-tax net unrealized loss of $27 million, consisting of gross unrealized gains of $4 million and gross unrealized losses of $31 million, associated with non-U.S. HTM debt securities.
As of December 31, 2025, the underlying collateral for non-U.S. MBS and ABS primarily included mortgages in Australia, the United Kingdom, and Netherlands. The securities listed under “Canada” were composed of Canadian government securities, corporate debt, covered bonds and non-U.S. agency securities. The securities listed under “France” were composed of sovereign bonds, corporate debt, covered bonds, ABS and non-U.S. agency securities. The securities listed under “Germany” were composed of non-U.S. agency securities, government bonds, ABS and corporate debt.
State Street Corporation | 75
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Contractual Maturities and Effective Yield
| TABLE 20: CONTRACTUAL MATURITIES AND YIELDS(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2025 | Under 1 Year | 1 to 5 Years | 6 to 10 Years | Over 10 Years | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | Amount | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Available-for-sale(2): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 6,161 | 3.33 | % | $ | 17,098 | 4.02 | % | $ | 1 | 3.52 | % | $ | — | — | % | $ | 23,260 | ||||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 80 | 4.58 | 1,638 | 4.42 | 1,083 | 4.25 | 12,785 | 5.16 | 15,586 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total U.S. Treasury and federal agencies | 6,241 | 18,736 | 1,084 | 12,785 | 38,846 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 180 | 4.06 | 485 | 3.98 | — | — | 1,913 | 4.29 | 2,578 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset-backed securities | 56 | 2.72 | 330 | 2.73 | 932 | 3.50 | 767 | 2.91 | 2,085 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 4,432 | 3.45 | 12,486 | 3.60 | 813 | 2.91 | — | — | 17,731 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Other | 800 | 4.41 | 1,996 | 4.64 | 30 | 4.68 | — | — | 2,826 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 5,468 | 15,297 | 1,775 | 2,680 | 25,220 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Student loans | 6 | 5.99 | — | — | 10 | 4.87 | 48 | 4.62 | 64 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Collateralized loan obligations | 156 | 5.18 | 16 | 5.00 | 1,341 | 5.12 | 1,392 | 5.19 | 2,905 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-agency CMBS and RMBS | — | — | — | — | 3 | 7.03 | — | — | 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Other | — | — | 91 | 4.63 | — | — | — | — | 91 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 162 | 107 | 1,354 | 1,440 | 3,063 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| State and political subdivisions(3) | 25 | 5.60 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 25 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 11,896 | $ | 34,140 | $ | 4,213 | $ | 16,905 | $ | 67,154 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Held-to-maturity(2): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 463 | 0.63 | % | $ | 103 | 0.96 | % | $ | — | — | % | $ | 7 | 4.31 | % | $ | 573 | ||||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 234 | 2.61 | 3,924 | 1.63 | 868 | 2.09 | 27,850 | 2.31 | 32,876 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total U.S. Treasury and federal agencies | 697 | 4,027 | 868 | 27,857 | 33,449 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 1,108 | 0.86 | 1,259 | 1.15 | 94 | 1.42 | — | — | 2,461 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 1,108 | 1,259 | 94 | — | 2,461 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Student loans | 127 | 4.62 | 424 | 4.94 | 413 | 4.92 | 1,297 | 4.46 | 2,261 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 127 | 424 | 413 | 1,297 | 2,261 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 1,932 | $ | 5,710 | $ | 1,375 | $ | 29,154 | $ | 38,171 |
(1) Weighted-average yields are calculated based on the effective yield of each security owned at the end of the period, excluding the effect of related hedges, weighted based on the face value of each security.
(2) The maturities of MBS and ABS are based on expected principal payments.
(3) Yields were calculated on a FTE basis, using applicable statutory tax rates (21.0% as of December 31, 2025).
State Street Corporation | 76
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Loans
| TABLE 21: LOANS | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, | ||||||
| (In millions) | 2025 | 2024 | ||||
| Subscription finance | $ | 13,138 | $ | 11,544 | ||
| Fund finance(1) | 10,916 | 10,244 | ||||
| Collateralized loan obligations(2) | 12,809 | 9,488 | ||||
| Commercial | 2,851 | 3,881 | ||||
| Commercial real estate | 2,471 | 2,842 | ||||
| Overdrafts | 1,962 | 1,980 | ||||
| Other(3) | 2,635 | 3,221 | ||||
| Total loans(4)(5) | $ | 46,782 | $ | 43,200 | ||
| Allowance for credit losses | (193) | (174) | ||||
| Loans, net of allowance for credit losses | $ | 46,589 | $ | 43,026 |
(1) Fund finance loans primarily include loans to real money funds and business development companies of $8.30 billion and $1.75 billion, respectively, as of December 31, 2025, compared to $7.90 billion and $1.44 billion, respectively, as of December 31, 2024.
(2) Collateralized loan obligations include broadly syndicated and middle market CLO loans of $10.30 billion and $2.51 billion, respectively, as of December 31, 2025, compared to $8.39 billion and $1.10 billion as of December 31, 2024.
(3) Includes securities finance loans and loans to municipalities of $2.52 billion and $0.12 billion, respectively, as of December 31, 2025, compared to $3.01 billion and $0.21 billion, respectively, as of December 31, 2024.
(4) Excluding overdrafts, floating rate loans and fixed rate loans totaled $42.37 billion and $2.45 billion, respectively, as of December 31, 2025. We have entered into interest rate swap agreements to hedge the forecasted cash flows associated with EURIBOR indexed floating-rate loans. See Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K for additional details.
(5) Non-U.S. loans totaled $18.78 billion and $16.79 billion as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively.
We segregate our loans into two segments: commercial and financial and commercial real estate. We further classify commercial and financial loans as subscription finance, fund finance loans, collateralized loan obligations, commercial, overdrafts and other loans.
Total loans as of December 31, 2025 increased $3.58 billion compared to December 31, 2024, primarily reflecting higher CLOs and subscription finance loans, partially offset by a decline in commercial loans.
Subscription Finance
Our subscription finance portfolio consists of revolving lines of credit that allow private equity and private credit fund managers to borrow against uncalled investor capital commitments. These facilities are secured by the limited partners’ commitments and the fund’s right to call capital, enabling managers across strategies, including private equity/buyout, private debt, infrastructure, secondaries, and real estate to manage capital calls, fund asset acquisitions, and mitigate timing mismatches. The uncalled capital commitments securing these facilities are predominantly from institutional investors.
Fund Finance
Our fund finance portfolio primarily consists of loans to real money funds (RMF). RMF facilities
provide liquidity and leverage solutions to funds regulated under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (1940 Act), as well as certain non‑U.S. regulated funds. Borrowers, which typically maintain highly diversified portfolios of liquid securities, may access revolving lines of credit for short‑term liquidity needs and structural leverage. Loans to business development companies (BDCs), also included in our fund finance portfolio, are senior secured credit facilities to 1940 Act registered funds that invest in U.S. middle‑market companies. All fund finance facilities to both RMFs and BDCs benefit from regulatory required structural protections.
Collateralized Loan Obligations
Our CLO loans portfolio consists of senior secured debt facilities to both broadly syndicated and middle market CLOs. Broadly syndicated CLOs are backed by diversified pools of broadly syndicated leveraged loans to corporate borrowers, while middle market CLOs are backed by loans typically originated to U.S. middle-market companies. We only invest at the AAA rated tranche.
Commercial
Our commercial portfolio primarily consists of U.S. and European leveraged loan syndications to sub-investment grade borrowers, as well as lines of credit and term loans provided to corporate, insurance and investment advisor clients, primarily large global institutions.
We had binding unfunded commitments as of December 31, 2025 and 2024 of $6 million and $104 million, respectively, to participate in syndications of leveraged loans. Additional information about these unfunded commitments is provided in Note 12 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
These leveraged loans, which are primarily rated “sub-investment grade” under our internal risk-rating framework (refer to Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K), are externally rated “BBB,” “BB” or “B,” with approximately 87% and 91% of the loans rated “BB” or “B” as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. Our investment strategy involves generally limiting our investment to larger, more liquid credits underwritten by major global financial institutions, applying our internal credit analysis process to each potential investment and diversifying our exposure by counterparty and industry segment. However, these loans have significant exposure to credit losses relative to higher-rated loans in our portfolio.
Commercial Real Estate
As of December 31, 2025, the commercial real estate portfolio consists of, by asset class, approximately 40% multifamily residential, 40% office buildings and 20% other asset classes, and the portfolio does not have any construction exposure.
State Street Corporation | 77
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Additionally, as of December 31, 2025, the commercial real estate loans are on properties located in multiple markets across the United States, with no significant concentrations (New York Metro is the largest concentration at approximately 20%). Despite not having a significant concentration in any one market, a material decline in real estate markets or economic conditions could negatively impact the value or performance of one or more individual properties, which could adversely impact timely loan repayment, which may result in increased provisions for credit losses. We continued to observe these effects in commercial real estate loans during 2025, particularly those collateralized by office buildings, resulting in additional provisions for credit losses. Were conditions, or our evaluation of conditions, in those or other markets to worsen during 2026 or subsequent periods, we may increase our allowance for credit losses during those periods.
Overdrafts
Overdrafts primarily occur with custody clients and totaled $1.96 billion as of December 31, 2025, compared to $1.98 billion as of December 31, 2024. Overdraft balances are recorded within the loan portfolio and are typically repaid over a short period.
Other
Our other loans consist of securities finance and municipal loans. Securities finance loans represent the balance sheet‑funded portion of facilities offered through State Street Markets, in which clients pledge securities to draw cash. We may subsequently lend these securities through our agency lending program to raise cash and reduce the balance sheet‑funded exposure. Municipal loans consist of revolving credit facilities and term loans to U.S. municipal and not‑for‑profit obligors.
Additional information about our loan segments, as well as their underlying classes, is provided in Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
The following table presents the contractual maturities for loans, by segment, as of December 31, 2025.
| TABLE 22: CONTRACTUAL MATURITIES FOR LOANS | |||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2025 | |||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Under 1 year | 1 to 5 years | 5 to 15 years | Over 15 years | Total | ||||||||||||||
| Commercial and financial | $ | 19,853 | $ | 10,157 | $ | 14,266 | $ | 35 | $ | 44,311 | |||||||||
| Commercial real estate | 268 | 1,662 | 541 | — | 2,471 | ||||||||||||||
| Total loans | $ | 20,121 | $ | 11,819 | $ | 14,807 | $ | 35 | $ | 46,782 |
The following table presents the classification of loan balances due after one year, by segment, as of December 31, 2025.
| TABLE 23: CLASSIFICATION OF LOAN BALANCES DUE AFTER ONE YEAR | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2025 | ||||||
| (In millions) | Loans with predetermined interest rates | Loans with floating or adjustable interest rates | ||||
| Commercial and financial | $ | 116 | $ | 24,342 | ||
| Commercial real estate | 2,144 | 59 | ||||
| Total loans | $ | 2,260 | $ | 24,401 |
Allowance for Credit Losses
| TABLE 24: ALLOWANCE FOR CREDIT LOSSES | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||
| (In millions) | 2025 | 2024 | ||||
| Allowance for credit losses: | ||||||
| Beginning balance | $ | 183 | $ | 150 | ||
| Provision for credit losses (funded commitments)(1) | 58 | 81 | ||||
| Provisions for credit losses (unfunded commitments) | (1) | (5) | ||||
| Provisions for credit losses (investment securities and all other) | 2 | (1) | ||||
| Charge-offs(2) | (39) | (42) | ||||
| Ending balance | $ | 203 | $ | 183 |
(1) The provision for credit losses is primarily related to commercial real estate and commercial loans.
(2) The charge-offs are primarily related to commercial loans and a commercial real estate loan.
As of December 31, 2025, the allowance for credit losses increased $20 million compared to December 31, 2024, driven by the provision for credit losses of $59 million primarily reflecting the evolving macroeconomic environment and an increase in loan loss reserves associated with certain commercial real estate and commercial loans, partially offset by charge-offs of $39 million, largely related to a commercial real estate loan and certain commercial loans.
As of December 31, 2025, approximately $120 million of our allowance for credit losses was related to certain commercial real estate loans compared to $102 million as of December 31, 2024. In addition, $69 million and $68 million as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively, was related to commercial loans. The remaining $14 million and $13 million as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively, was related to other loans, off-balance sheet commitments and other financial assets held at amortized cost, including investment securities. As of December 31, 2025, the allowance for credit losses on loans represented 0.4% of total loans.
As our view on current and future economic conditions changes, our allowance for credit losses related to these loans may be impacted through a change to the provisions for credit losses, reflecting factors such as credit migration within our loan portfolio, as well as changes in management’s economic outlook.
State Street Corporation | 78
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Additional information with respect to the allowance for credit losses, net impairment losses and gross unrealized losses related to investment securities, is provided in “Allowance for Credit Losses” under Significant Accounting Estimates and Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
RISK MANAGEMENT
Overview
In the normal course of our business activities, we are exposed to a variety of risks, some that are inherent in the financial services industry, and others that are more specific to our business activities. Our risk management framework focuses on material risks, which include the following:
•credit and counterparty risk;
•liquidity risk, including funding and management;
•operational risk;
•information technology and cybersecurity risk;
•resiliency risk;
•market risk associated with our trading activities;
•market risk associated with our non-trading activities, referred to as asset and liability management, consisting primarily of interest rate risk;
•model risk;
•strategic risk; and
•reputational, compliance, fiduciary and business conduct risk.
Many of these risks, as well as certain factors underlying each of them, could affect our businesses and our consolidated financial statements, and are discussed in detail under “Risk Factors” in this Form 10-K.
The identification, assessment, monitoring, mitigation and reporting of risks are essential to our financial performance and successful management of our businesses. Accordingly, the scope of our business requires that we consider these risks as part of a comprehensive and well-integrated risk management function.
These risks, if not effectively managed, can result in losses to us as well as erosion of our capital and damage to our reputation. Our approach to risk management, including Board and senior management oversight and a system of policies, procedures, limits, risk measurement and monitoring and internal controls, allows for an assessment of risks within a framework for evaluating opportunities
for the prudent use of capital that appropriately balances risk and return.
Our objective is to optimize our returns while operating at a prudent level of risk. In support of this objective, we have instituted a risk appetite framework that aligns our business strategy and financial objectives with the level of risk that we are willing to incur.
We manage risk with a focus on the following objectives:
•A culture of risk awareness that extends across all of our business activities;
•The identification, classification and quantification of our material risks;
•The establishment of our risk appetite and associated limits and policies, and our adherence to these limits;
•The establishment of a risk management structure that enables the control and coordination of risk-taking across the business lines;
•The implementation of stress testing practices and a dynamic risk-assessment capability (additional information with respect to our stress-testing process and practices is provided under “Capital” in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis);
•A direct link between risk and strategic decision-making processes and incentive compensation practices; and
•The overall flexibility to adapt to the ever-changing business and market conditions.
Our risk appetite framework outlines the quantitative limits and qualitative goals that define the level and type of risk we are willing to undertake in the course of executing our business strategy, and also serves as a guide in setting risk limits across our business units. It further defines responsibilities for measuring and monitoring risk against limits, and for reporting, escalating, approving and addressing exceptions. Our risk appetite framework is established by ERM, a separate corporate risk oversight group, in conjunction with the ERC and the RC of the Board. The Board formally reviews and approves our risk appetite statement annually, or more frequently in response to shifts in endogenous or exogenous risk conditions.
Governance and Structure
Our approach to risk management involves all levels of management, from the Board and its committees, including its E&A Committee, the RC, the HRC and the TOPS, to each business unit and employee. We allocate responsibility for risk oversight so that risk/return decisions are made under a
State Street Corporation | 79
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
process designed to place appropriate personnel in positions of decision-making authority and subject to robust review and challenge.
Risk management is the responsibility of each employee, and is implemented through three lines of defense:
•The business units and certain corporate functions, which own and manage the risks inherent in their areas, are considered the first line of defense;
•ERM function is the second line of defense and is responsible for overseeing the risk-taking activities of the first line of defense and challenging their execution of risk management responsibilities; and
•Corporate Audit is the third line of defense, reports to the E&A Committee of the Board and is independent from the business units, ERM and other corporate functions. Corporate Audit provides independent and objective assurance to the Board over the design and operating effectiveness of internal controls as well as the effectiveness of our risk management practices. For credit risk, Global Credit Review, which reports administratively to Corporate Audit and functionally to the RC of the Board, provides assurance over our credit risk practices.
The responsibilities for effective review and challenge reside with senior managers, management oversight committees, our risk management function, Corporate Audit and, ultimately, the Board and its committees.
Corporate-level risk committees provide focused oversight, and establish corporate standards and policies for specific risks, including credit, country, market, liquidity, operational, cyber, information technology as well as new business products, regulatory compliance and ethics, vendor risk and model risks. These committees have been delegated the responsibility to develop recommendations and remediation strategies to address issues that affect or have the potential to affect us.
We maintain a risk governance committee structure which serves as the formal governance mechanism through which we seek to undertake the consistent identification, management and mitigation of various risks facing us in connection with our business activities. This governance structure is enhanced and integrated through multi-disciplinary involvement, particularly through ERM. The following chart presents this structure.
While our risk management program is designed to manage the risks in our businesses, internal and external factors may create risks that cannot always be identified or anticipated.
| Board Risk Governance Committee Structure | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Board Committees: | ||||||
| Risk Committee (RC) | Examining & Audit Committee (E&A Committee) | Human Resources Committee (HRC) | Technology and Operations Committee (TOPS) |
| Management Risk Governance Committee Structure | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Executive Management Committee | |||||||||
| Enterprise Risk Committee (ERC) | |||||||||
| Risk Governance Committees: | |||||||||
| Asset-Liability Committee (ALCO) | Business Conduct and Compliance Committee (BCCC) | Credit and Market Risk Committee (CMRC) | Strategic Risk Committee (SRC) | Technology and Operational Risk Committee (TORC) |
State Street Corporation | 80
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Enterprise Risk Management
The goal of ERM is to ensure that risks are proactively identified, well-understood and prudently managed in support of our business strategy. ERM is responsible for identifying, measuring, monitoring, controlling, and reporting aggregate risks, as well as for establishing programs, frameworks, policies, and procedures that set forth principles and requirements for managing and overseeing risk. The second line is responsible for setting the risk appetite limits, developing policies and procedures to evaluate whether risks remain within the appropriate limits, and monitoring risk-taking.
Risk identification and assessments serve to enable ERM’s understanding of business unit strategy, risk profile, and potential exposures and support the management of risk. This is achieved through a series of risk assessments across our business using techniques for the identification, assessment, and measurement of risk across a spectrum of potential frequency and severity combinations. These techniques include business-specific programs, such as new business and product review and approval, new client screening, and, as deemed appropriate, targeted risk assessments.
Two primary risk assessment programs, which are supplemented by other business-specific programs, are the core of this component:
•The Material Risk Identification process utilizes a bottom-up approach to identify State Street’s most significant risk exposures across all on- and off-balance sheet risk-taking activities. The primary output from the program is a firmwide Material Risk Inventory, which forms a holistic view of the firm’s risk profile, irrespective of risk likelihood or frequency, and is used as a foundational element in State Street’s risk management and capital planning processes.
•The Risk and Control Self-Assessment program comprises a structured process to identify, assess, and manage non-financial risks (operational and compliance) within our business lines and corporate functions. See also “Operational Risk Management” below.
In addition, ERM establishes and reviews limits and, in collaboration with business unit management, monitors key risks. Ultimately, ERM works to validate that risk-taking occurs within the risk appetite statements approved by the Board and conforms to associated risk policies, limits and guidelines.
The CRO is responsible for our risk management globally, leads the ERM organization globally and has a dual reporting line to our CEO and the RC of the Board.
Board Committees
The Board has four committees which assist it in discharging its responsibilities with respect to risk management: the RC, the E&A Committee, the HRC and the TOPS.
•The RC oversees the operation and implementation of our enterprise-wide global risk management framework which includes risk management governance, material risk policies and risk control infrastructure. In doing so, the RC reviews our assessment and effective management of all risks applicable to our operations, including credit, market, interest rate, liquidity, operational, compliance, strategic, technology and reputational risks. In addition, the RC oversees capital planning activities, balance sheet management, and applicable risk related metrics and monitoring capital adequacy under business-as-usual and stress conditions. Further, the RC reviews liquidity risk tolerances and operating effectiveness, liquidity risk management strategies and new and emerging risks to State Street.
•The E&A Committee oversees the operation of a comprehensive system of internal controls covering the integrity of our accounting and financial reporting processes, the preparation, audit and disclosure of consolidated financial statements and compliance with laws and regulatory requirements. The E&A Committee monitors and oversees the performance of Corporate Audit and in reviewing certain communications with banking regulators. The E&A Committee has direct responsibility for the appointment, compensation, retention, evaluation and oversight of the work of our independent registered public accounting firm, including sole authority for the establishment of pre-approval policies and procedures for all audit engagements and any non-audit engagements. The E&A Committee also reviews and monitors the effectiveness of our compliance program, advancing a culture of compliance and ethical business practices.
•The HRC has direct responsibility for the oversight of human capital management, all compensation plans, policies and programs in which executive officers participate and incentive, retirement, welfare as well as equity plans in which certain of our other employees participate. In addition, it oversees the alignment of our incentive
State Street Corporation | 81
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
compensation arrangements with our safety and soundness, including the integration of risk management objectives, and related policies, arrangements and control processes consistent with applicable related regulatory rules and guidance.
•The TOPS leads and assists the Board in its oversight of enterprise-wide technology and operations strategy and programs. In addition, the TOPS oversees technology and operational risk management including the associated frameworks, policies, procedures and practices and setting risk tolerances and limits as appropriate. The TOPS further reviews technology and operational risk exposures, resiliency and controls on information security, cybersecurity risk, business continuity, data and access management and third-party risk management, or other related matters.
Executive Management Committee
ERC is the executive management oversight and decision-making body for all risks facing us in alignment with our strategy, risk appetite, balance sheet, and capital adequacy, including credit, interest rate, liquidity, market, operational and technology, compliance, and reputational risks globally. Its key responsibilities include:
•The review and recommendation for approval to the RC of the Board of our global risk policies, capital and liquidity management frameworks, including our risk appetite framework;
•The oversight of our capital adequacy processes and recovery and resolution plans, stress testing program, and monitoring and assessing our capital adequacy; and
•The ongoing monitoring and review of risks undertaken within the businesses, and our senior management oversight and approval of risk strategies and tactics.
ERC is co-chaired by the CRO and the CEO.
Risk Governance Committees
The following risk committees, under the authorization and oversight of the ERC, have focused responsibilities for oversight of specific areas of risk management:
•ALCO is the senior oversight and decision-making body for our balance sheet strategy, capital management, Global Treasury business activities and associated risks, including interest rate and mark-to-market risk, liquidity risk, non-trading market risk and capital adequacy measures. ALCO is co-chaired by the CFO and the Chief Financial Risk Officer;
•BCCC oversees the management of culture, conduct, and compliance risks, programs, framework and compliance risk exposures that could result in reputational risk. The BCCC is co-chaired by the Chief Compliance and Operational Risk Officer and the Chief Human Resources and Citizenship Officer;
•CMRC provides firm-wide oversight of our credit risks and market (trading) risks, including oversight of related risk appetite development, limit setting and breach management, and applicable risk policies. CMRC is co-chaired by the Global Head of Sales, Strategic Growth and Global Credit Finance and the Chief Financial Risk Officer;
•SRC oversees enterprise-wide strategic risk, which is defined as the risk to current or projected financial condition and resilience arising from adverse business decisions, poor implementation of business decisions, or lack of responsiveness to changes in the banking industry and operating environment. The SRC is co-chaired by the CFO and the CRO; and
•TORC provides oversight and assesses the effectiveness of enterprise-wide technology and operational risk management programs. It also reviews areas of improvement to manage and control technology and operational risk consistently across the organization. TORC is co-chaired by the Chief Operating Officer and Chief Compliance and Operational Risk Officer.
Credit and Counterparty Risk Management
Core Policies and Principles
We define credit risk as the risk of financial loss if a counterparty, borrower or obligor, is unable or unwilling to repay borrowings or settle contractual transactions in accordance with underlying terms. Credit risk may occur in our business activities through traditional lending such as loans and standby letters of credit; in our investment securities portfolio; in direct or indemnified agency trading activities, such as foreign exchange, principal securities lending and indemnified agency securities lending, in our treasury operations through deposit placements and other cash balances held with central banks or private sector institutions, and in our custody business through overdrafts. Credit risk is also incurred in our day-to-day settlement operations.
We distinguish between three major types of credit risk:
•Default risk - the risk that a counterparty fails to meet its contractual payment obligations;
•Country risk - the risk that we may suffer a loss, in any given country, due to any of the following reasons: deterioration of economic
State Street Corporation | 82
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
conditions, political and social upheaval, nationalization and appropriation of assets, government repudiation of indebtedness, exchange controls and disruptive currency depreciation or devaluation; and
•Settlement risk - the risk that the settlement or clearance of transactions will fail, which arises whenever the exchange of cash, securities or other assets is not simultaneous.
The acceptance of credit risk by us is governed by corporate policies and guidelines, which include standardized procedures applied across the entire organization. These policies and guidelines include specific requirements related to each counterparty’s risk profile; the markets served; counterparty, industry and country concentrations; and regulatory compliance. These policies and procedures also implement a number of core principles, which include the following:
•We measure and consolidate credit risks attributed to each counterparty, or group of counterparties, in accordance with a “one-obligor” principle that aggregates risks across our business units;
•ERM reviews and approves all material extensions of credit, and material changes to such extensions of credit (such as changes in term, collateral structure or covenants), in accordance with assigned credit-approval authorities;
•Credit-approval authorities are assigned to individuals according to their qualifications, experience and training, and these authorities are periodically reviewed. Our largest exposures require approval by the CC, a subcommittee of the CMRC. With respect to small and low-risk extensions of credit to certain types of counterparties, approval authority may be granted to individuals outside of ERM;
•We seek to avoid or limit undue concentrations of risk. Counterparty (or groups of counterparties), industry, country and product-specific concentrations of risk are subject to frequent review and approval in accordance with our risk policies and appetite;
•We evaluate the creditworthiness of counterparties through a detailed risk assessment, including the use of internal risk-rating methodologies;
•We review all extensions of credit and the creditworthiness of counterparties at least annually. The nature and extent of these reviews are determined by the size, nature
and term of the extensions of credit and the creditworthiness of the counterparty; and
•We subject all corporate policies and guidelines to annual review as an integral part of our periodic assessment of our risk appetite.
Our corporate policies and guidelines require that all extensions of credit are consistent with the bank’s standards, limit credit-related losses, and support our goal of maintaining a strong financial condition.
Structure and Organization
The Credit Risk group within ERM is responsible for the assessment, approval and monitoring of credit risk across our business. The group is managed centrally, has dedicated teams in a number of locations worldwide, and is responsible for related policies and procedures and our internal credit-rating systems and methodologies. In addition, the group, in conjunction with the business units, establishes measurements and limits to control the amount of credit risk accepted across its various business activities, both at the portfolio level and for each individual counterparty or group of counterparties, to individual sectors, and also to counterparties by product and country of risk. These measurements and limits are reviewed periodically, or at least annually.
In conjunction with other groups in ERM, the Credit Risk group is responsible for the design, implementation and oversight of our credit risk measurement and management systems, including data and assessment systems, quantification systems and the reporting framework.
Various key committees within our company are responsible for the oversight of credit risk and associated credit risk policies, systems and models. All credit-related activities are governed by our risk appetite framework and our credit risk guidelines, which define our general philosophy with respect to credit risk and the manner in which we control, manage and monitor such risks.
CMRC and CC have the primary responsibility for the oversight, review and approval of the credit risk guidelines and policies which are reviewed periodically, but at least annually.
The CC has responsibility for assigning credit authority and approving the largest and higher-risk extensions of credit to individual counterparties or groups of counterparties.
CMRC provides periodic updates to ERC and the RC of the Board.
Credit Ratings
We perform initial and ongoing reviews to exercise due diligence on the creditworthiness of our
State Street Corporation | 83
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
counterparties when conducting any business with them or approving any credit limits.
This due diligence process generally includes the assignment of an internal credit rating, which is determined by the use of internally developed and validated methodologies, scorecards and a 15-grade rating scale. This risk-rating process incorporates the use of risk-rating tools in conjunction with management judgment; qualitative and quantitative inputs are captured in a replicable manner and, following a formal review and approval process, an internal credit rating based on our rating scale is assigned. We generally rate our counterparties individually, although some counterparties defined by us as low-risk are rated on a pooled basis. Credit ratings are reviewed and approved by the Credit Risk group or its delegates. We evaluate and rate the credit risk of our counterparties on an ongoing basis. To facilitate comparability across the portfolio, counterparties within a given sector are rated using a risk-rating tool developed for that sector.
Our risk-rating models are subject to periodic internal review and validation. The overall risk rating methodology is reviewed and approved by the CC on an annual basis.
Risk Parameter Estimates
Our internal risk-rating system promotes a clear and consistent approach to determining appropriate credit risk classifications for our credit counterparties and exposures. This allows us to track the changes in risk associated with these counterparties and exposures over time. This capability enhances our ability to calculate both risk exposures and capital, and enables better strategic decision-making across the organization.
More specifically, our internal risk rating system is used for the following purposes:
•The assessment of the creditworthiness of new counterparties and, in conjunction with our risk appetite statement, the development of appropriate credit limits for our products and services, including loans, foreign exchange, securities finance, placements and repurchase agreements;
•The automation of limit approvals for certain low-risk counterparties, as defined in our credit risk guidelines and based on the counterparty’s PD;
•The development of approval authority matrices based on PD; riskier counterparties with higher PDs require higher levels of approval for a comparable PD and limit size compared to less risky counterparties with lower PDs;
•The analysis of risk concentration trends using historical PD and exposure-at-default (EAD), data;
•The determination of the level of management review of short-duration advances depending on PD; riskier counterparties with higher rating class values generally trigger higher levels of management escalation for comparable short-duration advances compared to less risky counterparties with lower rating-class values;
•The monitoring of credit facility utilization levels using EAD values and the identification of instances where counterparties have exceeded limits;
•The aggregation and comparison of counterparty exposures with risk appetite levels to determine if businesses are maintaining appropriate risk levels; and
•The determination of our regulatory capital requirements for the AIRB set forth in the Basel framework.
Credit Risk Mitigation
We seek to limit our credit exposure and reduce any potential credit losses through the use of various types of credit risk mitigation. The Basel III final rule permits us to reflect the application of credit risk mitigation when it meets the standards outlined therein. Examples of forms of credit risk mitigation include a security interest in financial and non-financial assets (collateral), netting and guarantees. Where permissible, we apply the recognition of collateral, guarantees and netting to mitigate overall risk within our counterparty credit portfolio. While credit default swaps are permitted under the Basel III final rule, we do not actively use credit default swaps as a risk mitigation tool.
Collateral
In many parts of our business, we regularly require or agree for collateral to be received from or provided to clients and counterparties in connection with contracts that involve credit risk. In our trading businesses, this collateral is typically in the form of cash, as well as highly-rated and/or liquid securities (i.e. government securities and other bonds or equity securities). Credit risks in our non-trading and securities finance businesses are also often secured by bonds and equity securities and by other types of assets. Collateral serves to reduce the risk of loss inherent in an exposure. However, changing market values of the collateral we hold, unexpected increases in the credit exposure to a client or counterparty, reductions in the value or change in the type of securities held by us, as well as operational
State Street Corporation | 84
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
errors or errors in the manner in which we seek to exercise our rights, may reduce the risk mitigation effects of collateral. While collateral is often an alternative source of repayment, it does not replace the requirement within our policies and guidelines for high-quality underwriting. We also may choose to incur credit exposure without the benefit of collateral or other risk mitigating credits rights.
Our credit risk guidelines require that the collateral we accept for risk mitigation purposes is of high quality, can be reliably valued and is supported by a valid security interest that permits liquidation if or when required. Generally, when collateral is of lower quality, more difficult to value or more challenging to liquidate, higher discounts to market values are applied for the purposes of measuring credit risk. For certain less liquid collateral, longer liquidation periods are assumed when determining the credit exposure.
All types of collateral are assessed regularly by ERM, as is the basis on which the collateral is valued. Our assessment of collateral, including the ability to liquidate collateral in the event of a counterparty default, and also with regard to market values of collateral under a variety of hypothetical market conditions, is an integral component of our assessment of risk and approval of credit limits. We also seek to identify, limit and monitor instances of “wrong-way” risk, where a counterparty’s risk of default is positively correlated with the risk of our collateral eroding in value.
We maintain policies and procedures requiring that documentation used to collateralize a transaction is legal, valid, binding and enforceable in the relevant jurisdictions. We also conduct legal reviews to assess whether our documentation meets these standards on an ongoing basis.
Netting
Netting is a mechanism that allows institutions and counterparties to net offsetting exposures and payment obligations against one another through the use of qualifying master netting agreements. A master netting agreement allows for certain rights and remedies upon a counterparty default, including the right to net obligations arising under derivatives or other transactions under such agreement. In such an event, the netting of obligations would result in a single net claim owed by, or to, the counterparty. This is commonly referred to as “close-out netting,” and is pursued wherever possible. We may also enter into master agreements that allow for the netting of amounts payable on a given day and in the same currency, reducing our settlement risk. This is commonly referred to as “payment netting,” and is widely used in our foreign exchange activities.
As with collateral, we have policies and procedures in place to apply close-out and payment netting only to the extent that we have verified legal
validity and enforceability of the master agreement. In the case of payment netting, operational constraints may preclude us from reducing settlement risk, notwithstanding the legal right to require the same under the master netting agreement. In the event we become unable, due to operational constraints, actions by regulators, changes in accounting principles, law or regulation (or related interpretations) or other factors, to net some or all of our offsetting exposures and payment obligations under those agreements, we would be required to gross up our assets and liabilities on our statement of condition and our calculation of RWA, accordingly. This would result in a potentially material change in our regulatory ratios, including LCR, and present increased credit, liquidity, asset and liability management and operational risks, some of which could be material.
Guarantees
A guarantee is a financial instrument that results in credit support being provided by a third party, (i.e., the protection provider) to the underlying obligor (the beneficiary of the provided protection) on account of an exposure owing by the obligor. The protection provider may support the underlying exposure either in whole or in part. Support of this kind may take different forms. Typical forms of guarantees provided to us include financial guarantees, letters of credit, bankers’ acceptances, purchase undertaking agreement contracts and insurance.
We have established a review process to evaluate guarantees under the applicable requirements of our policies and Basel III requirements. Governance for this evaluation is covered under policies and procedures that require regular reviews of documentation, jurisdictions and credit quality of protection providers.
Credit Limits
Central to our philosophy for our management of credit risk is the approval and imposition of credit limits, against which we monitor the actual and potential future credit exposure arising from our business activities with counterparties or groups of counterparties. Credit limits are a reflection of our risk appetite, which may be determined by the creditworthiness of the counterparty, the nature of the risk inherent in the business undertaken with the counterparty, or a combination of relevant credit factors. Our risk appetite for certain sectors and certain countries and geographic regions may also influence the level of risk we are willing to assume to certain counterparties.
The analysis and approval of credit limits is undertaken similarly across our businesses, although the nature and extent of the analysis may vary, based on the type, term and magnitude of the risk being
State Street Corporation | 85
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
assumed. Credit limits and underlying exposures are assessed and measured on both a gross and net basis where appropriate, with net exposure determined by deducting the value of any collateral held. For certain types of risk being assumed, we will also assess and measure exposures under a variety of hypothetical market conditions. Credit limit approvals across our business are undertaken by the Credit Risk group, by individuals to whom credit authority has been delegated, or by the Credit Committee.
Credit limits are re-evaluated annually, or more frequently as needed, and are revised periodically on prevailing and anticipated market conditions, changes in counterparty or country-specific credit ratings and outlook, changes in our risk appetite for certain counterparties, sectors or countries, and enhancements to the measurement of credit utilization.
Reporting
Ongoing active monitoring and management of our credit risk is an integral part of our credit risk management framework. We maintain management information systems to identify, measure, monitor and report credit risk across businesses and legal entities, enabling ERM and our businesses to have timely access to information on credit limits and exposures. Monitoring is performed along the dimensions of counterparty, industry, country and product-specific risks to facilitate the identification of concentrations of risk and emerging trends.
Key aspects of this credit risk reporting structure include governance and oversight groups and policies that define standards for the reporting of credit risk, data aggregation and sourcing systems.
The Credit Risk group routinely assesses the composition of our overall credit risk portfolio for alignment with our stated risk appetite. This assessment includes routine analysis and reporting of the portfolio, monitoring of market-based indicators, the assessment of industry trends and developments and regular reviews of concentrated risks. The Credit Risk group is also responsible, in conjunction with the business units, for defining the appetite for credit risk in the major sectors in which we have a concentration of business activities. These sector-level risk appetite statements, which include counterparty selection criteria and granular underwriting guidelines, are reviewed periodically and approved by either the CMRC or CC.
Monitoring
Regular surveillance of credit and counterparty risks is undertaken by our business units, the Credit Risk group and designees with ERM, allowing for
oversight. This surveillance process includes, but is not limited to, the following components:
•Annual Reviews. A formal review of counterparties is conducted at least annually and includes a review of operating performance, primary risk factors and our internal credit risk rating. This annual review also includes a review of current and proposed credit limits, an assessment of our ongoing risk appetite and assessment that supporting legal documentation remains effective.
•Interim Monitoring. Monitoring of our largest and riskiest counterparties is undertaken more frequently, utilizing financial information, market indicators and other relevant credit and performance measures. The nature and extent of this interim monitoring is individually tailored to certain counterparties and/or industry sectors to identify material changes to the risk profile of a counterparty (or group of counterparties) and assign an updated internal risk rating in a timely manner.
We maintain an active “surveillance list” for all counterparties. The surveillance list status denotes a concern with some aspect of a counterparty’s risk profile that warrants closer monitoring of the counterparty’s financial performance and related risk factors. Our ongoing monitoring processes are designed to facilitate the early identification of counterparties whose creditworthiness is deteriorating; any counterparty may be placed on the surveillance list by ERM at its sole discretion.
Counterparties on the surveillance list generally correspond with the non-investment grade or near non-investment grade ratings established by the major independent credit-rating agencies. The surveillance list also includes any counterparties rated “Special Mention,” “Substandard,” “Doubtful” and “Loss.”
The Credit Risk group maintains primary responsibility for our surveillance list processes, and generates a quarterly report of all surveillance list counterparties. The surveillance list is formally reviewed at least on a quarterly basis, with participation from senior Credit Risk staff, and representatives from the business units and our corporate finance and legal groups as appropriate. These meetings include a review of individual surveillance list counterparties, together with credit limits and prevailing exposures, and are focused on actions to contain, reduce or eliminate the risk of loss to us. Identified actions are documented and monitored.
State Street Corporation | 86
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Controls
The GCR function provides a separate level of surveillance and oversight over the integrity of our credit risk management processes, including the internal risk-rating system. GCR reviews counterparty credit ratings for all identified sectors on an ongoing basis. GCR is subject to oversight by the CMRC, and provides periodic updates to the ERC and RC of the Board.
Specific activities of GCR include the following:
•Perform separate and objective assessments of our credit and counterparty exposures to determine the nature and extent of risk undertaken by the business units;
•Execute periodic credit process and credit product reviews to assess the quality of credit analysis, compliance with policies, guidelines and relevant regulation, transaction structures and underwriting standards, and risk-rating integrity;
•Identify and monitor developing counterparty, market and/or industry sector trends to limit risk of loss and protect capital;
•Deliver regular and formal reporting to stakeholders, including exam results, identified issues and the status of requisite actions to remedy identified deficiencies;
•Allocate resources for specialized risk assessments (on an as-needed basis); and
•Liaise with assurance partners and regulatory personnel on matters relating to risk rating, reporting and measurement.
Allowance for Credit Losses
We record an allowance for credit losses related to certain on-balance sheet credit exposures, including our financial assets held at amortized cost, as well as certain off-balance sheet credit exposures, including unfunded commitments and letters of credit. Review and evaluation of the adequacy of the allowance for credit losses is ongoing throughout the year, but occurs at least quarterly, and is based, among other factors, on our evaluation of the level of risk in the portfolio and the estimated effects of our forecasts on our counterparties. We utilize multiple economic scenarios, consisting of a baseline, upside and downside scenarios, to develop our forecast of expected losses.
In 2025, the allowance reflected the evolving macroeconomic environment and an increase in loan loss reserves associated with certain commercial real estate and commercial loans. The allowance is inherently subject to uncertainties, including those inherent in our model and economic assumptions, and management may use qualitative adjustments. If future data and forecasts deviate relative to the
forecasts utilized to determine our allowance for credit losses as of December 31, 2025, or if credit risk migration is higher or lower than forecasted for reasons independent of the economic forecast, our allowance for credit losses will also change.
Additional information about the allowance for credit losses is provided in Notes 3 and 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Liquidity Risk Management
Our liquidity framework contemplates areas of potential risk to our liquidity based on our activities, size and other appropriate risk-related factors. In managing liquidity risk we employ limits, maintain established metrics and early warning indicators and perform routine liquidity stress testing to identify potential liquidity needs. This process involves the evaluation of a combination of internal and external scenarios which assist us in measuring our liquidity position and in identifying potential increases in cash needs or decreases in available sources of cash, as well as the potential impairment of our ability to access the global capital markets.
We manage our liquidity on a global, consolidated basis as well as on a stand-alone basis at the Parent Company and at certain branches and subsidiaries of State Street Bank. State Street Bank generally derives its liquidity from its customer deposit base, capital markets, wholesale funding and funding sources limited to banks, such as the federal funds market and the Federal Reserve’s discount window. The Parent Company is managed to a more conservative liquidity profile, reflecting narrower market access. Additionally, the Parent Company typically holds, or has direct access to, primarily through SSIF, a direct subsidiary of the Parent Company, and the support agreement, as discussed in “Supervision and Regulation” in Business in this Form 10-K, cash and equivalents intended to meet its current debt maturities and other cash needs, as well as those projected over the next twelve-month period. Absent financial distress at the Parent Company, the liquid assets available at SSIF continue to be available to the Parent Company. As of December 31, 2025, the value of our Parent Company’s net liquid assets totaled $627 million, compared with $438 million as of December 31, 2024, excluding available liquidity through SSIF. As of December 31, 2025, we and State Street Bank had approximately $3.85 billion of senior notes or subordinated debentures outstanding that will mature in the next 12 months.
As a G-SIB, our liquidity risk management activities are subject to heightened and evolving regulatory requirements, including interpretations of those requirements, under specific U.S. and international regulations and also resulting from published and unpublished guidance, supervisory
State Street Corporation | 87
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
activities, such as stress tests, resolution planning, examinations and other regulatory interactions. Satisfaction of these requirements could, in some cases, result in changes in the composition of our investment portfolio, reduced NII or NIM, a reduction in the level of certain business activities or modifications to the way in which we deliver our products and services. If we fail to meet regulatory requirements to the satisfaction of our regulators, we could receive negative regulatory stress test results, incur a resolution plan deficiency or determination of a non-credible resolution plan or otherwise receive an adverse regulatory finding. Failure to satisfy these regulatory requirements could have a materially adverse affect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Governance
Global Treasury is responsible for our management of liquidity. This includes day-to-day management of our global liquidity position, development and monitoring of early warning indicators and key liquidity risk metrics, creation and execution of liquidity stress tests, evaluation and implementation of regulatory requirements, maintenance and execution of our contingency funding plan (CFP), and routine management reporting to ALCO, ERC and the RC of the Board.
Global Treasury Risk Management, part of ERM, provides separate oversight over the identification, communication and management of Global Treasury’s risks in support of our business strategy. Global Treasury Risk Management reports to the CRO. Global Treasury Risk Management’s responsibilities relative to liquidity risk management include the development and review of liquidity risk policies and guidelines, and development and monitoring of limits related to adherence to the liquidity risk guidelines and associated reporting.
Liquidity Framework
We manage liquidity according to several principles that are equally important to our overall liquidity risk management framework:
•Structural liquidity management addresses liquidity by monitoring and directing the composition of our consolidated statement of condition. In addition, on a regular basis and as described below, our structural liquidity is evaluated under various stress scenarios.
•Tactical liquidity management addresses our day-to-day funding requirements and is largely driven by changes in our primary source of funding, which are client deposits. Fluctuations in client deposits may be supplemented with short-term borrowings, repurchase agreements, FHLB products and certificates of deposit.
•Stress testing includes internal and external liquidity stress testing to support our strategic liquidity risk management practices. Internal regular and ad hoc liquidity stress testing are performed under various severe but plausible scenarios at the consolidated level and at significant subsidiaries, including State Street Bank. These tests contemplate severe market and idiosyncratic events specific to us under various time horizons and severities. Tests contemplate the impact of material changes in key funding sources, credit ratings, additional collateral requirements, contingent uses of funding, systemic shocks to the financial markets and operational failures based on market and assumptions specific to us. These stress tests evaluate the required level of funding versus available sources in an adverse environment. In addition to internal stress testing performed, we also monitor and perform external regulatory stress testing through the LCR and NSFR. As stress testing contemplates potential forward-looking scenarios, results also serve as a trigger to activate specific liquidity stress levels and contingent funding actions.
•The contingency funding plan is designed to assist senior management with decision-making associated with any contingency funding response to a possible or actual crisis scenario. The CFP defines roles, responsibilities and management actions to be taken in the event of deterioration of our liquidity profile caused by either an event specific to us or a broader disruption in the capital markets. Specific actions are linked to the level of stress indicated by these measures or by management judgment of market conditions.
Liquidity Risk Metrics
In managing our liquidity, we employ early warning indicators and metrics intended to detect emerging risks which may result in a liquidity stress, including changes in our stock price and spreads on our long-term debt. Additional metrics that are critical to the management of our consolidated statement of condition and monitored as part of our routine liquidity management include measures of our fungible cash position, purchased wholesale funds, unencumbered liquid assets, deposits and the total of investment securities and loans as a percentage of total client deposits.
State Street Corporation | 88
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Asset Liquidity
Central to the management of our liquidity is asset liquidity, which consists primarily of high quality liquid assets of cash and securities.
We maintained average cash balances in excess of regulatory requirements governing deposits with the Federal Reserve, the ECB and other non-U.S. central banks of approximately $91.35 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2025, compared to $86.88 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2024. The higher levels of average cash balances with central banks is a result of an increase in client deposits.
Liquid securities carried in our asset liquidity include securities pledged without corresponding advances from the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston (FRBB), the FHLB, and other non-U.S. central banks. State Street Bank is a member of the FHLB. These arrangements allow for advances of liquidity in varying terms against high-quality collateral, which helps facilitate asset and liability management.
Access to primary, intraday and contingent liquidity provided by these utilities is an important source of contingent liquidity with utilization subject to underlying conditions.
In addition to the investment securities included in our asset liquidity, we have other unencumbered investment securities and certain loans that we can pledge as collateral to access these various facilities. These additional assets are available sources of liquidity, although not as rapidly deployed as those already included in our asset liquidity.
The average fair value of total unencumbered securities was $82.79 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2025, compared to $63.23 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2024.
Uses of Liquidity
Significant uses of our liquidity could result from the following: withdrawals of client deposits; draw-downs by our custody clients of lines of credit; advances to clients to settle securities transactions; increases in our investment and loan portfolios; or other permitted purposes. Such circumstances would generally arise under stress conditions, such as a deterioration in credit ratings or significant changes in FX rates. A recurring use of our liquidity involves our deployment of HQLA from our investment portfolio to post collateral to financial institutions and central banks to support various business activities.
We had unfunded commitments to extend credit with gross contractual amounts totaling $35.70 billion and $34.19 billion and standby letters of credit totaling $0.57 billion and $0.91 billion as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. These amounts do not reflect the value of any collateral. As of
December 31, 2025, approximately 70% of our unfunded commitments to extend credit and 35% of our standby letters of credit expire within one year. Since many of our commitments are expected to expire or renew without being drawn upon, the gross contractual amounts do not necessarily represent our future cash requirements.
Information about our resolution planning and the impact actions under our resolution plans could have on our liquidity is provided in “Supervision and Regulation” in Business in this Form 10-K.
Funding
Deposits
We provide products and services including custody, accounting, administration, daily pricing, FX services, cash management, financial asset management, securities finance and investment advisory services. As a provider of these products and services, we generate client deposits, which have generally provided a stable and low-cost source of funds. As a global custodian, clients place deposits with our entities in various currencies. As of both December 31, 2025 and 2024, approximately 70% of our average total deposit balances were denominated in U.S. dollars, 15% in EUR, 5% in GBP and 10% in all other currencies.
Short-Term Funding
Our on-balance sheet liquid assets are also an integral component of our liquidity management strategy. These assets provide liquidity through maturities of the assets, but more importantly, they provide us with the ability to raise funds by pledging the securities as collateral for borrowings or through outright sales. In addition, our access to the global capital markets gives us the ability to source incremental funding from wholesale investors through relatively low-cost channels to further support business growth. As discussed earlier under “Asset Liquidity,” State Street Bank’s membership in the FHLB allows for advances of liquidity with varying terms against high-quality collateral. We had $3.5 billion and $9.8 billion outstanding of FHLB funding as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. These outstanding borrowings have initial maturities of approximately 12 months and are recorded in other short-term borrowings in the consolidated statement of condition.
Short-term secured funding also comes in the form of securities lent or sold under agreements to repurchase. These transactions are short-term in nature, generally overnight and are collateralized by high-quality investment securities. These balances were $0.84 billion and $3.68 billion as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively.
Long-Term Funding
State Street Corporation | 89
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
We have the ability to issue debt and equity securities under our current universal shelf registration statement to meet current commitments and business needs.
On January 27, 2025, we redeemed $500 million aggregate principal amount of 4.857% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026.
On February 6, 2025, we redeemed $300 million aggregate principal amount of 1.746% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026.
On February 28, 2025, we issued $1,350 million aggregate principal amount of 4.536% fixed rate senior notes due 2028, $650 million aggregate principal amount of 4.729% fixed rate senior notes due 2030 and $750 million aggregate principal amount of 5.146% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2036.
On March 30, 2025, we redeemed $500 million aggregate principal amount of 2.901% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026.
On April 24, 2025, we issued $300 million aggregate principal amount of floating rate senior notes due 2028, $700 million aggregate principal amount of 4.543% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2028 and $1 billion aggregate principal amount of 4.834% fixed rate senior notes due 2030.
On May 18, 2025, we redeemed $1 billion aggregate principal amount of 5.104% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026.
On October 23, 2025, we issued $1 billion aggregate principal amount of 4.784% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2036.
On November 4, 2025, we redeemed $500 million aggregate principal amount of 5.751% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026.
Agency Credit Ratings
Our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment grade ratings as measured by major credit rating agencies.
| TABLE 25: CREDIT RATINGS | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2025 | |||||
| Standard & Poor’s | Moody’s Investors Service | Fitch | |||
| State Street: | |||||
| Senior debt | A | Aa3 | AA- | ||
| Subordinated debt | A- | A2 | A | ||
| Junior subordinated debt | BBB | A3 | NR | ||
| Preferred stock | BBB | Baa1 | BBB+ | ||
| Outlook | Stable | Stable | Stable | ||
| State Street Bank: | |||||
| Short-term deposits | A-1+ | P-1 | F1+ | ||
| Long-term deposits | AA- | Aa1 | AA+ | ||
| Senior debt/Long-term issuer | AA- | Aa2 | AA | ||
| Subordinated debt | A | Aa3 | NR | ||
| Outlook | Stable | Stable | Stable |
Factors essential to maintaining high credit ratings include:
•diverse and stable core earnings;
•relative market position;
•strong risk management;
•strong capital ratios;
•diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and client deposits;
•strong liquidity monitoring procedures; and
•preparedness for current or future regulatory developments.
High ratings limit borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by:
•providing confidence for unsecured funding and depositors;
•increasing the potential market for our debt and improving our ability to offer products;
•facilitating reduced collateral haircuts in secured lending transactions; and
•engaging in transactions in which clients value high credit ratings.
A downgrade or reduction in our credit ratings could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity by restricting our ability to access the capital markets, which could increase the related cost of funds. In turn, this could cause the sudden and large-scale withdrawal of unsecured deposits by our clients, which could lead to drawdowns of unfunded commitments to extend credit or trigger requirements under securities purchase commitments; or require additional collateral or force terminations of certain trading derivative contracts.
State Street Corporation | 90
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
A majority of our derivative contracts have been entered into under bilateral agreements with counterparties who may require us to post collateral or terminate the transactions based on changes in our credit ratings. We assess the impact of these arrangements by determining the collateral that would be required assuming a downgrade by major rating agencies. The additional collateral or termination payments related to our net derivative liabilities under these arrangements that could have been called by counterparties in the event of a downgrade in our credit ratings below levels specified in the agreements is provided in Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K. Other funding sources, such as secured financing transactions and other margin requirements, for which there are no explicit triggers, could also be adversely affected.
Contractual Cash Obligations and Other Commitments
The long-term contractual cash obligations included within Table 26: Long-Term Contractual Cash Obligations were recorded in our consolidated statement of condition as of December 31, 2025.
| TABLE 26: LONG-TERM CONTRACTUAL CASH OBLIGATIONS | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2025 | Payments Due by Period | |||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Less than 1 year | 1-3 years | 4-5 years | Over 5 years | Total | |||||||||||||
| Long-term debt(1)(2) | $ | 3,846 | $ | 6,590 | $ | 5,775 | $ | 8,810 | $ | 25,021 | ||||||||
| Operating leases | 174 | 290 | 184 | 410 | 1,058 | |||||||||||||
| Finance lease and equipment financing obligations(2) | 34 | 58 | 22 | — | 114 | |||||||||||||
| Total contractual cash obligations | $ | 4,054 | $ | 6,938 | $ | 5,981 | $ | 9,220 | $ | 26,193 |
(1) Long-term debt excludes finance lease and equipment financing obligations which are presented as a separate line item.
(2) Additional information about contractual cash obligations related to long-term debt and operating and finance leases is provided in Notes 9 and 20 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Total contractual cash obligations shown in Table 26: Long-Term Contractual Cash Obligations do not include:
•Obligations which will be settled in cash, primarily in less than one year, such as client deposits, securities sold under repurchase agreements and other short-term borrowings. Additional information about deposits, securities sold under repurchase agreements and other short-term borrowings is provided in Note 8 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
•Obligations related to derivative instruments because the derivative-related amounts recorded in our consolidated statement of condition as of December 31, 2025 did not represent the amounts that may ultimately be paid under the contracts upon settlement. Additional information about our derivative instruments is provided in Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K. We have obligations under pension and other post-retirement benefit plans, with additional information provided in Note 19 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K, which are not included in Table 26: Long-Term Contractual Cash Obligations.
| TABLE 27: OTHER COMMERCIAL COMMITMENTS | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duration of Commitment as of December 31, 2025 | ||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Less than 1 year | 1-3 years | 4-5 years | Over 5 years | Total amountscommitted(1) | |||||||||||||
| Indemnified securities financing | $ | 371,968 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 371,968 | ||||||||
| Unfunded credit facilities | 23,116 | 7,913 | 4,638 | 30 | 35,697 | |||||||||||||
| Standby letters of credit | 201 | 326 | 42 | — | 569 | |||||||||||||
| Purchase obligations(2) | 415 | 524 | 230 | 142 | 1,311 | |||||||||||||
| Total commercial commitments | $ | 395,700 | $ | 8,763 | $ | 4,910 | $ | 172 | $ | 409,545 |
(1) Total amounts committed reflect participations to independent third parties, if any.
(2) Amounts represent obligations pursuant to legally binding agreements, where we have agreed to purchase products or services with a specific minimum quantity defined at a fixed, minimum or variable price over a specified period of time.
Additional information about the commitments presented in Table 27: Other commercial commitments, except for purchase obligations, is provided in Note 12 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 91
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Operational Risk Management
Overview
Operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people and systems, or from external events. This definition excludes strategic and reputational risk.
In providing an array of products and services, we are exposed to operational risk. Operational risk may result from, but is not limited to, errors relating to transaction processing, breaches of internal control systems, or business interruption due to system failures or other events. Operational risk also includes potential legal or regulatory actions that could arise as a byproduct of our failure to maintain and execute an adequate system of internal control. In the case of an operational risk event, we could suffer financial loss and potential regulatory action, as well as reputational damage.
Unforeseen external events, including natural disasters, terrorist attacks, pandemics, global conflicts, volatility in the global equity and fixed income markets driven by recent policy developments and heightened geopolitical tensions (including changes in trade policy of the United States and of other nations, ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and in the Middle East and the recent shutdown of the U.S. federal government) may result in stress on the operating environment and increase operational risk.
Operational risk encompasses fiduciary risk and legal risk. Fiduciary risk is defined as the risk that we fail to properly exercise our fiduciary duties in our provision of products or services to clients. Legal risk is the risk of loss resulting from failure to comply with laws and contractual obligations.
Operational risk is inherent in the performance of investment servicing and investment management activities on behalf of our clients. Whether it be fiduciary risk, risk associated with execution and processing or other types of operational risk, a consistent, transparent and effective operational risk framework is key to identifying, monitoring and managing operational risk. To mitigate these risks, we have established policies, procedures, internal control standards and an operational risk framework. Controls are designed to manage operational risk at levels appropriate to our business model, the business environment and the markets in which we operate taking into account factors such as regulation and competition.
The organizational framework for operational risk is based on risk management activities comprising:
•Governance: We have established governance structures to oversee and assess
our operational risk management activities and our operational risk policy;
•Accountability: Business managers are responsible for maintaining an effective system of internal controls commensurate with their risk profiles and in accordance with State Street policies and procedures. Operational risk management is the second line function responsible for developing risk management policies and tools for assessing, measuring and monitoring operational risk; and
•Operational Risk Management Framework: An established operational risk management framework supports and drives the identification, assessment, mitigation, control and monitoring, and reporting of operational risk.
Governance
Our Board is responsible for the approval and oversight of our overall operational risk policy.
The operational risk policy establishes our approach to our management of operational risk across our business. The policy identifies the responsibilities of individuals and committees charged with oversight of the management of operational risk, and articulates a broad mandate that supports implementation of the operational risk framework.
Executive management manages and oversees our operational risk through membership on risk management committees, including TORC and its subcommittee, the Operational Risk and Controls Committee, each of which ultimately reports to a committee of the Board.
The Operational Risk and Controls Committee, chaired by the Head of Operational Risk Management, oversees the operational risk framework and policies, reviews and monitors program outputs and metrics, and monitors resolution of significant operational risk matters.
Accountability
Accountability for managing operational risk spans the first and second lines of defense:
•The Chief Compliance and Operational Risk Officer, a member of the CRO’s executive management team, leads ERM’s corporate ORM group. ORM is responsible for developing risk management policies and tools for assessing, measuring, monitoring and managing operational risk. The ORM function includes risk oversight of all lines of business and functions; and
•Business Managers are responsible for managing day to day operations, maintaining an effective system of internal controls and
State Street Corporation | 92
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
managing operational risks within risk appetite in its normal course of business.
Corporate Audit, as a third line of defense, performs separate reviews of the application of operational risk management practices and methodologies utilized across our business.
Operational Risk Management Framework
The operational risk management framework has been established in a structured manner to drive the identification, assessment, mitigation, control and monitoring, and reporting of operational risk. Operational risk management framework includes key elements such as risk and control self-assessment, capital analysis, monitoring and reporting and documentation and guidelines. These framework components are described below.
Risk and Control Self-Assessment
The objective of the risk and control self-assessment program is to proactively identify, assess and manage operational risks and related controls associated with day-to-day operations. A key component of understanding how risks are managed is to understand the effectiveness of controls. Effectiveness of controls is concluded through testing, both internal and external, business control assurance activities and self-assessments along with other control function reviews, such as a SOX testing program.
Capital Analysis
The primary measurement tool used to quantify operational risk capital and RWA related to operational risk under the advanced approaches is the loss distribution approach (LDA) model. Such required capital and RWA totaled $4.13 billion and $51.64 billion, respectively, as of December 31, 2025, compared to $3.95 billion and $49.35 billion, respectively, as of December 31, 2024; refer to the “Capital” section in “Financial Condition,” of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
The LDA model incorporates the three required operational risk elements described below:
•Internal loss event data is collected from across our business in conformity with our operating loss policy that establishes the requirements for collecting and reporting individual loss events;
•External loss event data from other financial institutions supplements our internal loss data pool with respect to loss event severity; and
•Business environment and internal control factors are those characteristics of a bank’s internal and external operating environment that bear an exposure to operational risk.
Monitoring and Reporting
The objective of risk monitoring is to proactively monitor the changing business environment and corresponding operational risk exposure. It is achieved through monitoring tools that are designed to help us understand changes in the business environment, internal control factors, risk metrics, risk assessments, exposures and operating effectiveness, as well as details of loss events and progress on risk initiatives implemented to mitigate potential risk exposures.
Operational risk reporting is intended to provide transparency, thereby enabling management to manage risk, provide oversight and escalate issues in a timely manner. It is designed to allow the business units, executive management, and the Board’s control functions and committees to gain insight into activities that may result in risks and potential exposures.
Documentation and Guidelines
Documentation and guidelines allow for consistency and repeatability of the various processes that support the operational risk framework across our business.
Operational risk guidelines document our practices and describe the key elements in a business unit’s operational risk management program. The purpose of the guidelines is to set forth and define key operational risk terms, provide further detail on our operational risk programs, and detail the business units’ responsibilities to identify, assess, measure, monitor and report operational risk. The guideline supports our operational risk policy.
Data standards have been established with the intent of maintaining consistent data repositories and systems that are controlled, accurate and available on a timely basis to support operational risk management.
Information Technology Risk Management
Overview and Principles
We define information technology risk as the risk associated with the use, ownership, operation and adoption of information technology. Information technology risk includes risks potentially triggered by non-compliance with regulatory obligations or expectations, information security or cyber incidents, internal control and process gaps, operational events and adoption of new business technologies.
The principal technology risks within our risk policy and risk appetite framework include:
•Third party risk;
•Business disruption and technology resiliency risk;
•Technology change management risk;
•Cyber and information security risk;
State Street Corporation | 93
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
•Technology asset and configuration risk; and
•Technology obsolescence risk.
Governance
Our Board is responsible for the approval and oversight of our overall technology risk framework and program. It does so through the TOPS, which reviews and approves our risk policy and appetite framework annually as well as our cybersecurity policy and related standards.
Our risk policy establishes the approach to management of technology risk across our businesses. The policy identifies the responsibilities of individuals and committees charged with oversight of the management of technology risk and articulates a broad mandate that supports implementation of the risk framework.
Risk control functions in the business are responsible for adopting and executing the risk framework and reporting requirements. They do this, in part, by developing and maintaining an inventory of critical applications and supporting infrastructure, as well as identifying, assessing and measuring technology risk. They are also responsible for monitoring and evaluating risk on a continual basis using key risk indicators, risk reporting and adopting appropriate risk responses to risk issues.
Enterprise Technology Risk Management (ETRM) is the separate risk function responsible for the technology risk management oversight and appetite, and technology risk framework development and execution. ETRM also performs overall technology risk monitoring and reporting to the Board, and provides a separate view of the technology risk posture to executive leadership.
We manage technology risks by:
•Coordinating various risk assessment and risk management activities, including ERM operational risk programs;
•Establishing, through TORC and TOPS of the Board, the enterprise level technology risk and cyber risk appetite and limits;
•Producing enterprise level risk reporting, aggregation, dashboards, profiles and risk appetite statements;
•Validating appropriateness of reporting of information technology and cybersecurity risks and risk acceptance to senior management risk committees and the Board;
•Promoting a strong technology and cybersecurity risk culture through communication;
•Serving as an escalation and challenge point for risk policy guidance, expectations and clarifications;
•Assessing effectiveness of key enterprise information technology and cybersecurity risks, including adoption of emerging technologies and internal control remediation programs; and
•Providing risk oversight, challenge and monitoring for the Enterprise Business Continuity Services function and Third Party Management program, including the collection of risk appetite, metrics and key risk indicators, and reviewing issue management processes and consistent program adoption.
Cybersecurity Risk Management
Cybersecurity risk is managed as part of our overall information technology risk as outlined above. For additional information about our cybersecurity risk management program, refer to Item 1C in this Form 10-K.
The TORC assesses and manages the effectiveness of our cybersecurity program, which is overseen by the TOPS of our Board. The TOPS receives regular cybersecurity updates throughout the year and is responsible for reviewing and approving the policy on an annual basis.
Market Risk Management
Market risk is the risk of loss that could result from broad market movements, such as changes in the general level of interest rates, credit spreads, foreign exchange rates or commodity prices. We are exposed to market risk in both our trading and certain of our non-trading, or asset and liability management, activities.
Information about the market risk associated with our trading activities is provided below under “Trading Activities.” Information about the market risk associated with our non-trading activities, which consists primarily of interest rate risk, is provided below under “Asset and Liability Management Activities.”
Trading Activities
In the conduct of our trading activities, we assume market risk, the level of which is a function of our overall risk appetite, business objectives and liquidity needs, our clients’ requirements and market volatility and our execution against those factors.
We engage in trading activities primarily to support our clients’ needs and to contribute to our overall corporate earnings and liquidity. In connection with certain of these trading activities, we enter into a variety of derivative financial instruments to support our clients' needs and to manage our interest rate and currency risk. These activities are generally intended to generate foreign exchange trading services revenue and to manage potential earnings
State Street Corporation | 94
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
volatility. In addition, we provide services related to derivatives in our role as both a manager and a servicer of financial assets.
Our clients use derivatives to manage the financial risks associated with their investment goals and business activities. With the growth of cross-border investing, our clients often enter into foreign exchange forward contracts to convert currency for international investments and to manage the currency risk in their international investment portfolios. As an active participant in the foreign exchange markets, we provide foreign exchange forward and option contracts in support of these client needs, and act as a dealer in the currency markets.
As part of our trading activities, we assume positions in the foreign exchange and interest rate markets by buying and selling cash instruments and entering into derivative instruments, including foreign exchange forward contracts, foreign exchange options and interest rate swaps, interest rate forward contracts and interest rate futures. As of December 31, 2025, the notional amount of these derivative contracts was $2.92 trillion, of which $2.78 trillion was composed of foreign exchange forward, swap and spot contracts. We seek to match positions closely with the objective of mitigating related currency and interest rate risk. All foreign exchange contracts are valued daily at current market rates.
Governance
Our assumption of market risk in our trading activities is an integral part of our corporate risk appetite. The RC of the Board reviews and oversees our management of market risk, including the approval of key market risk policies and the receipt and review of regular market risk reporting, as well as periodic updates on selected market risk topics.
The Trading and Markets Risk Committee, a subcommittee of the previously described CMRC (refer to “Risk Committees”), oversees all market risk-taking activities across our business associated with trading. The TMRC, which reports to the CMRC, is composed of members of ERM, our State Street Markets business and our Global Treasury group, other control functions, as well as our senior executives who manage our trading businesses and other members of management who possess specialized knowledge. The TMRC meets regularly to monitor the management of our trading market risk activities.
Our business units identify, manage and are responsible for the market risks inherent in their businesses. A dedicated market risk management group within ERM, and other groups within ERM, work with those business units to assist them in the identification, assessment, monitoring, management and control of market risk, and assist business unit
managers with their market risk management and measurement activities. ERM provides an additional line of oversight, support and coordination designed to promote the consistent identification, measurement and management of market risk across business units, separate from those business units’ discrete activities.
The ERM market risk management group is responsible for the management of corporate-wide market risk, the monitoring of key market risks and the development and maintenance of market risk management policies, guidelines and standards aligned with our corporate risk appetite. This group also establishes and approves market risk tolerance limits and trading authorities based on, but not limited to, market risk measures such as notional amounts, sensitivities, VaR and stress. Such limits and authorities are specified in our trading and market risk guidelines which govern our management of trading market risk.
Risk Appetite
Our corporate market risk appetite is specified in policy statements that outline the governance, responsibilities and requirements surrounding the identification, measurement, analysis, management and communication of market risk arising from our trading activities. These policy statements also set forth the market risk control framework designed to monitor, support, manage and control this portion of our risk appetite. All groups involved in the management and control of market risk associated with trading activities are required to comply with the qualitative and quantitative elements of these policy statements. Our trading market risk control framework is composed of the following:
•A trading market risk management process led by ERM, separate from the business units’ discrete activities;
•Defined responsibilities and authorities for the primary groups involved in trading market risk management;
•A trading market risk measurement methodology that captures correlation effects and allows aggregation of market risk across risk types, markets and business lines;
•Daily monitoring, analysis and reporting of market risk exposures associated with trading activities against market risk limits;
•A defined limit structure and escalation process in the event of a market risk limit excess;
•Use of VaR models to measure the one-day market risk exposure of trading positions;
State Street Corporation | 95
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
•Use of VaR as a ten-day-based regulatory capital measure of the market risk exposure of trading positions;
•Use of non-VaR-based limits and other controls;
•Use of stressed-VaR models, stress-testing analysis and scenario analysis to support the trading market risk measurement and management process by assessing how portfolios and global business lines perform under extreme market conditions;
•Use of back-testing as a diagnostic tool to assess the accuracy of VaR models and other risk management techniques; and
•An approval process for new products that requires market risk teams to assess trading-related market risks and apply risk tolerance limits to proposed new products and business activities.
We use our CAP to assess our overall capital and liquidity in relation to our risk profile and provide a comprehensive strategy for maintaining appropriate capital and liquidity levels. With respect to market risk associated with trading activities, our risk management and our calculations of regulatory capital are based primarily on our internal VaR models and stress testing analysis. As discussed in detail under “Value-at-Risk and Stressed VaR” below, VaR is measured daily by ERM.
The TMRC oversees our market risk exposure in relation to limits established within our risk appetite framework. These limits define threshold levels for VaR- and stressed VaR-based measures and are applicable to all trading positions subject to regulatory capital requirements. These limits are designed to mitigate undue concentration of market risk exposure, in light of the primarily non-proprietary nature of our trading activities. The risk appetite framework and associated limits are reviewed and approved by the RC of the Board.
Covered Positions
Our trading positions are subject to regulatory market risk capital requirements if they meet the regulatory definition of a “covered position.” A covered position is generally defined by the U.S. Agencies as an on- or off-balance sheet position associated with the organization’s trading activities that is free of any restrictions on its tradability, but does not include intangible assets, certain credit derivatives recognized as guarantees and certain equity positions not publicly traded. All FX and commodity positions are considered covered positions, regardless of the accounting treatment they receive.
Our covered positions consist primarily of the trading portfolios held by our State Street Markets
business. They also arise from certain positions held by our Global Treasury group. These trading positions include products such as foreign exchange spot, foreign exchange forwards, non-deliverable forwards, foreign exchange options, foreign exchange funding swaps, currency futures, financial futures and interest rate futures. New activities are analyzed to determine if the positions arising from such new activities meet the definition of a covered position and conform to our trading and market risk guidelines.
We use spot rates, forward points, yield curves and discount factors imported from third-party sources to measure the value of our covered positions, and we use such values to mark our covered positions to market on a daily basis. These values are subject to separate validation by us in order to evaluate reasonableness and consistency with market experience. The mark-to-market gain or loss on spot transactions is calculated by applying the spot rate to the foreign currency principal and comparing the resultant base currency amount to the original transaction principal. The mark-to-market gain or loss on a forward foreign exchange contract or forward cash flow contract is determined as the difference between the life-to-date (historical) value of the cash flow and the value of the cash flow at the inception of the transaction. The mark-to-market gain or loss on interest rate swaps is determined by discounting the future cash flows from each leg of the swap transaction.
Value-at-Risk and Stressed VaR
We use a variety of risk measurement tools and methodologies, including VaR, which is an estimate of potential loss for a given period within a stated statistical confidence interval. We use a risk measurement methodology to measure trading-related VaR daily. We have adopted standards for measuring trading-related VaR, and we maintain regulatory capital for market risk associated with our trading activities in conformity with currently applicable bank regulatory market risk requirements.
We utilize an internal VaR model to calculate our regulatory market risk capital requirements. We use a historical simulation model to calculate daily VaR- and stressed VaR-based measures for our covered positions in conformity with regulatory requirements. Our VaR model seeks to capture identified material risk factors associated with our covered positions, including risks arising from market movements such as changes in foreign exchange rates, interest rates and option-implied volatilities.
We have adopted standards and guidelines to value our covered positions which govern our VaR- and stressed VaR-based measures. Our regulatory VaR-based measure is calculated based on historical volatilities of market risk factors during a two-year
State Street Corporation | 96
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
observation period calibrated to a one-tail, 99% confidence interval and a ten-business-day holding period. We also use the same platform to calculate a one-tail, 99% confidence interval, one-business-day VaR for internal risk management purposes. A 99% one-tail confidence interval implies that daily trading losses are not expected to exceed the estimated VaR more than 1% of the time, or less than three business days out of a year.
Our market risk models, including our VaR model, are subject to change in connection with the governance, validation and back-testing processes described below. These models can change as a result of changes in our business activities, our historical experiences, market forces and events, regulations and regulatory interpretations and other factors. In addition, the models are subject to continuing regulatory review and approval. Changes in our models may result in changes in our measurements of our market risk exposures, including VaR, and related measures, including regulatory capital. These changes could result in material changes in those risk measurements and related measures as calculated and compared from period to period.
Value-at-Risk Measures
VaR measures are based on the most recent two years of historical price movements for instruments and related risk factors to which we have exposure. The instruments in question are limited to foreign exchange spot, forward and options contracts and interest rate contracts, including futures and interest rate swaps. Historically, these instruments have exhibited a higher degree of liquidity relative to other available capital markets instruments. As a result, the VaR measures shown reflect our ability to rapidly adjust exposures in highly dynamic markets. For this reason, risk inventory, in the form of net open positions, across all currencies is typically limited. In addition, long and short positions in major, as well as minor, currencies provide risk offsets that limit our potential downside exposure.
Our VaR methodology uses a historical simulation approach based on market-observed changes in foreign exchange rates, U.S. and non-U.S. interest rates and implied volatilities, and incorporates the resulting diversification benefits provided from the mix of our trading positions. Our VaR model incorporates approximately 5,000 risk factors and includes correlations among currency, interest rates and other market rates.
All VaR measures are subject to limitations and must be interpreted accordingly. Some, but not all, of the limitations of our VaR methodology include the following:
•Compared to a shorter observation period, a two-year observation period is slower to reflect increases in market volatility (although temporary increases in market volatility will affect the calculation of VaR for a longer period); consequently, in periods of sudden increases in volatility or increasing volatility, in each case relative to the prior two-year period, the calculation of VaR may understate current risk;
•Compared to a longer observation period, a two-year observation period may not reflect as many past periods of volatility in the markets, because such past volatility is no longer in the observation period; consequently, historical market scenarios of high volatility, even if similar to current or likely future market circumstances, may fall outside the two-year observation period, resulting in a potential understatement of current risk;
•The VaR-based measure is calibrated to a specified level of confidence and does not indicate the potential magnitude of losses beyond this confidence level;
•In certain cases, VaR-based measures approximate the impact of changes in risk factors on the values of positions and portfolios; this may happen because the number of inputs included in the VaR model is necessarily limited; for example, yield curve risk factors do not exist for all future dates;
•The use of historical market information may not be predictive of future events, particularly those that are extreme in nature; this “backward-looking” limitation can cause VaR to understate or overstate risk;
•The effect of extreme and rare market movements is difficult to estimate; this may result from non-linear risk sensitivities as well as the potential for actual volatility and correlation levels to differ from assumptions implicit in the VaR calculations; and
•Intra-day risk is not captured.
We calculate a stressed VaR-based measure using the same model we use to calculate VaR, but with model inputs calibrated to historical data from a range of continuous 12-month periods that reflect significant financial stress. The stressed VaR model is designed to identify the second-worst outcome occurring in the worst continuous one-year rolling period since July 2007. This stressed VaR meets the regulatory requirement as the rolling ten-day period with an outcome that is worse than 99% of other outcomes during that 12-month period of financial
State Street Corporation | 97
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
stress. For each portfolio, the stress period is determined algorithmically by seeking the one-year time horizon that produces the largest ten-business-day VaR from within the available historical data. Our historical dataset encompasses multiple periods of significant market stress, including major global financial disruptions and episodes of heightened volatility across foreign exchange, credit, equity, and debt markets. As the historical data set used to determine the stress period expands over time, future market stress events will be incorporated.
Stress Testing
We have a corporate-wide stress testing program in place that incorporates techniques to measure the potential loss we could suffer in a hypothetical scenario of adverse economic and financial conditions. We also monitor concentrations of risk such as concentration by branch, risk component, and currency pairs. We conduct stress testing on a daily basis based on selected historical stress events that are relevant to our positions in order to estimate the potential impact to our current portfolio should similar market conditions recur, and we also perform stress testing as part of the Federal Reserve’s DFAST process. Stress testing is conducted, analyzed and reported at the corporate, trading desk, division and risk-factor level (for example, exchange risk, interest rate risk and volatility risk).
Stress testing results and limits are actively monitored on a daily basis by ERM and reported to the TMRC. Limit breaches are addressed by ERM risk managers in conjunction with the business units, escalated as appropriate, and reviewed by the TMRC. In addition, we have established several action triggers that prompt review by management and the implementation of a remediation plan.
We perform scenario analysis daily based on selected historical stress events that are relevant to our positions in order to estimate the potential impact to our current portfolio should similar market conditions recur. Relevant scenarios are chosen from an inventory of historical financial stresses and applied to our current portfolio. These historical event scenarios involve spot foreign exchange, credit,
equity, unforeseen geo-political events and natural disasters, and government and central bank intervention scenarios. We continue to update our inventory of historical stress scenarios as new stress conditions emerge in the financial markets.
As each of the historical stress events is associated with a different time horizon, in some instances we normalize results by scaling down the longer horizon events to a ten-day horizon and keeping the shorter horizon events (i.e., events that are shorter than ten days) at their original terms. We also conduct sensitivity analysis daily to calculate the impact of a large predefined shock in a specific risk factor or a group of risk factors on our current portfolio. These predefined shocks include parallel and non-parallel yield curve shifts and foreign exchange spot and volatility surface shifts. In a parallel shift scenario, we apply a constant factor shift across all yield curve tenors. In a non-parallel shift scenario, we apply different shock levels to different tenors of a yield curve, rather than shifting the entire curve by a constant amount. Non-parallel shifts include steepening, flattening and butterflies.
Validation and Back-Testing
We perform frequent back-testing to assess the accuracy of our VaR-based model in estimating loss at the stated confidence level. This back-testing involves the comparison of estimated VaR model outputs to daily, actual P&L outcomes observed from daily market movements. We back-test our VaR model using “clean” P&L, which excludes non-trading revenue such as fees, commissions and NII, as well as estimated revenue from intraday trading.
Our VaR definition of trading losses excludes items that are not specific to the price movement of the trading assets and liabilities themselves, such as fees, commissions, changes to reserves and gains or losses from intraday activity.
We experienced no back-testing exceptions in 2025 and one back-testing exception in 2024. At a 99% confidence interval, the statistical expectation for a VaR model is to witness one exception every hundred trading days (or two to three exceptions per year).
State Street Corporation | 98
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Our model validation process also evaluates the integrity of our VaR models through the use of regular outcome analysis. This outcome analysis includes back-testing, which compares the VaR model’s predictions to actual outcomes using out-of-sample information. Consistent with regulatory guidance, the back-testing compared a “clean” P&L, defined above, with the one-day VaR produced by the model. The back-testing was performed for a time period not used for model development. The number of occurrences where “clean” trading-book P&L exceeded the one-day VaR was within our expected VaR tolerance level.
Market Risk Reporting
Our ERM market risk management group is responsible for market risk monitoring and reporting. We use a variety of systems and controlled market feeds from third-party services to compile data for several daily, weekly and monthly management reports.
The following tables present VaR and stressed VaR associated with our trading activities for covered positions held during the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively, as measured by our VaR methodology. Diversification effect in the tables below represents the difference between total VaR and the sum of the VaRs for each trading activity. This effect arises because the risks present in our trading activities are not perfectly correlated.
| TABLE 28: TEN-DAY VALUE-AT-RISK ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES FOR COVERED POSITIONS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended December 31, 2025 | As of December 31, 2025 | Year Ended December 31, 2024 | As of December 31, 2024 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| State Street Markets | $ | 8,157 | $ | 21,806 | $ | 4,001 | $ | 5,526 | $ | 13,909 | $ | 31,813 | $ | 6,253 | $ | 12,890 | ||||||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 3,478 | 8,943 | 571 | 4,302 | 2,268 | 8,332 | 468 | 2,451 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (3,220) | (8,942) | (2) | (4,451) | (2,056) | (7,807) | (276) | (2,851) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total VaR | $ | 8,415 | $ | 21,807 | $ | 4,570 | $ | 5,377 | $ | 14,121 | $ | 32,338 | $ | 6,445 | $ | 12,490 | ||||||||||||||||
| TABLE 29: TEN-DAY STRESSED VALUE-AT-RISK ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES FOR COVERED POSITIONS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Year Ended December 31, 2025 | As of December 31, 2025 | Year Ended December 31, 2024 | As of December 31, 2024 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| State Street Markets | $ | 45,578 | $ | 94,077 | $ | 20,392 | $ | 55,492 | $ | 44,313 | $ | 72,735 | $ | 16,172 | $ | 41,379 | ||||||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 12,067 | 32,666 | 5,363 | 12,475 | 8,522 | 23,717 | 3,943 | 7,790 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (10,761) | (29,355) | (4,479) | (14,479) | (7,581) | (22,417) | (1,257) | (4,580) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Stressed VaR | $ | 46,884 | $ | 97,388 | $ | 21,276 | $ | 53,488 | $ | 45,254 | $ | 74,035 | $ | 18,858 | $ | 44,589 |
The average and period-end stressed VaR-based measures were approximately $47 million and $53 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2025, compared to approximately $45 million and $45 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2024. The increase in average stressed VaR was primarily attributed to higher interest rate risk, with a greater variability observed in daily stressed VaR outcomes.
The VaR-based measures as presented in the preceding tables are primarily a reflection of the overall level of market volatility and our appetite for taking market risk in our trading activities.
We have in the past and may in the future modify and adjust our models and methodologies used to calculate VaR and stressed VaR, subject to regulatory review and approval, and any future modifications and adjustments may result in changes in our VaR-based and stressed VaR-based measures.
The following tables present the VaR and stressed-VaR associated with our trading activities attributable to foreign exchange risk, interest rate risk and volatility risk as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. Diversification effect in the tables below represents the difference between total VaR and the sum of the VaRs for each trading activity. This effect arises because the risks present in our trading activities are not perfectly correlated.
| TABLE 30: TEN-DAY VaR ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES BY RISK FACTOR(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended December 31, 2025 | Year Ended December 31, 2024 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | ||||||||||||||||||
| By component: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| State Street Markets | $ | 5,045 | $ | 3,938 | $ | 225 | $ | 3,474 | $ | 10,422 | $ | 180 | ||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 3,339 | 2,897 | — | 409 | 2,505 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (4,334) | (2,210) | — | (388) | (2,920) | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total VaR | $ | 4,050 | $ | 4,625 | $ | 225 | $ | 3,495 | $ | 10,007 | $ | 180 |
State Street Corporation | 99
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 31: TEN-DAY STRESSED VaR ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES BY RISK FACTOR(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended December 31, 2025 | Year Ended December 31, 2024 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | ||||||||||||||||||
| By component: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| State Street Markets | $ | 12,135 | $ | 76,853 | $ | 519 | $ | 7,357 | $ | 43,800 | $ | 518 | ||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 11,168 | 6,627 | — | 6,246 | 7,202 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (12,982) | (7,941) | — | (5,017) | (8,671) | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total Stressed VaR | $ | 10,321 | $ | 75,539 | $ | 519 | $ | 8,586 | $ | 42,331 | $ | 518 |
(1) For purposes of risk attribution by component, foreign exchange refers only to the risk from market movements in period-end rates. Forwards, futures, options and swaps with maturities greater than period-end have embedded interest rate risk that is captured by the measures used for interest rate risk. Accordingly, the interest rate risk embedded in these foreign exchange instruments is included in the interest rate risk component.
Asset and Liability Management Activities
The primary objective of asset and liability management is to provide sustainable NII under varying economic conditions, while protecting the economic value of the assets and liabilities carried on our consolidated statement of condition from the adverse effects of changes in interest rates. While many market factors affect the level of NII and the economic value of our assets and liabilities, one of the most significant factors is our exposure to movements in interest rates. Most of our NII is earned from the investment of client deposits generated by our businesses. We invest these client deposits in assets that conform generally to the liquidity characteristics of our balance sheet liabilities, as well as the currency composition of our significant non-U.S. dollar denominated client deposits.
We quantify NII sensitivity using an earnings simulation model that includes our expectations for new business growth, changes in balance sheet mix and investment portfolio positioning. This measure compares our baseline view of NII over a twelve-month horizon, based on our internal forecast of interest rates, to a wide range of rate shocks. Our baseline view of NII is updated on a regular basis. Table 32, Key Interest Rates for Baseline Forecasts, presents the spot and 12-month forward rates used in our baseline forecasts at December 31, 2025 and 2024. Our baseline rate forecast as of December 31, 2025 was generally consistent with common market expectations for global central bank actions at that point in time, which implied that rate cuts will continue in 2026.
| TABLE 32: KEY INTEREST RATES FOR BASELINE FORECASTS | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | ||||||||||||||||
| Fed Funds Target | ECB Target(1) | 10-Year Treasury | Fed Funds Target | ECB Target(1) | 10-Year Treasury | ||||||||||||
| Spot rates | 3.75 | % | 2.00 | % | 4.17 | % | 4.50 | % | 3.00 | % | 4.57 | % | |||||
| 12-month forward rates | 3.00 | 2.00 | 4.23 | 4.00 | 1.75 | 4.59 |
(1) ECB deposit facility rate.
In Table 33: Net Interest Income Sensitivity, we report the expected change in NII over the next twelve months from instantaneous 100 basis point shocks to various tenors on the yield curve relative to our baseline rate forecast, including the impacts from U.S. and non-U.S. rates. Each scenario assumes no management action is taken to mitigate the adverse effects of changes in interest rates on our financial performance. While investment securities balances and composition can fluctuate with the level of rates as prepayment assumptions change, for purposes of this analysis our deposit balances and mix are assumed to remain consistent with the baseline forecast. The results of these scenarios should not be extrapolated for other (e.g., more severe) shocks as the impact of interest rate shocks may not be linear. In lower rate scenarios, the full impact of the shock is realized for all currencies even if the result is negative interest rates.
| TABLE 33: NET INTEREST INCOME SENSITIVITY | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | U.S. Dollar | All Other Currencies | Total | U.S. Dollar | All Other Currencies | Total | ||||||||||||||||
| Rate change: | Benefit (Exposure) | Benefit (Exposure) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Parallel shifts: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| +100 bps shock | $ | 82 | $ | 236 | $ | 318 | $ | 19 | $ | 292 | $ | 311 | ||||||||||
| –100 bps shock | (84) | (218) | (302) | (16) | (254) | (270) | ||||||||||||||||
| Steeper yield curve: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| +100 bps shift in long-end rates(1) | 12 | 16 | 28 | 28 | 22 | 50 | ||||||||||||||||
| -100 bps shift in short-end rates(1) | (67) | (202) | (269) | 13 | (233) | (220) | ||||||||||||||||
| Flatter yield curve: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| +100 bps shift in short-end rates(1) | 67 | 220 | 287 | (9) | 270 | 261 | ||||||||||||||||
| -100 bps shift in long-end rates(1) | (23) | (16) | (39) | (29) | (22) | (51) |
(1) The short end is 0-3 months. The long end is 5 years and above. Interim term points are interpolated.
State Street Corporation | 100
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Our overall balance sheet, including all currencies, continues to be asset sensitive with an NII benefit in higher rate scenarios and NII exposure in lower rate scenarios, primarily driven by our sensitivities on the short-end of the yield curve. Compared to December 31, 2024, our USD balance sheet’s NII asset sensitivity has increased, primarily due to higher client deposit balances and a lower investment portfolio duration. Our non-USD NII asset sensitivity has reduced compared to December 31, 2024, primarily due to interest rate hedging activity.
EVE sensitivity is a discounted cash flow model designed to estimate the fair value of assets and liabilities under a series of interest rate shocks over a long-term horizon. In the following table, we report our EVE sensitivity to 200 bps instantaneous rate shocks, relative to spot interest rates. EVE sensitivity is dependent on the timing of interest and principal cash flows. Also, the measure only evaluates the spot balance sheet and does not include the impact of new business assumptions.
| TABLE 34: ECONOMIC VALUE OF EQUITY SENSITIVITY | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, | ||||||
| (In millions) | 2025 | 2024 | ||||
| Rate change: | Benefit (Exposure) | |||||
| +200 bps shock | $ | (756) | $ | (1,024) | ||
| –200 bps shock | 452 | 1,205 |
As of December 31, 2025, EVE sensitivity remains exposed to upward shifts in interest rates. Compared to December 31, 2024, our sensitivity has reduced, primarily driven by a decrease in investment portfolio duration.
Both NII sensitivity and EVE sensitivity are routinely monitored as market conditions change. For additional information about our Asset and Liability Management Activities, refer to Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, “Risk Management.”
Model Risk Management
State Street uses models to support its financial decision-making and business activities. Model risk is the potential for adverse outcomes due to incorrectly implemented or misused model outputs. Model Risk Management (MRM) is a separate control function within Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) responsible for specifying and maintaining the firmwide MRM policy and framework designed to monitor and control model risk within our risk appetite.
The MRM framework includes:
•Model risk governance that defines roles and responsibilities, including the authority to restrict model usage, provides policies and guidance, monitors compliance, and reports regularly to relevant internal committees and
the Board of Directors on the overall degree of model risk across the firm;
•Model development standards that focus on conceptual soundness and computational accuracy, data quality, robustness, stability, and sensitivity to assumptions; and
•Model validation standards designed to verify that models are conceptually sound, are computationally accurate, are performing as expected, and are in line with their intended use, and evaluate the level of model risk for each model by considering the model’s materiality, usage, performance, and sufficiency of compensating controls among other factors.
The MRM function is further responsible for model identification.
Governance
Models used in the regulatory capital calculation can only be deployed for use after undergoing a model validation by ERM’s MRM group. The model validation results and/or a decision by the MRC, a subcommittee of TORC, must permit model usage or the model may not be used.
ERM’s MRM group is responsible for defining the corporate-wide model risk management framework and maintaining policies that are designed to achieve the framework’s objectives. All regulatory capital calculation models, including any artificial intelligence and machine learning models, must comply with the model risk management framework and corresponding policies. The group is responsible for overall model risk governance capabilities, with particular emphasis in the areas of model identification, model validation, model risk reporting, model performance monitoring, tracking of new model development status and committee-level review and challenge.
The MRC, which is composed of senior managers representing MRM along with functional areas and business units provides guidance and oversight to the MRM function.
Model Development and Ongoing Monitoring
Models are developed under guidelines governing data sourcing, methodology selection and model integrity testing. Model development includes a statement of purpose to align development with intended use. It may also include a comparison of alternative approaches to promote a sound modeling approach.
Model developers conduct an assessment of data quality and relevance. The development teams conduct a variety of tests of the accuracy, robustness and stability of each model.
State Street Corporation | 101
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Model owners submit models to the MVG for validation on a regular basis, as per the existing policy. The model owners also conduct ongoing monitoring of each model.
Model Validation
MVG is part of MRM within ERM and performs model validations and reviews. MVG is independent, as contemplated by applicable bank regulatory requirements, of both the developers and users of the models. MVG validates models through an evaluation process that assesses the appropriateness, accuracy, and suitability of data inputs, methodologies, documentation, assumptions, and processing code. Model validation also encompasses an assessment of model performance, sensitivity, and robustness, as well as a model’s potential limitations given its particular assumptions or deficiencies. Based on the results of its review, MVG issues a model use decision and may require remedial actions and/or compensating controls on model use. MVG also maintains a model risk rating system, which assigns a risk rating to each model based on an assessment of a model’s inherent and residual risks. These ratings aid in the understanding and reporting of model risk across the model portfolio, and enable the triaging of needs for remediation.
Although model validation is the primary method of subjecting models to independent review and challenge, in practice, a multi-step governance process provides the opportunity for challenge by multiple parties. First, MVG conducts a model validation and issues a model use decision. MVG communicates their result as one of the following three outcomes: “Approved,” “Approved with conditions,” or “Not Approved”. There are three ways in which a model can be deemed “Not approved for Use” given a validation: 1) the aggregation of the model scoring within MRM’s model risk rating system is poor enough to result in a “high” rating, 2) the scoring of one or more model risk rating system element(s) is deemed “critical” resulting in an automatic “high” rating irrespective of the other elements as the “critical” element(s) undermines the model, or 3) the remediation action is not properly taken by the due date resulting in a severe compliance breach that undercuts the model rating. Second, these decisions may be reviewed, challenged, and confirmed by the MRC. Finally, model use decisions, risk ratings, and overall levels of model risk may be escalated to and reviewed by TORC. MRM also reports regularly on model risk issues to the ERC and Board.
Strategic Risk Management
We define strategic risk as the risk to current or projected financial condition and resilience arising from adverse business decisions, poor
implementation of business decisions or lack of responsiveness to changes in the industry and operating environments. Strategic risks are influenced by changes in the competitive environment; decline in market performance or changes in our business activities; as well as by the potential secondary impacts of reputational risks, not already captured as market, interest rate, credit, operational, model or liquidity risks. We incorporate strategic risk into our assessment of our business plans and risk and capital management processes. Management of strategic risk is an integral component of all aspects of our business.
Strategic risk is managed with a long-term focus, including through oversight of the strategic plan by executive management and the Board, as well as oversight for material transformation and change initiatives, including new business and product proposals. The potential impacts of strategic risk are difficult to quantify, but we assess these through the lens of historical earnings volatility, scenario analysis and stress-testing, and management judgment, among others. Management and control of strategic risks are generally the responsibility of the business units, with oversight from the control functions, as part of their overall strategic planning and internal risk management processes.
CAPITAL
Managing our capital involves evaluating whether our actual and projected levels of capital are commensurate with our risk profile, are in compliance with all applicable regulatory requirements, and are sufficient to provide us with the financial flexibility to undertake future strategic business initiatives. We assess capital adequacy based on relevant regulatory capital requirements, as well as our own internal capital goals, targets and other relevant metrics.
Framework
Our objective with respect to management of our capital is to maintain a strong capital base in order to provide financial flexibility for our business needs, including funding corporate growth and supporting clients’ cash management needs, and to provide protection against loss to depositors and creditors. We strive to maintain an appropriate level of capital, commensurate with our risk profile, on which an attractive return to shareholders is expected to be realized over both the short and long-term, while protecting our obligations to depositors and creditors and complying with regulatory capital requirements.
Our capital management focuses on our risk exposures, the regulatory requirements applicable to us with respect to multiple capital measures, the evaluations and resulting credit ratings of the major independent rating agencies, our return on capital at
State Street Corporation | 102
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
both the consolidated and line-of-business level and our capital position relative to our peers.
Assessment of our overall capital adequacy includes the comparison of capital sources with capital uses, as well as the consideration of the quality and quantity of the various components of capital. The assessment seeks to determine the optimal level of capital and composition of capital instruments to satisfy all constituents of capital, with the lowest overall cost to shareholders. Other factors considered in our assessment of capital adequacy are strategic and contingency planning, stress testing and planned capital actions.
Capital Adequacy Process (CAP)
Our primary federal banking regulator is the Federal Reserve. Both we and State Street Bank are subject to the minimum regulatory capital requirements established by the Federal Reserve and defined in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act. State Street Bank must exceed the regulatory capital thresholds for “well capitalized” in order for our Parent Company to maintain its status as a financial holding company. Accordingly, one of our primary objectives with respect to capital management is to exceed all applicable minimum regulatory capital requirements and for State Street Bank to be “well capitalized” under the PCA guidelines established by the FDIC. Our capital management activities are conducted as part of our corporate-wide CAP and associated Capital Policy and Guidelines.
We consider capital adequacy to be a key element of our financial well-being, which affects our ability to attract and maintain client relationships; operate effectively in the global capital markets; and satisfy regulatory, security holders and shareholder needs. Capital is one of several elements that affect our credit ratings and the ratings of our principal subsidiaries.
In conformity with our Capital Policy and Guidelines, we strive to achieve and maintain specific internal capital levels, not just at a point in time, but over time and during periods of stress, to account for changes in our strategic direction, evolving economic conditions, and financial and market volatility. We have developed and implemented a corporate-wide CAP to assess our overall capital in relation to our risk profile and to provide a comprehensive strategy for maintaining appropriate capital levels. The CAP considers material risks under multiple scenarios, with an emphasis on stress scenarios, and encompasses existing processes and systems used to measure our capital adequacy.
Capital Contingency Planning
Contingency planning is an integral component of capital management. The objective of contingency
planning is to monitor current and forecast levels of select capital, liquidity and other measures that serve as early indicators of a potentially adverse capital or liquidity adequacy situation. These measures are one of the inputs used to set our internal capital adequacy level. We review these measures annually for appropriateness and relevance in relation to our financial budget and capital plan. In addition, we maintain an inventory of capital contingency actions designed to conserve or generate capital to support the unique risks in our business model, our client and investor demands and regulatory requirements.
Stress Testing
We administer a robust business-wide stress-testing program that executes stress tests each year to assess the institution’s capital adequacy and/or future performance under adverse conditions. Our stress testing program is structured around what we determine to be the key risks inherent in our business, as assessed through a recurring material risk identification process. The material risk identification process represents a bottom-up approach to identifying the institution’s most significant risk exposures across all on- and off-balance sheet risk-taking activities, including credit, market, liquidity, interest rate, operational, fiduciary, business, reputation and regulatory risks. These key risks serve as an organizing principle for much of our risk management framework, as well as reporting, including the “risk dashboard” provided to the Board.
In connection with the focus on our key risks, each stress test incorporates idiosyncratic loss events tailored to our unique risk profile and business activities. Due to the nature of our business model and our consolidated statement of condition, our risks differ from those of a traditional commercial bank. Over the past few years, stress scenarios have included a deep recession in the United States, including impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic, a break-up of the Eurozone, a severe recession in China and an oil shock precipitated by turmoil in the Middle East/North Africa region.
The Federal Reserve requires bank holding companies with total consolidated assets of $50 billion or more, which includes us, to submit a capital plan on an annual basis. The Federal Reserve uses its annual DFAST process, which incorporates hypothetical financial and economic stress scenarios, to review those capital plans and assess whether banking organizations have capital planning processes that account for idiosyncratic risks and provide for sufficient capital to continue operations throughout times of economic and financial stress. As part of its supervisory stress test process, the Federal Reserve assesses each organization’s capital adequacy, capital planning process and plans to
State Street Corporation | 103
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
distribute capital, such as dividend payments or stock purchase programs. Management and Board risk committees review, challenge and approve supervisory stress test results and assumptions before submission to the Federal Reserve.
Through the evaluation of our capital adequacy and/or future performance under adverse conditions, the stress testing process provides us important insights for capital planning, risk management and strategic decision-making.
Governance
In order to support integrated decision-making, we have identified three management elements to aid in the compatibility and coordination of our CAP:
•Risk Management - identification, measurement, monitoring and forecasting of different types of risk and their combined impact on capital adequacy;
•Capital management - determination of optimal capital levels; and
•Business Management - strategic planning, budgeting, forecasting and performance management.
We have a hierarchical structure supporting appropriate committee review of relevant risk and capital information. The ongoing responsibility for capital management rests with our Treasurer. The Capital Management group within Global Treasury is responsible for the Capital Policy and Guidelines, development of the Capital Plan, the oversight of global capital management and optimization.
The ERC provides oversight of our capital management, our capital adequacy, our internal targets and the expectations of the major independent credit rating agencies. In addition, ERC approves our balance sheet strategy and related activities. The RC of the Board assists the Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities related to the assessment and management of risk and capital. Our Capital Policy is reviewed and approved annually by the RC of the Board.
Global Systemically Important Bank
We have been identified by the Financial Stability Board and the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision as a G-SIB. Our designation as a G-SIB is based on a number of factors, as evaluated by banking regulators, and requires us to maintain an additional capital surcharge above the minimum capital ratios set forth in the Basel III rule.
We and our depositary institution subsidiaries are subject to the current Basel III minimum risk-based capital and leverage ratio guidelines.
Additional information about G-SIBs is provided under “Regulatory Capital Adequacy and Liquidity
Standards” in “Supervision and Regulation” in Business in this Form 10-K.
Regulatory Capital
We and State Street Bank are subject to the U.S. Basel III framework. We are also subject to the final market risk capital rule issued by the U.S. Agencies.
The Basel III rule provides two frameworks for monitoring capital adequacy: the “standardized approach” and the “advanced approaches”, applicable to advanced approaches banking organizations, like us. The standardized approach prescribes standardized calculations for credit risk RWA, including specified risk weights for on and certain off-balance sheet exposures. The advanced approaches consist of the Advanced Internal Ratings-Based Approach used for the calculation of credit risk RWA, and the Advanced Measurement Approach used for the calculation of operational risk RWA.
As required by the Dodd-Frank Act enacted in 2010, we and State Street Bank, as advanced approaches banking organizations, are subject to a “capital floor,” also referred to as the Collins Amendment, in the assessment of our regulatory capital adequacy, such that our risk-based capital ratios for regulatory assessment purposes are the lower of each ratio calculated under the advanced approaches and the standardized approach. Under the advanced approaches, we and State Street Bank are subject to a 2.5% CCB requirement, plus any applicable countercyclical capital buffer requirement, which is currently set at 0%. Under the standardized approach, State Street Bank is subject to the same CCB and countercyclical capital buffer requirements, but for State Street, the 2.5% CCB requirement is replaced by the SCB requirement according to the SCB rule issued in 2020. In addition, State Street is subject to a G-SIB surcharge.
The SCB replaced, under the standardized approach, the CCB with a buffer calculated as the difference between the institution’s starting and lowest projected CET1 ratios under the DFAST severely adverse scenario plus planned common stock dividend payments (as a percentage of RWA) from the fourth through seventh quarter of the DFAST planning horizon. The SCB requirement can be no less than 2.5% of RWA. Breaching the SCB or other regulatory buffer or surcharge will limit a banking organization’s ability to make capital distributions and discretionary bonus payments to executive officers.
Our SCB requirement remains at 2.5% for the period from October 1, 2025 through September 30, 2026, based on the results of the 2025 supervisory stress test. Additionally, in February 2026 the Federal Reserve Board voted to maintain the current SCB requirements until 2027.
State Street Corporation | 104
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Our minimum risk-based capital ratios as of January 1, 2025 include a CCB of 2.5% and a SCB of 2.5% for the advanced approaches and standardized approach, respectively, a G-SIB surcharge of 1.0%, and a countercyclical buffer of 0.0%. This results in minimum risk-based ratios of 8.0% for the Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) capital ratio, 9.5% for the tier 1 capital ratio, and 11.5% for the total capital ratio.
Our current G-SIB surcharge, through December 31, 2026, is 1.0%. The finalization of the data as of December 31, 2025, which will be used to calculate our G-SIB surcharge through December 31, 2027, is currently pending.
To maintain the status of the Parent Company as a financial holding company, we and our IDI subsidiaries are required, among other requirements, to be “well capitalized” as defined by Regulation Y and Regulation H.
The market risk capital rule requires us to use internal models to calculate daily measures of VaR, which reflect general market risk for certain of our trading positions defined by the rule as “covered positions,” as well as stressed-VaR measures to supplement the VaR measures. The rule also requires a public disclosure composed of qualitative and quantitative information about the market risk associated with our trading activities and our related VaR and stressed-VaR measures. The qualitative and quantitative information required by the rule is provided under “Market Risk Management” included in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
The following table presents the regulatory capital structure and related regulatory capital ratios for us and State Street Bank as of the dates indicated. We are subject to the more stringent of the risk-based capital ratios calculated under the standardized approach and those calculated under the advanced approaches in the assessment of our capital adequacy under applicable bank regulatory standards.
State Street Corporation | 105
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 35: REGULATORY CAPITAL STRUCTURE AND RELATED REGULATORY CAPITAL RATIOS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| State Street Corporation | State Street Bank | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2025 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2025 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2024 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2024 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2025 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2025 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2024 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2024 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common shareholders’ equity: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common stock and related surplus | $ | 11,209 | $ | 11,209 | $ | 11,226 | $ | 11,226 | $ | 13,333 | $ | 13,333 | $ | 13,333 | $ | 13,333 | ||||||||||||||
| Retained earnings | 31,392 | 31,392 | 29,582 | 29,582 | 16,401 | 16,401 | 15,977 | 15,977 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) | (1,043) | (1,043) | (2,100) | (2,100) | (815) | (815) | (1,805) | (1,805) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Treasury stock, at cost | (17,276) | (17,276) | (16,198) | (16,198) | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | 24,282 | 24,282 | 22,510 | 22,510 | 28,919 | 28,919 | 27,505 | 27,505 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Regulatory capital adjustments: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Goodwill and other intangible assets, net of associated deferred tax liabilities | (8,921) | (8,921) | (8,320) | (8,320) | (8,342) | (8,342) | (8,054) | (8,054) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other adjustments(1) | (549) | (549) | (391) | (391) | (419) | (419) | (278) | (278) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital | 14,812 | 14,812 | 13,799 | 13,799 | 20,158 | 20,158 | 19,173 | 19,173 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Preferred stock | 3,559 | 3,559 | 2,816 | 2,816 | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital | 18,371 | 18,371 | 16,615 | 16,615 | 20,158 | 20,158 | 19,173 | 19,173 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Qualifying subordinated long-term debt | 1,872 | 1,872 | 1,861 | 1,861 | 524 | 524 | 530 | 530 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Adjusted allowance for credit losses | 18 | 203 | — | 183 | 18 | 203 | — | 183 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total capital | $ | 20,261 | $ | 20,446 | $ | 18,476 | $ | 18,659 | $ | 20,700 | $ | 20,885 | $ | 19,703 | $ | 19,886 | ||||||||||||||
| Risk-weighted assets: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Credit risk(2) | $ | 60,594 | $ | 125,138 | $ | 63,252 | $ | 124,281 | $ | 56,438 | $ | 121,747 | $ | 57,883 | $ | 121,785 | ||||||||||||||
| Operational risk(3) | 51,638 | NA | 49,350 | NA | 50,025 | NA | 47,538 | NA | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Market risk | 2,125 | 2,125 | 2,000 | 2,000 | 2,125 | 2,125 | 2,000 | 2,000 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total risk-weighted assets | $ | 114,357 | $ | 127,263 | $ | 114,602 | $ | 126,281 | $ | 108,588 | $ | 123,872 | $ | 107,421 | $ | 123,785 | ||||||||||||||
| Capital Ratios: | 2025 Minimum Requirements Including Capital Conservation Buffer and G-SIB Surcharge(4) | 2024 Minimum Requirements Including Capital Conservation Buffer and G-SIB Surcharge(4) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital | 8.0 | % | 8.0 | % | 13.0 | % | 11.6 | % | 12.0 | % | 10.9 | % | 18.6 | % | 16.3 | % | 17.8 | % | 15.5 | % | ||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital | 9.5 | 9.5 | 16.1 | 14.4 | 14.5 | 13.2 | 18.6 | 16.3 | 17.8 | 15.5 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Total capital | 11.5 | 11.5 | 17.7 | 16.1 | 16.1 | 14.8 | 19.1 | 16.9 | 18.3 | 16.1 |
(1) Other adjustments within CET1 capital primarily include disallowed deferred tax assets, cash flow hedges that are not recognized at fair value on the balance sheet, and the overfunded portion of our defined benefit pension plan obligation net of associated deferred tax liabilities.
(2) Under the advanced approaches, credit risk RWA includes a CVA which reflects the risk of potential fair value adjustments for credit risk reflected in our valuation of OTC derivative contracts. We used a simple CVA approach in conformity with the Basel III advanced approaches.
(3) Under the current advanced approaches rules and regulatory guidance concerning operational risk models, RWA attributable to operational risk can vary substantially from period-to-period, without direct correlation to the effects of a particular loss event on our results of operations and financial condition and impacting dates and periods that may differ from the dates and periods as of and during which the loss event is reflected in our financial statements, with the timing and categorization dependent on the processes for model updates and, if applicable, model revalidation and regulatory review and related supervisory processes. An individual loss event can have a significant effect on the output of our operational RWA under the advanced approaches depending on the severity of the loss event and its categorization among the seven Basel-defined UOMs.
(4) Minimum requirements include a CCB of 2.5% and a SCB of 2.5% for the advanced approaches and the standardized approach, respectively, a G-SIB surcharge of 1.0% and a countercyclical buffer of 0%.Our SCB requirement remains at 2.5% for the period from October 1, 2025 through September 30, 2026, based on the results of the 2025 supervisory stress test. Additionally, in February 2026 the Federal Reserve Board voted to maintain the current SCB requirements until 2027.
NA Not applicable
Our CET1 capital increased $1.01 billion as of December 31, 2025 compared to December 31, 2024, under both the advanced approaches and standardized approach, primarily due to an increase in net income and improved AOCI, partially offset by dividends declared and common share repurchases.
Our Tier 1 capital increased $1.76 billion as of December 31, 2025 compared to December 31, 2024 under both the advanced approaches and standardized approach, due to the increase in CET1 capital and net issuance of preferred stock in 2025.
Our Tier 2 capital remained relatively flat as of December 31, 2025 compared to December 31, 2024, under the advanced approaches and standardized approach.
Total capital increased $1.79 billion as of December 31, 2025 compared to December 31, 2024, under the advanced approaches and standardized approach, due to the increase in CET1 capital and net issuance of preferred stock in 2025.
State Street Corporation | 106
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The table below presents a roll-forward of CET1 capital, Tier 1 capital and total capital for the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024.
| TABLE 36: CAPITAL ROLL-FORWARD | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2025 | Basel III Standardized Approach December, 31, 2025 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2024 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2024 | ||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital balance, beginning of period | $ | 13,799 | $ | 13,799 | $ | 12,971 | $ | 12,971 | ||||||
| Net income | 2,945 | 2,945 | 2,687 | 2,687 | ||||||||||
| Changes in treasury stock, at cost | (1,078) | (1,078) | (1,173) | (1,173) | ||||||||||
| Dividends declared | (1,135) | (1,135) | (1,062) | (1,062) | ||||||||||
| Goodwill and other intangible assets, net of associated deferred tax liabilities | (601) | (601) | 150 | 150 | ||||||||||
| Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)(1) | 1,057 | 1,057 | 254 | 254 | ||||||||||
| Other adjustments(1) | (175) | (175) | (28) | (28) | ||||||||||
| Changes in common equity tier 1 capital | 1,013 | 1,013 | 828 | 828 | ||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital balance, end of period | 14,812 | 14,812 | 13,799 | 13,799 | ||||||||||
| Additional tier 1 capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital balance, beginning of period | 16,615 | 16,615 | 14,947 | 14,947 | ||||||||||
| Changes in common equity tier 1 capital | 1,013 | 1,013 | 828 | 828 | ||||||||||
| Net issuance (redemption) of preferred stock | 743 | 743 | 840 | 840 | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 1 capital | 1,756 | 1,756 | 1,668 | 1,668 | ||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital balance, end of period | 18,371 | 18,371 | 16,615 | 16,615 | ||||||||||
| Tier 2 capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Tier 2 capital balance, beginning of period | 1,861 | 2,044 | 1,870 | 2,020 | ||||||||||
| Net issuance (redemption) and changes in long-term debt qualifying as tier 2 capital | 11 | 11 | (9) | (9) | ||||||||||
| Changes in allowance for credit losses | 18 | 20 | — | 33 | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 2 capital | 29 | 31 | (9) | 24 | ||||||||||
| Tier 2 capital balance, end of period | 1,890 | 2,075 | 1,861 | 2,044 | ||||||||||
| Total capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Total capital balance, beginning of period | 18,476 | 18,659 | 16,817 | 16,967 | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 1 capital | 1,756 | 1,756 | 1,668 | 1,668 | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 2 capital | 29 | 31 | (9) | 24 | ||||||||||
| Total capital balance, end of period | $ | 20,261 | $ | 20,446 | $ | 18,476 | $ | 18,659 |
(1) Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) includes losses on cash flow hedges where the hedged exposures are not recognized at fair value on the balance sheet, which, under the Capital Rule, must be excluded from CET1 capital. This adjustment is captured in the Other Adjustments line.
The following table presents a roll-forward of the Basel III advanced approaches and standardized approach RWA for the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024.
| TABLE 37: ADVANCED & STANDARDIZED APPROACHES RISK-WEIGHTED ASSETS ROLL-FORWARD | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2025 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2024 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2025 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2024 | ||||||||||
| Total risk-weighted assets, beginning of period | $ | 114,602 | $ | 107,453 | $ | 126,281 | $ | 111,703 | ||||||
| Changes in credit risk-weighted assets: | ||||||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in investment securities-wholesale | (234) | (585) | (10) | (1,000) | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in loans and overdrafts | (1,467) | 919 | 1,008 | 2,241 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in securitization exposures | 630 | 628 | 595 | 592 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in repo-style transaction exposures | 324 | (558) | 4,302 | 2,968 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in over-the-counter derivatives exposures(1) | (1,731) | 2,595 | (7,660) | 10,778 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in all other(2) | (180) | (957) | 2,622 | (526) | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in credit risk-weighted assets | (2,658) | 2,042 | 857 | 15,053 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in market risk-weighted assets | 125 | (475) | 125 | (475) | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in operational risk-weighted assets | 2,288 | 5,582 | NA | NA | ||||||||||
| Total risk-weighted assets, end of period | $ | 114,357 | $ | 114,602 | $ | 127,263 | $ | 126,281 |
(1) Under the advanced approaches, includes CVA RWA.
(2) Includes assets not in a definable category, non-material portfolio, cleared transactions, other wholesale, cash and due from banks, interest-bearing deposits with banks and equity exposures.
NA Not applicable.
State Street Corporation | 107
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
As of December 31, 2025, total advanced approaches RWA decreased $0.25 billion compared to December 31, 2024, mainly due to lower derivatives RWA driven by lower market volatility and lower loans and overdrafts RWA driven by change in loan portfolio mix, largely offset by higher operational risk RWA.
As of December 31, 2025, total standardized approach RWA increased $0.98 billion compared to December 31, 2024, mainly reflecting higher repo-style transaction RWA driven by increased volumes, higher other RWA driven by increased cash balances, and higher loans and overdrafts RWA driven by increased balances, largely offset by lower derivatives RWA driven by lower market volatility.
The regulatory capital ratios as of December 31, 2025, presented in Table 35: Regulatory Capital Structure and Related Regulatory Capital Ratios, are calculated under the advanced approaches and standardized approach in conformity with the Basel III final rule. The advanced approaches based ratios reflect calculations and determinations with respect to our capital and related matters as of December 31, 2025, based on our internal and external data, quantitative formulae, statistical models, historical correlations and assumptions, collectively referred to as “advanced systems,” in effect and used by us for those purposes as of the time we first reported such ratios in a quarterly report on Form 10-Q or an annual report on Form 10-K. Significant components of these advanced systems involve the exercise of judgment by us and our regulators, and our advanced systems may not, individually or collectively, precisely represent or calculate the scenarios, circumstances, outputs or other results for which they are designed or intended.
Our advanced systems are subject to update and periodic revalidation in response to changes in our business activities and our historical experiences, forces and events experienced by the market broadly or by individual financial institutions, changes in regulations and regulatory interpretations and other factors, and are also subject to continuing regulatory review and approval. For example, a significant operational loss experienced by another financial institution, even if we do not experience a related loss, could result in a material change in the output of our advanced systems and a corresponding material change in our risk exposures, our total RWA and our capital ratios compared to prior periods. An operational loss that we experience could also result in a material change in our capital requirements for operational risk under the advanced approaches, depending on the severity of the loss event, its characterization among the seven Basel-defined UOM, and the stability of the distributional approach for a particular UOM, and without direct correlation to
the effects of the loss event, or the timing of such effects, on our results of operations.
Due to the influence of changes in these advanced systems, whether resulting from changes in data inputs, regulation or regulatory supervision or interpretation, specific to us or market activities or experiences or other updates or factors, we expect that our advanced systems and our capital ratios calculated in conformity with the Basel III final rule will change and may be volatile over time, and that those latter changes or volatility could be material as calculated and measured from period to period. The full effects of the Basel III final rule on us and State Street Bank are therefore subject to further evaluation and also to further regulatory guidance, action or rule-making.
Tier 1 and Supplementary Leverage Ratios
We are subject to a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio and a SLR. The Tier 1 leverage ratio is based on Tier 1 capital and adjusted quarterly average on-balance sheet assets. The SLR is based on total leverage exposure and, includes certain off-balance sheet exposures not used in the calculation of the minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio. We must maintain a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio of 4%.
As a U.S. G-SIB, we are subject to a minimum SLR of 3%, and are also subject to eSLR standards, comprising a 2% SLR buffer at the holding company (in order to avoid limitations on distributions to shareholders and discretionary bonus payments to certain executives) and a 3% SLR buffer at State Street Bank (in order to be considered “well capitalized” under the Federal Reserve’s prompt corrective action framework). If we do not maintain the 2% buffer at the holding company, limitations on these distributions and discretionary bonus payments would be increasingly stringent based upon the extent of the shortfall.
On November 25, 2025, the U.S. Agencies jointly adopted the eSLR Final Rule amending the calibration of the eSLR for U.S. G-SIBs and their IDI subsidiaries. The final rule is effective April 1, 2026, with the option for firms to adopt the modified standards early, effective January 1, 2026. The final rule replaces the current eSLR buffer of 2% at the holding company and 3% at State Street Bank (for State Street Bank to be considered "well capitalized"), with an eSLR buffer for both bank holding companies and IDI subsidiaries calibrated at 50% of a G-SIB’s Method 1 capital surcharge, with the buffer for IDI subsidiaries capped at 1%. Conforming changes were also made to the TLAC and LTD requirements. We adopted the modified standards effective January 1, 2026.
The eSLR Final Rule is not expected to materially impact our total leverage-based capital, which already benefits from the custody bank
State Street Corporation | 108
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
exemption for central bank placements in the SLR denominator from Section 402 of the EGRRCPA. Changes to the TLAC and LTD requirements may have limited implications for us, but, are not expected to change our management of TLAC or LTD.
| TABLE 38: TIER 1 AND SUPPLEMENTARY LEVERAGE RATIOS | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in millions) | December 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | ||||
| State Street: | ||||||
| Tier 1 capital | $ | 18,371 | $ | 16,615 | ||
| Average assets | 342,448 | 327,181 | ||||
| Less: adjustments for deductions from tier 1 capital and other | (9,470) | (8,711) | ||||
| Adjusted average assets for tier 1 leverage ratio | 332,978 | 318,470 | ||||
| Additional SLR exposure | 43,235 | 38,659 | ||||
| Adjustments for deductions of qualifying central bank deposits | (91,545) | (87,496) | ||||
| Total assets for SLR | $ | 284,668 | $ | 269,633 | ||
| Tier 1 leverage ratio(1) | 5.5 | % | 5.2 | % | ||
| Supplementary leverage ratio | 6.5 | 6.2 | ||||
| State Street Bank(2): | ||||||
| Tier 1 capital | $ | 20,158 | $ | 19,173 | ||
| Average assets | 336,795 | 323,086 | ||||
| Less: adjustments for deductions from tier 1 capital and other | (8,761) | (8,332) | ||||
| Adjusted average assets for tier 1 leverage ratio | 328,034 | 314,754 | ||||
| Additional SLR exposure | 43,346 | 40,299 | ||||
| Adjustments for deductions of qualifying central bank deposits | (91,545) | (87,496) | ||||
| Total assets for SLR | $ | 279,835 | $ | 267,557 | ||
| Tier 1 leverage ratio(1) | 6.1 | % | 6.1 | % | ||
| Supplementary leverage ratio | 7.2 | 7.2 |
(1) Tier 1 leverage ratios were calculated in conformity with the Basel III final rule.
(2) The SLR rule requires that, as of January 1, 2018, (i) State Street Bank maintains an SLR of at least 6.0% to be well capitalized under the U.S. banking regulators’ Prompt Corrective Action Framework and (ii) we maintain an SLR of at least 5.0% to avoid limitations on capital distributions and discretionary bonus payments. In addition to the SLR, State Street Bank is subject to a well capitalized Tier 1 leverage ratio requirement of 5.0%.
Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity
The Federal Reserve’s final rule on TLAC, LTD and clean holding company requirements for U.S. domiciled G-SIBs, such as us, is intended to improve the resiliency and resolvability of certain U.S. banking organizations through enhanced prudential standards, and requires us, among other things, to comply with minimum requirements for external TLAC (combined eligible tier 1 regulatory capital and LTD) and LTD. Specifically, we must hold:
| Amount equal to: | |
|---|---|
| External TLAC | Greater of:•21.5% of total RWA (18.0% minimum plus 2.5% plus a G-SIB surcharge calculated for these purposes under Method 1 of 1.0% plus any applicable countercyclical buffer, which is currently 0%); and •9.5% of total leverage exposure (7.5% minimum plus the SLR buffer of 2.0%), as defined by the SLR final rule. |
| Qualifying external LTD | Greater of:•7.0% of RWA (6.0% minimum plus a G-SIB surcharge calculated for these purposes under method 2 of 1.0%); and •4.5% of total leverage exposure, as defined by the SLR final rule. |
The following table presents external TLAC and external LTD as of December 31, 2025.
| TABLE 39: TOTAL LOSS-ABSORBING CAPACITY | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2025 | |||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | Actual | Requirement | |||||||||||
| Total loss-absorbing capacity: | |||||||||||||
| Risk-weighted assets | $ | 38,824 | 30.5 | % | $ | 27,362 | 21.5 | % | |||||
| Total leverage exposure | 38,824 | 13.6 | 27,043 | 9.5 | |||||||||
| Long-term debt: | |||||||||||||
| Risk-weighted assets | 18,953 | 14.9 | 8,908 | 7.0 | |||||||||
| Total leverage exposure | 18,953 | 6.7 | 12,810 | 4.5 |
Additional information about TLAC is provided under “Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity” in “Supervision and Regulation” in Business in this Form 10-K.
Regulatory Developments
In July 2023, the U.S. Agencies issued the 2023 Basel III Endgame Proposal and separately the 2023 G-SIB Surcharge Proposal. The 2023 Basel III Endgame Proposal would, among other things, eliminate the advanced approaches for monitoring risk-based capital adequacy in favor of a new standardized expanded risk-based approach that includes new standardized methodologies for credit risk, operational risk and CVA risk components, and would also replace the existing market risk rule with the new FRTB framework. The 2023 G-SIB Surcharge Proposal would, among other things, measure the G-SIB surcharge in 0.1% increments as opposed to the 0.5% increments that currently apply.
Public statements by U.S. banking agency officials indicate that the 2023 Basel III Endgame Proposal and 2023 G-SIB Surcharge Proposal are under reconsideration. While a re‑proposal is currently expected in March 2026, the timing and content of any potential re-proposal, and the effects on us, remain uncertain at this stage.
For additional information about regulatory developments, refer to the “Regulatory Capital Adequacy and Liquidity Standards” section of “Supervision and Regulation” in Business in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 109
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Capital Actions
Preferred Stock
The following table summarizes selected terms of each of the series of the preferred stock issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2025:
| TABLE 40: PREFERRED STOCK ISSUED AND OUTSTANDING | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preferred Stock(1): | Issuance Date | Depositary Shares Issued | Amount outstanding (in millions) | Ownership Interest Per Depositary Share | Liquidation Preference Per Share | Liquidation Preference Per Depositary Share | Per Annum Dividend Rate | Dividend Payment Frequency | Carrying Value as of December 31, 2025 (In millions) | Redemption Date(2) | |||||||||||||||||
| Series G | April 2016 | 20,000,000 | $ | 500 | 1/4,000th | 100,000 | 25 | 5.35%(3) | Quarterly: March, June, September and December | $ | 493 | March 15, 2026 | |||||||||||||||
| Series I | January 2024 | 1,500,000 | 1,500 | 1/100th | 100,000 | 1,000 | 6.700% through March 14, 2029; resets March 15, 2029 and every subsequent five year anniversary at five- year U.S. Treasury rate plus 2.613% | Quarterly: March, June, September and December | 1,481 | March 15, 2029 | |||||||||||||||||
| Series J | July 2024 | 850,000 | 850 | 1/100th | 100,000 | 1,000 | 6.700% through September 14, 2029; resets September 15, 2029 and every subsequent five year anniversary at the five-year U.S. Treasury rate plus 2.628% | Quarterly: March, June, September and December | 842 | September 15, 2029 | |||||||||||||||||
| Series K | February 2025 | 750,000 | 750 | 1/100th | 100,000 | 1,000 | 6.450% through September 14, 2030; resets September 15, 2030 and every subsequent five year anniversary at the five- year U.S. Treasury rate plus 2.135% | Quarterly: March, June, September and December | 743 | September 15, 2030 |
(1) The preferred stock and corresponding depositary shares may be redeemed at our option in whole, but not in part, prior to the redemption date upon the occurrence of a regulatory capital treatment event, as defined in the certificate of designation, at a redemption price equal to the liquidation price per share and liquidation price per depositary share plus any declared and unpaid dividends, without accumulation of any undeclared dividends.
(2) On the redemption date, or any dividend payment date thereafter, the preferred stock and corresponding depositary shares may be redeemed by us, in whole or in part, at the liquidation price per share and liquidation price per depositary share plus any declared and unpaid dividends, without accumulation of any undeclared dividends.
(3) The dividend rate for the floating rate period of the Series G preferred stock that begins on March 15, 2026 and all subsequent floating rate periods will remain at the current fixed rate in accordance with the LIBOR Act and the contractual terms of the Series G preferred stock.
On February 6, 2025, we issued 750,000 depositary shares, each representing a 1/100th ownership interest in a share of fixed rate reset, non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series K, without par value per share, with a liquidation preference of $100,000 per share (equivalent to $1,000 per depositary share), in a public offering. The aggregate proceeds, net of underwriting discounts, commissions and other issuance costs, were approximately $743 million.
State Street Corporation | 110
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following table presents the dividends declared for each of the series of preferred stock issued and outstanding for the periods indicated:
TABLE 41: PREFERRED STOCK DIVIDENDS
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 2024 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) | Dividends Declared per Share | Dividends Declared per Depositary Share | Total | Dividends Declared per Share | Dividends Declared per Depositary Share | Total | ||||||||||||||||
| Preferred Stock: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Series D | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 1,475 | $ | 0.37 | $ | 11 | ||||||||||
| Series F | — | — | — | 2,336 | 23.36 | 6 | ||||||||||||||||
| Series G | 5,350 | 1.34 | 27 | 5,350 | 1.34 | 27 | ||||||||||||||||
| Series H | — | — | — | 6,251 | 62.51 | 31 | ||||||||||||||||
| Series I | 6,700 | 67.00 | 100 | 5,863 | 58.63 | 88 | ||||||||||||||||
| Series J | 6,700 | 67.00 | 57 | 2,643 | 26.43 | 22 | ||||||||||||||||
| Series K | 5,536 | 55.36 | 42 | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 226 | $ | 185 |
In February 2026, we declared dividends on our series G, I, J and K preferred stock of approximately $1,338, $1,675, $1,675 and $1,613, respectively, per share, or approximately $0.33, $16.75, $16.75 and $16.13, respectively, per depositary share. These dividends total approximately $7 million, $25 million, $14 million and $12 million on our Series G, I, J and K preferred stock, respectively, which will be paid in March 2026.
Common Stock
On January 19, 2024, we announced a common share repurchase program, approved by the Board and superseding all prior programs, authorizing the purchase of up to $5.0 billion of our common stock beginning in the first quarter of 2024. During 2025, we repurchased $1.2 billion of our common stock and since its inception we have repurchased an aggregate of $2.5 billion of our common stock under the 2024 Program through December 31, 2025. The program has no set expiration date.
The table below presents the activity under our common share repurchase program for the periods indicated:
| TABLE 42: SHARES REPURCHASED | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2025 | 2024 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Shares Acquired (In millions) | Average Cost per Share | Total Acquired (In millions) | Shares Acquired (In millions) | Average Cost per Share | Total Acquired (In millions) | |||||||||||||||||
| 2024 Program | 11.5 | $ | 104.05 | $ | 1,200 | 15.1 | $ | 85.89 | $ | 1,300 |
The table below presents the dividends declared on common stock for the periods indicated:
| TABLE 43: COMMON STOCK DIVIDENDS | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||
| 2025 | 2024 | |||||||||||||
| Dividends Declared per Share | Total (In millions) | Dividends Declared per Share | Total (In millions) | |||||||||||
| Common Stock | $ | 3.20 | $ | 909 | $ | 2.90 | $ | 859 |
In February 2026, we declared a common stock dividend of $0.84 per share, payable on April 13, 2026, to shareholders of record on April 1, 2026.
State Street Corporation | 111
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS
On behalf of clients enrolled in our securities lending program, we lend securities to banks, broker/dealers and other institutions. In most circumstances, we indemnify our clients for the fair market value of those securities against a failure of the borrower to return such securities. Though these transactions are collateralized, the substantial volume of these activities necessitates detailed credit-based underwriting and monitoring processes. The aggregate amount of indemnified securities on loan totaled $371.97 billion and $310.81 billion as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. We require the borrower to provide collateral in an amount in excess of 100% of the fair market value of the securities borrowed. We hold the collateral received in connection with these securities lending services as agent, and the collateral is not recorded in our consolidated statement of condition. We revalue the securities on loan and the collateral daily to determine if additional collateral is necessary or if excess collateral is required to be returned to the borrower. We held, as agent, cash and securities totaling $393.58 billion and $325.61 billion as collateral for indemnified securities on loan as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively.
The cash collateral held by us as agent is invested on behalf of our clients. In certain cases, the cash collateral is invested in third-party repurchase agreements, for which we indemnify the client against loss of the principal invested. We require the counterparty to the indemnified repurchase agreement to provide collateral in an amount in excess of 100% of the amount of the repurchase agreement. In our role as agent, the indemnified repurchase agreements and the related collateral held by us are not recorded in our consolidated statement of condition. Of the collateral of $393.58 billion and $325.61 billion, referenced above, $51.76 billion and $63.66 billion was invested in indemnified repurchase agreements as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. We or our agents held $55.94 billion and $68.51 billion as collateral for indemnified investments in repurchase agreements as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively.
Additional information about our securities finance activities and other off-balance sheet arrangements is provided in Notes 10, 12 and 14 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES
Our consolidated financial statements are prepared in conformity with U.S. GAAP, and we apply accounting policies that affect the determination of
amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements.
Certain of our accounting policies, by their nature, include significant accounting estimates and assumptions which require management to make judgments about the effects of matters that are inherently uncertain. These estimates and assumptions are based on information available as of the date of the consolidated financial statements, and changes in this information over time could materially affect the amounts of assets, liabilities, equity, revenue and expenses reported in subsequent consolidated financial statements.
Based on the sensitivity of reported financial statement amounts to the underlying estimates and assumptions, the significant accounting estimates identified by management are:
•Recurring fair value measurements;
•Allowance for credit losses; and
•Contingencies.
These estimates require the most subjective or complex judgments, and could be most subject to revision as new information becomes available. An understanding of these estimates is essential to the understanding of our reported results of operations and financial condition.
The following is a discussion of the above-mentioned significant accounting estimates. Additional information on our significant accounting policies, including references to applicable footnotes, is provided in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Fair Value Measurements
We carry certain of our financial assets and liabilities at fair value in our consolidated financial statements on a recurring basis, including trading account assets and liabilities, AFS debt securities, certain equity securities and various types of derivative financial instruments.
Changes in the fair value of these financial assets and liabilities are recorded either as components of our consolidated statement of income or as components of other comprehensive income within shareholders’ equity in our consolidated statement of condition. In addition to those financial assets and liabilities that we carry at fair value in our consolidated financial statements on a recurring basis, we estimate the fair values of other financial assets and liabilities that we carry at amortized cost in our consolidated statement of condition, and we disclose these fair value estimates in the notes to our consolidated financial statements. We estimate the fair values of these financial assets and liabilities using the definition of fair value described below.
State Street Corporation | 112
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
U.S. GAAP defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in the principal or most advantageous market for an asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. When we measure fair value for our financial assets and liabilities, we consider the principal or the most advantageous market in which we would transact; we also consider assumptions that market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability. When possible, we look to active and observable markets to measure the fair value of identical, or similar, financial assets and liabilities. When identical financial assets and liabilities are not traded in active markets, we look to market-observable data for similar assets and liabilities. In some instances, certain assets and liabilities are not actively traded in observable markets; as a result, we use alternate valuation techniques to measure their fair value.
We categorize the financial assets and liabilities that we carry at fair value in our consolidated statement of condition on a recurring basis based on U.S. GAAP’s prescribed three-level valuation hierarchy. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (level 1) and the lowest priority to valuation methods using significant unobservable inputs (level 3).
With respect to derivative instruments, we evaluate the fair value impact of the credit risk of our counterparties. We consider such factors as the market-based probability of default by our counterparties, and our current and expected potential future net exposures by remaining maturities, in determining the appropriate measurements of fair value.
Additional information with respect to the assets and liabilities carried by us at fair value on a recurring basis is provided in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Allowance for Credit Losses
We record an allowance for credit losses related to certain on-balance sheet credit exposures, including our financial assets held at amortized cost, as well as certain off-balance sheet credit exposures, including unfunded commitments and letters of credit.
Determining the appropriateness of the allowance is complex and requires judgment by management about the effect of matters that are inherently uncertain. In future periods, factors and forecasts then prevailing may result in significant changes in the allowance for credit losses in those future periods. We estimate credit losses over the contractual life of the financial asset while factoring in prepayment activity where supported by data over a
three year reasonable and supportable forecast period. We utilize baseline, upside and downside scenarios that are applied based on a weighting determined by management, in order to better reflect management’s expectation of expected credit losses given existing market conditions and the changes in the economic environment. The multiple scenarios are based on a 13-quarter horizon with reversion period set to be 27 quarters, calculated by subtracting the 13-quarter period from an average 10-year/40-quarter business cycle. The contractual term excludes expected extensions, renewals and modifications, but includes prepayment assumptions where applicable.
Our allowance for credit losses is sensitive to a number of inputs, including macroeconomic forecast assumptions and credit rating migrations during the period. Our macroeconomic forecasts used in determining the December 31, 2025 allowance for credit losses consisted of three scenarios reflecting different assumptions in GDP and unemployment, with the baseline scenario generally in line with market consensus of economic forecasts for GDP and unemployment. We placed the most weight on our baseline scenario, with the remaining weighting split between the upside and downside scenarios.
Keeping all other factors constant, we estimate that if we had applied 100% weighting to the downside scenario, the allowance for credit losses as of December 31, 2025 would have been approximately $90 million higher. This estimate is intended to reflect the sensitivity of the allowance for credit losses to changes in our scenario weights and is not intended to be indicative of future changes in the allowance for credit losses.
Additional information about our allowance for credit losses is provided in Notes 3 and 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Contingencies
Information on significant estimates and judgments related with establishing litigation reserves is discussed in Note 13 of the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
RECENT ACCOUNTING DEVELOPMENTS
Information with respect to recent accounting developments is provided in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 113
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
MD&A history
Prior-year 10-K MD&A spans are extracted from SEC filings with the same bounded parser used for the latest filing. The latest 10-K appears above; prior years are below.
FY 2024 10-K MD&A
SEC filing source: 0000093751-25-000111.
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
GENERAL
This Management's Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes in this Form 10-K. Certain previously reported amounts presented in this Form 10-K have been reclassified to conform to current-period presentation.
As of December 31, 2024, we had consolidated total assets of $353.24 billion, consolidated total deposits of $261.92 billion, consolidated total shareholders’ equity of $25.33 billion and approximately 53,000 employees. Through our two lines of business, Investment Servicing and Investment Management, we operate in more than 100 geographic markets worldwide, including the United States, Canada, Latin America, Europe, the Middle East and Asia.
For the description of our lines of business, refer to “Lines of Business” in Item 1 in this Form 10-K. For financial and other information about our lines of business, refer to “Line of Business Information” in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis and Note 24 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
We prepare our consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions in its application of certain accounting policies that materially affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, equity, revenue and expenses.
Information about the significant accounting policies that require us to make judgments, estimates and assumptions that are difficult, subjective or complex about matters that are uncertain and may change in subsequent periods is included under “Significant Accounting Estimates” in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis and in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Certain financial information provided in this Form 10-K, including this Management’s Discussion and Analysis, is presented using both a U.S. GAAP, or reported basis, and a non-GAAP basis, including certain non-GAAP measures used in the calculation of identified regulatory ratios. We measure and compare certain financial information on a non-GAAP basis, including information that management uses in evaluating our business and activities. Non-GAAP financial information should be considered in addition to, and not as a substitute for or as superior to,
financial information prepared in conformity with U.S. GAAP. Any non-GAAP financial information presented in this Form 10-K, including this Management’s Discussion and Analysis, is reconciled to its most directly comparable currently applicable regulatory ratio or U.S. GAAP-basis measure. As part of our non-GAAP-basis measures, we present a fully taxable-equivalent NII that reports non-taxable revenue, such as interest income associated with tax-exempt investment securities, on a fully taxable-equivalent basis, which we believe facilitates an investor’s understanding and analysis of our underlying financial performance and trends.
In this Management’s Discussion and Analysis, where we describe the effects of changes in foreign currency translation, those effects are determined by applying applicable weighted average FX rates from the relevant 2023 period to the relevant 2024 period results.
This Management’s Discussion and Analysis contains statements that are considered “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of U.S. securities laws. These forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties which could cause actual results to differ materially. Additional information about forward-looking statements and related risks and uncertainties is provided in “Forward-Looking Statements”, “Risk Factors Summary” and “Risk Factors” in this Form 10-K.
Information regarding additional disclosures and materials available on our website is provided under “Additional Information” in Item 1 in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 58
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
OVERVIEW OF FINANCIAL RESULTS
| TABLE 1: OVERVIEW OF FINANCIAL RESULTS | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |||||||
| Total fee revenue | $ | 10,156 | $ | 9,480 | $ | 9,606 | ||||
| Net interest income | 2,923 | 2,759 | 2,544 | |||||||
| Total other income | (79) | (294) | (2) | |||||||
| Total revenue | 13,000 | 11,945 | 12,148 | |||||||
| Provision for credit losses | 75 | 46 | 20 | |||||||
| Total expenses | 9,530 | 9,583 | 8,801 | |||||||
| Income before income tax expense | 3,395 | 2,316 | 3,327 | |||||||
| Income tax expense | 708 | 372 | 553 | |||||||
| Net income | $ | 2,687 | $ | 1,944 | $ | 2,774 | ||||
| Adjustments to net income: | ||||||||||
| Dividends on preferred stock(1) | $ | (202) | $ | (122) | $ | (112) | ||||
| Earnings allocated to participating securities(2) | (2) | (1) | (2) | |||||||
| Net income available to common shareholders | $ | 2,483 | $ | 1,821 | $ | 2,660 | ||||
| Earnings per common share: | ||||||||||
| Basic | $ | 8.33 | $ | 5.65 | $ | 7.28 | ||||
| Diluted | 8.21 | 5.58 | 7.19 | |||||||
| Average common shares outstanding (in thousands): | ||||||||||
| Basic | 297,883 | 322,337 | 365,214 | |||||||
| Diluted | 302,226 | 326,568 | 370,109 | |||||||
| Cash dividends declared per common share | $ | 2.90 | $ | 2.64 | $ | 2.40 | ||||
| Return on average common equity | 11.1 | % | 8.2 | % | 11.1 | % | ||||
| Pre-tax margin | 26.1 | 19.4 | 27.4 | |||||||
| Return on average assets | 0.9 | 0.7 | 1.0 | |||||||
| Common dividend payout | 35.3 | 47.3 | 33.4 | |||||||
| Average common equity to average total assets | 7.2 | 8.1 | 8.3 |
(1) Additional information about our preferred stock dividends is provided in Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
(2) Represents the portion of net income available to common equity allocated to participating securities, composed of unvested and fully vested SERP (Supplemental executive retirement plans) shares and fully vested deferred director stock awards, which are equity-based awards that contain non-forfeitable rights to dividends, and are considered to participate with the common stock in undistributed earnings.
The following section provides information related to significant events, as well as highlights of our consolidated financial results for the year ended December 31, 2024 presented in Table 1: Overview of Financial Results. More detailed information about our consolidated financial results, including the comparison of our financial results for the year ended December 31, 2024 to those of the year ended December 31, 2023, is provided under “Consolidated Results of Operations”, “Line of Business Information” and “Capital” sections which follow “Financial Results and Highlights”, as well as in our consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
The comparison of our financial results for the year ended December 31, 2023 to those of the years ended December 31, 2022 is included in the Management’s Discussion and Analysis in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023 filed with the SEC on February 15, 2024.
Financial Results and Highlights
2024 financial performance
•EPS of $8.21, increased from $5.58 in 2023, primarily reflecting higher total revenue and lower total expenses, including the net impact of notable items in the current and prior year periods, which in aggregate represented $1.62 of the EPS increase. See “Notable Items” below.
•Total revenue increased 9% compared to 2023, primarily driven by higher fee revenue and NII and the impact of the loss on sale of investment securities notable item in the prior year period. The prior year notable item represented 3% points of the increase.
•Total expenses decreased 1% compared to 2023 as higher business investments, as well as revenue and performance-related costs, were more than offset by productivity savings from organizational simplification, process improvements and other initiatives, including from the joint venture consolidations in India and the net impact of notable items. The net impact of notable items in the current and prior year periods decreased expenses by 5% points in 2024 as compared to 2023.
•Pre-tax margin of 26.1% increased from 19.4% in 2023, primarily reflecting higher total revenue and lower total expenses. Return on equity of 11.1% increased from 8.2% in 2023, primarily reflecting higher total revenue and lower total expenses.
•Operating leverage was 9.4% points, largely reflecting the net impact of notable items in the current and prior year periods, which represented 7.4% points of operating leverage. Operating leverage represents the difference between the percentage change in total revenue and the percentage change in total expenses, in each case relative to the prior year period.
•Fee operating leverage was 7.7% points, largely reflecting the net impact of notable items in the current and prior year periods, which represented 5.6% points of fee operating leverage. Fee operating leverage represents the difference between the percentage change in total fee revenue and the percentage change in total expenses, in each case relative to the prior year period.
•Returned approximately $2.2 billion to our shareholders in the form of common share repurchases and common stock dividends compared to approximately $4.6 billion in 2023.
State Street Corporation | 59
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
•Completed the consolidation of our final joint venture in India, further advancing the plan to transform our operating model to unlock efficiency savings and improve client experience. The joint venture consolidation in 2024 increased our headcount by approximately 17% as of December 31, 2024, compared to December 31, 2023. Associated headcount cost was previously reflected in compensation and employee benefits expenses.
Notable Items
•The impact of notable items in 2024 includes:
◦Other expenses of $111 million, including a $99 million increase to the 2023 FDIC special assessment, and a $12 million charge associated with operating model changes.
◦Loss on sale of investment securities of $81 million related to an investment portfolio repositioning reflected in other income.
◦Deferred compensation expense acceleration of approximately $79 million, related to prior period incentive compensation awards to align our deferred pay mix with peers.
◦Gain on sale of an equity investment of $66 million recorded in other fee revenue.
◦Revenue-related recovery of $15 million from settlement proceeds associated with a 2018 FX benchmark litigation resolution, which is reflected in foreign exchange trading services.
◦Net repositioning release of $2 million, including a $15 million release reflected in compensation and employee benefits expenses, partially offset by $13 million of occupancy charges related to footprint optimization.
◦The impact of notable items in 2023 includes:
◦Loss on the sale of investment securities of approximately $294 million related to an investment portfolio repositioning.
◦FDIC special assessment of $387 million recorded in other expenses, related to FDIC’s recovery of estimated losses to the Deposit Insurance Fund associated with the
closures of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank.
◦Net repositioning charges of approximately $203 million, including $182 million of compensation and employee benefits expenses related to workforce rationalization and $21 million of occupancy costs related to real estate footprint optimization.
◦Other net expenses of approximately $30 million, including $41 million in information systems and communications and $4 million in other expenses, primarily related to operating model changes, partially offset by a $15 million accrual release in acquisition and restructuring costs.
Revenue
•Total fee revenue increased 7% compared to 2023, primarily reflecting higher management fees, foreign exchange trading services revenue, other fee revenue and servicing fees.
•Servicing fee revenue increased 2% compared to 2023, as higher average market levels and net new business, excluding a previously disclosed client transition, were partially offset by pricing headwinds, a previously disclosed client transition and lower client activity and adjustments, including asset mix shift.
•Management fee revenue increased 13% compared to 2023, primarily due to higher average market levels and net inflows.
•Foreign exchange trading services revenue increased 11% compared to 2023, primarily due to higher client volumes, partially offset by lower spreads associated with lower average FX volatility.
•Securities finance revenue increased 3% compared to 2023, mainly due to higher client lending balances, partially offset by lower spreads primarily resulting from muted industry specials activity.
▪Software and processing fees revenue increased 9% compared to 2023, primarily due to higher front office software and data revenue associated with CRD.
•Other fee revenue increased $109 million compared to 2023, primarily reflecting a $66 million gain on sale of an equity investment and the absence of the impact of the Argentine peso devaluation in the prior year period.
State Street Corporation | 60
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
•NII increased 6% compared to 2023, primarily due to higher investment securities yields and loan growth, partially offset by deposit mix shift towards interest-bearing deposits.
•Other income included a loss of $79 million compared to a loss of $294 million in 2023, mainly reflecting a loss on sale of investment securities related to the repositioning of the investment portfolio in both periods.
Provision for Credit Losses
•In 2024, we recorded a $75 million provision for credit losses, primarily reflecting an increase in loan loss reserves associated with certain commercial real estate and leveraged loans, compared to $46 million in 2023.
Expenses
•Total expenses decreased 1% compared to 2023, as higher business investments, as well as revenue and performance-related costs, were more than offset by productivity savings from organizational simplification, process improvements and other initiatives, including from the joint venture consolidations in India and the net impact of notable items. The net impact of notable items in the current and prior year periods decreased expenses by 5% points in 2024 as compared to 2023.
AUC/A and AUM
•AUC/A of $46.56 trillion as of December 31, 2024 increased 11% compared to December 31, 2023, primarily due to higher period-end market levels and client flows. In 2024, newly announced asset servicing mandates totaled approximately $2.33 trillion of AUC/A. We onboarded approximately $1.35 trillion of AUC/A during 2024. Servicing assets remaining to be installed in future periods totaled approximately $2.99 trillion as of December 31, 2024.
•AUM of $4.72 trillion as of December 31, 2024 increased 15% compared to December 31, 2023, primarily due to higher period-end market levels and net inflows.
Capital
•In 2024, we returned approximately $2.2 billion to our shareholders in the form of common share repurchases and common stock dividends compared to approximately $4.6 billion in 2023.
◦We declared aggregate common stock dividends of $2.90 per share, totaling
$859 million compared to $2.64 per share, totaling $837 million in 2023.
◦We increased the quarterly common stock dividend declared per common share by 10% in the third quarter of 2024.
◦We acquired an aggregate of 15.1 million shares of common stock at an average per share cost of $85.89 and an aggregate cost of approximately $1.3 billion. In 2023, we acquired an aggregate of 49.2 million shares of common stock, at an average per share cost of $77.22 and an aggregate cost of approximately $3.8 billion. These purchases were all conducted under the share repurchase programs approved by our Board of Directors.
•Our standardized CET1 capital ratio was 10.9% as of December 31, 2024, compared to 11.6% as of December 31, 2023, primarily driven by increased capital return and higher deployment of RWA for business growth, partially offset by capital generated from earnings. Our Tier 1 leverage ratio decreased to 5.2% as of December 31, 2024, compared to 5.5% as of December 31, 2023, mainly driven by higher average balance sheet levels. Given the current global economic environment, and our plans for capital actions, we expect our CET1 capital ratio and Tier 1 leverage ratio to remain within or above our target ranges of 10-11% and 5.25-5.75%, respectively.
•On January 31, 2024, we issued 1.5 million depositary shares, each representing a 1/100th ownership interest in a share of fixed rate reset, non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series I, without par value per share, with a liquidation preference of $100,000 per share (equivalent to $1,000 per depositary share), and an initial dividend rate of 6.700% per annual, in a public offering. The net proceeds from the offering were approximately $1.5 billion.
•On March 15, 2024, we redeemed an aggregate $1.0 billion, or all 7,500 outstanding shares, of our non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series D, for a cash redemption price of $100,000 per share (equivalent to $25 per depository share), and all 2,500 of the outstanding shares of our noncumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series F (represented by 250,000 depository shares), for a cash redemption price of $100,000 per share (equivalent to $1,000 per
State Street Corporation | 61
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
depositary share), plus all declared and unpaid dividends.
•On July 24, 2024, we issued 850,000 depositary shares, each representing a 1/100th ownership interest in a share of fixed rate reset, non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series J, without par value per share, with a liquidation preference of $100,000 per share (equivalent to $1,000 per depositary share), in a public offering. The net proceeds from the offering were approximately $842 million.
•On September 16, 2024, we redeemed an aggregate $500 million, or all 5,000 outstanding shares, of our non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series H (represented by 500,000 depository shares), for a cash redemption price of $100,000 per share (equivalent to $1,000 per depository share), plus all declared and unpaid dividends.
•On February 6, 2025, we issued 750,000 depositary shares, each representing a 1/100th ownership interest in a share of fixed rate reset, non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series K, without par value per share, with a liquidation preference of $100,000 per share (equivalent to $1,000 per depositary share), in a public offering. The net proceeds from the offering were approximately $743 million.
Debt Issuances and Redemptions
•On March 18, 2024, we issued $1 billion aggregate principal amount of 4.993% fixed rate senior notes due 2027.
•On August 20, 2024, we issued $1 billion aggregate principal amount of 4.530% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2029.
•On October 22, 2024, we issued $1.2 billion aggregate principal amount of 4.330% fixed rate senior notes due 2027, $300 million aggregate principal amount of floating rate senior notes due 2027, and $800 million aggregate principal amount of 4.675% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2032.
•On November 1, 2024, we redeemed $1 billion aggregate principal amount of 2.354% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2025.
•On November 25, 2024, State Street Bank issued $300 million aggregate principal amount of floating rate senior notes due 2026, $1.15 billion aggregate principal amount of 4.594% fixed rate senior notes due 2026 and $800 million aggregate principal
amount of 4.782% fixed rate senior notes due 2029.
•On January 27, 2025, we redeemed $500 million aggregate principal amount of 4.857% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026.
•On February 6, 2025, we redeemed $300 million aggregate principal amount of 1.746% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026.
CONSOLIDATED RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
This section discusses our consolidated results of operations for 2024 compared to 2023 and should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Total Revenue
| TABLE 2: TOTAL REVENUE | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2024 vs. 2023 | % Change 2023 vs. 2022 | ||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |||||||||||||||
| Fee revenue: | ||||||||||||||||||
| Back office services | $ | 4,633 | $ | 4,561 | $ | 4,714 | 2 | % | (3) | % | ||||||||
| Middle office services | 383 | 361 | 373 | 6 | (3) | |||||||||||||
| Servicing fees | 5,016 | 4,922 | 5,087 | 2 | (3) | |||||||||||||
| Management fees | 2,124 | 1,876 | 1,939 | 13 | (3) | |||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange trading services | 1,401 | 1,265 | 1,376 | 11 | (8) | |||||||||||||
| Securities finance | 438 | 426 | 416 | 3 | 2 | |||||||||||||
| Front office software and data | 639 | 580 | 550 | 10 | 5 | |||||||||||||
| Lending related and other fees | 249 | 231 | 239 | 8 | (3) | |||||||||||||
| Software and processing fees | 888 | 811 | 789 | 9 | 3 | |||||||||||||
| Other fee revenue | 289 | 180 | (1) | 61 | nm | |||||||||||||
| Total fee revenue | 10,156 | 9,480 | 9,606 | 7 | (1) | |||||||||||||
| Net interest income: | ||||||||||||||||||
| Interest income | 11,977 | 9,180 | 4,088 | 30 | nm | |||||||||||||
| Interest expense | 9,054 | 6,421 | 1,544 | 41 | nm | |||||||||||||
| Net interest income | 2,923 | 2,759 | 2,544 | 6 | 8 | |||||||||||||
| Other income: | ||||||||||||||||||
| Gains (losses) from sales of available-for-sale securities, net | (79) | (294) | (2) | (73) | nm | |||||||||||||
| Total other income | (79) | (294) | (2) | (73) | nm | |||||||||||||
| Total revenue | $ | 13,000 | $ | 11,945 | $ | 12,148 | 9 | (2) |
nm Not meaningful
Fee Revenue
Table 2: Total Revenue, provides the breakout of fee revenue for the years ended December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022. Servicing and management fees collectively made up approximately 70%, 72% and 73% of the total fee revenue in 2024, 2023 and 2022, respectively.
State Street Corporation | 62
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Servicing Fee Revenue
Servicing fees, as presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, increased 2% in 2024 compared to 2023, as higher average market levels and net new business, excluding a previously disclosed client transition, were partially offset by pricing headwinds, a previously disclosed client transition and lower client activity and adjustments, including asset mix shift.
Servicing fees generated outside the United States were approximately 47% of total servicing fees in 2024, compared to approximately 46% of total servicing fees in 2023.
Servicing fee revenue comprises revenue from a range of services provided to our clients, including certain Alpha servicing mandates, consisting of core custody services, accounting, reporting and administration, which we refer to collectively as back office services and middle office services. The nature and mix of services provided and the asset classes for which the services are performed affect our servicing fees. The basis for fees will differ across regions and clients. Generally, our servicing fee revenues are affected by several factors, including changes in market valuations, client activity and asset flows, net new business and the manner in which we price our services. For servicing fees for which we have not yet issued an invoice to our clients as of period end, we include an estimate of the impact of changes in market valuations, client activity and flows, net new business and changes in pricing in our revenues.
Changes in Market Valuations
Our servicing fee revenue is impacted by both our levels and the geographic and product mix of our AUC/A. Increases or decreases in market valuations have a corresponding impact on the level of our AUC/A and servicing fee revenues, though the degree of impact will vary depending on asset types and classes, and geography of assets held within our clients’ portfolios. For certain asset classes where the valuation process is more complex, including alternative investments, or where our valuation is dependent on third party information, AUC/A is reported on a time lag, typically one-month. For those asset classes, the impact of market levels on our reported AUC/A, and therefore servicing fee revenue, does not reflect current period-end market levels.
Over the five years ended December 31, 2024, we estimate that worldwide equity and fixed income market valuations impacted our servicing fees revenue by approximately 2% on average with a range of (4)% to 8% annually and approximately 5% and 1% in 2024 and 2023, respectively. See Table 3: Daily Averages, Month-End Averages and Year-End Equity Indices for selected indices. While the specific indices presented are indicative of general market trends, the asset types and classes relevant to individual client portfolios can and do differ, and the performance of associated relevant indices and of client portfolios can therefore differ from the performance of the indices presented. In addition, our asset classifications may differ from those industry classifications presented.
Assuming that all other factors remain constant, including client activity, asset flows and pricing, we estimate, using relevant information as of December 31, 2024, that a 10% increase or decrease in worldwide equity valuations, on a weighted average basis, over the relevant periods for which our servicing fees are calculated, would result in a corresponding change in our total servicing fee revenues, on average and over multiple quarters, of approximately 3%. We estimate, similarly assuming all other factors remain constant and using relevant information as of December 31, 2024, that changes in worldwide fixed income markets, which on a weighted average basis and over time are typically less volatile than worldwide equity markets, have a smaller corresponding impact on our servicing fee revenues on average and over time.
| TABLE 3: DAILY AVERAGES, MONTH-END AVERAGES AND YEAR-END EQUITY INDICES(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Daily Averages of Indices | Month-End Averages of Indices | Year-End Indices | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Years Ended December 31, | Years Ended December 31, | Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2024 | 2023 | % Change | 2024 | 2023 | % Change | 2024 | 2023 | % Change | ||||||||||||||||||
| S&P 500® | 5,428 | 4,284 | 27 | % | 5,460 | 4,323 | 26 | % | 5,882 | 4,770 | 23 | % | ||||||||||||||
| MSCI EAFE® | 2,326 | 2,093 | 11 | 2,337 | 2,101 | 11 | 2,262 | 2,236 | 1 | |||||||||||||||||
| MSCI® Emerging Markets | 1,071 | 985 | 9 | 1,071 | 985 | 9 | 1,075 | 1,024 | 5 | |||||||||||||||||
| MSCI ACWI® | 800 | 663 | 21 | 805 | 668 | 20 | 841 | 727 | 16 |
(1) The index names listed in the table are service marks of their respective owners.
| TABLE 4: YEAR-END DEBT INDICES(1) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, | ||||||||
| 2024 | 2023 | % Change | ||||||
| Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index® | 2,189 | 2,162 | 1 | % | ||||
| Bloomberg Global Aggregate Bond Index® | 463 | 471 | (2) |
(1) The index names listed in the table are service marks of their respective owners.
State Street Corporation | 63
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Client Activity and Asset Flows
Client activity and asset flows are impacted by the number of transactions we execute on behalf of our clients, including FX settlements, equity and derivative trades, and wire transfer activity, as well as actions by our clients to change the asset class in which their assets are invested. Our servicing fee revenues are impacted by a number of factors, including transaction volumes, asset levels and asset classes in which funds are invested, as well as industry trends associated with these client-related activities.
Our clients may change the asset classes in which their assets are invested, based on their market outlook, risk acceptance tolerance or other considerations. Over the five years ended December 31, 2024, we estimate that client activity and asset flows, together, impacted our servicing fees revenue by approximately (1)% on average with a range of (3)% to 1% annually and approximately 0% and (3)% in 2024 and 2023, respectively. See Table 5: Industry Asset Flows for selected asset flow information. While the asset flows presented are indicative of general market trends, the asset types and classes relevant to individual client portfolios can and do differ, and our flows may differ from those market trends. In addition, our asset classifications may differ from those industry classifications presented.
| TABLE 5: INDUSTRY ASSET FLOWS | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||
| (In billions) | 2024 | 2023 | ||||
| North America - (U.S. Domiciled) - Morningstar Direct Market Data(1)(2)(3) | ||||||
| Long-Term Funds(4) | $ | (362.0) | $ | (489.7) | ||
| Money Market | 678.6 | 907.3 | ||||
| Exchange-Traded Fund | 1,111.1 | 590.3 | ||||
| Total Flows | $ | 1,427.7 | $ | 1,007.9 | ||
| EMEA - Morningstar Direct Market Data(1)(2)(5) | ||||||
| Long-Term Funds(4) | $ | 233.0 | $ | (72.3) | ||
| Money Market | 245.7 | 217.8 | ||||
| Exchange-Traded Fund | 251.3 | 146.0 | ||||
| Total Flows | $ | 730.0 | $ | 291.5 |
(1) Industry data is provided for illustrative purposes only. It is not intended to reflect our activity or our clients’ activity and is indicative of only segments of the entire industry.
(2) Source: Morningstar. The data includes long-term mutual funds, ETFs and money market funds. Mutual fund data represents estimates of net new cash flow, which is new sales minus redemptions combined with net exchanges, while ETF data represents net issuance, which is gross issuance less gross redemptions. Data for Fund of Funds, Feeder funds and Obsolete funds were excluded from the series to prevent double counting. Data is from the Morningstar Direct Asset Flows database.
(3) The year ended December 31, 2024 data for North America (US domiciled) includes Morningstar direct actuals for January 2024 through November 2024 and Morningstar direct estimates for December 2024.
(4) The long-term fund flows reported by Morningstar direct in North America are composed of US domiciled market flows mainly in Equities, Allocation and Fixed-Income asset classes. The long-term fund flows reported by Morningstar direct in EMEA are composed of the European market flows mainly in Equities, Allocation and Fixed-Income asset classes.
(5) The year ended December 31, 2024 data for Europe is on a rolling twelve month basis for December 2023 through November 2024, sourced by Morningstar.
Net New Business
Over the five years ended December 31, 2024, net new business, which includes business both won and lost, has affected our servicing fee revenues by approximately 0% on average with a range of 0% to 1% annually and approximately 0% and 1% in 2024 and 2023, respectively.
Gross investment servicing mandates were $2.33 trillion of AUC/A in 2024 and $1.90 trillion of AUC/A per year on average over the five years ended December 31, 2024, ranging from approximately $0.79 trillion to $3.52 trillion of AUC/A annually in any given year.
Servicing fee revenue associated with new servicing mandates may vary based on the breadth of services provided, the time required to install the assets, and the types of assets installed.
Revenues associated with new mandates are not reflected in our servicing fee revenue until the assets have been installed. Our installation timeline, in general, can range from 6 to 36 months, with the average installation timeline being approximately 9 to 12 months over the past 2 full fiscal years. We expect that our more complex installations, including new State Street Alpha mandates, will generally be on the longer end of the 6 to 36 months range. With respect to the current asset mandates of approximately $2.99 trillion of AUC/A that are yet to be installed as of December 31, 2024, we expect the conversion will mostly occur over the coming 24 months, with approximately 60% expected to be installed in 2025 and approximately 30% in 2026, with the balance expected to be installed largely in 2027. The expected timing of these installations is subject to change due to a variety of factors, including adjusted implementation schedules agreed with clients, scope adjustments, and product and functionality changes.
State Street Corporation | 64
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Pricing
The industry in which we operate has historically faced pricing pressure, and our servicing fee revenues are also affected by such pressures today. Consequently, no assumption should be drawn as to future revenue run rate from announced servicing AUC/A wins, as the amount of revenue associated with AUC/A, once installed, can vary materially. On average, over the five years ended December 31, 2024, we estimate that pricing pressure with respect to existing clients has impacted our servicing fees by approximately (2)% annually, with the impact ranging from (2)% to (3)% in any given year and approximately (3)% and (2)% in 2024 and 2023, respectively. Pricing concessions can be a part of a contract renegotiation with a client including terms that may benefit us, such as extending the term of our relationship with the client, expanding the scope of services that we provide or reducing our dependency on manual processes through the standardization of the services we provide. In 2024, the impact was primarily driven by several multi-year renewals of large strategic clients. The timing of the impact of additional revenue generated by anticipated additional services and the amount of revenue generated may differ from expectations due to the impact of pricing concessions on existing services due to the necessary time required to onboard those new services or process changes, the nature of those services and client investment practices and other factors. These same market pressures also impact the fees we negotiate when we win business from new clients.
Historically, and based on an indicative sample of revenue, we estimate that approximately 60%, on average, of our servicing fee revenues have been variable due to changes in asset valuations including changes in daily average valuations of AUC/A; another approximately 20%, on average, of our servicing fees are impacted by the volume of activity in the funds we serve; and the remaining approximately 20% of our servicing fees tend not to be variable in nature nor impacted by market fluctuations or values.
In addition to the effects described above (i.e., client activity and asset flows, net new business and pricing) our servicing fee revenue in any period will vary depending on the mix of products and services we provide to our clients. The full impact of changes in market valuations and the volume of activity in the funds may not be fully reflected in our servicing fee revenues in the periods in which the changes occur, particularly in periods of higher volatility.
| TABLE 6: ASSETS UNDER CUSTODY AND/OR ADMINISTRATION BY PRODUCT(1)(2) | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | December 31, 2022 | % Change2024 vs. 2023 | % Change2023 vs. 2022 | ||||||||||||||||
| Collective funds, including ETFs | $ | 15,266 | $ | 14,070 | $ | 12,261 | 9 | % | 15 | % | |||||||||||
| Mutual funds | 12,301 | 11,009 | 9,610 | 12 | 15 | ||||||||||||||||
| Pension products | 9,386 | 8,352 | 7,734 | 12 | 8 | ||||||||||||||||
| Insurance and other products | 9,604 | 8,379 | 7,138 | 15 | 17 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 46,557 | $ | 41,810 | $ | 36,743 | 11 | 14 |
| TABLE 7: ASSETS UNDER CUSTODY AND/OR ADMINISTRATION BY ASSET CLASS(2) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | December 31, 2022 | % Change2024 vs. 2023 | % Change2023 vs. 2022 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Equities | $ | 27,535 | $ | 24,317 | $ | 20,575 | 13 | % | 18 | % | |||||||||||||
| Fixed-income | 11,933 | 11,043 | 10,318 | 8 | 7 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Short-term and other investments | 7,089 | 6,450 | 5,850 | 10 | 10 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 46,557 | $ | 41,810 | $ | 36,743 | 11 | 14 |
| TABLE 8: ASSETS UNDER CUSTODY AND/OR ADMINISTRATION BY GEOGRAPHY(2)(3) | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | December 31, 2022 | % Change2024 vs. 2023 | % Change2023 vs. 2022 | ||||||||||||
| Americas | $ | 33,284 | $ | 29,951 | $ | 26,981 | 11 | % | 11 | % | |||||||
| Europe/Middle East/Africa | 10,179 | 8,913 | 7,136 | 14 | 25 | ||||||||||||
| Asia/Pacific | 3,094 | 2,946 | 2,626 | 5 | 12 | ||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 46,557 | $ | 41,810 | $ | 36,743 | 11 | 14 |
(1) Certain previously reported amounts presented have been reclassified to conform to current-period presentation.
(2) Consistent with past practice, AUC/A values for certain asset classes are based on a lag, typically one-month.
(3) Geographic mix is generally based on the domicile of the entity servicing the funds and is not necessarily representative of the underlying asset mix.
State Street Corporation | 65
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Asset servicing mandates newly announced in 2024 totaled approximately $2.33 trillion of AUC/A. Servicing assets remaining to be installed in future periods totaled approximately $2.99 trillion as of December 31, 2024, which will be reflected in AUC/A in future periods after installation and will generate servicing fee revenue in subsequent periods. The full revenue impact of such mandates will be realized as the assets are installed and additional services are added over that period.
New asset servicing mandates, including Alpha servicing mandates, may be subject to completion of definitive agreements, consents or assignments, approval of applicable boards, shareholders and customary regulatory approvals or other conditions, the failure to complete any of which will prevent the relevant mandate from being installed and serviced. New asset servicing mandates and servicing assets remaining to be installed in future periods exclude certain new business which has been contracted, but for which the client has not yet provided permission to publicly disclose or anonymously reference. These excluded assets, which from time to time may be significant, will be included in new asset servicing mandates and reflected in servicing assets remaining to be installed in the period in which the client provides its permission. Servicing mandates and servicing assets remaining to be installed in future periods may include assets associated with acquisitions or structured transactions and are presented on a gross basis based on factors present on or about the time we determine the business to be won by us and are not updated based on subsequent developments, including changes in assets, market valuations, scope and, potentially, termination. Such assets therefore do not include the impact of clients who have notified us during the period of their intent to terminate or reduce their relationship with us, which from time to time may be significant.
With respect to these new servicing mandates, once installed we may provide various services, including back office services such as custody and safekeeping, transaction processing and trade settlement, fund administration, reporting and record keeping, security servicing, fund accounting, middle office services such as investment book of records, transaction management, loans, cash derivatives and collateral services, recordkeeping, client reporting and investment analytics, markets services such as FX trading services, liquidity solutions, currency and collateral management and securities finance, and front office services such as portfolio management solutions, risk analytics, scenario analysis, performance and attribution, trade order and execution management, pre-trade compliance and ESG investment tools. Revenues associated with new servicing mandates may vary based on the breadth of services provided, the timing of installation, and the types of assets.
As previously disclosed, in early 2021, due to a decision to diversify providers, one of our large asset servicing clients is moving a significant portion of its ETF assets currently with State Street to one or more other providers. Prior to the commencement of the transition of assets, which began in 2022, we estimated that the financial impact of this transition represented approximately 1.9% of our 2021 total fee revenue. We began to see the impact of the transition on our fee revenue and income growth trends primarily towards the end of 2023, with the remainder expected to be realized through 2025 as the transition continues. On a full year run rate basis, we estimate that 2024 reflected approximately two-thirds of the revenue impact of the exiting business. We expect to continue as a significant service provider for this client after this transition and for the client to continue to be meaningful to our business.
Management Fee Revenue
Management fees increased 13% in 2024 compared to 2023, primarily due to higher average market levels and net inflows.
Management fees generated outside the United States were approximately 25% of total management fees in 2024, compared to approximately 26% of total management fees in 2023.
Management fees generally are affected by our level of AUM, which we report based on month-end valuations. Management fees for certain components of managed assets, such as ETFs, mutual funds and Undertakings for Collective Investments in Transferable Securities, are affected by daily average valuations of AUM. Management fee revenue is more sensitive to market valuations than servicing fee revenue, as a higher proportion of the underlying services provided, and the associated management fees earned, are dependent on equity and fixed-income security valuations. Additional factors, such as the relative mix of assets managed, may have a significant effect on our management fee revenue. While certain management fees are directly determined by the values of AUM and the investment strategies employed, management fees may reflect other factors, including performance fee arrangements, as well as our relationship pricing for clients.
Asset-based management fees for passively managed products, to which our AUM is currently primarily weighted, are generally charged at a lower fee on AUM than for actively managed products. Actively managed products may also include performance fee arrangements which are recorded when the fee is earned, based on predetermined benchmarks associated with the applicable account’s performance.
State Street Corporation | 66
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
In light of the above, we estimate, using relevant information as of December 31, 2024 and assuming that all other factors remain constant, including the impact of business won and lost and client flows, that:
•A 10% increase or decrease in worldwide equity valuations, on a weighted average basis, over the relevant periods for which our management fees are calculated, would result in a corresponding change in our total management fee revenues, on average and over multiple quarters, of approximately 5%; and
•Changes in worldwide fixed income markets, which on a weighted average basis and over time are typically less volatile than worldwide equity markets, will have a significantly smaller corresponding impact on our management fee revenues on average and over time.
Daily averages, month-end averages and year-end indices demonstrate worldwide changes in equity and debt markets that affect our management fee revenue. Year-end indices affect the values of AUM as of those dates. See Table 3: Daily Averages, Month-End Averages and Year-End Equity Indices for selected indices. While the specific indices presented are indicative of general market trends, the asset types and classes relevant to individual client portfolios can and do differ, and the performance of associated relevant indices and of client portfolios can therefore differ from the performance of the indices presented. In addition, our asset classifications may differ from those industry classifications presented.
| TABLE 9: ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT BY ASSET CLASS AND INVESTMENT APPROACH | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | December 31, 2022 | % Change2024 vs. 2023 | % Change2023 vs. 2022 | ||||||||||||||||
| Equity: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | $ | 52 | $ | 47 | $ | 54 | 11 | % | (13) | % | |||||||||||
| Passive | 2,955 | 2,466 | 2,075 | 20 | 19 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total equity | 3,007 | 2,513 | 2,129 | 20 | 18 | ||||||||||||||||
| Fixed-income: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | 31 | 71 | 83 | (56) | (14) | ||||||||||||||||
| Passive | 585 | 538 | 471 | 9 | 14 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total fixed-income | 616 | 609 | 554 | 1 | 10 | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash(1) | 518 | 467 | 376 | 11 | 24 | ||||||||||||||||
| Multi-asset-class solutions: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | 23 | 21 | 28 | 10 | (25) | ||||||||||||||||
| Passive | 351 | 289 | 181 | 21 | 60 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total multi-asset-class solutions | 374 | 310 | 209 | 21 | 48 | ||||||||||||||||
| Alternative investments(2): | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | 10 | 11 | 35 | (9) | (69) | ||||||||||||||||
| Passive(3) | 190 | 192 | 178 | (1) | 8 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total alternative investments | 200 | 203 | 213 | (1) | (5) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 4,715 | $ | 4,102 | $ | 3,481 | 15 | 18 |
(1) Includes both floating- and constant-net-asset-value portfolios held in commingled structures or separate accounts.
(2) Includes real estate investment trusts, currency and commodities, including SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust. We are not the investment manager for the SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR®Gold MiniSharesSM Trust, but act as the marketing agent.
(3) AUM for passive alternative investments has been revised from prior presentations.
| TABLE 10: GEOGRAPHIC MIX OF ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT(1) | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | December 31, 2022 | % Change 2024 vs. 2023 | % Change 2023 vs. 2022 | ||||||||||||
| Americas | $ | 3,468 | $ | 3,028 | $ | 2,545 | 15 | % | 19 | % | |||||||
| Europe/Middle East/Africa(2) | 713 | 577 | 510 | 24 | 13 | ||||||||||||
| Asia/Pacific | 534 | 497 | 426 | 7 | 17 | ||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 4,715 | $ | 4,102 | $ | 3,481 | 15 | 18 |
| (1) Geographic mix is based on client location or fund management location. |
|---|
| (2) AUM for passive alternative investments has been revised from prior presentations. |
State Street Corporation | 67
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
.
| TABLE 11: EXCHANGE - TRADED FUNDS BY ASSET CLASS(1) | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | December 31, 2022 | % Change 2024 vs. 2023 | % Change 2023 vs. 2022 | ||||||||||||||||
| Alternative Investments(2) | $ | 90 | $ | 73 | $ | 67 | 23 | % | 9 | % | |||||||||||
| Equity | 1,310 | 1,038 | 817 | 26 | 27 | ||||||||||||||||
| Multi Asset | 1 | 1 | 1 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||
| Fixed-Income | 177 | 156 | 134 | 13 | 16 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total Exchange-Traded Funds | $ | 1,578 | $ | 1,268 | $ | 1,019 | 24 | 24 |
(1) ETFs are a component of AUM presented in the preceding table.
(2) Includes real estate investment trusts, currency and commodities, including SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust. We are not the investment manager for the SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR®Gold MiniSharesSM Trust, but act as the marketing agent.
| TABLE 12: ACTIVITY IN ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT BY PRODUCT CATEGORY | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | Equity | Fixed-Income | Cash(1) | Multi-Asset-Class Solutions | Alternative Investments(2)(3) | Total | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2021 | $ | 2,674 | $ | 623 | $ | 368 | $ | 222 | $ | 251 | $ | 4,138 | ||||||||||
| Long-term institutional flows, net(4) | (97) | 18 | 1 | 19 | — | (59) | ||||||||||||||||
| Exchange-traded fund flows, net | — | 22 | — | — | — | 22 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total flows, net | (97) | 40 | 1 | 19 | — | (37) | ||||||||||||||||
| Market appreciation (depreciation) | (397) | (94) | 9 | (28) | (31) | (541) | ||||||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange impact | (51) | (15) | (2) | (4) | (7) | (79) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total market/foreign exchange impact | (448) | (109) | 7 | (32) | (38) | (620) | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2022 | 2,129 | 554 | 376 | 209 | 213 | 3,481 | ||||||||||||||||
| Long-term institutional flows, net(4) | (98) | 13 | (1) | 65 | (26) | (47) | ||||||||||||||||
| Exchange-traded fund flows, net | 73 | 17 | — | — | (2) | 88 | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash fund flows, net | — | — | 76 | — | — | 76 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total flows, net | (25) | 30 | 75 | 65 | (28) | 117 | ||||||||||||||||
| Market appreciation (depreciation) | 408 | 26 | 16 | 35 | 15 | 500 | ||||||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange impact | 1 | (1) | — | 1 | 3 | 4 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total market/foreign exchange impact | 409 | 25 | 16 | 36 | 18 | 504 | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2023 | 2,513 | 609 | 467 | 310 | 203 | 4,102 | ||||||||||||||||
| Long-term institutional flows, net(4) | (7) | (8) | 1 | 34 | (17) | 3 | ||||||||||||||||
| Exchange-traded fund flows, net | 85 | 24 | — | — | — | 109 | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash fund flows, net | — | — | 32 | — | — | 32 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total flows, net | 78 | 16 | 33 | 34 | (17) | 144 | ||||||||||||||||
| Market appreciation (depreciation) | 457 | 4 | 21 | 32 | 21 | 535 | ||||||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange impact | (41) | (13) | (3) | (2) | (7) | (66) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total market/foreign exchange impact | 416 | (9) | 18 | 30 | 14 | 469 | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2024 | $ | 3,007 | $ | 616 | $ | 518 | $ | 374 | $ | 200 | $ | 4,715 |
(1) Includes both floating and constant-net-asset-value portfolios held in commingled structures or separate accounts.
(2) Includes real estate investment trusts, currency and commodities, including SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust. We are not the investment manager for the SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR®Gold MiniSharesSM Trust, but act as the marketing agent.
(3) AUM for passive alternative investments has been revised from prior presentations.
(4) Amounts represent long-term portfolios, excluding ETFs.
Foreign Exchange Trading Services
Foreign exchange trading services revenue, as presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, increased 11% in 2024 compared to 2023, primarily due to higher client volumes, partially offset by lower spreads associated with lower average FX volatility. Foreign exchange trading services revenue comprises revenue generated by FX trading and revenue generated by brokerage and other trading services, which made up 63% and 37%, respectively, of foreign exchange trading services revenue in both 2024 and 2023.
We primarily earn FX trading revenue by acting as a principal market-maker through both “direct sales and trading” and “indirect FX trading.”
•Direct sales and trading: Represent FX transactions at negotiated rates with clients and investment managers that contact our trading desk directly. Clients are able to choose their own execution time and method, trading by voice or electronically on one of the several available multibank platforms. These principal market-making activities include transactions for funds serviced by third party custodians or prime brokers, as well as those funds under custody with us.
State Street Corporation | 68
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
•Indirect FX trading: Represents FX transactions with clients, for which we are the funds’ custodian, or their investment managers, routed to our FX desk through our asset-servicing operation. We execute indirect FX trades as a principal at rates disclosed to our clients. Indirect FX is designed to address FX trades that relate to the purchase, sale or holding of a security where clients chose their execution frequency (either hourly or once per day), allowing us to offer straight-through processing and a fully automated service.
Our FX trading revenue is influenced by multiple factors, including: the volume and type of client FX transactions and related spreads; currency volatility, reflecting market conditions; and our management of exchange rate, interest rate and other market risks associated with our FX activities. The relative impact of these factors on our total FX trading revenues often differs from period to period. For example, assuming all other factors remain constant, increases or decreases in volumes or bid-offer spreads across product mix tend to result in increases or decreases, as the case may be, in client-related FX revenue.
Our clients that utilize indirect FX trading can, in addition to executing their FX transactions through dealers not affiliated with us, transition from indirect FX trading to either direct sales and trading execution, including our “Street FX” service. Street FX, in which we continue to act as a principal market-maker, enables our clients to define their FX execution strategy and automate the FX trade execution process, both for funds under custody with us as well as those under custody at another bank.
We also earn foreign exchange trading services revenue through “electronic FX services” and “other trading, transition management and brokerage revenue.”
•Electronic FX services: Our clients may choose to execute FX transactions through one of our electronic trading platforms (i.e., FX Connect, Currenex). These transactions generate revenue through a “click” fee.
•Other trading, transition management and brokerage revenue: As our clients look to us to enhance and preserve portfolio values, they may choose to utilize our Transition or Currency Management capabilities or transact with our Equity Trade execution group. These transactions, which are not limited to foreign exchange, generate revenue via commissions charged for trades transacted during the management of these portfolios.
Fund Connect is another one of our electronic trading platforms: it is a global trading, analytics and cash management tool with access to more than 400 money market funds from leading providers.
Securities Finance
Securities finance revenue, as presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, increased 3% in 2024 compared to 2023, mainly due to higher client lending balances, partially offset by lower spreads primarily resulting from muted industry specials activity.
Our securities finance business consists of three components:
(1) an agency lending program for State Street Global Advisors managed investment funds with a broad range of investment objectives, which we refer to as the State Street Global Advisors lending funds;
(2) an agency lending program for third-party investment managers and asset owners, which we refer to as the agency lending funds; and
(3) security lending transactions which we enter into as principal, which we refer to as our prime services business.
Securities finance revenue earned from our agency lending activities, which is composed of our split of both the spreads related to cash collateral and the fees related to non-cash collateral, is principally a function of the volume of securities on loan, the interest rate spreads and fees earned on the underlying collateral and our share of the fee split.
As principal, our prime services business borrows securities from the lending client or other market participants and then lends such securities to the subsequent borrower, either our client or a broker/dealer. We act as principal when the lending client is unable to, or elects not to, transact directly with the market and execute the transaction and furnish the securities. In our role as principal, we provide support to the transaction through our credit rating. While we source a significant proportion of the securities furnished by us in our role as principal from third parties, we have the ability to source securities through assets under custody from clients who have designated us as an eligible borrower.
Market influences may continue to affect client demand for securities finance, and as a result our revenue from, and the profitability of, our securities lending activities in future periods. In addition, the constantly evolving regulatory environment, including revised or proposed capital and liquidity standards, interpretations of those standards, and our own balance sheet management activities, may influence modifications to the way in which we deliver our agency lending or prime services businesses, the volume of our securities lending activity and related revenue and profitability in future periods.
State Street Corporation | 69
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Software and Processing Fees
Software and processing fees revenue, as presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, increased 9% in 2024 compared to 2023, primarily due to higher front office software and data revenue associated with CRD.
Software and processing fees revenue includes diverse types of fees and revenue, including fees from front office software and data and lending related and other fees.
Front office software and data revenue, which primarily includes revenue from CRD, Alpha Data Platform and Alpha Data Services, increased 10% in 2024 compared to 2023, primarily due to software-enabled revenue growth, partially offset by lower on-premises renewals.
Revenue related to the front office solutions provided by CRD is primarily driven by the sale of term software licenses and SaaS, including professional services such as consulting and implementation services, software support and maintenance. Approximately 50%-70% of revenue associated with a sale of software to be installed on-premises is recognized at a point in time when the customer benefits from obtaining access to and use of the software license, with the percentage varying based on the length of the contract and other contractual terms. The remainder of revenue for on-premise installations is recognized over the length of the contract as maintenance and other services are provided. Upon renewal of an on-premises software contract, the same pattern of revenue recognition is followed with 50%-70% recognized upon renewal and the remaining balance recognized over the term of the contract. Revenue for a SaaS related arrangement, where the customer does not take possession of the software, is recognized over the term of the contract as services are provided. Upon renewal of a SaaS arrangement, revenue continues to be recognized as services are provided under the new contract. As a result of these differences in how portions of CRD revenue are accounted for, CRD revenue may vary more than other business units quarter to quarter.
Lending related and other fees increased 8% in 2024 compared to 2023, reflecting higher unfunded commitments primarily relating to our fund finance products. Lending related and other fees primarily consists of fee revenue associated with our fund finance, leveraged loans, municipal finance, insurance and stable value wrap businesses.
Other Fee Revenue
Other fee revenue includes market-related adjustments and income associated with other equity method investments.
Other fee revenue increased $109 million in 2024, compared to 2023, primarily reflecting a $66 million gain on sale of an equity investment and the absence of the impact of the Argentine peso devaluation in the prior year period.
Additional information about fee revenue is provided under “Line of Business Information” included in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
Net Interest Income
See Table 2: Total Revenue, for the breakout of interest income and interest expense for the years ended December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022.
NII is defined as interest income earned on interest-earning assets less interest expense incurred on interest-bearing liabilities. Interest-earning assets, which principally consist of investment securities, interest-bearing deposits with banks, loans, resale agreements and other liquid assets, are financed primarily by client deposits, short-term borrowings and long-term debt.
NIM represents the relationship between annualized FTE NII and average total interest-earning assets for the period. It is calculated by dividing FTE NII by average interest-earning assets. Revenue that is exempt from income taxes, mainly earned from certain investment securities (state and political subdivisions), is adjusted to an FTE basis using the U.S. federal and state statutory income tax rates.
NII increased 6% in 2024 compared to 2023, primarily due to higher investment securities yields and loan growth, partially offset by deposit mix shift towards interest-bearing deposits.
State Street Corporation | 70
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
See Table 13: Average Balances and Interest Rates - Fully Taxable-Equivalent Basis, for the breakout of NII on a FTE basis for the years ended December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022.
| TABLE 13: AVERAGE BALANCES AND INTEREST RATES - FULLY TAXABLE-EQUIVALENT BASIS(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions; fully taxable-equivalent basis) | Average Balance | Interest Revenue/Expense | Rate | Average Balance | Interest Revenue/Expense | Rate | Average Balance | Interest Revenue/ Expense | Rate | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Interest-bearing deposits with banks | $ | 88,754 | $ | 3,634 | 4.09 | % | $ | 69,883 | $ | 2,869 | 4.11 | % | $ | 76,498 | $ | 842 | 1.10 | % | ||||||||||||||
| Securities purchased under resale agreements(2) | 6,789 | 686 | 10.10 | 1,764 | 312 | 17.67 | 2,116 | 188 | 8.88 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Trading account assets | 782 | — | — | 711 | — | — | 721 | — | 0.01 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment securities available for sale | 53,572 | 2,682 | 5.01 | 42,850 | 1,748 | 4.08 | 53,613 | 733 | 1.37 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment securities held-to-maturity | 51,212 | 1,090 | 2.13 | 62,915 | 1,262 | 2.01 | 58,316 | 979 | 1.68 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Investment securities | 104,784 | 3,772 | 3.60 | 105,765 | 3,010 | 2.85 | 111,929 | 1,712 | 1.53 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Loans | 39,660 | 2,272 | 5.73 | 34,800 | 1,863 | 5.35 | 35,117 | 973 | 2.77 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other interest-earning assets(3) | 25,300 | 1,616 | 6.39 | 18,098 | 1,131 | 6.25 | 20,850 | 383 | 1.84 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total interest-earning assets | 266,069 | 11,980 | 4.50 | 231,021 | 9,185 | 3.98 | 247,231 | 4,098 | 1.66 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Cash and due from banks | 3,674 | 3,925 | 3,652 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other non-interest-earning assets | 41,980 | 39,750 | 35,547 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total assets | $ | 311,723 | $ | 274,696 | $ | 286,430 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Interest-bearing deposits: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| U.S. | $ | 135,898 | $ | 5,532 | 4.07 | % | $ | 110,204 | $ | 3,976 | 3.61 | % | $ | 98,252 | $ | 887 | 0.90 | % | ||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. | 64,144 | 1,095 | 1.71 | 62,689 | 1,015 | 1.62 | 76,842 | 80 | 0.10 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total interest-bearing deposits(4)(5) | 200,042 | 6,627 | 3.31 | 172,893 | 4,991 | 2.89 | 175,094 | 967 | 0.55 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Securities sold under repurchase agreements | 3,163 | 156 | 4.93 | 3,904 | 34 | 0.87 | 3,633 | 14 | 0.39 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Federal funds purchased | — | — | — | 65 | 3 | 4.82 | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other short-term borrowings | 11,425 | 577 | 5.05 | 1,120 | 40 | 3.60 | 1,188 | 26 | 2.18 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Long-term debt | 20,394 | 1,086 | 5.32 | 17,355 | 888 | 5.12 | 14,132 | 376 | 2.66 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other interest-bearing liabilities(6) | 4,826 | 608 | 12.59 | 3,891 | 465 | 11.96 | 2,725 | 161 | 5.91 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total interest-bearing liabilities | 239,850 | 9,054 | 3.77 | 199,228 | 6,421 | 3.22 | 196,772 | 1,544 | 0.78 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-interest-bearing deposits(5) | 25,569 | 32,218 | 47,780 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other non-interest-bearing liabilities | 21,192 | 19,073 | 15,992 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Preferred shareholders’ equity | 2,773 | 1,976 | 1,976 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common shareholders’ equity | 22,339 | 22,201 | 23,910 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity | $ | 311,723 | $ | 274,696 | $ | 286,430 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Excess of rate earned over rate paid | 0.73 | % | 0.75 | % | 0.87 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income, fully taxable-equivalent basis | $ | 2,926 | $ | 2,764 | $ | 2,554 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest margin, fully taxable-equivalent basis | 1.10 | % | 1.20 | % | 1.03 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tax-equivalent adjustment | (3) | (5) | (10) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income, GAAP basis | $ | 2,923 | $ | 2,759 | $ | 2,544 |
(1) Rates earned/paid on interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities include the impact of hedge activities associated with our asset and liability management activities where applicable.
(2) Reflects the impact of balance sheet netting under enforceable netting agreements of approximately $191.26 billion, $140.36 billion and $71.02 billion for the years ended December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022, respectively. Excluding the impact of netting, the average interest rates would be approximately 0.46%, 0.22% and 0.26% for the years ended December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022, respectively.
(3) Reflects the impact of balance sheet netting under enforceable netting agreements of approximately $6.96 billion, $4.94 billion and $5.39 billion for the years ended December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022, respectively. Excluding the impact of netting, the average interest rates would be approximately 6.69%, 3.61% and 1.46% for the years ended December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022, respectively.
(4) Average rate includes the impact of FX swap costs of approximately ($274) million, $54 million and $20 million for the years ended December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022, respectively. Average rates for total interest-bearing deposits excluding the impact of FX swap costs were 3.45%, 2.86% and 0.55% for the years ended December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022, respectively.
(5) Total deposits averaged $225.61 billion, $205.11 billion and $222.87 billion for the years ended December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022, respectively.
(6) Reflects the impact of balance sheet netting under enforceable netting agreements of approximately $6.30 billion, $4.67 billion and $4.59 billion for the years ended December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022, respectively. Excluding the impact of netting, the average interest rates would be approximately 7.30%, 5.43% and 2.20% for the years ended December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022, respectively.
State Street Corporation | 71
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Changes in the components of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities are discussed in more detail below. Additional information about the components of interest income and interest expense is provided in Note 17 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Average total interest-earning assets were $266.07 billion in 2024 compared to $231.02 billion in 2023. The increase is primarily due to higher levels of client deposits and an increase in short-term wholesale funding.
Interest-bearing deposits with banks averaged $88.75 billion in 2024 compared to $69.88 billion in 2023. These deposits primarily reflect our maintenance of cash balances at the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank (ECB) and other non-U.S. central banks. The higher levels of average cash balances reflect higher levels of client deposits and funding levels.
Securities purchased under resale agreements averaged $6.79 billion in 2024 compared to $1.76 billion in 2023, due to a shift to term repurchase agreements, which reduces our ability to net against resale agreement balances. Additionally, as a member of FICC, we may net securities sold under repurchase agreements against those purchased under resale agreements with counterparties that are also members of the clearing organization when specific netting criteria are met. The impact of balance sheet netting was $191.26 billion on average in 2024 compared to $140.36 billion in 2023, primarily driven by an increase in FICC repurchase agreement volumes.
We are a direct and sponsoring member of FICC. As a sponsoring member within FICC, we enter into repurchase and resale transactions in eligible securities with sponsored clients and with other FICC members and, pursuant to FICC Government Securities Division rules, submit, novate and net the transactions. We may sponsor clients to clear their eligible repurchase transactions with FICC, backed by our guarantee to FICC of the prompt and full payment and performance of our sponsored member clients’ respective obligations. We generally obtain a security interest from our sponsored clients in the high quality securities collateral that they receive, which is designed to mitigate our potential exposure to FICC.
Additionally, as a member of certain industry clearing and settlement exchanges, we may be required to pay a pro rata share of the losses incurred by the organization and provide liquidity support in the event of the default of another member to the extent that the defaulting member’s clearing fund obligation and the prescribed loss allocation to FICC is depleted. It is difficult to estimate our maximum possible exposure under the membership agreement,
since this would require an assessment of future claims that may be made against us that have not yet occurred. We did not record any liabilities under these arrangements as of both December 31, 2024 and 2023.
Average investment securities were $104.78 billion in 2024 compared to $105.77 billion in 2023. While the overall size of the portfolio was relatively flat in 2024 compared to 2023, it included higher U.S. Treasury securities, offset by lower mortgage-backed and non-U.S. sovereign and supranational securities.
Average loans increased to $39.66 billion in 2024 compared to $34.80 billion in 2023. Average core loans, which exclude overdrafts and highlight our efforts to grow our lending portfolio, averaged $36.14 billion in 2024 compared to $30.97 billion in 2023. The increase is primarily due to growth in CLOs in loan form and fund finance loans. Additional information about these loans is provided in Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Average other interest-earning assets, largely associated with our prime service business, increased to $25.30 billion in 2024 from $18.10 billion in 2023, primarily driven by an increase in the level of cash collateral posted. Other interest-earning assets primarily reflects prime services assets where cash has been posted to borrow securities from lenders, which are then lent by us, as principal, to borrowers. This cash includes both cash from borrowers and cash utilized from our balance sheet, and is presented on a net basis on the balance sheet where we have enforceable netting agreements. Non-interest earning assets also includes a portion of our prime services assets where borrower-provided non-cash collateral has been utilized to borrow securities from lenders, which we subsequently loan, as principal, to our borrowers; in this structure our investment portfolio securities are encumbered, but this is not reflected on the balance sheet. Combined with our prime services liabilities, revenue from these activities generates securities finance fee revenue as well as net interest income.
Average total interest-bearing deposits increased to $200.04 billion in 2024 from $172.89 billion in 2023. The increase is driven by active engagement with our clients, rotation from non-interest bearing deposits and a reduction in the Federal Reserve’s overnight repurchase agreement activity. Future interest-bearing deposit levels will be influenced by the underlying asset servicing business, client behavior, the mix of interest-bearing and non-interest-bearing deposits and market conditions, including the general levels of U.S. and non-U.S. interest rates.
State Street Corporation | 72
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Average other short-term borrowings increased to $11.43 billion in 2024 from $1.12 billion in 2023, due to increased wholesale funding. The increase is driven by our effort to diversify our funding sources through relatively low-cost channels, to further support business growth.
Average long-term debt was $20.39 billion in 2024 compared to $17.36 billion in 2023. These amounts reflect issuances, redemptions and maturities of senior and subordinated debt during the respective periods.
Average other interest-bearing liabilities, largely associated with our prime services business, were $4.83 billion in 2024 compared to $3.89 billion in 2023. Other interest-bearing liabilities is primarily driven by cash received from our custody clients, which is presented on a net basis where we have enforceable netting agreements. Non-interest bearing liabilities also include a portion of our prime services liabilities where client-provided non-cash collateral has been received and we have rehypothecation rights. Securities received as collateral from our custody clients where we have no rehypothecation rights are used as a credit mitigant only and remain off balance sheet.
Several factors could affect future levels of NII and NIM, including the volume and mix of client deposits and funding sources; central bank actions; balance sheet management activities; changes in the level and slope of U.S. and non-U.S. interest rates; revised or proposed regulatory capital or liquidity standards, or interpretations of those standards; the yields earned on securities purchased compared to the yields earned on securities sold or matured; and changes in the type and amount of credit or other loans we extend.
Based on market conditions and other factors, including regulatory standards, we continue to reinvest the majority of the proceeds from pay-downs and maturities of investment securities in highly-rated U.S. and non-U.S. securities, such as federal agency MBS, sovereign debt securities and U.S. Treasury and agency securities. The pace at which we reinvest, and the types of investment securities purchased will depend on the impact of market conditions, the implementation of regulatory standards, including interpretation of those standards and other factors over time. We expect these factors and the levels of global interest rates to impact our reinvestment program and future levels of NII and NIM.
Provision for Credit Losses
In 2024, we recorded a $75 million provision for credit losses, primarily reflecting an increase in loan loss reserves associated with certain commercial real
estate and leveraged loans, compared to $46 million in 2023.
Additional information is provided under “Loans” in “Financial Condition” in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis and in Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Expenses
Table 14: Expenses, provides the breakout of expenses for the years ended December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022. Total expenses decreased 1% compared to 2023, as higher business investments, as well as revenue and performance-related costs, were more than offset by productivity savings from organizational simplification, process improvements and other initiatives, including from the joint venture consolidations in India and the net impact of notable items. The net impact of notable items in the current and prior year periods decreased expenses by 5% points in 2024 as compared to 2023.
| TABLE 14: EXPENSES | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2024 vs. 2023 | % Change 2023 vs. 2022 | |||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | ||||||||||||||
| Compensation and employee benefits | $ | 4,697 | $ | 4,744 | $ | 4,428 | (1) | % | 7 | % | |||||||
| Information systems and communications | 1,829 | 1,703 | 1,630 | 7 | 4 | ||||||||||||
| Transaction processing services | 998 | 957 | 971 | 4 | (1) | ||||||||||||
| Occupancy | 437 | 426 | 394 | 3 | 8 | ||||||||||||
| Amortization of other intangible assets | 230 | 239 | 238 | (4) | — | ||||||||||||
| Acquisition and restructuring costs | — | (15) | 65 | nm | nm | ||||||||||||
| Other: | |||||||||||||||||
| Professional services | 465 | 428 | 375 | 9 | 14 | ||||||||||||
| Other | 874 | 1,101 | 700 | (21) | 57 | ||||||||||||
| Total other | 1,339 | 1,529 | 1,075 | (12) | 42 | ||||||||||||
| Total expenses | $ | 9,530 | $ | 9,583 | $ | 8,801 | (1) | 9 | |||||||||
| Number of employees at year-end | 52,626 | 46,451 | 42,226 | 13 | 10 |
Compensation and employee benefits expenses decreased 1% in 2024 compared to 2023, as higher performance-based incentive compensation and employee benefits were more than offset by ongoing organizational simplification, process improvements and other initiatives, as well as net benefits from the joint venture consolidations in India and lower net impact of notable items. The net impact of notable items in the current and prior year periods decreased compensation and employee benefits expenses by 3% points in 2024 as compared to 2023.
Total headcount increased 13% as of December 31, 2024 compared to December 31, 2023, primarily reflecting the consolidation of our second joint venture in India in the second quarter of 2024. Associated headcount cost was previously reflected in compensation and employee benefits expenses.
State Street Corporation | 73
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Information systems and communications expenses increased 7% in 2024 compared to 2023, primarily reflecting higher technology and infrastructure investments, the absence of episodic vendor credits and notable items, partially offset by vendor savings initiatives and optimization savings. The absence of the prior year notable items decreased information systems and communications expenses by 3% points in 2024, as compared to 2023.
Transaction processing services expenses increased 4% in 2024 compared to 2023, primarily due to higher revenue-related costs associated with sub-custody, broker fees and market data costs.
Occupancy expenses increased 3% in 2024 compared to 2023, primarily driven by footprint expansion related to the joint venture consolidations in India, partially offset by footprint optimization and one-time vendor credits.
Amortization of other intangible assets decreased 4% in 2024 compared to 2023.
Other expenses decreased 12% in 2024 compared to 2023, primarily reflecting the impact of the FDIC special assessment notable items in the current and prior year periods, partially offset by higher professional services, and higher sales, marketing and other fund related expenses.
Repositioning Charges
In 2024, we recorded a net repositioning release of $2 million, including a $15 million release reflected in compensation and employee benefits expenses, partially offset by $13 million of occupancy charges related to footprint optimization.
In 2023, we recorded net repositioning charges of approximately $203 million to enable the next phase of our productivity efforts to streamline operations and technology, and improve efficiency. Expenses for 2023 included $182 million of compensation and employee benefits expenses related to workforce rationalization and $21 million of occupancy costs related to real estate footprint optimization.
The following table presents aggregate activity for repositioning charges for the periods indicated:
| TABLE 15: REPOSITIONING CHARGES | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | Employee Related Costs | Real Estate Actions | Total | |||||||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2021 | $ | 68 | $ | 6 | $ | 74 | ||||||||||
| Accruals for Repositioning Charges | 58 | 20 | 78 | |||||||||||||
| Payments and other adjustments | (43) | (21) | (64) | |||||||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2022 | 83 | 5 | 88 | |||||||||||||
| Accruals for Repositioning Charges | 182 | 21 | 203 | |||||||||||||
| Payments and other adjustments | (58) | (25) | (83) | |||||||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2023 | 207 | 1 | 208 | |||||||||||||
| Accruals for Repositioning Charges | (15) | 13 | (2) | |||||||||||||
| Payments and other adjustments | (96) | (14) | (110) | |||||||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2024 | $ | 96 | $ | — | $ | 96 |
Income Tax Expense
Income tax expense was $708 million in 2024 compared to $372 million in 2023. Our effective tax rate was 20.8% in 2024 compared to 16.1% in 2023, primarily due to lower impact of business tax credits, an increase in foreign tax-related costs and a decrease in discrete benefits.
Additional information regarding income tax expense, including unrecognized tax benefits and tax contingencies, is provided in Notes 13 and 22 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
LINE OF BUSINESS INFORMATION
Our operations are organized into two lines of business: Investment Servicing and Investment Management, which are defined based on products and services provided. The results of operations for these lines of business are not necessarily comparable with those of other companies, including companies in the financial services industry. For the description of our lines of business refer to “Lines of Business” in Item 1 in this Form 10-K. Certain amounts are not allocated to our two lines of business. For further information, please refer to Note 24 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 74
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Investment Servicing
| TABLE 16: INVESTMENT SERVICING LINE OF BUSINESS RESULTS | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in millions, except where otherwise noted) | Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2024 vs. 2023 | % Change 2023 vs. 2022 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Servicing fees | $ | 5,016 | $ | 4,922 | $ | 5,087 | 2 | % | (3) | % | |||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange trading services | 1,248 | 1,140 | 1,271 | 9 | (10) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Securities finance | 415 | 402 | 397 | 3 | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Software and processing fees | 888 | 811 | 789 | 9 | 3 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Other fee revenue | 188 | 145 | 46 | 30 | nm | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total fee revenue | 7,755 | 7,420 | 7,590 | 5 | (2) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income | 2,899 | 2,740 | 2,551 | 6 | 7 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total other income | 2 | — | (2) | nm | nm | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total revenue | 10,656 | 10,160 | 10,139 | 5 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Provision for credit losses | 75 | 46 | 20 | 63 | nm | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total expenses | 7,687 | 7,413 | 7,260 | 4 | 2 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Income before income tax expense | $ | 2,894 | $ | 2,701 | $ | 2,859 | 7 | (6) | |||||||||||||||
| Pre-tax margin | 27 | % | 27 | % | 28 | % | |||||||||||||||||
| Average assets (in billions) | $ | 308.5 | $ | 271.5 | $ | 283.2 |
nm Not meaningful
Servicing Fees
Servicing fees, as presented in Table 16: Investment Servicing Line of Business Results, increased 2% in 2024 compared to 2023, primarily due to as higher average market levels and net new business, excluding a previously disclosed client transition, were partially offset by pricing headwinds, a previously disclosed client transition and lower client activity and adjustments, including asset mix shift.
For additional information about servicing fees and the impact of worldwide equity and fixed-income valuations on our fee revenue, as well as other key drivers of our servicing fee revenue, refer to “Fee Revenue” in “Consolidated Results of Operations” included in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
Expenses
Total expenses for Investment Servicing increased 4% in 2024 compared to 2023, as higher business investments, as well as revenue and performance-related costs, were partially offset by productivity savings from organizational simplification, process improvements and other initiatives, including from the joint venture consolidations in India. Additional information about expenses is provided under “Expenses” in “Consolidated Results of Operations” included in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
Investment Management
| TABLE 17: INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT LINE OF BUSINESS RESULTS | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in millions, except where otherwise noted) | Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2024 vs. 2023 | % Change 2023 vs. 2022 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Management fees(1) | $ | 2,124 | $ | 1,876 | $ | 1,939 | 13 | % | (3) | % | |||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange trading services(2) | 138 | 125 | 82 | 10 | 52 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Securities finance | 23 | 24 | 19 | (4) | 26 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Other fee revenue(3) | 35 | 35 | (47) | — | nm | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total fee revenue | 2,320 | 2,060 | 1,993 | 13 | 3 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income | 24 | 19 | (7) | 26 | nm | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total revenue | 2,344 | 2,079 | 1,986 | 13 | 5 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total expenses | 1,655 | 1,540 | 1,396 | 7 | 10 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Income before income tax expense | $ | 689 | $ | 539 | $ | 590 | 28 | (9) | |||||||||||||||
| Pre-tax margin | 29 | % | 26 | % | 30 | % | |||||||||||||||||
| Average assets (in billions) | $ | 3.2 | $ | 3.2 | $ | 3.2 |
(1) Includes revenues from SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust AUM where we are not the investment manager but act as the marketing agent.
(2) Includes revenue for reimbursements received for certain ETFs associated with State Street Global Advisors where we act as the distribution and marketing agent.
(3) Includes other revenue items that are primarily driven by equity market movements.
nm Not meaningful
State Street Corporation | 75
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Investment Management total revenue increased 13% in 2024 compared to 2023.
Management Fees
Management fees increased 13% in 2024 compared to 2023, primarily due to higher average market levels and net inflows.
For additional information about the impact of worldwide equity and fixed-income valuations, as well as other key drivers of our management fees revenue, refer to “Fee Revenue” in “Consolidated Results of Operations” included in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
Expenses
Total expenses for Investment Management increased 7% in 2024 compared to 2023, reflecting higher revenue-related fund expenses, performance-based incentive compensation, and salaries and employee benefits.
Additional information about expenses is provided under “Expenses” in “Consolidated Results of Operations” included in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
For additional information about our two lines of business, as well as the revenues, expenses and capital allocation methodologies associated with them, refer to Note 24 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
FINANCIAL CONDITION
The structure of our consolidated statement of condition is primarily driven by the liabilities generated by our Investment Servicing and Investment Management lines of business. Our clients’ needs and our operating objectives determine the volume, mix and currency denomination of our assets and liabilities. As our clients execute their worldwide cash management and investment activities, they utilize deposits and short-term investments that constitute the majority of our liabilities. These liabilities are generally in the form of interest-bearing transaction account deposits, which are denominated in a variety of currencies; non-interest-bearing demand deposits; and repurchase agreements, which generally serve as short-term investment alternatives for our clients.
Deposits and other liabilities resulting from client initiated transactions are invested in assets that generally have contractual maturities significantly longer than our liabilities; however, we evaluate the operational nature of our deposits and seek to maintain appropriate short-term liquidity of those liabilities that are not operational in nature and maintain longer-termed assets for our operational deposits. Our assets consist primarily of securities held in our AFS or HTM portfolios and short-duration financial instruments, such as interest-bearing deposits with banks and securities purchased under resale agreements. The actual mix of assets is determined by the characteristics of the client liabilities and our desire to maintain a well-diversified portfolio of high-quality assets.
Additional information on our financial condition is presented in Table 13: Average Balances and Interest Rates - Fully Taxable-Equivalent Basis. We believe the average statement of condition is a better measure of the balance sheet trends as period-end balances can be impacted by the timing of client activities including deposits and withdrawals.
State Street Corporation | 76
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Investment Securities
| TABLE 18: CARRYING VALUES OF INVESTMENT SECURITIES | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, | ||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |||||||
| Available-for-sale: | ||||||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 23,525 | $ | 8,301 | $ | 7,981 | ||||
| Mortgage-backed securities(1) | 10,566 | 10,755 | 8,509 | |||||||
| Total U.S. Treasury and federal agencies | 34,091 | 19,056 | 16,490 | |||||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 2,430 | 1,857 | 1,623 | |||||||
| Asset-backed securities(2) | 1,868 | 2,137 | 1,669 | |||||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 13,939 | 15,100 | 14,089 | |||||||
| Other(3) | 2,821 | 2,735 | 2,091 | |||||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 21,058 | 21,829 | 19,472 | |||||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||
| Student loans(4) | 90 | 114 | 115 | |||||||
| Collateralized loan obligations(5) | 3,453 | 2,527 | 2,355 | |||||||
| Non-agency CMBS and RMBS(6) | 4 | 249 | 231 | |||||||
| Other | 91 | 90 | 88 | |||||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 3,638 | 2,980 | 2,789 | |||||||
| State and political subdivisions | 56 | 355 | 823 | |||||||
| Other U.S. debt securities(7) | 52 | 306 | 1,005 | |||||||
| Total available-for-sale securities(8)(9) | $ | 58,895 | $ | 44,526 | $ | 40,579 | ||||
| Held-to-maturity: | ||||||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 5,417 | $ | 8,584 | $ | 11,693 | ||||
| Mortgage-backed securities(10) | 36,101 | 39,472 | 42,307 | |||||||
| Total U.S. Treasury and federal agencies | 41,518 | 48,056 | 54,000 | |||||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 3,673 | 5,757 | 6,603 | |||||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 3,673 | 5,757 | 6,603 | |||||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||
| Student loans(4) | 2,536 | 3,298 | 3,955 | |||||||
| Non-agency CMBS and RMBS(11) | — | 6 | 142 | |||||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 2,536 | 3,304 | 4,097 | |||||||
| Total held-to-maturity securities(8)(12) | $ | 47,727 | $ | 57,117 | $ | 64,700 |
(1) As of December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022, the total fair value included $4.36 billion, $5.54 billion and $6.78 billion, respectively, of agency CMBS and $6.20 billion, $5.21 billion and $1.73 billion, respectively, of agency MBS.
(2) As of December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022, the fair value includes non-U.S. collateralized loan obligations of $0.70 billion, $1.02 billion and $0.86 billion, respectively.
(3) As of December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022, the fair value includes non-U.S. corporate bonds of $2.54 billion, $2.36 billion and $1.14 billion, respectively.
(4) Primarily comprised of securities guaranteed by the federal government with respect to at least 97% of defaulted principal and accrued interest on the underlying loans.
(5) Excludes collateralized loan obligations in loan form. Refer to Note 4 for additional information.
(6) Consists entirely of non-agency RMBS as of December 31, 2024 and entirely of non-agency CMBS as of both December 31, 2023 and 2022.
(7) As of December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022, the fair value of U.S. corporate bonds was $0.05 billion, $0.31 billion and $1.01 billion, respectively.
(8) An immaterial amount of accrued interest related to HTM and AFS investment securities was excluded from the amortized cost basis for the period ended December 31, 2024.
(9) As of December 31, 2024 and 2023, we had no allowance for credit losses on AFS investment securities. As of December 31, 2022, we had an allowance for credit losses on AFS investment securities of $2 million.
(10) As of December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022, the total amortized cost included $5.18 billion, $5.23 billion and $4.99 billion of agency CMBS, respectively.
(11) Consists entirely of non-agency RMBS as of December 31, 2023. As of December 31, 2022, the total amortized cost included $133 million of non-agency CMBS and $9 million of non-agency RMBS.
(12) As of December 31, 2024, we had no allowance for credit losses on HTM investment securities. As of December 31, 2023, we had an allowance for credit losses on HTM investment securities of $1 million. As of December 31, 2022, we had no allowance for credit losses on HTM investment securities.
Additional information about our investment securities portfolio is provided in Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
We manage our investment securities portfolio by taking into consideration the interest rate and duration characteristics of our client liabilities along with the context of the overall structure of our consolidated statement of condition, and in consideration of the global interest rate environment. We consider a well-diversified, high-credit quality investment securities portfolio to be an important element in the management of our consolidated statement of condition.
Average duration of our investment securities portfolio, including the impact of hedges, was 2.2 years and 2.7 years as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
Approximately 97% and 96% of the carrying value of the portfolio was rated “AA” or higher as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively, as follows:
| TABLE 19: INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO BY EXTERNAL CREDIT RATING | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | ||||
| AAA(1) | 88 | % | 85 | % | |
| AA | 9 | 11 | |||
| A | 2 | 2 | |||
| BBB | 1 | 2 | |||
| 100 | % | 100 | % |
(1) Includes U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities that are split-rated, “AAA” by Moody’s Investors Service and “AA+” by Standard & Poor’s and also includes Agency MBS securities which are not explicitly rated but which have an explicit or assumed guarantee from the U.S. government.
The following table presents the diversification of the investment portfolio with respect to asset class composition as of December 31, 2024 and 2023.
| TABLE 20: INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO BY ASSET CLASS | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | ||||
| U.S. Agency Mortgage-backed securities | 35 | % | 39 | % | |
| U.S. Treasuries | 27 | 17 | |||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 17 | 20 | |||
| Asset-backed securities | 10 | 10 | |||
| Other credit | 11 | 14 | |||
| 100 | % | 100 | % |
State Street Corporation | 77
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following table presents the net unamortized purchase premiums or discounts and net premium amortization or discount accretion related to the investment portfolio for the periods indicated:
| TABLE 21: INVESTMENT SECURITIES NET PREMIUM AMORTIZATION (DISCOUNT ACCRETION) | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 2024 | 2023 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | MBS | Non-MBS | Total(1) | MBS | Non-MBS | Total(1) | |||||||||||||||
| Unamortized purchase premiums and (discounts) at period end | $ | 364 | $ | (599) | $ | (235) | $ | 418 | $ | (264) | 154 | ||||||||||
| Net premium amortization (discount accretion) | 66 | (316) | (250) | 81 | (78) | 3 |
(1) Totals exclude premiums or discounts created from the transfer of securities from AFS to HTM.
Non-U.S. Debt Securities
Approximately 23% and 27% of the aggregate carrying value of our investment securities portfolio was non-U.S. debt securities as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
| TABLE 22: NON-U.S. DEBT SECURITIES(1) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | ||||
| Available-for-sale: | ||||||
| Canada | $ | 3,237 | $ | 4,020 | ||
| United Kingdom | 2,702 | 2,141 | ||||
| Australia | 2,055 | 1,833 | ||||
| France | 1,565 | 1,386 | ||||
| Germany | 1,195 | 1,389 | ||||
| Netherlands | 446 | 690 | ||||
| Austria | 382 | 339 | ||||
| Finland | 312 | 141 | ||||
| Spain | 301 | 230 | ||||
| Sweden | 263 | 270 | ||||
| Italy | 231 | 412 | ||||
| Mexico | 216 | — | ||||
| Brazil | 181 | 257 | ||||
| Republic of Korea | 168 | 223 | ||||
| Singapore | 141 | 249 | ||||
| Japan | 114 | 769 | ||||
| Other(2) | 7,549 | 7,480 | ||||
| Total | $ | 21,058 | $ | 21,829 | ||
| Held-to-maturity: | ||||||
| Ireland | $ | 397 | $ | 440 | ||
| Belgium | 254 | 459 | ||||
| France | 206 | 524 | ||||
| Germany | 201 | 212 | ||||
| Finland | 124 | 131 | ||||
| Canada | 104 | 112 | ||||
| Austria | 67 | 150 | ||||
| Spain | — | 805 | ||||
| Netherlands | — | 177 | ||||
| Other(2) | 2,320 | 2,747 | ||||
| Total | $ | 3,673 | $ | 5,757 |
(1) Geography is determined primarily based on the domicile of collateral or issuer.
(2) As of December 31, 2024, other non-U.S. investments include $6.97 billion supranational bonds in AFS securities and $2.32 billion supranational bonds in HTM securities.
Approximately 90% and 86% of the aggregate carrying value of these non-U.S. debt securities was rated “AAA” or “AA” as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. The majority of these securities comprised senior positions within the security structures; these positions have a level of protection provided through subordination and other forms of credit protection. As of December 31, 2024 and 2023, approximately 29% and 28%, respectively, of the aggregate carrying value of these non-U.S. debt securities was floating-rate.
As of December 31, 2024, our non-U.S. debt securities had an average market-to-book ratio of 99.8%, and an aggregate pre-tax net unrealized loss of $40 million, consisting of gross unrealized gains of $109 million and gross unrealized losses of $149 million. These unrealized amounts included:
•a pre-tax net unrealized gain of $26 million, consisting of gross unrealized gains of $102 million and gross unrealized losses of $76 million, associated with non-U.S. AFS debt securities; and
•a pre-tax net unrealized loss of $66 million, consisting of gross unrealized gains of $7 million and gross unrealized losses of $73 million, associated with non-U.S. HTM debt securities.
As of December 31, 2024, the underlying collateral for non-U.S. MBS and ABS primarily included mortgages in Australia, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Italy. The securities listed under “Canada” were composed of Canadian government securities, corporate debt, covered bonds and non-U.S. agency securities. The securities listed under “France” were composed of sovereign bonds, corporate debt, covered bonds, ABS and non-U.S. agency securities. The securities listed under “Germany” were composed of non-U.S. agency securities, ABS and corporate debt.
Municipal Obligations
We carried approximately $56 million of municipal securities classified as state and political subdivisions in our investment securities portfolio as of December 31, 2024, as shown in Table 18: Carrying Values of Investment Securities, all of which were classified as AFS. As of December 31, 2024, we also provided approximately $5.32 billion of credit and liquidity facilities to municipal issuers.
State Street Corporation | 78
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 23: STATE AND MUNICIPAL OBLIGORS(1) | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in millions) | Total Municipal Securities | Credit and Liquidity Facilities(2) | Total | % of Total Municipal Exposure | ||||||||||
| December 31, 2024 | ||||||||||||||
| State of Issuer: | ||||||||||||||
| Texas | $ | — | $ | 2,006 | $ | 2,006 | 37 | % | ||||||
| New York | 4 | 1,676 | 1,680 | 31 | ||||||||||
| California | 25 | 610 | 635 | 12 | ||||||||||
| Total | $ | 29 | $ | 4,292 | $ | 4,321 | ||||||||
| December 31, 2023 | ||||||||||||||
| State of Issuer: | ||||||||||||||
| Texas | $ | 112 | $ | 2,387 | $ | 2,499 | 37 | % | ||||||
| New York | 25 | 1,687 | 1,712 | 25 | ||||||||||
| California | 28 | 1,082 | 1,110 | 16 | ||||||||||
| Total | $ | 165 | $ | 5,156 | $ | 5,321 |
(1) Represented 5% or more of our aggregate municipal credit exposure of approximately $5.38 billion and $6.80 billion across our businesses as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
(2) Includes municipal loans which are also presented within Table 25: U.S. and Non-U.S. Loans.
Our aggregate municipal securities exposure presented in Table 23: State and Municipal Obligors, was concentrated primarily with highly-rated counterparties, with approximately 93% of the obligors rated “AA” or higher as of December 31, 2024. As of that date, approximately 45% and 54% of our aggregate municipal securities exposure was associated with general obligation and revenue bonds, respectively. The portfolios are also diversified geographically, with the states that represent our largest exposures widely dispersed across the United States.
Additional information with respect to our assessment of the allowance for credit losses on debt securities and impairment of AFS securities is provided in Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
| TABLE 24: CONTRACTUAL MATURITIES AND YIELDS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2024 | Under 1 Year | 1 to 5 Years | 6 to 10 Years | Over 10 Years | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | Amount | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Available-for-sale(1): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 8,625 | 0.24 | % | $ | 13,474 | 3.35 | % | $ | 1,426 | 3.22 | % | $ | — | — | % | $ | 23,525 | ||||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 49 | 5.23 | 1,819 | 4.99 | 2,493 | 4.91 | 6,205 | 5.18 | 10,566 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total U.S. treasury and federal agencies | 8,674 | 15,293 | 3,919 | 6,205 | 34,091 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 58 | 4.43 | 427 | 5.20 | 38 | 5.37 | 1,907 | 4.84 | 2,430 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset-backed securities | 276 | 3.77 | 279 | 3.74 | 1,007 | 4.74 | 306 | 3.89 | 1,868 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 2,700 | 0.87 | 10,136 | 2.95 | 1,103 | 2.52 | — | — | 13,939 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Other | 371 | — | 2,346 | 4.41 | 104 | 4.31 | — | — | 2,821 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 3,405 | 13,188 | 2,252 | 2,213 | 21,058 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Student loans | 24 | 7.44 | — | — | 12 | 5.48 | 54 | 5.08 | 90 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Collateralized loan obligations | 37 | 5.87 | 78 | 6.06 | 1,877 | 5.87 | 1,461 | 5.96 | 3,453 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-agency CMBS and RMBS | — | — | — | — | — | 6.01 | 4 | 6.26 | 4 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Other | — | — | 91 | 5.28 | — | — | — | — | 91 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 61 | 169 | 1,889 | 1,519 | 3,638 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| State and political subdivisions(2) | 30 | 3.74 | 26 | 5.93 | — | — | — | — | 56 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Other U.S. debt securities | 29 | 0.77 | 23 | 3.13 | — | — | — | — | 52 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 12,199 | $ | 28,699 | $ | 8,060 | $ | 9,937 | $ | 58,895 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Held-to-maturity(1): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 4,557 | 0.48 | % | $ | 851 | 0.78 | % | $ | 1 | 5.57 | % | $ | 8 | 5.07 | % | $ | 5,417 | ||||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 134 | 2.81 | 1,711 | 2.67 | 3,308 | 1.71 | 30,948 | 2.39 | 36,101 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total U.S. treasury and federal agencies | 4,691 | 2,562 | 3,309 | 30,956 | 41,518 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 1,409 | 1.98 | 2,044 | 1.12 | 220 | 0.73 | — | — | 3,673 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 1,409 | 2,044 | 220 | — | 3,673 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Student loans | 149 | 5.35 | 310 | 5.61 | 380 | 5.55 | 1,697 | 5.13 | 2,536 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 149 | 310 | 380 | 1,697 | 2,536 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 6,249 | $ | 4,916 | $ | 3,909 | $ | 32,653 | $ | 47,727 |
(1) The maturities of MBS, ABS and CMOs are based on expected principal payments.
(2) Yields were calculated on a FTE basis, using applicable statutory tax rates (21.0% as of December 31, 2024).
State Street Corporation | 79
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Loans
| TABLE 25: U.S. AND NON- U.S. LOANS | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, | ||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |||||||
| Domestic(1): | ||||||||||
| Commercial and financial: | ||||||||||
| Fund finance(2) | $ | 16,347 | $ | 13,697 | $ | 12,154 | ||||
| Leveraged loans | 2,742 | 2,412 | 2,431 | |||||||
| Overdrafts | 1,208 | 1,225 | 1,707 | |||||||
| Collateralized loan obligations in loan form | 50 | 150 | 100 | |||||||
| Other(3) | 3,220 | 2,512 | 1,871 | |||||||
| Commercial real estate | 2,842 | 3,069 | 2,985 | |||||||
| Total domestic | 26,409 | 23,065 | 21,248 | |||||||
| Foreign(1): | ||||||||||
| Commercial and financial: | ||||||||||
| Fund finance(2) | 6,601 | 4,956 | 3,949 | |||||||
| Leveraged loans | 1,082 | 1,194 | 1,118 | |||||||
| Overdrafts | 772 | 1,047 | 1,094 | |||||||
| Collateralized loan obligations in loan form | 8,336 | 6,369 | 4,741 | |||||||
| Total foreign | 16,791 | 13,566 | 10,902 | |||||||
| Total loans(4) | 43,200 | 36,631 | 32,150 | |||||||
| Allowance for loan losses | (174) | (135) | (97) | |||||||
| Loans, net of allowance | $ | 43,026 | $ | 36,496 | $ | 32,053 |
(1) Domestic and foreign categorization is based on the borrower’s country of domicile.
(2) Fund finance loans include primarily $11.54 billion private equity capital call finance loans, $8.09 billion loans to real money funds and $1.44 billion loans to business development companies as of December 31, 2024, compared to $9.69 billion and $7.57 billion private equity capital call finance loans, $6.63 billion and $6.61 billion loans to real money funds and $1.05 billion and $1.11 billion loans to business development companies as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively.
(3) Includes $3.01 billion securities finance loans and $214 million loans to municipalities as of December 31, 2024, $2.23 billion securities finance loans, $276 million loans to municipalities and $5 million other loans as of December 31, 2023 and $1.51 billion securities finance loans, $321 million loans to municipalities and $42 million other loans as of December 31, 2022.
(4) As of December 31, 2024, excluding overdrafts, floating rate loans totaled $38.46 billion and fixed rate loans totaled $2.76 billion. We have entered into interest rate swap agreements to hedge the forecasted cash flows associated with EURIBOR indexed floating-rate loans. See Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K for additional details.
We sold $300 million of total loans, which consisted of $250 million of leveraged loans and $50 million of commercial real estate loans in 2024.
We had binding unfunded commitments as of December 31, 2024 and 2023 of $104 million and $121 million, respectively, to participate in syndications of leveraged loans. Additional information about these unfunded commitments is provided in Note 12 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
These leveraged loans, which are primarily rated “speculative” under our internal risk-rating framework (refer to Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K), are externally rated “BBB,” “BB” or “B,” with approximately 91% and 92% of the loans rated “BB” or “B” as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. Our investment strategy involves generally limiting our investment to larger, more liquid credits underwritten by major global
financial institutions, applying our internal credit analysis process to each potential investment and diversifying our exposure by counterparty and industry segment. However, these loans have significant exposure to credit losses relative to higher-rated loans in our portfolio.
As of December 31, 2024, the commercial real estate portfolio consists of, by asset class, approximately 38% multifamily residential, 36% office buildings and 26% other asset classes, and the portfolio does not have any construction exposure. Additionally, as of December 31, 2024, the commercial real estate loans are on properties located in multiple markets across the United States, with no significant concentrations (New York Metro is the largest concentration at approximately 17%). Despite not having a significant concentration in any one market, a material decline in real estate markets or economic conditions could negatively impact the value or performance of one or more individual properties, which could adversely impact timely loan repayment, which may result in increased provisions for credit losses. We observed these effects in certain commercial real estate loans during 2024, resulting in additional provisions for credit losses. Were conditions, or our evaluation of conditions, in those or other markets to worsen during 2025 or subsequent periods, we may increase our allowance for credit losses during those periods.
Additional information about all of our loan segments, as well as underlying classes, is provided in Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
| TABLE 26: CONTRACTUAL MATURITIES FOR LOANS | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2024 | ||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Under 1 year | 1 to 5 years | 5 to 15 years | Total | ||||||||||
| Domestic: | ||||||||||||||
| Commercial and financial | $ | 15,280 | $ | 5,928 | $ | 2,359 | $ | 23,567 | ||||||
| Commercial real estate | 217 | 1,732 | 893 | 2,842 | ||||||||||
| Total domestic | 15,497 | 7,660 | 3,252 | 26,409 | ||||||||||
| Foreign: | ||||||||||||||
| Commercial and financial | 5,752 | 2,318 | 8,721 | 16,791 | ||||||||||
| Total foreign | 5,752 | 2,318 | 8,721 | 16,791 | ||||||||||
| Total loans | $ | 21,249 | $ | 9,978 | $ | 11,973 | $ | 43,200 |
State Street Corporation | 80
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 27: CLASSIFICATION OF LOAN BALANCES DUE AFTER ONE YEAR | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2024 | ||||||
| (In millions) | Loans with predetermined interest rates | Loans with floating or adjustable interest rates | ||||
| Domestic: | ||||||
| Commercial and financial | $ | 161 | $ | 8,126 | ||
| Commercial real estate | 2,332 | 293 | ||||
| Total domestic | 2,493 | 8,419 | ||||
| Foreign: | ||||||
| Commercial and financial | — | 11,038 | ||||
| Total foreign | — | 11,038 | ||||
| Total loans | $ | 2,493 | $ | 19,457 |
Allowance for credit losses
| TABLE 28: ALLOWANCE FOR CREDIT LOSSES | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |||||||
| Allowance for credit losses: | ||||||||||
| Beginning balance | $ | 150 | $ | 121 | $ | 108 | ||||
| Provision for credit losses (funded commitments)(1) | 81 | 56 | 16 | |||||||
| Provisions for credit losses (unfunded commitments) | (5) | (9) | 4 | |||||||
| Provisions for credit losses (investment securities and all other) | (1) | (1) | — | |||||||
| Charge-offs(2) | (42) | (17) | (7) | |||||||
| Ending balance | $ | 183 | $ | 150 | $ | 121 |
(1) The provision for credit losses is primarily related to commercial real estate and leveraged loans.
(2) The charge-offs are primarily related to leveraged loans and a commercial real estate loan.
As of December 31, 2024, the allowance for credit losses increased $33 million compared to December 31, 2023, reflecting provision for credit losses of $75 million primarily due to an increase in loan loss reserves associated with certain commercial real estate and leveraged loans, partially offset by charge-offs of $42 million, largely related to a single property in the commercial real estate portfolio and certain leveraged loans.
As of December 31, 2024, approximately $68 million of our allowance for credit losses was related to leveraged loans included in the commercial and financial segment and $102 million was related to commercial real estate loans, compared to $72 million and $60 million as of December 31, 2023, respectively. The remaining $13 million and $18 million as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively, was related to other loans, off-balance sheet commitments, interest-bearing deposits with banks and other financial assets held at amortized cost, including investment securities. As of December 31, 2024, the allowance for credit losses represented 0.4% of total loans.
As our view on current and future economic conditions changes, our allowance for credit losses related to these loans may be impacted through a change to the provisions for credit losses, reflecting
factors such as credit migration within our loan portfolio, as well as changes in management’s economic outlook.
Additional information with respect to the allowance for credit losses, net impairment losses and gross unrealized losses related to investment securities, is provided in “Allowance for Credit Losses” under Significant Accounting Estimates and Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
RISK MANAGEMENT
Overview
In the normal course of our business activities, we are exposed to a variety of risks, some that are inherent in the financial services industry, and others that are more specific to our business activities. Our risk management framework focuses on material risks, which include the following:
•credit and counterparty risk;
•liquidity risk, including funding and management;
•operational risk;
•information technology risk;
•resiliency risk;
•market risk associated with our trading activities;
•market risk associated with our non-trading activities, referred to as asset and liability management, consisting primarily of interest rate risk;
•model risk;
•strategic risk; and
•reputational, compliance, fiduciary and business conduct risk.
Many of these risks, as well as certain factors underlying each of them, could affect our businesses and our consolidated financial statements, and are discussed in detail under “Risk Factors” in this Form 10-K.
The identification, assessment, monitoring, mitigation and reporting of risks are essential to our financial performance and successful management of our businesses. Accordingly, the scope of our business requires that we consider these risks as part of a comprehensive and well-integrated risk management function.
These risks, if not effectively managed, can result in losses to us as well as erosion of our capital and damage to our reputation. Our approach to risk management, including Board and senior management oversight and a system of policies, procedures, limits, risk measurement and monitoring and internal controls, allows for an assessment of
State Street Corporation | 81
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
risks within a framework for evaluating opportunities for the prudent use of capital that appropriately balances risk and return.
Our objective is to optimize our returns while operating at a prudent level of risk. In support of this objective, we have instituted a risk appetite framework that aligns our business strategy and financial objectives with the level of risk that we are willing to incur.
We manage risk with a focus on the following objectives:
•A culture of risk awareness that extends across all of our business activities;
•The identification, classification and quantification of our material risks;
•The establishment of our risk appetite and associated limits and policies, and our compliance with these limits;
•The establishment of a risk management structure that enables the control and coordination of risk-taking across the business lines;
•The implementation of stress testing practices and a dynamic risk-assessment capability (additional information with respect to our stress-testing process and practices is provided under “Capital” in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis);
•A direct link between risk and strategic decision-making processes and incentive compensation practices; and
•The overall flexibility to adapt to the ever-changing business and market conditions.
Our risk appetite framework outlines the quantitative limits and qualitative goals that define the level and type of risk we are willing to undertake in the course of executing our business strategy, and also serves as a guide in setting risk limits across our business units. It further defines responsibilities for measuring and monitoring risk against limits, and for reporting, escalating, approving and addressing exceptions. Our risk appetite framework is established by ERM, a corporate risk oversight group, in conjunction with the MRAC and the RC of the Board. The Board formally reviews and approves our risk appetite statement annually, or more frequently in response to shifts in endogenous or exogenous risk conditions.
Governance and Structure
Our approach to risk management involves all levels of management, from the Board and its committees, including its E&A Committee, the RC, the
Human Resources Committee (HRC) and the TOPS, to each business unit and employee. We allocate responsibility for risk oversight so that risk/return decisions are made under a process designed to place appropriate personnel in positions of decision-making authority and subject to robust review and challenge.
Risk management is the responsibility of each employee, and is implemented through three lines of defense:
•The business units, which own and manage the risks inherent in their business, are considered the first line of defense;
•ERM and other support functions, such as Compliance, Finance and Vendor Management, provide the second line of defense; and
•Corporate Audit is the third line of defense, reports to the E&A committee of the Board and is independent from the business units, ERM and other corporate functions. Corporate Audit provides independent assurance to the Board over the design and operating effectiveness of key internal controls included within the risk management framework.
The responsibilities for effective review and challenge reside with senior managers, management oversight committees, Corporate Audit and, ultimately, the Board and its committees.
Corporate-level risk committees provide focused oversight, and establish corporate standards and policies for specific risks, including credit, country, market, liquidity, operational, cyber, information technology as well as new business products, regulatory compliance and ethics, vendor risk and model risks. These committees have been delegated the responsibility to develop recommendations and remediation strategies to address issues that affect or have the potential to affect us.
We maintain a risk governance committee structure which serves as the formal governance mechanism through which we seek to undertake the consistent identification, management and mitigation of various risks facing us in connection with our business activities. This governance structure is enhanced and integrated through multi-disciplinary involvement, particularly through ERM. The following chart presents this structure.
While our risk management program is designed to manage the risks in our businesses, internal and external factors may create risks that cannot always be identified or anticipated.
State Street Corporation | 82
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| Board Committee Risk Governance Structure | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Board Committees: | ||||||
| Risk Committee (RC) | Examining & Audit Committee (E&A Committee) | Human Resources Committee (HRC) | Technology and Operations Committee (TOPS) |
| Management Risk Governance Committee Structure | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Executive Management Committees: | ||||||||
| Management Risk and Capital Committee (MRAC) | Business Conduct and Compliance Committee (BCCC) | Technology and Operational Risk Committee (TORC) | ||||||
| Risk Committees: | ||||||||
| Asset-Liability Committee (ALCO) | Financial Risk Committee (FRC) | Fiduciary Risk Committee | Operational Risk and Controls Committee | Technology Risk Committee | ||||
| Recovery and Resolution Planning (RRP) Executive Review Board | Basel Oversight Committee (BOC) | Compliance Program Oversight Committee | Third Party and Outsourcing Risk Committee | Enterprise Resilience Risk Committee | ||||
| Stress-Testing Steering Committee | Model Risk Committee (MRC) | Conduct Standards Committee | Executive Operations Management Committee | Enterprise Data Management Committee | ||||
| Country Risk Committee | SSGA Risk Committee | Legal Entity Oversight Committee | ||||||
| Regulatory Reporting Oversight Committee | New Business and Product Committee | Incentive Compensation Control Committee | ||||||
| Global Financial Crimes Compliance Committee |
State Street Corporation | 83
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Enterprise Risk Management
The goal of ERM is to ensure that risks are proactively identified, well-understood and prudently managed in support of our business strategy. ERM provides risk oversight, support and coordination to allow for the consistent identification, measurement and management of risks across business units separate from the business units’ activities, and is responsible for the formulation and maintenance of corporate-wide risk management policies and guidelines.
Risk identification and assessments serve to enable ERM’s understanding of business unit strategy, risk profile, and potential exposures and support the management of risk. This is achieved through a series of risk assessments across our business using techniques for the identification, assessment, and measurement of risk across a spectrum of potential frequency and severity combinations, including business-specific programs to identify, assess and measure risk, such as new business and product review and approval, new client screening, and, as deemed appropriate, targeted risk assessments. Two primary risk assessment programs, which are supplemented by other business-specific programs, are the core of this component:
•The Material Risk Identification process utilizes a bottom-up approach to identify our most significant risk exposures across on- and off-balance sheet risk-taking activities. The program is designed to consider risks that could have a material impact irrespective of their likelihood or frequency. This can include risks that may have an impact on longer-term business objectives, such as significant change management activities or long-term strategic initiatives.
•The Risk and Control Self-Assessment program comprises a structured process to identify, assess, and manage non-financial risks (operational and compliance) within our business lines and support functions. See also “Operational Risk Management” below.
In addition, ERM establishes and reviews limits and, in collaboration with business unit management, monitors key risks. Ultimately, ERM works to validate that risk-taking occurs within the risk appetite statement approved by the Board and conforms to associated risk policies, limits and guidelines.
The CRO is responsible for our risk management globally, leads ERM and has a dual reporting line to our CEO and the Board’s RC.
Board Committees
The Board has four committees which assist it in discharging its responsibilities with respect to risk management: the RC, the E&A Committee, the HRC and the TOPS.
•The RC is responsible for oversight related to the operation of our global risk management framework, including policies and procedures establishing risk management governance and processes and risk control infrastructure. It is responsible for reviewing and discussing with management our assessment and management of all risks applicable to our operations, including credit, market, interest rate, liquidity, operational, regulatory, technology, business, compliance and reputation risks, and related policies. In addition, the RC provides oversight of capital policies, capital planning and balance sheet management, resolution planning and monitors capital adequacy in relation to risk. It is also responsible for discharging the duties and obligations of the Board under applicable Basel and other regulatory requirements.
•The E&A Committee oversees management’s operation of our comprehensive system of internal controls covering the integrity of our consolidated financial statements and reports, compliance with laws, regulations and corporate policies. The E&A Committee acts on behalf of the Board in monitoring and overseeing the performance of Corporate Audit and in reviewing certain communications with banking regulators. The E&A Committee has direct responsibility for the appointment, compensation, retention, evaluation and oversight of the work of our independent registered public accounting firm, including sole authority for the establishment of pre-approval policies and procedures for all audit engagements and any non-audit engagements.
•The HRC has direct responsibility for the oversight of human capital management, all compensation plans, policies and programs in which executive officers participate and incentive, retirement, welfare as well as equity plans in which certain of our other employees participate. In addition, it oversees the alignment of our incentive compensation arrangements with our safety and soundness, including the integration of risk management objectives, and related policies, arrangements and control processes
State Street Corporation | 84
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
consistent with applicable related regulatory rules and guidance.
•The TOPS leads and assists in the Board’s oversight of technology and operational risk management and the role of these risks, including cyber risk, in executing our strategy and supporting our global business requirements. The TOPS reviews strategic initiatives from a technology and operational risk perspective and reviews and approves technology-related risk matters. In addition, the TOPS reviews matters related to corporate information security and cybersecurity programs, and their related risks, operational and technology resiliency, data and access management and third-party risk management.
Executive Management Committees
MRAC is the senior management decision-making body for risk and capital issues, and oversees our financial risks, our consolidated statement of condition, and our capital adequacy, liquidity and recovery and resolution planning. Its responsibilities include:
•The approval of our global risk policies, capital and liquidity management frameworks, including our risk appetite framework;
•The monitoring and assessment of our capital adequacy based on internal policies and regulatory requirements;
•The oversight of our firm-wide risk identification, model risk governance, stress testing and Recovery and Resolution Planning programs; and
•The ongoing monitoring and review of risks undertaken within the businesses, and our senior management oversight and approval of risk strategies and tactics.
MRAC is co-chaired by our CRO and Chief Financial Officer, who regularly present to the RC on developments in the risk environment and performance trends in our key business areas.
BCCC provides oversight of the management of culture, conduct and compliance risks, including culture and conduct programs, frameworks and compliance risk exposures that could result in reputational risk. The BCCC is co-chaired by our Chief Compliance Officer and our General Counsel.
TORC provides oversight and assesses the effectiveness of enterprise-wide technology and operational risk management programs. TORC also reviews areas of improvement to manage and control technology and operational risk consistently across
the organization. TORC is co-chaired by the Chief Operating Officer and the CRO.
Risk Committees
The following second line risk committees, under the oversight of the respective executive management committees, have focused responsibilities for oversight of specific areas of risk management:
Management Risk and Capital Committee
•ALCO is the senior corporate oversight and decision-making body for balance sheet strategy, Global Treasury business activities and risk management for interest rate risk, liquidity risk and non-trading market risk. ALCO’s roles and responsibilities are designed to be complementary to, and in coordination with the MRAC, which approves the corporate risk appetite and associated balance sheet strategy;
•FRC provides second line oversight of financial risk at State Street, supporting alignment with our risk appetite and policies and procedures. Key activities include risk appetite development, limit setting and breach management, risk policies and procedures oversight, and independent stress-testing;
•BOC provides oversight and governance over Basel related regulatory requirements, assesses compliance with respect to Basel regulations and approves all material methodologies and changes, policies and reporting;
•RRP Executive Review Board oversees the development of recovery and resolution plans as required by banking regulators;
•MRC monitors the overall level of model risk and provides oversight of the model governance process pertaining to all models, including the validation of key models and the ongoing monitoring of model performance. The MRC may also, as appropriate, mandate remedial actions and compensating controls to be applied to models to address modeling deficiencies as well as other issues identified;
•Stress Testing Steering Committee provides primary supervision of our stress testing program, including stress tests performed in conformity with the Federal Reserve’s CCAR process, and is responsible for the overall management, review, and approval of all material assumptions, methodologies, and results of each stress scenario;
State Street Corporation | 85
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
•State Street Global Advisors Risk Committee is the most senior oversight and decision-making committee for risk management within State Street Global Advisors; the committee is responsible for overseeing the alignment of State Street Global Advisors’ strategy, and risk appetite, as well as alignment with our corporate-wide strategy and risk management standards;
•New Business and Product Committee provides oversight of the evaluation of the risk inherent in proposed new products or services, new business, and extensions of existing products or services, including economic justification, material risk, compliance, regulatory and legal considerations, and capital and liquidity analyses;
•Country Risk Committee oversees the identification, assessment, monitoring, reporting and mitigation, where necessary, of country risks; and
•Regulatory Reporting Oversight Committee is responsible for providing oversight of regulatory reporting and related report governance processes and accountabilities.
Business Conduct and Compliance Committee
•Fiduciary Risk Committee reviews and assesses the fiduciary risk management programs of those units in which we serve in a fiduciary capacity;
•Compliance Program Oversight Committee provides review and oversight of our compliance programs, including our culture of compliance and high standards of ethical behavior;
•The Conduct Standards Committee provides oversight of our enforcement of employee conduct standards;
•Legal Entity Oversight Committee establishes standards with respect to the governance of our legal entities, monitors adherence to those standards, and oversees the ongoing evaluation of our legal entity structure, including the formation, maintenance and dissolution of legal entities;
•The Incentive Compensation Control Committee serves as the forum for the formal review and risk assessment of the design, implementation and monitoring of incentive compensation arrangements; and
•The Global Financial Crimes Compliance Committee provides oversight and strategic direction for the Financial Crimes program,
comprised of the AML and Sanctions, Fraud, Anti-Bribery and Corruption and Market Surveillance programs.
Technology and Operational Risk Committee
•Operational Risk and Controls Committee along with the support of regional business or entity-specific working groups and committees, is responsible for oversight of our operational risk programs, including determining that the implementation of those programs is designed to identify, manage and control operational risk in an effective and consistent manner across the firm;
•Technology Risk Committee is responsible for the global oversight, review and monitoring of operational, legal and regulatory compliance and reputational risk that may result in a significant change to our information technology or cyber risk profile or a material financial loss or reputational impact to global technology services. The Committee serves as a forum to provide regular reporting to TORC and escalate technology and cyber risk and control issues to TORC, as appropriate;
•Enterprise Resilience Risk Committee considers matters pertaining to business continuity, operational resilience, and related risks, including oversight in determining the direction of the continuity program and continuity strategy and approach;
•Global Third Party and Outsourcing Risk Committee is responsible for overseeing our framework and processes for the identification, assessment, and ongoing management of third party and outsourcing-related risks. This committee is also a decision-making body for third party risk acceptance and the end-to-end third party management process, including the oversight of appropriate controls and risk mitigants that comply with applicable regulatory standards;
•Executive Operations Management Committee is a forum for the development of strategy, decision-making, and escalation for operations, regulatory remediation, product management, technology, and the operating model; and
•Enterprise Data Management Committee oversees the enterprise-wide data management strategy, provides senior oversight of the programs associated with enterprise-wide data management, serves as an escalation point for material and emerging enterprise-wide data management issues,
State Street Corporation | 86
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
and determines / oversees enterprise-wide data management priorities and strategy.
Credit and Counterparty Risk Management
Core Policies and Principles
We define credit risk as the risk of financial loss if a counterparty, borrower or obligor, collectively referred to as a counterparty, is either unable or unwilling to repay borrowings or settle a transaction in accordance with underlying contractual terms. We assume credit risk in our traditional non-trading lending activities, such as overdrafts, loans and contingent commitments, in our investment securities portfolio, where recourse to a counterparty exists, and in our direct and indirect trading activities, such as securities purchased under a resale agreement, principal securities lending and FX and indemnified agency securities lending. We also assume credit risk in our day-to-day treasury and securities and other settlement operations, in the form of deposit placements and other cash balances, with central banks or private sector institutions and fees receivables.
We distinguish between three major types of credit risk:
•Default risk - the risk that a counterparty fails to meet its contractual payment obligations;
•Country risk - the risk that we may suffer a loss, in any given country, due to any of the following reasons: deterioration of economic conditions, political and social upheaval, nationalization and appropriation of assets, government repudiation of indebtedness, exchange controls and disruptive currency depreciation or devaluation; and
•Settlement risk - the risk that the settlement or clearance of transactions will fail, which arises whenever the exchange of cash, securities or other assets is not simultaneous.
The acceptance of credit risk by us is governed by corporate policies and guidelines, which include standardized procedures applied across the entire organization. These policies and guidelines include specific requirements related to each counterparty’s risk profile; the markets served; counterparty, industry and country concentrations; and regulatory compliance. These policies and procedures also implement a number of core principles, which include the following:
•We measure and consolidate credit risks attributed to each counterparty, or group of counterparties, in accordance with a “one-obligor” principle that aggregates risks across our business units;
•ERM reviews and approves all material extensions of credit, and material changes to such extensions of credit (such as changes in term, collateral structure or covenants), in accordance with assigned credit-approval authorities;
•Credit-approval authorities are assigned to individuals according to their qualifications, experience and training, and these authorities are periodically reviewed. Our largest exposures require approval by the Credit Committee, a subcommittee of the FRC. With respect to small and low-risk extensions of credit to certain types of counterparties, approval authority may be granted to individuals outside of ERM;
•We seek to avoid or limit undue concentrations of risk. Counterparty (or groups of counterparties), industry, country and product-specific concentrations of risk are subject to frequent review and approval in accordance with our risk policies and appetite;
•We evaluate the creditworthiness of counterparties through a detailed risk assessment, including the use of internal risk-rating methodologies;
•We review all extensions of credit and the creditworthiness of counterparties at least annually. The nature and extent of these reviews are determined by the size, nature and term of the extensions of credit and the creditworthiness of the counterparty; and
•We subject all corporate policies and guidelines to annual review as an integral part of our periodic assessment of our risk appetite.
Our corporate policies and guidelines require that all extensions of credit are consistent with the bank’s standards, limit credit-related losses, and our goal of maintaining a strong financial condition.
Structure and Organization
The Credit Risk group within ERM is responsible for the assessment, approval and monitoring of credit risk across our business. The group is managed centrally, has dedicated teams in a number of locations worldwide, and is responsible for related policies and procedures, and for our internal credit-rating systems and methodologies. In addition, the group, in conjunction with the business units, establishes measurements and limits to control the amount of credit risk accepted across its various business activities, both at the portfolio level and for each individual counterparty or group of counterparties, to individual sectors, and also to
State Street Corporation | 87
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
counterparties by product and country of risk. These measurements and limits are reviewed periodically, or at least annually.
In conjunction with other groups in ERM, the Credit Risk group is responsible for the design, implementation and oversight of our credit risk measurement and management systems, including data and assessment systems, quantification systems and the reporting framework.
Various key committees within our company are responsible for the oversight of credit risk and associated credit risk policies, systems and models. All credit-related activities are governed by our risk appetite framework and our credit risk guidelines, which define our general philosophy with respect to credit risk and the manner in which we control, manage and monitor such risks.
FRC and it's sub-committee, Credit Committee have the primary responsibility for the oversight, review and approval of the credit risk guidelines and policies which are reviewed periodically, but at least annually.
The Credit Committee, a subcommittee of the FRC, has responsibility for assigning credit authority and approving the largest and higher-risk extensions of credit to individual counterparties or groups of counterparties.
FRC provides periodic updates to MRAC and the Board’s RC.
Credit Ratings
We perform initial and ongoing reviews to exercise due diligence on the creditworthiness of our counterparties when conducting any business with them or approving any credit limits.
This due diligence process generally includes the assignment of an internal credit rating, which is determined by the use of internally developed and validated methodologies, scorecards and a 15-grade rating scale. This risk-rating process incorporates the use of risk-rating tools in conjunction with management judgment; qualitative and quantitative inputs are captured in a replicable manner and, following a formal review and approval process, an internal credit rating based on our rating scale is assigned. We generally rate our counterparties individually, although some counterparties defined by us as low-risk are rated on a pooled basis. Credit ratings are reviewed and approved by the Credit Risk group or its delegates. We evaluate and rate the credit risk of our counterparties on an ongoing basis. To facilitate comparability across the portfolio, counterparties within a given sector are rated using a risk-rating tool developed for that sector.
Our risk-rating models are subject to periodic internal review and validation. The overall risk rating
methodology is reviewed and approved by the Credit Risk Committee, a subcommittee of the FRC, on an annual basis.
Risk Parameter Estimates
Our internal risk-rating system promotes a clear and consistent approach to determining appropriate credit risk classifications for our credit counterparties and exposures. This allows us to track the changes in risk associated with these counterparties and exposures over time. This capability enhances our ability to calculate both risk exposures and capital, and enables better strategic decision-making across the organization.
More specifically, our internal risk rating system is used for the following purposes:
•The assessment of the creditworthiness of new counterparties and, in conjunction with our risk appetite statement, the development of appropriate credit limits for our products and services, including loans, foreign exchange, securities finance, placements and repurchase agreements;
•The automation of limit approvals for certain low-risk counterparties, as defined in our credit risk guidelines and based on the counterparty’s probability-of-default;
•The development of approval authority matrices based on PD; riskier counterparties with higher PDs require higher levels of approval for a comparable PD and limit size compared to less risky counterparties with lower PDs;
•The analysis of risk concentration trends using historical PD and exposure-at-default (EAD), data;
•The determination of the level of management review of short-duration advances depending on PD; riskier counterparties with higher rating class values generally trigger higher levels of management escalation for comparable short-duration advances compared to less risky counterparties with lower rating-class values;
•The monitoring of credit facility utilization levels using EAD values and the identification of instances where counterparties have exceeded limits;
•The aggregation and comparison of counterparty exposures with risk appetite levels to determine if businesses are maintaining appropriate risk levels; and
•The determination of our regulatory capital requirements for the AIRB set forth in the Basel framework.
State Street Corporation | 88
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Credit Risk Mitigation
We seek to limit our credit exposure and reduce any potential credit losses through the use of various types of credit risk mitigation. The Basel III final rule permits us to reflect the application of credit risk mitigation when it meets the standards outlined therein. Examples of forms of credit risk mitigation include a security interest in financial and non-financial assets (collateral), netting and guarantees. Where permissible, we apply the recognition of collateral, guarantees and netting to mitigate overall risk within our counterparty credit portfolio. While credit default swaps are permitted under the Basel III final rule, we do not actively use credit default swaps as a risk mitigation tool.
Collateral
In many parts of our business, we regularly require or agree for collateral to be received from or provided to clients and counterparties in connection with contracts that involve credit risk. In our trading businesses, this collateral is typically in the form of cash, as well as highly-rated and/or liquid securities (i.e. government securities and other bonds or equity securities). Credit risks in our non-trading and securities finance businesses are also often secured by bonds and equity securities and by other types of assets. Collateral serves to reduce the risk of loss inherent in an exposure. However, changing market values of the collateral we hold, unexpected increases in the credit exposure to a client or counterparty, reductions in the value or change in the type of securities held by us, as well as operational errors or errors in the manner in which we seek to exercise our rights, may reduce the risk mitigation effects of collateral. While collateral is often an alternative source of repayment, it does not replace the requirement within our policies and guidelines for high-quality underwriting. We also may choose to incur credit exposure without the benefit of collateral or other risk mitigating credits rights.
Our credit risk guidelines require that the collateral we accept for risk mitigation purposes is of high quality, can be reliably valued and is supported by a valid security interest that permits liquidation if or when required. Generally, when collateral is of lower quality, more difficult to value or more challenging to liquidate, higher discounts to market values are applied for the purposes of measuring credit risk. For certain less liquid collateral, longer liquidation periods are assumed when determining the credit exposure.
All types of collateral are assessed regularly by ERM, as is the basis on which the collateral is valued. Our assessment of collateral, including the ability to liquidate collateral in the event of a counterparty default, and also with regard to market values of collateral under a variety of hypothetical market
conditions, is an integral component of our assessment of risk and approval of credit limits. We also seek to identify, limit and monitor instances of “wrong-way” risk, where a counterparty’s risk of default is positively correlated with the risk of our collateral eroding in value.
We maintain policies and procedures requiring that documentation used to collateralize a transaction is legal, valid, binding and enforceable in the relevant jurisdictions. We also conduct legal reviews to assess whether our documentation meets these standards on an ongoing basis.
Netting
Netting is a mechanism that allows institutions and counterparties to net offsetting exposures and payment obligations against one another through the use of qualifying master netting agreements. A master netting agreement allows for certain rights and remedies upon a counterparty default, including the right to net obligations arising under derivatives or other transactions under such agreement. In such an event, the netting of obligations would result in a single net claim owed by, or to, the counterparty. This is commonly referred to as “close-out netting,” and is pursued wherever possible. We may also enter into master agreements that allow for the netting of amounts payable on a given day and in the same currency, reducing our settlement risk. This is commonly referred to as “payment netting,” and is widely used in our foreign exchange activities.
As with collateral, we have policies and procedures in place to apply close-out and payment netting only to the extent that we have verified legal validity and enforceability of the master agreement. In the case of payment netting, operational constraints may preclude us from reducing settlement risk, notwithstanding the legal right to require the same under the master netting agreement. In the event we become unable, due to operational constraints, actions by regulators, changes in accounting principles, law or regulation (or related interpretations) or other factors, to net some or all of our offsetting exposures and payment obligations under those agreements, we would be required to gross up our assets and liabilities on our statement of condition and our calculation of RWA, accordingly. This would result in a potentially material change in our regulatory ratios, including LCR, and present increased credit, liquidity, asset and liability management and operational risks, some of which could be material.
Guarantees
A guarantee is a financial instrument that results in credit support being provided by a third party, (i.e., the protection provider) to the underlying obligor (the beneficiary of the provided protection) on account of an exposure owing by the obligor. The protection
State Street Corporation | 89
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
provider may support the underlying exposure either in whole or in part. Support of this kind may take different forms. Typical forms of guarantees provided to us include financial guarantees, letters of credit, bankers’ acceptances, purchase undertaking agreement contracts and insurance.
We have established a review process to evaluate guarantees under the applicable requirements of our policies and Basel III requirements. Governance for this evaluation is covered under policies and procedures that require regular reviews of documentation, jurisdictions and credit quality of protection providers.
Credit Limits
Central to our philosophy for our management of credit risk is the approval and imposition of credit limits, against which we monitor the actual and potential future credit exposure arising from our business activities with counterparties or groups of counterparties. Credit limits are a reflection of our risk appetite, which may be determined by the creditworthiness of the counterparty, the nature of the risk inherent in the business undertaken with the counterparty, or a combination of relevant credit factors. Our risk appetite for certain sectors and certain countries and geographic regions may also influence the level of risk we are willing to assume to certain counterparties.
The analysis and approval of credit limits is undertaken similarly across our businesses, although the nature and extent of the analysis may vary, based on the type, term and magnitude of the risk being assumed. Credit limits and underlying exposures are assessed and measured on both a gross and net basis where appropriate, with net exposure determined by deducting the value of any collateral held. For certain types of risk being assumed, we will also assess and measure exposures under a variety of hypothetical market conditions. Credit limit approvals across our business are undertaken by the Credit Risk group, by individuals to whom credit authority has been delegated, or by the Credit Committee.
Credit limits are re-evaluated annually, or more frequently as needed, and are revised periodically on prevailing and anticipated market conditions, changes in counterparty or country-specific credit ratings and outlook, changes in our risk appetite for certain counterparties, sectors or countries, and enhancements to the measurement of credit utilization.
Reporting
Ongoing active monitoring and management of our credit risk is an integral part of our credit risk management framework. We maintain management information systems to identify, measure, monitor and
report credit risk across businesses and legal entities, enabling ERM and our businesses to have timely access to information on credit limits and exposures. Monitoring is performed along the dimensions of counterparty, industry, country and product-specific risks to facilitate the identification of concentrations of risk and emerging trends.
Key aspects of this credit risk reporting structure include governance and oversight groups and policies that define standards for the reporting of credit risk, data aggregation and sourcing systems.
The Credit Risk group routinely assesses the composition of our overall credit risk portfolio for alignment with our stated risk appetite. This assessment includes routine analysis and reporting of the portfolio, monitoring of market-based indicators, the assessment of industry trends and developments and regular reviews of concentrated risks. The Credit Risk group is also responsible, in conjunction with the business units, for defining the appetite for credit risk in the major sectors in which we have a concentration of business activities. These sector-level risk appetite statements, which include counterparty selection criteria and granular underwriting guidelines, are reviewed periodically and approved by either the FRC or Credit Committee.
Monitoring
Regular surveillance of credit and counterparty risks is undertaken by our business units, the Credit Risk group and designees with ERM, allowing for oversight. This surveillance process includes, but is not limited to, the following components:
•Annual Reviews. A formal review of counterparties is conducted at least annually and includes a review of operating performance, primary risk factors and our internal credit risk rating. This annual review also includes a review of current and proposed credit limits, an assessment of our ongoing risk appetite and assessment that supporting legal documentation remains effective.
•Interim Monitoring. Monitoring of our largest and riskiest counterparties is undertaken more frequently, utilizing financial information, market indicators and other relevant credit and performance measures. The nature and extent of this interim monitoring is individually tailored to certain counterparties and/or industry sectors to identify material changes to the risk profile of a counterparty (or group of counterparties) and assign an updated internal risk rating in a timely manner.
We maintain an active “surveillance list” for all counterparties. The surveillance list status denotes a
State Street Corporation | 90
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
concern with some aspect of a counterparty’s risk profile that warrants closer monitoring of the counterparty’s financial performance and related risk factors. Our ongoing monitoring processes are designed to facilitate the early identification of counterparties whose creditworthiness is deteriorating; any counterparty may be placed on the surveillance list by ERM at its sole discretion.
Counterparties on the surveillance list generally correspond with the non-investment grade or near non-investment grade ratings established by the major independent credit-rating agencies. The surveillance list also includes any counterparties rated “Special Mention,” “Substandard,” “Doubtful” and “Loss.”
The Credit Risk group maintains primary responsibility for our surveillance list processes, and generates a quarterly report of all surveillance list counterparties. The surveillance list is formally reviewed at least on a quarterly basis, with participation from senior Credit Risk staff, and representatives from the business units and our corporate finance and legal groups as appropriate. These meetings include a review of individual surveillance list counterparties, together with credit limits and prevailing exposures, and are focused on actions to contain, reduce or eliminate the risk of loss to us. Identified actions are documented and monitored.
Controls
GCR provides a separate level of surveillance and oversight over the integrity of our credit risk management processes, including the internal risk-rating system. GCR reviews counterparty credit ratings for all identified sectors on an ongoing basis. GCR is subject to oversight by the FRC, and provides periodic updates to the Board’s RC.
Specific activities of GCR include the following:
•Perform separate and objective assessments of our credit and counterparty exposures to determine the nature and extent of risk undertaken by the business units;
•Execute periodic credit process and credit product reviews to assess the quality of credit analysis, compliance with policies, guidelines and relevant regulation, transaction structures and underwriting standards, and risk-rating integrity;
•Identify and monitor developing counterparty, market and/or industry sector trends to limit risk of loss and protect capital;
•Deliver regular and formal reporting to stakeholders, including exam results,
identified issues and the status of requisite actions to remedy identified deficiencies;
•Allocate resources for specialized risk assessments (on an as-needed basis); and
•Liaise with assurance partners and regulatory personnel on matters relating to risk rating, reporting and measurement.
Allowance for Credit Losses
We record an allowance for credit losses related to certain on-balance sheet credit exposures, including our financial assets held at amortized cost, as well as certain off-balance sheet credit exposures, including unfunded commitments and letters of credit. Review and evaluation of the adequacy of the allowance for credit losses is ongoing throughout the year, but occurs at least quarterly, and is based, among other factors, on our evaluation of the level of risk in the portfolio and the estimated effects of our forecasts on our counterparties. We utilize multiple economic scenarios, consisting of a baseline, upside and downside scenarios, to develop our forecast of expected losses.
In 2024, the allowance estimate reflected an increase in loan loss reserves associated with certain commercial real estate and leveraged loans. Allowance estimates are subject to uncertainties, including those inherent in our model and economic assumptions, and management may use qualitative adjustments. If future data and forecasts deviate relative to the forecasts utilized to determine our allowance for credit losses as of December 31, 2024, or if credit risk migration is higher or lower than forecasted for reasons independent of the economic forecast, our allowance for credit losses will also change.
Additional information about the allowance for credit losses is provided in Notes 3 and 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Liquidity Risk Management
Our liquidity framework contemplates areas of potential risk to our liquidity based on our activities, size and other appropriate risk-related factors. In managing liquidity risk we employ limits, maintain established metrics and early warning indicators and perform routine stress testing to identify potential liquidity needs. This process involves the evaluation of a combination of internal and external scenarios which assist us in measuring our liquidity position and in identifying potential increases in cash needs or decreases in available sources of cash, as well as the potential impairment of our ability to access the global capital markets.
We manage our liquidity on a global, consolidated basis as well as on a stand-alone basis at our Parent Company and at certain branches and
State Street Corporation | 91
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
subsidiaries of State Street Bank. State Street Bank generally has access to markets and funding sources limited to banks, such as the federal funds market and the Federal Reserve’s discount window. The Parent Company is managed to a more conservative liquidity profile, reflecting narrower market access. Additionally, the Parent Company typically holds, or has direct access to, primarily through SSIF, a direct subsidiary of the Parent Company, and the support agreement, as discussed in “Supervision and Regulation” in Business in this Form 10-K, cash and equivalents intended to meet its current debt maturities and other cash needs, as well as those projected over the next twelve-month period. Absent financial distress at the Parent Company, the liquid assets available at SSIF continue to be available to the Parent Company. As of December 31, 2024, the value of our Parent Company’s net liquid assets totaled $438 million, compared with $659 million as of December 31, 2023, excluding available liquidity through SSIF. As of December 31, 2024, our Parent Company and State Street Bank had approximately $1.28 billion of senior notes or subordinated debentures outstanding that will mature in the next twelve months.
As a SIFI, our liquidity risk management activities are subject to heightened and evolving regulatory requirements, including interpretations of those requirements, under specific U.S. and international regulations and also resulting from published and unpublished guidance, supervisory activities, such as stress tests, resolution planning, examinations and other regulatory interactions. Satisfaction of these requirements could, in some cases, result in changes in the composition of our investment portfolio, reduced NII or NIM, a reduction in the level of certain business activities or modifications to the way in which we deliver our products and services. If we fail to meet regulatory requirements to the satisfaction of our regulators, we could receive negative regulatory stress test results, incur a resolution plan deficiency or determination of a non-credible resolution plan or otherwise receive an adverse regulatory finding. Our efforts to satisfy, or our failure to satisfy, these regulatory requirements could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Governance
Global Treasury is responsible for our management of liquidity. This includes the day-to-day management of our global liquidity position, the development and monitoring of early warning indicators, key liquidity risk metrics, the creation and execution of stress tests, the evaluation and implementation of regulatory requirements, the maintenance and execution of our liquidity guidelines and contingency funding plan (CFP), and routine
management reporting to ALCO, MRAC and the Board’s RC.
Global Treasury Risk Management, part of ERM, provides separate oversight over the identification, communication and management of Global Treasury’s risks in support of our business strategy. Global Treasury Risk Management reports to the CRO. Global Treasury Risk Management’s responsibilities relative to liquidity risk management include the development and review of policies and guidelines; the monitoring of limits related to adherence to the liquidity risk guidelines and associated reporting.
Liquidity Framework
We manage liquidity according to several principles that are equally important to our overall liquidity risk management framework:
•Structural liquidity management addresses liquidity by monitoring and directing the composition of our consolidated statement of condition. Structural liquidity is measured by metrics such as the percentage of total wholesale funds to consolidated total assets, and the percentage of non-government investment securities to client deposits. In addition, on a regular basis and as described below, our structural liquidity is evaluated under various stress scenarios.
•Tactical liquidity management addresses our day-to-day funding requirements and is largely driven by changes in our primary source of funding, which are client deposits. Fluctuations in client deposits may be supplemented with short-term borrowings, repurchase agreements, FHLB products and certificates of deposit.
•Stress testing and contingent funding planning are longer-term strategic liquidity risk management practices. Regular and ad hoc liquidity stress testing are performed under various severe but plausible scenarios at the consolidated level and at significant subsidiaries, including State Street Bank. These tests contemplate severe market and events specific to us under various time horizons and severities. Tests contemplate the impact of material changes in key funding sources, credit ratings, additional collateral requirements, contingent uses of funding, systemic shocks to the financial markets and operational failures based on market and assumptions specific to us. The stress tests evaluate the required level of funding versus available sources in an adverse environment. As stress testing contemplates potential forward-looking scenarios, results also serve
State Street Corporation | 92
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
as a trigger to activate specific liquidity stress levels and contingent funding actions.
CFPs are designed to assist senior management with decision-making associated with any contingency funding response to a possible or actual crisis scenario. The CFPs define roles, responsibilities and management actions to be taken in the event of deterioration of our liquidity profile caused by either an event specific to us or a broader disruption in the capital markets. Specific actions are linked to the level of stress indicated by these measures or by management judgment of market conditions.
Liquidity Risk Metrics
In managing our liquidity, we employ early warning indicators and metrics intended to detect situations which may result in a liquidity stress, including changes in our stock price and spreads on our long-term debt. Additional metrics that are critical to the management of our consolidated statement of condition and monitored as part of our routine liquidity management include measures of our fungible cash position, purchased wholesale funds, unencumbered liquid assets, deposits and the total of investment securities and loans as a percentage of total client deposits.
Asset Liquidity
Central to the management of our liquidity is asset liquidity, which consists primarily of HQLA. HQLA is the amount of liquid assets that qualify for inclusion in the LCR. As a banking organization, we are subject to a minimum LCR under the LCR rule approved by the U.S. Agencies. The LCR is intended to promote the short-term resilience of internationally active banking organizations, like us, to improve the banking industry’s ability to absorb shocks arising from market stress over a 30 calendar day period and improve the measurement and management of liquidity risk. The LCR measures an institution’s HQLA against its net cash outflows. HQLA primarily consists of unencumbered cash and certain high quality liquid securities that qualify for inclusion under the LCR rule. Net cash outflows are measured as prescribed under the LCR rule which provides a significant benefit for deposits classified as operational. We report the LCR to the Federal Reserve daily. For both the quarters ended December 31, 2024 and December 31, 2023, average daily LCR for the Parent Company was 107% and 106%, respectively. The impact of higher deposits on the Parent Company’s LCR is limited by a cap, known as the transferability restriction, on the HQLA from State Street Bank that can be recognized at the Parent Company as defined in the U.S. LCR Final Rule. This restriction limits the HQLA used in the calculation of the Parent Company’s LCR to the
amount of net cash outflows of its principal banking subsidiary (State Street Bank). The average HQLA, post-prescribed haircuts for the Parent Company under the LCR final rule definition was $142.34 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2024 compared to $128.96 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2023, primarily due to a decrease in client deposits relative to the prior period. For the quarter ended December 31, 2024, the LCR for State Street Bank was approximately 134%.
In addition, as a large banking organization, we are subject to the NSFR rule approved by the U.S. Agencies. The NSFR rule requires large banking organizations to maintain a minimum amount of available stable funding, which is a weighted measure of a company’s funding sources over a one-year time horizon, calculated by applying standardized weightings to the company’s equity and liabilities based on their expected stability. The amount of stable funding can be no less than the amount of required stable funding, which is calculated by applying standardized weightings to assets, derivatives exposures and certain other items based on their liquidity characteristics. As a U.S. G-SIB, we are required to maintain an NSFR that is equal to or greater than 100%. As a subsidiary of a U.S. G-SIB, State Street Bank is similarly required to maintain an NSFR that is equal to or greater than 100%. As of December 31, 2024, both the Parent Company’s and State Street Bank’s NSFR were above the 100% minimum NSFR requirement. The average NSFR for the Parent Company was 137% and 141% for the three months ended December 31, 2024 and September 30, 2024, respectively.
We maintained average cash balances in excess of regulatory requirements governing deposits with the Federal Reserve of approximately $86.88 billion at the Federal Reserve, the ECB and other non-U.S. central banks for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, and $69.28 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2023. The higher levels of average cash balances with central banks reflect higher levels of client deposits.
Liquid securities carried in our asset liquidity include securities pledged without corresponding advances from the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston (FRBB), the FHLB, and other non-U.S. central banks. State Street Bank is a member of the FHLB. This membership allows for advances of liquidity in varying terms against high-quality collateral, which helps facilitate asset and liability management.
Access to primary, intraday and contingent liquidity provided by these utilities is an important source of contingent liquidity with utilization subject to underlying conditions.
State Street Corporation | 93
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
In addition to the investment securities included in our asset liquidity, we have other unencumbered investment securities and certain loans that we can pledge as collateral to access these various facilities. These additional assets are available sources of liquidity, although not as rapidly deployed as those included in our LCR asset liquidity.
The average fair value of total unencumbered securities was $63.23 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, compared to $76.86 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2023.
Measures of liquidity include LCR and NSFR, which are described in “Supervision and Regulation” in Business in this Form 10-K.
Uses of Liquidity
Significant uses of our liquidity could result from the following: withdrawals of client deposits; draw-downs by our custody clients of lines of credit; advances to clients to settle securities transactions; increases in our investment and loan portfolios; or other permitted purposes. Such circumstances would generally arise under stress conditions including deterioration in credit ratings. A recurring use of our liquidity involves our deployment of HQLA from our investment portfolio to post collateral to financial institutions serving as sources of securities under our prime services program.
We had unfunded commitments to extend credit with gross contractual amounts totaling $34.19 billion and $34.20 billion and standby letters of credit totaling $0.91 billion and $1.51 billion as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. These amounts do not reflect the value of any collateral. As of December 31, 2024, approximately 75% of our unfunded commitments to extend credit and 33% of our standby letters of credit expire within one year. Since many of our commitments are expected to expire or renew without being drawn upon, the gross contractual amounts do not necessarily represent our future cash requirements.
Information about our resolution planning and the impact actions under our resolution plans could have on our liquidity is provided in “Supervision and Regulation” in Business in this Form 10-K.
Funding
Deposits
We provide products and services including custody, accounting, administration, daily pricing, FX services, cash management, financial asset management, securities finance and investment advisory services. As a provider of these products and services, we generate client deposits, which have generally provided a stable, low-cost source of funds. As a global custodian, clients place deposits with our entities in various currencies. As of both December
31, 2024 and December 31, 2023, approximately 70% of our average total deposit balances were denominated in U.S. dollars, 15% in EUR, 10% in GBP and 5% in all other currencies.
Short-Term Funding
Our on-balance sheet liquid assets are also an integral component of our liquidity management strategy. These assets provide liquidity through maturities of the assets, but more importantly, they provide us with the ability to raise funds by pledging the securities as collateral for borrowings or through outright sales. In addition, our access to the global capital markets gives us the ability to source incremental funding from wholesale investors through relatively low-cost channels to further support business growth. As discussed earlier under “Asset Liquidity,” State Street Bank’s membership in the FHLB allows for advances of liquidity with varying terms against high-quality collateral. We had $9.8 billion and $2.5 billion outstanding of FHLB funding as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. These outstanding borrowings have initial maturities of approximately twelve months and are recorded in other short-term borrowings in the consolidated statement of condition.
Short-term secured funding also comes in the form of securities lent or sold under agreements to repurchase. These transactions are short-term in nature, generally overnight and are collateralized by high-quality investment securities. These balances were $3.68 billion and $1.87 billion as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
State Street Bank continues to maintain a line of credit with a financial institution of CAD $1.40 billion, or approximately $0.97 billion, as of December 31, 2024, to support its Canadian securities processing operations. The line of credit has no stated termination date and is cancellable by either party with prior notice. As of both December 31, 2024 and 2023, there was no balance outstanding on this line of credit.
Long-Term Funding
We have the ability to issue debt and equity securities under our current universal shelf registration statement to meet current commitments and business needs. In addition, State Street Bank also has current authorization from the Board to issue unsecured senior debt. The total amount remaining for issuance pursuant to this authority is $2.60 billion as of December 31, 2024.
State Street Corporation | 94
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
On March 18, 2024, we issued $1 billion aggregate principal amount of 4.993% fixed rate senior notes due 2027.
On August 20, 2024, we issued $1 billion aggregate principal amount of 4.530% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2029.
On October 22, 2024, we issued $1.2 billion aggregate principal amount of 4.330% fixed rate senior notes due 2027, $300 million aggregate principal amount of floating rate senior notes due 2027, and $800 million aggregate principal amount of 4.675% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2032.
On November 1, 2024, we redeemed $1 billion aggregate principal amount of 2.354% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2025.
On November 25, 2024, State Street Bank issued $300 million aggregate principal amount of floating rate senior notes due 2026, $1.15 billion aggregate principal amount of 4.594% fixed rate senior notes due 2026 and $800 million aggregate principal amount of 4.782% fixed rate senior notes due 2029.
On January 27, 2025, we redeemed $500 million aggregate principal amount of 4.857% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026.
On February 6, 2025, we redeemed $300 million aggregate principal amount of 1.746% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026.
Agency Credit Ratings
Our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment grade ratings as measured by major credit rating agencies.
| TABLE 29: CREDIT RATINGS | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2024 | |||||
| Standard & Poor’s | Moody’s Investors Service | Fitch | |||
| State Street: | |||||
| Senior debt | A | Aa3 | AA- | ||
| Subordinated debt | A- | A2 | A | ||
| Junior subordinated debt | BBB | A3 | NR | ||
| Preferred stock | BBB | Baa1 | BBB+ | ||
| Outlook | Stable | Stable | Stable | ||
| State Street Bank: | |||||
| Short-term deposits | A-1+ | P-1 | F1+ | ||
| Long-term deposits | AA- | Aa1 | AA+ | ||
| Senior debt/Long-term issuer | AA- | Aa2 | AA | ||
| Subordinated debt | A | Aa3 | NR | ||
| Outlook | Stable | Stable | Stable |
Factors essential to maintaining high credit ratings include:
•diverse and stable core earnings;
•relative market position;
•strong risk management;
•strong capital ratios;
•diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and client deposits;
•strong liquidity monitoring procedures; and
•preparedness for current or future regulatory developments.
High ratings limit borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by:
•providing confidence for unsecured funding and depositors;
•increasing the potential market for our debt and improving our ability to offer products;
•facilitating reduced collateral haircuts in secured lending transactions; and
•engaging in transactions in which clients value high credit ratings.
A downgrade or reduction in our credit ratings could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity by restricting our ability to access the capital markets, which could increase the related cost of funds. In turn, this could cause the sudden and large-scale withdrawal of unsecured deposits by our clients, which could lead to drawdowns of unfunded commitments to extend credit or trigger requirements under securities purchase commitments; or require additional collateral or force terminations of certain trading derivative contracts.
A majority of our derivative contracts have been entered into under bilateral agreements with counterparties who may require us to post collateral or terminate the transactions based on changes in our credit ratings. We assess the impact of these arrangements by determining the collateral that would be required assuming a downgrade by major rating agencies. The additional collateral or termination payments related to our net derivative liabilities under these arrangements that could have been called by counterparties in the event of a downgrade in our credit ratings below levels specified in the agreements is provided in Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K. Other funding sources, such as secured financing transactions and other margin requirements, for which there are no explicit triggers, could also be adversely affected.
State Street Corporation | 95
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Contractual Cash Obligations and Other Commitments
The long-term contractual cash obligations included within Table 30: Long-Term Contractual Cash Obligations were recorded in our consolidated statement of condition as of December 31, 2024, except for the interest portions of long-term debt and finance leases.
| TABLE 30: LONG-TERM CONTRACTUAL CASH OBLIGATIONS | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2024 | Payments Due by Period | |||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Less than 1 year | 1-3 years | 4-5 years | Over 5 years | Total | |||||||||||||
| Long-term debt(1)(2) | $ | 1,285 | $ | 9,595 | $ | 4,520 | $ | 7,756 | $ | 23,156 | ||||||||
| Operating leases | 182 | 286 | 206 | 342 | 1,016 | |||||||||||||
| Finance lease and equipment financing obligations(2) | 55 | 26 | — | — | 81 | |||||||||||||
| Tax liability | — | 22 | — | — | 22 | |||||||||||||
| Total contractual cash obligations | $ | 1,522 | $ | 9,929 | $ | 4,726 | $ | 8,098 | $ | 24,275 |
(1) Long-term debt excludes finance lease obligations and equipment financing (presented as a separate line item) and the effect of interest rate swaps. Interest payments were calculated at the stated rate with the exception of floating-rate debt, for which payments were calculated using the indexed rate in effect as of December 31, 2024.
(2) Additional information about contractual cash obligations related to long-term debt and operating and finance leases is provided in Notes 9 and 20 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Total contractual cash obligations shown in Table 30: Long-Term Contractual Cash Obligations do not include:
•Obligations which will be settled in cash, primarily in less than one year, such as client deposits, federal funds purchased, securities sold under repurchase agreements and other short-term borrowings. Additional information about deposits, federal funds purchased, securities sold under repurchase agreements and other short-term borrowings is provided in Note 8 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
•Obligations related to derivative instruments because the derivative-related amounts recorded in our consolidated statement of condition as of December 31, 2024 did not represent the amounts that may ultimately be paid under the contracts upon settlement. Additional information about our derivative instruments is provided in Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K. We have obligations under pension and other post-retirement benefit plans, with additional information provided in Note 19 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K, which are not included in Table 30: Long-Term Contractual Cash Obligations.
| TABLE 31: OTHER COMMERCIAL COMMITMENTS | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duration of Commitment as of December 31, 2024 | ||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Less than 1 year | 1-3 years | 4-5 years | Over 5 years | Total amountscommitted(1) | |||||||||||||
| Indemnified securities financing | $ | 310,814 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 310,814 | ||||||||
| Unfunded credit facilities | 23,217 | 5,458 | 5,159 | 357 | 34,191 | |||||||||||||
| Standby letters of credit | 300 | 554 | 54 | — | 908 | |||||||||||||
| Purchase obligations(2) | 434 | 545 | 217 | 154 | 1,350 | |||||||||||||
| Total commercial commitments | $ | 334,765 | $ | 6,557 | $ | 5,430 | $ | 511 | $ | 347,263 |
(1) Total amounts committed reflect participations to independent third parties, if any.
(2) Amounts represent obligations pursuant to legally binding agreements, where we have agreed to purchase products or services with a specific minimum quantity defined at a fixed, minimum or variable price over a specified period of time.
Additional information about the commitments presented in Table 31: Other commercial commitments, except for purchase obligations, is provided in Note 12 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 96
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Operational Risk Management
Overview
Operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people and systems or from external events.
In providing an array of products and services, we are exposed to operational risk. Operational risk may result from, but is not limited to, errors relating to transaction processing, breaches of internal control systems, or business interruption due to system failures or other events. Operational risk also includes potential legal or regulatory actions that could arise as a byproduct of our failure to maintain and execute an adequate system of internal control. In the case of an operational risk event, we could suffer financial loss and potential regulatory action, as well as reputational damage.
Unforeseen external events, including natural disasters, terrorist attacks, pandemics, global conflicts, or other geopolitical events (including the ongoing wars in Ukraine and in the Middle East), may result in stress on the operating environment and increase operational risk.
Operational risk encompasses fiduciary risk and legal risk. Fiduciary risk is defined as the risk that we fail to properly exercise our fiduciary duties in our provision of products or services to clients. Legal risk is the risk of loss resulting from failure to comply with laws and contractual obligations.
Operational risk is inherent in the performance of investment servicing and investment management activities on behalf of our clients. Whether it be fiduciary risk, risk associated with execution and processing or other types of operational risk, a consistent, transparent and effective operational risk framework is key to identifying, monitoring and managing operational risk. To mitigate these risks, we have established policies, procedures, internal control standards and an operational risk framework. Controls are designed to manage operational risk at levels appropriate to our business model, the business environment and the markets in which we operate taking into account factors such as regulation and competition.
The organizational framework for operational risk is based on risk management activities comprising:
•Governance: We have established governance structures to oversee and assess our operational risk management activities and our operational risk policy;
•Accountability: Business managers are responsible for maintaining an effective system of internal controls commensurate
with their risk profiles and in accordance with State Street policies and procedures. Operational risk management is the second line function responsible for developing risk management policies and tools for assessing, measuring and monitoring operational risk; and
•Operational Risk Management Framework: An established operational risk management framework supports and drives the identification, assessment, mitigation and monitoring of operational risk.
Governance
Our Board is responsible for the approval and oversight of our overall operational risk policy.
Our operational risk policy establishes our approach to our management of operational risk across our business. The policy identifies the responsibilities of individuals and committees charged with oversight of the management of operational risk, and articulates a broad mandate that supports implementation of the operational risk framework.
Executive management manages and oversees our operational risk through membership on risk management committees, including TORC and the Operational Risk and Controls Committee, each of which ultimately reports to a committee of the Board.
The Operational Risk and Controls Committee, chaired by the global head of operational risk, oversees the operational risk framework and policies, reviews and monitors program outputs and metrics, and monitors resolution of significant operational risk matters.
Accountability
Accountability for managing operational risk spans the first and second lines of defense:
•The global head of Operational Risk, a member of the CRO’s executive management team, leads ERM’s corporate ORM group. ORM is responsible for developing risk management policies and tools for assessing, measuring, monitoring and managing operational risk. The ORM function includes risk oversight of all lines of business and functions; and
•Business Managers are responsible for managing day to day operations, maintaining an effective system of internal controls and managing operational risks within risk appetite in its normal course of business.
Corporate Audit, as a third line of defense, performs separate reviews of the application of operational risk management practices and methodologies utilized across our business.
State Street Corporation | 97
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Operational Risk Management Framework
The operational risk management framework has been established in a structured manner to drive the identification, assessment, mitigation, monitoring, and reporting of operational risk. Operational risk management framework includes key elements such as risk and control self-assessment, capital analysis, monitoring and reporting and documentation and guidelines. These framework components are described below.
Risk and Control Self-Assessment
The objective of the risk and control self-assessment program is to proactively identify, assess and manage operational risks and related controls associated with day-to-day operations. A key component of understanding how risks are managed is to understand the effectiveness of controls. Effectiveness of controls is concluded through testing, both internal and external, business control assurance activities and self-assessments along with other control function reviews, such as a SOX testing program.
Capital Analysis
The primary measurement tool used to quantify operational risk capital and RWA related to operational risk under the advanced approaches is the loss distribution approach (LDA) model. Such required capital and RWA totaled $3.95 billion and $49.35 billion, respectively, as of December 31, 2024, compared to $3.50 billion and $43.77 billion, respectively, as of December 31, 2023; refer to the “Capital” section in “Financial Condition,” of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
The LDA model incorporates the three required operational risk elements described below:
•Internal loss event data is collected from across our business in conformity with our operating loss policy that establishes the requirements for collecting and reporting individual loss events;
•External loss event data from other financial institutions supplements our internal loss data pool with respect to loss event severity; and
•Business environment and internal control factors are those characteristics of a bank’s internal and external operating environment that bear an exposure to operational risk.
Monitoring and Reporting
The objective of risk monitoring is to proactively monitor the changing business environment and corresponding operational risk exposure. It is achieved through monitoring tools that are designed to help us understand changes in the business environment, internal control factors, risk metrics, risk assessments, exposures and operating effectiveness,
as well as details of loss events and progress on risk initiatives implemented to mitigate potential risk exposures.
Operational risk reporting is intended to provide transparency, thereby enabling management to manage risk, provide oversight and escalate issues in a timely manner. It is designed to allow the business units, executive management, and the Board’s control functions and committees to gain insight into activities that may result in risks and potential exposures.
Documentation and Guidelines
Documentation and guidelines allow for consistency and repeatability of the various processes that support the operational risk framework across our business.
Operational risk guidelines document our practices and describe the key elements in a business unit’s operational risk management program. The purpose of the guidelines is to set forth and define key operational risk terms, provide further detail on our operational risk programs, and detail the business units’ responsibilities to identify, assess, measure, monitor and report operational risk. The guideline supports our operational risk policy.
Data standards have been established with the intent of maintaining consistent data repositories and systems that are controlled, accurate and available on a timely basis to support operational risk management.
Information Technology Risk Management
Overview and Principles
We define information technology risk as the risk associated with the use, ownership, operation and adoption of information technology. Information technology risk includes risks potentially triggered by non-compliance with regulatory obligations or expectations, information security or cyber incidents, internal control and process gaps, operational events and adoption of new business technologies.
The principal technology risks within our risk policy and risk appetite framework include:
•Third party risk;
•Business disruption and technology resiliency risk;
•Technology change management risk;
•Cyber and information security risk;
•Technology asset and configuration risk; and
•Technology obsolescence risk.
Governance
Our Board is responsible for the approval and oversight of our overall technology risk framework and program. It does so through its TOPS, which
State Street Corporation | 98
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
reviews and approves our risk policy and appetite framework annually as well as our cybersecurity policy and related standards.
Our risk policy establishes our approach to our management of technology risk across our business. The policy identifies the responsibilities of individuals and committees charged with oversight of the management of technology risk and articulates a broad mandate that supports implementation of the risk framework.
Risk control functions in the business are responsible for adopting and executing the risk framework and reporting requirements. They do this, in part, by developing and maintaining an inventory of critical applications and supporting infrastructure, as well as identifying, assessing and measuring technology risk. They are also responsible for monitoring and evaluating risk on a continual basis using key risk indicators, risk reporting and adopting appropriate risk responses to risk issues.
Enterprise Technology Risk Management (ETRM) is the separate risk function responsible for the technology risk management oversight and appetite, and technology risk framework development and execution. ETRM also performs overall technology risk monitoring and reporting to the Board, and provides a separate view of the technology risk posture to executive leadership.
We manage technology risks by:
•Coordinating various risk assessment and risk management activities, including ERM operational risk programs;
•Establishing, through TORC and TOPS of the Board, the enterprise level technology risk and cyber risk appetite and limits;
•Producing enterprise level risk reporting, aggregation, dashboards, profiles and risk appetite statements;
•Validating appropriateness of reporting of information technology and cybersecurity risks and risk acceptance to senior management risk committees and the Board;
•Promoting a strong technology and cybersecurity risk culture through communication;
•Serving as an escalation and challenge point for risk policy guidance, expectations and clarifications;
•Assessing effectiveness of key enterprise information technology and cybersecurity risk and internal control remediation programs; and
•Providing risk oversight, challenge and monitoring for the Enterprise Continuity Services function and Third Party Management program, including the collection of risk appetite, metrics and key risk indicators, and reviewing issue management processes and consistent program adoption.
Cybersecurity Risk Management
Cybersecurity risk is managed as part of our overall information technology risk as outlined above. For additional information about our cybersecurity risk management program, refer to Item 1C in this Form 10-K.
The TORC assesses and manages the effectiveness of our cybersecurity program, which is overseen by the TOPS of our Board. The TOPS receives regular cybersecurity updates throughout the year and is responsible for reviewing and approving the policy on an annual basis.
Market Risk Management
Market risk is defined by the U.S. Agencies as the risk of loss that could result from broad market movements, such as changes in the general level of interest rates, credit spreads, foreign exchange rates or commodity prices. We are exposed to market risk in both our trading and certain of our non-trading, or asset and liability management, activities.
Information about the market risk associated with our trading activities is provided below under “Trading Activities.” Information about the market risk associated with our non-trading activities, which consists primarily of interest rate risk, is provided below under “Asset and Liability Management Activities.”
Trading Activities
In the conduct of our trading activities, we assume market risk, the level of which is a function of our overall risk appetite, business objectives and liquidity needs, our clients’ requirements and market volatility and our execution against those factors.
We engage in trading activities primarily to support our clients’ needs and to contribute to our overall corporate earnings and liquidity. In connection with certain of these trading activities, we enter into a variety of derivative financial instruments to support our clients' needs and to manage our interest rate and currency risk. These activities are generally intended to generate foreign exchange trading services revenue and to manage potential earnings volatility. In addition, we provide services related to derivatives in our role as both a manager and a servicer of financial assets.
Our clients use derivatives to manage the financial risks associated with their investment goals
State Street Corporation | 99
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
and business activities. With the growth of cross-border investing, our clients often enter into foreign exchange forward contracts to convert currency for international investments and to manage the currency risk in their international investment portfolios. As an active participant in the foreign exchange markets, we provide foreign exchange forward and option contracts in support of these client needs, and act as a dealer in the currency markets.
As part of our trading activities, we assume positions in the foreign exchange and interest rate markets by buying and selling cash instruments and entering into derivative instruments, including foreign exchange forward contracts, foreign exchange and interest rate options and interest rate swaps, interest rate forward contracts and interest rate futures. As of December 31, 2024, the notional amount of these derivative contracts was $2.70 trillion, of which $2.62 trillion was composed of foreign exchange forward, swap and spot contracts. We seek to match positions closely with the objective of mitigating related currency and interest rate risk. All foreign exchange contracts are valued daily at current market rates.
Governance
Our assumption of market risk in our trading activities is an integral part of our corporate risk appetite. The RC of the Board reviews and oversees our management of market risk, including the approval of key market risk policies and the receipt and review of regular market risk reporting, as well as periodic updates on selected market risk topics.
The Trading and Markets Risk Committee, a sub-committee of the previously described FRC (refer to “Risk Committees”), oversees all market risk-taking activities across our business associated with trading. The TMRC, which reports to the FRC, is composed of members of ERM, our Global Markets business and our Global Treasury group, other control functions, as well as our senior executives who manage our trading businesses and other members of management who possess specialized knowledge. The TMRC meets regularly to monitor the management of our trading market risk activities.
Our business units identify, manage and are responsible for the market risks inherent in their businesses. A dedicated market risk management group within ERM, and other groups within ERM, work with those business units to assist them in the identification, assessment, monitoring, management and control of market risk, and assist business unit managers with their market risk management and measurement activities. ERM provides an additional line of oversight, support and coordination designed to promote the consistent identification, measurement and management of market risk across business
units, separate from those business units’ discrete activities.
The ERM market risk management group is responsible for the management of corporate-wide market risk, the monitoring of key market risks and the development and maintenance of market risk management policies, guidelines and standards aligned with our corporate risk appetite. This group also establishes and approves market risk tolerance limits and trading authorities based on, but not limited to, measures of notional amounts, sensitivity, VaR and stress. Such limits and authorities are specified in our trading and market risk guidelines which govern our management of trading market risk.
Risk Appetite
Our corporate market risk appetite is specified in policy statements that outline the governance, responsibilities and requirements surrounding the identification, measurement, analysis, management and communication of market risk arising from our trading activities. These policy statements also set forth the market risk control framework designed to monitor, support, manage and control this portion of our risk appetite. All groups involved in the management and control of market risk associated with trading activities are required to comply with the qualitative and quantitative elements of these policy statements. Our trading market risk control framework is composed of the following:
•A trading market risk management process led by ERM, separate from the business units’ discrete activities;
•Defined responsibilities and authorities for the primary groups involved in trading market risk management;
•A trading market risk measurement methodology that captures correlation effects and allows aggregation of market risk across risk types, markets and business lines;
•Daily monitoring, analysis and reporting of market risk exposures associated with trading activities against market risk limits;
•A defined limit structure and escalation process in the event of a market risk limit excess;
•Use of VaR models to measure the one-day market risk exposure of trading positions;
•Use of VaR as a ten-day-based regulatory capital measure of the market risk exposure of trading positions;
•Use of non-VaR-based limits and other controls;
•Use of stressed-VaR models, stress-testing analysis and scenario analysis to support the
State Street Corporation | 100
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
trading market risk measurement and management process by assessing how portfolios and global business lines perform under extreme market conditions;
•Use of back-testing as a diagnostic tool to assess the accuracy of VaR models and other risk management techniques; and
•A new product approval process that requires market risk teams to assess trading-related market risks and apply risk tolerance limits to proposed new products and business activities.
We use our CAP to assess our overall capital and liquidity in relation to our risk profile and provide a comprehensive strategy for maintaining appropriate capital and liquidity levels. With respect to market risk associated with trading activities, our risk management and our calculations of regulatory capital are based primarily on our internal VaR models and stress testing analysis. As discussed in detail under “Value-at-Risk and Stressed VaR” below, VaR is measured daily by ERM.
The TMRC oversees our market risk exposure in relation to limits established within our risk appetite framework. These limits define threshold levels for VaR- and stressed VaR-based measures and are applicable to all trading positions subject to regulatory capital requirements. These limits are designed to mitigate undue concentration of market risk exposure, in light of the primarily non-proprietary nature of our trading activities. The risk appetite framework and associated limits are reviewed and approved by the Board’s RC.
Covered Positions
Our trading positions are subject to regulatory market risk capital requirements if they meet the regulatory definition of a “covered position.” A covered position is generally defined by the U.S. Agencies as an on- or off-balance sheet position associated with the organization’s trading activities that is free of any restrictions on its tradability, but does not include intangible assets, certain credit derivatives recognized as guarantees and certain equity positions not publicly traded. All FX and commodity positions are considered covered positions, regardless of the accounting treatment they receive. The identification of covered positions for inclusion in our market risk capital framework is governed by our trading and market risk guidelines, which outline the standards we use to determine whether a trading position is a covered position.
Our covered positions consist primarily of the trading portfolios held by our Global Markets business. They also arise from certain positions held by our Global Treasury group. These trading positions include products such as foreign exchange spot,
foreign exchange forwards, non-deliverable forwards, foreign exchange options, foreign exchange funding swaps, currency futures, financial futures and interest rate futures. New activities are analyzed to determine if the positions arising from such new activities meet the definition of a covered position and conform to our trading and market risk guidelines. This documented analysis, including any decisions with respect to market risk treatments, must receive approval from the Covered Positions Working Group which reports to the BOC.
We use spot rates, forward points, yield curves and discount factors imported from third-party sources to measure the value of our covered positions, and we use such values to mark our covered positions to market on a daily basis. These values are subject to separate validation by us in order to evaluate reasonableness and consistency with market experience. The mark-to-market gain or loss on spot transactions is calculated by applying the spot rate to the foreign currency principal and comparing the resultant base currency amount to the original transaction principal. The mark-to-market gain or loss on a forward foreign exchange contract or forward cash flow contract is determined as the difference between the life-to-date (historical) value of the cash flow and the value of the cash flow at the inception of the transaction. The mark-to-market gain or loss on interest rate swaps is determined by discounting the future cash flows from each leg of the swap transaction.
Value-at-Risk and Stressed VaR
We use a variety of risk measurement tools and methodologies, including VaR, which is an estimate of potential loss for a given period within a stated statistical confidence interval. We use a risk measurement methodology to measure trading-related VaR daily. We have adopted standards for measuring trading-related VaR, and we maintain regulatory capital for market risk associated with our trading activities in conformity with currently applicable bank regulatory market risk requirements.
We utilize an internal VaR model to calculate our regulatory market risk capital requirements. We use a historical simulation model to calculate daily VaR- and stressed VaR-based measures for our covered positions in conformity with regulatory requirements. Our VaR model seeks to capture identified material risk factors associated with our covered positions, including risks arising from market movements such as changes in foreign exchange rates, interest rates and option-implied volatilities.
We have adopted standards and guidelines to value our covered positions which govern our VaR- and stressed VaR-based measures. Our regulatory VaR-based measure is calculated based on historical
State Street Corporation | 101
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
volatilities of market risk factors during a two-year observation period calibrated to a one-tail, 99% confidence interval and a ten-business-day holding period. We also use the same platform to calculate a one-tail, 99% confidence interval, one-business-day VaR for internal risk management purposes. A 99% one-tail confidence interval implies that daily trading losses are not expected to exceed the estimated VaR more than 1% of the time, or less than three business days out of a year.
Our market risk models, including our VaR model, are subject to change in connection with the governance, validation and back-testing processes described below. These models can change as a result of changes in our business activities, our historical experiences, market forces and events, regulations and regulatory interpretations and other factors. In addition, the models are subject to continuing regulatory review and approval. Changes in our models may result in changes in our measurements of our market risk exposures, including VaR, and related measures, including regulatory capital. These changes could result in material changes in those risk measurements and related measures as calculated and compared from period to period.
Value-at-Risk Measures
VaR measures are based on the most recent two years of historical price movements for instruments and related risk factors to which we have exposure. The instruments in question are limited to foreign exchange spot, forward and options contracts and interest rate contracts, including futures and interest rate swaps. Historically, these instruments have exhibited a higher degree of liquidity relative to other available capital markets instruments. As a result, the VaR measures shown reflect our ability to rapidly adjust exposures in highly dynamic markets. For this reason, risk inventory, in the form of net open positions, across all currencies is typically limited. In addition, long and short positions in major, as well as minor, currencies provide risk offsets that limit our potential downside exposure.
Our VaR methodology uses a historical simulation approach based on market-observed changes in foreign exchange rates, U.S. and non-U.S. interest rates and implied volatilities, and incorporates the resulting diversification benefits provided from the mix of our trading positions. Our VaR model incorporates approximately 5,000 risk factors and includes correlations among currency, interest rates and other market rates.
All VaR measures are subject to limitations and must be interpreted accordingly. Some, but not all, of the limitations of our VaR methodology include the following:
•Compared to a shorter observation period, a two-year observation period is slower to reflect increases in market volatility (although temporary increases in market volatility will affect the calculation of VaR for a longer period); consequently, in periods of sudden increases in volatility or increasing volatility, in each case relative to the prior two-year period, the calculation of VaR may understate current risk;
•Compared to a longer observation period, a two-year observation period may not reflect as many past periods of volatility in the markets, because such past volatility is no longer in the observation period; consequently, historical market scenarios of high volatility, even if similar to current or likely future market circumstances, may fall outside the two-year observation period, resulting in a potential understatement of current risk;
•The VaR-based measure is calibrated to a specified level of confidence and does not indicate the potential magnitude of losses beyond this confidence level;
•In certain cases, VaR-based measures approximate the impact of changes in risk factors on the values of positions and portfolios; this may happen because the number of inputs included in the VaR model is necessarily limited; for example, yield curve risk factors do not exist for all future dates;
•The use of historical market information may not be predictive of future events, particularly those that are extreme in nature; this “backward-looking” limitation can cause VaR to understate or overstate risk;
•The effect of extreme and rare market movements is difficult to estimate; this may result from non-linear risk sensitivities as well as the potential for actual volatility and correlation levels to differ from assumptions implicit in the VaR calculations; and
•Intra-day risk is not captured.
We calculate a stressed VaR-based measure using the same model we use to calculate VaR, but with model inputs calibrated to historical data from a range of continuous twelve-month periods that reflect significant financial stress. The stressed VaR model is designed to identify the second-worst outcome occurring in the worst continuous one-year rolling period since July 2007. This stressed VaR meets the regulatory requirement as the rolling ten-day period with an outcome that is worse than 99% of other outcomes during that twelve-month period of financial
State Street Corporation | 102
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
stress. For each portfolio, the stress period is determined algorithmically by seeking the one-year time horizon that produces the largest ten-business-day VaR from within the available historical data. This historical data set includes the financial crisis of 2008, the highly volatile period surrounding the Eurozone sovereign debt crisis and the Standard & Poor’s downgrade of U.S. Treasury debt in August 2011. As the historical data set used to determine the stress period expands over time, future market stress events will be incorporated.
Stress Testing
We have a corporate-wide stress testing program in place that incorporates techniques to measure the potential loss we could suffer in a hypothetical scenario of adverse economic and financial conditions. We also monitor concentrations of risk such as concentration by branch, risk component, and currency pairs. We conduct stress testing on a daily basis based on selected historical stress events that are relevant to our positions in order to estimate the potential impact to our current portfolio should similar market conditions recur, and we also perform stress testing as part of the Federal Reserve’s CCAR process. Stress testing is conducted, analyzed and reported at the corporate, trading desk, division and risk-factor level (for example, exchange risk, interest rate risk and volatility risk).
Stress testing results and limits are actively monitored on a daily basis by ERM and reported to the TMRC. Limit breaches are addressed by ERM risk managers in conjunction with the business units, escalated as appropriate, and reviewed by the TMRC if material. In addition, we have established several action triggers that prompt immediate review by management and the implementation of a remediation plan.
We perform scenario analysis daily based on selected historical stress events that are relevant to our positions in order to estimate the potential impact to our current portfolio should similar market conditions recur. Relevant scenarios are chosen from an inventory of historical financial stresses and applied to our current portfolio. These historical event scenarios involve spot foreign exchange, credit, equity, unforeseen geo-political events and natural disasters, and government and central bank intervention scenarios. Examples of the specific historical scenarios we incorporate in our stress testing program may include the Asian financial crisis of 1997, the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States and the 2008 financial crisis. We continue to update our inventory of historical stress scenarios as new stress conditions emerge in the financial markets.
As each of the historical stress events is associated with a different time horizon, in some instances we normalize results by scaling down the longer horizon events to a ten-day horizon and keeping the shorter horizon events (i.e., events that are shorter than ten days) at their original terms. We also conduct sensitivity analysis daily to calculate the impact of a large predefined shock in a specific risk factor or a group of risk factors on our current portfolio. These predefined shocks include parallel and non-parallel yield curve shifts and foreign exchange spot and volatility surface shifts. In a parallel shift scenario, we apply a constant factor shift across all yield curve tenors. In a non-parallel shift scenario, we apply different shock levels to different tenors of a yield curve, rather than shifting the entire curve by a constant amount. Non-parallel shifts include steepening, flattening and butterflies.
Validation and Back-Testing
We perform frequent back-testing to assess the accuracy of our VaR-based model in estimating loss at the stated confidence level. This back-testing involves the comparison of estimated VaR model outputs to daily, actual P&L outcomes observed from daily market movements. We back-test our VaR model using a “clean” P&L, which excludes non-trading revenue such as fees, commissions and NII, as well as estimated revenue from intraday trading.
Our VaR definition of trading losses excludes items that are not specific to the price movement of the trading assets and liabilities themselves, such as fees, commissions, changes to reserves and gains or losses from intraday activity.
We experienced one back-testing exception in 2024 and no back-testing exceptions in 2023. At a 99% confidence interval, the statistical expectation for a VaR model is to witness one exception every hundred trading days (or two to three exceptions per year).
Our model validation process also evaluates the integrity of our VaR models through the use of regular outcome analysis. This outcome analysis includes back-testing, which compares the VaR model’s predictions to actual outcomes using out-of-sample information. Consistent with regulatory guidance, the back-testing compared a “clean” P&L, defined above, with the one-day VaR produced by the model. The back-testing was performed for a time period not used for model development. The number of occurrences where “clean” trading-book P&L exceeded the one-day VaR was within our expected VaR tolerance level.
State Street Corporation | 103
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Market Risk Reporting
Our ERM market risk management group is responsible for market risk monitoring and reporting. We use a variety of systems and controlled market feeds from third-party services to compile data for several daily, weekly and monthly management reports.
The following tables present VaR and stressed VaR associated with our trading activities for covered positions held during the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively, as measured by our VaR methodology. Diversification effect in the tables below represents the difference between total VaR and the sum of the VaRs for each trading activity. This effect arises because the risks present in our trading activities are not perfectly correlated.
| TABLE 32: TEN-DAY VALUE-AT-RISK ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES FOR COVERED POSITIONS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended December 31, 2024 | As of December 31, 2024 | Year Ended December 31, 2023 | As of December 31, 2023 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Global Markets | $ | 13,909 | $ | 31,813 | $ | 6,253 | $ | 12,890 | $ | 11,697 | $ | 23,797 | $ | 5,106 | $ | 9,029 | ||||||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 2,268 | 8,332 | 468 | 2,451 | 2,712 | 7,311 | 407 | 1,591 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (2,056) | (7,807) | (276) | (2,851) | (2,819) | (6,829) | (1,021) | (1,276) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total VaR | $ | 14,121 | $ | 32,338 | $ | 6,445 | $ | 12,490 | $ | 11,590 | $ | 24,279 | $ | 4,492 | $ | 9,344 | ||||||||||||||||
| TABLE 33: TEN-DAY STRESSED VALUE-AT-RISK ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES FOR COVERED POSITIONS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Year Ended December 31, 2024 | As of December 31, 2024 | Year Ended December 31, 2023 | As of December 31, 2023 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Global Markets | $ | 44,313 | $ | 72,735 | $ | 16,172 | $ | 41,379 | $ | 42,569 | $ | 103,551 | $ | 19,606 | $ | 62,724 | ||||||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 8,522 | 23,717 | 3,943 | 7,790 | 6,710 | 16,762 | 3,252 | 5,578 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (7,581) | (22,417) | (1,257) | (4,580) | (8,463) | (18,555) | (3,486) | (7,936) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Stressed VaR | $ | 45,254 | $ | 74,035 | $ | 18,858 | $ | 44,589 | $ | 40,816 | $ | 101,758 | $ | 19,372 | $ | 60,366 |
The average and period-end stressed VaR-based measures were both approximately $45 million for the year ended December 31, 2024, compared to $41 million and $60 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2023. The increase in the average stressed VaR was primarily attributed to higher foreign exchange and interest rate risk positions.
The VaR-based measures as presented in the preceding tables are primarily a reflection of the overall level of market volatility and our appetite for taking market risk in our trading activities. While overall levels of volatility have varied over the historical observation periods, smaller residual market risk positions during the quarter have led to a reduction in VaR measures presented.
We have in the past and may in the future modify and adjust our models and methodologies used to calculate VaR and stressed VaR, subject to regulatory review and approval, and any future modifications and adjustments may result in changes in our VaR-based and stressed VaR-based measures.
The following tables present the VaR and stressed-VaR associated with our trading activities attributable to foreign exchange risk, interest rate risk and volatility risk as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. The totals of the VaR-based and stressed VaR-based measures for the three attributes in total exceeded the related total VaR and total stressed VaR presented in the foregoing tables as of each period-end, primarily due to the benefits of diversification across risk types. Diversification effect in the tables below represents the difference between total VaR and the sum of the VaRs for each trading activity. This effect arises because the risks present in our trading activities are not perfectly correlated.
| TABLE 34: TEN-DAY VaR ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES BY RISK FACTOR(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended December 31, 2024 | Year Ended December 31, 2023 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | ||||||||||||||||||
| By component: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Global Markets | $ | 3,474 | $ | 10,422 | $ | 180 | $ | 2,348 | $ | 10,023 | $ | 356 | ||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 409 | 2,505 | — | 496 | 1,446 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (388) | (2,920) | — | (324) | (831) | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total VaR | $ | 3,495 | $ | 10,007 | $ | 180 | $ | 2,520 | $ | 10,638 | $ | 356 |
State Street Corporation | 104
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 35: TEN-DAY STRESSED VaR ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES BY RISK FACTOR(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended December 31, 2024 | Year Ended December 31, 2023 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | ||||||||||||||||||
| By component: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Global Markets | $ | 7,357 | $ | 43,800 | $ | 518 | $ | 5,402 | $ | 64,418 | $ | 501 | ||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 6,246 | 7,202 | — | 4,978 | 6,347 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (5,017) | (8,671) | — | (2,891) | (6,209) | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total Stressed VaR | $ | 8,586 | $ | 42,331 | $ | 518 | $ | 7,489 | $ | 64,556 | $ | 501 |
(1) For purposes of risk attribution by component, foreign exchange refers only to the risk from market movements in period-end rates. Forwards, futures, options and swaps with maturities greater than period-end have embedded interest rate risk that is captured by the measures used for interest rate risk. Accordingly, the interest rate risk embedded in these foreign exchange instruments is included in the interest rate risk component.
Asset and Liability Management Activities
The primary objective of asset and liability management is to provide sustainable NII under varying economic conditions, while protecting the economic value of the assets and liabilities carried on our consolidated statement of condition from the adverse effects of changes in interest rates. While many market factors affect the level of NII and the economic value of our assets and liabilities, one of the most significant factors is our exposure to movements in interest rates. Most of our NII is earned from the investment of client deposits generated by our businesses. We invest these client deposits in assets that conform generally to the liquidity characteristics of our balance sheet liabilities, as well as the currency composition of our significant non-U.S. dollar denominated client deposits.
We quantify NII sensitivity using an earnings simulation model that includes our expectations for new business growth, changes in balance sheet mix and investment portfolio positioning. This measure compares our baseline view of NII over a twelve-month horizon, based on our internal forecast of interest rates, to a wide range of rate shocks. Our baseline view of NII is updated on a regular basis. Table 36, Key Interest Rates for Baseline Forecasts, presents the spot and 12-month forward rates used in our baseline forecasts at December 31, 2024 and 2023. Our baseline rate forecast as of December 31, 2024 was generally consistent with common market expectations for global central bank actions at that point in time, which implied that rates have reached peak levels and rate cuts will continue in 2025.
| TABLE 36: KEY INTEREST RATES FOR BASELINE FORECASTS | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | ||||||||||||||||
| Fed Funds Target | ECB Target(1) | 10-Year Treasury | Fed Funds Target | ECB Target(1) | 10-Year Treasury | ||||||||||||
| Spot rates | 4.50 | % | 3.00 | % | 4.57 | % | 5.50 | % | 4.00 | % | 3.88 | % | |||||
| 12-month forward rates | 4.00 | 1.75 | 4.59 | 4.25 | 2.75 | 3.87 |
(1) European Central Bank deposit facility rate.
In Table 37: Net Interest Income Sensitivity, we report the expected change in NII over the next twelve months from instantaneous 100 basis point shocks to various tenors on the yield curve relative to our baseline rate forecast, including the impacts from U.S. and non-U.S. rates. Each scenario assumes no management action is taken to mitigate the adverse effects of changes in interest rates on our financial performance. While investment securities balances and composition can fluctuate with the level of rates as prepayment assumptions change, for purposes of this analysis our deposit balances and mix are assumed to remain consistent with the baseline forecast which assumes client deposit balance rotation including reductions in non-interest-bearing deposit balances. The results of these scenarios should not be extrapolated for other (e.g., more severe) shocks as the impact of interest rate shocks may not be linear. In lower rate scenarios, the full impact of the shock is realized for all currencies even if the result is negative interest rates.
| TABLE 37: NET INTEREST INCOME SENSITIVITY | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | U.S. Dollar | All Other Currencies | Total | U.S. Dollar | All Other Currencies | Total | ||||||||||||||||
| Rate change: | Benefit (Exposure) | Benefit (Exposure) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Parallel shifts: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| +100 bps shock | $ | 19 | $ | 292 | $ | 311 | $ | (26) | $ | 274 | $ | 248 | ||||||||||
| –100 bps shock | (16) | (254) | (270) | 4 | (227) | (223) | ||||||||||||||||
| Steeper yield curve: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| +100 bps shift in long-end rates(1) | 28 | 22 | 50 | 28 | 11 | 39 | ||||||||||||||||
| -100 bps shift in short-end rates(1) | 13 | (233) | (220) | 35 | (215) | (180) | ||||||||||||||||
| Flatter yield curve: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| +100 bps shift in short-end rates(1) | (9) | 270 | 261 | (53) | 262 | 209 | ||||||||||||||||
| -100 bps shift in long-end rates(1) | (29) | (22) | (51) | (30) | (11) | (41) |
(1) The short end is 0-3 months. The long end is 5 years and above. Interim term points are interpolated.
State Street Corporation | 105
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Our overall balance sheet, including all currencies, continues to be asset sensitive with an NII benefit in higher rate scenarios and NII exposure in lower rate scenarios. As of December 31, 2024, our USD balance sheet’s NII sensitivity is relatively neutral given expectations for USD deposit betas and the repricing characteristics of our USD assets. Compared to December 31, 2023, our USD NII turned asset sensitive largely driven by lower investment portfolio duration and lower non-interest bearing deposits. As of December 31, 2024, non-USD NII benefits from higher rate scenarios and is exposed to lower rates primarily driven by our sensitivities on the short-end of the yield curve. Compared to December 31, 2023, our non-USD NII sensitivity increased, driven by higher deposit balances and lower duration in the investment portfolio.
EVE sensitivity is a discounted cash flow model designed to estimate the fair value of assets and liabilities under a series of interest rate shocks over a long-term horizon. In the following table, we report our EVE sensitivity to 200 bps instantaneous rate shocks, relative to spot interest rates. EVE sensitivity is dependent on the timing of interest and principal cash flows. Also, the measure only evaluates the spot balance sheet and does not include the impact of new business assumptions.
| TABLE 38: ECONOMIC VALUE OF EQUITY SENSITIVITY | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, | ||||||
| (In millions) | 2024 | 2023 | ||||
| Rate change: | Benefit (Exposure) | |||||
| +200 bps shock | $ | (1,024) | $ | (1,447) | ||
| –200 bps shock | 1,205 | 1,683 |
As of December 31, 2024, EVE sensitivity remains exposed to upward shifts in interest rates. Compared to December 31, 2023, our sensitivity in the up 200bp shock scenario decreased, primarily driven by a decrease in the duration of the investment portfolio.
Both NII sensitivity and EVE sensitivity are routinely monitored as market conditions change. For additional information about our Asset and Liability Management Activities, refer to Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, “Risk Management.”
Model Risk Management
State Street uses models to support its financial decision-making and business activities. Model risk is the potential for adverse outcomes due to incorrectly implemented or misused model outputs. Model Risk Management (MRM) is a separate control function within Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) responsible for specifying and maintaining the firmwide MRM policy and framework designed to monitor and control model risk within our risk appetite.
The MRM framework includes:
•Model risk governance that defines roles and responsibilities, including the authority to restrict model usage, provides policies and guidance, monitors compliance, and reports regularly to relevant internal committees and the Board of Directors on the overall degree of model risk across the firm;
•Model development standards that focus on conceptual soundness and computational accuracy, data quality, robustness, stability, and sensitivity to assumptions; and
•Model validation standards designed to verify that models are conceptually sound, are computationally accurate, are performing as expected, and are in line with their intended use, and evaluate the level of model risk for each model by considering the model’s materiality, usage, performance, and sufficiency of compensating controls among other factors
The MRM function is further responsible for model identification.
Governance
Models used in the regulatory capital calculation can only be deployed for use after undergoing a model validation by ERM’s MRM group. The model validation results and/or a decision by the MRC must permit model usage or the model may not be used.
ERM’s MRM group is responsible for defining the corporate-wide model risk management framework and maintaining policies that are designed to achieve the framework’s objectives. All regulatory capital calculation models, including any artificial intelligence and machine learning models, must comply with the model risk management framework and corresponding policies. The group is responsible for overall model risk governance capabilities, with particular emphasis in the areas of model identification, model validation, model risk reporting, model performance monitoring, tracking of new model development status and committee-level review and challenge.
State Street Corporation | 106
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The MRC, which is composed of senior managers representing MRM along with functional areas and business units, reports to MRAC, and provides guidance and oversight to the MRM function.
Model Development and Ongoing Monitoring
Models are developed under guidelines governing data sourcing, methodology selection and model integrity testing. Model development includes a statement of purpose to align development with intended use. It may also include a comparison of alternative approaches to promote a sound modeling approach.
Model developers conduct an assessment of data quality and relevance. The development teams conduct a variety of tests of the accuracy, robustness and stability of each model.
Model owners submit models to the MVG for validation on a regular basis, as per the existing policy. The model owners also conduct ongoing monitoring of each model.
Model Validation
MVG is part of MRM within ERM and performs model validations and reviews. MVG is independent, as contemplated by applicable bank regulatory requirements, of both the developers and users of the models. MVG validates models through an evaluation process that assesses the appropriateness, accuracy, and suitability of data inputs, methodologies, documentation, assumptions, and processing code. Model validation also encompasses an assessment of model performance, sensitivity, and robustness, as well as a model’s potential limitations given its particular assumptions or deficiencies. Based on the results of its review, MVG issues a model use decision and may require remedial actions and/or compensating controls on model use. MVG also maintains a model risk rating system, which assigns a risk rating to each model based on an assessment of a model’s inherent and residual risks. These ratings aid in the understanding and reporting of model risk across the model portfolio, and enable the triaging of needs for remediation.
Although model validation is the primary method of subjecting models to independent review and challenge, in practice, a multi-step governance process provides the opportunity for challenge by multiple parties. First, MVG conducts a model validation and issues a model use decision. MVG communicates their result as one of the following three outcomes: “Approved,” “Approved with conditions,” or “Not Approved”. There are three ways in which a model can be deemed “Not approved for Use” given a validation: 1) the aggregation of the model scoring within MRM’s model risk rating system is poor enough to result in a “high” rating, 2) the
scoring of one or more model risk rating system element(s) is deemed “critical” resulting in an automatic “high” rating irrespective of the other elements as the “critical” element(s) undermines the model, or 3) the remediation action is not properly taken by the due date resulting in a severe compliance breach that undercuts the model rating. Second, these decisions may be reviewed, challenged, and confirmed by the MRC. Finally, model use decisions, risk ratings, and overall levels of model risk may be escalated to and reviewed by MRAC. MRM also reports regularly on model risk issues to the Board.
Strategic Risk Management
We define strategic risk as the current or prospective impact on earnings or capital arising from adverse business decisions, improper implementation of strategic initiatives, or lack of responsiveness to industry-wide changes. Strategic risks are influenced by changes in the competitive environment; decline in market performance or changes in our business activities; and the potential secondary impacts of reputational risks, not already captured as market, interest rate, credit, operational, model or liquidity risks. We incorporate strategic risk into our assessment of our business plans and risk and capital management processes. Management of strategic risk is an integral component of all aspects of our business.
Separating the effects of a potential material adverse event into operational and strategic risk is sometimes difficult. For instance, the direct financial impact of an unfavorable event in the form of fines or penalties would be classified as an operational risk loss, while the impact on our reputation and consequently the potential loss of clients and corresponding decline in revenue would be classified as a strategic risk loss. An additional example of strategic risk is the integration of a major acquisition. Failure to successfully integrate the operations of an acquired business, and the resultant inability to retain clients and the associated revenue, would be classified as a loss due to strategic risk.
Strategic risk is managed with a long-term focus. Techniques for its assessment and management include the development of business plans, which are subject to review and challenge from senior management and the Board of Directors, as well as a formal review and approval process for all new business and product proposals. The potential impact of the various elements of strategic risk is difficult to quantify with any degree of precision. We use a combination of historical earnings volatility, scenario analysis, stress-testing and management judgment to help assess the potential effect on us attributable to strategic risk. Management and control of strategic
State Street Corporation | 107
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
risks are generally the responsibility of the business units, with oversight from the control functions, as part of their overall strategic planning and internal risk management processes.
CAPITAL
Managing our capital involves evaluating whether our actual and projected levels of capital are commensurate with our risk profile, are in compliance with all applicable regulatory requirements, and are sufficient to provide us with the financial flexibility to undertake future strategic business initiatives. We assess capital adequacy based on relevant regulatory capital requirements, as well as our own internal capital goals, targets and other relevant metrics.
Framework
Our objective with respect to management of our capital is to maintain a strong capital base in order to provide financial flexibility for our business needs, including funding corporate growth and supporting clients’ cash management needs, and to provide protection against loss to depositors and creditors. We strive to maintain an appropriate level of capital, commensurate with our risk profile, on which an attractive return to shareholders is expected to be realized over both the short and long-term, while protecting our obligations to depositors and creditors and complying with regulatory capital requirements.
Our capital management focuses on our risk exposures, the regulatory requirements applicable to us with respect to multiple capital measures, the evaluations and resulting credit ratings of the major independent rating agencies, our return on capital at both the consolidated and line-of-business level and our capital position relative to our peers.
Assessment of our overall capital adequacy includes the comparison of capital sources with capital uses, as well as the consideration of the quality and quantity of the various components of capital. The assessment seeks to determine the optimal level of capital and composition of capital instruments to satisfy all constituents of capital, with the lowest overall cost to shareholders. Other factors considered in our assessment of capital adequacy are strategic and contingency planning, stress testing and planned capital actions.
Capital Adequacy Process (CAP)
Our primary federal banking regulator is the Federal Reserve. Both we and State Street Bank are subject to the minimum regulatory capital requirements established by the Federal Reserve and defined in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act. State Street Bank must exceed the regulatory capital thresholds for “well capitalized” in order for our Parent Company to maintain its status as a financial holding company. Accordingly, one of
our primary objectives with respect to capital management is to exceed all applicable minimum regulatory capital requirements and for State Street Bank to be “well capitalized” under the PCA guidelines established by the FDIC. Our capital management activities are conducted as part of our corporate-wide CAP and associated Capital Policy and Guidelines.
We consider capital adequacy to be a key element of our financial well-being, which affects our ability to attract and maintain client relationships; operate effectively in the global capital markets; and satisfy regulatory, security holders and shareholder needs. Capital is one of several elements that affect our credit ratings and the ratings of our principal subsidiaries.
In conformity with our Capital Policy and Guidelines, we strive to achieve and maintain specific internal capital levels, not just at a point in time, but over time and during periods of stress, to account for changes in our strategic direction, evolving economic conditions, and financial and market volatility. We have developed and implemented a corporate-wide CAP to assess our overall capital in relation to our risk profile and to provide a comprehensive strategy for maintaining appropriate capital levels. The CAP considers material risks under multiple scenarios, with an emphasis on stress scenarios, and encompasses existing processes and systems used to measure our capital adequacy.
Capital Contingency Planning
Contingency planning is an integral component of capital management. The objective of contingency planning is to monitor current and forecast levels of select capital, liquidity and other measures that serve as early indicators of a potentially adverse capital or liquidity adequacy situation. These measures are one of the inputs used to set our internal capital adequacy level. We review these measures annually for appropriateness and relevance in relation to our financial budget and capital plan. In addition, we maintain an inventory of capital contingency actions designed to conserve or generate capital to support the unique risks in our business model, our client and investor demands and regulatory requirements.
Stress Testing
We administer a robust business-wide stress-testing program that executes stress tests each year to assess the institution’s capital adequacy and/or future performance under adverse conditions. Our stress testing program is structured around what we determine to be the key risks inherent in our business, as assessed through a recurring material risk identification process. The material risk identification process represents a bottom-up approach to identifying the institution’s most
State Street Corporation | 108
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
significant risk exposures across all on- and off-balance sheet risk-taking activities, including credit, market, liquidity, interest rate, operational, fiduciary, business, reputation and regulatory risks. These key risks serve as an organizing principle for much of our risk management framework, as well as reporting, including the “risk dashboard” provided to the Board.
In connection with the focus on our key risks, each stress test incorporates idiosyncratic loss events tailored to our unique risk profile and business activities. Due to the nature of our business model and our consolidated statement of condition, our risks differ from those of a traditional commercial bank. Over the past few years, stress scenarios have included a deep recession in the United States, including impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic, a break-up of the Eurozone, a severe recession in China and an oil shock precipitated by turmoil in the Middle East/North Africa region.
The Federal Reserve requires bank holding companies with total consolidated assets of $50 billion or more, which includes us, to submit a capital plan on an annual basis. The Federal Reserve uses its annual CCAR process, which incorporates hypothetical financial and economic stress scenarios, to review those capital plans and assess whether banking organizations have capital planning processes that account for idiosyncratic risks and provide for sufficient capital to continue operations throughout times of economic and financial stress. As part of its CCAR process, the Federal Reserve assesses each organization’s capital adequacy, capital planning process and plans to distribute capital, such as dividend payments or stock purchase programs. Management and Board risk committees review, challenge and approve CCAR results and assumptions before submission to the Federal Reserve.
Through the evaluation of our capital adequacy and/or future performance under adverse conditions, the stress testing process provides us important insights for capital planning, risk management and strategic decision-making.
Governance
In order to support integrated decision-making, we have identified three management elements to aid in the compatibility and coordination of our CAP:
•Risk Management - identification, measurement, monitoring and forecasting of different types of risk and their combined impact on capital adequacy;
•Capital management - determination of optimal capital levels; and
•Business Management - strategic planning, budgeting, forecasting and performance management.
We have a hierarchical structure supporting appropriate committee review of relevant risk and capital information. The ongoing responsibility for capital management rests with our Treasurer. The Capital Management group within Global Treasury is responsible for the Capital Policy and Guidelines, development of the Capital Plan, the oversight of global capital management and optimization.
The MRAC provides oversight of our capital management, our capital adequacy, our internal targets and the expectations of the major independent credit rating agencies. In addition, MRAC approves our balance sheet strategy and related activities. The Board’s RC assists the Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities related to the assessment and management of risk and capital. Our Capital Policy is reviewed and approved annually by the Board’s RC.
Global Systemically Important Bank
We have been identified by the Financial Stability Board and the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision as a G-SIB. Our designation as a G-SIB is based on a number of factors, as evaluated by banking regulators, and requires us to maintain an additional capital surcharge above the minimum capital ratios set forth in the Basel III rule.
We and our depositary institution subsidiaries are subject to the current Basel III minimum risk-based capital and leverage ratio guidelines.
Additional information about G-SIBs is provided under “Regulatory Capital Adequacy and Liquidity Standards” in “Supervision and Regulation” in Business in this Form 10-K.
Regulatory Capital
We and State Street Bank, as advanced approaches banking organizations, are subject to the U.S. Basel III framework. We are also subject to the final market risk capital rule issued by the U.S. Agencies.
The Basel III rule provides two frameworks for monitoring capital adequacy: the “standardized approach” and the “advanced approaches”, applicable to advanced approaches banking organizations, like us. The standardized approach prescribes standardized calculations for credit risk RWA, including specified risk weights for on and certain off-balance sheet exposures. The advanced approaches consist of the Advanced Internal Ratings-Based Approach used for the calculation of credit risk RWA, and the Advanced Measurement Approach used for the calculation of operational risk RWA.
State Street Corporation | 109
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
As required by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) enacted in 2010, we and State Street Bank, as advanced approaches banking organizations, are subject to a “capital floor,” also referred to as the Collins Amendment, in the assessment of our regulatory capital adequacy, such that our risk-based capital ratios for regulatory assessment purposes are the lower of each ratio calculated under the advanced approaches and the standardized approach. Under the advanced approaches, State Street and State Street Bank are subject to a 2.5% CCB requirement, plus any applicable countercyclical capital buffer requirement, which is currently set at 0%. Under the standardized approach, State Street Bank is subject to the same CCB and countercyclical capital buffer requirements, but for State Street, the 2.5% CCB requirement is replaced by the SCB requirement according to the SCB rule issued in 2020. In addition, State Street is subject to a G-SIB surcharge.
The SCB replaced, under the standardized approach, the CCB with a buffer calculated as the difference between the institution’s starting and lowest projected CET1 ratio under the CCAR severely adverse scenario plus planned common stock dividend payments (as a percentage of RWA) from the fourth through seventh quarter of the CCAR planning horizon. The SCB requirement can be no less than 2.5% of RWA. Breaching the SCB or other regulatory buffer or surcharge will limit a banking organization’s ability to make capital distributions and discretionary bonus payments to executive officers.
Our SCB requirement was 2.5% for the period from October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2024. On June 26, 2024, we were notified by the Federal Reserve of the results from the 2024 supervisory stress test. Our SCB calculated under the 2024 supervisory stress test was below the 2.5% minimum, resulting in an SCB at that floor, which remains in effect for the period from October 1, 2024 through September 30, 2025.
Our minimum risk-based capital ratios as of January 1, 2024 include a CCB of 2.5% and a SCB of 2.5% for the advanced approaches and standardized approach, respectively, a G-SIB surcharge of 1.0%, and a countercyclical buffer of 0.0%. This results in minimum risk-based ratios of 8.0% for the Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) capital ratio, 9.5% for the tier 1 capital ratio, and 11.5% for the total capital ratio.
Our current G-SIB surcharge, through December 31, 2025, is 1.0%. Based upon preliminary calculations using data as of December 31, 2024, we currently anticipate that our surcharge will remain at 1.0% through December 31, 2026; however, that calculation has not yet been finalized and is subject to many financial, balance sheet, market and other factors, and consequently there is a risk that a higher G-SIB surcharge (e.g., 1.5%) may result from the final calculation.
To maintain the status of the Parent Company as a financial holding company, we and our IDI subsidiaries are required, among other requirements, to be “well capitalized” as defined by Regulation Y and Regulation H.
The market risk capital rule requires us to use internal models to calculate daily measures of VaR, which reflect general market risk for certain of our trading positions defined by the rule as “covered positions,” as well as stressed-VaR measures to supplement the VaR measures. The rule also requires a public disclosure composed of qualitative and quantitative information about the market risk associated with our trading activities and our related VaR and stressed-VaR measures. The qualitative and quantitative information required by the rule is provided under “Market Risk Management” included in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
The following table presents the regulatory capital structure and related regulatory capital ratios for us and State Street Bank as of the dates indicated. We are subject to the more stringent of the risk-based capital ratios calculated under the standardized approach and those calculated under the advanced approaches in the assessment of our capital adequacy under applicable bank regulatory standards.
State Street Corporation | 110
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 39: REGULATORY CAPITAL STRUCTURE AND RELATED REGULATORY CAPITAL RATIOS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| State Street Corporation | State Street Bank | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2024 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2024 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2023 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2023 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2024 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2024 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2023 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2023 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common shareholders’ equity: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common stock and related surplus | $ | 11,226 | $ | 11,226 | $ | 11,245 | $ | 11,245 | $ | 13,333 | $ | 13,333 | $ | 13,033 | $ | 13,033 | ||||||||||||||
| Retained earnings | 29,582 | 29,582 | 27,957 | 27,957 | 15,977 | 15,977 | 14,454 | 14,454 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) | (2,100) | (2,100) | (2,354) | (2,354) | (1,805) | (1,805) | (2,097) | (2,097) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Treasury stock, at cost | (16,198) | (16,198) | (15,025) | (15,025) | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | 22,510 | 22,510 | 21,823 | 21,823 | 27,505 | 27,505 | 25,390 | 25,390 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Regulatory capital adjustments: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Goodwill and other intangible assets, net of associated deferred tax liabilities | (8,320) | (8,320) | (8,470) | (8,470) | (8,054) | (8,054) | (8,208) | (8,208) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other adjustments(1) | (391) | (391) | (382) | (382) | (278) | (278) | (298) | (298) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital | 13,799 | 13,799 | 12,971 | 12,971 | 19,173 | 19,173 | 16,884 | 16,884 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Preferred stock | 2,816 | 2,816 | 1,976 | 1,976 | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital | 16,615 | 16,615 | 14,947 | 14,947 | 19,173 | 19,173 | 16,884 | 16,884 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Qualifying subordinated long-term debt | 1,861 | 1,861 | 1,870 | 1,870 | 530 | 530 | 536 | 536 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Adjusted allowance for credit losses | — | 183 | — | 150 | — | 183 | — | 150 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total capital | $ | 18,476 | $ | 18,659 | $ | 16,817 | $ | 16,967 | $ | 19,703 | $ | 19,886 | $ | 17,420 | $ | 17,570 | ||||||||||||||
| Risk-weighted assets: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Credit risk(2) | $ | 63,252 | $ | 124,281 | $ | 61,210 | $ | 109,228 | $ | 57,883 | $ | 121,785 | $ | 54,942 | $ | 107,067 | ||||||||||||||
| Operational risk(3) | 49,350 | NA | 43,768 | NA | 47,538 | NA | 42,297 | NA | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Market risk | 2,000 | 2,000 | 2,475 | 2,475 | 2,000 | 2,000 | 2,475 | 2,475 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total risk-weighted assets | $ | 114,602 | $ | 126,281 | $ | 107,453 | $ | 111,703 | $ | 107,421 | $ | 123,785 | $ | 99,714 | $ | 109,542 | ||||||||||||||
| Capital Ratios: | 2024 Minimum Requirements Including Capital Conservation Buffer and G-SIB Surcharge(4) | 2023 Minimum Requirements Including Capital Conservation Buffer and G-SIB Surcharge(4) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital | 8.0 | % | 8.0 | % | 12.0 | % | 10.9 | % | 12.1 | % | 11.6 | % | 17.8 | % | 15.5 | % | 16.9 | % | 15.4 | % | ||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital | 9.5 | 9.5 | 14.5 | 13.2 | 13.9 | 13.4 | 17.8 | 15.5 | 16.9 | 15.4 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Total capital | 11.5 | 11.5 | 16.1 | 14.8 | 15.7 | 15.2 | 18.3 | 16.1 | 17.5 | 16.0 |
(1) Other adjustments within CET1 capital primarily include disallowed deferred tax assets, cash flow hedges that are not recognized at fair value on the balance sheet, and the overfunded portion of our defined benefit pension plan obligation net of associated deferred tax liabilities.
(2) Under the advanced approaches, credit risk RWA includes a CVA which reflects the risk of potential fair value adjustments for credit risk reflected in our valuation of OTC derivative contracts. We used a simple CVA approach in conformity with the Basel III advanced approaches.
(3) Under the current advanced approaches rules and regulatory guidance concerning operational risk models, RWA attributable to operational risk can vary substantially from period-to-period, without direct correlation to the effects of a particular loss event on our results of operations and financial condition and impacting dates and periods that may differ from the dates and periods as of and during which the loss event is reflected in our financial statements, with the timing and categorization dependent on the processes for model updates and, if applicable, model revalidation and regulatory review and related supervisory processes. An individual loss event can have a significant effect on the output of our operational RWA under the advanced approaches depending on the severity of the loss event and its categorization among the seven Basel-defined UOMs.
(4) Minimum requirements include a CCB of 2.5% and a SCB of 2.5% for the advanced approaches and the standardized approach, respectively, a G-SIB surcharge of 1.0% and a countercyclical buffer of 0%. On June 26, 2024, we were notified by the Federal Reserve of the results from the 2024 supervisory stress test. Our SCB calculated under the 2024 supervisory stress test was well below the 2.5% minimum, resulting in an SCB at that floor, which remains in effect for the period from October 1, 2024 through September 30, 2025.
NA Not applicable
Our CET1 capital increased $0.83 billion as of December 31, 2024 compared to December 31, 2023, primarily due to an increase in net income and improved AOCI, partially offset by dividends declared and common share repurchases in 2024. Our Tier 1 capital increased $1.67 billion as of December 31, 2024 compared to December 31, 2023 under both the advanced approaches and standardized approach, due to the increase in CET1 capital and net issuance of preferred stock in 2024.
Our Tier 2 capital remained relatively flat as of December 31, 2024 compared to December 31, 2023, under the advanced approaches and standardized approach.
Total capital increased under the advanced approaches and standardized approach, as of December 31, 2024 compared to December 31, 2023, by $1.66 billion and $1.69 billion, respectively, primarily due to the increase in CET1 capital and net issuance of preferred stock in 2024.
State Street Corporation | 111
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The table below presents a roll-forward of CET1 capital, Tier 1 capital and total capital for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023.
| TABLE 40: CAPITAL ROLL-FORWARD | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2024 | Basel III Standardized Approach December, 31, 2024 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2023 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2023 | ||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital balance, beginning of period | $ | 12,971 | $ | 12,971 | $ | 14,547 | $ | 14,547 | ||||||
| Net income | 2,687 | 2,687 | 1,944 | 1,944 | ||||||||||
| Changes in treasury stock, at cost | (1,173) | (1,173) | (3,689) | (3,689) | ||||||||||
| Dividends declared | (1,062) | (1,062) | (958) | (958) | ||||||||||
| Goodwill and other intangible assets, net of associated deferred tax liabilities | 150 | 150 | 75 | 75 | ||||||||||
| Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)(1) | 254 | 254 | 1,357 | 1,357 | ||||||||||
| Other adjustments(1) | (28) | (28) | (305) | (305) | ||||||||||
| Changes in common equity tier 1 capital | 828 | 828 | (1,576) | (1,576) | ||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital balance, end of period | 13,799 | 13,799 | 12,971 | 12,971 | ||||||||||
| Additional tier 1 capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital balance, beginning of period | 14,947 | 14,947 | 16,523 | 16,523 | ||||||||||
| Changes in common equity tier 1 capital | 828 | 828 | (1,576) | (1,576) | ||||||||||
| Net issuance (redemption) of preferred stock | 840 | 840 | — | — | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 1 capital | 1,668 | 1,668 | (1,576) | (1,576) | ||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital balance, end of period | 16,615 | 16,615 | 14,947 | 14,947 | ||||||||||
| Tier 2 capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Tier 2 capital balance, beginning of period | 1,870 | 2,020 | 1,376 | 1,496 | ||||||||||
| Net issuance (redemption) and changes in long-term debt qualifying as tier 2 capital | (9) | (9) | 494 | 494 | ||||||||||
| Changes in allowance for credit losses | — | 33 | — | 30 | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 2 capital | (9) | 24 | 494 | 524 | ||||||||||
| Tier 2 capital balance, end of period | 1,861 | 2,044 | 1,870 | 2,020 | ||||||||||
| Total capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Total capital balance, beginning of period | 16,817 | 16,967 | 17,899 | 18,019 | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 1 capital | 1,668 | 1,668 | (1,576) | (1,576) | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 2 capital | (9) | 24 | 494 | 524 | ||||||||||
| Total capital balance, end of period | $ | 18,476 | $ | 18,659 | $ | 16,817 | $ | 16,967 |
(1) Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) includes losses on cash flow hedges where the hedged exposures are not recognized at fair value on the balance sheet, which, under the Capital Rule, must be excluded from CET1 capital. This adjustment is captured in the Other Adjustments line.
The following table presents a roll-forward of the Basel III advanced approaches and standardized approach RWA for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023.
| TABLE 41: ADVANCED & STANDARDIZED APPROACHES RISK-WEIGHTED ASSETS ROLL-FORWARD | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2024 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2023 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2024 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2023 | ||||||||||
| Total risk-weighted assets, beginning of period | $ | 107,453 | $ | 105,359 | $ | 111,703 | $ | 107,227 | ||||||
| Changes in credit risk-weighted assets: | ||||||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in investment securities-wholesale | (585) | (1,927) | (1,000) | (1,614) | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in loans and overdrafts | 919 | 405 | 2,241 | 1,734 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in securitization exposures | 628 | 359 | 592 | 339 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in repo-style transaction exposures | (558) | 932 | 2,968 | 1,851 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in over-the-counter derivatives exposures(1) | 2,595 | 25 | 10,778 | (311) | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in all other(2) | (957) | 308 | (526) | 1,490 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in credit risk-weighted assets | 2,042 | 102 | 15,053 | 3,489 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in market risk-weighted assets | (475) | 987 | (475) | 987 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in operational risk-weighted assets | 5,582 | 1,005 | NA | NA | ||||||||||
| Total risk-weighted assets, end of period | $ | 114,602 | $ | 107,453 | $ | 126,281 | $ | 111,703 |
(1) Under the advanced approaches, includes CVA RWA.
(2) Includes assets not in a definable category, non-material portfolio, cleared transactions, other wholesale, cash and due from banks, interest-bearing deposits with banks and equity exposures.
NA Not applicable.
State Street Corporation | 112
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
As of December 31, 2024, total advanced approaches RWA increased $7.15 billion compared to December 31, 2023, mainly due to an increase in operational risk RWA. The increase in operational risk RWA was primarily due to a model recalibration driven largely by an increase in the value of loss due to inflation and to reflect more recent loss history. Credit risk RWA increased $2.04 billion compared to December 31, 2023, mainly due to increase in over-the-counter derivatives driven by market volatility.
As of December 31, 2024, total standardized approach RWA increased $14.58 billion compared to December 31, 2023, mainly driven by an increase in credit risk RWA. The increase in credit risk RWA mainly reflects higher derivatives RWA, driven by market volatility, higher repo-style transaction RWA, driven by volume, and higher loans RWA, driven by private equity capital call finance loans and CLO loans.
The regulatory capital ratios as of December 31, 2024, presented in Table 39: Regulatory Capital Structure and Related Regulatory Capital Ratios, are calculated under the advanced approaches and standardized approach in conformity with the Basel III final rule. The advanced approaches based ratios reflect calculations and determinations with respect to our capital and related matters as of December 31, 2024, based on our internal and external data, quantitative formulae, statistical models, historical correlations and assumptions, collectively referred to as “advanced systems,” in effect and used by us for those purposes as of the time we first reported such ratios in a quarterly report on Form 10-Q or an annual report on Form 10-K. Significant components of these advanced systems involve the exercise of judgment by us and our regulators, and our advanced systems may not, individually or collectively, precisely represent or calculate the scenarios, circumstances, outputs or other results for which they are designed or intended.
Our advanced systems are subject to update and periodic revalidation in response to changes in our business activities and our historical experiences, forces and events experienced by the market broadly or by individual financial institutions, changes in regulations and regulatory interpretations and other factors, and are also subject to continuing regulatory review and approval. For example, a significant operational loss experienced by another financial institution, even if we do not experience a related loss, could result in a material change in the output of our advanced systems and a corresponding material change in our risk exposures, our total RWA and our capital ratios compared to prior periods. An operational loss that we experience could also result in a material change in our capital requirements for operational risk under the advanced approaches,
depending on the severity of the loss event, its characterization among the seven Basel-defined UOM, and the stability of the distributional approach for a particular UOM, and without direct correlation to the effects of the loss event, or the timing of such effects, on our results of operations.
Due to the influence of changes in these advanced systems, whether resulting from changes in data inputs, regulation or regulatory supervision or interpretation, specific to us or market activities or experiences or other updates or factors, we expect that our advanced systems and our capital ratios calculated in conformity with the Basel III final rule will change and may be volatile over time, and that those latter changes or volatility could be material as calculated and measured from period to period. The full effects of the Basel III final rule on us and State Street Bank are therefore subject to further evaluation and also to further regulatory guidance, action or rule-making.
State Street Corporation | 113
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Tier 1 and Supplementary Leverage Ratios
We are subject to a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio and SLR. The Tier 1 leverage ratio is based on Tier 1 capital and adjusted quarterly average on-balance sheet assets. The Tier 1 leverage ratio differs from the SLR primarily in that the denominator of the Tier 1 leverage ratio is a quarterly average of on-balance sheet assets, while the SLR additionally includes off-balance sheet exposures. We must maintain a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio of 4%.
We are also subject to a minimum SLR of 3%, and as a U.S. G-SIB, we must maintain a 2% SLR buffer in order to avoid any limitations on distributions to shareholders and discretionary bonus payments to certain executives. If we do not maintain this buffer, limitations on these distributions and discretionary bonus payments would be increasingly stringent based upon the extent of the shortfall.
| TABLE 42: TIER 1 AND SUPPLEMENTARY LEVERAGE RATIOS | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in millions) | December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | ||||
| State Street: | ||||||
| Tier 1 capital | $ | 16,615 | $ | 14,947 | ||
| Average assets | 327,181 | 278,659 | ||||
| Less: adjustments for deductions from tier 1 capital and other | (8,711) | (8,852) | ||||
| Adjusted average assets for Tier 1 leverage ratio | 318,470 | 269,807 | ||||
| Additional SLR exposure | 38,659 | 39,291 | ||||
| Adjustments for deductions of qualifying central bank deposits | (87,496) | (69,579) | ||||
| Total assets for SLR | $ | 269,633 | $ | 239,519 | ||
| Tier 1 leverage ratio(1) | 5.2 | % | 5.5 | % | ||
| Supplementary leverage ratio | 6.2 | 6.2 | ||||
| State Street Bank(2): | ||||||
| Tier 1 capital | $ | 19,173 | $ | 16,884 | ||
| Average assets | 323,086 | 275,324 | ||||
| Less: adjustments for deductions from tier 1 capital and other | (8,332) | (8,506) | ||||
| Adjusted average assets for Tier 1 leverage ratio | 314,754 | 266,818 | ||||
| Additional SLR exposure | 40,299 | 39,069 | ||||
| Adjustments for deductions of qualifying central bank deposits | (87,496) | (69,579) | ||||
| Total assets for SLR | $ | 267,557 | $ | 236,308 | ||
| Tier 1 leverage ratio (1) | 6.1 | % | 6.3 | % | ||
| Supplementary leverage ratio | 7.2 | 7.1 |
(1) Tier 1 leverage ratios were calculated in conformity with the Basel III final rule.
(2) The SLR rule requires that, as of January 1, 2018, (i) State Street Bank maintains an SLR of at least 6.0% to be well capitalized under the U.S. banking regulators’ Prompt Corrective Action Framework and (ii) we maintain an SLR of at least 5.0% to avoid limitations on capital distributions and discretionary bonus payments. In addition to the SLR, State Street Bank is subject to a well capitalized Tier 1 leverage ratio requirement of 5.0%.
Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity (TLAC)
The Federal Reserve’s final rule on TLAC, LTD and clean holding company requirements for U.S. domiciled G-SIBs, such as us, is intended to improve the resiliency and resolvability of certain U.S. banking organizations through enhanced prudential standards, and requires us, among other things, to comply with minimum requirements for external TLAC (combined eligible tier 1 regulatory capital and LTD) and LTD. Specifically, we must hold:
| Amount equal to: | |
|---|---|
| External TLAC | Greater of:•21.5% of total RWA (18.0% minimum plus 2.5% plus a G-SIB surcharge calculated for these purposes under Method 1 of 1.0% plus any applicable countercyclical buffer, which is currently 0%); and •9.5% of total leverage exposure (7.5% minimum plus the SLR buffer of 2.0%), as defined by the SLR final rule. |
| Qualifying external LTD | Greater of:•7.0% of RWA (6.0% minimum plus a G-SIB surcharge calculated for these purposes under method 2 of 1.0%); and •4.5% of total leverage exposure, as defined by the SLR final rule. |
The following table presents external TLAC and external LTD as of December 31, 2024.
| TABLE 43: TOTAL LOSS-ABSORBING CAPACITY | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2024 | |||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | Actual | Requirement | |||||||||||
| Total loss-absorbing capacity: | |||||||||||||
| Risk-weighted assets | $ | 38,768 | 30.7 | % | $ | 27,150 | 21.5 | % | |||||
| Total leverage exposure | 38,768 | 14.4 | 25,615 | 9.5 | |||||||||
| Long-term debt: | |||||||||||||
| Risk-weighted assets | 18,828 | 14.9 | 8,840 | 7.0 | |||||||||
| Total leverage exposure | 18,828 | 7.0 | 12,133 | 4.5 |
Additional information about TLAC is provided under “Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity” in “Supervision and Regulation” in Business in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 114
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Regulatory Developments
On July 27, 2023, the U.S. Agencies issued the 2023 Basel III Endgame Proposal for large banks, and separately proposed revisions to the 2023 G-SIB Surcharge Proposal. The 2023 Basel III Endgame Proposal would, among other things, eliminate the advanced approaches for monitoring risk-based capital adequacy in favor of a new standardized expanded risk-based approach that includes new standardized approaches for operational risk and CVA risk RWA components, and would also replace the existing market risk rule with the new FRTB framework. The G-SIB Surcharge Proposal would, among other things, measure the G-SIB surcharge in more granular 0.1% increments as opposed to the 0.5% increments that currently apply.
For additional information about regulatory developments, refer to the “Regulatory Capital Adequacy and Liquidity Standards” section of “Supervision and Regulation” in Business in this Form 10-K.
Capital Actions
Preferred Stock
The following table summarizes selected terms of each of the series of the preferred stock issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2024:
| TABLE 44: PREFERRED STOCK ISSUED AND OUTSTANDING | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preferred Stock(1): | Issuance Date | Depositary Shares Issued | Amount outstanding (in millions) | Ownership Interest Per Depositary Share | Liquidation Preference Per Share | Liquidation Preference Per Depositary Share | Per Annum Dividend Rate | Dividend Payment Frequency | Carrying Value as of December 31, 2024 (In millions) | Redemption Date(2) | |||||||||||||||||
| Series G | April 2016 | 20,000,000 | $ | 500 | 1/4,000th | 100,000 | 25 | 5.35%(3) | Quarterly: March, June, September and December | $ | 493 | March 15, 2026 | |||||||||||||||
| Series I | January 2024 | 1,500,000 | 1,500 | 1/100th | 100,000 | 1,000 | 6.700% through March 14, 2029; resets March 15, 2029 and every subsequent five year anniversary at five- year U.S. Treasury rate plus 2.613% | Quarterly: March, June, September and December | 1,481 | March 15, 2029 | |||||||||||||||||
| Series J | July 2024 | 850,000 | 850 | 1/100th | 100,000 | 1,000 | 6.700% through September 14, 2029; resets September 15, 2029 and every subsequent five year anniversary at the five-year U.S. Treasury rate plus 2.628% | Quarterly: March, June, September and December | 842 | September 15, 2029 |
(1) The preferred stock and corresponding depositary shares may be redeemed at our option in whole, but not in part, prior to the redemption date upon the occurrence of a regulatory capital treatment event, as defined in the certificate of designation, at a redemption price equal to the liquidation price per share and liquidation price per depositary share plus any declared and unpaid dividends, without accumulation of any undeclared dividends.
(2) On the redemption date, or any dividend payment date thereafter, the preferred stock and corresponding depositary shares may be redeemed by us, in whole or in part, at the liquidation price per share and liquidation price per depositary share plus any declared and unpaid dividends, without accumulation of any undeclared dividends.
(3) The dividend rate for the floating rate period of the Series G preferred stock that begins on March 15, 2026 and all subsequent floating rate periods will remain at the current fixed rate in accordance with the LIBOR Act and the contractual terms of the Series G preferred stock.
On January 31, 2024, we issued 1.5 million depositary shares, each representing a 1/100th ownership interest in a share of fixed rate reset, non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series I, without par value per share, with a liquidation preference of $100,000 per share (equivalent to $1,000 per depositary share), in a public offering. The aggregate proceeds, net of underwriting discounts, commissions and other issuance costs, were approximately $1.5 billion.
On March 15, 2024, we redeemed an aggregate $1.0 billion, or all 7,500 outstanding shares, of our non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series D (represented by 30,000,000 depository shares), for a cash redemption price of $100,000 per share (equivalent to $25 per depository share), plus all declared and unpaid dividends and all 2,500 of the outstanding shares of our noncumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series F (represented by 250,000 depository shares), for a cash redemption price of $100,000 per share (equivalent to $1,000 per depositary share) plus all declared and unpaid dividends.
On July 24, 2024, we issued 850,000 depositary shares, each representing a 1/100th ownership interest in a share of fixed rate reset, non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series J, without par value per share, with a liquidation preference of $100,000 per share (equivalent to $1,000 per depositary share), in a public offering. The aggregate proceeds, net of underwriting discounts, commissions and other issuance costs, were approximately $842 million.
State Street Corporation | 115
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
On September 16, 2024, we redeemed an aggregate $500 million, or all 5,000 outstanding shares, of our non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series H (represented by 500,000 depository shares), for a cash redemption price of $100,000 per share (equivalent to $1,000 per depository share), plus all declared and unpaid dividends.
On February 6, 2025, we issued 750,000 depositary shares, each representing a 1/100th ownership interest in a share of fixed rate reset, non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series K, without par value per share, with a liquidation preference of $100,000 per share (equivalent to $1,000 per depositary share), in a public offering. The aggregate proceeds, net of underwriting discounts, commissions and other issuance costs, were approximately $743 million. Dividends on the Series K Preferred Stock will be payable quarterly at an initial rate of 6.450% per annum commencing on June 15, 2025, with the first dividend payable on a pro-rata basis. Our preferred stock dividends, including the declaration, timing and amount thereof, are subject to consideration and approval by the Board at the relevant times.
The following table presents the dividends declared for each of the series of preferred stock issued and outstanding for the periods indicated:
TABLE 45: PREFERRED STOCK DIVIDENDS
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 2023 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) | Dividends Declared per Share | Dividends Declared per Depositary Share | Total | Dividends Declared per Share | Dividends Declared per Depositary Share | Total | ||||||||||||||||
| Preferred Stock: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Series D | $ | 1,475 | $ | 0.37 | $ | 11 | $ | 5,900 | $ | 1.48 | $ | 44 | ||||||||||
| Series F | 2,336 | 23.36 | 6 | 8,935 | 89.35 | 23 | ||||||||||||||||
| Series G | 5,350 | 1.34 | 27 | 5,350 | 1.34 | 27 | ||||||||||||||||
| Series H | 6,251 | 62.51 | 31 | 5,625 | 56.25 | 28 | ||||||||||||||||
| Series I | 5,863 | 58.63 | 88 | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||
| Series J | 2,643 | 26.43 | 22 | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 185 | $ | 122 |
Common Stock
On January 19, 2024, we announced a new common share repurchase program, approved by our Board and superseding all prior programs, authorizing the purchase of up to $5.0 billion of our common stock beginning in the first quarter of 2024 with no set expiration date (the “2024 Program”). During 2024, we repurchased $1.3 billion of our common stock under the 2024 Program and expect common share repurchases to continue under this program during 2025.
In 2023, we repurchased $3.8 billion of our common stock under the previously approved common share repurchase program authorizing the purchase of up to $4.5 billion of our common stock through December 31, 2023 (the “2023 Program”).
The tables below present the activity under our common share repurchase program for the period indicated:
| TABLE 46: SHARES REPURCHASED | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2024 | 2023 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Shares Acquired (In millions) | Average Cost per Share | Total Acquired (In millions) | Shares Acquired (In millions) | Average Cost per Share | Total Acquired (In millions) | |||||||||||||||||
| 2024 Program | 15.1 | $ | 85.89 | $ | 1,300 | — | $ | — | $ | — | ||||||||||||
| 2023 Program | — | — | — | 49.2 | 77.22 | 3,800 |
The table below presents the dividends declared on common stock for the periods indicated:
| TABLE 47: COMMON STOCK DIVIDENDS | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||
| 2024 | 2023 | |||||||||||||
| Dividends Declared per Share | Total (In millions) | Dividends Declared per Share | Total (In millions) | |||||||||||
| Common Stock | $ | 2.90 | $ | 859 | $ | 2.64 | $ | 837 |
State Street Corporation | 116
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Federal and state banking regulations place certain restrictions on dividends paid by subsidiary banks to the parent holding company. In addition, banking regulators have the authority to prohibit bank holding companies from paying dividends. For information concerning limitations on dividends from our subsidiary banks, refer to “Related Stockholder Matters” included under Item 5, Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities, and to Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K. Our common stock and preferred stock dividends, including the declaration, timing and amount thereof, are subject to consideration and approval by the Board at the relevant times.
Stock purchases under our common share repurchase program may be made using various types of transactions, including open market purchases, accelerated share repurchases or other transactions off the market, and may be made under Rule 10b5-1 trading programs. The timing and amount of any stock purchases and the type of transaction may not be ratable over the duration of the program, may vary from reporting period to reporting period and will depend on several factors, including our capital position and our financial performance, investment opportunities, market conditions, the nature and timing of implementation of revisions to the Basel III framework and the amount of common stock issued as part of employee compensation programs. The common share repurchase program does not have specific price targets and may be suspended at any time.
OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS
On behalf of clients enrolled in our securities lending program, we lend securities to banks, broker/dealers and other institutions. In most circumstances, we indemnify our clients for the fair market value of those securities against a failure of the borrower to return such securities. Though these transactions are collateralized, the substantial volume of these activities necessitates detailed credit-based underwriting and monitoring processes. The aggregate amount of indemnified securities on loan totaled $310.81 billion and $279.92 billion as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. We require the borrower to provide collateral in an amount in excess of 100% of the fair market value of the securities borrowed. We hold the collateral received in connection with these securities lending services as agent, and the collateral is not recorded in our consolidated statement of condition. We revalue the securities on loan and the collateral daily to determine if additional collateral is necessary or if excess collateral is required to be returned to the borrower. We held, as agent, cash and securities
totaling $325.61 billion and $293.86 billion as collateral for indemnified securities on loan as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
The cash collateral held by us as agent is invested on behalf of our clients. In certain cases, the cash collateral is invested in third-party repurchase agreements, for which we indemnify the client against loss of the principal invested. We require the counterparty to the indemnified repurchase agreement to provide collateral in an amount in excess of 100% of the amount of the repurchase agreement. In our role as agent, the indemnified repurchase agreements and the related collateral held by us are not recorded in our consolidated statement of condition. Of the collateral of $325.61 billion and $293.86 billion, referenced above, $63.66 billion and $59.03 billion was invested in indemnified repurchase agreements as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. We or our agents held $68.51 billion and $63.11 billion as collateral for indemnified investments in repurchase agreements as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
Additional information about our securities finance activities and other off-balance sheet arrangements is provided in Notes 10, 12 and 14 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES
Our consolidated financial statements are prepared in conformity with U.S. GAAP, and we apply accounting policies that affect the determination of amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements.
Certain of our accounting policies, by their nature, include significant accounting estimates and assumptions which require management to make judgments about the effects of matters that are inherently uncertain. These estimates and assumptions are based on information available as of the date of the consolidated financial statements, and changes in this information over time could materially affect the amounts of assets, liabilities, equity, revenue and expenses reported in subsequent consolidated financial statements.
Based on the sensitivity of reported financial statement amounts to the underlying estimates and assumptions, the significant accounting estimates identified by management are:
•Recurring fair value measurements;
•Allowance for credit losses;
•Impairment of goodwill and other intangible assets; and
•Contingencies.
These estimates require the most subjective or complex judgments, and could be most subject to
State Street Corporation | 117
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
revision as new information becomes available. An understanding of these estimates is essential to the understanding of our reported results of operations and financial condition.
The following is a discussion of the above-mentioned significant accounting estimates. Additional information on our significant accounting policies, including references to applicable footnotes, is provided in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Fair Value Measurements
We carry certain of our financial assets and liabilities at fair value in our consolidated financial statements on a recurring basis, including trading account assets and liabilities, AFS debt securities, certain equity securities and various types of derivative financial instruments.
Changes in the fair value of these financial assets and liabilities are recorded either as components of our consolidated statement of income or as components of other comprehensive income within shareholders’ equity in our consolidated statement of condition. In addition to those financial assets and liabilities that we carry at fair value in our consolidated financial statements on a recurring basis, we estimate the fair values of other financial assets and liabilities that we carry at amortized cost in our consolidated statement of condition, and we disclose these fair value estimates in the notes to our consolidated financial statements. We estimate the fair values of these financial assets and liabilities using the definition of fair value described below.
U.S. GAAP defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in the principal or most advantageous market for an asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. When we measure fair value for our financial assets and liabilities, we consider the principal or the most advantageous market in which we would transact; we also consider assumptions that market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability. When possible, we look to active and observable markets to measure the fair value of identical, or similar, financial assets and liabilities. When identical financial assets and liabilities are not traded in active markets, we look to market-observable data for similar assets and liabilities. In some instances, certain assets and liabilities are not actively traded in observable markets; as a result, we use alternate valuation techniques to measure their fair value.
We categorize the financial assets and liabilities that we carry at fair value in our consolidated statement of condition on a recurring basis based on U.S. GAAP’s prescribed three-level valuation
hierarchy. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (level 1) and the lowest priority to valuation methods using significant unobservable inputs (level 3).
With respect to derivative instruments, we evaluate the fair value impact of the credit risk of our counterparties. We consider such factors as the market-based probability of default by our counterparties, and our current and expected potential future net exposures by remaining maturities, in determining the appropriate measurements of fair value.
Additional information with respect to the assets and liabilities carried by us at fair value on a recurring basis is provided in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Allowance for Credit Losses
We record an allowance for credit losses related to certain on-balance sheet credit exposures, including our financial assets held at amortized cost, as well as certain off-balance sheet credit exposures, including unfunded commitments and letters of credit.
Determining the appropriateness of the allowance is complex and requires judgment by management about the effect of matters that are inherently uncertain. In future periods, factors and forecasts then prevailing may result in significant changes in the allowance for credit losses in those future periods. We estimate credit losses over the contractual life of the financial asset while factoring in prepayment activity where supported by data over a three year reasonable and supportable forecast period. We utilize baseline, upside and downside scenarios that are applied based on a probability weighting, in order to better reflect management’s expectation of expected credit losses given existing market conditions and the changes in the economic environment. The multiple scenarios are based on a 13-quarter horizon (or less depending on contractual maturity) with reversion period set to be 27 quarters, calculated by subtracting the 13-quarter period from an average 10-year/40-quarter business cycle. The contractual term excludes expected extensions, renewals and modifications, but includes prepayment assumptions where applicable.
Our allowance for credit losses is sensitive to a number of inputs, including macroeconomic forecast assumptions and credit rating migrations during the period. Our macroeconomic forecasts used in determining the December 31, 2024 allowance for credit losses consisted of three scenarios reflecting different assumptions in GDP and unemployment, with the baseline scenario generally in line with market consensus of economic forecasts for GDP and unemployment. We placed the most weight on
State Street Corporation | 118
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
our baseline scenario, with the remaining weighting split between the upside and downside scenarios.
Keeping all other factors constant, we estimate that if we had applied 100% weighting to the downside scenario, the allowance for credit losses as of December 31, 2024 would have been approximately $78 million higher. This estimate is intended to reflect the sensitivity of the allowance for credit losses to changes in our scenario weights and is not intended to be indicative of future changes in the allowance for credit losses.
Additional information about our allowance for credit losses is provided in Notes 3 and 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets
Goodwill represents the excess of the cost of an acquisition over the fair value of the net tangible and other intangible assets acquired at the acquisition date. Other intangible assets represent purchased long-lived intangible assets, primarily client relationships, core deposit intangible assets and technology that can be distinguished from goodwill because of contractual rights or because the asset can be exchanged on its own or in combination with a related contract, asset or liability. Other intangible assets are initially measured at their acquisition date fair value, the determination of which requires management judgment. Goodwill is not amortized, while other intangible assets are amortized over their estimated useful lives.
Management reviews goodwill for impairment annually or more frequently if circumstances arise or events occur that indicate an impairment of the carrying amount may exist. We begin our review by first assessing qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. Events that may indicate impairment include: significant or adverse changes in the business, economic or political climate; an adverse action or assessment by a regulator; unanticipated competition; and a more-likely-than-not expectation that we will sell or otherwise dispose of a business to which the goodwill or other intangible assets relate. If we conclude from the qualitative assessment of goodwill impairment that it is more likely than not that a reporting unit’s fair value is greater than its carrying amount, quantitative tests are not required. However, if we determine it is more likely than not that a reporting unit’s fair value is less than its carrying amount, then we complete a quantitative assessment to determine if there is goodwill impairment. We may elect to bypass the qualitative assessment and complete a quantitative assessment in any given year.
In 2024, we assessed goodwill for impairment using a qualitative assessment. Based on our evaluation of the qualitative factors noted above, we determined it was more likely than not that the fair value of each of the reporting units exceeded its respective carrying amount. We determined there was no goodwill impairment in 2024.
Other intangible assets are supported by the future cash flows that are directly associated with and expected to arise as a direct result of the use of the intangible asset, less any costs associated with the intangible asset’s eventual disposition. We evaluate other intangible assets for impairment at the lowest level for which there are identifiable cash flows that are largely independent of the cash flows from other groups of assets using the following process. First, we routinely assess whether impairment indicators are present. When impairment indicators are identified as being present, we compare the estimated future net undiscounted cash flows of the intangible asset with its carrying value. If the future net undiscounted cash flows are greater than the carrying value, then there is no impairment, but if the intangible asset’s net undiscounted cash flows are less than its carrying value, we are required to calculate impairment. An impairment is recognized by writing the intangible asset down to its fair value. We evaluate intangible assets for indicators of impairment on a quarterly basis. There were no impairments taken on other intangible assets in 2024.
Additional information about goodwill and other intangible assets, including information by line of business, is provided in Note 5 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Contingencies
Information on significant estimates and judgments related with establishing litigation reserves is discussed in Note 13 of the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
RECENT ACCOUNTING DEVELOPMENTS
Information with respect to recent accounting developments is provided in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 119
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
FY 2023 10-K MD&A
SEC filing source: 0000093751-24-000498.
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
GENERAL
This Management's Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes in this Form 10-K. Certain previously reported amounts presented in this Form 10-K have been reclassified to conform to current-period presentation.
As of December 31, 2023, we had consolidated total assets of $297.26 billion, consolidated total deposits of $220.97 billion, consolidated total shareholders' equity of $23.80 billion and approximately 46,000 employees. Through our two lines of business, Investment Servicing and Investment Management, we operate in more than 100 geographic markets worldwide, including the United States, Canada, Latin America, Europe, the Middle East and Asia.
For the description of our lines of business, refer to “Lines of Business” in Item 1 in this Form 10-K. For financial and other information about our lines of business, refer to “Line of Business Information” in this Management's Discussion and Analysis and Note 24 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
We prepare our consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions in its application of certain accounting policies that materially affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, equity, revenue and expenses.
Information about the significant accounting policies that require us to make judgments, estimates and assumptions that are difficult, subjective or complex about matters that are uncertain and may change in subsequent periods is included under “Significant Accounting Estimates” in this Management's Discussion and Analysis and in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Certain financial information provided in this Form 10-K, including this Management's Discussion and Analysis, is presented using both a U.S. GAAP, or reported basis, and a non-GAAP basis, including certain non-GAAP measures used in the calculation of identified regulatory ratios. We measure and compare certain financial information on a non-GAAP basis, including information that management uses in evaluating our business and activities. Non-GAAP financial information should be considered in addition to, and not as a substitute for or as superior to,
financial information prepared in conformity with U.S. GAAP. Any non-GAAP financial information presented in this Form 10-K, including this Management’s Discussion and Analysis, is reconciled to its most directly comparable currently applicable regulatory ratio or U.S. GAAP-basis measure. As part of our non-GAAP-basis measures, we present a fully taxable-equivalent NII that reports non-taxable revenue, such as interest income associated with tax-exempt investment securities, on a fully taxable-equivalent basis, which we believe facilitates an investor's understanding and analysis of our underlying financial performance and trends.
In this Management’s Discussion and Analysis, where we describe the effects of changes in foreign currency translation, those effects are determined by applying applicable weighted average FX rates from the relevant 2022 period to the relevant 2023 period results.
This Management's Discussion and Analysis contains statements that are considered “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of U.S. securities laws. These forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties which could cause actual results to differ materially. Additional information about forward-looking statements and related risks and uncertainties is provided in “Forward-Looking Statements”, “Risk Factors Summary” and “Risk Factors” in this Form 10-K.
Information regarding additional disclosures and materials available on our website is provided under “Additional Information” in Item 1 in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 61
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
OVERVIEW OF FINANCIAL RESULTS
| TABLE 1: OVERVIEW OF FINANCIAL RESULTS | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |||||||
| Total fee revenue | $ | 9,480 | $ | 9,606 | $ | 10,012 | ||||
| Net interest income | 2,759 | 2,544 | 1,905 | |||||||
| Total other income | (294) | (2) | 110 | |||||||
| Total revenue | 11,945 | 12,148 | 12,027 | |||||||
| Provision for credit losses | 46 | 20 | (33) | |||||||
| Total expenses | 9,583 | 8,801 | 8,889 | |||||||
| Income before income tax expense | 2,316 | 3,327 | 3,171 | |||||||
| Income tax expense | 372 | 553 | 478 | |||||||
| Net income | $ | 1,944 | $ | 2,774 | $ | 2,693 | ||||
| Adjustments to net income: | ||||||||||
| Dividends on preferred stock(1) | $ | (122) | $ | (112) | $ | (119) | ||||
| Earnings allocated to participating securities(2) | (1) | (2) | (2) | |||||||
| Net income available to common shareholders | $ | 1,821 | $ | 2,660 | $ | 2,572 | ||||
| Earnings per common share: | ||||||||||
| Basic | $ | 5.65 | $ | 7.28 | $ | 7.30 | ||||
| Diluted | 5.58 | 7.19 | 7.19 | |||||||
| Average common shares outstanding (in thousands): | ||||||||||
| Basic | 322,337 | 365,214 | 352,565 | |||||||
| Diluted | 326,568 | 370,109 | 357,962 | |||||||
| Cash dividends declared per common share | $ | 2.64 | $ | 2.40 | $ | 2.18 | ||||
| Return on average common equity | 8.2 | % | 11.1 | % | 10.7 | % | ||||
| Pre-tax margin | 19.4 | 27.4 | 26.4 | |||||||
| Return on average assets | 0.7 | 1.0 | 0.9 | |||||||
| Common dividend payout | 47.3 | 33.4 | 30.3 | |||||||
| Average common equity to average total assets | 8.1 | 8.3 | 8.0 |
(1) Additional information about our preferred stock dividends is provided in Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
(2) Represents the portion of net income available to common equity allocated to participating securities, composed of unvested and fully vested SERP (Supplemental executive retirement plans) shares and fully vested deferred director stock awards, which are equity-based awards that contain non-forfeitable rights to dividends, and are considered to participate with the common stock in undistributed earnings.
The following section provides information related to significant events, as well as highlights of our consolidated financial results for the year ended December 31, 2023 presented in Table 1: Overview of Financial Results. More detailed information about our consolidated financial results, including the comparison of our financial results for the year ended December 31, 2023 to those of the year ended December 31, 2022, is provided under “Consolidated Results of Operations”, “Line of Business Information” and “Capital” sections which follow “Financial Results and Highlights”, as well as in our consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
The comparison of our financial results for the year ended December 31, 2022 to those of the years ended December 31, 2021 is included in the Management's Discussion and Analysis in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022 filed with the SEC on February 16, 2023.
Financial Results and Highlights
2023 financial performance
•EPS of $5.58, decreased 22% compared to 2022, primarily reflecting the impact of the following notable items which, in aggregate, decreased EPS by $2.08 in 2023:
◦Loss on sale of investment securities of $294 million;
◦FDIC special assessment of $387 million;
◦Net repositioning charges of approximately $203 million; and
◦Other net expenses of approximately $30 million.
•Total revenue decreased 2% compared to 2022. The effects of the 2023 loss on sale of investment securities notable item and lower fee revenue were partially offset by higher NII.
•Total expenses increased 9% compared to 2022, primarily reflecting the impact of 2023 notable items, higher salaries and continued business investments, partially offset by productivity savings.
•Return on equity of 8.2% decreased from 11.1% in 2022, primarily due to the impact of the 2023 notable items. Pre-tax margin of 19.4% decreased from 27.4% in 2022, primarily due to the impact of 2023 notable items.
•Operating leverage was (10.6)% points, largely due to the impact of the 2023 notable items. Operating leverage represents the difference between the percentage change in total revenue and the percentage change in total expenses, in each case relative to the prior year period.
•Fee operating leverage was (10.2)% points, largely due to the impact of the 2023 notable items. Fee operating leverage represents the difference between the percentage change in total fee revenue and the percentage change in total expenses, in each case relative to the prior year period.
•Returned approximately $4.6 billion to our shareholders in the form of common share repurchases and common stock dividends compared to approximately $2.4 billion in 2022.
•Completed consolidation of one of our operations joint ventures in India, aimed at lowering operating costs and enhancing client service, and announced plans for consolidation of a second operations joint
State Street Corporation | 62
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
venture in India. The joint venture consolidation in 2023 increased our headcount by approximately 10% as of December 31, 2023 compared to December 31, 2022. Associated headcount cost was previously reflected in compensation and employee benefits expenses.
Revenue
•Total fee revenue decreased 1% compared to 2022, reflecting lower servicing fees, management fees, and FX trading services revenue, partially offset by higher other fee revenue and software and processing fees.
•Servicing fee revenue decreased 3% compared to 2022, primarily driven by lower client activity and adjustments, normal pricing headwinds, lower average fixed income markets and a previously disclosed client transition, partially offset by higher average equity market levels and net new business.
•Management fee revenue decreased 3% compared to 2022, as the previously disclosed shift of certain management fees into NII, client insourcing and the impacts of a strategic ETF product suite repricing initiative were partially offset by higher average equity market levels.
•Foreign exchange trading services revenue decreased 8% compared to 2022, primarily reflecting lower direct FX spreads, a decline in market volatility and lower client FX volumes.
•Securities finance revenue increased 2% compared to 2022, as higher prime services revenue and higher agency spreads were partially offset by lower agency balances.
▪Software and processing fees revenue increased 3% compared to 2022, primarily due to higher front office software and data revenue associated with CRD.
•Other fee revenue increased $181 million compared to 2022, primarily due to a previously disclosed tax credit investment accounting change and the positive impact of market-related adjustments, partially offset by lower fair value adjustments on equity investments and the impact of the Argentine peso devaluation.
•NII increased 8% compared to 2022, primarily due to the impact of higher interest rates, partially offset by lower average deposit balances and deposit mix shift towards interest-bearing deposits.
•Other income reflects a loss on sale of AFS securities recorded in the third quarter of
2023 of approximately $294 million, related to the investment portfolio repositioning, which benefited NII in the fourth quarter of 2023 and which we expect to benefit NII in future periods.
Provision for Credit Losses
•In 2023, we recorded a $46 million provision for credit losses, compared to $20 million in 2022, primarily reflecting an increase in loan loss reserves associated with commercial real estate.
Expenses
•Total expenses increased 9% compared to 2022, primarily reflecting the impact of 2023 notable items, higher salaries and continued business investments, partially offset by productivity savings.
Notable Items
•The impact of notable items in 2023 includes:
◦Loss on the sale of investment securities of approximately $294 million relating to the investment portfolio repositioning.
◦FDIC special assessment of $387 million recorded in other expenses, related to FDIC’s recovery of estimated losses to the Deposit Insurance Fund associated with the closures of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank.
◦Net repositioning charges of approximately $203 million, including $182 million of compensation and employee benefits expenses related to workforce rationalization and $21 million of occupancy costs related to real estate footprint optimization.
◦Other net expenses of approximately $30 million, including $41 million in information systems and communications and $4 million in other expenses, primarily related to operating model changes, partially offset by a $15 million accrual release in acquisition and restructuring costs.
•The impact of notable items in 2022 includes:
◦Revenue-related recovery of $23 million from settlement proceeds associated with the 2018 FX benchmark litigation resolution, which is reflected in foreign exchange trading services revenue;
State Street Corporation | 63
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
◦Repositioning charges of approximately $78 million, consisting of $50 million of compensation and benefits expenses primarily related to streamlining the Investment Services organization, $20 million of occupancy charges related to real estate footprint optimization and $8 million of BBH-related repositioning charges; and
◦Acquisition and restructuring costs of approximately $65 million related to the BBH Investor Services acquisition transaction that we are no longer pursuing.
AUC/A and AUM
•AUC/A of $41.81 trillion as of December 31, 2023 increased 14% compared to December 31, 2022, primarily due to higher period-end market levels and net new business. In 2023, newly announced asset servicing mandates totaled approximately $904 billion. We onboarded approximately $1.74 trillion of AUC/A during 2023. Servicing assets remaining to be installed in future periods totaled approximately $2.30 trillion as of December 31, 2023.
•AUM of $4.13 trillion as of December 31, 2023 increased 19% compared to December 31, 2022, primarily due to higher period-end market levels.
Capital
•In 2023, we returned approximately $4.6 billion to our shareholders in the form of common share repurchases and common stock dividends compared to approximately $2.4 billion in 2022.
◦We declared aggregate common stock dividends of $2.64 per share, totaling $837 million compared to $2.40 per share, totaling $871 million in 2022.
◦We increased the quarterly common stock dividend declared per common share by 10% in the third quarter of 2023.
◦We acquired an aggregate of 49.2 million shares of common stock at an average per share cost of $77.22 and an aggregate cost of approximately $3.8 billion. In 2022, we acquired an aggregate of 19.5 million shares of common stock, at an average per share cost of $76.81 and an aggregate cost of approximately $1.5 billion. These purchases were all conducted under the share repurchase programs approved by our Board of Directors.
◦In January 2024, our Board approved a share repurchase program and superseding all prior programs, authorizing the purchase of up to $5.0 billion of our common stock beginning in the first quarter of 2024. This new program has no set expiration date and is not expected to be executed in full during 2024.
•Our standardized CET1 capital ratio decreased to 11.6% as of December 31, 2023, compared to 13.6% as of December 31, 2022, primarily driven by the continuation of common share repurchases and other capital distributions, partially offset by retained earnings and an improvement in AOCI. Our Tier 1 leverage ratio decreased to 5.5% as of December 31, 2023 compared to 6.0% as of December 31, 2022, primarily driven by the continuation of common share repurchases, partially offset by lower consolidated average assets. Given the current global economic environment, and our plans for share repurchases, we currently expect our CET1 capital and Tier 1 leverage ratios to remain within or above our target ranges of 10-11% and 5.25-5.75%, respectively.
Debt Issuances and Redemptions
•On January 26, 2023, we issued $500 million aggregate principal amount of 4.857% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026 and $750 million aggregate principal amount of 4.821% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2034.
•On May 18, 2023, we issued $1 billion aggregate principal amount of 5.104% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026 and $1 billion aggregate principal amount of 5.159% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2034.
•On August 3, 2023, we issued $1.2 billion aggregate principal amount of 5.272% fixed rate senior notes due 2026 and $300 million aggregate principal amount of floating rate senior notes due 2026.
•On November 21, 2023, we issued $1 billion aggregate principal amount of 5.684% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2029 and $500 million aggregate principal amount of 6.123% fixed-to-floating rate senior subordinated notes due 2034.
•On December 3, 2023, we redeemed $500 million aggregate principal amount of 3.776% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2024.
State Street Corporation | 64
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
CONSOLIDATED RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
This section discusses our consolidated results of operations for 2023 compared to 2022 and should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Total Revenue
| TABLE 2: TOTAL REVENUE | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2023 vs. 2022 | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | ||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |||||||||||||||
| Fee revenue: | ||||||||||||||||||
| Back office services | $ | 4,561 | $ | 4,714 | $ | 5,117 | (3) | % | (8) | % | ||||||||
| Middle office services | 361 | 373 | 414 | (3) | (10) | |||||||||||||
| Servicing fees(1) | 4,922 | 5,087 | 5,531 | (3) | (8) | |||||||||||||
| Management fees | 1,876 | 1,939 | 2,053 | (3) | (6) | |||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange trading services | 1,265 | 1,376 | 1,211 | (8) | 14 | |||||||||||||
| Securities finance | 426 | 416 | 416 | 2 | — | |||||||||||||
| Front office software and data | 580 | 550 | 484 | 5 | 14 | |||||||||||||
| Lending related and other fees | 231 | 239 | 254 | (3) | (6) | |||||||||||||
| Software and processing fees(1) | 811 | 789 | 738 | 3 | 7 | |||||||||||||
| Other fee revenue(1) | 180 | (1) | 63 | nm | nm | |||||||||||||
| Total fee revenue | 9,480 | 9,606 | 10,012 | (1) | (4) | |||||||||||||
| Net interest income: | ||||||||||||||||||
| Interest income | 9,180 | 4,088 | 1,908 | nm | nm | |||||||||||||
| Interest expense | 6,421 | 1,544 | 3 | nm | nm | |||||||||||||
| Net interest income | 2,759 | 2,544 | 1,905 | 8 | 34 | |||||||||||||
| Other income: | ||||||||||||||||||
| Gains (losses) related to investment securities, net | (294) | (2) | 57 | nm | nm | |||||||||||||
| Other income | — | — | 53 | nm | nm | |||||||||||||
| Total other income | (294) | (2) | 110 | nm | nm | |||||||||||||
| Total revenue | $ | 11,945 | $ | 12,148 | $ | 12,027 | (2) | 1 |
(1) In the first quarter of 2022, we reclassified certain fee revenue in our Consolidated Statement of Operations, primarily moving revenues that are not directly associated with software and processing fees to a new Other fee revenue line item. In addition, we provided a disaggregation of servicing fees into Back office services and Middle office services and of software and processing fees into Front office software and data and Lending related and other fees. Prior periods have been revised to reflect these changes.
nm Not meaningful
Fee Revenue
Table 2: Total Revenue, provides the breakout of fee revenue for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021. Servicing and management fees collectively made up approximately 72%, 73% and 76% of the total fee revenue in 2023, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
Servicing Fee Revenue
Servicing fees, as presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, decreased 3% in 2023 compared to 2022, primarily due to lower client activity and adjustments, normal pricing headwinds, lower average fixed income markets and a previously disclosed client transition, partially offset by higher average equity market levels and net new business.
Servicing fees generated outside the U.S. were approximately 46% of total servicing fees in both 2023 and 2022.
Servicing fee revenue comprises revenue from a range of services provided to our clients, including certain Alpha servicing mandates, consisting of core custody services, accounting, reporting and administration, which we refer to collectively as back office services and middle office services. The nature and mix of services provided and the asset classes for which the services are performed affect our servicing fees. The basis for fees will differ across regions and clients. Generally, our servicing fee revenues are affected by several factors, including changes in market valuations, client activity and asset flows, net new business and the manner in which we price our services. For servicing fees for which we have not yet issued an invoice to our clients as of period end, we include an estimate of the impact of changes in market valuations, client activity and flows, net new business and changes in pricing in our revenues.
State Street Corporation | 65
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Changes in Market Valuations
Our servicing fee revenue is impacted by both our levels and the geographic and product mix of our AUC/A. Increases or decreases in market valuations have a corresponding impact on the level of our AUC/A and servicing fee revenues, though the degree of impact will vary depending on asset types and classes and geography of assets held within our clients’ portfolios. For certain asset classes where the valuation process is more complex, including alternative investments, or where our valuation is dependent on third party information, AUC/A is reported on a time lag, typically one-month. For those asset classes, the impact of market levels on our reported AUC/A, and therefore servicing fee revenue, does not reflect current period-end market levels.
Over the five years ended December 31, 2023, we estimate that worldwide equity and fixed income market valuations impacted our servicing fees revenue by approximately 2% on average with a range of (4)% to 8% annually and approximately 1% and (4)% in 2023 and 2022, respectively. The impact of changes in worldwide fixed income markets on our servicing fees, which historically was included within client activity and asset flows, is now reflected within change in market valuations. See Table 3: Daily Averages, Month-End Averages and Year-End Equity Indices for selected indices. While the specific indices presented are indicative of general market trends, the asset types and classes relevant to individual client portfolios can and do differ, and the performance of associated relevant indices and of client portfolios can therefore differ from the performance of the indices presented. In addition, our asset classifications may differ from those industry classifications presented.
Assuming that all other factors remain constant, including client activity, asset flows and pricing, we estimate, using relevant information as of December 31, 2023, that a 10% increase or decrease in worldwide equity valuations, on a weighted average basis, over the relevant periods for which our servicing fees are calculated, would result in a corresponding change in our total servicing fee revenues, on average and over multiple quarters, of approximately 3%. We estimate, similarly assuming all other factors remain constant and using relevant information as of December 31, 2023, that changes in worldwide fixed income markets, which on a weighted average basis and over time are typically less volatile than worldwide equity markets, have a smaller corresponding impact on our servicing fee revenues on average and over time. In periods of higher fixed income market volatility such as we have been experiencing since the second quarter of 2022, the impact of fixed income markets on our servicing fee revenues may increase.
| TABLE 3: DAILY AVERAGES, MONTH-END AVERAGES AND YEAR-END EQUITY INDICES(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Daily Averages of Indices | Month-End Averages of Indices | Year-End Indices | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Years Ended December 31, | Years Ended December 31, | Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2023 | 2022 | % Change | 2023 | 2022 | % Change | 2023 | 2022 | % Change | ||||||||||||||||||
| S&P 500® | 4,284 | 4,099 | 5 | % | 4,323 | 4,078 | 6 | % | 4,770 | 3,840 | 24 | % | ||||||||||||||
| MSCI EAFE® | 2,093 | 1,976 | 6 | 2,101 | 1,965 | 7 | 2,236 | 1,944 | 15 | |||||||||||||||||
| MSCI® Emerging Markets | 985 | 1,033 | (5) | 985 | 1,026 | (4) | 1,024 | 956 | 7 |
(1) The index names listed in the table are service marks of their respective owners.
| TABLE 4: YEAR-END DEBT INDICES(1) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, | ||||||||
| 2023 | 2022 | % Change | ||||||
| Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index® | 2,162 | 2,049 | 6 | % | ||||
| Bloomberg Global Aggregate Bond Index® | 471 | 446 | 6 |
(1) The index names listed in the table are service marks of their respective owners.
State Street Corporation | 66
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Client Activity and Asset Flows
Client activity and asset flows are impacted by the number of transactions we execute on behalf of our clients, including FX settlements, equity and derivative trades, and wire transfer activity, as well as actions by our clients to change the asset class in which their assets are invested. Our servicing fee revenues are impacted by a number of factors, including transaction volumes, asset levels and asset classes in which funds are invested, as well as industry trends associated with these client-related activities.
Our clients may change the asset classes in which their assets are invested, based on their market outlook, risk acceptance tolerance or other considerations. Over the five years ended December 31, 2023, we estimate that client activity and asset flows, together, impacted our servicing fees revenue by approximately (1)% on average with a range of (3)% to 1% annually and approximately (3)% and 0% in 2023 and 2022, respectively. As noted under “Changes in Market Valuations” in this section, this analysis now excludes, but in prior reporting previously included, the impact of changes in worldwide fixed income markets on our servicing fees. See Table 5: Industry Asset Flows for selected asset flow information. While the asset flows presented are indicative of general market trends, the asset types and classes relevant to individual client portfolios can and do differ, and our flows may differ from those market trends. In addition, our asset classifications may differ from those industry classifications presented.
| TABLE 5: INDUSTRY ASSET FLOWS | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||
| (In billions) | 2023 | 2022 | ||||
| North America - (US Domiciled) - Morningstar Direct Market Data(1)(2)(3) | ||||||
| Long-Term Funds(4) | $ | (489.8) | $ | (890.3) | ||
| Money Market | 920.6 | (56.7) | ||||
| Exchange-Traded Fund | 590.2 | 576.8 | ||||
| Total Flows | $ | 1,021.0 | $ | (370.2) | ||
| Europe - Morningstar Direct Market Data(1)(2)(5) | ||||||
| Long-Term Funds(4) | $ | (78.9) | $ | (170.2) | ||
| Money Market | 186.2 | 98.1 | ||||
| Exchange-Traded Fund | 135.3 | 79.3 | ||||
| Total Flows | $ | 242.6 | $ | 7.2 |
(1) Industry data is provided for illustrative purposes only. It is not intended to reflect our activity or our clients' activity and is indicative of only segments of the entire industry.
(2) Source: Morningstar. The data includes long-term mutual funds, ETFs and money market funds. Mutual fund data represents estimates of net new cash flow, which is new sales minus redemptions combined with net exchanges, while ETF data represents net issuance, which is gross issuance less gross redemptions. Data for Fund of Funds, Feeder funds and Obsolete funds were excluded from the series to prevent double counting. Data is from the Morningstar Direct Asset Flows database.
(3) The year ended December 31, 2023 data for North America (US domiciled) includes Morningstar direct actuals for January 2023 through November 2023 and Morningstar direct estimates for December 2023.
(4) The long-term fund flows reported by Morningstar direct in North America are composed of US domiciled market flows mainly in Equities, Allocation and Fixed-Income asset classes. The long-term fund flows reported by Morningstar direct in EMEA are composed of the European market flows mainly in Equities, Allocation and Fixed-Income asset classes.
(5) The year ended December 31, 2023 data for Europe is on a rolling twelve month basis for December 2022 through November 2023, sourced by Morningstar.
Net New Business
Over the five years ended December 31, 2023, net new business, which includes business both won and lost, has affected our servicing fee revenues by approximately 0% on average with a range of 0% to 1% annually and approximately 1% in both 2023 and 2022.
Gross investment servicing mandates were $904 billion of AUC/A in 2023 and $1.80 trillion of AUC/A per year on average over the five years ended December 31, 2023, ranging from approximately $0.79 trillion to $3.52 trillion of AUC/A annually in any given year.
Servicing fee revenue associated with new servicing mandates may vary based on the breadth of services provided, the time required to install the assets, and the types of assets installed.
Revenues associated with new mandates are not reflected in our servicing fee revenue until the assets have been installed. Our installation timeline, in general, can range from 6 to 36 months, with the average installation timeline being approximately 9 to 12 months over the past 2 years. We expect that our more complex installations, including new State Street Alpha mandates, will generally be on the longer end of the 6 to 36 month range. With respect to the current asset mandates of approximately $2.30 trillion of AUC/A that are yet to be installed as of December 31, 2023, we expect the conversion will occur over the coming 24 months, with approximately 70-80% expected to be installed in 2024, with the remaining expected to be installed throughout 2025 and 2026. The expected timing of these installations is subject to change due to a variety of factors, including adjusted implementation schedules agreed with clients, scope adjustments, and product and functionality changes.
State Street Corporation | 67
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Pricing
The industry in which we operate has historically faced pricing pressure, and our servicing fee revenues are also affected by such pressures today. Consequently, no assumption should be drawn as to future revenue run rate from announced servicing AUC/A wins, as the amount of revenue associated with AUC/A, once installed, can vary materially. On average, over the five years ended December 31, 2023, we estimate that pricing pressure with respect to existing clients has impacted our servicing fees by approximately (3)% annually, with the impact ranging from (2)% to (4)% in any given year and approximately (2)% in both 2023 and 2022. Pricing concessions can be a part of a contract renegotiation with a client including terms that may benefit us, such as extending the term of our relationship with the client, expanding the scope of services that we provide or reducing our dependency on manual processes through the standardization of the services we provide. The timing of the impact of additional revenue generated by anticipated additional services and the amount of revenue generated, may differ from expectations due to the impact of pricing concessions on existing services due to the necessary time required to onboard those new services or process changes, the nature of those services and client investment practices and other factors. These same market pressures also impact the fees we negotiate when we win business from new clients.
Historically, and based on an indicative sample of revenue, we estimate that approximately 60%, on average, of our servicing fee revenues have been variable due to changes in asset valuations including changes in daily average valuations of AUC/A; another approximately 15%, on average, of our servicing fees are impacted by the volume of activity in the funds we serve; and the remaining approximately 25% of our servicing fees tend not to be variable in nature nor impacted by market fluctuations or values.
Based on the impact of the above, client activity and asset flows, net new business and pricing, noted drivers of our servicing fee revenue will vary depending on the mix of products and services we provide to our clients. The full impact of changes in market valuations and the volume of activity in the funds may not be fully reflected in our servicing fee revenues in the periods in which the changes occur, particularly in periods of higher volatility.
| TABLE 6: ASSETS UNDER CUSTODY AND/OR ADMINISTRATION BY PRODUCT(1)(2) | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2023 | December 31, 2022 | December 31, 2021 | % Change 2023 vs. 2022 | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | ||||||||||||||||
| Collective funds, including ETFs | $ | 14,070 | $ | 12,261 | $ | 15,722 | 15 | % | (22) | % | |||||||||||
| Mutual funds | 11,009 | 9,610 | 11,575 | 15 | (17) | ||||||||||||||||
| Pension products | 8,352 | 7,734 | 8,443 | 8 | (8) | ||||||||||||||||
| Insurance and other products | 8,379 | 7,138 | 7,938 | 17 | (10) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 41,810 | $ | 36,743 | $ | 43,678 | 14 | (16) |
| TABLE 7: ASSETS UNDER CUSTODY AND/OR ADMINISTRATION BY ASSET CLASS(2) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2023 | December 31, 2022 | December 31, 2021 | % Change 2023 vs. 2022 | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Equities | $ | 24,317 | $ | 20,575 | $ | 25,974 | 18 | % | (21) | % | |||||||||||||
| Fixed-income | 11,043 | 10,318 | 12,587 | 7 | (18) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Short-term and other investments | 6,450 | 5,850 | 5,117 | 10 | 14 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 41,810 | $ | 36,743 | $ | 43,678 | 14 | (16) |
| TABLE 8: ASSETS UNDER CUSTODY AND/OR ADMINISTRATION BY GEOGRAPHY(2)(3) | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2023 | December 31, 2022 | December 31, 2021 | % Change 2023 vs. 2022 | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | ||||||||||||
| Americas | $ | 29,951 | $ | 26,981 | $ | 32,427 | 11 | % | (17) | % | |||||||
| Europe/Middle East/Africa | 8,913 | 7,136 | 8,599 | 25 | (17) | ||||||||||||
| Asia/Pacific | 2,946 | 2,626 | 2,652 | 12 | (1) | ||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 41,810 | $ | 36,743 | $ | 43,678 | 14 | (16) |
(1) Certain previously reported amounts presented have been reclassified to conform to current-period presentation.
(2) Consistent with past practice, AUC/A values for certain asset classes are based on a lag, typically one-month.
(3) Geographic mix is generally based on the domicile of the entity servicing the funds and is not necessarily representative of the underlying asset mix.
Asset servicing mandates newly announced in 2023 totaled approximately $904 billion of AUC/A. Servicing assets remaining to be installed in future periods totaled approximately $2.30 trillion as of December 31, 2023, which will be reflected in AUC/A in future periods after installation and will generate servicing fee revenue in subsequent periods. The full revenue impact of such mandates will be realized as the assets are installed and additional services are added over that period.
New asset servicing mandates may be subject to completion of definitive agreements, approval of applicable boards and shareholders and customary regulatory approvals. New asset servicing mandates and servicing assets remaining to be installed in future periods exclude certain new business which has been contracted, but for which the client has not yet provided permission to publicly disclose and the expected installation date extends beyond
State Street Corporation | 68
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
one quarter. These excluded assets, which from time to time may be significant, will be included in new asset servicing mandates and reflected in servicing assets remaining to be installed in the period in which the client provides its permission. Servicing mandates and servicing assets remaining to be installed in future periods are presented on a gross basis based on factors present on or about the time we determine the business to be won by us and are not updated based on subsequent developments, including changes in assets, market valuations, scope and, potentially, termination. Such assets therefore do not include the impact of clients who have notified us during the period of their intent to terminate or reduce their relationship with us, which may from time to time be significant.
With respect to these new servicing mandates, once installed we may provide various services, including back office services such as custody and safekeeping, transaction processing and trade settlement, fund administration, reporting and record keeping, security servicing, fund accounting, middle office services such as investment book of records, transaction management, loans, cash derivatives and collateral services, recordkeeping, client reporting and investment analytics, markets services such as FX trading services, liquidity solutions, currency and collateral management and securities finance, and front office services such as portfolio management solutions, risk analytics, scenario analysis, performance and attribution, trade order and execution management, pre-trade compliance and ESG investment tools. Revenues associated with new servicing mandates may vary based on the breadth of services provided, the timing of installation, and the types of assets.
As previously disclosed, in early 2021, due to a decision to diversify providers, one of our large asset servicing clients is moving a significant portion of its ETF assets currently with State Street to one or more other providers. Prior to the commencement of the transition of assets, which began in 2022, we estimated that the financial impact of this transition represented approximately 1.9% of our 2021 total fee revenue. We began to see the impact of the transition on our fee revenue and income growth trends primarily towards the end of 2023, with the remainder expected to be realized through 2025 as the transition continues. On a quarterly run rate basis, we estimate that the fourth quarter of 2023 reflects approximately half of the revenue impact of the exiting business. On a full year basis, we estimate that 2023 reflects approximately a fourth of the revenue impact of the exiting business. We expect to continue as a significant service provider for this client after this transition and for the client to continue to be meaningful to our business.
Management Fee Revenue
Management fees decreased 3% in 2023 compared to 2022, as the previously disclosed shift of certain management fees into NII, client insourcing and the impacts of a strategic ETF product suite repricing initiative were partially offset by higher average equity market levels.
Management fees generated outside the U.S. were approximately 26% of total management fees in both 2023 and 2022.
Management fees generally are affected by our level of AUM, which we report based on month-end valuations. Management fees for certain components of managed assets, such as ETFs, mutual funds and Undertakings for Collective Investments in Transferable Securities, are affected by daily average valuations of AUM. Management fee revenue is more sensitive to market valuations than servicing fee revenue, as a higher proportion of the underlying services provided, and the associated management fees earned, are dependent on equity and fixed-income security valuations. Additional factors, such as the relative mix of assets managed, may have a significant effect on our management fee revenue. While certain management fees are directly determined by the values of AUM and the investment strategies employed, management fees may reflect other factors, including performance fee arrangements, as well as our relationship pricing for clients.
Asset-based management fees for passively managed products, to which our AUM is currently primarily weighted, are generally charged at a lower fee on AUM than for actively managed products. Actively managed products may also include performance fee arrangements which are recorded when the fee is earned, based on predetermined benchmarks associated with the applicable account's performance.
In light of the above, we estimate, using relevant information as of December 31, 2023 and assuming that all other factors remain constant, including the impact of business won and lost and client flows, that:
•A 10% increase or decrease in worldwide equity valuations, on a weighted average basis, over the relevant periods for which our management fees are calculated, would result in a corresponding change in our total management fee revenues, on average and over multiple quarters, of approximately 5%; and
•Changes in worldwide fixed income markets, which on a weighted average basis and over time are typically less volatile than worldwide equity markets, will have a significantly smaller corresponding impact on our management fee revenues on average and over time.
State Street Corporation | 69
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Daily averages, month-end averages and year-end indices demonstrate worldwide changes in equity and debt markets that affect our management fee revenue. Year-end indices affect the values of AUM as of those dates. See Table 3: Daily Averages, Month-End Averages and Year-End Equity Indices for selected indices. While the specific indices presented are indicative of general market trends, the asset types and classes relevant to individual client portfolios can and do differ, and the performance of associated relevant indices and of client portfolios can therefore differ from the performance of the indices presented. In addition, our asset classifications may differ from those industry classifications presented.
| TABLE 9: ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT BY ASSET CLASS AND INVESTMENT APPROACH | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2023 | December 31, 2022 | December 31, 2021 | % Change 2023 vs. 2022 | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | ||||||||||||||||
| Equity: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | $ | 47 | $ | 54 | $ | 80 | (13) | % | (33) | % | |||||||||||
| Passive | 2,466 | 2,074 | 2,594 | 19 | (20) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total equity | 2,513 | 2,128 | 2,674 | 18 | (20) | ||||||||||||||||
| Fixed-income: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | 71 | 83 | 103 | (14) | (19) | ||||||||||||||||
| Passive | 538 | 471 | 520 | 14 | (9) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total fixed-income | 609 | 554 | 623 | 10 | (11) | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash(1) | 467 | 376 | 368 | 24 | 2 | ||||||||||||||||
| Multi-asset-class solutions: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | 21 | 28 | 34 | (25) | (18) | ||||||||||||||||
| Passive | 289 | 181 | 188 | 60 | (4) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total multi-asset-class solutions | 310 | 209 | 222 | 48 | (6) | ||||||||||||||||
| Alternative investments(2): | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | 11 | 35 | 56 | (69) | (38) | ||||||||||||||||
| Passive | 218 | 179 | 195 | 22 | (8) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total alternative investments | 229 | 214 | 251 | 7 | (15) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 4,128 | $ | 3,481 | $ | 4,138 | 19 | (16) |
(1) Includes both floating- and constant-net-asset-value portfolios held in commingled structures or separate accounts.
(2) Includes real estate investment trusts, currency and commodities, including SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust. We are not the investment manager for the SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR®Gold MiniSharesSM Trust, but act as the marketing agent.
| TABLE 10: GEOGRAPHIC MIX OF ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT(1) | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2023 | December 31, 2022 | December 31, 2021 | % Change 2023 vs. 2022 | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | ||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 3,029 | $ | 2,544 | $ | 2,931 | 19 | % | (13) | % | |||||||
| Europe/Middle East/Africa | 602 | 511 | 592 | 18 | (14) | ||||||||||||
| Asia/Pacific | 497 | 426 | 615 | 17 | (31) | ||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 4,128 | $ | 3,481 | $ | 4,138 | 19 | (16) |
(1) Geographic mix is based on client location or fund management location.
.
| TABLE 11: EXCHANGE - TRADED FUNDS BY ASSET CLASS(1) | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2023 | December 31, 2022 | December 31, 2021 | % Change 2023 vs. 2022 | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | ||||||||||||||||
| Alternative Investments(2) | $ | 73 | $ | 67 | $ | 72 | 9 | % | (7) | % | |||||||||||
| Equity | 1,038 | 817 | 970 | 27 | (16) | ||||||||||||||||
| Multi Asset | 1 | 1 | 1 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||
| Fixed-Income | 156 | 134 | 135 | 16 | (1) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total Exchange-Traded Funds | $ | 1,268 | $ | 1,019 | $ | 1,178 | 24 | (13) |
(1) ETFs are a component of AUM presented in the preceding table.
(2) Includes real estate investment trusts, currency and commodities, including SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust. We are not the investment manager for the SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR®Gold MiniSharesSM Trust, but act as the marketing agent.
State Street Corporation | 70
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 12: ACTIVITY IN ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT BY PRODUCT CATEGORY | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | Equity(1) | Fixed-Income(1) | Cash(1)(2) | Multi-Asset-Class Solutions(1) | Alternative Investments(1)(3) | Total | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2020 | $ | 2,171 | $ | 549 | $ | 349 | $ | 186 | $ | 212 | $ | 3,467 | ||||||||||
| Long-term institutional flows, net(4) | (25) | 70 | (2) | 16 | 10 | 69 | ||||||||||||||||
| Exchange-traded fund flows, net | 94 | 23 | — | — | (10) | 107 | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash fund flows, net | — | — | 20 | — | — | 20 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total flows, net | 69 | 93 | 18 | 16 | — | 196 | ||||||||||||||||
| Market appreciation (depreciation) | 476 | (7) | 2 | 22 | 43 | 536 | ||||||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange impact | (42) | (12) | (1) | (2) | (4) | (61) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total market/foreign exchange impact | 434 | (19) | 1 | 20 | 39 | 475 | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2021 | $ | 2,674 | $ | 623 | $ | 368 | $ | 222 | $ | 251 | $ | 4,138 | ||||||||||
| Long-term institutional flows, net(4) | (97) | 18 | 1 | 19 | — | (59) | ||||||||||||||||
| Exchange-traded fund flows, net | — | 22 | — | — | — | 22 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total flows, net | (97) | 40 | 1 | 19 | — | (37) | ||||||||||||||||
| Market appreciation (depreciation) | (398) | (94) | 9 | (28) | (30) | (541) | ||||||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange impact | (51) | (15) | (2) | (4) | (7) | (79) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total market/foreign exchange impact | (449) | (109) | 7 | (32) | (37) | (620) | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2022 | $ | 2,128 | $ | 554 | $ | 376 | $ | 209 | $ | 214 | $ | 3,481 | ||||||||||
| Long-term institutional flows, net(4) | (98) | 13 | (1) | 65 | (18) | (39) | ||||||||||||||||
| Exchange-traded fund flows, net | 73 | 17 | — | — | (2) | 88 | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash fund flows, net | — | — | 76 | — | — | 76 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total flows, net | (25) | 30 | 75 | 65 | (20) | 125 | ||||||||||||||||
| Market appreciation (depreciation) | 409 | 26 | 16 | 35 | 32 | 518 | ||||||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange impact | 1 | (1) | — | 1 | 3 | 4 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total market/foreign exchange impact | 410 | 25 | 16 | 36 | 35 | 522 | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2023 | $ | 2,513 | $ | 609 | $ | 467 | $ | 310 | $ | 229 | $ | 4,128 |
(1) The implementation of an improved internal data management system for product level data in the first quarter of 2021 resulted in some AUM reclassifications between the categories presented for prior periods to align with the current presentation. There was no impact to the total level of reported AUM.
(2) Includes both floating- and constant-net-asset-value portfolios held in commingled structures or separate accounts.
(3) Includes real estate investment trusts, currency and commodities, including SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust. We are not the investment manager for the SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR®Gold MiniSharesSM Trust, but act as the marketing agent.
(4) Amounts represent long-term portfolios, excluding ETFs.
Foreign Exchange Trading Services
Foreign exchange trading services revenue, as presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, decreased 8% in 2023 compared to 2022, primarily reflecting lower direct FX spreads, a decline in market volatility and lower client FX volumes. Foreign exchange trading services revenue comprises revenue generated by FX trading and revenue generated by brokerage and other trading services, which made up 63% and 37%, respectively, of foreign exchange trading services revenue in 2023, and 68% and 32%, respectively in 2022.
We primarily earn FX trading revenue by acting as a principal market-maker through both “direct sales and trading” and “indirect FX trading.”
•Direct sales and trading: Represent FX transactions at negotiated rates with clients and investment managers that contact our trading desk directly. Clients are able to choose their own execution time and method, trading by voice or electronically on one of the several available multibank platforms. These principal market-making activities include transactions for funds serviced by third party custodians or prime brokers, as well as those funds under custody with us.
•Indirect FX trading: Represents FX transactions with clients, for which we are the funds' custodian, or their investment managers, routed to our FX desk through our asset-servicing operation. We execute indirect FX trades as a principal at rates disclosed to our clients. Indirect FX is designed to address FX trades that relate to the purchase, sale or holding of a security where clients chose their execution frequency (either hourly or once per day), allowing us to offer straight-through processing and a fully automated service.
Our FX trading revenue is influenced by multiple factors, including: the volume and type of client FX transactions and related spreads; currency volatility, reflecting market conditions; and our management of exchange rate, interest rate and other market risks associated with our FX activities. The relative impact of these factors on our total FX trading revenues often differs from period to period. For example, assuming all other factors remain constant, increases or decreases in volumes or bid-offer spreads across product mix tend to result in increases or decreases, as the case may be, in client-related FX revenue.
Our clients that utilize indirect FX trading can, in addition to executing their FX transactions through dealers not affiliated with us, transition from indirect FX trading to either direct sales and trading execution, including our “Street
State Street Corporation | 71
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
FX” service, or to one of our electronic trading platforms. Street FX, in which we continue to act as a principal market-maker, enables our clients to define their FX execution strategy and automate the FX trade execution process, both for funds under custody with us as well as those under custody at another bank.
We also earn foreign exchange trading services revenue through “electronic FX services” and “other trading, transition management and brokerage revenue.”
•Electronic FX services: Our clients may choose to execute FX transactions through one of our electronic trading platforms. These transactions generate revenue through a “click” fee.
•Other trading, transition management and brokerage revenue: As our clients look to us to enhance and preserve portfolio values, they may choose to utilize our Transition or Currency Management capabilities or transact with our Equity Trade execution group. These transactions, which are not limited to foreign exchange, generate revenue via commissions charged for trades transacted during the management of these portfolios.
Fund Connect is another one of our electronic trading platforms: it is a global trading, analytics and cash management tool with access to more than 400 money market funds from leading providers.
Securities Finance
Securities finance revenue, as presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, increased 2% in 2023 compared to 2022, as higher prime services revenue and higher agency spreads were partially offset by lower agency balances.
Our securities finance business consists of three components:
(1) an agency lending program for State Street Global Advisors managed investment funds with a broad range of investment objectives, which we refer to as the State Street Global Advisors lending funds;
(2) an agency lending program for third-party investment managers and asset owners, which we refer to as the agency lending funds; and
(3) security lending transactions which we enter into as principal, which we refer to as our prime services business.
Securities finance revenue earned from our agency lending activities, which is composed of our split of both the spreads related to cash collateral and the fees related to non-cash collateral, is principally a function of the volume of securities on loan, the interest rate spreads and fees earned on the underlying collateral and our share of the fee split.
As principal, our prime services business borrows securities from the lending client or other market participants and then lends such securities to the subsequent borrower, either our client or a broker/dealer. We act as principal when the lending client is unable to, or elects not to, transact directly with the market and execute the transaction and furnish the securities. In our role as principal, we provide support to the transaction through our credit rating. While we source a significant proportion of the securities furnished by us in our role as principal from third parties, we have the ability to source securities through assets under custody from clients who have designated us as an eligible borrower.
Market influences may continue to affect client demand for securities finance, and as a result our revenue from, and the profitability of, our securities lending activities in future periods. In addition, the constantly evolving regulatory environment, including revised or proposed capital and liquidity standards, interpretations of those standards, and our own balance sheet management activities, may influence modifications to the way in which we deliver our agency lending or prime services businesses, the volume of our securities lending activity and related revenue and profitability in future periods.
Software and Processing Fees
Software and processing fees revenue, presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, increased 3% in 2023 compared to 2022, primarily due to higher front office software and data revenue associated with CRD.
Software and processing fees revenue includes diverse types of fees and revenue, including fees from software licensing and maintenance and fees from our structured products business.
Front office software and data revenue, which primarily includes revenue from CRD, Alpha Data Platform and Alpha Data Services, increased 5% in 2023 compared to 2022, primarily driven by higher software-enabled and professional services revenue, partially offset by lower on-premises renewals.
Revenue related to the front office solutions provided by CRD is primarily driven by the sale of term software licenses and SaaS, including professional services such as consulting and implementation services, software support and maintenance. Approximately 50%-70% of revenue associated with a sale of software to be installed on-premises is recognized at a point in time when the customer benefits from obtaining access to and use of the software license, with the percentage varying based on the length of the contract and other contractual terms. The
State Street Corporation | 72
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
remainder of revenue for on-premise installations is recognized over the length of the contract as maintenance and other services are provided. Upon renewal of an on-premises software contract, the same pattern of revenue recognition is followed with 50%-70% recognized upon renewal and the remaining balance recognized over the term of the contract. Revenue for a SaaS related arrangement, where the customer does not take possession of the software, is recognized over the term of the contract as services are provided. Upon renewal of a SaaS arrangement, revenue continues to be recognized as services are provided under the new contract. As a result of these differences in how portions of CRD revenue are accounted for, CRD revenue may vary more than other business units quarter to quarter.
Lending related and other fees decreased 3% in 2023 compared to 2022, primarily driven by the municipal finance and stable value wrap business. Lending related and other fees primarily consists of fee revenue associated with our fund finance, leveraged loans, municipal finance, insurance and stable value wrap businesses.
Other Fee Revenue
Other fee revenue includes market-related adjustments and income associated with other equity method investments.
Other fee revenue increased $181 million in 2023, compared to 2022, primarily driven by a previously disclosed tax credit investment accounting change and the positive impact of market-related adjustments, partially offset by lower fair value adjustments on equity investments and the impact of the Argentine peso devaluation. For further information on the tax credit investment accounting change, please refer to Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Additional information about fee revenue is provided under “Line of Business Information” included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
Net Interest Income
See Table 2: Total Revenue, for the breakout of interest income and interest expense for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021.
NII is defined as interest income earned on interest-earning assets less interest expense incurred on interest-bearing liabilities. Interest-earning assets, which principally consist of investment securities, interest-bearing deposits with banks, loans, resale agreements and other liquid assets, are financed primarily by client deposits, short-term borrowings and long-term debt.
NIM represents the relationship between annualized FTE NII and average total interest-earning assets for the period. It is calculated by dividing FTE NII by average interest-earning assets. Revenue that is exempt from income taxes, mainly earned from certain investment securities (state and political subdivisions), is adjusted to a FTE basis using the U.S. federal and state statutory income tax rates.
NII on an FTE basis increased 8% in 2023 compared to 2022, primarily due to the impact of higher interest rates, partially offset by lower average deposit balances and deposit mix shift towards interest-bearing deposits.
Investment securities' net purchase premium amortization, which is included in interest income, was $3 million in 2023, compared to $225 million in 2022 and $556 million in 2021. The decrease in net purchase premium amortization in 2023, as compared to 2022, was primarily driven by a shift in the non-MBS portfolio from a net unamortized purchase premium as of December 31, 2022 to a net unamortized purchase discount as of December 31, 2023, as well as reduced prepayment rates on the MBS portfolio due to higher interest rates.
Interest income related to debt securities is recognized in our consolidated statement of income using the effective interest method, or on a basis approximating a level rate of return over the contractual or estimated life of the security. The rate of return considers any non-refundable fees or costs, as well as purchase premiums or discounts, resulting in amortization or accretion, accordingly. The amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts are adjusted for prepayments when they occur, which primarily impact mortgage-backed securities.
The following table presents the investment securities net premium amortization (discount accretion) for the periods indicated:
| TABLE 13: INVESTMENT SECURITIES NET PREMIUM AMORTIZATION | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | MBS | Non-MBS | Total(1) | MBS | Non-MBS | Total(1) | MBS | Non-MBS | Total(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Unamortized purchase premiums and (discounts) at period end | $ | 418 | $ | (264) | $ | 154 | $ | 520 | $ | 208 | 728 | $ | 712 | $ | 502 | $ | 1,214 | ||||||||||||||||
| Net premium amortization (discount accretion) | 81 | (78) | 3 | 142 | 83 | 225 | 342 | 214 | 556 |
(1) Totals exclude premiums or discounts created from the transfer of securities from AFS to HTM. Additional information on the transfer of securities is provided in Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 73
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
See Table 14: Average Balances and Interest Rates - Fully Taxable-Equivalent Basis, for the breakout of NII on a FTE basis for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021.
| TABLE 14: AVERAGE BALANCES AND INTEREST RATES - FULLY TAXABLE-EQUIVALENT BASIS(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions; fully taxable-equivalent basis) | Average Balance | Interest Revenue/Expense | Rate | Average Balance | Interest Revenue/Expense | Rate | Average Balance | Interest Revenue/ Expense | Rate | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Interest-bearing deposits with banks(2) | $ | 69,883 | $ | 2,869 | 4.11 | % | $ | 76,498 | $ | 842 | 1.10 | % | $ | 89,996 | $ | (15) | (0.02) | % | ||||||||||||||
| Securities purchased under resale agreements(3) | 1,764 | 312 | 17.67 | 2,116 | 188 | 8.88 | 4,193 | 27 | 0.63 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Trading account assets | 711 | — | — | 721 | — | 0.01 | 752 | — | 0.01 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment securities available for sale | 42,850 | 1,748 | 4.08 | 53,613 | 733 | 1.37 | 66,584 | 583 | 0.88 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment securities held-to-maturity | 62,915 | 1,262 | 2.01 | 58,316 | 979 | 1.68 | 44,832 | 665 | 1.48 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment securities held-to-maturity purchased under money market liquidity facility | — | — | — | — | — | — | 314 | 4 | 1.35 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Investment securities | 105,765 | 3,010 | 2.85 | 111,929 | 1,712 | 1.53 | 111,730 | 1,252 | 1.12 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Loans | 34,800 | 1,863 | 5.35 | 35,117 | 973 | 2.77 | 31,009 | 640 | 2.07 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other interest-earning assets(4) | 18,098 | 1,131 | 6.25 | 20,850 | 383 | 1.84 | 22,355 | 17 | 0.08 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total interest-earning assets | 231,021 | 9,185 | 3.98 | 247,231 | 4,098 | 1.66 | 260,035 | 1,921 | 0.74 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Cash and due from banks | 3,925 | 3,652 | 5,057 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other non-interest-earning assets | 39,750 | 35,547 | 34,651 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total assets | $ | 274,696 | $ | 286,430 | $ | 299,743 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Interest-bearing deposits: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| U.S. | $ | 110,204 | $ | 3,976 | 3.61 | % | $ | 98,252 | $ | 887 | 0.90 | % | $ | 104,848 | $ | 10 | 0.01 | % | ||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S.(2)(5) | 62,689 | 1,015 | 1.62 | 76,842 | 80 | 0.10 | 82,126 | (273) | (0.33) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total interest-bearing deposits(5)(6) | 172,893 | 4,991 | 2.89 | 175,094 | 967 | 0.55 | 186,974 | (263) | (0.07) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Securities sold under repurchase agreements | 3,904 | 34 | 0.87 | 3,633 | 14 | 0.39 | 667 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Federal funds purchased | 65 | 3 | 4.82 | — | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Short-term borrowings under money market liquidity facility | — | — | — | — | — | — | 315 | 4 | 1.21 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other short-term borrowings | 1,120 | 40 | 3.60 | 1,188 | 26 | 2.18 | 788 | 2 | 0.21 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Long-term debt | 17,355 | 888 | 5.12 | 14,132 | 376 | 2.66 | 13,383 | 219 | 1.64 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other interest-bearing liabilities(7) | 3,891 | 465 | 11.96 | 2,725 | 161 | 5.91 | 5,486 | 41 | 0.75 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total interest-bearing liabilities | 199,228 | 6,421 | 3.22 | 196,772 | 1,544 | 0.78 | 207,613 | 3 | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-interest-bearing deposits(6) | 32,218 | 47,780 | 48,430 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other non-interest-bearing liabilities | 19,073 | 15,992 | 17,615 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Preferred shareholders' equity | 1,976 | 1,976 | 2,076 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common shareholders' equity | 22,201 | 23,910 | 24,009 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total liabilities and shareholders' equity | $ | 274,696 | $ | 286,430 | $ | 299,743 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Excess of rate earned over rate paid | 0.75 | % | 0.87 | % | 0.74 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income, fully taxable-equivalent basis | $ | 2,764 | $ | 2,554 | $ | 1,918 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest margin, fully taxable-equivalent basis | 1.20 | % | 1.03 | % | 0.74 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tax-equivalent adjustment | (5) | (10) | (13) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income, GAAP basis | $ | 2,759 | $ | 2,544 | $ | 1,905 |
(1) Rates earned/paid on interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities include the impact of hedge activities associated with our asset and liability management activities where applicable.
(2) Negative values reflect the impact of interest rate environments outside of the U.S. where central bank rates were below zero for several major currencies.
(3) Reflects the impact of balance sheet netting under enforceable netting agreements of approximately $140.36 billion, $71.02 billion and $62.15 billion for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Excluding the impact of netting, the average interest rates would be approximately 0.22%, 0.26% and 0.04% for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
(4) Reflects the impact of balance sheet netting under enforceable netting agreements of approximately $4.94 billion, $5.39 billion and $5.60 billion for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Excluding the impact of netting, the average interest rates would be approximately 3.61%, 1.46% and 0.06% for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
(5) Average rate includes the impact of FX swap costs of approximately $54 million, $20 million and ($68) million for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Average rates for total interest-bearing deposits excluding the impact of FX swap costs were 2.86%, 0.55% and (0.10)% for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
(6) Total deposits averaged $205.11 billion, $222.87 billion and $235.40 billion for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
(7) Reflects the impact of balance sheet netting under enforceable netting agreements of approximately $4.67 billion, $4.59 billion and $5.48 billion for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Excluding the impact of netting, the average interest rates would be approximately 5.43%, 2.20% and 0.38% for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
State Street Corporation | 74
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Changes in the components of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities are discussed in more detail below. Additional information about the components of interest income and interest expense is provided in Note 17 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Average total interest-earning assets were $231.02 billion in 2023 compared to $247.23 billion in 2022. The decrease is primarily due to lower client deposit balances.
Interest-bearing deposits with banks averaged $69.88 billion in 2023 compared to $76.50 billion in 2022. These deposits primarily reflect our maintenance of cash balances at the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank (ECB) and other non-U.S. central banks. The lower levels of average cash balances reflect lower levels of client deposits.
Securities purchased under resale agreements averaged $1.76 billion in 2023 compared to $2.12 billion in 2022. As a member of FICC, we may net securities sold under repurchase agreements against those purchased under resale agreements with counterparties that are also members of the clearing organization, when specific netting criteria are met. The impact of balance sheet netting was $140.36 billion on average in 2023 compared to $71.02 billion in 2022, primarily driven by an increase in FICC repo volumes.
We are a direct and sponsoring member of FICC. As a sponsoring member within FICC, we enter into repurchase and resale transactions in eligible securities with sponsored clients and with other FICC members and, pursuant to FICC Government Securities Division rules, submit, novate and net the transactions. We may sponsor clients to clear their eligible repurchase transactions with FICC, backed by our guarantee to FICC of the prompt and full payment and performance of our sponsored member clients’ respective obligations. We generally obtain a security interest from our sponsored clients in the high quality securities collateral that they receive, which is designed to mitigate our potential exposure to FICC.
Additionally, as a member of FICC, we may be required to pay a pro rata share of the losses incurred by the organization and provide liquidity support in the event of the default of another member to the extent that the defaulting member’s clearing fund obligation and the prescribed loss allocation to FICC is depleted. It is difficult to estimate our maximum possible exposure under the membership agreement, since this would require an assessment of future claims that may be made against us that have not yet occurred. We did not record any liabilities under these arrangements as of both December 31, 2023 and 2022.
Average investment securities decreased to $105.77 billion in 2023 from $111.93 billion in 2022. The portfolio declined across major asset classes, which was primarily driven by a smaller balance sheet from lower client deposits amidst a higher level of market rates.
Loans averaged $34.80 billion in 2023 compared to $35.12 billion in 2022. Average core loans, which exclude overdrafts and highlight our efforts to grow our lending portfolio, averaged $30.97 billion in 2023 compared to $29.10 billion in 2022. The increase is primarily due to growth in CLOs in loan form and consumer real estate loans, partially offset by a decline in leveraged loans. Additional information about these loans is provided in Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Average other interest-earning assets, largely associated with our prime service business, decreased to $18.10 billion in 2023 from $20.85 billion in 2022, primarily driven by a decrease in the level of cash collateral posted. Other interest-earning assets primarily reflects prime services assets where cash has been posted to borrow securities from lenders, which are then lent by us, as principal, to borrowers. This cash includes both cash from borrowers and cash utilized from our balance sheet, and is presented on a net basis on the balance sheet where we have enforceable netting agreements. Non-interest earning assets also included a portion of our prime service assets where borrower-provided non-cash collateral has been utilized to borrow securities from lenders, which we subsequently loan, as principal, to our borrowers; in this structure our investment portfolio securities are encumbered, but this is not reflected on the balance sheet. Combined with our prime services liabilities, revenue from these activities generates securities finance fee revenue as well as net interest income.
Aggregate average total interest-bearing deposits decreased to $172.89 billion in 2023 from $175.09 billion in 2022. The decrease is driven by the higher market interest rate environment across most major currencies and quantitative tightening, partially offset by our focus on deposit-raising initiatives and rotation from non-interest bearing deposits. Future deposit levels will be influenced by the underlying asset servicing business, client behavior, the mix of interest-bearing and non-interest-bearing deposits and market conditions, including the general levels of U.S. and non-U.S. interest rates.
Average short-term borrowings decreased to $1.12 billion in 2023 from $1.19 billion in 2022.
Average long-term debt was $17.36 billion in 2023 compared to $14.13 billion in 2022. These amounts reflect issuances, redemptions and
State Street Corporation | 75
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
maturities of senior debt during the respective periods.
Average other interest-bearing liabilities, largely associated with our prime services business, were $3.89 billion in 2023 compared to $2.73 billion in 2022. Other interest-bearing liabilities is primarily driven by cash received from our custody clients, which is presented on a net basis where we have enforceable netting agreements. Non-interest bearing liabilities also include a portion of our prime services liabilities where client provided non-cash collateral has been received and we have rehypothecation rights. Securities received as collateral from our custody clients where we have no rehypothecation rights are used as a credit mitigant only and remain off balance sheet.
Several factors could affect future levels of NII and NIM, including the volume and mix of client deposits and funding sources; central bank actions; balance sheet management activities; changes in the level and slope of U.S. and non-U.S. interest rates; revised or proposed regulatory capital or liquidity standards, or interpretations of those standards; the yields earned on securities purchased compared to the yields earned on securities sold or matured and changes in the type and amount of credit or other loans we extend.
Based on market conditions and other factors, including regulatory standards, we continue to reinvest the majority of the proceeds from pay-downs and maturities of investment securities in highly-rated U.S. and non-U.S. securities, such as federal agency MBS, sovereign debt securities and U.S. Treasury and agency securities. The pace at which we reinvest and the types of investment securities purchased will depend on the impact of market conditions, the implementation of regulatory standards, including interpretation of those standards and other factors over time. We expect these factors and the levels of global interest rates to impact our reinvestment program and future levels of NII and NIM.
Provision for Credit Losses
In 2023, we recorded a $46 million provision for credit losses, compared to $20 million in 2022, primarily reflecting an increase in loan loss reserves associated with commercial real estate.
Additional information is provided under “Loans” in “Financial Condition” in this Management's Discussion and Analysis and in Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Expenses
Table 15: Expenses, provides the breakout of expenses for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021. Total expenses increased 9% compared to 2022, primarily reflecting the impact of
the 2023 notable items, higher salaries and continued business investments, partially offset by productivity savings. Notable items totaling $620 million, including $387 million associated with the FDIC special assessment and $203 million of repositioning charges, contributed to the increase in total expenses in 2023 relative to 2022.
| TABLE 15: EXPENSES | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2023 vs. 2022 | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | |||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | ||||||||||||||
| Compensation and employee benefits | $ | 4,744 | $ | 4,428 | $ | 4,554 | 7 | % | (3) | % | |||||||
| Information systems and communications | 1,703 | 1,630 | 1,661 | 4 | (2) | ||||||||||||
| Transaction processing services | 957 | 971 | 1,024 | (1) | (5) | ||||||||||||
| Occupancy | 426 | 394 | 444 | 8 | (11) | ||||||||||||
| Amortization of other intangible assets | 239 | 238 | 245 | — | (3) | ||||||||||||
| Acquisition and restructuring costs | (15) | 65 | 65 | nm | — | ||||||||||||
| Other: | |||||||||||||||||
| Professional services | 428 | 375 | 334 | 14 | 12 | ||||||||||||
| Other | 1,101 | 700 | 562 | 57 | 25 | ||||||||||||
| Total other | 1,529 | 1,075 | 896 | 42 | 20 | ||||||||||||
| Total expenses | $ | 9,583 | $ | 8,801 | $ | 8,889 | 9 | (1) | |||||||||
| Number of employees at year-end | 46,451 | 42,226 | 38,784 | 10 | 9 |
Compensation and employee benefits expenses increased 7% in 2023 compared to 2022, primarily due to higher repositioning charges, higher salaries and employee benefits, partially offset by lower contractor spend and seasonal expenses.
Total headcount increased 10% as of December 31, 2023 compared to December 31, 2022, reflecting the consolidation of one of our operations joint ventures in India. Associated headcount cost was previously reflected in compensation and employee benefits expenses.
Information systems and communications expenses increased 4% in 2023 compared to 2022, primarily reflecting the impact of notable items in 2023 and higher technology and infrastructure investments, partially offset by optimization savings, insourcing and vendor savings.
Transaction processing services expenses decreased 1% in 2023 compared to 2022, primarily due to lower sub-custody costs and broker fees.
Occupancy expenses increased 8% in 2023 compared 2022, primarily driven by an episodic 2022 gain on a sale leaseback transaction and expanded international real estate footprint, partially offset by savings from real estate footprint optimization.
Amortization of other intangible assets was flat in 2023 compared to 2022.
Other expenses increased 42% in 2023 compared to 2022, primarily reflecting the impact of
State Street Corporation | 76
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
the FDIC special assessment, as well as higher marketing expenses and professional fees.
Acquisition and Restructuring Costs
In 2023, we released a $15 million accrual related to the BBH Investor Services acquisition transaction that we are no longer pursuing. In 2022, we recorded acquisition costs of $65 million related to the same transaction.
Repositioning Charges
In 2023, we recorded net repositioning charges of approximately $203 million to enable the next phase of our productivity efforts to streamline operations and technology, and improve efficiency. Expenses for 2023 included $182 million of compensation and employee benefits expenses related to workforce rationalization and $21 million of occupancy costs related to real estate footprint optimization.
In 2022, we recorded repositioning charges of $78 million, consisting of $50 million of compensation and benefits expense primarily related to streamlining the Investment Services organization, $20 million of occupancy charges related to real estate footprint optimization and $8 million of BBH-related repositioning charges recorded in acquisition and restructuring costs.
The following table presents aggregate activity for repositioning charges for the periods indicated:
| TABLE 16: RESTRUCTURING AND REPOSITIONING CHARGES | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | Employee Related Costs | Real Estate Actions | Total | |||||||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2020 | $ | 190 | $ | 6 | $ | 196 | ||||||||||
| Accruals for Repositioning Charges | (32) | 29 | (3) | |||||||||||||
| Payments and Other Adjustments | (90) | (29) | (119) | |||||||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2021 | 68 | 6 | 74 | |||||||||||||
| Accruals for Repositioning Charges | 58 | 20 | 78 | |||||||||||||
| Payments and other adjustments | (43) | (21) | (64) | |||||||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2022 | 83 | 5 | 88 | |||||||||||||
| Accruals for Repositioning Charges | 182 | 21 | 203 | |||||||||||||
| Payments and other adjustments | (58) | (25) | (83) | |||||||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2023 | $ | 207 | $ | 1 | $ | 208 |
Income Tax Expense
Income tax expense was $372 million in 2023 compared to $553 million in 2022. Our effective tax rate was 16.1% in 2023 compared to 16.6% in 2022. Income tax expense for 2023 included the impact of the tax credit investment accounting change. For further information on the tax credit investment accounting change, please refer to Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Additional information regarding income tax expense, including unrecognized tax benefits and tax contingencies, is provided in Notes 13 and 22 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
LINE OF BUSINESS INFORMATION
Our operations are organized into two lines of business: Investment Servicing and Investment Management, which are defined based on products and services provided. The results of operations for these lines of business are not necessarily comparable with those of other companies, including companies in the financial services industry. For the description of our lines of business refer to “Lines of Business” in Item 1 in this Form 10-K. Certain amounts are not allocated to our two lines of business. For further information, please refer to Note 24 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Investment Servicing
| TABLE 17: INVESTMENT SERVICING LINE OF BUSINESS RESULTS | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in millions, except where otherwise noted) | Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2023 vs. 2022 | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Servicing fees | $ | 4,922 | $ | 5,087 | $ | 5,531 | (3) | % | (8) | % | |||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange trading services | 1,140 | 1,271 | 1,149 | (10) | 11 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Securities finance | 402 | 397 | 402 | 1 | (1) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Software and processing fees | 811 | 789 | 738 | 3 | 7 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Other fee revenue | 145 | 46 | 59 | nm | (22) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total fee revenue | 7,420 | 7,590 | 7,879 | (2) | (4) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income | 2,740 | 2,551 | 1,919 | 7 | 33 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total other income | — | (2) | (1) | nm | nm | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total revenue | 10,160 | 10,139 | 9,797 | — | 3 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Provision for credit losses | 46 | 20 | (33) | nm | nm | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total expenses | 7,413 | 7,260 | 7,182 | 2 | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Income before income tax expense | $ | 2,701 | $ | 2,859 | $ | 2,648 | (6) | 8 | |||||||||||||||
| Pre-tax margin | 27 | % | 28 | % | 27 | % | |||||||||||||||||
| Average assets (in billions) | $ | 271.5 | $ | 283.2 | $ | 296.5 |
nm Not meaningful
State Street Corporation | 77
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Servicing Fees
Servicing fees, as presented in Table 17: Investment Servicing Line of Business Results, decreased 3% in 2023 compared to 2022, primarily due to lower client activity and adjustments, normal pricing headwinds, lower average fixed income markets and a previously disclosed client transition, partially offset by higher average equity market levels and net new business.
For additional information about servicing fees and the impact of worldwide equity and fixed-income valuations on our fee revenue, as well as other key drivers of our servicing fee revenue, refer to “Fee Revenue” in “Consolidated Results of Operations” included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
Expenses
Total expenses for Investment Servicing increased 2% in 2023 compared to 2022, as expense growth from higher salaries, headcount and continued business investments were partially offset by productivity and optimization savings. Seasonal deferred incentive compensation expense and payroll taxes were $131 million in 2023 compared to $143 million in 2022. Additional information about expenses is provided under “Expenses” in “Consolidated Results of Operations” included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
Investment Management
| TABLE 18: INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT LINE OF BUSINESS RESULTS | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in millions, except where otherwise noted) | Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2023 vs. 2022 | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Management fees(1) | $ | 1,876 | $ | 1,939 | $ | 2,053 | (3) | % | (6) | % | |||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange trading services(2) | 125 | 82 | 62 | 52 | 32 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Securities finance | 24 | 19 | 14 | 26 | 36 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Other fee revenue(3) | 35 | (47) | 4 | nm | nm | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total fee revenue | 2,060 | 1,993 | 2,133 | 3 | (7) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income | 19 | (7) | (14) | nm | (50) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total revenue | 2,079 | 1,986 | 2,119 | 5 | (6) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total expenses | 1,540 | 1,396 | 1,445 | 10 | (3) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Income before income tax expense | $ | 539 | $ | 590 | $ | 674 | (9) | (12) | |||||||||||||||
| Pre-tax margin | 26 | % | 30 | % | 32 | % | |||||||||||||||||
| Average assets (in billions) | $ | 3.2 | $ | 3.2 | $ | 3.2 |
(1) Includes revenues from SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust AUM where we are not the investment manager but act as the marketing agent.
(2) Includes revenue for reimbursements received for certain ETFs associated with State Street Global Advisors where we act as the distribution and marketing agent.
(3) Includes other revenue items that are primarily driven by equity market movements.
nm Not meaningful
Investment Management total revenue increased 5% in 2023 compared to 2022.
Management Fees
Management fees decreased 3% in 2023 compared to 2022, as the previously disclosed shift of certain management fees into NII, client insourcing and the impacts of a strategic ETF product suite repricing initiative were partially offset by higher average equity market levels.
For additional information about the impact of worldwide equity and fixed-income valuations, as well as other key drivers of our management fees revenue, refer to “Fee Revenue” in “Consolidated Results of Operations” included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
Expenses
Total expenses for Investment Management increased 10% in 2023 compared to 2022, reflecting higher salaries, headcount and continued business investments. Seasonal deferred incentive compensation expense and payroll taxes were $50 million in 2023, compared to $65 million in 2022.
Additional information about expenses is provided under “Expenses” in “Consolidated Results of Operations” included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
For additional information about our two lines of business, as well as the revenues, expenses and capital allocation methodologies associated with them, refer to Note 24 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 78
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
FINANCIAL CONDITION
The structure of our consolidated statement of condition is primarily driven by the liabilities generated by our Investment Servicing and Investment Management lines of business. Our clients' needs and our operating objectives determine the volume, mix and currency denomination of our assets and liabilities. As our clients execute their worldwide cash management and investment activities, they utilize deposits and short-term investments that constitute the majority of our liabilities. These liabilities are generally in the form of interest-bearing transaction account deposits, which are denominated in a variety of currencies; non-interest-bearing demand deposits; and repurchase agreements, which generally serve as short-term investment alternatives for our clients.
Deposits and other liabilities resulting from client initiated transactions are invested in assets that generally have contractual maturities significantly longer than our liabilities; however, we evaluate the operational nature of our deposits and seek to maintain appropriate short-term liquidity of those liabilities that are not operational in nature and maintain longer-termed assets for our operational deposits. Our assets consist primarily of securities held in our AFS or HTM portfolios and short-duration financial instruments, such as interest-bearing deposits with banks and securities purchased under resale agreements. The actual mix of assets is determined by the characteristics of the client liabilities and our desire to maintain a well-diversified portfolio of high-quality assets.
Additional information on our financial condition is presented in Table 14: Average Balances and Interest Rates - Fully Taxable-Equivalent Basis. We believe the average statement of condition is a better measure of the balance sheet trends as period-end balances can be impacted by the timing of client activities including deposits and withdrawals.
Investment Securities
| TABLE 19: CARRYING VALUES OF INVESTMENT SECURITIES | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, | ||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |||||||
| Available-for-sale: | ||||||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 8,301 | $ | 7,981 | $ | 17,939 | ||||
| Mortgage-backed securities(1) | 10,755 | 8,509 | 18,208 | |||||||
| Total U.S. Treasury and federal agencies | 19,056 | 16,490 | 36,147 | |||||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 1,857 | 1,623 | 1,995 | |||||||
| Asset-backed securities(2) | 2,137 | 1,669 | 2,087 | |||||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 15,100 | 14,089 | 23,547 | |||||||
| Other(3) | 2,735 | 2,091 | 3,098 | |||||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 21,829 | 19,472 | 30,727 | |||||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||
| Student loans(4) | 114 | 115 | 211 | |||||||
| Collateralized loan obligations(5) | 2,527 | 2,355 | 2,155 | |||||||
| Non-agency CMBS and RMBS(6) | 249 | 231 | 52 | |||||||
| Other | 90 | 88 | 91 | |||||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 2,980 | 2,789 | 2,509 | |||||||
| State and political subdivisions | 355 | 823 | 1,272 | |||||||
| Other U.S. debt securities(7) | 306 | 1,005 | 2,744 | |||||||
| Total available-for-sale securities(8)(9) | $ | 44,526 | $ | 40,579 | $ | 73,399 | ||||
| Held-to-maturity: | ||||||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 8,584 | $ | 11,693 | $ | 2,170 | ||||
| Mortgage-backed securities(10) | 39,472 | 42,307 | 33,481 | |||||||
| Total U.S. Treasury and federal agencies | 48,056 | 54,000 | 35,651 | |||||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 5,757 | 6,603 | 1,564 | |||||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 5,757 | 6,603 | 1,564 | |||||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||
| Student loans(4) | 3,298 | 3,955 | 4,908 | |||||||
| Non-agency CMBS and RMBS(11) | 6 | 142 | 307 | |||||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 3,304 | 4,097 | 5,215 | |||||||
| Total held-to-maturity securities(8)(12) | $ | 57,117 | $ | 64,700 | $ | 42,430 |
(1) As of December 31, 2023 and 2022, the total fair value included $5.54 billion and $6.78 billion, respectively, of agency CMBS and $5.21 billion and $1.73 billion, respectively, of agency MBS.
(2) As of December 31, 2023 and 2022, the fair value includes non-U.S. collateralized loan obligations of $1.02 billion and $0.86 billion, respectively.
(3) As of December 31, 2023 and 2022, the fair value includes non-U.S. corporate bonds of $2.36 billion and $1.14 billion, respectively.
(4) Primarily comprised of securities guaranteed by the federal government with respect to at least 97% of defaulted principal and accrued interest on the underlying loans.
(5) Excludes collateralized loan obligations in loan form. Refer to Note 4 for additional information.
(6) Consists entirely of non-agency CMBS as of both December 31, 2023 and 2022.
(7) As of December 31, 2023 and 2022, the fair value of U.S. corporate bonds was $0.31 billion and $1.01 billion, respectively.
(8) An immaterial amount of accrued interest related to HTM and AFS investment securities was excluded from the amortized cost basis for the period ended December 31, 2023.
(9) As of December 31, 2023, we had no allowance for credit losses on AFS investment securities. As of December 31, 2022, we had an allowance for credit losses on AFS investment securities of $2 million.
(10) As of December 31, 2023 and 2022, the total amortized cost included $5.23 billion and $4.99 billion of agency CMBS, respectively.
(11) Consists entirely of non-agency RMBS as of December 31, 2023. As of December 31, 2022, the total amortized cost included $133 million of non-agency CMBS and $9 million of non-agency RMBS.
(12) As of December 31, 2023, we had an allowance for credit losses on HTM investment securities of $1 million. As of December 31, 2022, we had no allowance for credit losses on HTM investment securities.
State Street Corporation | 79
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Additional information about our investment securities portfolio is provided in Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
We manage our investment securities portfolio by taking into consideration the interest rate and duration characteristics of our client liabilities along with the context of the overall structure of our consolidated statement of condition, and in consideration of the global interest rate environment. We consider a well-diversified, high-credit quality investment securities portfolio to be an important element in the management of our consolidated statement of condition.
Average duration of our investment securities portfolio, including the impact of hedges, was 2.7 years and 2.6 years as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively.
Approximately 96% and 95% of the carrying value of the portfolio was rated “AA” or higher as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively, as follows:
| TABLE 20: INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO BY EXTERNAL CREDIT RATING | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2023 | December 31, 2022 | ||||
| AAA(1) | 85 | % | 84 | % | |
| AA | 11 | 11 | |||
| A | 2 | 3 | |||
| BBB | 2 | 2 | |||
| 100 | % | 100 | % |
(1) Includes U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities that are split-rated, “AAA” by Moody’s Investors Service and “AA+” by Standard & Poor’s and also includes Agency MBS securities which are not explicitly rated but which have an explicit or assumed guarantee from the U.S. government.
The following table presents the diversification of the investment portfolio with respect to asset class composition as of December 31, 2023 and 2022.
| TABLE 21: INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO BY ASSET CLASS | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2023 | December 31, 2022 | ||||
| U.S. Agency Mortgage-backed securities | 39 | % | 37 | % | |
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 20 | 19 | |||
| U.S. Treasuries | 17 | 19 | |||
| Asset-backed securities | 10 | 9 | |||
| Other credit | 14 | 16 | |||
| 100 | % | 100 | % |
Non-U.S. Debt Securities
Approximately 27% and 25% of the aggregate carrying value of our investment securities portfolio was non-U.S. debt securities as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively.
| TABLE 22: NON-U.S. DEBT SECURITIES(1) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | December 31, 2023 | December 31, 2022 | ||||
| Available-for-sale: | ||||||
| Canada | $ | 4,020 | $ | 3,685 | ||
| United Kingdom | 2,141 | 1,449 | ||||
| Australia | 1,833 | 2,159 | ||||
| Germany | 1,389 | 1,147 | ||||
| France | 1,386 | 1,059 | ||||
| Japan | 769 | 768 | ||||
| Netherlands | 690 | 542 | ||||
| Italy | 412 | 290 | ||||
| Austria | 339 | 769 | ||||
| Sweden | 270 | — | ||||
| Brazil | 257 | 202 | ||||
| Singapore | 249 | — | ||||
| Spain | 230 | 250 | ||||
| Republic of Korea | 223 | 230 | ||||
| Other(2) | 7,621 | 6,922 | ||||
| Total | $ | 21,829 | $ | 19,472 | ||
| Held-to-maturity: | ||||||
| Spain | $ | 805 | $ | 804 | ||
| France | 524 | 638 | ||||
| Belgium | 459 | 703 | ||||
| Ireland | 440 | 442 | ||||
| Germany | 212 | 123 | ||||
| Netherlands | 177 | 172 | ||||
| Austria | 150 | 362 | ||||
| Finland | 131 | 213 | ||||
| Canada | 112 | — | ||||
| Singapore | 3 | 269 | ||||
| Other(2) | 2,744 | 2,877 | ||||
| Total | $ | 5,757 | $ | 6,603 |
(1) Geography is determined primarily based on the domicile of collateral or issuer.
(2) As of December 31, 2023, other non-U.S. investments include $6.83 billion supranational bonds in AFS securities and $2.74 billion supranational bonds in HTM securities.
Approximately 86% of the aggregate carrying value of these non-U.S. debt securities was rated “AAA” or “AA” as of both December 31, 2023 and 2022. The majority of these securities comprised senior positions within the security structures; these positions have a level of risk mitigation provided through subordination and other forms of credit protection. As of December 31, 2023 and 2022, approximately 28% and 26%, respectively, of the aggregate carrying value of these non-U.S. debt securities was floating-rate.
State Street Corporation | 80
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
As of December 31, 2023, our non-U.S. debt securities had an average market-to-book ratio of 99.2%, and an aggregate pre-tax net unrealized loss of $217 million, consisting of gross unrealized gains of $125 million and gross unrealized losses of $342 million. These unrealized amounts included:
•a pre-tax net unrealized loss of $72 million, consisting of gross unrealized gains of $117 million and gross unrealized losses of $189 million, associated with non-U.S. AFS debt securities; and
•a pre-tax net unrealized loss of $145 million, consisting of gross unrealized gains of $8 million and gross unrealized losses of $153 million, associated with non-U.S. HTM debt securities.
As of December 31, 2023, the underlying collateral for non-U.S. MBS and ABS primarily included mortgages in Australia, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Italy. The securities listed under “Canada” were composed of Canadian government securities and provincial bonds, corporate debt and non-U.S. agency securities. The securities listed under “France” were composed of sovereign bonds, corporate debt, covered bonds, ABS and Non-U.S. agency securities. The securities listed under “Japan” were substantially composed of Japanese government securities.
Municipal Obligations
We carried approximately $0.36 billion of municipal securities classified as state and political subdivisions in our investment securities portfolio as of December 31, 2023, as shown in Table 19: Carrying Values of Investment Securities, all of which were classified as AFS. As of December 31, 2023, we also provided approximately $6.44 billion of credit and
liquidity facilities to municipal issuers.
| TABLE 23: STATE AND MUNICIPAL OBLIGORS(1) | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in millions) | Total Municipal Securities | Credit and Liquidity Facilities(2) | Total | % of Total Municipal Exposure | ||||||||||
| December 31, 2023 | ||||||||||||||
| State of Issuer: | ||||||||||||||
| Texas | $ | 112 | $ | 2,387 | $ | 2,499 | 37 | % | ||||||
| New York | 25 | 1,687 | 1,712 | 25 | ||||||||||
| California | 28 | 1,082 | 1,110 | 16 | ||||||||||
| Total | $ | 165 | $ | 5,156 | $ | 5,321 | ||||||||
| December 31, 2022 | ||||||||||||||
| State of Issuer: | ||||||||||||||
| Texas | $ | 178 | $ | 2,395 | $ | 2,573 | 33 | % | ||||||
| New York | 154 | 1,607 | 1,761 | 23 | ||||||||||
| California | 84 | 1,299 | 1,383 | 18 | ||||||||||
| Total | $ | 416 | $ | 5,301 | $ | 5,717 |
(1) Represented 5% or more of our aggregate municipal credit exposure of approximately $6.80 billion and $7.81 billion across our businesses as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively.
(2) Includes municipal loans which are also presented within Table 25: U.S. and Non-U.S. Loans .
Our aggregate municipal securities exposure presented in Table 23: State and Municipal Obligors, was concentrated primarily with highly-rated counterparties, with approximately 96% of the obligors rated “AA” or higher as of December 31, 2023. As of that date, approximately 65% and 35% of our aggregate municipal securities exposure was associated with general obligation and revenue bonds, respectively. The portfolios are also diversified geographically, with the states that represent our largest exposures dispersed across the U.S.
Additional information with respect to our assessment of the allowance for credit losses on debt securities and impairment of AFS securities is provided in Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 81
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 24: CONTRACTUAL MATURITIES AND YIELDS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2023 | Under 1 Year | 1 to 5 Years | 6 to 10 Years | Over 10 Years | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | Amount | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Available-for-sale(1): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 279 | — | % | $ | 7,385 | 1.77 | % | $ | 637 | 1.87 | % | $ | — | — | % | $ | 8,301 | ||||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 39 | 5.75 | 1,718 | 5.55 | 3,797 | 5.60 | 5,201 | 5.27 | 10,755 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total U.S. treasury and federal agencies | 318 | 9,103 | 4,434 | 5,201 | 19,056 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 243 | 4.93 | 262 | 4.24 | — | — | 1,352 | 4.91 | 1,857 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset-backed securities | 339 | 4.72 | 558 | 4.65 | 649 | 4.74 | 591 | 4.76 | 2,137 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 5,472 | 0.84 | 7,291 | 2.94 | 2,337 | 3.19 | — | — | 15,100 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Other | 335 | 3.36 | 2,169 | 3.54 | 231 | 3.96 | — | — | 2,735 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 6,389 | 10,280 | 3,217 | 1,943 | 21,829 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Student loans | 32 | 7.80 | — | — | 16 | 6.25 | 66 | 5.71 | 114 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Collateralized loan obligations | 80 | 6.66 | 323 | 6.04 | 1,422 | 6.67 | 702 | 7.00 | 2,527 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-agency CMBS and RMBS | — | — | 20 | 5.05 | — | — | 229 | 6.83 | 249 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Other | — | — | 90 | 6.25 | — | — | — | — | 90 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 112 | 433 | 1,438 | 997 | 2,980 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| State and political subdivisions(2) | 93 | 6.05 | 128 | 5.52 | 134 | 6.25 | — | — | 355 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Other U.S. debt securities | 228 | 3.04 | 78 | 2.65 | — | — | — | — | 306 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 7,140 | $ | 20,022 | $ | 9,223 | $ | 8,141 | $ | 44,526 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Held-to-maturity(1): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 3,277 | 1.44 | % | $ | 5,272 | 0.52 | % | $ | 24 | 1.75 | % | $ | 11 | 5.80 | % | $ | 8,584 | ||||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 130 | 2.80 | 727 | 3.21 | 4,359 | 1.88 | 34,256 | 2.40 | 39,472 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total U.S. treasury and federal agencies | 3,407 | 5,999 | 4,383 | 34,267 | 48,056 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 1,971 | 2.02 | 3,262 | 1.57 | 524 | 0.75 | — | — | 5,757 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 1,971 | 3,262 | 524 | — | 5,757 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Student loans | 225 | 5.88 | 317 | 6.48 | 500 | 6.27 | 2,256 | 5.89 | 3,298 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-agency CMBS and RMBS | 1 | 4.83 | — | — | — | — | 5 | 4.67 | 6 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 226 | 317 | 500 | 2,261 | 3,304 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 5,604 | $ | 9,578 | $ | 5,407 | $ | 36,528 | $ | 57,117 |
(1) The maturities of MBS, ABS and CMOs are based on expected principal payments.
(2) Yields were calculated on a FTE basis, using applicable statutory tax rates (21.0% as of December 31, 2023).
State Street Corporation | 82
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Loans
| TABLE 25: U.S. AND NON- U.S. LOANS | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, | ||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |||||||
| Domestic(1): | ||||||||||
| Commercial and financial: | ||||||||||
| Fund Finance(2) | $ | 13,697 | $ | 12,154 | $ | 12,296 | ||||
| Leveraged Loans | 2,412 | 2,431 | 3,106 | |||||||
| Overdrafts | 1,225 | 1,707 | 1,796 | |||||||
| Collateralized loan obligations in loan form | 150 | 100 | 100 | |||||||
| Other(3) | 2,512 | 1,871 | 2,262 | |||||||
| Commercial real estate | 3,069 | 2,985 | 2,554 | |||||||
| Total domestic | 23,065 | 21,248 | 22,114 | |||||||
| Foreign(1): | ||||||||||
| Commercial and financial: | ||||||||||
| Fund Finance(2) | 4,956 | 3,949 | 4,965 | |||||||
| Leveraged Loans | 1,194 | 1,118 | 1,328 | |||||||
| Overdrafts | 1,047 | 1,094 | 1,312 | |||||||
| Collateralized loan obligations in loan form | 6,369 | 4,741 | 2,813 | |||||||
| Total foreign | 13,566 | 10,902 | 10,418 | |||||||
| Total loans(4) | 36,631 | 32,150 | 32,532 | |||||||
| Allowance for loan losses | (135) | (97) | (87) | |||||||
| Loans, net of allowance | $ | 36,496 | $ | 32,053 | $ | 32,445 |
(1) Domestic and foreign categorization is based on the borrower’s country of domicile.
(2) Fund finance loans include primarily $9.69 billion private equity capital call finance loans, $6.63 billion loans to real money funds and $1.05 billion loans to business development companies as of December 31, 2023, compared to $7.57 billion and $9.15 billion private equity capital call finance loans, $6.61 billion and $6.40 billion loans to real money funds and $1.11 billion and $1.39 billion loans to business development companies as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
(3) Includes $2.23 billion securities finance loans, $276 million loans to municipalities and $5 million other loans as of December 31, 2023, $1.51 billion securities finance loans, $321 million loans to municipalities and $42 million other loans as of December 31, 2022 and $1.78 billion securities finance loans, $455 million loans to municipalities and $23 million other loans as of December 31, 2021.
(4) As of December 31, 2023, excluding overdrafts, floating rate loans totaled $31.42 billion and fixed rate loans totaled $2.94 billion. We have entered into interest rate swap agreements to hedge the forecasted cash flows associated with EURIBOR indexed floating-rate loans. See Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K for additional details.
The increase in domestic loans was primarily driven by an increase in fund finance loans and other loans, partially offset by lower overdrafts, and the increase in foreign loans was primarily driven by fund finance loans and collateralized loan obligations in loan form as of December 31, 2023 compared to December 31, 2022.
As of December 31, 2023 and 2022, our leveraged loans totaled approximately $3.61 billion and $3.55 billion, respectively. We sold $519 million of leveraged loans in 2023.
In addition, we had binding unfunded commitments as of December 31, 2023 and 2022 of $121 million and $98 million, respectively, to participate in syndications of leveraged loans. Additional information about these unfunded commitments is provided in Note 12 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
These leveraged loans, which are primarily rated “speculative” under our internal risk-rating framework (refer to Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K), are externally rated “BBB,” “BB” or “B,” with approximately 92% and 96% of the loans rated “BB” or “B” as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively. Our investment strategy involves generally limiting our investment to larger, more liquid credits underwritten by major global financial institutions, applying our internal credit analysis process to each potential investment and diversifying our exposure by counterparty and industry segment. However, these loans have significant exposure to credit losses relative to higher-rated loans in our portfolio.
As of December 31, 2023, the commercial real estate portfolio consists of, by asset class, approximately 37% multifamily residential, 35% office buildings and 28% other asset classes, and the portfolio does not have any construction exposure. Additionally, as of December 31, 2023, the commercial real estate loans are on properties located in multiple markets across the United States, with no significant concentrations (New York Metro is the largest concentration at approximately 16%).
Additional information about all of our loan segments, as well as underlying classes, is provided in Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
| TABLE 26: CONTRACTUAL MATURITIES FOR LOANS | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2023 | ||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Under 1 year | 1 to 5 years | 5 to 15 years | Total | ||||||||||
| Domestic: | ||||||||||||||
| Commercial and financial | $ | 13,714 | $ | 5,100 | $ | 1,182 | $ | 19,996 | ||||||
| Commercial real estate | 149 | 1,489 | 1,431 | 3,069 | ||||||||||
| Total domestic | 13,863 | 6,589 | 2,613 | 23,065 | ||||||||||
| Foreign: | ||||||||||||||
| Commercial and financial | 3,851 | 3,093 | 6,622 | 13,566 | ||||||||||
| Total foreign | 3,851 | 3,093 | 6,622 | 13,566 | ||||||||||
| Total loans | $ | 17,714 | $ | 9,682 | $ | 9,235 | $ | 36,631 |
| TABLE 27: CLASSIFICATION OF LOAN BALANCES DUE AFTER ONE YEAR | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2023 | ||||||
| (In millions) | Loans with predetermined interest rates | Loans with floating or adjustable interest rates | ||||
| Domestic: | ||||||
| Commercial and financial | $ | 276 | $ | 6,005 | ||
| Commercial real estate | 2,514 | 405 | ||||
| Total domestic | 2,790 | 6,410 | ||||
| Foreign: | ||||||
| Commercial and financial | — | 9,714 | ||||
| Total foreign | — | 9,714 | ||||
| Total loans | $ | 2,790 | $ | 16,124 |
State Street Corporation | 83
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Allowance for credit losses
| TABLE 28: ALLOWANCE FOR CREDIT LOSSES | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |||||||
| Allowance for credit losses: | ||||||||||
| Beginning balance | $ | 121 | $ | 108 | $ | 148 | ||||
| Provision for credit losses (funded commitments)(1) | 56 | 16 | (29) | |||||||
| Provisions for credit losses (unfunded commitments) | (9) | 4 | (2) | |||||||
| Provisions for credit losses (investment securities and all other) | (1) | — | (2) | |||||||
| Charge-offs(2) | (17) | (7) | (2) | |||||||
| Other(3) | — | — | (5) | |||||||
| Ending balance | $ | 150 | $ | 121 | $ | 108 |
(1) The provision for credit losses is primarily related to commercial and financial loans.
(2) The charge-offs are related to commercial and financial loans.
(3) Consists primarily of foreign currency translation.
In 2023, we recorded a $46 million provision for credit losses, compared to $20 million in 2022, primarily reflecting an increase in loan loss reserves associated with commercial real estate.
As of December 31, 2023, approximately $72 million of our allowance for credit losses was related to leveraged loans included in the commercial and financial segment and $60 million was related to commercial real estate loans, compared to $73 million and $19 million as of December 31, 2022, respectively. The remaining $18 million and $29 million as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively, was related to other loans, off-balance sheet commitments, interest-bearing deposits with banks and other financial assets held at amortized cost, including investment securities. As of December 31, 2023, the allowance for credit losses represented 0.4% of total loans.
As our view on current and future economic conditions changes, our allowance for credit losses related to these loans may be impacted through a change to the provisions for credit losses, reflecting factors such as credit migration within our loan portfolio, as well as changes in management's economic outlook.
Additional information with respect to the allowance for credit losses, net impairment losses and gross unrealized losses related to investment securities, is provided in “Allowance for Credit Losses“ under Significant Accounting Estimates and Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
RISK MANAGEMENT
Overview
In the normal course of our business activities, we are exposed to a variety of risks, some that are inherent in the financial services industry, and others
that are more specific to our business activities. Our risk management framework focuses on material risks, which include the following:
•credit and counterparty risk;
•liquidity risk, including funding and management;
•operational risk;
•information technology risk;
•operational resiliency risk;
•market risk associated with our trading activities;
•market risk associated with our non-trading activities, referred to as asset and liability management, consisting primarily of interest rate risk;
•model risk;
•strategic risk; and
•reputational, compliance, fiduciary and business conduct risk.
Many of these risks, as well as certain factors underlying each of them, could affect our businesses and our consolidated financial statements, and are discussed in detail under “Risk Factors” in this Form 10-K.
The identification, assessment, monitoring, mitigation and reporting of risks are essential to our financial performance and successful management of our businesses. Accordingly, the scope of our business requires that we consider these risks as part of a comprehensive and well-integrated risk management function.
These risks, if not effectively managed, can result in losses to us as well as erosion of our capital and damage to our reputation. Our approach to risk management, including Board and senior management oversight and a system of policies, procedures, limits, risk measurement and monitoring and internal controls, allows for an assessment of risks within a framework for evaluating opportunities for the prudent use of capital that appropriately balances risk and return.
Our objective is to optimize our returns while operating at a prudent level of risk. In support of this objective, we have instituted a risk appetite framework that aligns our business strategy and financial objectives with the level of risk that we are willing to incur.
We manage risk with a focus on the following objectives:
•A culture of risk awareness that extends across all of our business activities;
•The identification, classification and quantification of our material risks;
State Street Corporation | 84
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
•The establishment of our risk appetite and associated limits and policies, and our compliance with these limits;
•The establishment of a risk management structure at the “top of the house” that enables the control and coordination of risk-taking across the business lines;
•The implementation of stress testing practices and a dynamic risk-assessment capability (additional information with respect to our stress-testing process and practices is provided under “Capital” in this Management's Discussion and Analysis);
•A direct link between risk and strategic-decision making processes and incentive compensation practices; and
•The overall flexibility to adapt to the ever-changing business and market conditions.
Our risk appetite framework outlines the quantitative limits and qualitative goals that define the level and type of risk we are willing to undertake in the course of executing our business strategy, and also serves as a guide in setting risk limits across our business units. It further defines responsibilities for measuring and monitoring risk against limits, and for reporting, escalating, approving and addressing exceptions. Our risk appetite framework is established by ERM, a corporate risk oversight group, in conjunction with the MRAC and the RC of the Board. The Board formally reviews and approves our risk appetite statement annually, or more frequently in response to shifts in endogenous or exogenous risk conditions.
Governance and Structure
Our approach to risk management involves all levels of management, from the Board and its committees, including its Examining and Audit Committee (E&A Committee), the RC, the Human Resources Committee (HRC) and the TOPS, to each business unit and employee. We allocate responsibility for risk oversight so that risk/return decisions are made under a process designed to place appropriate personnel in positions of decision-making authority and subject to robust review and challenge.
Risk management is the responsibility of each employee, and is implemented through three lines of defense:
•The business units, which own and manage the risks inherent in their business, are considered the first line of defense;
•ERM and other support functions, such as Compliance, Finance and Vendor Management, provide the second line of defense; and
•Corporate Audit is the third line of defense, reports to the E&A committee of the Board and is independent from the business units, ERM and other corporate functions. Corporate Audit provides independent assurance to the Board over the design and operating effectiveness of key internal controls included within the risk management framework.
The responsibilities for effective review and challenge reside with senior managers, management oversight committees, Corporate Audit and, ultimately, the Board and its committees.
Corporate-level risk committees provide focused oversight, and establish corporate standards and policies for specific risks, including credit, sovereign exposure, market, liquidity, operational, information technology as well as new business products, regulatory compliance and ethics, vendor risk and model risks. These committees have been delegated the responsibility to develop recommendations and remediation strategies to address issues that affect or have the potential to affect us.
We maintain a risk governance committee structure which serves as the formal governance mechanism through which we seek to undertake the consistent identification, management and mitigation of various risks facing us in connection with our business activities. This governance structure is enhanced and integrated through multi-disciplinary involvement, particularly through ERM. The following chart presents this structure.
While our risk management program is designed to manage the risks in our businesses, internal and external factors may create risks that cannot always be identified or anticipated.
State Street Corporation | 85
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| Board Committee Risk Governance Structure | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Board Committees: | ||||||
| Risk Committee (RC) | Examining & Audit Committee (E&A Committee) | Human Resources Committee (HRC) | Technology and Operations Committee (TOPS) |
| Management Risk Governance Committee Structure | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Executive Management Committees: | ||||||||
| Management Risk and Capital Committee (MRAC) | Business Conduct and Compliance Committee (BCCC) | Technology and Operational Risk Committee (TORC) | ||||||
| Risk Committees: | ||||||||
| Asset-Liability Committee (ALCO) | Credit and Market Risk Committee (CMRC) | Fiduciary Review Committee | Operational Risk and Controls Committee | Technology Risk Committee | ||||
| Recovery and Resolution Planning (RRP) Executive Review Board | Basel Oversight Committee (BOC) | Civil Rights Momentum Committee | Global Third Party and Outsourcing Risk Committee | Enterprise Continuity Steering Committee | ||||
| CCAR Steering Committee | Model Risk Committee (MRC) | Core Compliance and Ethics Committee | Executive Operations Management Committee | Enterprise Data Management Committee | ||||
| Country Risk Committee | SSGA Risk Committee | Legal Entity Oversight Committee | ||||||
| Regulatory Reporting Oversight Committee | New Business and Product Committee | Conduct Standards Committee |
State Street Corporation | 86
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Enterprise Risk Management
The goal of ERM is to ensure that risks are proactively identified, well-understood and prudently managed in support of our business strategy. ERM provides risk oversight, support and coordination to allow for the consistent identification, measurement and management of risks across business units separate from the business units' activities, and is responsible for the formulation and maintenance of corporate-wide risk management policies and guidelines.
Risk identification and assessments serve to enable ERM’s understanding of business unit strategy, risk profile, and potential exposures and support the management of risk. This is achieved through a series of risk assessments across our business using techniques for the identification, assessment, and measurement of risk across a spectrum of potential frequency and severity combinations, including business-specific programs to identify, assess and measure risk, such as new business and product review and approval, new client screening, and, as deemed appropriate, targeted risk assessments. Two primary risk assessment programs, which are supplemented by other business-specific programs, are the core of this component:
•The Material Risk Identification process utilizes a bottom-up approach to identify our most significant risk exposures across on- and off-balance sheet risk-taking activities. The program is designed to consider risks that could have a material impact irrespective of their likelihood or frequency. This can include risks that may have an impact on longer-term business objectives, such as significant change management activities or long-term strategic initiatives.
•The risk and control assessment program. See also “Operational Risk Management” below.
In addition, ERM establishes and reviews limits and, in collaboration with business unit management, monitors key risks. Ultimately, ERM works to validate that risk-taking occurs within the risk appetite statement approved by the Board and conforms to associated risk policies, limits and guidelines.
The Chief Risk Officer (CRO) is responsible for our risk management globally, leads ERM and has a dual reporting line to our CEO and the Board’s RC.
Board Committees
The Board has four committees which assist it in discharging its responsibilities with respect to risk management: the RC, the E&A Committee, the HRC and the TOPS.
•The RC is responsible for oversight related to the operation of our global risk management framework, including policies and procedures establishing risk management governance and processes and risk control infrastructure. It is responsible for reviewing and discussing with management our assessment and management of all risks applicable to our operations, including credit, market, interest rate, liquidity, operational, regulatory, technology, business, compliance and reputation risks, and related policies. In addition, the RC provides oversight of capital policies, capital planning and balance sheet management, resolution planning and monitors capital adequacy in relation to risk. It is also responsible for discharging the duties and obligations of the Board under applicable Basel and other regulatory requirements.
•The E&A Committee oversees management's operation of our comprehensive system of internal controls covering the integrity of our consolidated financial statements and reports, compliance with laws, regulations and corporate policies. The E&A Committee acts on behalf of the Board in monitoring and overseeing the performance of Corporate Audit and in reviewing certain communications with banking regulators. The E&A Committee has direct responsibility for the appointment, compensation, retention, evaluation and oversight of the work of our independent registered public accounting firm, including sole authority for the establishment of pre-approval policies and procedures for all audit engagements and any non-audit engagements.
•The HRC has direct responsibility for the oversight of human capital management, all compensation plans, policies and programs in which executive officers participate and incentive, retirement, welfare as well as equity plans in which certain of our other employees participate. In addition, it oversees the alignment of our incentive compensation arrangements with our safety and soundness, including the integration of risk management objectives, and related policies, arrangements and control processes consistent with applicable related regulatory rules and guidance.
•The TOPS leads and assists in the Board’s oversight of technology and operational risk management and the role of these risks, including cyber risk, in executing our strategy and supporting our global business
State Street Corporation | 87
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
requirements. The TOPS reviews strategic initiatives from a technology and operational risk perspective and reviews and approves technology-related risk matters. In addition, the TOPS reviews matters related to corporate information security and cybersecurity programs, and their related risks, operational and technology resiliency, data and access management and third-party risk management.
Executive Management Committees
MRAC is the senior management decision-making body for risk and capital issues, and oversees our financial risks, our consolidated statement of condition, and our capital adequacy, liquidity and recovery and resolution planning. Its responsibilities include:
•The approval of our global risk policies, capital and liquidity management frameworks, including our risk appetite framework;
•The monitoring and assessment of our capital adequacy based on internal policies and regulatory requirements;
•The oversight of our firm-wide risk identification, model risk governance, stress testing and Recovery and Resolution Planning programs; and
•The ongoing monitoring and review of risks undertaken within the businesses, and our senior management oversight and approval of risk strategies and tactics.
MRAC is co-chaired by our CRO and Chief Financial Officer, who regularly present to the RC on developments in the risk environment and performance trends in our key business areas.
BCCC provides oversight of the management of culture, conduct and compliance risks, our commitments to clients and others with whom we do business, and our potential reputational risks, on an enterprise-wide basis. Management considers adherence to high ethical standards to be critical to the success of our business and to our reputation. The BCCC is co-chaired by our Chief Compliance Officer and our General Counsel.
TORC provides oversight and assesses the effectiveness of enterprise-wide technology and operational risk management programs. TORC also reviews areas of improvement to manage and control technology and operational risk consistently across the organization. TORC is co-chaired by the Chief Operating Officer and the CRO.
Risk Committees
The following second line risk committees, under the oversight of the respective executive management committees, have focused responsibilities for oversight of specific areas of risk management:
Management Risk and Capital Committee
•ALCO is the senior corporate oversight and decision-making body for balance sheet strategy, Global Treasury business activities and risk management for interest rate risk, liquidity risk and non-trading market risk. ALCO’s roles and responsibilities are designed to be complementary to, and in coordination with the MRAC, which approves the corporate risk appetite and associated balance sheet strategy;
•CMRC is the senior risk oversight and decision-making body for our credit, counterparty, and trading-related activities. It is responsible, as part of the second line of defense within ERM, for overseeing alignment of these activities with our appetite for risk and prevailing policy and guidelines. This committee also serves as a forum to discuss, address, and escalate material risk issues;
•BOC provides oversight and governance over Basel related regulatory requirements, assesses compliance with respect to Basel regulations and approves all material methodologies and changes, policies and reporting;
•RRP Executive Review Board oversees the development of recovery and resolution plans as required by banking regulators;
•MRC monitors the overall level of model risk and provides oversight of the model governance process pertaining to all models, including the validation of key models and the ongoing monitoring of model performance. The MRC may also, as appropriate, mandate remedial actions and compensating controls to be applied to models to address modeling deficiencies as well as other issues identified;
•CCAR Steering Committee provides primary supervision of the stress tests performed in conformity with the Federal Reserve's CCAR process and the Dodd-Frank Act, and is responsible for the overall management, review, and approval of all material assumptions, methodologies, and results of each stress scenario;
State Street Corporation | 88
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
•State Street Global Advisors Risk Committee is the most senior oversight and decision making committee for risk management within State Street Global Advisors; the committee is responsible for overseeing the alignment of State Street Global Advisors' strategy, and risk appetite, as well as alignment with our corporate-wide strategy and risk management standards;
•New Business and Product Committee provides oversight of the evaluation of the risk inherent in proposed new products or services, new business, and extensions of existing products or services, including economic justification, material risk, compliance, regulatory and legal considerations, and capital and liquidity analyses;
•Country Risk Committee oversees the identification, assessment, monitoring, reporting and mitigation, where necessary, of country risks; and
•Regulatory Reporting Oversight Committee is responsible for providing oversight of regulatory reporting and related report governance processes and accountabilities.
Business Conduct and Compliance Committee
•Fiduciary Review Committee reviews and assesses the fiduciary risk management programs of those units in which we serve in a fiduciary capacity;
•Civil Rights Momentum Committee provides oversight, monitoring, support, and guidance over the company’s civil rights efforts, including acting as the forum for assessing strategic civil rights corporate activities;
•Compliance Program Oversight Committee provides review and oversight of our compliance programs, including our culture of compliance and high standards of ethical behavior;
•Legal Entity Oversight Committee establishes standards with respect to the governance of our legal entities, monitors adherence to those standards, and oversees the ongoing evaluation of our legal entity structure, including the formation, maintenance and dissolution of legal entities; and
•The Conduct Standards Committee provides oversight of our enforcement of employee conduct standards.
Technology and Operational Risk Committee
•Operational Risk and Controls Committee along with the support of regional business or entity-specific working groups and committees, is responsible for oversight of our operational risk programs, including determining that the implementation of those programs is designed to identify, manage and control operational risk in an effective and consistent manner across the firm;
•Technology Risk Committee is responsible for the global oversight, review and monitoring of operational, legal and regulatory compliance and reputational risk that may result in a significant change to our information technology or cyber risk profile or a material financial loss or reputational impact to global technology services. The Committee serves as a forum to provide regular reporting to TORC and escalate technology and cyber risk and control issues to TORC, as appropriate;
•Enterprise Continuity Steering Committee considers matters pertaining to continuity and related risks, including oversight in determining the direction of the continuity program;
•Global Third Party and Outsourcing Risk Committee is responsible for overseeing our framework and processes for the identification, assessment, and ongoing management of third party and outsourcing-related risks. This committee is also a decision-making body for third party risk acceptance and the end-to-end third party management process, including the oversight of appropriate controls and risk mitigants that comply with applicable regulatory standards;
•Executive Operations Management Committee is a forum for the development of strategy, decision-making, and escalation for operations, regulatory remediation, product management, technology, and the operating model; and
•Enterprise Data Management Committee oversees the enterprise-wide data management strategy, provides senior oversight of the programs associated with enterprise-wide data management, serves as an escalation point for material and emerging enterprise-wide data management issues, and determines / oversees enterprise-wide data management priorities and strategy.
State Street Corporation | 89
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Credit Risk Management
Core Policies and Principles
We define credit risk as the risk of financial loss if a counterparty, borrower or obligor, collectively referred to as a counterparty, is either unable or unwilling to repay borrowings or settle a transaction in accordance with underlying contractual terms. We assume credit risk in our traditional non-trading lending activities, such as overdrafts, loans and contingent commitments, in our investment securities portfolio, where recourse to a counterparty exists, and in our direct and indirect trading activities, such as securities purchased under a resale agreement, principal securities lending and FX and indemnified agency securities lending. We also assume credit risk in our day-to-day treasury and securities and other settlement operations, in the form of deposit placements and other cash balances, with central banks or private sector institutions and fees receivables.
We distinguish between three major types of credit risk:
•Default risk - the risk that a counterparty fails to meet its contractual payment obligations;
•Country risk - the risk that we may suffer a loss, in any given country, due to any of the following reasons: deterioration of economic conditions, political and social upheaval, nationalization and appropriation of assets, government repudiation of indebtedness, exchange controls and disruptive currency depreciation or devaluation; and
•Settlement risk - the risk that the settlement or clearance of transactions will fail, which arises whenever the exchange of cash, securities or other assets is not simultaneous.
The acceptance of credit risk by us is governed by corporate policies and guidelines, which include standardized procedures applied across the entire organization. These policies and guidelines include specific requirements related to each counterparty's risk profile; the markets served; counterparty, industry and country concentrations; and regulatory compliance. These policies and procedures also implement a number of core principles, which include the following:
•We measure and consolidate credit risks attributed to each counterparty, or group of counterparties, in accordance with a “one-obligor” principle that aggregates risks across our business units;
•ERM reviews and approves all material extensions of credit, and material changes to such extensions of credit (such as changes in term, collateral structure or covenants), in accordance with assigned credit-approval authorities;
•Credit-approval authorities are assigned to individuals according to their qualifications, experience and training, and these authorities are periodically reviewed. Our largest exposures require approval by the Credit Committee, a sub-committee of the CMRC. With respect to small and low-risk extensions of credit to certain types of counterparties, approval authority may be granted to individuals outside of ERM;
•We seek to avoid or limit undue concentrations of risk. Counterparty (or groups of counterparties), industry, country and product-specific concentrations of risk are subject to frequent review and approval in accordance with our risk policies and appetite;
•We evaluate the creditworthiness of counterparties through a detailed risk assessment, including the use of internal risk-rating methodologies;
•We review all extensions of credit and the creditworthiness of counterparties at least annually. The nature and extent of these reviews are determined by the size, nature and term of the extensions of credit and the creditworthiness of the counterparty; and
•We subject all corporate policies and guidelines to annual review as an integral part of our periodic assessment of our risk appetite.
Our corporate policies and guidelines require that all extensions of credit are consistent with the bank's standards, limit credit-related losses, and our goal of maintaining a strong financial condition.
Structure and Organization
The Credit Risk group within ERM is responsible for the assessment, approval and monitoring of credit risk across our business. The group is managed centrally, has dedicated teams in a number of locations worldwide, and is responsible for related policies and procedures, and for our internal credit-rating systems and methodologies. In addition, the group, in conjunction with the business units, establishes measurements and limits to control the amount of credit risk accepted across its various business activities, both at the portfolio level and for each individual counterparty or group of
State Street Corporation | 90
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
counterparties, to individual sectors, and also to counterparties by product and country of risk. These measurements and limits are reviewed periodically, but at least annually.
In conjunction with other groups in ERM, the Credit Risk group is responsible for the design, implementation and oversight of our credit risk measurement and management systems, including data and assessment systems, quantification systems and the reporting framework.
Various key committees within our company are responsible for the oversight of credit risk and associated credit risk policies, systems and models. All credit-related activities are governed by our risk appetite framework and our credit risk guidelines, which define our general philosophy with respect to credit risk and the manner in which we control, manage and monitor such risks.
The previously described CMRC (refer to “Risk Committees”) has primary responsibility for the oversight, review and approval of the credit risk guidelines and policies. Credit risk guidelines and policies are reviewed periodically, but at least annually.
The Credit Committee, a sub-committee of the CMRC, has responsibility for assigning credit authority and approving the largest and higher-risk extensions of credit to individual counterparties or groups of counterparties.
CMRC provides periodic updates to MRAC and the Board's RC.
Credit Ratings
We perform initial and ongoing reviews to exercise due diligence on the creditworthiness of our counterparties when conducting any business with them or approving any credit limits.
This due diligence process generally includes the assignment of an internal credit rating, which is determined by the use of internally developed and validated methodologies, scorecards and a 15-grade rating scale. This risk-rating process incorporates the use of risk-rating tools in conjunction with management judgment; qualitative and quantitative inputs are captured in a replicable manner and, following a formal review and approval process, an internal credit rating based on our rating scale is assigned. We generally rate our counterparties individually, although some counterparties defined by us as low-risk are rated on a pooled basis. Credit ratings are reviewed and approved by the Credit Risk group or its delegates. We evaluate and rate the credit risk of our counterparties on an ongoing basis. To facilitate comparability across the portfolio, counterparties within a given sector are rated using a risk-rating tool developed for that sector.
Our risk-rating methodologies are approved for use by the Trading Markets Committee, a subcommittee of the CMRC, after completion of internal model validation processes, and are subject to an annual review, including re-validation.
Risk Parameter Estimates
Our internal risk-rating system promotes a clear and consistent approach to determining appropriate credit risk classifications for our credit counterparties and exposures. This allows us to track the changes in risk associated with these counterparties and exposures over time. This capability enhances our ability to calculate both risk exposures and capital, and enables better strategic decision making across the organization.
More specifically, our internal risk rating system is used for the following purposes:
•The assessment of the creditworthiness of new counterparties and, in conjunction with our risk appetite statement, the development of appropriate credit limits for our products and services, including loans, foreign exchange, securities finance, placements and repurchase agreements;
•The automation of limit approvals for certain low-risk counterparties, as defined in our credit risk guidelines and based on the counterparty’s probability-of-default;
•The development of approval authority matrices based on PD; riskier counterparties with higher PDs require higher levels of approval for a comparable PD and limit size compared to less risky counterparties with lower PDs;
•The analysis of risk concentration trends using historical PD and exposure-at-default (EAD), data;
•The determination of the level of management review of short-duration advances depending on PD; riskier counterparties with higher rating class values generally trigger higher levels of management escalation for comparable short-duration advances compared to less risky counterparties with lower rating-class values;
•The monitoring of credit facility utilization levels using EAD values and the identification of instances where counterparties have exceeded limits;
•The aggregation and comparison of counterparty exposures with risk appetite levels to determine if businesses are maintaining appropriate risk levels; and
State Street Corporation | 91
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
•The determination of our regulatory capital requirements for the AIRB set forth in the Basel framework.
Credit Risk Mitigation
We seek to limit our credit exposure and reduce any potential credit losses through the use of various types of credit risk mitigation. The Basel III final rule permits us to reflect the application of credit risk mitigation when it meets the standards outlined therein. Examples of forms of credit risk mitigation include a security interest in financial and non-financial assets (collateral), netting and guarantees. Where permissible, we apply the recognition of collateral, guarantees and netting to mitigate overall risk within our counterparty credit portfolio. While credit default swaps are permitted under the Basel III final rule, we do not actively use credit default swaps as a risk mitigation tool.
Collateral
In many parts of our business, we regularly require or agree for collateral to be received from or provided to clients and counterparties in connection with contracts that involve credit risk. In our trading businesses, this collateral is typically in the form of cash, as well as highly-rated and/or liquid securities (i.e. government securities and other bonds or equity securities). Credit risks in our non-trading and securities finance businesses are also often secured by bonds and equity securities and by other types of assets. Collateral serves to reduce the risk of loss inherent in an exposure. However, changing market values of the collateral we hold, unexpected increases in the credit exposure to a client or counterparty, reductions in the value or change in the type of securities held by us, as well as operational errors or errors in the manner in which we seek to exercise our rights, may reduce the risk mitigation effects of collateral. While collateral is often an alternative source of repayment, it does not replace the requirement within our policies and guidelines for high-quality underwriting. We also may choose to incur credit exposure without the benefit of collateral or other risk mitigating credits rights.
Our credit risk guidelines require that the collateral we accept for risk mitigation purposes is of high quality, can be reliably valued and is supported by a valid security interest that permits liquidation if or when required. Generally, when collateral is of lower quality, more difficult to value or more challenging to liquidate, higher discounts to market values are applied for the purposes of measuring credit risk. For certain less liquid collateral, longer liquidation periods are assumed when determining the credit exposure.
All types of collateral are assessed regularly by ERM, as is the basis on which the collateral is valued. Our assessment of collateral, including the ability to
liquidate collateral in the event of a counterparty default, and also with regard to market values of collateral under a variety of hypothetical market conditions, is an integral component of our assessment of risk and approval of credit limits. We also seek to identify, limit and monitor instances of “wrong-way” risk, where a counterparty’s risk of default is positively correlated with the risk of our collateral eroding in value.
We maintain policies and procedures requiring that documentation used to collateralize a transaction is legal, valid, binding and enforceable in the relevant jurisdictions. We also conduct legal reviews to assess whether our documentation meets these standards on an ongoing basis.
Netting
Netting is a mechanism that allows institutions and counterparties to net offsetting exposures and payment obligations against one another through the use of qualifying master netting agreements. A master netting agreement allows for certain rights and remedies upon a counterparty default, including the right to net obligations arising under derivatives or other transactions under such agreement. In such an event, the netting of obligations would result in a single net claim owed by, or to, the counterparty. This is commonly referred to as “close-out netting,” and is pursued wherever possible. We may also enter into master agreements that allow for the netting of amounts payable on a given day and in the same currency, reducing our settlement risk. This is commonly referred to as “payment netting,” and is widely used in our foreign exchange activities.
As with collateral, we have policies and procedures in place to apply close-out and payment netting only to the extent that we have verified legal validity and enforceability of the master agreement. In the case of payment netting, operational constraints may preclude us from reducing settlement risk, notwithstanding the legal right to require the same under the master netting agreement. In the event we become unable, due to operational constraints, actions by regulators, changes in accounting principles, law or regulation (or related interpretations) or other factors, to net some or all of our offsetting exposures and payment obligations under those agreements, we would be required to gross up our assets and liabilities on our statement of condition and our calculation of RWA, accordingly. This would result in a potentially material change in our regulatory ratios, including LCR, and present increased credit, liquidity, asset-and-liability management and operational risks, some of which could be material.
Guarantees
A guarantee is a financial instrument that results in credit support being provided by a third party, (i.e.,
State Street Corporation | 92
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
the protection provider) to the underlying obligor (the beneficiary of the provided protection) on account of an exposure owing by the obligor. The protection provider may support the underlying exposure either in whole or in part. Support of this kind may take different forms. Typical forms of guarantees provided to us include financial guarantees, letters of credit, bankers’ acceptances, purchase undertaking agreement contracts and insurance.
We have established a review process to evaluate guarantees under the applicable requirements of our policies and Basel III requirements. Governance for this evaluation is covered under policies and procedures that require regular reviews of documentation, jurisdictions and credit quality of protection providers.
Credit Limits
Central to our philosophy for our management of credit risk is the approval and imposition of credit limits, against which we monitor the actual and potential future credit exposure arising from our business activities with counterparties or groups of counterparties. Credit limits are a reflection of our risk appetite, which may be determined by the creditworthiness of the counterparty, the nature of the risk inherent in the business undertaken with the counterparty, or a combination of relevant credit factors. Our risk appetite for certain sectors and certain countries and geographic regions may also influence the level of risk we are willing to assume to certain counterparties.
The analysis and approval of credit limits is undertaken similarly across our businesses, although the nature and extent of the analysis may vary, based on the type, term and magnitude of the risk being assumed. Credit limits and underlying exposures are assessed and measured on both a gross and net basis where appropriate, with net exposure determined by deducting the value of any collateral held. For certain types of risk being assumed, we will also assess and measure exposures under a variety of hypothetical market conditions. Credit limit approvals across our business are undertaken by the Credit Risk group, by individuals to whom credit authority has been delegated, or by the Credit Committee.
Credit limits are re-evaluated annually, or more frequently as needed, and are revised periodically on prevailing and anticipated market conditions, changes in counterparty or country-specific credit ratings and outlook, changes in our risk appetite for certain counterparties, sectors or countries, and enhancements to the measurement of credit utilization.
Reporting
Ongoing active monitoring and management of our credit risk is an integral part of our credit risk management framework. We maintain management information systems to identify, measure, monitor and report credit risk across businesses and legal entities, enabling ERM and our businesses to have timely access to information on credit limits and exposures. Monitoring is performed along the dimensions of counterparty, industry, country and product-specific risks to facilitate the identification of concentrations of risk and emerging trends.
Key aspects of this credit risk reporting structure include governance and oversight groups and policies that define standards for the reporting of credit risk, data aggregation and sourcing systems.
The Credit Risk group routinely assesses the composition of our overall credit risk portfolio for alignment with our stated risk appetite. This assessment includes routine analysis and reporting of the portfolio, monitoring of market-based indicators, the assessment of industry trends and developments and regular reviews of concentrated risks. The Credit Risk group is also responsible, in conjunction with the business units, for defining the appetite for credit risk in the major sectors in which we have a concentration of business activities. These sector-level risk appetite statements, which include counterparty selection criteria and granular underwriting guidelines, are reviewed periodically and approved by the CMRC.
Monitoring
Regular surveillance of credit and counterparty risks is undertaken by our business units, the Credit Risk group and designees with ERM, allowing for oversight. This surveillance process includes, but is not limited to, the following components:
•Annual Reviews. A formal review of counterparties is conducted at least annually and includes a review of operating performance, primary risk factors and our internal credit risk rating. This annual review also includes a review of current and proposed credit limits, an assessment of our ongoing risk appetite and assessment that supporting legal documentation remains effective.
•Interim Monitoring. Monitoring of our largest and riskiest counterparties is undertaken more frequently, utilizing financial information, market indicators and other relevant credit and performance measures. The nature and extent of this interim monitoring is individually tailored to certain counterparties and/or industry sectors to identify material changes to the risk profile of a counterparty (or group of counterparties)
State Street Corporation | 93
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
and assign an updated internal risk rating in a timely manner.
We maintain an active “surveillance list” for all counterparties. The surveillance list status denotes a concern with some aspect of a counterparty's risk profile that warrants closer monitoring of the counterparty's financial performance and related risk factors. Our ongoing monitoring processes are designed to facilitate the early identification of counterparties whose creditworthiness is deteriorating; any counterparty may be placed on the surveillance list by ERM at its sole discretion.
Counterparties on the surveillance list generally correspond with the non-investment grade or near non-investment grade ratings established by the major independent credit-rating agencies. The surveillance list also includes any counterparties rated “Special Mention,” “Substandard,” “Doubtful” and “Loss.”
The Credit Risk group maintains primary responsibility for our surveillance list processes, and generates a quarterly report of all surveillance list counterparties. The surveillance list is formally reviewed at least on a quarterly basis, with participation from senior Credit Risk staff, and representatives from the business units and our corporate finance and legal groups as appropriate. These meetings include a review of individual surveillance list counterparties, together with credit limits and prevailing exposures, and are focused on actions to contain, reduce or eliminate the risk of loss to us. Identified actions are documented and monitored.
Controls
GCR provides a separate level of surveillance and oversight over the integrity of our credit risk management processes, including the internal risk-rating system. GCR reviews counterparty credit ratings for all identified sectors on an ongoing basis. GCR is subject to oversight by the CMRC, and provides periodic updates to the Board’s RC.
Specific activities of GCR include the following:
•Perform separate and objective assessments of our credit and counterparty exposures to determine the nature and extent of risk undertaken by the business units;
•Execute periodic credit process and credit product reviews to assess the quality of credit analysis, compliance with policies, guidelines and relevant regulation, transaction structures and underwriting standards, and risk-rating integrity;
•Identify and monitor developing counterparty, market and/or industry sector trends to limit risk of loss and protect capital;
•Deliver regular and formal reporting to stakeholders, including exam results, identified issues and the status of requisite actions to remedy identified deficiencies;
•Allocate resources for specialized risk assessments (on an as-needed basis); and
•Liaise with assurance partners and regulatory personnel on matters relating to risk rating, reporting and measurement.
Allowance for Credit Losses
We record an allowance for credit losses related to certain on-balance sheet credit exposures, including our financial assets held at amortized cost, as well as certain off-balance sheet credit exposures, including unfunded commitments and letters of credit. Review and evaluation of the adequacy of the allowance for credit losses is ongoing throughout the year, but occurs at least quarterly, and is based, among other factors, on our evaluation of the level of risk in the portfolio and the estimated effects of our forecasts on our counterparties. We utilize multiple economic scenarios, consisting of a baseline, upside and downside scenarios, to develop our forecast of expected losses.
In 2023, the majority of the increase in the allowance estimate reflected an increase in reserves for the commercial real estate portfolio, with management's economic outlook and the leveraged loan portfolio remaining relatively stable. Allowance estimates are subject to uncertainties, including those inherent in our model and economic assumptions, and management may use qualitative adjustments. If future data and forecasts deviate relative to the forecasts utilized to determine our allowance for credit losses as of December 31, 2023, or if credit risk migration is higher or lower than forecasted for reasons independent of the economic forecast, our allowance for credit losses will also change.
Additional information about the allowance for credit losses is provided in Notes 3 and 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Liquidity Risk Management
Our liquidity framework contemplates areas of potential risk to our liquidity based on our activities, size and other appropriate risk-related factors. In managing liquidity risk we employ limits, maintain established metrics and early warning indicators and perform routine stress testing to identify potential liquidity needs. This process involves the evaluation of a combination of internal and external scenarios which assist us in measuring our liquidity position and in identifying potential increases in cash needs or decreases in available sources of cash, as well as the
State Street Corporation | 94
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
potential impairment of our ability to access the global capital markets.
We manage our liquidity on a global, consolidated basis as well as on a stand-alone basis at our Parent Company and at certain branches and subsidiaries of State Street Bank. State Street Bank generally has access to markets and funding sources limited to banks, such as the federal funds market, and the Federal Reserve's discount window and the Bank Term Funding Program. The Parent Company is managed to a more conservative liquidity profile, reflecting narrower market access. Additionally, the Parent Company typically holds, or has direct access to, primarily through SSIF, a direct subsidiary of the Parent Company, and the support agreement, as discussed in “Supervision and Regulation” in Business in this Form 10-K, cash and equivalents intended to meet its current debt maturities and other cash needs, as well as those projected over the next twelve-month period. Absent financial distress at the Parent Company, the liquid assets available at SSIF continue to be available to the Parent Company. As of December 31, 2023, the value of our Parent Company's net liquid assets totaled $659 million, compared with $460 million as of December 31, 2022, excluding available liquidity through SSIF. As of December 31, 2023, our Parent Company and State Street Bank had approximately $0.98 billion of senior notes or subordinated debentures outstanding that will mature in the next twelve months.
As a SIFI, our liquidity risk management activities are subject to heightened and evolving regulatory requirements, including interpretations of those requirements, under specific U.S. and international regulations and also resulting from published and unpublished guidance, supervisory activities, such as stress tests, resolution planning, examinations and other regulatory interactions. Satisfaction of these requirements could, in some cases, result in changes in the composition of our investment portfolio, reduced NII or NIM, a reduction in the level of certain business activities or modifications to the way in which we deliver our products and services. If we fail to meet regulatory requirements to the satisfaction of our regulators, we could receive negative regulatory stress test results, incur a resolution plan deficiency or determination of a non-credible resolution plan or otherwise receive an adverse regulatory finding. Our efforts to satisfy, or our failure to satisfy, these regulatory requirements could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Governance
Global Treasury is responsible for our management of liquidity. This includes the day-to-day management of our global liquidity position, the
development and monitoring of early warning indicators, key liquidity risk metrics, the creation and execution of stress tests, the evaluation and implementation of regulatory requirements, the maintenance and execution of our liquidity guidelines and contingency funding plan (CFP), and routine management reporting to ALCO, MRAC and the Board's RC.
Global Treasury Risk Management, part of ERM, provides separate oversight over the identification, communication and management of Global Treasury’s risks in support of our business strategy. Global Treasury Risk Management reports to the CRO. Global Treasury Risk Management’s responsibilities relative to liquidity risk management include the development and review of policies and guidelines; the monitoring of limits related to adherence to the liquidity risk guidelines and associated reporting.
Liquidity Framework
We manage liquidity according to several principles that are equally important to our overall liquidity risk management framework:
•Structural liquidity management addresses liquidity by monitoring and directing the composition of our consolidated statement of condition. Structural liquidity is measured by metrics such as the percentage of total wholesale funds to consolidated total assets, and the percentage of non-government investment securities to client deposits. In addition, on a regular basis and as described below, our structural liquidity is evaluated under various stress scenarios.
•Tactical liquidity management addresses our day-to-day funding requirements and is largely driven by changes in our primary source of funding, which are client deposits. Fluctuations in client deposits may be supplemented with short-term borrowings, repurchase agreements, FHLB products and certificates of deposit.
•Stress testing and contingent funding planning are longer-term strategic liquidity risk management practices. Regular and ad hoc liquidity stress testing are performed under various severe but plausible scenarios at the consolidated level and at significant subsidiaries, including State Street Bank. These tests contemplate severe market and events specific to us under various time horizons and severities. Tests contemplate the impact of material changes in key funding sources, credit ratings, additional collateral requirements, contingent uses of funding, systemic shocks to the financial markets and
State Street Corporation | 95
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
operational failures based on market and assumptions specific to us. The stress tests evaluate the required level of funding versus available sources in an adverse environment. As stress testing contemplates potential forward-looking scenarios, results also serve as a trigger to activate specific liquidity stress levels and contingent funding actions.
CFPs are designed to assist senior management with decision-making associated with any contingency funding response to a possible or actual crisis scenario. The CFPs define roles, responsibilities and management actions to be taken in the event of deterioration of our liquidity profile caused by either an event specific to us or a broader disruption in the capital markets. Specific actions are linked to the level of stress indicated by these measures or by management judgment of market conditions.
Liquidity Risk Metrics
In managing our liquidity, we employ early warning indicators and metrics intended to detect situations which may result in a liquidity stress, including changes in our stock price and spreads on our long-term debt. Additional metrics that are critical to the management of our consolidated statement of condition and monitored as part of our routine liquidity management include measures of our fungible cash position, purchased wholesale funds, unencumbered liquid assets, deposits and the total of investment securities and loans as a percentage of total client deposits.
Asset Liquidity
Central to the management of our liquidity is asset liquidity, which consists primarily of HQLA. HQLA is the amount of liquid assets that qualify for inclusion in the LCR. As a banking organization, we are subject to a minimum LCR under the LCR rule approved by U.S. banking regulators. The LCR is intended to promote the short-term resilience of internationally active banking organizations, like us, to improve the banking industry's ability to absorb shocks arising from market stress over a 30 calendar day period and improve the measurement and management of liquidity risk. The LCR measures an institution’s HQLA against its net cash outflows. HQLA primarily consists of unencumbered cash and certain high quality liquid securities that qualify for inclusion under the LCR rule. Net cash outflows are measured as prescribed under the LCR rule which provides a significant benefit for deposits classified as operational. We report the LCR to the Federal Reserve daily. For both the quarters ended December 31, 2023 and December 31, 2022, average daily LCR for the Parent Company was 106%. The impact of higher deposits on the Parent Company's LCR is
limited by a cap, known as the transferability restriction, on the HQLA from State Street Bank that can be recognized at the Parent Company as defined in the U.S. LCR Final Rule. This restriction limits the HQLA used in the calculation of the Parent Company's LCR to the amount of net cash outflows of its principal banking subsidiary (State Street Bank). The average HQLA, post-prescribed haircuts for the Parent Company under the LCR final rule definition was $128.96 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2023 compared to $139.88 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2022, primarily due to a decrease in client deposits relative to the prior period. For the quarter ended December 31, 2023, the LCR for State Street Bank was approximately 122%.
In addition, we are subject to the final rule issued by the U.S. banking agencies implementing the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision's (BCBS's) NSFR in the U.S. which became effective on July 1, 2021. The final rule requires large banking organizations to maintain an amount of available stable funding, which is a weighted measure of a company’s funding sources over a one-year time horizon, calculated by applying standardized weightings to the company’s equity and liabilities based on their expected stability. The amount of stable funding can be no less than the amount of required stable funding, which is calculated by applying standardized weightings to assets, derivatives exposures and certain other items based on their liquidity characteristics. As a U.S. G-SIB, we are required to maintain an NSFR that is equal to or greater than 100%. Pursuant to the BCBS's NSFR final rule, as a subsidiary of a U.S. G-SIB, State Street Bank is similarly required to maintain an NSFR that is equal to or greater than 100%. As of December 31, 2023, both the Parent Company's and State Street Bank's NSFR were above the 100% minimum NSFR requirement. The average NSFR for the Parent Company was 136% for the fourth quarter of 2023 and 132% for the third quarter of 2023.
We maintained average cash balances in excess of regulatory requirements governing deposits with the Federal Reserve of approximately $69.28 billion at the Federal Reserve, the ECB and other non-U.S. central banks for the quarter ended December 31, 2023, and $79.52 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2022. The higher levels of average cash balances with central banks reflect higher levels of client deposits.
Liquid securities carried in our asset liquidity include securities pledged without corresponding advances from the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston (FRBB), the FHLB, and other non-U.S. central banks. State Street Bank is a member of the FHLB. This membership allows for advances of liquidity in varying terms against high-quality collateral, which helps facilitate asset-and-liability management.
State Street Corporation | 96
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Access to primary, intraday and contingent liquidity provided by these utilities is an important source of contingent liquidity with utilization subject to underlying conditions. As of December 31, 2023, we had no outstanding primary credit borrowings from the FRBB discount window, $1 billion outstanding of Bank Term Funding Program and $2.5 billion outstanding of FHLB funding. As of December 31, 2022, we had no outstanding primary credit borrowings from the FRBB discount window or any other central bank facility and $2.0 billion outstanding borrowings from the FHLB.
In addition to the investment securities included in our asset liquidity, we have other unencumbered investment securities and certain loans that we can pledge as collateral to access these various facilities. These additional assets are available sources of liquidity, although not as rapidly deployed as those included in our LCR asset liquidity.
The average fair value of total unencumbered securities was $76.86 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2023, compared to $78.25 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2022.
Measures of liquidity include LCR and NSFR, which are described in “Supervision and Regulation” in Business in this Form 10-K.
Uses of Liquidity
Significant uses of our liquidity could result from the following: withdrawals of client deposits; draw-downs by our custody clients of lines of credit; advances to clients to settle securities transactions; increases in our investment and loan portfolios; or other permitted purposes. Such circumstances would generally arise under stress conditions including deterioration in credit ratings. A recurring use of our liquidity involves our deployment of HQLA from our investment portfolio to post collateral to financial institutions serving as sources of securities under our prime services program.
We had unfunded commitments to extend credit with gross contractual amounts totaling $34.20 billion and $31.20 billion and standby letters of credit totaling $1.51 billion and $2.13 billion as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively. These amounts do not reflect the value of any collateral. As of December 31, 2023, approximately 75% of our unfunded commitments to extend credit and 35% of our standby letters of credit expire within one year. Since many of our commitments are expected to expire or renew without being drawn upon, the gross contractual amounts do not necessarily represent our future cash requirements.
Information about our resolution planning and the impact actions under our resolution plans could have on our liquidity is provided in “Supervision and Regulation” in Business in this Form 10-K.
Funding
Deposits
We provide products and services including custody, accounting, administration, daily pricing, FX services, cash management, financial asset management, securities finance and investment advisory services. As a provider of these products and services, we generate client deposits, which have generally provided a stable, low-cost source of funds. As a global custodian, clients place deposits with our entities in various currencies. As of December 31, 2023, approximately 70% of our average total deposit balances were denominated in U.S. dollars, 15% in EUR, 5% in GBP and 10% in all other currencies. As of December 31, 2022, 65% of our average total deposit balances were denominated in U.S. dollars, 15% in EUR, 10% in GBP and 10% in all other currencies.
Short-Term Funding
Our on-balance sheet liquid assets are also an integral component of our liquidity management strategy. These assets provide liquidity through maturities of the assets, but more importantly, they provide us with the ability to raise funds by pledging the securities as collateral for borrowings or through outright sales. In addition, our access to the global capital markets gives us the ability to source incremental funding from wholesale investors. As discussed earlier under “Asset Liquidity,” State Street Bank's membership in the FHLB allows for advances of liquidity with varying terms against high-quality collateral.
Short-term secured funding also comes in the form of securities lent or sold under agreements to repurchase. These transactions are short-term in nature, generally overnight and are collateralized by high-quality investment securities. These balances were $1.87 billion and $1.18 billion as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively.
State Street Bank continues to maintain a line of credit with a financial institution of CAD $1.40 billion, or approximately $1.06 billion, as of December 31, 2023, to support its Canadian securities processing operations. The line of credit has no stated termination date and is cancellable by either party with prior notice. As of both December 31, 2023 and 2022, there was no balance outstanding on this line of credit.
State Street Corporation | 97
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Long-Term Funding
We have the ability to issue debt and equity securities under our current universal shelf registration statement to meet current commitments and business needs. In addition, State Street Bank also has current authorization from the Board to issue unsecured senior debt. The total amount remaining for issuance pursuant to this authority is $2.15 billion as of December 31, 2023.
On January 26, 2023, we issued $500 million aggregate principal amount of 4.857% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026 and $750 million aggregate principal amount of 4.821% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2034.
On May 18, 2023, we issued $1 billion aggregate principal amount of 5.104% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026 and $1 billion aggregate principal amount of 5.159% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2034.
On August 3, 2023, we issued $1.2 billion aggregate principal amount of 5.272% fixed rate senior notes due 2026 and $300 million aggregate principal amount of floating rate senior notes due 2026.
On November 21, 2023, we issued $1 billion aggregate principal amount of 5.684% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2029 and $500 million aggregate principal amount of 6.123% fixed-to-floating rate senior subordinated notes due 2034.
On December 3, 2023, we redeemed $500 million aggregate principal amount of 3.776% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2024.
Agency Credit Ratings
Our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment grade ratings as measured by major credit rating agencies.
| TABLE 29: CREDIT RATINGS | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2023 | |||||
| Standard & Poor’s | Moody’s Investors Service | Fitch | |||
| State Street: | |||||
| Senior debt | A | A1 | AA- | ||
| Subordinated debt | A- | A2 | A | ||
| Junior subordinated debt | BBB | A3 | NR | ||
| Preferred stock | BBB | Baa1 | BBB+ | ||
| Outlook | Stable | Negative | Stable | ||
| State Street Bank: | |||||
| Short-term deposits | A-1+ | P-1 | F1+ | ||
| Long-term deposits | AA- | Aa1 | AA+ | ||
| Senior debt/Long-term issuer | AA- | Aa3 | AA | ||
| Subordinated debt | A | Aa3 | NR | ||
| Outlook | Stable | Negative | Stable |
Factors essential to maintaining high credit ratings include:
•diverse and stable core earnings;
•relative market position;
•strong risk management;
•strong capital ratios;
•diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and client deposits;
•strong liquidity monitoring procedures; and
•preparedness for current or future regulatory developments.
High ratings limit borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by:
•providing confidence for unsecured funding and depositors;
•increasing the potential market for our debt and improving our ability to offer products;
•facilitating reduced collateral haircuts in secured lending transactions; and
•engaging in transactions in which clients value high credit ratings.
A downgrade or reduction in our credit ratings could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity by restricting our ability to access the capital markets, which could increase the related cost of funds. In turn, this could cause the sudden and large-scale withdrawal of unsecured deposits by our clients, which could lead to drawdowns of unfunded commitments to extend credit or trigger requirements under securities purchase commitments; or require additional collateral or force terminations of certain trading derivative contracts.
A majority of our derivative contracts have been entered into under bilateral agreements with counterparties who may require us to post collateral or terminate the transactions based on changes in our credit ratings. We assess the impact of these arrangements by determining the collateral that would be required assuming a downgrade by major rating agencies. The additional collateral or termination payments related to our net derivative liabilities under these arrangements that could have been called by counterparties in the event of a downgrade in our credit ratings below levels specified in the agreements is provided in Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K. Other funding sources, such as secured financing transactions and other margin requirements, for which there are no explicit triggers, could also be adversely affected.
State Street Corporation | 98
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Contractual Cash Obligations and Other Commitments
The long-term contractual cash obligations included within Table 30: Long-Term Contractual Cash Obligations were recorded in our consolidated statement of condition as of December 31, 2023, except for the interest portions of long-term debt and finance leases.
| TABLE 30: LONG-TERM CONTRACTUAL CASH OBLIGATIONS | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2023 | Payments Due by Period | |||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Less than 1 year | 1-3 years | 4-5 years | Over 5 years | Total | |||||||||||||
| Long-term debt(1)(2) | $ | 977 | $ | 7,382 | $ | 1,697 | $ | 8,596 | $ | 18,652 | ||||||||
| Operating leases | 172 | 274 | 201 | 357 | 1,004 | |||||||||||||
| Finance lease and equipment financing obligations(2) | 76 | 122 | — | — | 198 | |||||||||||||
| Tax liability | 22 | 28 | — | — | 50 | |||||||||||||
| Total contractual cash obligations | $ | 1,247 | $ | 7,806 | $ | 1,898 | $ | 8,953 | $ | 19,904 |
(1) Long-term debt excludes finance lease obligations and equipment financing (presented as a separate line item) and the effect of interest rate swaps. Interest payments were calculated at the stated rate with the exception of floating-rate debt, for which payments were calculated using the indexed rate in effect as of December 31, 2023.
(2) Additional information about contractual cash obligations related to long-term debt and operating and finance leases is provided in Notes 9 and 20 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Total contractual cash obligations shown in Table 30: Long-Term Contractual Cash Obligations do not include:
•Obligations which will be settled in cash, primarily in less than one year, such as client deposits, federal funds purchased, securities sold under repurchase agreements and other short-term borrowings. Additional information about deposits, federal funds purchased, securities sold under repurchase agreements and other short-term borrowings is provided in Note 8 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
•Obligations related to derivative instruments because the derivative-related amounts recorded in our consolidated statement of condition as of December 31, 2023 did not represent the amounts that may ultimately be paid under the contracts upon settlement. Additional information about our derivative instruments is provided in Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K. We have obligations under pension and other post-retirement benefit plans, with additional information provided in Note 19 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K, which are not included in Table 30: Long-Term Contractual Cash Obligations.
| TABLE 31: OTHER COMMERCIAL COMMITMENTS | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duration of Commitment as of December 31, 2023 | ||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Less than 1 year | 1-3 years | 4-5 years | Over 5 years | Total amountscommitted(1) | |||||||||||||
| Indemnified securities financing | $ | 279,916 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 279,916 | ||||||||
| Unfunded credit facilities | 23,531 | 4,698 | 5,450 | 518 | 34,197 | |||||||||||||
| Standby letters of credit | 535 | 600 | 375 | — | 1,510 | |||||||||||||
| Purchase obligations(2) | 438 | 772 | 226 | 81 | 1,517 | |||||||||||||
| Total commercial commitments | $ | 304,420 | $ | 6,070 | $ | 6,051 | $ | 599 | $ | 317,140 |
(1) Total amounts committed reflect participations to independent third parties, if any.
(2) Amounts represent obligations pursuant to legally binding agreements, where we have agreed to purchase products or services with a specific minimum quantity defined at a fixed, minimum or variable price over a specified period of time.
Additional information about the commitments presented in Table 31: Other commercial commitments, except for purchase obligations, is provided in Note 12 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 99
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Operational Risk Management
Overview
Operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people and systems or from external events.
In providing an array of products and services, we are exposed to operational risk. Operational risk may result from, but is not limited to, errors relating to transaction processing, breaches of internal control systems, or business interruption due to system failures or other events. Operational risk also includes potential legal or regulatory actions that could arise as a byproduct of our failure to maintain and execute an adequate system of internal control. In the case of an operational risk event, we could suffer financial loss and potential regulatory action, as well as reputational damage.
Unforeseen external events, including natural disasters, terrorist attacks, pandemics, global conflicts, or other geopolitical events (including the ongoing war in Ukraine and the Israel-Hamas war), may result in stress on the operating environment and increase operational risk.
Operational risk encompasses fiduciary risk and legal risk. Fiduciary risk is defined as the risk that we fail to properly exercise our fiduciary duties in our provision of products or services to clients. Legal risk is the risk of loss resulting from failure to comply with laws and contractual obligations.
Operational risk is inherent in the performance of investment servicing and investment management activities on behalf of our clients. Whether it be fiduciary risk, risk associated with execution and processing or other types of operational risk, a consistent, transparent and effective operational risk framework is key to identifying, monitoring and managing operational risk. To mitigate these risks, we have established policies, procedures, an internal control standards and an operational risk framework. Controls are designed to manage operational risk at levels appropriate to our business model, the business environment and the markets in which we operate taking into account factors such as regulation and competition.
The organizational framework for operational risk is based on risk management activities comprising:
•Governance: We have established governance structures to oversee and assess our operational risk management activities and our operational risk policy;
•Accountability: Business managers are responsible for maintaining an effective system of internal controls commensurate
with their risk profiles and in accordance with State Street policies and procedures. Operational risk management is the second line function responsible for developing risk management policies and tools for assessing, measuring and monitoring operational risk; and
•Operational Risk Management Framework: An established operational risk management framework supports and drives the identification, assessment, mitigation and monitoring of operational risk.
Governance
Our Board is responsible for the approval and oversight of our overall operational risk policy.
Our operational risk policy establishes our approach to our management of operational risk across our business. The policy identifies the responsibilities of individuals and committees charged with oversight of the management of operational risk, and articulates a broad mandate that supports implementation of the operational risk framework.
Executive management manages and oversees our operational risk through membership on risk management committees, including TORC and the Operational Risk and Controls Committee, each of which ultimately reports to a committee of the Board.
The Operational Risk and Controls Committee, chaired by the global head of operational risk, oversees the operational risk framework and policies, reviews and monitors program outputs and metrics, and monitors resolution of significant operational risk matters.
Accountability
Accountability for managing operational risk spans the first and second lines of defense:
•The global head of Operational Risk, a member of the CRO’s executive management team, leads ERM’s corporate ORM group. ORM is responsible for developing risk management policies and tools for assessing, measuring, monitoring and managing operational risk. The ORM function includes risk oversight of all line of business and functions; and
•Business Managers are responsible for managing day to day operations, maintaining an effective system of internal controls and managing operational risks within risk appetite in its normal course of business.
Corporate Audit, as a third line of defense, performs separate reviews of the application of operational risk management practices and methodologies utilized across our business.
State Street Corporation | 100
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Operational Risk Management Framework
The operational risk management framework has been established in a structured manner to drive the identification, assessment, mitigation and monitoring of operational risk. Operational risk management framework includes key elements such as risk and control self assessment, capital analysis, monitoring and reporting and documentation and guidelines. These framework components are described below.
Risk and Control Self Assessment
The objective of the risk and control self assessment program is to proactively identify, assess and manage operational risks and related controls associated with day-to-day operations. A key component of understanding how risks are managed is to understand the effectiveness of controls. Effectiveness of controls is concluded through testing, both internal and external, business control assurance activities and self-assessments along with other control function reviews, such as a SOX testing program.
Capital Analysis
The primary measurement tool used to quantify operational risk capital and RWA related to operational risk under the advanced approaches is the loss distribution approach (LDA) model. Such required capital and RWA totaled $3.50 billion and $43.77 billion, respectively, as of December 31, 2023, compared to $3.42 billion and $42.76 billion, respectively, as of December 31, 2022; refer to the “Capital” section in “Financial Condition,” of this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
The LDA model incorporates the three required operational risk elements described below:
•Internal loss event data is collected from across our business in conformity with our operating loss policy that establishes the requirements for collecting and reporting individual loss events;
•External loss event data from other financial institutions supplements our internal loss data pool with respect to loss event severity; and
•Business environment and internal control factors are those characteristics of a bank’s internal and external operating environment that bear an exposure to operational risk.
Monitoring and Reporting
The objective of risk monitoring is to proactively monitor the changing business environment and corresponding operational risk exposure. It is achieved through monitoring tools that are designed to help us to understand changes in the business environment, internal control factors, risk metrics, risk assessments, exposures and operating effectiveness,
as well as details of loss events and progress on risk initiatives implemented to mitigate potential risk exposures.
Operational risk reporting is intended to provide transparency, thereby enabling management to manage risk, provide oversight and escalate issues in a timely manner. It is designed to allow the business units, executive management, and the Board's control functions and committees to gain insight into activities that may result in risks and potential exposures.
Documentation and Guidelines
Documentation and guidelines allow for consistency and repeatability of the various processes that support the operational risk framework across our business.
Operational risk guidelines document our practices and describe the key elements in a business unit's operational risk management program. The purpose of the guidelines is to set forth and define key operational risk terms, provide further detail on our operational risk programs, and detail the business units' responsibilities to identify, assess, measure, monitor and report operational risk. The guideline supports our operational risk policy.
Data standards have been established with the intent of maintaining consistent data repositories and systems that are controlled, accurate and available on a timely basis to support operational risk management.
Information Technology Risk Management
Overview and Principles
We define information technology risk as the risk associated with the use, ownership, operation and adoption of information technology. Information technology risk includes risks potentially triggered by non-compliance with regulatory obligations, information security or cyber incidents, internal control and process gaps, operational events and adoption of new business technologies.
The principal technology risks within our risk policy and risk appetite framework include:
•Third party risk;
•Business disruption and technology resiliency risk;
•Technology change management risk;
•Cyber and information security risk;
•Technology asset and configuration risk; and
•Technology obsolescence risk.
Governance
Our Board is responsible for the approval and oversight of our overall technology risk framework and program. It does so through its TOPS, which
State Street Corporation | 101
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
reviews and approves our risk policy and appetite framework annually as well as our cybersecurity policy and related standards.
Our risk policy establishes our approach to our management of technology risk across our business. The policy identifies the responsibilities of individuals and committees charged with oversight of the management of technology risk and articulates a broad mandate that supports implementation of the risk framework.
Risk control functions in the business are responsible for adopting and executing the risk framework and reporting requirements. They do this, in part, by developing and maintaining an inventory of critical applications and supporting infrastructure, as well as identifying, assessing and measuring technology risk. They are also responsible for monitoring and evaluating risk on a continual basis using key risk indicators, risk reporting and adopting appropriate risk responses to risk issues.
Enterprise Technology Risk Management (ETRM) is the separate risk function responsible for the technology risk strategy and appetite, and technology risk framework development and execution. ETRM also performs overall technology risk monitoring and reporting to the Board, and provides a separate view of the technology risk posture to executive leadership.
We manage technology risks by:
•Coordinating various risk assessment and risk management activities, including ERM operational risk programs;
•Establishing, through TORC and TOPS of the Board, the enterprise level technology risk and cyber risk appetite and limits;
•Producing enterprise level risk reporting, aggregation, dashboards, profiles and risk appetite statements;
•Validating appropriateness of reporting of information technology and cybersecurity risks and risk acceptance to senior management risk committees and the Board;
•Promoting a strong technology and cybersecurity risk culture through communication;
•Serving as an escalation and challenge point for risk policy guidance, expectations and clarifications;
•Assessing effectiveness of key enterprise information technology and cybersecurity risk and internal control remediation programs; and
•Providing risk oversight, challenge and monitoring for the Enterprise Continuity Services function and Third Party
Management program, including the collection of risk appetite, metrics and key risk indicators, and reviewing issue management processes and consistent program adoption.
Cybersecurity Risk Management
Cybersecurity risk is managed as part of our overall information technology risk, as outlined above under the direction of our Chief Information Security Officer (CISO). Our CISO is an executive vice president at State Street and is responsible for our overall information security program.
Before joining State Street, our CISO worked at a global information technology firm for more than 10 years, holding various positions, including senior vice president and chief security officer, and, prior to that, chief information security officer for that firm’s software division. Earlier on, she held leadership and general manager roles at an information management firm and an information security firm, each based in both the United States and Europe. She has worked with the World Economic Forum as a member of their Global Future Council on Cybersecurity. She holds a Doctor of Philosophy in information security and a Bachelor of Science in computer science.
We recognize the significance of cyber-attacks and take steps to mitigate the risks associated with them. We invest in building and maintaining a mature cybersecurity program to leverage people, technology and processes to protect our systems and the data in our care. We have also implemented a program to help us better measure and manage cybersecurity risk, including those risks we face when we engage third parties for products and services.
We design our information and systems access restrictions referencing the National Institute of Standards and Technology 800 53R4 Framework and use the supplemental requirements as implementation guidance. Our information security policies and standards are reviewed and updated with the onset of new regulatory changes and/or mandates. These standards are applicable to all corporate functions, business units, subsidiaries and controlled affiliates across the enterprise. Annual audits are conducted by internal and external parties to measure compliance and adherence to the standards.
All employees and third parties that have access to our systems or networks are required to adhere to our cybersecurity policy and standards. Our centralized information security group provides education and training. This training includes a required annual online training class for all employees and third parties that have access to our systems or networks, multiple simulated phishing attacks and regular information security awareness materials.
State Street Corporation | 102
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Every employee and contractor has a defined role in protecting systems and information of State Street, our clients and others. They are responsible for complying with the information security program, reporting suspected violations and threats; and protecting the confidentiality of information assets of us, our clients and others at all times.
We employ Information Security Officers to help the business better understand and manage their information security risks, as well as to work with the centralized GCS team to drive awareness and compliance throughout the business.
We use independent third parties to perform ethical hacks of key systems and penetration tests of our network and certain applications to help us better understand the effectiveness of our controls and to implement more effective controls, and we engage with third parties to conduct reviews of our overall program to help us better align our cybersecurity program with what is required of a large financial services organization.
We have an incident response program in place that is designed to enable a coordinated response to mitigate the impact of cyber-attacks, recover from the attack and to drive the appropriate level of communication to internal and external stakeholders, including timely reporting of material incidents in accordance with SEC rules.
The TORC assesses and manages the effectiveness of our cybersecurity program, which is overseen by the TOPS of our Board. The TOPS receives regular cybersecurity updates throughout the year and is responsible for reviewing and approving the policy on an annual basis.
Market Risk Management
Market risk is defined by U.S. banking regulators as the risk of loss that could result from broad market movements, such as changes in the general level of interest rates, credit spreads, foreign exchange rates or commodity prices. We are exposed to market risk in both our trading and certain of our non-trading, or asset-and-liability management, activities.
Information about the market risk associated with our trading activities is provided below under “Trading Activities.” Information about the market risk associated with our non-trading activities, which consists primarily of interest rate risk, is provided below under “Asset-and-Liability Management Activities.”
Trading Activities
In the conduct of our trading activities, we assume market risk, the level of which is a function of our overall risk appetite, business objectives and liquidity needs, our clients' requirements, market volatility and our execution against those factors.
We engage in trading activities primarily to support our clients' needs and to contribute to our overall corporate earnings and liquidity. In connection with certain of these trading activities, we enter into a variety of derivative financial instruments to support our clients' needs and to manage our interest rate and currency risk. These activities are generally intended to generate foreign exchange trading services revenue and to manage potential earnings volatility. In addition, we provide services related to derivatives in our role as both a manager and a servicer of financial assets.
Our clients use derivatives to manage the financial risks associated with their investment goals and business activities. With the growth of cross-border investing, our clients often enter into foreign exchange forward contracts to convert currency for international investments and to manage the currency risk in their international investment portfolios. As an active participant in the foreign exchange markets, we provide foreign exchange forward and option contracts in support of these client needs, and act as a dealer in the currency markets.
As part of our trading activities, we assume positions in the foreign exchange and interest rate markets by buying and selling cash instruments and entering into derivative instruments, including foreign exchange forward contracts, foreign exchange and interest rate options and interest rate swaps, interest rate forward contracts and interest rate futures. As of December 31, 2023, the notional amount of these derivative contracts was $2.57 trillion, of which $2.54 trillion was composed of foreign exchange forward, swap and spot contracts. We seek to match positions closely with the objective of mitigating related currency and interest rate risk. All foreign exchange contracts are valued daily at current market rates.
Governance
Our assumption of market risk in our trading activities is an integral part of our corporate risk appetite. The RC of the Board reviews and oversees our management of market risk, including the approval of key market risk policies and the receipt and review of regular market risk reporting, as well as periodic updates on selected market risk topics.
The previously described CMRC (refer to “Risk Committees”) oversees all market risk-taking activities across our business associated with trading. The CMRC, which reports to MRAC, is composed of members of ERM, our Global Markets business and our Global Treasury group, as well as our senior executives who manage our trading businesses and other members of management who possess specialized knowledge. The CMRC meets regularly to monitor the management of our trading market risk activities.
State Street Corporation | 103
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Our business units identify, manage and are responsible for the market risks inherent in their businesses. A dedicated market risk management group within ERM, and other groups within ERM, work with those business units to assist them in the identification, assessment, monitoring, management and control of market risk, and assist business unit managers with their market risk management and measurement activities. ERM provides an additional line of oversight, support and coordination designed to promote the consistent identification, measurement and management of market risk across business units, separate from those business units' discrete activities.
The ERM market risk management group is responsible for the management of corporate-wide market risk, the monitoring of key market risks and the development and maintenance of market risk management policies, guidelines and standards aligned with our corporate risk appetite. This group also establishes and approves market risk tolerance limits and trading authorities based on, but not limited to, measures of notional amounts, sensitivity, VaR and stress. Such limits and authorities are specified in our trading and market risk guidelines which govern our management of trading market risk.
Risk Appetite
Our corporate market risk appetite is specified in policy statements that outline the governance, responsibilities and requirements surrounding the identification, measurement, analysis, management and communication of market risk arising from our trading activities. These policy statements also set forth the market risk control framework designed to monitor, support, manage and control this portion of our risk appetite. All groups involved in the management and control of market risk associated with trading activities are required to comply with the qualitative and quantitative elements of these policy statements. Our trading market risk control framework is composed of the following:
•A trading market risk management process led by ERM, separate from the business units' discrete activities;
•Defined responsibilities and authorities for the primary groups involved in trading market risk management;
•A trading market risk measurement methodology that captures correlation effects and allows aggregation of market risk across risk types, markets and business lines;
•Daily monitoring, analysis and reporting of market risk exposures associated with trading activities against market risk limits;
•A defined limit structure and escalation process in the event of a market risk limit excess;
•Use of VaR models to measure the one-day market risk exposure of trading positions;
•Use of VaR as a ten-day-based regulatory capital measure of the market risk exposure of trading positions;
•Use of non-VaR-based limits and other controls;
•Use of stressed-VaR models, stress-testing analysis and scenario analysis to support the trading market risk measurement and management process by assessing how portfolios and global business lines perform under extreme market conditions;
•Use of back-testing as a diagnostic tool to assess the accuracy of VaR models and other risk management techniques; and
•A new product approval process that requires market risk teams to assess trading-related market risks and apply risk tolerance limits to proposed new products and business activities.
We use our CAP to assess our overall capital and liquidity in relation to our risk profile and provide a comprehensive strategy for maintaining appropriate capital and liquidity levels. With respect to market risk associated with trading activities, our risk management and our calculations of regulatory capital are based primarily on our internal VaR models and stress testing analysis. As discussed in detail under “Value-at-Risk and Stressed VaR” below, VaR is measured daily by ERM.
The CMRC oversees our market risk exposure in relation to limits established within our risk appetite framework. These limits define threshold levels for VaR- and stressed VaR-based measures and are applicable to all trading positions subject to regulatory capital requirements. These limits are designed to mitigate undue concentration of market risk exposure, in light of the primarily non-proprietary nature of our trading activities. The risk appetite framework and associated limits are reviewed and approved by the Board's RC.
Covered Positions
Our trading positions are subject to regulatory market risk capital requirements if they meet the regulatory definition of a “covered position.” A covered position is generally defined by U.S. banking regulators as an on- or off-balance sheet position associated with the organization's trading activities that is free of any restrictions on its tradability, but does not include intangible assets, certain credit derivatives recognized as guarantees and certain
State Street Corporation | 104
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
equity positions not publicly traded. All FX and commodity positions are considered covered positions, regardless of the accounting treatment they receive. The identification of covered positions for inclusion in our market risk capital framework is governed by our trading and market risk guidelines, which outline the standards we use to determine whether a trading position is a covered position.
Our covered positions consist primarily of the trading portfolios held by our Global Markets business. They also arise from certain positions held by our Global Treasury group. These trading positions include products such as foreign exchange spot, foreign exchange forwards, non-deliverable forwards, foreign exchange options, foreign exchange funding swaps, currency futures, financial futures and interest rate futures. New activities are analyzed to determine if the positions arising from such new activities meet the definition of a covered position and conform to our trading and market risk guidelines. This documented analysis, including any decisions with respect to market risk treatments, must receive approval from the CMRC.
We use spot rates, forward points, yield curves and discount factors imported from third-party sources to measure the value of our covered positions, and we use such values to mark our covered positions to market on a daily basis. These values are subject to separate validation by us in order to evaluate reasonableness and consistency with market experience. The mark-to-market gain or loss on spot transactions is calculated by applying the spot rate to the foreign currency principal and comparing the resultant base currency amount to the original transaction principal. The mark-to-market gain or loss on a forward foreign exchange contract or forward cash flow contract is determined as the difference between the life-to-date (historical) value of the cash flow and the value of the cash flow at the inception of the transaction. The mark-to-market gain or loss on interest rate swaps is determined by discounting the future cash flows from each leg of the swap transaction.
Value-at-Risk and Stressed VaR
We use a variety of risk measurement tools and methodologies, including VaR, which is an estimate of potential loss for a given period within a stated statistical confidence interval. We use a risk measurement methodology to measure trading-related VaR daily. We have adopted standards for measuring trading-related VaR, and we maintain regulatory capital for market risk associated with our trading activities in conformity with currently applicable bank regulatory market risk requirements.
We utilize an internal VaR model to calculate our regulatory market risk capital requirements. We use a
historical simulation model to calculate daily VaR- and stressed VaR-based measures for our covered positions in conformity with regulatory requirements. Our VaR model seeks to capture identified material risk factors associated with our covered positions, including risks arising from market movements such as changes in foreign exchange rates, interest rates and option-implied volatilities.
We have adopted standards and guidelines to value our covered positions which govern our VaR- and stressed VaR-based measures. Our regulatory VaR-based measure is calculated based on historical volatilities of market risk factors during a two-year observation period calibrated to a one-tail, 99% confidence interval and a ten-business-day holding period. We also use the same platform to calculate a one-tail, 99% confidence interval, one-business-day VaR for internal risk management purposes. A 99% one-tail confidence interval implies that daily trading losses are not expected to exceed the estimated VaR more than 1% of the time, or less than three business days out of a year.
Our market risk models, including our VaR model, are subject to change in connection with the governance, validation and back-testing processes described below. These models can change as a result of changes in our business activities, our historical experiences, market forces and events, regulations and regulatory interpretations and other factors. In addition, the models are subject to continuing regulatory review and approval. Changes in our models may result in changes in our measurements of our market risk exposures, including VaR, and related measures, including regulatory capital. These changes could result in material changes in those risk measurements and related measures as calculated and compared from period to period.
Value-at-Risk Measures
VaR measures are based on the most recent two years of historical price movements for instruments and related risk factors to which we have exposure. The instruments in question are limited to foreign exchange spot, forward and options contracts and interest rate contracts, including futures and interest rate swaps. Historically, these instruments have exhibited a higher degree of liquidity relative to other available capital markets instruments. As a result, the VaR measures shown reflect our ability to rapidly adjust exposures in highly dynamic markets. For this reason, risk inventory, in the form of net open positions, across all currencies is typically limited. In addition, long and short positions in major, as well as minor, currencies provide risk offsets that limit our potential downside exposure.
State Street Corporation | 105
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Our VaR methodology uses a historical simulation approach based on market-observed changes in foreign exchange rates, U.S. and non-U.S. interest rates and implied volatilities, and incorporates the resulting diversification benefits provided from the mix of our trading positions. Our VaR model incorporates approximately 5,000 risk factors and includes correlations among currency, interest rates and other market rates.
All VaR measures are subject to limitations and must be interpreted accordingly. Some, but not all, of the limitations of our VaR methodology include the following:
•Compared to a shorter observation period, a two-year observation period is slower to reflect increases in market volatility (although temporary increases in market volatility will affect the calculation of VaR for a longer period); consequently, in periods of sudden increases in volatility or increasing volatility, in each case relative to the prior two-year period, the calculation of VaR may understate current risk;
•Compared to a longer observation period, a two-year observation period may not reflect as many past periods of volatility in the markets, because such past volatility is no longer in the observation period; consequently, historical market scenarios of high volatility, even if similar to current or likely future market circumstances, may fall outside the two-year observation period, resulting in a potential understatement of current risk;
•The VaR-based measure is calibrated to a specified level of confidence and does not indicate the potential magnitude of losses beyond this confidence level;
•In certain cases, VaR-based measures approximate the impact of changes in risk factors on the values of positions and portfolios; this may happen because the number of inputs included in the VaR model is necessarily limited; for example, yield curve risk factors do not exist for all future dates;
•The use of historical market information may not be predictive of future events, particularly those that are extreme in nature; this “backward-looking” limitation can cause VaR to understate or overstate risk;
•The effect of extreme and rare market movements is difficult to estimate; this may result from non-linear risk sensitivities as well as the potential for actual volatility and
correlation levels to differ from assumptions implicit in the VaR calculations; and
•Intra-day risk is not captured.
We calculate a stressed VaR-based measure using the same model we use to calculate VaR, but with model inputs calibrated to historical data from a range of continuous twelve-month periods that reflect significant financial stress. The stressed VaR model is designed to identify the second-worst outcome occurring in the worst continuous one-year rolling period since July 2007. This stressed VaR meets the regulatory requirement as the rolling ten-day period with an outcome that is worse than 99% of other outcomes during that twelve-month period of financial stress. For each portfolio, the stress period is determined algorithmically by seeking the one-year time horizon that produces the largest ten-business-day VaR from within the available historical data. This historical data set includes the financial crisis of 2008, the highly volatile period surrounding the Eurozone sovereign debt crisis and the Standard & Poor's downgrade of U.S. Treasury debt in August 2011. As the historical data set used to determine the stress period expands over time, future market stress events will be incorporated.
Stress Testing
We have a corporate-wide stress testing program in place that incorporates techniques to measure the potential loss we could suffer in a hypothetical scenario of adverse economic and financial conditions. We also monitor concentrations of risk such as concentration by branch, risk component, and currency pairs. We conduct stress testing on a daily basis based on selected historical stress events that are relevant to our positions in order to estimate the potential impact to our current portfolio should similar market conditions recur, and we also perform stress testing as part of the Federal Reserve's CCAR process. Stress testing is conducted, analyzed and reported at the corporate, trading desk, division and risk-factor level (for example, exchange risk, interest rate risk and volatility risk).
Stress testing results and limits are actively monitored on a daily basis by ERM and reported to the CMRC. Limit breaches are addressed by ERM risk managers in conjunction with the business units, escalated as appropriate, and reviewed by the CMRC if material. In addition, we have established several action triggers that prompt immediate review by management and the implementation of a remediation plan.
We perform scenario analysis daily based on selected historical stress events that are relevant to our positions in order to estimate the potential impact to our current portfolio should similar market
State Street Corporation | 106
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
conditions recur. Relevant scenarios are chosen from an inventory of historical financial stresses and applied to our current portfolio. These historical event scenarios involve spot foreign exchange, credit, equity, unforeseen geo-political events and natural disasters, and government and central bank intervention scenarios. Examples of the specific historical scenarios we incorporate in our stress testing program may include the Asian financial crisis of 1997, the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the U.S. and the 2008 financial crisis. We continue to update our inventory of historical stress scenarios as new stress conditions emerge in the financial markets.
As each of the historical stress events is associated with a different time horizon, we normalize results by scaling down the longer horizon events to a ten-day horizon and keeping the shorter horizon events (i.e., events that are shorter than ten days) at their original terms. We also conduct sensitivity analysis daily to calculate the impact of a large predefined shock in a specific risk factor or a group of risk factors on our current portfolio. These predefined shocks include parallel and non-parallel yield curve shifts and foreign exchange spot and volatility surface shifts. In a parallel shift scenario, we apply a constant factor shift across all yield curve tenors. In a non-parallel shift scenario, we apply different shock levels to different tenors of a yield curve, rather than shifting the entire curve by a constant amount. Non-parallel shifts include steepening, flattening and butterflies.
Validation and Back-Testing
We perform frequent back-testing to assess the accuracy of our VaR-based model in estimating loss at the stated confidence level. This back-testing involves the comparison of estimated VaR model outputs to daily, actual profit-and-loss (P&L) outcomes observed from daily market movements. We back-test our VaR model using a “clean” P&L, which excludes non-trading revenue such as fees, commissions and NII, as well as estimated revenue from intraday trading.
Our VaR definition of trading losses excludes items that are not specific to the price movement of the trading assets and liabilities themselves, such as fees, commissions, changes to reserves and gains or losses from intraday activity.
We experienced no back-testing exceptions in 2023 and three back-testing exceptions in 2022. At a
99% confidence interval, the statistical expectation for a VaR model is to witness one exception every hundred trading days (or two to three exceptions per year). Two 2022 back-testing exceptions occurred on days of higher volatility on the back of market concerns on economic outlook, inflation and central bank rate policy. A third back-testing exception occurred during the UK market turmoil in late September 2022.
Our model validation process also evaluates the integrity of our VaR models through the use of regular outcome analysis. This outcome analysis includes back-testing, which compares the VaR model's predictions to actual outcomes using out-of-sample information. Consistent with regulatory guidance, the back-testing compared a “clean” P&L, defined above, with the one-day VaR produced by the model. The back-testing was performed for a time period not used for model development. The number of occurrences where “clean” trading-book P&L exceeded the one-day VaR was within our expected VaR tolerance level.
Market Risk Reporting
Our ERM market risk management group is responsible for market risk monitoring and reporting. We use a variety of systems and controlled market feeds from third-party services to compile data for several daily, weekly and monthly management reports.
The following tables present VaR and stressed VaR associated with our trading activities for covered positions held during the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively, as measured by our VaR methodology. Diversification effect in the tables below represents the difference between total VaR and the sum of the VaRs for each trading activity. This effect arises because the risks present in our trading activities are not perfectly correlated.
State Street Corporation | 107
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 32: TEN-DAY VALUE-AT-RISK ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES FOR COVERED POSITIONS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended December 31, 2023 | As of December 31, 2023 | Year Ended December 31, 2022 | As of December 31, 2022 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Global Markets | $ | 11,697 | $ | 23,797 | $ | 5,106 | $ | 9,029 | $ | 8,567 | $ | 25,779 | $ | 2,631 | $ | 7,591 | ||||||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 2,712 | 7,311 | 407 | 1,591 | 2,661 | 7,255 | 559 | 5,632 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (2,819) | (6,829) | (1,021) | (1,276) | (2,591) | (6,959) | 311 | (6,075) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total VaR | $ | 11,590 | $ | 24,279 | $ | 4,492 | $ | 9,344 | $ | 8,637 | $ | 26,075 | $ | 3,501 | $ | 7,148 | ||||||||||||||||
| TABLE 33: TEN-DAY STRESSED VALUE-AT-RISK ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES FOR COVERED POSITIONS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Year Ended December 31, 2023 | As of December 31, 2023 | Year Ended December 31, 2022 | As of December 31, 2022 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Global Markets | $ | 42,569 | $ | 103,551 | $ | 19,606 | $ | 62,724 | $ | 35,391 | $ | 97,420 | $ | 16,413 | $ | 30,778 | ||||||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 6,710 | 16,762 | 3,252 | 5,578 | 4,629 | 17,695 | 778 | 8,431 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (8,463) | (18,555) | (3,486) | (7,936) | (5,693) | (19,176) | (1,014) | (12,206) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Stressed VaR | $ | 40,816 | $ | 101,758 | $ | 19,372 | $ | 60,366 | $ | 34,327 | $ | 95,939 | $ | 16,177 | $ | 27,003 |
The average and period-end stressed VaR-based measures were approximately $41 million and $60 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2023, compared to $34 million and $27 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2022. The increase in the average stressed VaR is primarily attributed to higher foreign exchange and interest rate risk positions.
The VaR-based measures as presented in the preceding tables are primarily a reflection of the overall level of market volatility and our appetite for taking market risk in our trading activities. While overall levels of volatility have varied over the historical observation periods, smaller residual market risk positions during the quarter have led to a reduction in VaR measures presented.
We have in the past and may in the future modify and adjust our models and methodologies used to calculate VaR and stressed VaR, subject to regulatory review and approval, and any future modifications and adjustments may result in changes in our VaR-based and stressed VaR-based measures.
The following tables present the VaR and stressed-VaR associated with our trading activities attributable to foreign exchange risk, interest rate risk and volatility risk as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively. The totals of the VaR-based and stressed VaR-based measures for the three attributes in total exceeded the related total VaR and total stressed VaR presented in the foregoing tables as of each period-end, primarily due to the benefits of diversification across risk types. Diversification effect in the tables below represents the difference between total VaR and the sum of the VaRs for each trading activity. This effect arises because the risks present in our trading activities are not perfectly correlated.
| TABLE 34: TEN-DAY VaR ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES BY RISK FACTOR(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended December 31, 2023 | Year Ended December 31, 2022 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | ||||||||||||||||||
| By component: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Global Markets | $ | 2,348 | $ | 10,023 | $ | 356 | $ | 5,562 | $ | 4,656 | $ | 358 | ||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 496 | 1,446 | — | 5,602 | 1,442 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (324) | (831) | — | (6,344) | (1,155) | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total VaR | $ | 2,520 | $ | 10,638 | $ | 356 | $ | 4,820 | $ | 4,943 | $ | 358 |
| TABLE 35: TEN-DAY STRESSED VaR ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES BY RISK FACTOR(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended December 31, 2023 | Year Ended December 31, 2022 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | ||||||||||||||||||
| By component: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Global Markets | $ | 5,402 | $ | 64,418 | $ | 501 | $ | 9,527 | $ | 37,077 | $ | 565 | ||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 4,978 | 6,347 | — | 7,623 | 9,941 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (2,891) | (6,209) | — | (8,189) | (15,328) | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total Stressed VaR | $ | 7,489 | $ | 64,556 | $ | 501 | $ | 8,961 | $ | 31,690 | $ | 565 |
(1) For purposes of risk attribution by component, foreign exchange refers only to the risk from market movements in period-end rates. Forwards, futures, options and swaps with maturities greater than period-end have embedded interest rate risk that is captured by the measures used for interest rate risk. Accordingly, the interest rate risk embedded in these foreign exchange instruments is included in the interest rate risk component.
State Street Corporation | 108
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Asset and Liability Management Activities
The primary objective of asset and liability management is to provide sustainable NII under varying economic conditions, while protecting the economic value of the assets and liabilities carried on our consolidated statement of condition from the adverse effects of changes in interest rates. While many market factors affect the level of NII and the economic value of our assets and liabilities, one of the most significant factors is our exposure to movements in interest rates. Most of our NII is earned from the investment of client deposits generated by our businesses. We invest these client deposits in assets that conform generally to the liquidity characteristics of our balance sheet liabilities, as well as the currency composition of our significant non-U.S. dollar denominated client deposits.
We quantify NII sensitivity using an earnings simulation model that includes our expectations for new business growth, changes in balance sheet mix and investment portfolio positioning. This measure compares our baseline view of NII over a twelve-month horizon, based on our internal forecast of interest rates, to a wide range of rate shocks. Our baseline view of NII is updated on a regular basis. Table 36, Key Interest Rates for Baseline Forecasts, presents the spot and 12-month forward rates used in our baseline forecasts at December 31, 2023 and 2022. Our baseline rate forecast as of December 31, 2023 was generally consistent with common market expectations for global central bank actions at that point in time, which implied that rates have reached peak levels and rate cuts will begin in the first half of 2024.
| TABLE 36: KEY INTEREST RATES FOR BASELINE FORECASTS | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2023 | December 31, 2022 | ||||||||||||||||
| Fed Funds Target | ECB Target(1) | 10-Year Treasury | Fed Funds Target | ECB Target(1) | 10-Year Treasury | ||||||||||||
| Spot rates | 5.50 | % | 4.00 | % | 3.88 | % | 4.50 | % | 2.00 | % | 3.87 | % | |||||
| 12-month forward rates | 4.25 | 2.75 | 3.87 | 4.75 | 3.00 | 3.81 |
(1) European Central Bank deposit facility rate.
In Table 37: Net Interest Income Sensitivity, we report the expected change in NII over the next twelve months from instantaneous 100 basis point shocks to various tenors on the yield curve relative to our baseline rate forecast, including the impacts from U.S. and non-U.S. rates. Each scenario assumes no management action is taken to mitigate the adverse effects of changes in interest rates on our financial performance. While investment securities balances and composition can fluctuate with the level of rates as prepayment assumptions change, for purposes of this analysis our deposit balances and mix are assumed to remain consistent with the baseline forecast which assumes client deposit balance rotation including reductions in non-interest-bearing deposit balances. The results of these scenarios should not be extrapolated for other (e.g., more severe) shocks as the impact of interest rate shocks may not be linear. In lower rate scenarios, the full impact of the shock is realized for all currencies even if the result is negative interest rates.
| TABLE 37: NET INTEREST INCOME SENSITIVITY | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2023 | December 31, 2022 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | U.S. Dollar | All Other Currencies | Total | U.S. Dollar | All Other Currencies | Total | ||||||||||||||||
| Rate change: | Benefit (Exposure) | Benefit (Exposure) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Parallel shifts: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| +100 bps shock | $ | (26) | $ | 274 | $ | 248 | $ | (225) | $ | 432 | $ | 207 | ||||||||||
| –100 bps shock | 4 | (227) | (223) | 207 | (419) | (212) | ||||||||||||||||
| Steeper yield curve: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| '+100 bps shift in long-end rates(1) | 28 | 11 | 39 | 42 | 23 | 65 | ||||||||||||||||
| '-100 bps shift in short-end rates(1) | 35 | (215) | (180) | 250 | (397) | (147) | ||||||||||||||||
| Flatter yield curve: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| '+100 bps shift in short-end rates(1) | (53) | 262 | 209 | (267) | 409 | 142 | ||||||||||||||||
| '-100 bps shift in long-end rates(1) | (30) | (11) | (41) | (43) | (22) | (65) |
(1) The short end is 0-3 months. The long end is 5 years and above. Interim term points are interpolated.
State Street Corporation | 109
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Our overall balance sheet, including all currencies, continues to be asset sensitive with an NII benefit in higher rate scenarios and NII exposure in lower rate scenarios. As of December 31, 2023, our USD balance sheet’s NII sensitivity is relatively neutral given expectations for USD deposit betas and the repricing characteristics of our USD assets. Compared to December 31, 2022, our USD NII positioning is less liability sensitive as a result of lower investment portfolio balances and hedging activity, partially offset by impact from rising deposit betas and deposit rotation. As of December 31, 2023, non-USD NII benefits from higher rate scenarios and is exposed to lower rates primarily driven by our sensitivities on the short-end of the yield curve. USD and non-USD NII sensitivities are also impacted by routine currency-level baseline forecasting updates and refinements, including deposit betas.
EVE sensitivity is a discounted cash flow model designed to estimate the fair value of assets and liabilities under a series of interest rate shocks over a long-term horizon. In the following table, we report our EVE sensitivity to 200 bps instantaneous rate shocks, relative to spot interest rates. Management compares the change in EVE sensitivity against our aggregate Tier 1 and Tier 2 risk-based capital. EVE sensitivity is dependent on the timing of interest and principal cash flows. Also, the measure only evaluates the spot balance sheet and does not include the impact of new business assumptions.
| TABLE 38: ECONOMIC VALUE OF EQUITY SENSITIVITY | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, | ||||||
| (In millions) | 2023 | 2022 | ||||
| Rate change: | Benefit (Exposure) | |||||
| +200 bps shock | $ | (1,447) | $ | (917) | ||
| –200 bps shock | 1,683 | 1,082 |
As of December 31, 2023, EVE sensitivity remains exposed to upward shifts in interest rates. Compared to December 31, 2022, our sensitivity in the up 200bp shock scenario increased due to lower liability duration driven by client deposit rotation and higher betas.
Both NII sensitivity and EVE sensitivity are routinely monitored as market conditions change. For additional information about our Asset and Liability Management Activities, refer to Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, “Risk Management.”
Model Risk Management
The use of models is widespread throughout the financial services industry, with large and complex organizations relying on sophisticated models to support numerous aspects of their financial decision making. The models contemporaneously represent both a significant advancement in financial management and a source of risk. In large banking organizations like us, model results influence business decisions, and model failure could have a harmful effect on our financial performance. As a result, the MRM Framework seeks to mitigate our model risk.
Our MRM program has three principal components:
•A model risk governance program that defines roles and responsibilities, including the authority to restrict model usage, provides policies and guidance, monitors compliance and reports regularly to the Board on the overall degree of model risk across the corporation;
•A model development process that focuses on sound design and computational accuracy, and includes activities designed to assess data quality, to test for robustness, stability and sensitivity to assumptions, and to conduct ongoing monitoring of model performance; and
•A model validation function designed to verify that models are conceptually sound, computationally accurate, are performing as expected, and are in line with their intended use.
The MRM Framework, highlighted above, also provides insight and guidance into addressing key model risks that arise.
Governance
Models used in the regulatory capital calculation can only be deployed for use after undergoing a model validation by ERM's MRM group. The model validation results and/or a decision by the Model Risk Committee must permit model usage or the model may not be used.
ERM’s MRM group is responsible for defining the corporate-wide model risk management framework and maintaining policies that are designed to achieve the framework’s objectives. All regulatory capital calculation models, including any artificial intelligence and machine learning models, must comply with the model risk management framework and corresponding policies. The group is responsible for overall model risk governance capabilities, with particular emphasis in the areas of model identification, model validation, model risk reporting, model performance monitoring, tracking of new model
State Street Corporation | 110
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
development status and committee-level review and challenge.
MRC, which is composed of senior managers representing MRM along with functional areas and business units with key models across the organization, reports to MRAC, and provides guidance and oversight to the MRM function.
Model Development and Ongoing Monitoring
Models are developed under guidelines governing data sourcing, methodology selection and model integrity testing. Model development includes a statement of purpose to align development with intended use. It may also include a comparison of alternative approaches to promote a sound modeling approach.
Model developers conduct an assessment of data quality and relevance. The development teams conduct a variety of tests of the accuracy, robustness and stability of each model.
Model owners submit models to the MVG for validation on a regular basis, as per the existing policy. The model owners also conduct ongoing monitoring of each model.
Model Validation
MVG is part of MRM within ERM and performs model validations and reviews. MVG is independent, as contemplated by applicable bank regulatory requirements, of both the developers and users of the models. MVG validates models through an evaluation process that assesses the appropriateness, accuracy, and suitability of data inputs, methodologies, documentation, assumptions, and processing code. Model validation also encompasses an assessment of model performance, sensitivity, and robustness, as well as a model’s potential limitations given its particular assumptions or deficiencies. Based on the results of its review, MVG issues a model use decision and may require remedial actions and/or compensating controls on model use. MVG also maintains a model risk rating system, which assigns a risk rating to each model based on an assessment of a model's inherent and residual risks. These ratings aid in the understanding and reporting of model risk across the model portfolio, and enable the triaging of needs for remediation.
Although model validation is the primary method of subjecting models to independent review and challenge, in practice, a multi-step governance process provides the opportunity for challenge by multiple parties. First, MVG conducts a model validation and issues a model use decision. MVG communicates their result as one of the following three outcomes: “Approved”, “Approved with conditions”, or “Not Approved”. There are three ways in which a model can be deemed “Not approved for
Use” given a validation: 1) the aggregation of the model scoring within MRM’s model risk rating system is poor enough to result in a “high” rating, 2) the scoring of one or more model risk rating system element(s) is deemed “critical” resulting in an automatic “high” rating irrespective of the other elements as the “critical” element(s) undermines the model, or 3) the remediation action is not properly taken by the due date resulting in a severe compliance breach that undercuts the model rating. Second, these decisions may be reviewed, challenged, and confirmed by the MRC. Finally, model use decisions, risk ratings, and overall levels of model risk may be escalated to and reviewed by MRAC. MRM also reports regularly on model risk issues to the Board.
Strategic Risk Management
We define strategic risk as the current or prospective impact on earnings or capital arising from adverse business decisions, improper implementation of strategic initiatives, or lack of responsiveness to industry-wide changes. Strategic risks are influenced by changes in the competitive environment; decline in market performance or changes in our business activities; and the potential secondary impacts of reputational risks, not already captured as market, interest rate, credit, operational, model or liquidity risks. We incorporate strategic risk into our assessment of our business plans and risk and capital management processes. Management of strategic risk is an integral component of all aspects of our business.
Separating the effects of a potential material adverse event into operational and strategic risk is sometimes difficult. For instance, the direct financial impact of an unfavorable event in the form of fines or penalties would be classified as an operational risk loss, while the impact on our reputation and consequently the potential loss of clients and corresponding decline in revenue would be classified as a strategic risk loss. An additional example of strategic risk is the integration of a major acquisition. Failure to successfully integrate the operations of an acquired business, and the resultant inability to retain clients and the associated revenue, would be classified as a loss due to strategic risk.
Strategic risk is managed with a long-term focus. Techniques for its assessment and management include the development of business plans, which are subject to review and challenge from senior management and the Board of Directors, as well as a formal review and approval process for all new business and product proposals. The potential impact of the various elements of strategic risk is difficult to quantify with any degree of precision. We use a combination of historical earnings volatility, scenario
State Street Corporation | 111
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
analysis, stress-testing and management judgment to help assess the potential effect on us attributable to strategic risk. Management and control of strategic risks are generally the responsibility of the business units, with oversight from the control functions, as part of their overall strategic planning and internal risk management processes.
CAPITAL
Managing our capital involves evaluating whether our actual and projected levels of capital are commensurate with our risk profile, are in compliance with all applicable regulatory requirements, and are sufficient to provide us with the financial flexibility to undertake future strategic business initiatives. We assess capital adequacy based on relevant regulatory capital requirements, as well as our own internal capital goals, targets and other relevant metrics.
Framework
Our objective with respect to management of our capital is to maintain a strong capital base in order to provide financial flexibility for our business needs, including funding corporate growth and supporting clients’ cash management needs, and to provide protection against loss to depositors and creditors. We strive to maintain an appropriate level of capital, commensurate with our risk profile, on which an attractive return to shareholders is expected to be realized over both the short and long-term, while protecting our obligations to depositors and creditors and complying with regulatory capital requirements.
Our capital management focuses on our risk exposures, the regulatory requirements applicable to us with respect to multiple capital measures, the evaluations and resulting credit ratings of the major independent rating agencies, our return on capital at both the consolidated and line-of-business level and our capital position relative to our peers.
Assessment of our overall capital adequacy includes the comparison of capital sources with capital uses, as well as the consideration of the quality and quantity of the various components of capital. The assessment seeks to determine the optimal level of capital and composition of capital instruments to satisfy all constituents of capital, with the lowest overall cost to shareholders. Other factors considered in our assessment of capital adequacy are strategic and contingency planning, stress testing and planned capital actions.
Capital Adequacy Process (CAP)
Our primary federal banking regulator is the Federal Reserve. Both we and State Street Bank are subject to the minimum regulatory capital requirements established by the Federal Reserve and defined in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act. State Street Bank must exceed the
regulatory capital thresholds for “well capitalized” in order for our Parent Company to maintain its status as a financial holding company. Accordingly, one of our primary objectives with respect to capital management is to exceed all applicable minimum regulatory capital requirements and for State Street Bank to be “well capitalized” under the PCA guidelines established by the FDIC. Our capital management activities are conducted as part of our corporate-wide CAP and associated Capital Policy and Guidelines.
We consider capital adequacy to be a key element of our financial well-being, which affects our ability to attract and maintain client relationships; operate effectively in the global capital markets; and satisfy regulatory, security holders and shareholder needs. Capital is one of several elements that affect our credit ratings and the ratings of our principal subsidiaries.
In conformity with our Capital Policy and Guidelines, we strive to achieve and maintain specific internal capital levels, not just at a point in time, but over time and during periods of stress, to account for changes in our strategic direction, evolving economic conditions, and financial and market volatility. We have developed and implemented a corporate-wide CAP to assess our overall capital in relation to our risk profile and to provide a comprehensive strategy for maintaining appropriate capital levels. The CAP considers material risks under multiple scenarios, with an emphasis on stress scenarios, and encompasses existing processes and systems used to measure our capital adequacy.
Capital Contingency Planning
Contingency planning is an integral component of capital management. The objective of contingency planning is to monitor current and forecast levels of select capital, liquidity and other measures that serve as early indicators of a potentially adverse capital or liquidity adequacy situation. These measures are one of the inputs used to set our internal capital adequacy level. We review these measures annually for appropriateness and relevance in relation to our financial budget and capital plan. In addition, we maintain an inventory of capital contingency actions designed to conserve or generate capital to support the unique risks in our business model, our client and investor demands and regulatory requirements.
Stress Testing
We administer a robust business-wide stress-testing program that executes stress tests each year to assess the institution’s capital adequacy and/or future performance under adverse conditions. Our stress testing program is structured around what we determine to be the key risks inherent in our business, as assessed through a recurring material
State Street Corporation | 112
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
risk identification process. The material risk identification process represents a bottom-up approach to identifying the institution’s most significant risk exposures across all on- and off-balance sheet risk-taking activities, including credit, market, liquidity, interest rate, operational, fiduciary, business, reputation and regulatory risks. These key risks serve as an organizing principle for much of our risk management framework, as well as reporting, including the “risk dashboard” provided to the Board.
In connection with the focus on our key risks, each stress test incorporates idiosyncratic loss events tailored to our unique risk profile and business activities. Due to the nature of our business model and our consolidated statement of condition, our risks differ from those of a traditional commercial bank. Over the past few years, stress scenarios have included a deep recession in the U.S., including impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic, a break-up of the Eurozone, a severe recession in China and an oil shock precipitated by turmoil in the Middle East/North Africa region.
The Federal Reserve requires bank holding companies with total consolidated assets of $50 billion or more, which includes us, to submit a capital plan on an annual basis. The Federal Reserve uses its annual CCAR process, which incorporates hypothetical financial and economic stress scenarios, to review those capital plans and assess whether banking organizations have capital planning processes that account for idiosyncratic risks and provide for sufficient capital to continue operations throughout times of economic and financial stress. As part of its CCAR process, the Federal Reserve assesses each organization’s capital adequacy, capital planning process and plans to distribute capital, such as dividend payments or stock purchase programs. Management and Board risk committees review, challenge and approve CCAR results and assumptions before submission to the Federal Reserve.
Through the evaluation of our capital adequacy and/or future performance under adverse conditions, the stress testing process provides us important insights for capital planning, risk management and strategic decision-making.
Governance
In order to support integrated decision making, we have identified three management elements to aid in the compatibility and coordination of our CAP:
•Risk Management - identification, measurement, monitoring and forecasting of different types of risk and their combined impact on capital adequacy;
•Capital management - determination of optimal capital levels; and
•Business Management - strategic planning, budgeting, forecasting and performance management.
We have a hierarchical structure supporting appropriate committee review of relevant risk and capital information. The ongoing responsibility for capital management rests with our Treasurer. The Capital Management group within Global Treasury is responsible for the Capital Policy and Guidelines, development of the Capital Plan, the oversight of global capital management and optimization.
The MRAC provides oversight of our capital management, our capital adequacy, our internal targets and the expectations of the major independent credit rating agencies. In addition, MRAC approves our balance sheet strategy and related activities. The Board’s RC assists the Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities related to the assessment and management of risk and capital. Our Capital Policy is reviewed and approved annually by the Board's RC.
Global Systemically Important Bank
We have been identified by the Financial Stability Board and the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision as a G-SIB. Our designation as a G-SIB is based on a number of factors, as evaluated by banking regulators, and requires us to maintain an additional capital surcharge above the minimum capital ratios set forth in the Basel III rule.
We and our depositary institution subsidiaries are subject to the current Basel III minimum risk-based capital and leverage ratio guidelines.
Additional information about G-SIBs is provided under “Regulatory Capital Adequacy and Liquidity Standards” in “Supervision and Regulation” in Business in this Form 10-K.
Regulatory Capital
We and State Street Bank, as advanced approaches banking organizations, are subject to the U.S. Basel III framework. We are also subject to the final market risk capital rule issued by U.S. banking regulators.
The Basel III rule provides for two frameworks for monitoring capital adequacy: the “standardized approach” and the “advanced approaches”, applicable to advanced approaches banking organizations, like us. The standardized approach prescribes standardized calculations for credit risk RWA, including specified risk weights for on and certain off-balance sheet exposures. The advanced approaches consist of the Advanced Internal Ratings-Based Approach used for the calculation of credit risk RWA, and the Advanced Measurement Approach used for the calculation of operational risk RWA.
State Street Corporation | 113
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
As required by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) enacted in 2010, we and State Street Bank, as advanced approaches banking organizations, are subject to a “capital floor,” also referred to as the Collins Amendment, in the assessment of our regulatory capital adequacy, such that our risk-based capital ratios for regulatory assessment purposes are the lower of each ratio calculated under the advanced approaches and the standardized approach. Under the advanced approaches, State Street and State Street Bank are subject to a 2.5% CCB requirement, plus any applicable countercyclical capital buffer requirement, which is currently set at 0%. Under the standardized approach, State Street Bank is subject to the same CCB and countercyclical capital buffer requirements, but for State Street, the 2.5% CCB requirement is replaced by the SCB requirement according to the SCB rule issued in 2020. In addition, State Street is subject to a G-SIB surcharge.
The SCB replaced, under the standardized approach, the CCB with a buffer calculated as the difference between the institution’s starting and lowest projected CET1 ratio under the CCAR severely adverse scenario plus planned common stock dividend payments (as a percentage of RWA) from the fourth through seventh quarter of the CCAR planning horizon. The SCB requirement can be no less than 2.5% of RWA. Breaching the SCB or other regulatory buffer or surcharge will limit a banking organization’s ability to make capital distributions and discretionary bonus payments to executive officers.
Our SCB requirement was 2.5% for the period from October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2023. On June 28, 2023, we were notified by the Federal Reserve of the results from the 2023 supervisory stress test. Our SCB calculated under the 2023 supervisory stress test was well below the 2.5% minimum, resulting in an SCB at that floor, which went into effect starting October 1, 2023 and will remain effective through September 30, 2024.
Our minimum risk-based capital ratios as of January 1, 2023 include a CCB of 2.5% and a SCB of 2.5% for the advanced approaches and standardized approach, respectively, a G-SIB surcharge of 1.0%, and a countercyclical buffer of 0.0%. This results in minimum risk-based ratios of 8.0% for the Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) capital ratio, 9.5% for the tier 1 capital ratio, and 11.5% for the total capital ratio.
Our current G-SIB surcharge, through December 31, 2024, is 1.0%. Based upon preliminary calculations using data as of December 31, 2023, we currently anticipate that our surcharge will remain at 1% through December 31, 2025; however, that calculation has not yet been finalized and is subject to many financial, balance sheet, market and other factors, and consequently there is a risk that a higher G-SIB surcharge of 1.5% will result from the final calculation.
To maintain the status of the Parent Company as a financial holding company, we and our IDI subsidiaries are required, among other requirements, to be “well capitalized” as defined by Regulation Y and Regulation H.
The market risk capital rule requires us to use internal models to calculate daily measures of VaR, which reflect general market risk for certain of our trading positions defined by the rule as “covered positions,” as well as stressed-VaR measures to supplement the VaR measures. The rule also requires a public disclosure composed of qualitative and quantitative information about the market risk associated with our trading activities and our related VaR and stressed-VaR measures. The qualitative and quantitative information required by the rule is provided under “Market Risk Management” included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
The following table presents the regulatory capital structure and related regulatory capital ratios for us and State Street Bank as of the dates indicated. We are subject to the more stringent of the risk-based capital ratios calculated under the standardized approach and those calculated under the advanced approaches in the assessment of our capital adequacy under applicable bank regulatory standards.
State Street Corporation | 114
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 39: REGULATORY CAPITAL STRUCTURE AND RELATED REGULATORY CAPITAL RATIOS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| State Street Corporation | State Street Bank | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2023 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2023 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2022 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2022 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2023 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2023 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2022 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2022 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common shareholders' equity: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common stock and related surplus | $ | 11,245 | $ | 11,245 | $ | 11,234 | $ | 11,234 | $ | 13,033 | $ | 13,033 | $ | 13,033 | $ | 13,033 | ||||||||||||||
| Retained earnings | 27,957 | 27,957 | 27,028 | 27,028 | 14,454 | 14,454 | 16,975 | 16,975 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) | (2,354) | (2,354) | (3,711) | (3,711) | (2,097) | (2,097) | (3,428) | (3,428) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Treasury stock, at cost | (15,025) | (15,025) | (11,336) | (11,336) | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | 21,823 | 21,823 | 23,215 | 23,215 | 25,390 | 25,390 | 26,580 | 26,580 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Regulatory capital adjustments: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Goodwill and other intangible assets, net of associated deferred tax liabilities | (8,470) | (8,470) | (8,545) | (8,545) | (8,208) | (8,208) | (8,288) | (8,288) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other adjustments(1) | (382) | (382) | (123) | (123) | (298) | (298) | (19) | (19) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital | 12,971 | 12,971 | 14,547 | 14,547 | 16,884 | 16,884 | 18,273 | 18,273 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Preferred stock | 1,976 | 1,976 | 1,976 | 1,976 | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital | 14,947 | 14,947 | 16,523 | 16,523 | 16,884 | 16,884 | 18,273 | 18,273 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Qualifying subordinated long-term debt | 1,870 | 1,870 | 1,376 | 1,376 | 536 | 536 | 542 | 542 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Adjusted allowance for credit losses | — | 150 | — | 120 | — | 150 | — | 120 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total capital | $ | 16,817 | $ | 16,967 | $ | 17,899 | $ | 18,019 | $ | 17,420 | $ | 17,570 | $ | 18,815 | $ | 18,935 | ||||||||||||||
| Risk-weighted assets: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Credit risk(2) | $ | 61,210 | $ | 109,228 | $ | 61,108 | $ | 105,739 | $ | 54,942 | $ | 107,067 | $ | 54,675 | $ | 104,184 | ||||||||||||||
| Operational risk(3) | 43,768 | NA | 42,763 | NA | 42,297 | NA | 42,325 | NA | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Market risk | 2,475 | 2,475 | 1,488 | 1,488 | 2,475 | 2,475 | 1,488 | 1,488 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total risk-weighted assets | $ | 107,453 | $ | 111,703 | $ | 105,359 | $ | 107,227 | $ | 99,714 | $ | 109,542 | $ | 98,488 | $ | 105,672 | ||||||||||||||
| Capital Ratios: | 2023 Minimum Requirements Including Capital Conservation Buffer and G-SIB Surcharge(4) | 2022 Minimum Requirements Including Capital Conservation Buffer and G-SIB Surcharge(4) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital | 8.0 | % | 8.0 | % | 12.1 | % | 11.6 | % | 13.8 | % | 13.6 | % | 16.9 | % | 15.4 | % | 18.6 | % | 17.3 | % | ||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital | 9.5 | 9.5 | 13.9 | 13.4 | 15.7 | 15.4 | 16.9 | 15.4 | 18.6 | 17.3 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Total capital | 11.5 | 11.5 | 15.7 | 15.2 | 17.0 | 16.8 | 17.5 | 16.0 | 19.1 | 17.9 |
(1) Other adjustments within CET1 capital primarily include AOCI hedges that are not recognized at fair value on the balance sheet, the overfunded portion of our defined benefit pension plan obligation net of associated deferred tax liabilities, disallowed deferred tax assets, and other required credit risk-based deductions.
(2) Under the advanced approaches, credit risk RWA includes a CVA which reflects the risk of potential fair value adjustments for credit risk reflected in our valuation of OTC derivative contracts. We used a simple CVA approach in conformity with the Basel III advanced approaches.
(3) Under the current advanced approaches rules and regulatory guidance concerning operational risk models, RWA attributable to operational risk can vary substantially from period-to-period, without direct correlation to the effects of a particular loss event on our results of operations and financial condition and impacting dates and periods that may differ from the dates and periods as of and during which the loss event is reflected in our financial statements, with the timing and categorization dependent on the processes for model updates and, if applicable, model revalidation and regulatory review and related supervisory processes. An individual loss event can have a significant effect on the output of our operational RWA under the advanced approaches depending on the severity of the loss event and its categorization among the seven Basel-defined UOMs.
(4) Minimum requirements include a CCB of 2.5% and a SCB of 2.5% for the advanced approaches and the standardized approach, respectively, a G-SIB surcharge of 1.0% and a countercyclical capital buffer of 0%. On June 28, 2023, we were notified by the Federal Reserve of the results from the 2023 supervisory stress test. Our preliminary SCB calculated under the 2023 supervisory stress test was well below the 2.5% minimum, resulting in an SCB at that floor, which will be in effect from October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2024.
NA Not applicable
Our CET1 capital decreased $1.58 billion as of December 31, 2023 compared to December 31, 2022, primarily due to common share repurchases and dividends declared in 2023, partially offset by net income and an improvement in AOCI. Our Tier 1 capital decreased $1.58 billion as of December 31, 2023 compared to December 31, 2022 under both the advanced approaches and standardized approach, due to the decrease in CET1 capital.
Our Tier 2 capital increased under the advanced approaches and standardized approach, as of December 31, 2023 compared to December 31, 2022, by $0.49 billion and $0.52 billion, respectively, mainly driven by the net issuances of our Tier 2 qualifying debt.
Total capital decreased under the advanced approaches and standardized approach, as of December 31, 2023 compared to December 31, 2022, by $1.08 billion and $1.05 billion, respectively, mainly driven by the decrease in CET1 capital, partially offset by an increase in Tier 2 capital.
State Street Corporation | 115
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The table below presents a roll-forward of CET1 capital, Tier 1 capital and total capital for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022.
| TABLE 40: CAPITAL ROLL-FORWARD | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2023 | Basel III Standardized Approach December, 31, 2023 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2022 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2022 | ||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital balance, beginning of period | $ | 14,547 | $ | 14,547 | $ | 15,947 | $ | 15,947 | ||||||
| Net income | 1,944 | 1,944 | 2,774 | 2,774 | ||||||||||
| Changes in treasury stock, at cost | (3,689) | (3,689) | (1,327) | (1,327) | ||||||||||
| Dividends declared | (958) | (958) | (984) | (984) | ||||||||||
| Goodwill and other intangible assets, net of associated deferred tax liabilities | 75 | 75 | 390 | 390 | ||||||||||
| Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)(1) | 1,357 | 1,357 | (2,578) | (2,578) | ||||||||||
| Other adjustments(1) | (305) | (305) | 325 | 325 | ||||||||||
| Changes in common equity tier 1 capital | (1,576) | (1,576) | (1,400) | (1,400) | ||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital balance, end of period | 12,971 | 12,971 | 14,547 | 14,547 | ||||||||||
| Additional tier 1 capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital balance, beginning of period | 16,523 | 16,523 | 17,923 | 17,923 | ||||||||||
| Changes in common equity tier 1 capital | (1,576) | (1,576) | (1,400) | (1,400) | ||||||||||
| Net issuance (redemption) of preferred stock | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 1 capital | (1,576) | (1,576) | (1,400) | (1,400) | ||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital balance, end of period | 14,947 | 14,947 | 16,523 | 16,523 | ||||||||||
| Tier 2 capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Tier 2 capital balance, beginning of period | 1,376 | 1,496 | 1,588 | 1,696 | ||||||||||
| Net issuance (redemption) and changes in long-term debt qualifying as tier 2 capital | 494 | 494 | (212) | (212) | ||||||||||
| Changes in allowance for credit losses | — | 30 | — | 12 | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 2 capital | 494 | 524 | (212) | (200) | ||||||||||
| Tier 2 capital balance, end of period | 1,870 | 2,020 | 1,376 | 1,496 | ||||||||||
| Total capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Total capital balance, beginning of period | 17,899 | 18,019 | 19,511 | 19,619 | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 1 capital | (1,576) | (1,576) | (1,400) | (1,400) | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 2 capital | 494 | 524 | (212) | (200) | ||||||||||
| Total capital balance, end of period | $ | 16,817 | $ | 16,967 | $ | 17,899 | $ | 18,019 |
(1) Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) includes losses on cash flow hedges where the hedged exposures are not recognized at fair value on the balance sheet, which, under the Capital Rule, must be excluded from CET1 capital. This adjustment is captured in the Other Adjustments line.
The following table presents a roll-forward of the Basel III advanced approaches and standardized approach RWA for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022.
| TABLE 41: ADVANCED & STANDARDIZED APPROACHES RISK-WEIGHTED ASSETS ROLL-FORWARD | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2023 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2022 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2023 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2022 | ||||||||||
| Total risk-weighted assets, beginning of period | $ | 105,359 | $ | 111,398 | $ | 107,227 | $ | 111,667 | ||||||
| Changes in credit risk-weighted assets: | ||||||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in investment securities-wholesale | (1,927) | (4,850) | (1,614) | (3,591) | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in loans and overdrafts | 405 | (3,054) | 1,734 | (5,387) | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in securitization exposures | 359 | (5) | 339 | (5) | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in repo-style transaction exposures | 932 | (1,420) | 1,851 | (5,157) | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in over-the-counter derivatives exposures(1) | 25 | 2,161 | (311) | 6,295 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in all other(2) | 308 | 4,541 | 1,490 | 4,030 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in credit risk-weighted assets | 102 | (2,627) | 3,489 | (3,815) | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in market risk-weighted assets | 987 | (625) | 987 | (625) | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in operational risk-weighted assets | 1,005 | (2,787) | NA | NA | ||||||||||
| Total risk-weighted assets, end of period | $ | 107,453 | $ | 105,359 | $ | 111,703 | $ | 107,227 |
(1) Under the advanced approaches, includes CVA RWA.
(2) Includes assets not in a definable category, non-material portfolio, cleared transactions, other wholesale, cash and due from banks, interest-bearing deposits with banks and equity exposures.
NA Not applicable.
State Street Corporation | 116
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
As of December 31, 2023, total advanced approaches RWA increased $2.09 billion compared to December 31, 2022, mainly due to an increase in operational risk RWA. The increase in operational risk RWA primarily reflects higher frequency of conduct and business practices events in the five-year frequency window. Credit risk RWA was flat year-over-year. RWA increases in reverse repurchase transactions driven by increased volume and higher equity market levels, in loans driven by new capital call commitments and in securitization driven by new collateralized loan obligation loans, were mostly offset by RWA decreases in derivative exposures driven by volatility.
As of December 31, 2023, total standardized approach RWA increased $4.48 billion compared to December 31, 2022, mainly driven by an increase in credit risk RWA. The increase in credit risk RWA primarily reflects higher reverse repurchase transactions RWA driven by increased volume and higher equity market levels and higher loans RWA related to new capital call commitments, partially offset by lower investment securities RWA due to the impact of the investment portfolio repositioning.
The regulatory capital ratios as of December 31, 2023, presented in Table 39: Regulatory Capital Structure and Related Regulatory Capital Ratios, are calculated under the advanced approaches and standardized approach in conformity with the Basel III final rule. The advanced approaches based ratios reflect calculations and determinations with respect to our capital and related matters as of December 31, 2023, based on our and external data, quantitative formulae, statistical models, historical correlations and assumptions, collectively referred to as “advanced systems,” in effect and used by us for those purposes as of the time we first reported such ratios in a quarterly report on Form 10-Q or an annual report on Form 10-K. Significant components of these advanced systems involve the exercise of judgment by us and our regulators, and our advanced systems may not, individually or collectively, precisely represent or calculate the scenarios, circumstances, outputs or other results for which they are designed or intended.
Our advanced systems are subject to update and periodic revalidation in response to changes in our business activities and our historical experiences, forces and events experienced by the market broadly or by individual financial institutions, changes in regulations and regulatory interpretations and other factors, and are also subject to continuing regulatory review and approval. For example, a significant operational loss experienced by another financial institution, even if we do not experience a related loss, could result in a material change in the output of our advanced systems and a corresponding material change in our risk exposures, our total RWA and our capital ratios compared to prior periods. An operational loss that we experience could also result in a material change in our capital requirements for operational risk under the advanced approaches, depending on the severity of the loss event, its characterization among the seven Basel-defined UOM, and the stability of the distributional approach for a particular UOM, and without direct correlation to the effects of the loss event, or the timing of such effects, on our results of operations.
Due to the influence of changes in these advanced systems, whether resulting from changes in data inputs, regulation or regulatory supervision or interpretation, specific to us or market activities or experiences or other updates or factors, we expect that our advanced systems and our capital ratios calculated in conformity with the Basel III final rule will change and may be volatile over time, and that those latter changes or volatility could be material as calculated and measured from period to period. The full effects of the Basel III final rule on us and State Street Bank are therefore subject to further evaluation and also to further regulatory guidance, action or rule-making.
State Street Corporation | 117
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Tier 1 and Supplementary Leverage Ratios
We are subject to a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio and SLR. The Tier 1 leverage ratio is based on Tier 1 capital and adjusted quarterly average on-balance sheet assets. The Tier 1 leverage ratio differs from the SLR primarily in that the denominator of the Tier 1 leverage ratio is a quarterly average of on-balance sheet assets, while the SLR additionally includes off-balance sheet exposures. We must maintain a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio of 4%.
We are also subject to a minimum SLR of 3%, and as a U.S. G-SIB, we must maintain a 2% SLR buffer in order to avoid any limitations on distributions to shareholders and discretionary bonus payments to certain executives. If we do not maintain this buffer, limitations on these distributions and discretionary bonus payments would be increasingly stringent based upon the extent of the shortfall.
| TABLE 42: TIER 1 AND SUPPLEMENTARY LEVERAGE RATIOS | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in millions) | December 31, 2023 | December 31, 2022 | ||||
| State Street: | ||||||
| Tier 1 capital | $ | 14,947 | $ | 16,523 | ||
| Average assets | 278,659 | 284,346 | ||||
| Less: adjustments for deductions from tier 1 capital and other | (8,852) | (8,668) | ||||
| Adjusted average assets for Tier 1 leverage ratio | 269,807 | 275,678 | ||||
| Additional SLR exposure | 39,291 | 40,126 | ||||
| Adjustments for deductions of qualifying central bank deposits | (69,579) | (78,455) | ||||
| Total assets for SLR | $ | 239,519 | $ | 237,349 | ||
| Tier 1 leverage ratio(1) | 5.5 | % | 6.0 | % | ||
| Supplementary leverage ratio | 6.2 | 7.0 | ||||
| State Street Bank(2): | ||||||
| Tier 1 capital | $ | 16,884 | $ | 18,273 | ||
| Average assets | 275,324 | 281,527 | ||||
| Less: adjustments for deductions from tier 1 capital and other | (8,506) | (8,307) | ||||
| Adjusted average assets for Tier 1 leverage ratio | 266,818 | 273,220 | ||||
| Additional SLR exposure | 39,069 | 42,043 | ||||
| Adjustments for deductions of qualifying central bank deposits | (69,579) | (78,455) | ||||
| Total assets for SLR | $ | 236,308 | $ | 236,808 | ||
| Tier 1 leverage ratio (1) | 6.3 | % | 6.7 | % | ||
| Supplementary leverage ratio | 7.1 | 7.7 |
(1) Tier 1 leverage ratios were calculated in conformity with the Basel III final rule.
(2) The SLR rule requires that, as of January 1, 2018, (i) State Street Bank maintains an SLR of at least 6.0% to be well capitalized under the U.S. banking regulators’ Prompt Corrective Action Framework and (ii) we maintain an SLR of at least 5.0% to avoid limitations on capital distributions and discretionary bonus payments. In addition to the SLR, State Street Bank is subject to a well capitalized Tier 1 leverage ratio requirement of 5.0%.
Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity (TLAC)
The Federal Reserve's final rule on TLAC, LTD and clean holding company requirements for U.S. domiciled G-SIBs, such as us, is intended to improve the resiliency and resolvability of certain U.S. banking organizations through enhanced prudential standards, and requires us, among other things, to comply with minimum requirements for external TLAC (combined eligible Tier 1 regulatory capital and LTD) and LTD. Specifically, we must hold:
| Amount equal to: | |
|---|---|
| External TLAC | Greater of:•21.5% of total RWA (18.0% minimum plus 2.5% plus a G-SIB surcharge calculated for these purposes under Method 1 of 1.0% plus any applicable countercyclical buffer, which is currently 0%); and •9.5% of total leverage exposure (7.5% minimum plus the SLR buffer of 2.0%), as defined by the SLR final rule. |
| Qualifying external LTD | Greater of:•7.0% of RWA (6.0% minimum plus a G-SIB surcharge calculated for these purposes under method 2 of 1.0%); and •4.5% of total leverage exposure, as defined by the SLR final rule. |
The following table presents external TLAC and external LTD as of December 31, 2023.
| TABLE 43: TOTAL LOSS-ABSORBING CAPACITY | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2023 | |||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | Actual | Requirement | |||||||||||
| Total loss-absorbing capacity: | |||||||||||||
| Risk-weighted assets | $ | 32,850 | 29.4 | % | $ | 24,016 | 21.5 | % | |||||
| Total leverage exposure | 32,850 | 13.7 | 22,754 | 9.5 | |||||||||
| Long-term debt: | |||||||||||||
| Risk-weighted assets | 16,753 | 15.0 | 7,819 | 7.0 | |||||||||
| Total leverage exposure | 16,753 | 7.0 | 10,778 | 4.5 |
Additional information about TLAC is provided under “Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity” in “Supervision and Regulation” in Business in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 118
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Regulatory Developments
On July 27, 2023, the U.S. Agencies issued a proposed rule to implement the Basel III Endgame Proposal for large banks, and separately proposed the G-SIB Surcharge Proposal. The Basel III Endgame Proposal would, among other things, eliminate the advanced approaches for monitoring capital adequacy in favor of a new standardized expanded risk-based approach that would include, unlike the current standardized approach, operational risk and CVA risk RWA components, and would also replace the existing market risk rule with the new fundamental review of the FRTB framework. The G-SIB Surcharge Proposal would, among other things, measure the G-SIB surcharge in more granular 0.1% increments as opposed to the 0.5% increments that currently apply.
For additional information about regulatory developments, refer to the “Regulatory Capital Adequacy and Liquidity Standards” section of “Supervision and Regulation” in Business in this Form 10-K.
Capital Actions
Preferred Stock
The following table summarizes selected terms of each of the series of the preferred stock issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2023:
| TABLE 44: PREFERRED STOCK ISSUED AND OUTSTANDING | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preferred Stock(1): | Issuance Date | Depositary Shares Issued | Amount outstanding (in millions) | Ownership Interest Per Depositary Share | Liquidation Preference Per Share | Liquidation Preference Per Depositary Share | Per Annum Dividend Rate | Dividend Payment Frequency | Carrying Value as of December 31, 2023 (In millions) | Redemption Date(2) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Series D | February 2014 | 30,000,000 | $ | 750 | 1/4,000th | $ | 100,000 | $ | 25 | 5.90% to but excluding March 15, 2024, then 9.008%(3) | Quarterly: March, June, September and December | $ | 742 | March 15, 2024 | |||||||||||||||
| Series F | May 2015 | 250,000 | 250 | 1/100th | 100,000 | 1,000 | Floating rate equal to the three-month CME term SOFR plus 3.859%, or 9.243% effective December 15, 2023 | Quarterly: March, June, September and December | 247 | September 15, 2020 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Series G | April 2016 | 20,000,000 | 500 | 1/4,000th | 100,000 | 25 | 5.35%(4) | Quarterly: March, June, September and December | 493 | March 15, 2026 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Series H | September 2018 | 500,000 | 500 | 1/100th | 100,000 | 1,000 | Floating rate equal to the three-month CME term SOFR plus 2.801%, or 8.185% effective December 15,2023 | Quarterly: March, June, September and December | 494 | December 15, 2023 |
(1) The preferred stock and corresponding depositary shares may be redeemed at our option in whole, but not in part, prior to the redemption date upon the occurrence of a regulatory capital treatment event, as defined in the certificate of designation, at a redemption price equal to the liquidation price per share and liquidation price per depositary share plus any declared and unpaid dividends, without accumulation of any undeclared dividends.
(2) On the redemption date, or any dividend payment date thereafter, the preferred stock and corresponding depositary shares may be redeemed by us, in whole or in part, at the liquidation price per share and liquidation price per depositary share plus any declared and unpaid dividends, without accumulation of any undeclared dividends.
(3) The dividend rate for the floating rate period of the Series D preferred stock that begins on March 15, 2024 and all subsequent floating rate periods will transition to a new, fixed rate in accordance with the LIBOR Act and the contractual terms of the Series D preferred stock.
(4) The dividend rate for the floating rate period of the Series G preferred stock that begins on March 15, 2026 and all subsequent floating rate periods will remain at the current fixed rate in accordance with the LIBOR Act and the contractual terms of the Series G preferred stock.
State Street Corporation | 119
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
In January 2024, we issued 1.5 million depositary shares, each representing 1/100th ownership interest in shares of fixed-to-floating rate, non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series I, without par value per share, with a liquidation preference of $100,000 per share (equivalent to $1,000 per depositary share), in a public offering. The aggregate proceeds, net of underwriting discounts, commissions and other issuance costs, were approximately $1.5 billion. Dividends on the Series I Preferred Stock will be payable quarterly at an initial rate of 6.700% per annum commencing on June 15, 2024, with the first dividend payable on a pro-rata basis. Our preferred stock dividends, including the declaration, timing and amount thereof, are subject to consideration and approval by the Board at the relevant times.
In addition, on February 8, 2024, we announced that we will redeem on March 15, 2024 an aggregate $1.0 billion, or all 7,500 outstanding shares, of our non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series D (represented by 30,000,000 depository shares), for a cash redemption price of $100,000 per share (equivalent to $25 per depository share), plus all declared and unpaid dividends and all 2,500 of the outstanding shares of our non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series F (represented by 250,000 depository shares), for a cash redemption price of $100,000 per share (equivalent to $1,000 per depositary share) plus all declared and unpaid dividends. Cash dividends on the Series D and F Preferred Stock, of approximately $1,475 and $2,336, respectively, per share, or approximately $0.37 and $23.36, respectively per depository share have been declared for the period from December 15, 2023 up to but not including March 15, 2024 (together, the “March Dividends"). The March Dividends will be paid separately to the holders of record of the Series D Preferred Stock and the Series F Preferred Stock as of February 29, 2024 in the customary manner. Accordingly, there will not be any declared and unpaid dividends included in the Series D and Series F redemption price.
The following table presents the dividends declared for each of the series of preferred stock issued and outstanding for the periods indicated:
TABLE 45: PREFERRED STOCK DIVIDENDS
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 2022 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) | Dividends Declared per Share | Dividends Declared per Depositary Share | Total | Dividends Declared per Share | Dividends Declared per Depositary Share | Total | ||||||||||||||||
| Preferred Stock: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Series D | $ | 5,900 | $ | 1.48 | $ | 44 | $ | 5,900 | $ | 1.48 | $ | 44 | ||||||||||
| Series F | 8,935 | 89.35 | 23 | 5,208 | 52.08 | 13 | ||||||||||||||||
| Series G | 5,350 | 1.34 | 27 | 5,352 | 1.32 | 27 | ||||||||||||||||
| Series H | 5,625 | 56.25 | 28 | 5,625 | 56.25 | 28 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 122 | $ | 112 |
In January 2024, we declared dividends on our series D, F, G, and H preferred stock of approximately $1,475, $2,336, $1,338, and $2,069, respectively, per share, or approximately $0.37, $23.36, $0.33, and $20.69, respectively, per depositary share. These dividends total approximately $11 million, $6 million, $7 million, and $10 million on our series D, F, G, and H preferred stock, respectively, which will be paid in March 2024.
Common Stock
On January 19, 2024, we announced a new common share repurchase program, approved by our Board and superseding all prior programs, authorizing the purchase of up to $5.0 billion of our common stock beginning in the first quarter of 2024. This new program has no set expiration date and is not expected to be executed in full during 2024.
In January 2023, our Board approved a common share repurchase program authorizing the purchase of up to $4.5 billion of our common stock through December 31, 2023 (the 2023 Program). We repurchased $3.8 billion of our common stock during 2023 under the 2023 Program.
In 2022, we repurchased $1.5 billion of our common stock under the 2021 program authorizing the purchase of up to $3.0 billion of our common stock through the end of 2022.
State Street Corporation | 120
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The table below presents the activity under our common share repurchase program for the period indicated:
| TABLE 46: SHARES REPURCHASED | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2023 | 2022 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Shares Acquired (In millions) | Average Cost per Share | Total Acquired (In millions) | Shares Acquired (In millions) | Average Cost per Share | Total Acquired (In millions) | |||||||||||||||||
| 2023 Program | 49.2 | $ | 77.22 | $ | 3,800 | — | $ | — | $ | — | ||||||||||||
| 2021 Program | — | — | — | 19.5 | 76.81 | 1,500 |
The table below presents the dividends declared on common stock for the periods indicated:
| TABLE 47: COMMON STOCK DIVIDENDS | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||
| 2023 | 2022 | |||||||||||||
| Dividends Declared per Share | Total (In millions) | Dividends Declared per Share | Total (In millions) | |||||||||||
| Common Stock | $ | 2.64 | $ | 837 | $ | 2.40 | $ | 871 |
Federal and state banking regulations place certain restrictions on dividends paid by subsidiary banks to the parent holding company. In addition, banking regulators have the authority to prohibit bank holding companies from paying dividends. For information concerning limitations on dividends from our subsidiary banks, refer to “Related Stockholder Matters” included under Item 5, Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities, and to Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K. Our common stock dividends, including the declaration, timing and amount thereof, are subject to consideration and approval by the Board at the relevant times.
Stock purchases under our common share repurchase program may be made using various types of transactions, including open market purchases, accelerated share repurchases or other transactions off the market, and may be made under Rule 10b5-1 trading programs. The timing and amount of any stock purchases and the type of transaction may not be ratable over the duration of the program, may vary from reporting period to reporting period and will depend on several factors, including our capital position and our financial performance, investment opportunities, market conditions, the nature and timing of implementation of revisions to the Basel III framework and the amount of common stock issued as part of employee compensation programs. The common share repurchase program does not have specific price targets and may be suspended at any time.
OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS
On behalf of clients enrolled in our securities lending program, we lend securities to banks, broker/dealers and other institutions. In most circumstances, we indemnify our clients for the fair market value of those securities against a failure of the borrower to return such securities. Though these transactions are collateralized, the substantial volume of these activities necessitates detailed credit-based underwriting and monitoring processes. The aggregate amount of indemnified securities on loan totaled $279.92 billion and $348.92 billion as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively. We require the borrower to provide collateral in an amount in excess of 100% of the fair market value of the securities borrowed. We hold the collateral received in connection with these securities lending services as agent, and the collateral is not recorded in our consolidated statement of condition. We revalue the securities on loan and the collateral daily to determine if additional collateral is necessary or if excess collateral is required to be returned to the borrower. We held, as agent, cash and securities totaling $293.86 billion and $366.90 billion as collateral for indemnified securities on loan as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively.
The cash collateral held by us as agent is invested on behalf of our clients. In certain cases, the cash collateral is invested in third-party repurchase agreements, for which we indemnify the client against loss of the principal invested. We require the counterparty to the indemnified repurchase agreement to provide collateral in an amount in excess of 100% of the amount of the repurchase agreement. In our role as agent, the indemnified repurchase agreements and the related collateral held by us are not recorded in our consolidated statement of condition. Of the collateral of $293.86 billion and $366.90 billion, referenced above, $59.03 billion and $54.11 billion was invested in indemnified repurchase agreements as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively. We or our agents held $63.11 billion and $57.90 billion as collateral for indemnified investments in repurchase agreements as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively.
Additional information about our securities finance activities and other off-balance sheet arrangements is provided in Notes 10, 12 and 14 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 121
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES
Our consolidated financial statements are prepared in conformity with U.S. GAAP, and we apply accounting policies that affect the determination of amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements.
Certain of our accounting policies, by their nature, require management to make judgments, involving significant estimates and assumptions, about the effects of matters that are inherently uncertain. These estimates and assumptions are based on information available as of the date of the consolidated financial statements, and changes in this information over time could materially affect the amounts of assets, liabilities, equity, revenue and expenses reported in subsequent consolidated financial statements.
Based on the sensitivity of reported financial statement amounts to the underlying estimates and assumptions, the more significant accounting policies identified by management are:
•Recurring fair value measurements;
•Allowance for credit losses;
•Impairment of goodwill and other intangible assets; and
•Contingencies.
These policies require the most subjective or complex judgments, and underlying estimates and assumptions could be most subject to revision as new information becomes available. An understanding of the judgments, estimates and assumptions underlying these accounting policies is essential to the understanding of our reported results of operations and financial condition.
The following is a discussion of the above-mentioned significant accounting estimates. Additional information on our significant accounting policies, including references to applicable footnotes, is provided in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Fair Value Measurements
We carry certain of our financial assets and liabilities at fair value in our consolidated financial statements on a recurring basis, including trading account assets and liabilities, AFS debt securities, certain equity securities and various types of derivative financial instruments.
Changes in the fair value of these financial assets and liabilities are recorded either as components of our consolidated statement of income or as components of other comprehensive income within shareholders' equity in our consolidated statement of condition. In addition to those financial assets and liabilities that we carry at fair value in our
consolidated financial statements on a recurring basis, we estimate the fair values of other financial assets and liabilities that we carry at amortized cost in our consolidated statement of condition, and we disclose these fair value estimates in the notes to our consolidated financial statements. We estimate the fair values of these financial assets and liabilities using the definition of fair value described below.
U.S. GAAP defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in the principal or most advantageous market for an asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. When we measure fair value for our financial assets and liabilities, we consider the principal or the most advantageous market in which we would transact; we also consider assumptions that market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability. When possible, we look to active and observable markets to measure the fair value of identical, or similar, financial assets and liabilities. When identical financial assets and liabilities are not traded in active markets, we look to market-observable data for similar assets and liabilities. In some instances, certain assets and liabilities are not actively traded in observable markets; as a result, we use alternate valuation techniques to measure their fair value.
We categorize the financial assets and liabilities that we carry at fair value in our consolidated statement of condition on a recurring basis based on U.S. GAAP's prescribed three-level valuation hierarchy. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (level 1) and the lowest priority to valuation methods using significant unobservable inputs (level 3).
With respect to derivative instruments, we evaluate the fair value impact of the credit risk of our counterparties. We consider such factors as the market-based probability of default by our counterparties, and our current and expected potential future net exposures by remaining maturities, in determining the appropriate measurements of fair value.
Additional information with respect to the assets and liabilities carried by us at fair value on a recurring basis is provided in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 122
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Allowance for Credit Losses
We record an allowance for credit losses related to certain on-balance sheet credit exposures, including our financial assets held at amortized cost, as well as certain off-balance sheet credit exposures, including unfunded commitments and letters of credit.
Determining the appropriateness of the allowance is complex and requires judgment by management about the effect of matters that are inherently uncertain. In future periods, factors and forecasts then prevailing may result in significant changes in the allowance for credit losses in those future periods. We estimate credit losses over the contractual life of the financial asset while factoring in prepayment activity where supported by data over a three year reasonable and supportable forecast period. We utilize baseline, upside and downside scenarios that are applied based on a probability weighting, in order to better reflect management’s expectation of expected credit losses given existing market conditions and the changes in the economic environment. The multiple scenarios are based on a three year horizon (or less depending on contractual maturity) and then revert linearly over a two year period to a ten-year historical average thereafter. The contractual term excludes expected extensions, renewals and modifications, but includes prepayment assumptions where applicable.
Our allowance for credit losses is sensitive to a number of inputs, including macroeconomic forecast assumptions and credit rating migrations during the period. Our macroeconomic forecasts used in determining the December 31, 2023 allowance for credit losses consisted of three scenarios reflecting contractions in GDP and rising unemployment of varying severity, with the baseline scenario generally in line with market consensus of economic forecasts for GDP and unemployment. We placed the most weight on our baseline scenario, with the remaining weighting split equally between the upside and downside scenarios.
Keeping all other factors constant, we estimate that if we had applied 100% weighting to the downside scenario, the allowance for credit losses as of December 31, 2023 would have been approximately $58 million higher. This estimate is intended to reflect the sensitivity of the allowance for credit losses to changes in our scenario weights and is not intended to be indicative of future changes in the allowance for credit losses.
Additional information about our allowance for credit losses is provided in Notes 3 and 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets
Goodwill represents the excess of the cost of an acquisition over the fair value of the net tangible and
other intangible assets acquired at the acquisition date. Other intangible assets represent purchased long-lived intangible assets, primarily client relationships, core deposit intangible assets and technology that can be distinguished from goodwill because of contractual rights or because the asset can be exchanged on its own or in combination with a related contract, asset or liability. Other intangible assets are initially measured at their acquisition date fair value, the determination of which requires management judgment. Goodwill is not amortized, while other intangible assets are amortized over their estimated useful lives.
Management reviews goodwill for impairment annually or more frequently if circumstances arise or events occur that indicate an impairment of the carrying amount may exist. We begin our review by first assessing qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. Events that may indicate impairment include: significant or adverse changes in the business, economic or political climate; an adverse action or assessment by a regulator; unanticipated competition; and a more-likely-than-not expectation that we will sell or otherwise dispose of a business to which the goodwill or other intangible assets relate. If we conclude from the qualitative assessment of goodwill impairment that it is more likely than not that a reporting unit’s fair value is greater than its carrying amount, quantitative tests are not required. However, if we determine it is more likely than not that a reporting unit’s fair value is less than its carrying amount, then we complete a quantitative assessment to determine if there is goodwill impairment. We may elect to bypass the qualitative assessment and complete a quantitative assessment in any given year.
In 2023, due to the passage of time since the last quantitative test, we elected to bypass the qualitative assessment and we assessed goodwill for impairment using a quantitative approach. We determined there was no goodwill impairment in 2023.
Other intangible assets are supported by the future cash flows that are directly associated with and expected to arise as a direct result of the use of the intangible asset, less any costs associated with the intangible asset’s eventual disposition. We evaluate other intangible assets for impairment at the lowest level for which there are identifiable cash flows that are largely independent of the cash flows from other groups of assets using the following process. First, we routinely assess whether impairment indicators are present. When impairment indicators are identified as being present, we compare the estimated future net undiscounted cash flows of the
State Street Corporation | 123
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
intangible asset with its carrying value. If the future net undiscounted cash flows are greater than the carrying value, then there is no impairment, but if the intangible asset's net undiscounted cash flows are less than its carrying value, we are required to calculate impairment. An impairment is recognized by writing the intangible asset down to its fair value. We evaluate intangible assets for indicators of impairment on a quarterly basis. There were no impairments taken on other intangible assets in 2023.
Additional information about goodwill and other intangible assets, including information by line of business, is provided in Note 5 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Contingencies
Information on significant estimates and judgments related with establishing litigation reserves is discussed in Note 13 of the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
RECENT ACCOUNTING DEVELOPMENTS
Information with respect to recent accounting developments is provided in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
OTHER MATTERS
Closures of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank and Related FDIC Matters
On March 12 and 13, 2023, following the closures of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and Signature Bank and the appointment of the FDIC as the receiver for those banks, the FDIC announced that, under the systemic risk exception set forth in the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDIA), all insured and uninsured deposits of those banks were transferred to the respective bridge banks for SVB and Signature Bank. The FDIC also announced that, as required by the FDIA, any losses to the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”) to support uninsured depositors would be recovered by a special assessment.
On November 29, 2023, the FDIC published in the Federal Register a final rule to implement a special assessment to recover the loss to the DIF arising from the protection of uninsured depositors following the closure of SVB and Signature Bank. The FDIC has determined that the current total special assessment for those purposes is $16.3 billion, which is approximately equal to the FDIC’s estimate of losses to the DIF attributable to the protection of uninsured depositors at SVB and Signature Bank. The FDIC will determine the exact amount of losses incurred when it terminates the receiverships of these two banks, and the amount of the special assessment will be adjusted as the loss estimates change. For IDIs such as State Street Bank, the special assessment will be applied at a quarterly rate of 3.36 basis points multiplied by the IDI’s estimated
uninsured deposits, reported as of December 31, 2022 and adjusted to exclude the first $5 billion in estimated uninsured deposits from the IDI. The FDIC will collect the special assessment over eight quarterly assessment periods, although the collection period may change due to updates to the estimated loss pursuant to the systemic risk determination or if assessments collected change due to corrective amendments to the amount of uninsured deposits reported for the December 31, 2022 reporting period. The final rule is effective on April 1, 2024, with the first collection for the special assessment reflected on the invoice for the first quarterly assessment period of 2024 (i.e., January 1 through March 31, 2024), with a payment date of June 28, 2024.
In the fourth quarter of 2023, we recognized a pre-tax expense within Other Expenses of approximately $387 million, reflecting the current full amount of State Street Bank’s allocation of the special assessment consistent with the calculation methodology noted above. The total expense for the special assessment remains subject to any actions by the FDIC, as described above, to cease collection early, extend the collection period, or impose a final additional shortfall special assessment.
FY 2022 10-K MD&A
SEC filing source: 0000093751-23-000489.
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
GENERAL
This Management's Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes in this Form 10-K. Certain previously reported amounts presented in this Form 10-K have been reclassified to conform to current-period presentation.
As of December 31, 2022, we had consolidated total assets of $301.45 billion, consolidated total deposits of $235.46 billion, consolidated total shareholders' equity of $25.19 billion and approximately 42,000 employees. Through our two lines of business, Investment Servicing and Investment Management, we operate in more than 100 geographic markets worldwide, including the U.S., Canada, Latin America, Europe, the Middle East and Asia.
For the description of our lines of business, refer to "Lines of Business” in Item 1 in this Form 10-K. For financial and other information about our lines of business, refer to “Line of Business Information” in this Management's Discussion and Analysis and Note 24 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
We prepare our consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions in its application of certain accounting policies that materially affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, equity, revenue and expenses.
Information about the significant accounting policies that require us to make judgments, estimates and assumptions that are difficult, subjective or complex about matters that are uncertain and may change in subsequent periods is included under “Significant Accounting Estimates” in this Management's Discussion and Analysis and in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Certain financial information provided in this Form 10-K, including this Management's Discussion and Analysis, is presented using both a U.S. GAAP, or reported basis, and a non-GAAP basis, including certain non-GAAP measures used in the calculation of identified regulatory ratios. We measure and compare certain financial information on a non-GAAP basis, including information that management uses in evaluating our business and activities. Non-GAAP financial information should be considered in addition to, and not as a substitute for or as superior to,
financial information prepared in conformity with U.S. GAAP. Any non-GAAP financial information presented in this Form 10-K, including this Management’s Discussion and Analysis, is reconciled to its most directly comparable currently applicable regulatory ratio or U.S. GAAP-basis measure. As part of our non-GAAP-basis measures, we present a fully taxable-equivalent NII that reports non-taxable revenue, such as interest income associated with tax-exempt investment securities, on a fully taxable-equivalent basis, which we believe facilitates an investor's understanding and analysis of our underlying financial performance and trends.
In this Management’s Discussion and Analysis, where we describe the effects of changes in foreign currency translation, those effects are determined by applying applicable weighted average FX rates from the relevant 2021 period to the relevant 2022 period results.
This Management's Discussion and Analysis contains statements that are considered "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of U.S. securities laws. These forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties which could cause actual results to differ materially. Additional information about forward-looking statements and related risks and uncertainties is provided in "Forward-Looking Statements", "Risk Factors Summary" and "Risk Factors" in this Form 10-K.
Information regarding additional disclosures and materials available on our corporate website is provided under "Additional Information" in Item 1 in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 59
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
OVERVIEW OF FINANCIAL RESULTS
| TABLE 1: OVERVIEW OF FINANCIAL RESULTS | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |||||||
| Total fee revenue | $ | 9,606 | $ | 10,012 | $ | 9,499 | ||||
| Net interest income | 2,544 | 1,905 | 2,200 | |||||||
| Total other income | (2) | 110 | 4 | |||||||
| Total revenue | 12,148 | 12,027 | 11,703 | |||||||
| Provision for credit losses | 20 | (33) | 88 | |||||||
| Total expenses | 8,801 | 8,889 | 8,716 | |||||||
| Income before income tax expense | 3,327 | 3,171 | 2,899 | |||||||
| Income tax expense | 553 | 478 | 479 | |||||||
| Net income | $ | 2,774 | $ | 2,693 | $ | 2,420 | ||||
| Adjustments to net income: | ||||||||||
| Dividends on preferred stock(1) | $ | (112) | $ | (119) | $ | (162) | ||||
| Earnings allocated to participating securities(2) | (2) | (2) | (1) | |||||||
| Net income available to common shareholders | $ | 2,660 | $ | 2,572 | $ | 2,257 | ||||
| Earnings per common share: | ||||||||||
| Basic | $ | 7.28 | $ | 7.30 | $ | 6.40 | ||||
| Diluted | 7.19 | 7.19 | 6.32 | |||||||
| Average common shares outstanding (in thousands): | ||||||||||
| Basic | 365,214 | 352,565 | 352,865 | |||||||
| Diluted | 370,109 | 357,962 | 357,106 | |||||||
| Cash dividends declared per common share | $ | 2.40 | $ | 2.18 | $ | 2.08 | ||||
| Return on average common equity | 11.1 | % | 10.7 | % | 10.0 | % | ||||
| Pre-tax margin | 27.4 | 26.4 | 24.8 | |||||||
| Return on average assets | 1.0 | 0.9 | 0.9 | |||||||
| Common dividend payout | 33.4 | 30.3 | 32.9 | |||||||
| Average common equity to average total assets | 8.3 | 8.0 | 8.3 |
(1) Additional information about our preferred stock dividends is provided in Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
(2) Represents the portion of net income available to common equity allocated to participating securities, composed of unvested and fully vested SERP (Supplemental executive retirement plans) shares and fully vested deferred director stock awards, which are equity-based awards that contain non-forfeitable rights to dividends, and are considered to participate with the common stock in undistributed earnings.
The following section provides information related to significant events, as well as highlights of our consolidated financial results for the year ended December 31, 2022 presented in Table 1: Overview of Financial Results. More detailed information about our consolidated financial results, including the comparison of our financial results for the year ended December 31, 2022 to those of the year ended December 31, 2021, is provided under “Consolidated Results of Operations”, "Line of Business Information" and "Capital" sections which follow “Financial Results and Highlights”, as well as in our consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
The comparison of our financial results for the year ended December 31, 2021 to those of the year ended December 31, 2020 is included in the Management's Discussion and Analysis in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021 filed with the SEC on February 17, 2022.
Financial Results and Highlights
•2022 financial performance:
◦EPS of $7.19, flat compared to 2021.
◦Total revenue increased 1% compared to 2021, as higher NII was partially offset by lower fee revenue and the impact of currency translation, which decreased total revenue by 2% in 2022 relative to the same period in 2021.
◦Total expenses decreased 1% compared to 2021, as continued productivity and optimization savings, as well as the benefit from currency translation were partially offset by ongoing business investments and merit increases, professional fees, recoverable client-related expenses, marketing and travel costs. Currency translation reduced expenses by 3% in 2022 compared to 2021.
◦Return on equity of 11.1% increased from 10.7% in 2021, primarily due to an increase in net income available to common shareholders. Pre-tax margin of 27.4% increased from 26.4% in 2021, primarily due to the increase in total revenue and lower expenses.
◦Positive operating leverage of 2.0% points. Operating leverage represents the difference between the percentage change in total revenue and the percentage change in total expenses, in each case relative to the prior year period.
◦Negative fee operating leverage of 3.1% points. Fee operating leverage represents the difference between the percentage change in total fee revenue and the percentage change in total expenses, in each case relative to the prior year period.
◦Returned approximately $2.4 billion to our shareholders in the form of common stock dividends and common share repurchases compared to approximately $1.7 billion in 2021.
State Street Corporation | 60
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Revenue
•Total fee revenue decreased 4% compared to 2021, primarily driven by lower servicing fees, management fees, and other fee revenue, partially offset by higher foreign exchange trading services revenue and software and processing fees. Currency translation negatively impacted both total revenue and total fee revenue by 2% each in 2022 compared to 2021.
•Servicing fee revenue decreased 8% compared to 2021, primarily due to normal pricing headwinds, lower average market levels and lower client activity and adjustments, partially offset by net new business. Currency translation contributed 3% to the decrease in servicing fee revenue in 2022 compared to 2021.
•Management fee revenue decreased 6% compared to 2021, primarily due to lower average equity and fixed income market levels, a previously reported client-specific pricing adjustment and institutional net outflows, partially offset by the absence of the impact of money market fee waivers and net inflows from cash and ETFs. Currency translation contributed 2% to the decrease in management fee revenue in 2022 compared to 2021.
•Foreign exchange trading services revenue increased 14% compared to 2021, primarily reflecting higher FX spreads and a revenue- related recovery from a 2018 FX benchmark litigation resolution, partially offset by lower client FX volumes.
•Securities finance revenue was flat compared to 2021, reflecting higher spreads, offset by lower agency and enhanced custody balances.
▪Software and processing fees revenue increased 7% compared to 2021, primarily due to higher front office software and data revenue associated with CRD, partially offset by lower lending fees.
•Other fee revenue decreased $64 million compared to 2021, primarily driven by negative market-related adjustments.
•NII increased 34% compared to 2021, primarily due to higher interest rates from U.S. and international central bank rate hikes, partially offset by lower client deposits.
Provision for Credit Losses
•We recorded a $20 million provision for credit losses, due to a downward shift in management's economic outlook that was
partially offset by a reduction in overall loan portfolio risk, compared to a $33 million release of credit reserves in 2021.
Expenses
•Total expenses decreased 1% compared to 2021, as continued productivity and optimization savings, as well as the benefit from currency translation were partially offset by ongoing business investments and merit increases, professional fees, recoverable client-related expenses, marketing and travel costs. Currency translation reduced expenses by 3% in 2022 compared to 2021.
Notable Items
•The impact of notable items in 2022 includes:
◦Revenue-related recovery of $23 million from settlement proceeds associated with the 2018 FX benchmark litigation resolution, which is reflected in foreign exchange trading services revenue;
◦Repositioning charges of approximately $78 million, consisting of $50 million of compensation and benefits expenses primarily related to streamlining the Investment Services organization, and $20 million of occupancy charges related to real estate footprint optimization and $8 million of BBH-related repositioning charges; and
◦Acquisition and restructuring costs of approximately $65 million related to the BBH Investor Services acquisition transaction we are no longer pursuing.
•The impact of notable items in 2021 includes:
◦Gain on the sale of a majority share of our Wealth Management Services (WMS) business of $53 million recorded in other income;
◦Gain on sale of investment securities of $58 million related to a one-time transfer of LIBOR and Euro Interbank Offered Rate based securities from HTM to AFS, and the subsequent sale of the majority of those securities in 2021;
◦Net repositioning release of approximately $3 million, consisting of $32 million release of previously accrued severance charges, partially offset by $29 million of occupancy charges related to footprint optimization;
State Street Corporation | 61
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
◦Deferred compensation expense acceleration of approximately $147 million associated with an amendment of certain outstanding deferred cash incentive compensation awards;
◦Acquisition and restructuring costs of approximately $65 million, of which $53 million related to CRD and $13 million related to the BBH Investor Services acquisition transaction we are no longer pursuing;
◦Net legal and other expenses of approximately $18 million, including $20 million in information systems and communications, $8 million in transaction processing services and $1 million in other expenses, partially offset by a legal accrual release of approximately $11 million associated with a settlement related to the invoicing matter; and
◦Costs of $5 million due to the partial redemption of outstanding Series F non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock representing the difference between the redemption value and the net carrying value of the preferred stock.
AUC/A and AUM
•AUC/A of $36.74 trillion as of December 31, 2022 decreased 16% compared to December 31, 2021, primarily due to lower market levels, a previously disclosed client transition and the impact of currency translation, partially offset by new business installations. In 2022, newly announced asset servicing mandates totaled approximately $1.9 trillion. Servicing assets remaining to be installed in future periods totaled approximately $3.60 trillion as of December 31, 2022.
•AUM of $3.48 trillion as of December 31, 2022 decreased 16% compared to December 31, 2021, primarily due to lower market levels, institutional net outflows and the impact of currency translation, partially offset by net inflows from ETFs.
Capital
•In 2022, we returned approximately $2.4 billion to our shareholders in the form of
common stock dividends and common share repurchases compared to approximately $1.7 billion in 2021.
•We declared aggregate common stock dividends of $2.40 per share, totaling $871 million compared to $2.18 per share, totaling $779 million in 2021.
•We did not repurchase any common stock during the first three quarters of 2022. In October 2022, we resumed our share repurchases under the 2021 Program, and purchased an aggregate of 19.5 million shares of common stock, at an average per share cost of $76.81 and an aggregate cost of approximately $1.5 billion in the fourth quarter of 2022.
•In January 2023, our Board approved a share repurchase program authorizing the purchase of up to $4.5 billion of our common stock through December 31, 2023.
•Our standardized CET1 capital ratio decreased to 13.6% as of December 31, 2022, compared to 14.3% as of December 31, 2021, primarily reflecting lower AOCI related to AFS securities, largely recognized in the first half of 2022 driven by the significant increase in interest rates across the yield curve and the resumption of common share repurchases in the fourth quarter of 2022, partially offset by higher retained earnings and episodically lower RWA. However, we anticipate RWA to increase over the coming quarter as market volatility levels normalize and we efficiently deploy capital to our businesses. Our Tier 1 leverage ratio decreased to 6.0% as of December 31, 2022 compared to 6.1% as of December 31, 2021, primarily driven by lower AOCI and resumption of share repurchases in the fourth quarter of 2022, partially offset by a decline in consolidated average assets. During 2022, we completed a number of actions designed to mitigate additional AOCI risk in the current environment including a $23.56 billion transfer of securities from AFS to HTM. Given the current global economic environment, we currently expect our CET1 and Tier 1 leverage capital ratios to move into our target ranges of 10-11% and 5.25-5.75%, respectively.
State Street Corporation | 62
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Debt Issuances and Redemptions
•On February 7, 2022, we issued $300 million aggregate principal amount of 1.746% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026, $650 million aggregate principal amount of 2.203% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2028 and $550 million aggregate principal amount of 2.623% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2033.
•On March 30, 2022, we redeemed $750 million aggregate principal amount of 2.825% Fixed-to-Floating Rate Senior Notes due 2023.
•On May 13, 2022, we issued $500 million aggregate principal amount of 4.421% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2033.
•On May 15, 2022, we redeemed $750 million aggregate principal amount of 2.653% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2023.
•On August 4, 2022, we issued $750 million aggregate principal amount of 4.164% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2033.
•On November 4, 2022, we issued $500 million aggregate principal amount of 5.751% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026 and $500 million aggregate principal amount of 5.820% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2028.
•On January 26, 2023, we issued $500 million aggregate principal amount of 4.857% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026 and $750 million aggregate principal amount of 4.821% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2034.
CONSOLIDATED RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
This section discusses our consolidated results of operations for 2022 compared to 2021 and should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Total Revenue
| TABLE 2: TOTAL REVENUE | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | ||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |||||||||||||||
| Fee revenue: | ||||||||||||||||||
| Back office services | $ | 4,714 | $ | 5,117 | $ | 4,758 | (8) | % | 8 | % | ||||||||
| Middle office services | 373 | 414 | 399 | (10) | 4 | |||||||||||||
| Servicing fees(1) | 5,087 | 5,531 | 5,157 | (8) | 7 | |||||||||||||
| Management fees | 1,939 | 2,053 | 1,880 | (6) | 9 | |||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange trading services | 1,376 | 1,211 | 1,363 | 14 | (11) | |||||||||||||
| Securities finance | 416 | 416 | 356 | — | 17 | |||||||||||||
| Front office software and data | 550 | 484 | 446 | 14 | 9 | |||||||||||||
| Lending related and other fees | 239 | 254 | 239 | (6) | 6 | |||||||||||||
| Software and processing fees(1) | 789 | 738 | 685 | 7 | 8 | |||||||||||||
| Other fee revenue(1) | (1) | 63 | 58 | nm | 9 | |||||||||||||
| Total fee revenue | 9,606 | 10,012 | 9,499 | (4) | 5 | |||||||||||||
| Net interest income: | ||||||||||||||||||
| Interest income | 4,088 | 1,908 | 2,575 | nm | (26) | |||||||||||||
| Interest expense | 1,544 | 3 | 375 | nm | (99) | |||||||||||||
| Net interest income | 2,544 | 1,905 | 2,200 | 34 | (13) | |||||||||||||
| Other income: | ||||||||||||||||||
| Gains (losses) related to investment securities, net | (2) | 57 | 4 | nm | nm | |||||||||||||
| Other income | — | 53 | — | nm | nm | |||||||||||||
| Total other income | (2) | 110 | 4 | nm | nm | |||||||||||||
| Total revenue | $ | 12,148 | $ | 12,027 | $ | 11,703 | 1 | 3 |
(1) In the first quarter of 2022, we reclassified certain fee revenue in our Consolidated Statement of Operations, primarily moving revenues that are not directly associated with software and processing fees to a new Other fee revenue line item. In addition, we provided a disaggregation of servicing fees into Back office services and Middle office services and of software and processing fees into Front office software and data and Lending related and other fees. Prior periods have been revised to reflect these changes.
nm Not meaningful
State Street Corporation | 63
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Fee Revenue
Table 2: Total Revenue, provides the breakout of fee revenue for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020. Servicing and management fees collectively made up approximately 73%, 76% and 74% of the total fee revenue in 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively.
Servicing Fee Revenue
Servicing fees, as presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, decreased 8% in 2022 compared to 2021 primarily due to normal pricing headwinds, lower average market levels and lower client activity and adjustments, partially offset by net new business. Currency translation decreased servicing fee revenue by 3% in 2022 relative to 2021.
Servicing fees generated outside the U.S. were approximately 46% of total servicing fees in 2022, compared to approximately 48% in 2021.
Servicing fee revenue comprises revenue from both back office and middle office services. Generally, our servicing fee revenues are affected by several factors including changes in market valuations, client activity and asset flows, net new business and the manner in which we price our services. We provide a range of services to our clients, including core custody services, accounting, reporting and administration, which we refer to collectively as back office services and middle office services. The nature and mix of services provided and the asset classes for which the services are performed affect our servicing fees. The basis for fees will differ across regions and clients.
Changes in Market Valuations
Our servicing fee revenue is impacted by both our levels and the geographic and product mix of our AUC/A. Increases or decreases in market valuations have a corresponding impact on the level of our AUC/A and servicing fee revenues, though the degree of impact will vary depending on asset types and classes and geography of assets held within our clients’ portfolios. For certain asset classes where the valuation process is more complex, including alternative investments, or where our valuation is dependent on third party information, AUC/A is reported on a time lag, typically one-month. For those asset classes, the impact of market levels on our reported AUC/A does not reflect current period-end market levels.
We estimate that worldwide market valuations impacted our servicing fee revenues by approximately (2)% and 7% in 2022 and 2021, respectively. Over the five years ended December 31, 2022, we estimate this impact was 2% on average with a range of (2)% to 7% annually. See Table 3: Daily Averages, Month-End Averages and Year-End Equity Indices for selected indices. While the specific indices presented are indicative of general market trends, the asset types and classes relevant to individual client portfolios can and do differ, and the performance of associated relevant indices and of client portfolios can therefore differ from the performance of the indices presented. In addition, our asset classifications may differ from those industry classifications presented.
Assuming that all other factors remain constant, including client activity, asset flows and pricing, we estimate, using relevant information as of December 31, 2022, that a 10% increase or decrease in worldwide equity valuations, on a weighted average basis, over the relevant periods for which our servicing fees are calculated, would result in a corresponding change in our total servicing fee revenues, on average and over multiple quarters, of approximately 3%. We estimate, similarly assuming all other factors remain constant and using relevant information as of December 31, 2022, that changes in worldwide fixed income markets, which on a weighted average basis and over time are typically less volatile than worldwide equity markets, have a significantly smaller impact on our servicing fee revenues on average and over time.
| TABLE 3: DAILY AVERAGES, MONTH-END AVERAGES AND YEAR-END EQUITY INDICES(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Daily Averages of Indices | Month-End Averages of Indices | Year-End Indices | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Years Ended December 31, | Years Ended December 31, | Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2022 | 2021 | % Change | 2022 | 2021 | % Change | 2022 | 2021 | % Change | ||||||||||||||||||
| S&P 500® | 4,099 | 4,273 | (4) | % | 4,078 | 4,279 | (5) | % | 3,840 | 4,766 | (19) | % | ||||||||||||||
| MSCI EAFE® | 1,976 | 2,289 | (14) | 1,965 | 2,272 | (14) | 1,944 | 2,336 | (17) | |||||||||||||||||
| MSCI® Emerging Markets | 1,033 | 1,315 | (21) | 1,026 | 1,303 | (21) | 956 | 1,232 | (22) |
(1) The index names listed in the table are service marks of their respective owners.
| TABLE 4: YEAR-END DEBT INDICES(1) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, | ||||||||
| 2022 | 2021 | % Change | ||||||
| Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index® | 2,049 | 2,355 | (13) | % | ||||
| Bloomberg Global Aggregate Bond Index® | 446 | 532 | (16) |
(1) The index names listed in the table are service marks of their respective owners.
State Street Corporation | 64
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Client Activity and Asset Flows
Client activity and asset flows are impacted by the number of transactions we execute on behalf of our clients, including FX settlements, equity and derivative trades, and wire transfer activity, as well as actions by our clients to change the asset class in which their assets are invested. Our servicing fee revenues are impacted by a number of factors, including transaction volumes, asset levels and asset classes in which funds are invested, as well as industry trends associated with these client-related activities.
Our clients may change the asset classes in which their assets are invested, based on their market outlook, risk acceptance tolerance or other considerations. We estimate that client activity and asset flows, together, impacted our servicing fee revenues by approximately (2)% and 0% in 2022 and 2021, respectively. Over the five years ended December 31, 2022, we estimate this impact was 0% on average with a range of (2)% to 2% annually. See Table 5: Industry Asset Flows for selected asset flow information. While the asset flows presented are indicative of general market trends, the asset types and classes relevant to individual client portfolios can and do differ, and our flows may differ from those market trends. In addition, our asset classifications may differ from those industry classifications presented.
| TABLE 5: INDUSTRY ASSET FLOWS | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||
| (In billions) | 2022 | 2021 | ||||
| North America - (US Domiciled) - Morningstar Direct Market Data(1)(2)(3) | ||||||
| Long-Term Funds(4) | $ | (890.9) | $ | 612.4 | ||
| Money Market | (35.3) | 405.4 | ||||
| Exchange-Traded Fund | 572.5 | 504.6 | ||||
| Total Flows | $ | (353.7) | $ | 1,522.4 | ||
| Europe - Morningstar Direct Market Data(1)(2)(5) | ||||||
| Long-Term Funds(4) | $ | (254.1) | $ | 809.4 | ||
| Money Market | 63.7 | 4.5 | ||||
| Exchange-Traded Fund | 67.0 | 176.8 | ||||
| Total Flows | $ | (123.4) | $ | 990.7 |
(1) Industry data is provided for illustrative purposes only. It is not intended to reflect our activity or our clients' activity and is indicative of only segments of the entire industry.
(2) Source: Morningstar. The data includes long-term mutual funds, ETFs and money market funds. Mutual fund data represents estimates of net new cash flow, which is new sales minus redemptions combined with net exchanges, while ETF data represents net issuance, which is gross issuance less gross redemptions. Data for Fund of Funds, Feeder funds and Obsolete funds were excluded from the series to prevent double counting. Data is from the Morningstar Direct Asset Flows database.
(3) The year ended December 31, 2022 data for North America (US domiciled) includes Morningstar direct actuals for January 2022 through November 2022 and Morningstar direct estimates for December 2022.
(4) The long-term fund flows reported by Morningstar direct in North America are composed of US domiciled market flows mainly in Equities, Allocation and Fixed-Income asset classes. The long-term fund flows reported by Morningstar direct in EMEA are composed of the European market flows mainly in Equities, Allocation and Fixed-Income asset classes.
(5) The year ended December 31, 2022 data for Europe is on a rolling twelve month basis for December 2021 through November 2022, sourced by Morningstar.
Net New Business
Net new business, which includes business both won and lost, has affected our servicing fee revenues by approximately 1% in both 2022 and 2021. Over the five years ended December 31, 2022, this impact was 0% on average with a range of 0% to 1% annually. Gross investment servicing mandates were $1.94 trillion in 2022 and $2.00 trillion per year on average over the past five years. Over the five years ended December 31, 2022, gross annual investment servicing mandates ranged from approximately $0.79 trillion to $3.52 trillion.
Servicing fee revenue associated with new servicing mandates may vary based on the breadth of services provided, the time required to install the assets, and the types of assets installed.
Revenues associated with new mandates are not reflected in our servicing fee revenue until the assets have been installed. Our installation timeline, in general, can range from 6 to 36 months, with the average installation timeline being approximately 9 to 12 months over the past 2 years. Our more complex installations, including new State Street Alpha mandates, will generally be on the longer end of that range. With respect to the current asset mandates of approximately $3.61 trillion that are yet to be installed as of December 31, 2022, we expect the conversion will occur over the coming 36 months.
Pricing
The industry in which we operate has historically faced pricing pressure, and our servicing fee revenues are also affected by such pressures today. Consequently, no assumption should be drawn as to future revenue run rate from announced servicing wins, as the amount of revenue associated with AUC/A, once installed, can vary materially. We estimate that pricing pressure with respect to existing clients has impacted our servicing fees by approximately (2)% in both 2022 and 2021. On average, over the five years ended December 31, 2022, this impact
State Street Corporation | 65
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
was approximately (3)% annually, with the impact ranging from (2)% to (4)% in any given year. Pricing concessions can be a part of a contract renegotiation with a client including terms that may benefit us, such as extending the term of our relationship with the client, expanding the scope of services that we provide or reducing our dependency on manual processes through the standardization of the services we provide. The timing of the impact of additional revenue generated by anticipated additional services, and the amount of revenue generated, may differ from expectations due to the impact of pricing concessions on existing services due to the necessary time required to onboard those new services, the nature of those services and client investment practices and other factors. These same market pressures also impact the fees we negotiate when we win business from new clients.
In order to offset the typical client attrition and normal pricing headwinds, we estimate that we need at least $1.5 trillion of new AUC/A per year; although, notwithstanding increases in AUC/A, servicing fees remain subject to several factors, including changes in market valuations, client activity and asset flows, the manner in which we price our services, the nature of the assets being serviced and the type of services and the other factors described in this Form 10-K.
Historically, and based on an indicative sample of revenue, we estimate that approximately 60%, on average, of our servicing fee revenues have been variable due to changes in asset valuations including changes in daily average valuations of AUC/A; another 15%, on average, of our servicing fees are impacted by the volume of activity in the funds we serve; and the remaining approximately 25% of our servicing fees tend not to be variable in nature nor impacted by market fluctuations or values.
Based on the impact of the above, client activity and asset flows, net new business and pricing, noted drivers of our servicing fee revenue will vary depending on the mix of products and services we provide to our clients. The full impact of changes in market valuations and the volume of activity in the funds may not be fully reflected in our servicing fee revenues in the periods in which the changes occur, particularly in periods of higher volatility.
| TABLE 6: ASSETS UNDER CUSTODY AND/OR ADMINISTRATION BY PRODUCT(1)(2) | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2022 | December 31, 2021 | December 31, 2020 | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | ||||||||||||||||
| Collective funds, including ETFs | $ | 12,261 | $ | 15,722 | $ | 13,387 | (22) | % | 17 | % | |||||||||||
| Mutual funds | 9,610 | 11,575 | 9,810 | (17) | 18 | ||||||||||||||||
| Pension products | 7,734 | 8,443 | 7,594 | (8) | 11 | ||||||||||||||||
| Insurance and other products | 7,138 | 7,938 | 8,000 | (10) | (1) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 36,743 | $ | 43,678 | $ | 38,791 | (16) | 13 |
| TABLE 7: ASSETS UNDER CUSTODY AND/OR ADMINISTRATION BY ASSET CLASS(2) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2022 | December 31, 2021 | December 31, 2020 | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Equities | $ | 20,575 | $ | 25,974 | $ | 21,626 | (21) | % | 20 | % | |||||||||||||
| Fixed-income | 10,318 | 12,587 | 12,834 | (18) | (2) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Short-term and other investments | 5,850 | 5,117 | 4,331 | 14 | 18 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 36,743 | $ | 43,678 | $ | 38,791 | (16) | 13 |
| TABLE 8: ASSETS UNDER CUSTODY AND/OR ADMINISTRATION BY GEOGRAPHY(2)(3) | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2022 | December 31, 2021 | December 31, 2020 | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | ||||||||||||
| Americas | $ | 26,981 | $ | 32,427 | $ | 28,245 | (17) | % | 15 | % | |||||||
| Europe/Middle East/Africa | 7,136 | 8,599 | 8,101 | (17) | 6 | ||||||||||||
| Asia/Pacific | 2,626 | 2,652 | 2,445 | (1) | 8 | ||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 36,743 | $ | 43,678 | $ | 38,791 | (16) | 13 |
(1) Certain previously reported amounts presented have been reclassified to conform to current-period presentation.
(2) Consistent with past practice, AUC/A values for certain asset classes are based on a lag, typically one-month.
(3) Geographic mix is generally based on the domicile of the entity servicing the funds and is not necessarily representative of the underlying asset mix.
Asset servicing mandates newly announced in 2022 totaled approximately $1.94 trillion. Servicing assets remaining to be installed in future periods totaled approximately $3.61 trillion as of December 31, 2022, which will be reflected in AUC/A in future periods after installation and will generate servicing fee revenue in subsequent periods. The full revenue impact of such mandates will be realized as the assets are installed and additional services are added over that period.
New asset servicing mandates may be subject to completion of definitive agreements, approval of applicable boards and shareholders and customary regulatory approvals. New asset servicing mandates and servicing assets remaining to be installed in future periods exclude certain new business which has been contracted, but for which the client has not yet provided permission to publicly disclose and the expected installation date extends beyond one quarter. These excluded assets, which from time to time may be significant, will be included in new asset
State Street Corporation | 66
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
servicing mandates and reflected in servicing assets remaining to be installed in the period in which the client provides its permission. Servicing mandates and servicing assets remaining to be installed in future periods are presented on a gross basis and therefore also do not include the impact of clients who have notified us during the period of their intent to terminate or reduce their relationship with us, which may from time to time be significant.
With respect to these new servicing mandates, once installed we may provide various services, including back office services such as custody and safekeeping, transaction processing and trade settlement, fund administration, reporting and record keeping, security servicing, fund accounting, middle office services such as investment book of records (IBOR), transaction management, loans, cash derivatives and collateral services, recordkeeping, client reporting and investment analytics, markets services such as FX trading services, liquidity solutions, currency and collateral management and securities finance, and front office services such as portfolio management solutions, risk analytics, scenario analysis, performance and attribution, trade order and execution management, pre-trade compliance and ESG investment tools. Revenues associated with new servicing mandates may vary based on the breadth of services provided, the timing of installation, and the types of assets.
As previously disclosed, in early 2021, due to a decision to diversify providers, one of our large asset servicing clients has advised us it expects to move a significant portion of its ETF assets currently with State Street to one or more other providers, pending necessary approvals. We expect to continue as a significant service provider for this client after this transition and for the client to continue to be meaningful to our business. The transition began in 2022, but will principally occur in 2023 and 2024 and will impact our fee revenue and income growth trends through 2025. For the year ended December 31, 2022, the fee revenue associated with the assets yet to transition represented approximately 1.7% of our total fee revenue. The actual total revenue and income impact of this transition will reflect a range of factors, including potential growth in our continuing business with the client and expense reductions associated with the transition.
Management Fee Revenue
Management fees decreased 6% in 2022 compared to 2021, primarily due to lower average equity and fixed income market levels, a previously reported client-specific pricing adjustment and institutional net outflows, partially offset by the absence of the impact of money market fee waivers and net inflows from cash and ETFs.
Management fees generated outside the U.S. were approximately 26% of total management fees in both 2022 and 2021.
Management fees generally are affected by our level of AUM, which we report based on month-end valuations. Management fees for certain components of managed assets, such as ETFs, mutual funds and UCITS, are affected by daily average valuations of AUM. Management fee revenue is more sensitive to market valuations than servicing fee revenue, as a higher proportion of the underlying services provided, and the associated management fees earned, are dependent on equity and fixed-income security valuations. Additional factors, such as the relative mix of assets managed, may have a significant effect on our management fee revenue. While certain management fees are directly determined by the values of AUM and the investment strategies employed, management fees may reflect other factors, including performance fee arrangements, as well as our relationship pricing for clients. From the second half of 2020 through the first quarter of 2022, we were in a prolonged low-interest rate environment, and waived certain fees for our clients for money market products. Following the Federal Reserve rate hikes in March and September 2022, money market fee waivers did not have a significant impact on our management fee revenue in the last three quarters of 2022.
Asset-based management fees for passively managed products, to which our AUM is currently primarily weighted, are generally charged at a lower fee on AUM than for actively managed products. Actively managed products may also include performance fee arrangements which are recorded when the fee is earned, based on predetermined benchmarks associated with the applicable account's performance.
In light of the above, we estimate, using relevant information as of December 31, 2022 and assuming that all other factors remain constant, including the impact of business won and lost and client flows, that:
•A 10% increase or decrease in worldwide equity valuations, on a weighted average basis, over the relevant periods for which our management fees are calculated, would result in a corresponding change in our total management fee revenues, on average and over multiple quarters, of approximately 5%; and
•changes in worldwide fixed income markets, which on a weighted average basis and over time are typically less volatile than worldwide equity markets, will have a significantly smaller impact on our management fee revenues on average and over time.
State Street Corporation | 67
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Daily averages, month-end averages and year-end indices demonstrate worldwide changes in equity and debt markets that affect our management fee revenue. Year-end indices affect the values of AUM as of those dates. See Table 3: Daily Averages, Month-End Averages and Year-End Equity Indices for selected indices. While the specific indices presented are indicative of general market trends, the asset types and classes relevant to individual client portfolios can and do differ, and the performance of associated relevant indices and of client portfolios can therefore differ from the performance of the indices presented. In addition, our asset classifications may differ from those industry classifications presented.
| TABLE 9: ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT BY ASSET CLASS AND INVESTMENT APPROACH | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2022 | December 31, 2021 | December 31, 2020 | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | ||||||||||||||||
| Equity: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | $ | 54 | $ | 80 | $ | 85 | (33) | % | (6) | % | |||||||||||
| Passive | 2,074 | 2,594 | 2,086 | (20) | 24 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total equity(1) | 2,128 | 2,674 | 2,171 | (20) | 23 | ||||||||||||||||
| Fixed-income: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | 83 | 103 | 90 | (19) | 14 | ||||||||||||||||
| Passive | 471 | 520 | 459 | (9) | 13 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total fixed-income(1) | 554 | 623 | 549 | (11) | 13 | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash(1)(2) | 376 | 368 | 349 | 2 | 5 | ||||||||||||||||
| Multi-asset-class solutions: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | 28 | 34 | 40 | (18) | (15) | ||||||||||||||||
| Passive | 181 | 188 | 146 | (4) | 29 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total multi-asset-class solutions(1) | 209 | 222 | 186 | (6) | 19 | ||||||||||||||||
| Alternative investments(3): | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | 35 | 56 | 39 | (38) | 44 | ||||||||||||||||
| Passive | 179 | 195 | 173 | (8) | 13 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total alternative investments(1) | 214 | 251 | 212 | (15) | 18 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 3,481 | $ | 4,138 | $ | 3,467 | (16) | 19 |
(1) The implementation of an improved internal data management system for product level data in the first quarter of 2021 resulted in some AUM reclassifications between the categories presented for prior periods to align with the current presentation. There was no impact to the total level of reported AUM.
(2) Includes both floating- and constant-net-asset-value portfolios held in commingled structures or separate accounts.
(3) Includes real estate investment trusts, currency and commodities, including SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust. We are not the investment manager for the SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR®Gold MiniSharesSM Trust, but act as the marketing agent.
| TABLE 10: GEOGRAPHIC MIX OF ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT(1) | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2022 | December 31, 2021 | December 31, 2020 | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | ||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 2,544 | $ | 2,931 | $ | 2,411 | (13) | % | 22 | % | |||||||
| Europe/Middle East/Africa | 511 | 592 | 512 | (14) | 16 | ||||||||||||
| Asia/Pacific | 426 | 615 | 544 | (31) | 13 | ||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 3,481 | $ | 4,138 | $ | 3,467 | (16) | 19 |
(1) Geographic mix is based on client location or fund management location.
.
| TABLE 11: EXCHANGE - TRADED FUNDS BY ASSET CLASS(1) | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2022 | December 31, 2021 | December 31, 2020 | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | ||||||||||||||||
| Alternative Investments(2) | $ | 67 | $ | 72 | $ | 83 | (7) | % | (13) | % | |||||||||||
| Equity(3) | 817 | 970 | 708 | (16) | 37 | ||||||||||||||||
| Multi Asset | 1 | 1 | — | — | nm | ||||||||||||||||
| Fixed-Income(3) | 134 | 135 | 115 | (1) | 17 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total Exchange-Traded Funds | $ | 1,019 | $ | 1,178 | $ | 906 | (13) | 30 |
(1) ETFs are a component of AUM presented in the preceding table.
(2) Includes real estate investment trusts, currency and commodities, including SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust. We are not the investment manager for the SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR®Gold MiniSharesSM Trust, but act as the marketing agent.
(3) The implementation of an improved internal data management system for product level data in the first quarter of 2021 resulted in some AUM reclassifications between the categories presented for prior periods to align with the current presentation. There was no impact to the total level of reported AUM.
nm Not meaningful
State Street Corporation | 68
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 12: ACTIVITY IN ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT BY PRODUCT CATEGORY | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | Equity(1) | Fixed-Income(1) | Cash(1)(2) | Multi-Asset-Class Solutions(1) | Alternative Investments(1)(3) | Total | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2019 | $ | 1,990 | $ | 479 | $ | 317 | $ | 157 | $ | 173 | $ | 3,116 | ||||||||||
| Long-term institutional flows, net(4) | (101) | 4 | (1) | 9 | (11) | (100) | ||||||||||||||||
| Exchange-traded fund flows, net | 12 | 16 | — | — | 16 | 44 | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash fund flows, net | — | — | 32 | — | — | 32 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total flows, net | (89) | 20 | 31 | 9 | 5 | (24) | ||||||||||||||||
| Market appreciation (depreciation) | 241 | 42 | (1) | 18 | 30 | 330 | ||||||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange impact | 29 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 45 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total market/foreign exchange impact | 270 | 50 | 1 | 20 | 34 | 375 | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2020 | $ | 2,171 | $ | 549 | $ | 349 | $ | 186 | $ | 212 | $ | 3,467 | ||||||||||
| Long-term institutional flows, net(4) | (25) | 70 | (2) | 16 | 10 | 69 | ||||||||||||||||
| Exchange-traded fund flows, net | 94 | 23 | — | — | (10) | 107 | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash fund flows, net | — | — | 20 | — | — | 20 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total flows, net | 69 | 93 | 18 | 16 | — | 196 | ||||||||||||||||
| Market appreciation (depreciation) | 476 | (7) | 2 | 22 | 43 | 536 | ||||||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange impact | (42) | (12) | (1) | (2) | (4) | (61) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total market/foreign exchange impact | 434 | (19) | 1 | 20 | 39 | 475 | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2021 | $ | 2,674 | $ | 623 | $ | 368 | $ | 222 | $ | 251 | $ | 4,138 | ||||||||||
| Long-term institutional flows, net(4) | (97) | 18 | 1 | 19 | — | (59) | ||||||||||||||||
| Exchange-traded fund flows, net | — | 22 | — | — | — | 22 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total flows, net | (97) | 40 | 1 | 19 | — | (37) | ||||||||||||||||
| Market appreciation (depreciation) | (398) | (94) | 9 | (28) | (30) | (541) | ||||||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange impact | (51) | (15) | (2) | (4) | (7) | (79) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total market/foreign exchange impact | (449) | (109) | 7 | (32) | (37) | (620) | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2022 | $ | 2,128 | $ | 554 | $ | 376 | $ | 209 | $ | 214 | $ | 3,481 |
(1) The implementation of an improved internal data management system for product level data in the first quarter of 2021 resulted in some AUM reclassifications between the categories presented for prior periods to align with the current presentation. There was no impact to the total level of reported AUM.
(2) Includes both floating- and constant-net-asset-value portfolios held in commingled structures or separate accounts.
(3) Includes real estate investment trusts, currency and commodities, including SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust. We are not the investment manager for the SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR®Gold MiniSharesSM Trust, but act as the marketing agent.
(4) Amounts represent long-term portfolios, excluding ETFs.
Foreign Exchange Trading Services
Foreign exchange trading services revenue, as presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, increased 14% in 2022 compared to 2021, primarily reflecting higher FX spreads and a revenue- related recovery from a 2018 FX benchmark litigation resolution, partially offset by lower client FX volumes. The negative impact on foreign exchange trading services revenue for fee waivers to money market funds participating on the Fund Connect platform, including State Street Global Advisors funds, was $12 million in 2022, compared to $53 million in 2021. The lower impact in 2022 was driven by the higher interest rate environment.
Foreign exchange trading services revenue comprises revenue generated by FX trading and revenue generated by brokerage and other trading services, which made up 68% and 32%, respectively, of foreign exchange trading services revenue in 2022, and 67% and 33%, respectively in 2021.
We primarily earn FX trading revenue by acting as a principal market-maker through both "direct sales and trading” and “indirect FX trading.”
•Direct sales and trading: Represent FX transactions at negotiated rates with clients and investment managers that contact our trading desk directly. These principal market-making activities include transactions for funds serviced by third party custodians or prime brokers, as well as those funds under custody with us.
•Indirect FX trading: Represents FX transactions with clients, for which we are the funds' custodian, or their investment managers, routed to our FX desk through our asset-servicing operation. We execute indirect FX trades as a principal at rates disclosed to our clients.
Our FX trading revenue is influenced by multiple factors, including: the volume and type of client FX transactions and related spreads; currency volatility, reflecting market conditions; and our management of exchange rate, interest rate and other market risks associated with our FX activities. The relative impact of these factors on our total FX trading revenues often differs from period to period. For example, assuming all other factors remain constant, increases or decreases in volumes or bid-offer spreads across product mix tend to result in increases or decreases, as the case may be, in client-related FX revenue.
Our clients that utilize indirect FX trading can, in addition to executing their FX transactions through dealers not affiliated with us, transition from indirect FX trading to either direct sales and trading execution, including our “Street FX” service, or to one of our electronic trading platforms. Street FX, in which we continue to act as a principal
State Street Corporation | 69
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
market-maker, enables our clients to define their FX execution strategy and automate the FX trade execution process, both for funds under custody with us as well as those under custody at another bank.
We also earn foreign exchange trading services revenue through "electronic FX services" and "other trading, transition management and brokerage revenue."
•Electronic FX services: Our clients may choose to execute FX transactions through one of our electronic trading platforms. These transactions generate revenue through a “click” fee.
•Other trading, transition management and brokerage revenue: As our clients look to us to enhance and preserve portfolio values, they may choose to utilize our Transition or Currency Management capabilities or transact with our Equity Trade execution group. These transactions, which are not limited to foreign exchange, generate revenue via commissions charged for trades transacted during the management of these portfolios.
Fund Connect is another one of our electronic trading platforms: it is a global trading, analytics and cash management tool with access to more than 400 money market funds from leading providers.
Securities Finance
Securities finance revenue, as presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, was flat in 2022 compared to 2021, primarily driven by higher spreads, offset by lower agency and enhanced custody balances.
Our securities finance business consists of three components:
(1) an agency lending program for State Street Global Advisors managed investment funds with a broad range of investment objectives, which we refer to as the State Street Global Advisors lending funds;
(2) an agency lending program for third-party investment managers and asset owners, which we refer to as the agency lending funds; and
(3) security lending transactions which we enter into as principal, which we refer to as our enhanced custody business.
Securities finance revenue earned from our agency lending activities, which is composed of our split of both the spreads related to cash collateral and the fees related to non-cash collateral, is principally a function of the volume of securities on loan, the interest rate spreads and fees earned on the underlying collateral and our share of the fee split.
As principal, our enhanced custody business borrows securities from the lending client or other market participants and then lends such securities to the subsequent borrower, either our client or a broker/dealer. We act as principal when the lending client is unable to, or elects not to, transact directly with the market and execute the transaction and furnish the securities. In our role as principal, we provide support to the transaction through our credit rating. While we source a significant proportion of the securities furnished by us in our role as principal from third parties, we have the ability to source securities through assets under custody from clients who have designated us as an eligible borrower.
Market influences may continue to affect client demand for securities finance, and as a result our revenue from, and the profitability of, our securities lending activities in future periods. In addition, the constantly evolving regulatory environment, including revised or proposed capital and liquidity standards, interpretations of those standards, and our own balance sheet management activities, may influence modifications to the way in which we deliver our agency lending or enhanced custody businesses, the volume of our securities lending activity and related revenue and profitability in future periods.
Software and Processing Fees
Software and processing fees revenue, presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, increased 7% in 2022 compared to 2021, primarily driven by higher front office software and data revenue associated with CRD, partially offset by lower lending fees.
Software and processing fees revenue includes diverse types of fees and revenue, including fees from software licensing and maintenance and fees from our structured products business.
Front office software and data revenue, which primarily includes revenue from CRD, Alpha Data Platform and Alpha Data Services, increased 14% in 2022 compared to 2021, primarily driven by higher on-premises renewals and software-enabled revenue.
Revenue related to the front office solutions provided by CRD is primarily driven by the sale of term software licenses and SaaS, including professional services such as consulting and implementation services, software support and maintenance. Approximately 50%-70% of revenue associated with a sale of software to be installed on-premises is recognized at a point in time when the customer benefits from obtaining access to and use of the software license, with the percentage varying based on the length of the contract and other contractual terms. The
State Street Corporation | 70
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
remainder of revenue for on-premise installations is recognized over the length of the contract as maintenance and other services are provided. Upon renewal of an on-premises software contract, the same pattern of revenue recognition is followed with 50%-70% recognized upon renewal and the remaining balance recognized over the term of the contract. Revenue for a SaaS related arrangement, where the customer does not take possession of the software, is recognized over the term of the contract as services are provided. Upon renewal of a SaaS arrangement, revenue continues to be recognized as services are provided under the new contract. As a result of these differences in how portions of CRD revenue are accounted for, CRD revenue may vary more than other business units quarter to quarter.
Lending related and other fees decreased 6% in 2022 compared to 2021, reflecting lower unfunded commitments relating to our municipal and fund finance products, driven by changes in product mix. Lending related and other fees primarily consists of fee revenue associated with our fund finance, leverage loans, municipal finance, insurance and stable value wrap businesses.
Other Fee Revenue
Other fee revenue includes market-related adjustments and income associated with certain tax-advantaged investments and other equity method investments.
Other fee revenue decreased $64 million in 2022, compared to 2021, primarily driven by negative market-related adjustments which impacted other fee revenue by approximately $57 million compared to the same period in 2021.
Additional information about fee revenue is provided under "Line of Business Information" included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
Net Interest Income
See Table 2: Total Revenue, for the breakout of interest income and interest expense for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020.
NII is defined as interest income earned on interest-earning assets less interest expense incurred on interest-bearing liabilities. Interest-earning assets, which principally consist of investment securities, interest-bearing deposits with banks, loans, resale agreements and other liquid assets, are financed primarily by client deposits, short-term borrowings and long-term debt.
NIM represents the relationship between annualized FTE NII and average total interest-earning assets for the period. It is calculated by dividing FTE NII by average interest-earning assets. Revenue that is exempt from income taxes, mainly earned from certain investment securities (state and political subdivisions), is adjusted to a FTE basis using the U.S. federal and state statutory income tax rates.
NII on an FTE basis increased in 2022 compared to 2021, primarily due to higher interest rates from U.S. and international central bank rate hikes, partially offset by lower client deposits.
Net premium amortization on investment securities, which is included in interest income, was $225 million in 2022, compared to $556 million in 2021 and $575 million in 2020. The decrease in MBS premium amortization is primarily due to lower prepayments from higher long-end interest rates.
Interest income related to debt securities is recognized in our consolidated statement of income using the effective interest method, or on a basis approximating a level rate of return over the contractual or estimated life of the security. The rate of return considers any non-refundable fees or costs, as well as purchase premiums or discounts, resulting in amortization or accretion, accordingly. The amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts are adjusted for prepayments when they occur, which primarily impact mortgage-backed securities.
The following table presents the investment securities amortizable purchase premium net of discount accretion for the periods indicated:
| TABLE 13: INVESTMENT SECURITIES NET PREMIUM AMORTIZATION | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | MBS | Non-MBS | Total(1) | MBS | Non-MBS | Total(1) | MBS | Non-MBS | Total(1) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Unamortized premiums, net of discounts at period end | $ | 520 | $ | 208 | $ | 728 | $ | 712 | $ | 502 | $ | 1,214 | $ | 1,173 | $ | 736 | $ | 1,909 | ||||||||||||||||
| Net premium amortization(2) | 142 | 83 | 225 | 342 | 214 | 556 | 399 | 176 | 575 |
(1) The investment securities portfolio duration was 2.6 years in 2022, 2.9 years in 2021 and 3.0 years in 2020. Totals exclude premiums or discounts created from the transfer of securities from AFS to HTM. Additional information on the transfer of securities is provided in Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
(2) Net of discount accretion on MMLF HTM securities.
State Street Corporation | 71
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
See Table 14: Average Balances and Interest Rates - Fully Taxable-Equivalent Basis, for the breakout of NII on a FTE basis for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020.
| TABLE 14: AVERAGE BALANCES AND INTEREST RATES - FULLY TAXABLE-EQUIVALENT BASIS(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions; fully taxable-equivalent basis) | Average Balance | Interest Revenue/Expense | Rate | Average Balance | Interest Revenue/Expense | Rate | Average Balance | Interest Revenue/ Expense | Rate | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Interest-bearing deposits with banks(2) | $ | 76,498 | $ | 842 | 1.10 | % | $ | 89,996 | $ | (15) | (.02) | % | $ | 76,588 | $ | 76 | .10 | % | ||||||||||||||
| Securities purchased under resale agreements(3) | 2,116 | 188 | 8.88 | 4,193 | 27 | .63 | 3,452 | 126 | 3.64 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Trading account assets | 721 | — | .01 | 752 | — | .01 | 878 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment securities available for sale | 53,613 | 733 | 1.37 | 66,584 | 583 | .88 | 58,036 | 761 | 1.31 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment securities held-to-maturity | 58,316 | 979 | 1.68 | 44,832 | 665 | 1.48 | 42,956 | 830 | 1.93 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment securities held-to-maturity purchased under money market liquidity facility | — | — | — | 314 | 4 | 1.35 | 8,183 | 117 | 1.43 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Investment securities | 111,929 | 1,712 | 1.53 | 111,730 | 1,252 | 1.12 | 109,175 | 1,708 | 1.56 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Loans | 35,117 | 973 | 2.77 | 31,009 | 640 | 2.07 | 27,525 | 627 | 2.28 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other interest-earning assets(4) | 20,850 | 383 | 1.84 | 22,355 | 17 | .08 | 11,256 | 55 | .49 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Average total interest-earning assets | 247,231 | 4,098 | 1.66 | 260,035 | 1,921 | .74 | 228,874 | 2,592 | 1.13 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Cash and due from banks | 3,652 | 5,057 | 3,849 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other assets | 35,547 | 34,651 | 36,611 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Average total Assets | $ | 286,430 | $ | 299,743 | $ | 269,334 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Interest-bearing deposits: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| U.S. | $ | 98,252 | $ | 887 | .90 | % | $ | 104,848 | $ | 10 | .01 | % | $ | 87,444 | $ | 114 | .13 | % | ||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S.(2)(5) | 76,842 | 80 | .10 | 82,126 | (273) | (.33) | 68,806 | (231) | (.34) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total interest-bearing deposits(5)(6) | 175,094 | 967 | .55 | 186,974 | (263) | (.07) | 156,250 | (117) | (.07) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Securities sold under repurchase agreements | 3,633 | 14 | .39 | 667 | — | — | 2,615 | 4 | .14 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Short-term borrowings under money market liquidity facility | — | — | — | 315 | 4 | 1.21 | 8,207 | 101 | 1.22 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other short-term borrowings | 1,188 | 26 | 2.18 | 788 | 2 | .21 | 2,226 | 18 | 0.78 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Long-term debt | 14,132 | 376 | 2.66 | 13,383 | 219 | 1.64 | 14,371 | 312 | 2.17 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other interest-bearing liabilities(7) | 2,725 | 161 | 5.91 | 5,486 | 41 | .75 | 3,176 | 57 | 1.82 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Average total interest-bearing liabilities | 196,772 | 1,544 | .78 | 207,613 | 3 | — | 186,845 | 375 | .20 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-interest bearing deposits | 47,780 | 48,430 | 36,975 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other liabilities | 15,992 | 17,615 | 20,464 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Preferred shareholders' equity | 1,976 | 2,076 | 2,569 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common shareholders' equity | 23,910 | 24,009 | 22,481 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Average total liabilities and shareholders' equity | $ | 286,430 | $ | 299,743 | $ | 269,334 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Excess of rate earned over rate paid | .87 | % | .74 | % | .93 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income, fully taxable-equivalent basis | $ | 2,554 | $ | 1,918 | $ | 2,217 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest margin, fully taxable-equivalent basis | 1.03 | % | .74 | % | .97 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tax-equivalent adjustment | (10) | (13) | (17) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income, GAAP basis | $ | 2,544 | $ | 1,905 | $ | 2,200 |
(1) Rates earned/paid on interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities include the impact of hedge activities associated with our asset and liability management activities where applicable.
(2) Negative values reflect the impact of interest rate environments outside of the U.S. where central bank rates were below zero for several major currencies.
(3) Reflects the impact of balance sheet netting under enforceable netting agreements of approximately $71.02 billion, $62.15 billion and $100.45 billion for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively. Excluding the impact of netting, the average interest rates would be approximately 0.26%, 0.04% and 0.12% for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively.
(4) Reflects the impact of balance sheet netting under enforceable netting agreements of approximately $5.39 billion, $$5.60 billion and $$5.65 billion for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively. Excluding the impact of netting, the average interest rates would be approximately 1.46%, 0.06% and 0.32% for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively.
(5) Average rate includes the impact of FX swap costs of approximately ($20) million, ($68) million and ($63) million for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively. Average rates for total interest-bearing deposits excluding the impact of FX swap costs were (0.55)%, (0.10)% and (0.03)% for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively.
(6) Total deposits averaged $222.87 billion, $235.40 billion and $193.23 billion for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively.
(7) Reflects the impact of balance sheet netting under enforceable netting agreements of approximately $4.59 billion, $5.48 billion and $6.38 billion for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively. Excluding the impact of netting, the average interest rates would be approximately 2.20%, 0.38% and 0.60% for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively.
State Street Corporation | 72
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Changes in the components of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities are discussed in more detail below. Additional information about the components of interest income and interest expense is provided in Note 17 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Average total interest-earning assets were $247.23 billion in 2022 compared to $260.04 billion in 2021. The decrease is primarily due to lower client deposit balances.
Interest-bearing deposits with banks averaged $76.50 billion in 2022 compared to $90.00 billion in 2021. These deposits primarily reflect our maintenance of cash balances at the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank (ECB) and other non-U.S. central banks. The lower levels of average cash balances reflect lower levels of client deposits.
Securities purchased under resale agreements averaged $2.12 billion in 2022 compared to $4.19 billion in 2021. As a member of FICC, we may net securities sold under repurchase agreements against those purchased under resale agreements with counterparties that are also members of the clearing organization, when specific netting criteria are met. The impact of balance sheet netting was $71.02 billion on average in 2022 compared to $62.15 billion in 2021, primarily driven by an increase in FICC repo volumes.
We are a direct and sponsoring member of FICC. As a sponsoring member within FICC, we enter into repurchase and resale transactions in eligible securities with sponsored clients and with other FICC members and, pursuant to FICC Government Securities Division rules, submit, novate and net the transactions. We may sponsor clients to clear their eligible repurchase transactions with FICC, backed by our guarantee to FICC of the prompt and full payment and performance of our sponsored member clients’ respective obligations. We generally obtain a security interest from our sponsored clients in the high quality securities collateral that they receive, which is designed to mitigate our potential exposure to FICC.
Additionally, as a member of FICC, we may be required to pay a pro rata share of the losses incurred by the organization and provide liquidity support in the event of the default of another member to the extent that the defaulting member’s clearing fund obligation and the prescribed loss allocation to FICC is depleted. It is difficult to estimate our maximum possible exposure under the membership agreement, since this would require an assessment of future claims that may be made against us that have not yet occurred. At December 31, 2022 and 2021, we did not record any liabilities under these arrangements.
Average investment securities increased to $111.93 billion in 2022 from $111.73 billion in 2021,
primarily driven by growth in U.S. Treasuries, MBS and CMBS balances, partially offset by a reduction in credit-sensitive assets.
Loans averaged $35.12 billion in 2022 compared to $31.01 billion in 2021. Average core loans, which exclude overdrafts and highlight our efforts to grow our lending portfolio, averaged $29.10 billion in 2022 compared to $26.76 billion in 2021. The increase is primarily due to growth in CLOs in loan form and consumer real estate loans, partially offset by a decline in leveraged loans. Additional information about these loans is provided in Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Average other interest-earning assets, largely associated with our enhanced custody business, decreased to $20.85 billion in 2022 from $22.36 billion in 2021, primarily driven by a decrease in the level of cash collateral posted. Enhanced custody is our securities financing business where we act as principal with respect to our custody clients and generate securities finance revenue.
Aggregate average total interest-bearing deposits decreased to $175.09 billion in 2022 from $186.97 billion in 2021. The decrease is driven by higher market rates from central bank rate hikes, the impact of quantitative tightening, currency translation and equity market declines. Future deposit levels will be influenced by the underlying asset servicing business, client deposit behavior and market conditions, including the general levels of U.S. and non-U.S. interest rates.
Average other short-term borrowings increased to $1.19 billion in 2022 from $0.79 billion in 2021.
Average long-term debt was $14.13 billion in 2022 compared to $13.38 billion in 2021. These amounts reflect issuances, redemptions and maturities of senior debt during the respective periods.
Average other interest-bearing liabilities were $2.73 billion in 2022 compared to $5.49 billion in 2021. Other interest-bearing liabilities primarily reflect our level of cash collateral received from clients in connection with our enhanced custody business, which is presented on a net basis where we have enforceable netting agreements.
Several factors could affect future levels of NII and NIM, including the volume and mix of client deposits and funding sources; central bank actions; balance sheet management activities; changes in the level and slope of U.S. and non-U.S. interest rates; revised or proposed regulatory capital or liquidity standards, or interpretations of those standards; the yields earned on securities purchased compared to the yields earned on securities sold or matured and
State Street Corporation | 73
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
changes in the type and amount of credit or other loans we extend.
Based on market conditions and other factors, including regulatory standards, we continue to reinvest the majority of the proceeds from pay-downs and maturities of investment securities in highly-rated U.S. and non-U.S. securities, such as federal agency MBS, sovereign debt securities and U.S. Treasury and agency securities. The pace at which we reinvest and the types of investment securities purchased will depend on the impact of market conditions, the implementation of regulatory standards, including interpretation of those standards and other factors over time. We expect these factors and the levels of global interest rates to impact our reinvestment program and future levels of NII and NIM.
Provision for Credit Losses
We recorded a $20 million provision for credit losses in 2022, due to a downward shift in management's economic outlook that was partially offset by a reduction in overall loan portfolio risk, compared to a $33 million release of credit reserves in 2021.
Additional information is provided under “Loans” in "Financial Condition" in this Management's Discussion and Analysis and in Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Expenses
Table 15: Expenses, provides the breakout of expenses for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020. Total expenses decreased 1% compared to 2021, as continued productivity and optimization savings, as well as the benefit from currency translation were partially offset by ongoing business investments and merit increases, professional fees, recoverable client-related expenses, marketing and travel costs. Currency translation reduced expenses by 3% in 2022 compared to 2021.
| TABLE 15: EXPENSES | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | |||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | ||||||||||||||
| Compensation and employee benefits | $ | 4,428 | $ | 4,554 | $ | 4,450 | (3) | % | 2 | % | |||||||
| Information systems and communications | 1,630 | 1,661 | 1,550 | (2) | 7 | ||||||||||||
| Transaction processing services | 971 | 1,024 | 978 | (5) | 5 | ||||||||||||
| Occupancy | 394 | 444 | 489 | (11) | (9) | ||||||||||||
| Amortization of other intangible assets | 238 | 245 | 234 | (3) | 5 | ||||||||||||
| Acquisition and restructuring costs | 65 | 65 | 50 | — | 30 | ||||||||||||
| Other: | |||||||||||||||||
| Professional services | 375 | 334 | 364 | 12 | (8) | ||||||||||||
| Other | 700 | 562 | 601 | 25 | (6) | ||||||||||||
| Total other | 1,075 | 896 | 965 | 20 | (7) | ||||||||||||
| Total expenses | $ | 8,801 | $ | 8,889 | $ | 8,716 | (1) | 2 | |||||||||
| Number of employees at year-end | 42,226 | 38,784 | 39,439 | 9 | (2) |
Compensation and employee benefits expenses decreased 3% in 2022 compared to 2021, primarily due to the impact of currency translation and a decrease in notable items, partially offset by higher headcount and merit increases. Currency translation decreased compensation and employee benefits expenses by 3% in 2022 relative to 2021.
Total headcount increased 9% as of December 31, 2022 compared to December 31, 2021, primarily in global hubs driven by operational support for new business growth segments, as well as technology investments and in-sourcing.
Information systems and communications expenses decreased 2% in 2022 compared to 2021, primarily due to productivity and vendor savings initiatives, partially offset by technology infrastructure investments.
Transaction processing services expenses decreased 5% in 2022 compared to 2021, primarily due to lower sub-custody costs and the impact of currency translation which reduced transaction processing services expenses by 2% in 2022 compare to 2021.
Occupancy expenses decreased 11% in 2022 compared 2021, primarily due to footprint optimization and the impact of currency translation which reduced occupancy expenses by 4% in 2022 compared to 2021.
Amortization of other intangible assets decreased 3% in 2022 compared to 2021, primarily reflecting the impact of currency translation which reduced amortization of other intangible assets by 3% in 2022 compared to 2021.
Other expenses increased 20% in 2022 compared to 2021, primarily due to higher professional services, recoverable client-related expenses, securities processing costs, travel costs and marketing expenses.
Acquisition and Restructuring Costs
Acquisition and restructuring costs were $65 million in 2022, unchanged compared to 2021. We recorded approximately $65 million and $13 million in 2022 and 2021, respectively, of acquisition costs related to the BBH Investor Services acquisition transaction we are no longer pursuing. In addition, in 2021, we also recorded approximately $52 million of acquisition costs related to our 2018 acquisition of CRD for which we no longer distinguished certain costs as acquisition costs starting in 2022.
Repositioning Charges
Expenses for 2022 included repositioning charges of $78 million, consisting of $50 million of compensation and benefits expenses primarily related to streamlining the Investment Services organization, $20 million of occupancy charges
State Street Corporation | 74
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
related to real estate footprint optimization and $8 million of BBH-related repositioning charges. The BBH-related repositioning charges were recognized in acquisition and restructuring expenses. Expenses included a net repositioning release of $3 million in 2021.
The following table presents aggregate activity for repositioning charges and activity related to previous Beacon restructuring charges for the periods indicated:
| TABLE 16: RESTRUCTURING AND REPOSITIONING CHARGES | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | Employee Related Costs | Real Estate Actions | Asset and Other Write-offs | Total | ||||||||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2019 | $ | 190 | $ | 7 | $ | 1 | $ | 198 | ||||||||||
| Accruals for Beacon | (4) | — | — | (4) | ||||||||||||||
| Accruals for Repositioning Charges | 82 | 51 | — | 133 | ||||||||||||||
| Payments and Other Adjustments | (78) | (52) | (1) | (131) | ||||||||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2020 | 190 | 6 | — | 196 | ||||||||||||||
| Accruals for Beacon | (1) | — | — | (1) | ||||||||||||||
| Accruals for Repositioning Charges | (32) | 29 | — | (3) | ||||||||||||||
| Payments and Other Adjustments | (89) | (29) | — | (118) | ||||||||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2021 | 68 | 6 | — | 74 | ||||||||||||||
| Accruals for Repositioning Charges | 58 | 20 | — | 78 | ||||||||||||||
| Payments and other adjustments | (43) | (21) | — | (64) | ||||||||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2022 | $ | 83 | $ | 5 | $ | — | $ | 88 |
Income Tax Expense
Income tax expense was $553 million in 2022 compared to $478 million in 2021. Our effective tax rate was 16.6% in 2022 compared to 15.1% in 2021. The 2021 effective tax rate included higher discrete benefits from the completion of tax audits than we experienced in 2022.
Additional information regarding income tax expense, including unrecognized tax benefits and tax contingencies, are provided in Notes 13 and 22 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
LINE OF BUSINESS INFORMATION
Our operations are organized into two lines of business: Investment Servicing and Investment Management, which are defined based on products and services provided. The results of operations for these lines of business are not necessarily comparable with those of other companies, including companies in the financial services industry. For the description of our lines of business, refer to "Lines of Business” in Item 1 in this Form 10-K. Certain amounts that are not allocated to our two lines of business, including repositioning charges, employee costs, acquisition costs, revenue-related recoveries and certain legal accruals. See Note 24 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Investment Servicing
| TABLE 17: INVESTMENT SERVICING LINE OF BUSINESS RESULTS | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in millions, except where otherwise noted) | Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Servicing fees | $ | 5,087 | $ | 5,531 | $ | 5,157 | (8) | % | 7 | % | |||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange trading services | 1,271 | 1,149 | 1,299 | 11 | (12) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Securities finance | 397 | 402 | 342 | (1) | 18 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Software and processing fees | 789 | 738 | 685 | 7 | 8 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Other fee revenue | 46 | 59 | 31 | (22) | 90 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total fee revenue | 7,590 | 7,879 | 7,514 | (4) | 5 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income | 2,551 | 1,919 | 2,211 | 33 | (13) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total other income | (2) | (1) | 4 | nm | nm | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total revenue | 10,139 | 9,797 | 9,729 | 3 | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Provision for credit losses | 20 | (33) | 88 | nm | nm | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total expenses | 7,260 | 7,182 | 7,071 | 1 | 2 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Income before income tax expense | $ | 2,859 | $ | 2,648 | $ | 2,570 | 8 | 3 | |||||||||||||||
| Pre-tax margin | 28 | % | 27 | % | 26 | % | |||||||||||||||||
| Average assets (in billions) | $ | 283.2 | $ | 296.5 | $ | 266.4 |
nm Not meaningful
Servicing Fees
Servicing fees, as presented in Table 17: Investment Servicing Line of Business Results, decreased 8% in 2022 compared to 2021 primarily due to normal pricing headwinds, lower average market levels and lower client activity and adjustments, partially offset by net new business. Currency translation decreased servicing fees revenue by 3% in 2022 relative to 2021.
For additional information about servicing fees and the impact of worldwide equity and fixed-income valuations on our fee revenue, as well as other key drivers of our servicing fee revenue, refer to "Fee Revenue" in "Consolidated Results of Operations" included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
Expenses
Total expenses for Investment Servicing increased 1% in 2022 compared to 2021, as expense growth from higher technology infrastructure investments, higher headcount and merit increases was partially offset by productivity savings, on-going expense management initiatives and the benefit of currency translation, which reduced expenses for Investment Servicing by 3% in 2022 relative to 2021. Seasonal deferred incentive compensation expense and payroll taxes were $143 million in 2022 compared to $124 million in 2021. Additional information about expenses is provided under "Expenses" in "Consolidated Results of Operations" included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
State Street Corporation | 75
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Investment Management
| TABLE 18: INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT LINE OF BUSINESS RESULTS | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in millions, except where otherwise noted) | Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2022 vs. 2021 | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Management fees(1) | $ | 1,939 | $ | 2,053 | $ | 1,880 | (6) | % | 9 | % | |||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange trading services(2) | 82 | 62 | 64 | 32 | (3) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Securities finance | 19 | 14 | 14 | 36 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Other fee revenue(3) | (47) | 4 | 27 | nm | (85) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total fee revenue | 1,993 | 2,133 | 1,985 | (7) | 7 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income | (7) | (14) | (11) | (50) | 27 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total revenue | 1,986 | 2,119 | 1,974 | (6) | 7 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total expenses | 1,396 | 1,445 | 1,471 | (3) | (2) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Income before income tax expense | $ | 590 | $ | 674 | $ | 503 | (12) | 34 | |||||||||||||||
| Pre-tax margin | 30 | % | 32 | % | 25 | % | |||||||||||||||||
| Average assets (in billions) | $ | 3.2 | $ | 3.2 | $ | 2.9 |
(1) Includes revenues from SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust AUM where we are not the investment manager but act as the marketing agent.
(2) Includes revenue for reimbursements received for certain ETFs associated with State Street Global Advisors where we act as the distribution and marketing agent.
(3) Includes other revenue items that are primarily driven by equity market movements.
nm Not meaningful
Investment Management total revenue decreased 6% in 2022 compared to 2021.
Management Fees
Management fees decreased 6% in 2022 compared to 2021, primarily due to lower average equity and fixed income market levels, a previously reported client-specific pricing adjustment and institutional net outflows, partially offset by the absence of the impact of money market fee waivers and net inflows from cash and ETFs. Currency translation decreased management fees by 2% in 2022 relative to 2021.
For additional information about the impact of worldwide equity and fixed-income valuations, as well as other key drivers of our management fees revenue, refer to "Fee Revenue" in "Consolidated Results of Operations" included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
Expenses
Total expenses for Investment Management decreased 3% in 2022 compared to 2021, as savings from on-going expense management initiatives and lower incentive compensation were partially offset by merit increases. Currency translation reduced expenses for Investment Management by 2% in 2022 relative to 2021. Seasonal deferred incentive compensation expense and payroll taxes were $65 million in 2022, compared to $52 million in 2021.
Additional information about expenses is provided under "Expenses" in "Consolidated Results of Operations" included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
For additional information about our two lines of business, as well as the revenues, expenses and capital allocation methodologies associated with them, refer to Note 24 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
FINANCIAL CONDITION
The structure of our consolidated statement of condition is primarily driven by the liabilities generated by our Investment Servicing and Investment Management lines of business. Our clients' needs and our operating objectives determine the volume, mix and currency denomination of our assets and liabilities. As our clients execute their worldwide cash management and investment activities, they utilize deposits and short-term investments that constitute the majority of our liabilities. These liabilities are generally in the form of interest-bearing transaction account deposits, which are denominated in a variety of currencies; non-interest-bearing demand deposits; and repurchase agreements, which generally serve as short-term investment alternatives for our clients.
Deposits and other liabilities resulting from client initiated transactions are invested in assets that generally have contractual maturities significantly longer than our liabilities; however, we evaluate the operational nature of our deposits and seek to maintain appropriate short-term liquidity of those liabilities that are not operational in nature and maintain longer-termed assets for our operational deposits. Our assets consist primarily of securities held in our AFS or HTM portfolios and short-duration financial instruments, such as interest-bearing deposits with banks and securities purchased under resale agreements. The actual mix of assets is determined by the characteristics of the client liabilities and our desire to maintain a well-diversified portfolio of high-quality assets.
Additional information on our financial condition is presented in Table 14: Average Balances and Interest Rates - Fully Taxable-Equivalent Basis. We believe the average statement of condition is a better measure of the balance
State Street Corporation | 76
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
sheet trends as period-end balances can be impacted by the timing of client activities including deposits and withdrawals.
Investment Securities
| TABLE 19: CARRYING VALUES OF INVESTMENT SECURITIES | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, | ||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |||||||
| Available-for-sale: | ||||||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 7,981 | $ | 17,939 | $ | 6,575 | ||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 8,509 | 18,208 | 14,305 | |||||||
| Total U.S. Treasury and federal agencies | 16,490 | 36,147 | 20,880 | |||||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 1,623 | 1,995 | 1,996 | |||||||
| Asset-backed securities(1) | 1,669 | 2,087 | 2,291 | |||||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 14,089 | 23,547 | 22,087 | |||||||
| Other(2) | 2,091 | 3,098 | 3,355 | |||||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 19,472 | 30,727 | 29,729 | |||||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||
| Student loans(3) | 115 | 211 | 314 | |||||||
| Collateralized loan obligations(4) | 2,355 | 91 | 2,966 | |||||||
| Non-agency CMBS and RMBS(5) | 231 | 52 | 78 | |||||||
| Other | 88 | 2,155 | 90 | |||||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 2,789 | 2,509 | 3,448 | |||||||
| State and political subdivisions | 823 | 1,272 | 1,548 | |||||||
| Other U.S. debt securities(6) | 1,005 | 2,744 | 3,443 | |||||||
| Total available-for-sale securities | $ | 40,579 | $ | 73,399 | $ | 59,048 | ||||
| Held-to-maturity: | ||||||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 11,693 | $ | 2,170 | $ | 6,057 | ||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 42,307 | 33,481 | 36,901 | |||||||
| Total U.S. Treasury and federal agencies | 54,000 | 35,651 | 42,958 | |||||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | — | — | 303 | |||||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 6,603 | 1,564 | 342 | |||||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 6,603 | 1,564 | 645 | |||||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||
| Student loans(3) | 3,955 | 4,908 | 4,774 | |||||||
| Non-agency CMBS and RMBS(7) | 142 | 307 | 554 | |||||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 4,097 | 5,215 | 5,328 | |||||||
| Total(8) | 64,700 | 42,430 | 48,931 | |||||||
| Held-to-maturity under money market mutual fund liquidity facility(8) | — | — | 3,300 | |||||||
| Total held-to-maturity securities(8) | $ | 64,700 | $ | 42,430 | $ | 52,231 |
(1) As of December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, the fair value non-U.S. collateralized loan obligations of $0.86 billion, $0.83 billion and $0.96 billion, respectively.
(2) As of December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, the fair value includes non-U.S. corporate bonds of $1.14 billion, $1.53 billion and $1.88 billion, respectively.
(3) Primarily comprised of securities guaranteed by the federal government with respect to at least 97% of defaulted principal and accrued interest on the underlying loans.
(4) Excludes collateralized loan obligations in loan form. Refer to Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K for additional information.
(5) Consists entirely of non-agency CMBS as of December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020.
(6) As of December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, the fair value of U.S. corporate bonds was $1.01 billion, $2.44 billion and $3.44 billion, respectively.
(7) As of December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, the total amortized cost included $133 million, $292 million and $464 million, respectively, of non-agency CMBS and $9 million, $14 million and $90 million, respectively, of non-agency RMBS.
(8) As of December 31, 2020, we recognized an allowance for credit losses on all HTM securities of $3 million, inclusive of $1 million related to HTM securities purchased under the money market mutual fund liquidity facility.
Additional information about our investment securities portfolio is provided in Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
We manage our investment securities portfolio to align with the interest rate and duration characteristics of our client liabilities and in the context of the overall structure of our consolidated statement of condition, in consideration of the global interest rate environment. We consider a well-diversified, high-credit quality investment securities portfolio to be an important element in the management of our consolidated statement of condition.
In 2022, we completed a number of actions to mitigate additional AOCI risk in the current environment including a $23.56 billion transfer of securities from AFS to HTM. While these measures may serve to mitigate additional AOCI risk, we continue to be exposed to risks associated with sudden or significant AOCI deterioration, particularly in an environment of continuing significant, and potentially, historic interest rate increases. There can be no assurance that we will not experience further, potentially material AOCI deterioration.
Average duration of our investment securities portfolio was 2.6 years and 2.9 years as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
Approximately 95% of the carrying value of the portfolio was rated “AA” or higher as of both December 31, 2022 and 2021 as follows:
| TABLE 20: INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO BY EXTERNAL CREDIT RATING | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2022 | December 31, 2021 | ||||
| AAA(1) | 84 | % | 79 | % | |
| AA | 11 | 13 | |||
| A | 3 | 4 | |||
| BBB | 2 | 4 | |||
| 100 | % | 100 | % |
(1) Includes U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities that are split-rated, “AAA” by Moody’s Investors Service and “AA+” by Standard & Poor’s and also includes Agency MBS securities which are not explicitly rated but which have an explicit or assumed guarantee from the U.S. government.
State Street Corporation | 77
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
As of December 31, 2022 and 2021, the investment portfolio was diversified with respect to asset class composition. The following table presents the composition of these asset classes.
| TABLE 21: INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO BY ASSET CLASS | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2022 | December 31, 2021 | ||||
| U.S. Agency Mortgage-backed securities | 37 | % | 33 | % | |
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 19 | 21 | |||
| U.S. Treasuries | 19 | 17 | |||
| Asset-backed securities | 9 | 10 | |||
| Other credit | 16 | 19 | |||
| 100 | % | 100 | % |
Non-U.S. Debt Securities
Approximately 25% and 28% of the aggregate carrying value of our investment securities portfolio was non-U.S. debt securities as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
| TABLE 22: NON-U.S. DEBT SECURITIES(1) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | December 31, 2022 | December 31, 2021 | ||||
| Available-for-sale: | ||||||
| Canada | $ | 3,685 | $ | 4,502 | ||
| Australia | 2,159 | 3,019 | ||||
| United Kingdom | 1,449 | 1,961 | ||||
| Germany | 1,147 | 2,130 | ||||
| France | 1,059 | 2,180 | ||||
| Austria | 769 | 1,478 | ||||
| Japan | 768 | 1,332 | ||||
| Hong Kong | 701 | — | ||||
| Netherlands | 542 | 1,109 | ||||
| Italy | 290 | 803 | ||||
| Spain | 250 | 1,227 | ||||
| Republic of Korea | 230 | 201 | ||||
| Brazil | 202 | — | ||||
| Finland | 185 | 837 | ||||
| Other(2) | 6,036 | 9,948 | ||||
| Total | $ | 19,472 | $ | 30,727 | ||
| Held-to-maturity: | ||||||
| Spain | $ | 804 | $ | — | ||
| Belgium | 703 | — | ||||
| France | 638 | — | ||||
| Ireland | 442 | — | ||||
| Austria | 362 | — | ||||
| Singapore | 269 | 222 | ||||
| Finland | 213 | — | ||||
| Netherlands | 172 | — | ||||
| Germany | 123 | — | ||||
| Other(2) | 2,877 | 1,342 | ||||
| Total | $ | 6,603 | $ | 1,564 |
(1) Geography is determined primarily based on the domicile of collateral or issuer.
(2) As of December 31, 2022, other non-U.S. investments include $5.7 billion supranational bonds in AFS securities and $2.9 billion supranational bonds in HTM securities.
Approximately 86% and 81% of the aggregate carrying value of these non-U.S. debt securities was rated “AAA” or “AA” as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. The majority of these securities comprised senior positions within the security structures; these positions have a level of protection provided through subordination and other forms of credit protection. As of December 31, 2022 and 2021, approximately 26% and 24%, respectively, of the aggregate carrying value of these non-U.S. debt securities was floating-rate.
As of December 31, 2022, our non-U.S. debt securities had an average market-to-book ratio of 96.5%, and an aggregate pre-tax net unrealized loss of $937 million, composed of gross unrealized gains of $1 million and gross unrealized losses of $938 million. These unrealized amounts included:
•a pre-tax net unrealized loss of $633 million, composed of gross unrealized gains of $1 million and gross unrealized losses of $634 million, associated with non-U.S. AFS debt securities; and
•a pre-tax net unrealized loss of $304 million associated with non-U.S. HTM debt securities.
As of December 31, 2022, the underlying collateral for non-U.S. MBS and ABS primarily included mortgages in Australia, the U.K., the Netherlands and Italy. The securities listed under “Canada” were composed of Canadian government securities and provincial bonds, corporate debt and non-U.S. agency securities. The securities listed under “France” were composed of sovereign bonds, corporate debt, covered bonds, ABS and Non-U.S. agency securities. The securities listed under “Japan” were substantially composed of Japanese government securities.
Municipal Obligations
We carried approximately $0.82 billion of municipal securities classified as state and political subdivisions in our investment securities portfolio as of December 31, 2022, as shown in Table 19: Carrying Values of Investment Securities, all of which were classified as AFS. As of December 31, 2022, we also provided approximately $6.98 billion of credit and liquidity facilities to municipal issuers.
State Street Corporation | 78
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 23: STATE AND MUNICIPAL OBLIGORS(1) | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in millions) | Total Municipal Securities | Credit and Liquidity Facilities(2) | Total | % of Total Municipal Exposure | ||||||||||
| December 31, 2022 | ||||||||||||||
| State of Issuer: | ||||||||||||||
| Texas | $ | 178 | $ | 2,395 | $ | 2,573 | 33 | % | ||||||
| New York | 154 | 1,607 | 1,761 | 23 | ||||||||||
| California | 84 | 1,299 | 1,383 | 18 | ||||||||||
| Total | $ | 416 | $ | 5,301 | $ | 5,717 | ||||||||
| December 31, 2021 | ||||||||||||||
| State of Issuer: | ||||||||||||||
| Texas | $ | 221 | $ | 2,357 | $ | 2,578 | 25 | % | ||||||
| California | 108 | 2,005 | 2,113 | 21 | ||||||||||
| New York | 271 | 1,112 | 1,383 | 14 | ||||||||||
| Massachusetts | 245 | 696 | 941 | 9 | ||||||||||
| Tennessee | — | 491 | 491 | 5 | ||||||||||
| Total | $ | 845 | $ | 6,661 | $ | 7,506 |
(1) Represented 5% or more of our aggregate municipal credit exposure of approximately $7.81 billion and $10.22 billion across our businesses as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
(2) Includes municipal loans which are also presented within Table 25: U.S. and Non-U.S. Loans .
Our aggregate municipal securities exposure presented in Table 23: State and Municipal Obligors, was concentrated primarily with highly-rated counterparties, with approximately 93% of the obligors rated “AA” or higher as of December 31, 2022. As of that date, approximately 31% and 69% of our aggregate municipal securities exposure was associated with general obligation and revenue bonds, respectively. The portfolios are also diversified geographically, with the states that represent our largest exposures widely dispersed across the U.S.
Additional information with respect to our assessment of impairment of our municipal securities is provided in Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
| TABLE 24: CONTRACTUAL MATURITIES AND YIELDS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2022 | Under 1 Year | 1 to 5 Years | 6 to 10 Years | Over 10 Years | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | Amount | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Available-for-sale(1): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 1,940 | 0.52 | % | $ | 5,496 | 1.08 | % | $ | 545 | 1.66 | % | $ | — | — | % | $ | 7,981 | ||||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 49 | 4.38 | 454 | 4.35 | 6,345 | 4.06 | 1,661 | 3.02 | 8,509 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total U.S. treasury and federal agencies | 1,989 | 5,950 | 6,890 | 1,661 | 16,490 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 58 | 3.19 | 382 | 3.04 | — | — | 1,183 | 3.87 | 1,623 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset-backed securities | 342 | 2.37 | 578 | 2.43 | 444 | 3.05 | 305 | 2.50 | 1,669 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 4,567 | 0.74 | 6,897 | 1.52 | 2,625 | 3.10 | — | — | 14,089 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Other | 187 | 1.94 | 1,769 | 2.24 | 120 | 2.60 | 15 | 2.12 | 2,091 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 5,154 | 9,626 | 3,189 | 1,503 | 19,472 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Student loans | 39 | 6.88 | — | — | — | — | 76 | 4.82 | 115 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Collateralized loan obligations | 182 | 5.10 | 390 | 4.30 | 1,205 | 5.08 | 578 | 5.40 | 2,355 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-agency CMBS and RMBS | — | — | — | — | — | — | 231 | 5.57 | 231 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Other | — | — | 88 | 5.06 | — | — | — | — | 88 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 221 | 478 | 1,205 | 885 | 2,789 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| State and political subdivisions(2) | 144 | 6.24 | 266 | 4.71 | 373 | 5.99 | 40 | 6.21 | 823 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Other U.S. debt securities | 117 | 2.13 | 850 | 2.16 | 38 | 3.67 | — | — | 1,005 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 7,625 | $ | 17,170 | $ | 11,695 | $ | 4,089 | $ | 40,579 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Held-to-maturity(1): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 2,329 | 0.37 | % | $ | 9,327 | 0.86 | % | $ | 24 | 1.66 | % | $ | 13 | 4.29 | % | $ | 11,693 | ||||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 154 | 2.86 | 578 | 3.26 | 4,627 | 1.93 | 36,948 | 2.36 | 42,307 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total U.S. treasury and federal agencies | 2,483 | 9,905 | 4,651 | 36,961 | 54,000 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 1,518 | 1.04 | 4,520 | 1.70 | 565 | 0.49 | — | — | 6,603 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 1,518 | 4,520 | 565 | — | 6,603 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Student loans | 290 | 4.83 | 8 | 4.80 | 931 | 5.30 | 2,726 | 4.87 | 3,955 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-agency CMBS and RMBS | 122 | 4.94 | — | — | — | — | 20 | 4.13 | 142 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 412 | 8 | 931 | 2,746 | 4,097 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 4,413 | $ | 14,433 | $ | 6,147 | $ | 39,707 | $ | 64,700 |
(1) The maturities of MBS, ABS and CMOs are based on expected principal payments.
(2) Yields were calculated on a FTE basis, using applicable statutory tax rates (21.0% as of December 31, 2022).
State Street Corporation | 79
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Loans
| TABLE 25: U.S. AND NON- U.S. LOANS | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, | ||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |||||||
| Domestic(1): | ||||||||||
| Commercial and financial: | ||||||||||
| Fund Finance(2) | $ | 12,154 | $ | 12,296 | $ | 11,531 | ||||
| Leveraged Loans | 2,431 | 3,106 | 2,923 | |||||||
| Overdrafts | 1,707 | 1,796 | 1,894 | |||||||
| Collateralized loan obligations in loan form | 100 | 100 | — | |||||||
| Other(3) | 1,871 | 2,262 | 2,688 | |||||||
| Commercial real estate | 2,985 | 2,554 | 2,096 | |||||||
| Total domestic | 21,248 | 22,114 | 21,132 | |||||||
| Foreign(1): | ||||||||||
| Commercial and financial: | ||||||||||
| Fund Finance(2) | 3,949 | 4,965 | 4,432 | |||||||
| Leveraged Loans | 1,118 | 1,328 | 1,242 | |||||||
| Overdrafts | 1,094 | 1,312 | 1,088 | |||||||
| Collateralized loan obligations in loan form | 4,741 | 2,813 | — | |||||||
| Other(3) | — | — | 31 | |||||||
| Total foreign | 10,902 | 10,418 | 6,793 | |||||||
| Total loans(4) | 32,150 | 32,532 | 27,925 | |||||||
| Allowance for loan losses | (97) | (87) | (122) | |||||||
| Loans, net of allowance | $ | 32,053 | $ | 32,445 | $ | 27,803 |
(1) Domestic and foreign categorization is based on the borrower’s country of domicile.
(2) Fund finance loans include primarily $7.57 billion private equity capital call finance loans, $6.61 billion loans to real money funds and $1.11 billion loans to business development companies as of December 31, 2022, compared to $9.15 billion and $8.38 billion private equity capital call finance loans, $6.40 billion and $6.04 billion loans to real money funds and $1.39 billion and $832 million loans to business development companies as of December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively.
(3) Includes $1.51 billion securities finance loans, $321 million loans to municipalities and $42 million other loans as of December 31, 2022, $1.78 billion securities finance loans, $455 million loans to municipalities and $23 million other loans as of December 31, 2021 and $1.91 billion securities finance loans, $754 million loans to municipalities and $54 million other loans as of December 31, 2020.
(4) As of December 31, 2022, excluding overdrafts, floating rate loans totaled $26.57 billion and fixed rate loans totaled $2.77 billion. We have entered into interest rate swap agreements to hedge the forecasted cash flows associated with LIBOR indexed floating-rate loans. See Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K for additional details.
The decrease in domestic loans was primarily driven by leveraged loans and the increase in foreign loans was primarily driven by an increase in collateralized loan obligations in loan forms, partially offset by a decrease in fund finance loans as of December 31, 2022 compared to December 31, 2021.
As of December 31, 2022 and 2021, our leveraged loans totaled approximately $3.55 billion and $4.43 billion, respectively. We sold $935 million of leveraged loans in 2022.
In addition, we had binding unfunded commitments as of December 31, 2022 and 2021 of $98 million and $124 million, respectively, to participate in syndications of leveraged loans. Additional information about these unfunded
commitments is provided in Note 12 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
These leveraged loans, which are primarily rated “speculative” under our internal risk-rating framework (refer to Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K), are externally rated “BBB,” “BB” or “B,” with approximately 96% and 94% of the loans rated “BB” or “B” as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Our investment strategy involves generally limiting our investment to larger, more liquid credits underwritten by major global financial institutions, applying our internal credit analysis process to each potential investment and diversifying our exposure by counterparty and industry segment. However, these loans have significant exposure to credit losses relative to higher-rated loans in our portfolio.
Additional information about all of our loan segments, as well as underlying classes, is provided in Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
No loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings as of both December 31, 2022 and 2021.
| TABLE 26: CONTRACTUAL MATURITIES FOR LOANS | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2022 | ||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Under 1 year | 1 to 5 years | 5 to 15 years | Total | ||||||||||
| Domestic: | ||||||||||||||
| Commercial and financial | $ | 11,843 | $ | 4,951 | $ | 1,469 | $ | 18,263 | ||||||
| Commercial real estate | 89 | 1,218 | 1,678 | 2,985 | ||||||||||
| Total domestic | 11,932 | 6,169 | 3,147 | 21,248 | ||||||||||
| Foreign: | ||||||||||||||
| Commercial and financial | 3,838 | 1,873 | 5,191 | 10,902 | ||||||||||
| Total foreign | 3,838 | 1,873 | 5,191 | 10,902 | ||||||||||
| Total loans | $ | 15,770 | $ | 8,042 | $ | 8,338 | $ | 32,150 |
| TABLE 27: CLASSIFICATION OF LOAN BALANCES DUE AFTER ONE YEAR | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2022 | ||||||
| (In millions) | Loans with predetermined interest rates | Loans with floating or adjustable interest rates | ||||
| Domestic: | ||||||
| Commercial and financial | $ | 321 | $ | 6,098 | ||
| Commercial real estate | 2,409 | 488 | ||||
| Total domestic | 2,730 | 6,586 | ||||
| Foreign: | ||||||
| Commercial and financial | — | 7,064 | ||||
| Total foreign | — | 7,064 | ||||
| Total loans | $ | 2,730 | $ | 13,650 |
State Street Corporation | 80
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Allowance for credit losses
| TABLE 28: ALLOWANCE FOR CREDIT LOSSES | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |||||||
| Allowance for credit losses: | ||||||||||
| Beginning balance | $ | 108 | $ | 148 | $ | 93 | ||||
| Provision for credit losses (funded commitments)(1) | 16 | (29) | 83 | |||||||
| Provisions for credit losses (unfunded commitments) | 4 | (2) | 3 | |||||||
| Provisions for credit losses (investment securities and all other) | — | (2) | 2 | |||||||
| Charge-offs(2) | (7) | (2) | (41) | |||||||
| Other(3) | — | (5) | 8 | |||||||
| Ending balance | $ | 121 | $ | 108 | $ | 148 |
(1) The provision for credit losses is primarily related to commercial and financial loans.
(2) The charge-offs are related to commercial and financial loans.
(3) Consists primarily of foreign currency translation.
We recorded a provision for credit losses of $20 million in 2022, due to a downward shift in management's economic outlook that was partially offset by a reduction in overall loan portfolio risk, compared to $33 million release of credit reserves in 2021.
As of December 31, 2022, approximately $73 million of our allowance for credit losses was related to leveraged loans included in the commercial and financial segment compared to $61 million as of December 31, 2021. As our view on current and future economic scenarios changes, our allowance for credit losses related to these loans may be impacted through a change to the provisions for credit losses, reflecting credit migration within our loan portfolio, as well as changes in management's economic outlook as of year-end. The remaining $48 million and $47 million as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, was related to other loans, commercial real estate loans, off-balance sheet commitments and other financial assets held at amortized cost, including investment securities. As of December 31, 2022, the allowance for credit losses represented 0.3% of total loans.
Additional information with respect to the allowance for credit losses, net impairment losses and gross unrealized losses related to investment securities, is provided in "Allowance for Credit Losses" under Significant Accounting Estimates and Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
RISK MANAGEMENT
Overview
In the normal course of our business activities, we are exposed to a variety of risks, some that are inherent in the financial services industry, and others that are more specific to our business activities. Our
risk management framework focuses on material risks, which include the following:
•credit and counterparty risk;
•liquidity risk, funding and management;
•operational risk;
•information technology risk;
•operational resiliency risk;
•market risk associated with our trading activities;
•market risk associated with our non-trading activities, referred to as asset and liability management, consisting primarily of interest rate risk;
•model risk;
•strategic risk; and
•reputational, fiduciary and business conduct risk.
Many of these risks, as well as certain factors underlying each of them, could affect our businesses and our consolidated financial statements, and are discussed in detail under "Risk Factors" in this Form 10-K.
The identification, assessment, monitoring, mitigation and reporting of risks are essential to our financial performance and successful management of our businesses. Accordingly, the scope of our business requires that we consider these risks as part of a comprehensive and well-integrated risk management function.
These risks, if not effectively managed, can result in losses to us as well as erosion of our capital and damage to our reputation. Our approach to risk management, including Board and senior management oversight and a system of policies, procedures, limits, risk measurement and monitoring and internal controls, allows for an assessment of risks within a framework for evaluating opportunities for the prudent use of capital that appropriately balances risk and return.
Our objective is to optimize our returns while operating at a prudent level of risk. In support of this objective, we have instituted a risk appetite framework that aligns our business strategy and financial objectives with the level of risk that we are willing to incur.
State Street Corporation | 81
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
We manage risk with a focus on the following objectives:
•A culture of risk awareness that extends across all of our business activities;
•The identification, classification and quantification of our material risks;
•The establishment of our risk appetite and associated limits and policies, and our compliance with these limits;
•The establishment of a risk management structure at the “top of the house” that enables the control and coordination of risk-taking across the business lines;
•The implementation of stress testing practices and a dynamic risk-assessment capability (additional information with respect to our stress-testing process and practices is provided under "Capital" in this Management's Discussion and Analysis);
•A direct link between risk and strategic-decision making processes and incentive compensation practices; and
•The overall flexibility to adapt to the ever-changing business and market conditions.
Our risk appetite framework outlines the quantitative limits and qualitative goals that define the level and type of risk we are willing to undertake in the course of executing our business strategy, and also serves as a guide in setting risk limits across our business units. It further defines responsibilities for measuring and monitoring risk against limits, and for reporting, escalating, approving and addressing exceptions. Our risk appetite framework is established by ERM, a corporate risk oversight group, in conjunction with the MRAC and the RC of the Board. The Board formally reviews and approves our risk appetite statement annually, or more frequently in response to shifts in endogenous or exogenous risk conditions.
Governance and Structure
Our approach to risk management involves all levels of management, from the Board and its committees, including its Examining and Audit Committee (E&A Committee), the RC, the Human Resources Committee (HRC) and the TOPS, to each business unit and employee. We allocate responsibility for risk oversight so that risk/return decisions are made at an appropriate level, and are subject to robust and effective review and challenge.
Risk management is the responsibility of each employee, and is implemented through three lines of defense:
•The business units, which own and manage the risks inherent in their business, are considered the first line of defense;
•ERM and other support functions, such as Compliance, Finance and Vendor Management, provide the second line of defense; and
•Corporate Audit is the third line of defense, reports to the E&A committee of the Board and is independent from the business units, ERM and other corporate functions. Corporate Audit provides independent assurance to the Board over the design and operating effectiveness of key internal controls included within the risk management framework.
The responsibilities for effective review and challenge reside with senior managers, management oversight committees, Corporate Audit and, ultimately, the Board and its committees.
Corporate-level risk committees provide focused oversight, and establish corporate standards and policies for specific risks, including credit, sovereign exposure, market, liquidity, operational, information technology as well as new business products, regulatory compliance and ethics, vendor risk and model risks. These committees have been delegated the responsibility to develop recommendations and remediation strategies to address issues that affect or have the potential to affect us.
We maintain a risk governance committee structure which serves as the formal governance mechanism through which we seek to undertake the consistent identification, management and mitigation of various risks facing us in connection with our business activities. This governance structure is enhanced and integrated through multi-disciplinary involvement, particularly through ERM. The following chart presents this structure.
While our risk management program is designed to manage the risks in our businesses, internal and external factors may create risks that cannot always be identified or anticipated.
State Street Corporation | 82
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| Management Risk Governance Committee Structure | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Executive Management Committees: | ||||||||
| Management Risk and Capital Committee (MRAC) | Business Conduct Committee (BCC) | Technology and Operational Risk Committee (TORC) | ||||||
| Risk Committees: | ||||||||
| Asset-Liability Committee (ALCO) | Credit and Market Risk Committee (CMRC) | Fiduciary Review Committee | Operational Risk and Controls Committee | Technology Risk Committee | ||||
| Recovery and Resolution Planning (RRP) Executive Review Board | Basel Oversight Committee (BOC) | New Business and Product Committee | Global Third Party and Outsourcing Risk Committee | Enterprise Continuity Steering Committee | ||||
| CCAR Steering Committee | Model Risk Committee (MRC) | Core Compliance and Ethics Committee | Executive Operations Management Committee | Enterprise Data Management Committee | ||||
| Country Risk Committee | SSGA Risk Committee | Legal Entity Oversight Committee | ||||||
| Regulatory Reporting Oversight Committee | Conduct Standards Committee |
State Street Corporation | 83
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Enterprise Risk Management
The goal of ERM is to ensure that risks are proactively identified, well-understood and prudently managed in support of our business strategy. ERM provides risk oversight, support and coordination to allow for the consistent identification, measurement and management of risks across business units separate from the business units' activities, and is responsible for the formulation and maintenance of corporate-wide risk management policies and guidelines. In addition, ERM establishes and reviews limits and, in collaboration with business unit management, monitors key risks. Ultimately, ERM works to validate that risk-taking occurs within the risk appetite statement approved by the Board and conforms to associated risk policies, limits and guidelines.
The Chief Risk Officer (CRO) is responsible for our risk management globally, leads ERM and has a dual reporting line to our CEO and the Board’s RC. ERM manages its responsibilities globally through a three-dimensional organization structure:
•“Vertical” business unit-aligned risk groups that support business managers with risk management, measurement and monitoring activities;
•“Horizontal” risk groups that monitor the risks that cross all of our business units (for example, credit and operational risk); and
•Risk oversight for international activities, which combines intersecting “Verticals” and “Horizontals” through a hub and spoke model to provide important regional and legal entity perspectives to the global risk framework.
Sitting on top of this three-dimensional organization structure is a centralized group responsible for the aggregation of risk exposures across the vertical, horizontal and regional dimensions, for consolidated reporting, for setting the corporate-level risk appetite framework and associated limits and policies, and for dynamic risk assessment across our business.
Board Committees
The Board has four committees which assist it in discharging its responsibilities with respect to risk management: the RC, the E&A Committee, the HRC and the TOPS.
•The RC is responsible for oversight related to the operation of our global risk management framework, including policies and procedures establishing risk management governance and processes and risk control infrastructure. It is responsible for reviewing and discussing with management our assessment and management of all risks applicable to our
operations, including credit, market, interest rate, liquidity, operational, regulatory, technology, business, compliance and reputation risks, and related policies. In addition, the RC provides oversight of capital policies, capital planning and balance sheet management, resolution planning and monitors capital adequacy in relation to risk. It is also responsible for discharging the duties and obligations of the Board under applicable Basel and other regulatory requirements.
•The E&A Committee oversees management's operation of our comprehensive system of internal controls covering the integrity of our consolidated financial statements and reports, compliance with laws, regulations and corporate policies. The E&A Committee acts on behalf of the Board in monitoring and overseeing the performance of Corporate Audit and in reviewing certain communications with banking regulators. The E&A Committee has direct responsibility for the appointment, compensation, retention, evaluation and oversight of the work of our independent registered public accounting firm, including sole authority for the establishment of pre-approval policies and procedures for all audit engagements and any non-audit engagements.
•The HRC has direct responsibility for the oversight of human capital management, all compensation plans, policies and programs in which executive officers participate and incentive, retirement, welfare as well as equity plans in which certain of our other employees participate. In addition, it oversees the alignment of our incentive compensation arrangements with our safety and soundness, including the integration of risk management objectives, and related policies, arrangements and control processes consistent with applicable related regulatory rules and guidance.
•The TOPS leads and assists in the Board’s oversight of technology and operational risk management and the role of these risks in executing our strategy and supporting our global business requirements. The TOPS reviews strategic initiatives from a technology and operational risk perspective and reviews and approves technology-related risk matters. In addition, the TOPS reviews matters related to corporate information security and cybersecurity programs, operational and technology resiliency, data
State Street Corporation | 84
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
and access management and third-party risk management.
Executive Management Committees
MRAC is the senior management decision-making body for risk and capital issues, and oversees our financial risks, our consolidated statement of condition, and our capital adequacy, liquidity and recovery and resolution planning. Its responsibilities include:
•The approval of our global risk policies, capital and liquidity management frameworks, including our risk appetite framework;
•The monitoring and assessment of our capital adequacy based on internal policies and regulatory requirements;
•The oversight of our firm-wide risk identification, model risk governance, stress testing and Recovery and Resolution Plan programs; and
•The ongoing monitoring and review of risks undertaken within the businesses, and our senior management oversight and approval of risk strategies and tactics.
MRAC is co-chaired by our CRO and Chief Financial Officer, who regularly present to the RC on developments in the risk environment and performance trends in our key business areas.
BCC provides oversight of our business conduct and culture risks and standards, our commitments to clients and others with whom we do business, and our potential reputational risks, on an enterprise-wide basis. Management considers adherence to high ethical standards to be critical to the success of our business and to our reputation. The BCC is co-chaired by our Chief Compliance Officer and our General Counsel.
TORC provides oversight of, and assesses the effectiveness of, corporate-wide technology and operational risk management programs, and reviews areas of improvement to manage and control technology and operational risk consistently across the organization. TORC is co-chaired by the Chief Operating Officer and the CRO.
Risk Committees
The following second line risk committees, under the oversight of the respective executive management committees, have focused responsibilities for oversight of specific areas of risk management:
Management Risk and Capital Committee
•ALCO is the senior corporate oversight and decision-making body for balance sheet strategy, Global Treasury business activities and risk management for interest rate risk,
liquidity risk and non-trading market risk. ALCO’s roles and responsibilities are designed to be complementary to, and in coordination with the MRAC, which approves the corporate risk appetite and associated balance sheet strategy;
•CMRC is the independent risk oversight and decision-making body for our credit, counterparty, and trading-related activities. It is responsible, as part of the second line of defense within ERM, for overseeing alignment of these activities with our appetite for risk and prevailing policy and guidelines. This committee also serves as a forum to discuss, address, and escalate material risk issues;
•BOC provides oversight and governance over Basel related regulatory requirements, assesses compliance with respect to Basel regulations and approves all material methodologies and changes, policies and reporting;
•RRP Executive Review Board oversees the development of recovery and resolution plans as required by banking regulators;
•MRC monitors the overall level of model risk and provides oversight of the model governance process pertaining to all models, including the validation of key models and the ongoing monitoring of model performance. The MRC may also, as appropriate, mandate remedial actions and compensating controls to be applied to models to address modeling deficiencies as well as other issues identified;
•CCAR Steering Committee provides primary supervision of the stress tests performed in conformity with the Federal Reserve's CCAR process and the Dodd-Frank Act, and is responsible for the overall management, review, and approval of all material assumptions, methodologies, and results of each stress scenario;
•State Street Global Advisors Risk Committee is the most senior oversight and decision making committee for risk management within State Street Global Advisors; the committee is responsible for overseeing the alignment of State Street Global Advisors' strategy, and risk appetite, as well as alignment with our corporate-wide strategy and risk management standards;
•Country Risk Committee oversees the identification, assessment, monitoring, reporting and mitigation, where necessary, of country risks; and
State Street Corporation | 85
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
•Regulatory Reporting Oversight Committee is responsible for providing oversight of regulatory reporting and related report governance processes and accountabilities.
Business Conduct Committee
•Fiduciary Review Committee reviews and assesses the fiduciary risk management programs of those units in which we serve in a fiduciary capacity;
•New Business and Product Committee provides oversight of the evaluation of the risk inherent in proposed new products or services and new business, and extensions of existing products or services, evaluations including economic justification, material risk, compliance, regulatory and legal considerations, and capital and liquidity analyses;
•Core Compliance and Ethics Committee provides review and oversight of our compliance programs, including our culture of compliance and high standards of ethical behavior;
•Legal Entity Oversight Committee establishes standards with respect to the governance of our legal entities, monitors adherence to those standards, and oversees the ongoing evaluation of our legal entity structure, including the formation, maintenance and dissolution of legal entities; and
•The Conduct Standards Committee provides oversight of our enforcement of employee conduct standards.
Technology and Operational Risk Committee
•Operational Risk and Controls Committee along with the support of regional business or entity-specific working groups and committees, is responsible for oversight of our operational risk programs, including determining that the implementation of those programs is designed to identify, manage and control operational risk in an effective and consistent manner across the firm;
•Technology Risk Committee is responsible for the global oversight, review and monitoring of operational, legal and regulatory compliance and reputational risk that may result in a significant change to our Information Technology risk profile or a material financial loss or reputational impact to global technology services. The Committee serves as a forum to provide regular reporting
to TORC and escalate technology risk and control issues to TORC, as appropriate;
•Enterprise Continuity Steering Committee considers matters pertaining to continuity and related risks, including oversight in determining the direction of the continuity program;
•Global Third Party and Outsourcing Risk Committee is responsible for overseeing our framework and processes for the identification, assessment, and ongoing management of third party and outsourcing-related risks. This committee is also a decision-making body for outsourcing strategy, third party risk acceptance, and the end-to-end third party management process, including the oversight of appropriate controls and risk mitigants that comply with applicable regulatory standards;
•Executive Operations Management Committee is a forum for the development of strategy, decision-making, and escalation for operations, regulatory remediation, product management, technology, and the operating model; and
•Enterprise Data Management Committee oversees the enterprise-wide data management strategy, provides independent oversight of the programs associated with enterprise-wide data management, serves as an escalation point for material and emerging enterprise-wide data management issues, and determines / oversees enterprise-wide data management priorities and strategy.
Credit Risk Management
Core Policies and Principles
We define credit risk as the risk of financial loss if a counterparty, borrower or obligor, collectively referred to as a counterparty, is either unable or unwilling to repay borrowings or settle a transaction in accordance with contractual terms. We assume credit risk in our traditional non-trading lending activities, such as overdrafts, loans and contingent commitments, in our investment securities portfolio, where recourse to a counterparty exists, and in our direct and indirect trading activities, such as securities purchased under a resale agreement, principal securities lending and foreign exchange and indemnified agency securities lending. We also assume credit risk in our treasury and securities and other settlement operations, in the form of deposit placements and other cash balances, with central banks or private sector institutions and fee receivables.
We distinguish between three major types of credit risk:
State Street Corporation | 86
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
•Default risk - the risk that a counterparty fails to meet its contractual payment obligations;
•Country risk - the risk that we may suffer a loss, in any given country, due to any of the following reasons: deterioration of economic conditions, political and social upheaval, nationalization and appropriation of assets, government repudiation of indebtedness, exchange controls and disruptive currency depreciation or devaluation; and
•Settlement risk - the risk that the settlement or clearance of transactions will fail, which arises whenever the exchange of cash, securities or other assets is not simultaneous.
The acceptance of credit risk by us is governed by corporate policies and guidelines, which include standardized procedures applied across the entire organization. These policies and guidelines include specific requirements related to each counterparty's risk profile; the markets served; counterparty, industry and country concentrations; and regulatory compliance. These policies and procedures also implement a number of core principles, which include the following:
•We measure and consolidate credit risks attributed to each counterparty, or group of counterparties, in accordance with a “one-obligor” principle that aggregates risks across our business units;
•ERM reviews and approves all material extensions of credit, and material changes to such extensions of credit (such as changes in term, collateral structure or covenants), in accordance with assigned credit-approval authorities;
•Credit-approval authorities are assigned to individuals according to their qualifications, experience and training, and these authorities are periodically reviewed. Our largest exposures require approval by the Credit Committee, a sub-committee of the CMRC. With respect to small and low-risk extensions of credit to certain types of counterparties, approval authority may be granted to individuals outside of ERM;
•We seek to avoid or limit undue concentrations of risk. Counterparty (or groups of counterparties), industry, country and product-specific concentrations of risk are subject to frequent review and approval in accordance with our risk policies and appetite;
•We evaluate the creditworthiness of counterparties through a detailed risk assessment, including the use of internal risk-rating methodologies;
•We review all extensions of credit and the creditworthiness of counterparties at least annually. The nature and extent of these reviews are determined by the size, nature and term of the extensions of credit and the creditworthiness of the counterparty; and
•We subject all corporate policies and guidelines to annual review as an integral part of our periodic assessment of our risk appetite.
Our corporate policies and guidelines require that all extensions of credit are consistent with the bank's standards, limit credit-related losses, and our goal of maintaining a strong financial condition.
Structure and Organization
The Credit and Global Markets Risk group within ERM is responsible for the assessment, approval and monitoring of credit risk across our business. The group is managed centrally, has dedicated teams in a number of locations worldwide, and is responsible for related policies and procedures, and for our internal credit-rating systems and methodologies. In addition, the group, in conjunction with the business units, establishes measurements and limits to control the amount of credit risk accepted across its various business activities, both at the portfolio level and for each individual counterparty or group of counterparties, to individual sectors, and also to counterparties by product and country of risk. These measurements and limits are reviewed periodically, but at least annually.
In conjunction with other groups in ERM, the Credit and Global Markets Risk group is jointly responsible for the design, implementation and oversight of our credit risk measurement and management systems, including data and assessment systems, quantification systems and the reporting framework.
Various key committees within our company are responsible for the oversight of credit risk and associated credit risk policies, systems and models. All credit-related activities are governed by our risk appetite framework and our credit risk guidelines, which define our general philosophy with respect to credit risk and the manner in which we control, manage and monitor such risks.
The previously described CMRC (refer to "Risk Committees") has primary responsibility for the oversight, review and approval of the credit risk guidelines and policies. Credit risk guidelines and
State Street Corporation | 87
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
policies are reviewed periodically, but at least annually.
The Credit Committee, a sub-committee of the CMRC, has responsibility for assigning credit authority and approving the largest and higher-risk extensions of credit to individual counterparties or groups of counterparties.
CMRC provides periodic updates to MRAC and the Board's RC.
Credit Ratings
We perform initial and ongoing reviews to exercise due diligence on the creditworthiness of our counterparties when conducting any business with them or approving any credit limits.
This due diligence process generally includes the assignment of an internal credit rating, which is determined by the use of internally developed and validated methodologies, scorecards and a 15-grade rating scale. This risk-rating process incorporates the use of risk-rating tools in conjunction with management judgment; qualitative and quantitative inputs are captured in a replicable manner and, following a formal review and approval process, an internal credit rating based on our rating scale is assigned. We generally rate our counterparties individually, although some counterparties defined by us as low-risk are rated on a pooled basis. Credit ratings are reviewed and approved by the Credit and Global Markets Risk group or its delegates. We evaluate and rate the credit risk of our counterparties on an ongoing basis. To facilitate comparability across the portfolio, counterparties within a given sector are rated using a risk-rating tool developed for that sector.
Our risk-rating methodologies are approved for use by the Portfolio Risk Committee, a subcommittee of the CMRC, after completion of internal model validation processes, and are subject to an annual review, including re-validation.
Risk Parameter Estimates
Our internal risk-rating system promotes a clear and consistent approach to determining appropriate credit risk classifications for our credit counterparties and exposures. This allows us to track the changes in risk associated with these counterparties and exposures over time. This capability enhances our ability to calculate both risk exposures and capital, and enables better strategic decision making across the organization.
More specifically, our internal risk rating system is used for the following purposes:
•The assessment of the creditworthiness of new counterparties and, in conjunction with our risk appetite statement, the development of appropriate credit limits for our products
and services, including loans, foreign exchange, securities finance, placements and repurchase agreements;
•The automation of limit approvals for certain low-risk counterparties, as defined in our credit risk guidelines and based on the counterparty’s probability-of-default;
•The development of approval authority matrices based on PD; riskier counterparties with higher PDs require higher levels of approval for a comparable PD and limit size compared to less risky counterparties with lower PDs;
•The analysis of risk concentration trends using historical PD and exposure-at-default (EAD), data;
•The determination of the level of management review of short-duration advances depending on PD; riskier counterparties with higher rating class values generally trigger higher levels of management escalation for comparable short-duration advances compared to less risky counterparties with lower rating-class values;
•The monitoring of credit facility utilization levels using EAD values and the identification of instances where counterparties have exceeded limits;
•The aggregation and comparison of counterparty exposures with risk appetite levels to determine if businesses are maintaining appropriate risk levels; and
•The determination of our regulatory capital requirements for the AIRB set forth in the Basel framework.
Credit Risk Mitigation
We seek to limit our credit exposure and reduce any potential credit losses through the use of various types of credit risk mitigation. The Basel III final rule permits us to reflect the application of credit risk mitigation when it meets the standards outlined therein. Examples of forms of credit risk mitigation include a security interest in financial and non financial assets (collateral), netting and guarantees. Where permissible, we apply the recognition of collateral, guarantees and netting to mitigate overall risk within our counterparty credit portfolio. While credit default swaps are permitted under the Basel III final rule, we do not actively use credit default swaps as a risk mitigation tool.
State Street Corporation | 88
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Collateral
In many parts of our business, we regularly require or agree for collateral to be received from or provided to clients and counterparties in connection with contracts that involve credit risk. In our trading businesses, this collateral is typically in the form of cash, as well as highly-rated and/or liquid securities (i.e. government securities and other bonds or equity securities). Credit risks in our non-trading and securities finance businesses are also often secured by bonds and equity securities and by other types of assets. Collateral serves to reduce the risk of loss inherent in an exposure. However, changing market values of the collateral we hold, unexpected increases in the credit exposure to a client or counterparty, reductions in the value or change in the type of securities held by us, as well as operational errors or errors in the manner in which we seek to exercise our rights, may reduce the risk mitigation effects of collateral. While collateral is often an alternative source of repayment, it does not replace the requirement within our policies and guidelines for high-quality underwriting. We also may choose to incur credit exposure without the benefit of collateral or other risk mitigating credits rights.
Our credit risk guidelines require that the collateral we accept for risk mitigation purposes is of high quality, can be reliably valued and is supported by a valid security interest that permits liquidation if or when required. Generally, when collateral is of lower quality, more difficult to value or more challenging to liquidate, higher discounts to market values are applied for the purposes of measuring credit risk. For certain less liquid collateral, longer liquidation periods are assumed when determining the credit exposure.
All types of collateral are assessed regularly by ERM, as is the basis on which the collateral is valued. Our assessment of collateral, including the ability to liquidate collateral in the event of a counterparty default, and also with regard to market values of collateral under a variety of hypothetical market conditions, is an integral component of our assessment of risk and approval of credit limits. We also seek to identify, limit and monitor instances of "wrong-way" risk, where a counterparty’s risk of default is positively correlated with the risk of our collateral eroding in value.
We maintain policies and procedures requiring that documentation used to collateralize a transaction is legal, valid, binding and enforceable in the relevant jurisdictions. We also conduct legal reviews to assess whether our documentation meets these standards on an ongoing basis.
Netting
Netting is a mechanism that allows institutions and counterparties to net offsetting exposures and
payment obligations against one another through the use of qualifying master netting agreements. A master netting agreement allows for certain rights and remedies upon a counterparty default, including the right to net obligations arising under derivatives or other transactions under such agreement. In such an event, the netting of obligations would result in a single net claim owed by, or to, the counterparty. This is commonly referred to as "close-out netting,” and is pursued wherever possible. We may also enter into master agreements that allow for the netting of amounts payable on a given day and in the same currency, reducing our settlement risk. This is commonly referred to as “payment netting,” and is widely used in our foreign exchange activities.
As with collateral, we have policies and procedures in place to apply close-out and payment netting only to the extent that we have verified legal validity and enforceability of the master agreement. In the case of payment netting, operational constraints may preclude us from reducing settlement risk, notwithstanding the legal right to require the same under the master netting agreement. In the event we become unable, due to operational constraints, actions by regulators, changes in accounting principles, law or regulation (or related interpretations) or other factors, to net some or all of our offsetting exposures and payment obligations under those agreements, we would be required to gross up our assets and liabilities on our statement of condition and our calculation of RWA, accordingly. This would result in a potentially material change in our regulatory ratios, including LCR, and present increased credit, liquidity, asset-and-liability management and operational risks, some of which could be material.
Guarantees
A guarantee is a financial instrument that results in credit support being provided by a third party, (i.e., the protection provider) to the underlying obligor (the beneficiary of the provided protection) on account of an exposure owing by the obligor. The protection provider may support the underlying exposure either in whole or in part. Support of this kind may take different forms. Typical forms of guarantees provided to us include financial guarantees, letters of credit, bankers’ acceptances, purchase undertaking agreement contracts and insurance.
We have established a review process to evaluate guarantees under the applicable requirements of our policies and Basel III requirements. Governance for this evaluation is covered under policies and procedures that require regular reviews of documentation, jurisdictions and credit quality of protection providers.
State Street Corporation | 89
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Credit Limits
Central to our philosophy for our management of credit risk is the approval and imposition of credit limits, against which we monitor the actual and potential future credit exposure arising from our business activities with counterparties or groups of counterparties. Credit limits are a reflection of our risk appetite, which may be determined by the creditworthiness of the counterparty, the nature of the risk inherent in the business undertaken with the counterparty, or a combination of relevant credit factors. Our risk appetite for certain sectors and certain countries and geographic regions may also influence the level of risk we are willing to assume to certain counterparties.
The analysis and approval of credit limits is undertaken similarly across our businesses, although the nature and extent of the analysis may vary, based on the type, term and magnitude of the risk being assumed. Credit limits and underlying exposures are assessed and measured on both a gross and net basis where appropriate, with net exposure determined by deducting the value of any collateral held. For certain types of risk being assumed, we will also assess and measure exposures under a variety of hypothetical market conditions. Credit limit approvals across our business are undertaken by the Credit and Global Markets Risk group, by individuals to whom credit authority has been delegated, or by the Credit Committee.
Credit limits are re-evaluated annually, or more frequently as needed, and are revised periodically on prevailing and anticipated market conditions, changes in counterparty or country-specific credit ratings and outlook, changes in our risk appetite for certain counterparties, sectors or countries, and enhancements to the measurement of credit utilization.
Reporting
Ongoing active monitoring and management of our credit risk is an integral part of our credit risk management framework. We maintain management information systems to identify, measure, monitor and report credit risk across businesses and legal entities, enabling ERM and our businesses to have timely access to information on credit limits and exposures. Monitoring is performed along the dimensions of counterparty, industry, country and product-specific risks to facilitate the identification of concentrations of risk and emerging trends.
Key aspects of this credit risk reporting structure include governance and oversight groups and policies that define standards for the reporting of credit risk, data aggregation and sourcing systems.
The Credit and Global Markets Risk group routinely assesses the composition of our overall
credit risk portfolio for alignment with our stated risk appetite. This assessment includes routine analysis and reporting of the portfolio, monitoring of market-based indicators, the assessment of industry trends and developments and regular reviews of concentrated risks. The Credit and Global Markets Risk group is also responsible, in conjunction with the business units, for defining the appetite for credit risk in the major sectors in which we have a concentration of business activities. These sector-level risk appetite statements, which include counterparty selection criteria and granular underwriting guidelines, are reviewed periodically and approved by the CMRC.
Monitoring
Regular surveillance of credit and counterparty risks is undertaken by our business units, the Credit and Global Markets Risk group and designees with ERM, allowing for oversight. This surveillance process includes, but is not limited to, the following components:
•Annual Reviews. A formal review of counterparties is conducted at least annually and includes a review of operating performance, primary risk factors and our internal credit risk rating. This annual review also includes a review of current and proposed credit limits, an assessment of our ongoing risk appetite and assessment that supporting legal documentation remains effective.
•Interim Monitoring. Monitoring of our largest and riskiest counterparties is undertaken more frequently, utilizing financial information, market indicators and other relevant credit and performance measures. The nature and extent of this interim monitoring is individually tailored to certain counterparties and/or industry sectors to identify material changes to the risk profile of a counterparty (or group of counterparties) and assign an updated internal risk rating in a timely manner.
We maintain an active "watch list" for all counterparties. The watch list status denotes a concern with some aspect of a counterparty's risk profile that warrants closer monitoring of the counterparty's financial performance and related risk factors. Our ongoing monitoring processes are designed to facilitate the early identification of counterparties whose creditworthiness is deteriorating; any counterparty may be placed on the watch list by ERM at its sole discretion.
Counterparties on the watch list generally correspond with the non-investment grade or near non-investment grade ratings established by the major independent credit-rating agencies. The watch
State Street Corporation | 90
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
list also includes any counterparties rated “Special Mention,” “Substandard,” “Doubtful” and “Loss.”
The Credit and Global Markets Risk group maintains primary responsibility for our watch list processes, and generates a quarterly report of all watch list counterparties. The watch list is formally reviewed at least on a quarterly basis, with participation from senior ERM staff, and representatives from the business units and our corporate finance and legal groups as appropriate. These meetings include a review of individual watch list counterparties, together with credit limits and prevailing exposures, and are focused on actions to contain, reduce or eliminate the risk of loss to us. Identified actions are documented and monitored.
Controls
GCR provides a separate level of surveillance and oversight over the integrity of our credit risk management processes, including the internal risk-rating system. GCR reviews counterparty credit ratings for all identified sectors on an ongoing basis. GCR is subject to oversight by the CMRC, and provides periodic updates to the Board’s RC.
Specific activities of GCR include the following:
•Perform separate and objective assessments of our credit and counterparty exposures to determine the nature and extent of risk undertaken by the business units;
•Execute periodic credit process and credit product reviews to assess the quality of credit analysis, compliance with policies, guidelines and relevant regulation, transaction structures and underwriting standards, and risk-rating integrity;
•Identify and monitor developing counterparty, market and/or industry sector trends to limit risk of loss and protect capital;
•Deliver regular and formal reporting to stakeholders, including exam results, identified issues and the status of requisite actions to remedy identified deficiencies;
•Allocate resources for specialized risk assessments (on an as-needed basis); and
•Liaise with assurance partners and regulatory personnel on matters relating to risk rating, reporting and measurement.
Allowance for Credit Losses
We record an allowance for credit losses related to certain on-balance sheet credit exposures, including our financial assets held at amortized cost, as well as certain off-balance sheet credit exposures, including unfunded commitments and letters of credit. Review and evaluation of the adequacy of the
allowance for credit losses is ongoing throughout the year, but occurs at least quarterly, and is based, among other factors, on our evaluation of the level of risk in the portfolio and the estimated effects of our forecasts on our counterparties. We utilize multiple economic scenarios, consisting of a baseline, upside and downside scenarios, to develop our forecast of expected losses.
In 2022, the allowance estimate reflected a downward shift in our economic outlook, which was partially offset by a reduction in loan portfolio risk. Allowance estimates are subject to uncertainties, including those inherent in our model and economic assumptions, and management may use qualitative adjustments. If future data and forecasts deviate relative to the forecasts utilized to determine our allowance for credit losses as of December 31, 2022, or if credit risk migration is higher or lower than forecasted for reasons independent of the economic forecast, our allowance for credit losses will also change.
Additional information about the allowance for credit losses is provided in Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Liquidity Risk Management
Our liquidity framework contemplates areas of potential risk to our liquidity based on our activities, size and other appropriate risk-related factors. In managing liquidity risk we employ limits, maintain established metrics and early warning indicators and perform routine stress testing to identify potential liquidity needs. This process involves the evaluation of a combination of internal and external scenarios which assist us in measuring our liquidity position and in identifying potential increases in cash needs or decreases in available sources of cash, as well as the potential impairment of our ability to access the global capital markets.
We manage our liquidity on a global, consolidated basis as well as on a stand-alone basis at our Parent Company and at certain branches and subsidiaries of State Street Bank. State Street Bank generally has access to markets and funding sources limited to banks, such as the federal funds market and the Federal Reserve's discount window. The Parent Company is managed to a more conservative liquidity profile, reflecting narrower market access. Additionally, the Parent Company typically holds, or has direct access to, primarily through SSIF, a direct subsidiary of the Parent Company, and the support agreement, as discussed in "Supervision and Regulation" in Business in this Form 10-K, cash and equivalents intended to meet its current debt maturities and other cash needs, as well as those projected over the next twelve-month period. Absent financial distress at the Parent Company, the liquid assets available at SSIF continue to be available to
State Street Corporation | 91
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
the Parent Company. As of December 31, 2022, the value of our Parent Company's net liquid assets totaled $460 million, compared with $482 million as of December 31, 2021, excluding available liquidity through SSIF. As of December 31, 2022, our Parent Company and State Street Bank had approximately $1.99 billion of senior notes or subordinated debentures outstanding that will mature in the next twelve months.
As a SIFI, our liquidity risk management activities are subject to heightened and evolving regulatory requirements, including interpretations of those requirements, under specific U.S. and international regulations and also resulting from published and unpublished guidance, supervisory activities, such as stress tests, resolution planning, examinations and other regulatory interactions. Satisfaction of these requirements could, in some cases, result in changes in the composition of our investment portfolio, reduced NII or NIM, a reduction in the level of certain business activities or modifications to the way in which we deliver our products and services. If we fail to meet regulatory requirements to the satisfaction of our regulators, we could receive negative regulatory stress test results, incur a resolution plan deficiency or determination of a non-credible resolution plan or otherwise receive an adverse regulatory finding. Our efforts to satisfy, or our failure to satisfy, these regulatory requirements could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Governance
Global Treasury is responsible for our management of liquidity. This includes the day-to-day management of our global liquidity position, the development and monitoring of early warning indicators, key liquidity risk metrics, the creation and execution of stress tests, the evaluation and implementation of regulatory requirements, the maintenance and execution of our liquidity guidelines and contingency funding plan (CFP), and routine management reporting to ALCO, MRAC and the Board's RC.
Global Treasury Risk Management, part of ERM, provides separate oversight over the identification, communication and management of Global Treasury’s risks in support of our business strategy. Global Treasury Risk Management reports to the CRO. Global Treasury Risk Management’s responsibilities relative to liquidity risk management include the development and review of policies and guidelines; the monitoring of limits related to adherence to the liquidity risk guidelines and associated reporting.
Liquidity Framework
We manage liquidity according to several principles that are equally important to our overall liquidity risk management framework:
•Structural liquidity management addresses liquidity by monitoring and directing the composition of our consolidated statement of condition. Structural liquidity is measured by metrics such as the percentage of total wholesale funds to consolidated total assets, and the percentage of non-government investment securities to client deposits. In addition, on a regular basis and as described below, our structural liquidity is evaluated under various stress scenarios.
•Tactical liquidity management addresses our day-to-day funding requirements and is largely driven by changes in our primary source of funding, which are client deposits. Fluctuations in client deposits may be supplemented with short-term borrowings, repurchase agreements, FHLB products and certificates of deposit.
•Stress testing and contingent funding planning are longer-term strategic liquidity risk management practices. Regular and ad hoc liquidity stress testing are performed under various severe but plausible scenarios at the consolidated level and at significant subsidiaries, including State Street Bank. These tests contemplate severe market and events specific to us under various time horizons and severities. Tests contemplate the impact of material changes in key funding sources, credit ratings, additional collateral requirements, contingent uses of funding, systemic shocks to the financial markets and operational failures based on market and assumptions specific to us. The stress tests evaluate the required level of funding versus available sources in an adverse environment. As stress testing contemplates potential forward-looking scenarios, results also serve as a trigger to activate specific liquidity stress levels and contingent funding actions.
CFPs are designed to assist senior management with decision-making associated with any contingency funding response to a possible or actual crisis scenario. The CFPs define roles, responsibilities and management actions to be taken in the event of deterioration of our liquidity profile caused by either an event specific to us or a broader disruption in the capital markets. Specific actions are linked to the level of stress indicated by these measures or by management judgment of market conditions.
State Street Corporation | 92
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Liquidity Risk Metrics
In managing our liquidity, we employ early warning indicators and metrics intended to detect situations which may result in a liquidity stress, including changes in our stock price and spreads on our long-term debt. Additional metrics that are critical to the management of our consolidated statement of condition and monitored as part of our routine liquidity management include measures of our fungible cash position, purchased wholesale funds, unencumbered liquid assets, deposits and the total of investment securities and loans as a percentage of total client deposits.
Asset Liquidity
Central to the management of our liquidity is asset liquidity, which consists primarily of HQLA. HQLA is the amount of liquid assets that qualify for inclusion in the LCR. As a banking organization, we are subject to a minimum LCR under the LCR rule approved by U.S. banking regulators. The LCR is intended to promote the short-term resilience of internationally active banking organizations, like us, to improve the banking industry's ability to absorb shocks arising from market stress over a 30 calendar day period and improve the measurement and management of liquidity risk. The LCR measures an institution’s HQLA against its net cash outflows. HQLA primarily consists of unencumbered cash and certain high quality liquid securities that qualify for inclusion under the LCR rule. We report LCR to the Federal Reserve daily. For the quarters ended December 31, 2022 and 2021, daily average LCR for the Parent Company was 106% and 105%, respectively. The impact of higher deposits on the Parent Company's LCR is offset by a cap, known as the transferability restriction, on the HQLA from State Street Bank and Trust that can be recognized at the Parent Company as defined in the U.S. LCR Final Rule as it prohibits the upstreaming of liquidity under stress. The average HQLA, post-prescribed haircuts for the Parent Company under the LCR final rule definition was $139.88 billion and $159.36 billion for the quarters ended December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. The decrease in average HQLA for the quarter ended December 31, 2022, compared to the quarter ended December 31, 2021, was primarily driven by a decrease in client deposits. For the quarter ended December 31, 2022, LCR for State Street Bank and Trust was approximately 122%. State Street Bank and Trust's LCR is higher than the Parent Company's LCR, primarily due to application of the transferability restriction in the LCR final rule to the calculation of the Parent Company's LCR. This restriction limits the HQLA used in the calculation of the Parent Company's LCR to the amount of net cash outflows of its principal banking subsidiary (State Street Bank and Trust). This transferability restriction does not apply in the calculation of State Street Bank and Trust's LCR, and therefore State Street Bank and
Trust's LCR reflects the benefit of all of its HQLA holdings.
We maintained average cash balances in excess of regulatory requirements governing deposits with the Federal Reserve of approximately $79.52 billion at the Federal Reserve, the ECB and other non-U.S. central banks for the quarter ended December 31, 2022, and $83.48 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2021. The higher levels of average cash balances with central banks reflect higher levels of client deposits.
Liquid securities carried in our asset liquidity include securities pledged without corresponding advances from the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston (FRBB), the FHLB, and other non-U.S. central banks. State Street Bank is a member of the FHLB. This membership allows for advances of liquidity in varying terms against high-quality collateral, which helps facilitate asset-and-liability management. As of December 31, 2022 and 2021, we had no outstanding borrowings from the FHLB.
Access to primary, intra-day and contingent liquidity provided by these utilities is an important source of contingent liquidity with utilization subject to underlying conditions. As of December 31, 2022 and 2021, we had no outstanding primary credit borrowings from the FRBB discount window or any other central bank facility.
In addition to the securities included in our asset liquidity, we have other unencumbered investment securities. These securities are available sources of liquidity, although not as rapidly deployed as those included in our asset liquidity.
The average fair value of total unencumbered securities was $78.25 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2022, compared to $99.47 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2021.
Measures of liquidity include LCR and NSFR, which are described in "Supervision and Regulation" in Business in this Form 10-K.
Uses of Liquidity
Significant uses of our liquidity could result from the following: withdrawals of client deposits; draw-downs by our custody clients of lines of credit; advances to clients to settle securities transactions; increases in our investment and loan portfolios; or other permitted purposes. Such circumstances would generally arise under stress conditions including deterioration in credit ratings. A recurring use of our liquidity involves our deployment of HQLA from our investment portfolio to post collateral to financial institutions serving as sources of securities under our enhanced custody program.
We had unfunded commitments to extend credit with gross contractual amounts totaling $31.20 billion
State Street Corporation | 93
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
and $33.03 billion and standby letters of credit totaling $2.13 billion and $3.24 billion as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. These amounts do not reflect the value of any collateral. As of December 31, 2022, approximately 77% of our unfunded commitments to extend credit and 22% of our standby letters of credit expire within one year. Since many of our commitments are expected to expire or renew without being drawn upon, the gross contractual amounts do not necessarily represent our future cash requirements.
Information about our resolution planning and the impact actions under our resolution plans could have on our liquidity is provided in "Supervision and Regulation" in Business in this Form 10-K.
Funding
Deposits
We provide products and services including custody, accounting, administration, daily pricing, FX services, cash management, financial asset management, securities finance and investment advisory services. As a provider of these products and services, we generate client deposits, which have generally provided a stable, low-cost source of funds. As a global custodian, clients place deposits with our entities in various currencies. As of both December 31, 2022 and 2021, approximately 65% of our average total deposit balances were denominated in U.S. dollars, 15% in EUR, 10% in GBP and 10% in all other currencies.
Short-Term Funding
Our on-balance sheet liquid assets are also an integral component of our liquidity management strategy. These assets provide liquidity through maturities of the assets, but more importantly, they provide us with the ability to raise funds by pledging the securities as collateral for borrowings or through outright sales. In addition, our access to the global capital markets gives us the ability to source incremental funding from wholesale investors. As discussed earlier under “Asset Liquidity,” State Street Bank's membership in the FHLB allows for advances of liquidity with varying terms against high-quality collateral.
Short-term secured funding also comes in the form of securities lent or sold under agreements to repurchase. These transactions are short-term in nature, generally overnight and are collateralized by high-quality investment securities. These balances were $1.18 billion and $1.58 billion as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
State Street Bank currently maintains a line of credit with a financial institution of CAD $1.40 billion, or approximately $1.03 billion, as of December 31, 2022, to support its Canadian securities processing operations. The line of credit has no stated termination date and is cancelable by either party with prior notice. As of both December 31, 2022 and 2021, there was no balance outstanding on this line of credit.
Long-Term Funding
We have the ability to issue debt and equity securities under our current universal shelf registration statement to meet current commitments and business needs. In addition, State Street Bank also has current authorization from the Board to issue unsecured senior debt. The total amount remaining for issuance pursuant to this authority is $2.15 billion as of December 31, 2022.
On February 7, 2022, we issued $300 million aggregate principal amount of 1.746% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026, $650 million aggregate principal amount of 2.203% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2028 and $550 million aggregate principal amount of 2.623% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2033.
On March 30, 2022, we redeemed $750 million aggregate principal amount of 2.825% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2023.
On May 13, 2022, we issued $500 million aggregate principal amount of 4.421% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2033.
On May 15, 2022, we redeemed $750 million aggregate principal amount of 2.653% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2023.
On August 4, 2022, we issued $750 million aggregate principal amount of 4.164% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2033.
On November 4, 2022, we issued $500 million aggregate principal amount of 5.751% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026 and $500 million aggregate principal amount of 5.820% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2028.
On January 26, 2023, we issued $500 million aggregate principal amount of 4.857% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026 and $750 million aggregate principal amount of 4.821% fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2034.
State Street Corporation | 94
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Agency Credit Ratings
Our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment grade ratings as measured by the major independent credit rating agencies.
| TABLE 29: CREDIT RATINGS | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2022 | |||||
| Standard & Poor’s | Moody’s Investors Service | Fitch | |||
| State Street: | |||||
| Senior debt | A | A1 | AA- | ||
| Subordinated debt | A- | A2 | A | ||
| Junior subordinated debt | BBB | A3 | NR | ||
| Preferred stock | BBB | Baa1 | BBB+ | ||
| Outlook | Stable | Stable | Stable | ||
| State Street Bank: | |||||
| Short-term deposits | A-1+ | P-1 | F1+ | ||
| Long-term deposits | AA- | Aa1 | AA+ | ||
| Senior debt/Long-term issuer | AA- | Aa3 | AA | ||
| Subordinated debt | A | Aa3 | NR | ||
| Outlook | Stable | Stable | Stable |
Factors essential to maintaining high credit ratings include:
•diverse and stable core earnings;
•relative market position;
•strong risk management;
•strong capital ratios;
•diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and client deposits;
•strong liquidity monitoring procedures; and
•preparedness for current or future regulatory developments.
High ratings limit borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by:
•providing confidence for unsecured funding and depositors;
•increasing the potential market for our debt and improving our ability to offer products;
•facilitating reduced collateral haircuts in secured lending transactions; and
•engaging in transactions in which clients value high credit ratings.
A downgrade or reduction in our credit ratings could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity by restricting our ability to access the capital markets, which could increase the related cost of funds. In turn, this could cause the sudden and large-scale withdrawal of unsecured deposits by our clients, which could lead to drawdowns of unfunded commitments to extend credit or trigger requirements under securities purchase commitments; or require additional collateral or force terminations of certain trading derivative contracts.
A majority of our derivative contracts have been entered into under bilateral agreements with counterparties who may require us to post collateral or terminate the transactions based on changes in our credit ratings. We assess the impact of these arrangements by determining the collateral that would be required assuming a downgrade by the major rating agencies. The additional collateral or termination payments related to our net derivative liabilities under these arrangements that could have been called by counterparties in the event of a downgrade in our credit ratings below levels specified in the agreements is provided in Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K. Other funding sources, such as secured financing transactions and other margin requirements, for which there are no explicit triggers, could also be adversely affected.
State Street Corporation | 95
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Contractual Cash Obligations and Other Commitments
The long-term contractual cash obligations included within Table 30: Long-Term Contractual Cash Obligations were recorded in our consolidated statement of condition as of December 31, 2022, except for the interest portions of long-term debt and finance leases.
| TABLE 30: LONG-TERM CONTRACTUAL CASH OBLIGATIONS | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2022 | Payments Due by Period | |||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Less than 1 year | 1-3 years | 4-5 years | Over 5 years | Total | |||||||||||||
| Long-term debt(1)(2) | $ | 1,991 | $ | 3,661 | $ | 2,607 | $ | 6,561 | $ | 14,820 | ||||||||
| Operating leases | 189 | 232 | 154 | 101 | 676 | |||||||||||||
| Finance lease obligations(2) | 50 | 104 | 31 | — | 185 | |||||||||||||
| Tax liability | 10 | 47 | — | — | 57 | |||||||||||||
| Total contractual cash obligations | $ | 2,240 | $ | 4,044 | $ | 2,792 | $ | 6,662 | $ | 15,738 |
(1) Long-term debt excludes finance lease obligations (presented as a separate line item) and the effect of interest rate swaps. Interest payments were calculated at the stated rate with the exception of floating-rate debt, for which payments were calculated using the indexed rate in effect as of December 31, 2022.
(2) Additional information about contractual cash obligations related to long-term debt and operating and finance leases is provided in Notes 9 and 20 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Total contractual cash obligations shown in Table 30: Long-Term Contractual Cash Obligations do not include:
•Obligations which will be settled in cash, primarily in less than one year, such as client deposits, federal funds purchased, securities sold under repurchase agreements and other short-term borrowings. Additional information about deposits, federal funds purchased, securities sold under repurchase agreements and other short-term borrowings is provided in Note 8 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
•Obligations related to derivative instruments because the derivative-related amounts recorded in our consolidated statement of condition as of December 31, 2022 did not represent the amounts that may ultimately be paid under the contracts upon settlement. Additional information about our derivative instruments is provided in Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K. We have obligations under pension and other post-retirement benefit plans, with additional information provided in Note 19 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K, which are not included in Table 30: Long-Term Contractual Cash Obligations.
| TABLE 31: OTHER COMMERCIAL COMMITMENTS | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duration of Commitment as of December 31, 2022 | ||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Less than 1 year | 1-3 years | 4-5 years | Over 5 years | Total amountscommitted(1) | |||||||||||||
| Indemnified securities financing | $ | 348,924 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 348,924 | ||||||||
| Unfunded credit facilities | 21,682 | 4,170 | 5,172 | 184 | 31,208 | |||||||||||||
| Standby letters of credit | 467 | 812 | 846 | — | 2,125 | |||||||||||||
| Purchase obligations(2) | 236 | 502 | 297 | 192 | 1,227 | |||||||||||||
| Total commercial commitments | $ | 371,309 | $ | 5,484 | $ | 6,315 | $ | 376 | $ | 383,484 |
(1) Total amounts committed reflect participations to independent third parties, if any.
(2) Amounts represent obligations pursuant to legally binding agreements, where we have agreed to purchase products or services with a specific minimum quantity defined at a fixed, minimum or variable price over a specified period of time.
Additional information about the commitments presented in Table 31: Other commercial commitments, except for purchase obligations, is provided in Note 12 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 96
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Operational Risk Management
Overview
Operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people and systems or from external events.
Tight labor markets, challenging conditions in the global equity and fixed income markets, and heightened geopolitical tensions, including the ongoing war in Ukraine, are resulting in stress on the operating environment and have increased, and may continue to increase, operational risk. The war in Ukraine may also heighten information technology risk exposures, including cyber-threats. See also “Information Technology Risk Management” below.
Operational risk encompasses fiduciary risk and legal risk. Fiduciary risk is defined as the risk that we fail to properly exercise our fiduciary duties in our provision of products or services to clients. Legal risk is the risk of loss resulting from failure to comply with laws and contractual obligations.
Operational risk is inherent in the performance of investment servicing and investment management activities on behalf of our clients. Whether it be fiduciary risk, risk associated with execution and processing or other types of operational risk, a consistent, transparent and effective operational risk framework is key to identifying, monitoring and managing operational risk.
We have established an operational risk framework that is based on three major goals:
•Strong, active governance;
•Ownership and accountability; and
•Consistency and transparency.
Governance
Our Board is responsible for the approval and oversight of our overall operational risk framework. It does so through its TOPS, which reviews our operational risk framework and recommends RC approval of our operational risk policy annually.
Our operational risk policy establishes our approach to our management of operational risk across our business. The policy identifies the responsibilities of individuals and committees charged with oversight of the management of operational risk, and articulates a broad mandate that supports implementation of the operational risk framework.
ERM and other control groups provide the oversight, validation and verification of the management and measurement of operational risk.
Executive management actively manages and oversees our operational risk framework through membership on various risk management committees, including MRAC, the BCC, TORC, the
Operational Risk and Controls Committee, the Cybersecurity Risk Committee, the Enterprise Continuity Steering Committee, the Compliance and Ethics Committee, the Third Party and Outsourcing Risk Committee, and the Fiduciary Review Committee, all of which ultimately report to the appropriate committee of the Board.
The Operational Risk and Controls Committee, chaired by the global head of Operational Risk, provides cross-business oversight of operational risk, operational risk programs and their implementation to identify, measure, manage and control operational risk in an effective and consistent manner and reviews and approves operational risk guidelines intended to maintain a consistent implementation of our corporate operational risk policy and framework.
Ownership and Accountability
We have implemented our operational risk framework to support the broad mandate established by our operational risk policy. This framework represents a set of processes and tools that assists us in the management and measurement of operational risk, including our calculation of required capital and RWA.
The framework utilizes aspects of the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) framework and other industry leading practices, and is designed foremost to address our risk management needs while complying with regulatory requirements. The operational risk framework is intended to provide a number of important benefits, including:
•A common understanding of operational risk management and its supporting processes;
•The clarification of responsibilities for the management of operational risk across our business;
•The alignment of business priorities with risk management objectives;
•The active management of risk and early identification of emerging risks;
•The consistent application of policies and the collection of data for risk management and measurement; and
•The estimation of our operational risk capital requirement.
The operational risk framework employs a distributed risk management infrastructure executed by ERM groups aligned with the business units, which are responsible for the implementation of the operational risk framework at the business unit level.
As with other risks, senior business unit management is responsible for the day-to-day operational risk management of their respective
State Street Corporation | 97
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
businesses. It is business unit management's responsibility to provide oversight of the implementation and ongoing execution of the operational risk framework within their respective organizations, as well as coordination and communication with ERM.
Consistency and Transparency
A number of corporate control functions are directly responsible for implementing and assessing various aspects of our operational risk framework, with the overarching goal of consistency and transparency to meet the evolving needs of the business:
•The global head of Operational Risk, a member of the CRO’s executive management team, leads ERM’s corporate ORM group. ORM is responsible for the strategy, evolution and consistent implementation of our operational risk guidelines, framework and supporting tools across our business. ORM reviews and analyzes operational key risk information, events, metrics and indicators at the business unit and corporate level for purposes of risk management, reporting and escalation to the CRO, senior management and governance committees;
•ERM’s Centralized Modeling and Analytics group develops and maintains operational risk capital estimation models, and ORM's Capital Analysis group calculates our required capital for operational risk;
•ERM’s MVG validates the quantitative models used to measure operational risk, and ORM performs validation checks on the output of the model;
•GCS establishes the framework, policies and related programs to measure, monitor and report on information security risks, including the effectiveness of cybersecurity program protections. GCS defines and manages the enterprise-wide information security program. GCS coordinates with Information Technology, control functions and business units to support the confidentiality, integrity and availability of corporate information assets. GCS identifies and employs a risk-based methodology consistent with applicable regulatory cybersecurity requirements and monitors the compliance of our systems with information security policies; and
•Corporate Audit performs separate reviews of the application of operational risk management practices and methodologies utilized across our business.
Our operational risk framework consists of five components, each described below.
Risk Identification and Assessments
The objective of risk identification and assessments is to understand business unit strategy, risk profile and potential exposures. It is achieved through a series of risk assessments across our business using techniques for the identification, assessment and measurement of risk across a spectrum of potential frequency and severity combinations, including business-specific programs to identify, assess and measure risk, such as new business and product review and approval, new client screening, and, as deemed appropriate, targeted risk assessments. Two primary risk assessment programs, which occur annually, augmented by other business-specific programs, are the core of this component:
•The risk and control assessment program seeks to understand the risks associated with day-to-day activities, and the effectiveness of controls intended to manage potential exposures arising from these activities. These risks are typically frequent in nature but generally not severe in terms of exposure; and
•The Material Risk Identification process utilizes a bottom-up approach to identify our most significant risk exposures across all on- and off-balance sheet risk-taking activities. The program is specifically designed to consider risks that could have a material impact irrespective of their likelihood or frequency. This can include risks that may have an impact on longer-term business objectives, such as significant change management activities or long-term strategic initiatives.
Capital Analysis
The primary measurement tool used is an internally developed loss distribution approach (LDA) model. We use the LDA model to quantify required operational risk capital, from which we calculate RWA related to operational risk. Such required capital and RWA totaled $3.42 billion and $42.76 billion, respectively, as of December 31, 2022, compared to $3.64 billion and $45.60 billion, respectively, as of December 31, 2021; refer to the "Capital" section in "Financial Condition," of this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
The LDA model incorporates the three required operational risk elements described below:
•Internal loss event data is collected from across our business in conformity with our operating loss policy that establishes the
State Street Corporation | 98
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
requirements for collecting and reporting individual loss events. We categorize the data into seven Basel-defined event types and further subdivide the data by business unit, as deemed appropriate. Each of these loss events are represented in a UOM which is used to estimate a specific amount of capital required for the types of loss events that fall into each specific category. Some UOMs are measured at the corporate level because they are not “business specific,” such as damage to physical assets, where the cause of an event is not primarily driven by the behavior of a single business unit. Internal losses of $500 or greater are captured, analyzed and included in the modeling approach. Loss event data is collected using a corporate-wide data collection tool, Incident Capture and Management System (ICAMS), to support processes related to analysis, management reporting and the calculation of required capital. Internal loss event data provides our frequency and severity information to our capital calculation process for historical loss events experienced by us. Internal loss event data may be incorporated into our LDA model in a future quarter following the realization of the losses, with the timing and categorization dependent on the processes for model updates and, if applicable, model revalidation and regulatory review and related supervisory processes. An individual loss event can have a significant effect on the output of our LDA model and our operational risk RWA under the advanced approaches depending on the severity of the loss event, its categorization among the seven Basel-defined UOMs and the stability of the distributional approach for a particular UOM;
•External loss event data provides information with respect to loss event severity from other financial institutions to inform our capital estimation process of events in similar business units at other banking organizations. This information supplements the data pool available for use in our LDA model. Assessments of the sufficiency of internal data and the relevance of external data are completed before pooling the two data sources for use in our LDA model; and
•Business environment and internal control factors are gathered from internal loss event data and business-relevant metrics, such as risk assessment program results, along with industry loss event data and case studies where appropriate. Business environment
and internal control factors are those characteristics of a bank’s internal and external operating environment that bear an exposure to operational risk. The use of this information indirectly influences our calculation of required capital by providing additional relevant data to workshop participants when reviewing specific UOM risks.
Monitoring, Reporting and Analytics
The objective of risk monitoring is to proactively monitor the changing business environment and corresponding operational risk exposure. It is achieved through a series of quantitative and qualitative monitoring tools that are designed to allow us to understand changes in the business environment, internal control factors, risk metrics, risk assessments, exposures and operating effectiveness, as well as details of loss events and progress on risk initiatives implemented to mitigate potential risk exposures.
Operational risk reporting is intended to provide transparency, thereby enabling management to manage risk, provide oversight and escalate issues in a timely manner. It is designed to allow the business units, executive management, and the Board's control functions and committees to gain insight into activities that may result in risks and potential exposures. Reports are intended to identify business activities that are experiencing processing issues, whether or not they result in actual loss events. Reporting includes results of monitoring activities, internal and external examinations, regulatory reviews and control assessments. These elements combine in a manner designed to provide a view of potential and emerging risks facing us and information that details its progress on managing risks.
Effectiveness and Testing
The objective of effectiveness and testing is to verify that internal controls are designed appropriately, are consistent with corporate and regulatory standards, and are operating effectively. It is achieved through a series of assessments by both internal and external parties, independent registered public accounting firms, business self-assessments and other control function reviews, such as a Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) testing program.
Consistent with our standard model validation process, the operational risk LDA model is subject to a detailed review, overseen by the MRC. In addition, the model is subject to a rigorous internal governance process. All changes to the model or input parameters, and the deployment of model updates, are reviewed and approved by the Operational Risk and Controls Committee, which has oversight
State Street Corporation | 99
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
responsibility for the model, with technical input from the MRC.
Documentation and Guidelines
Documentation and guidelines allow for consistency and repeatability of the various processes that support the operational risk framework across our business.
Operational risk guidelines document our practices and describe the key elements in a business unit's operational risk management program. The purpose of the guidelines is to set forth and define key operational risk terms, provide further detail on our operational risk programs, and detail the business units' responsibilities to identify, assess, measure, monitor and report operational risk. The guideline supports our operational risk policy.
Data standards have been established with the intent of maintaining consistent data repositories and systems that are controlled, accurate and available on a timely basis to support operational risk management.
Information Technology Risk Management
Overview and Principles
We define information technology risk as the risk associated with the use, ownership, operation, involvement, influence and adoption of information technology. Information technology risk includes risks potentially triggered by technology non-compliance with regulatory obligations, information security and privacy incidents, business disruption, technology internal control and process gaps, technology operational events and adoption of new business technologies.
The principal technology risks within our technology risk policy and risk appetite framework include:
•Third party and vendor management risk;
•Business disruption and technology resiliency risk;
•Technology change management risk;
•Cyber and information security risk;
•Technology asset and configuration risk; and
•Technology obsolescence risk.
Governance
Our Board is responsible for the approval and oversight of our overall technology risk framework and program. It does so through its TOPS, which reviews and approves our technology risk policy and appetite framework annually.
Our technology risk policy establishes our approach to our management of technology risk across our business. The policy identifies the
responsibilities of individuals and committees charged with oversight of the management of technology risk and articulates a broad mandate that supports implementation of the technology risk framework.
Risk control functions in the business are responsible for adopting and executing the information technology risk framework and reporting requirements. They do this, in part, by developing and maintaining an inventory of critical applications and supporting infrastructure, as well as identifying, assessing and measuring technology risk utilizing the technology risk framework. They are also responsible for monitoring and evaluating risk on a continual basis using key risk indicators, risk reporting and adopting appropriate risk responses to risk issues.
The Chief Technology Risk Officer, a member of the CRO’s executive management team, leads the Enterprise Technology Risk Management (ETRM) function. ETRM is the separate risk function responsible for the technology risk strategy and appetite, and technology risk framework development and execution. ETRM also performs overall technology risk monitoring and reporting to the Board, and provides a separate view of the technology risk posture to executive leadership.
We manage technology risks by:
•Coordinating various risk assessment and risk management activities, including ERM operational risk programs;
•Establishing, through TORC and TOPS of the Board, the enterprise level technology risk and cyber risk appetite and limits;
•Producing enterprise level risk reporting, aggregation, dashboards, profiles and risk appetite statements;
•Validating appropriateness of reporting of information technology risks and risk acceptance to senior management risk committees and the Board;
•Promoting a strong technology risk culture through communication;
•Serving as an escalation and challenge point for technology risk policy guidance, expectations and clarifications;
•Assessing effectiveness of key enterprise information technology risk and internal control remediation programs; and
•Providing risk oversight, challenge and monitoring for the Global Continuity and Third Party Vendor Management Program, including the collection of risk appetite, metrics and key risk indicators, and reviewing issue management processes and consistent program adoption.
State Street Corporation | 100
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Cybersecurity Risk Management
Cybersecurity risk is managed as part of our overall information technology risk framework as outlined above under the direction of our Chief Information Security Officer.
We recognize the significance of cyber-attacks and have taken steps to mitigate the risks associated with them. We have invested in building a mature cybersecurity program to leverage people, technology and processes to protect our systems and the data in our care. We have also implemented a program to help us better measure and manage the cybersecurity risk we face when we engage with third parties for services.
All employees are required to adhere to our cybersecurity policy and standards. Our centralized information security group provides education and training. This training includes a required annual online training class for all employees, multiple simulated phishing attacks and regular information security awareness materials.
We employ Information Security Officers to help the business better understand and manage their information security risks, as well as to work with the centralized Information Security team to drive awareness and compliance throughout the business.
We use independent third parties to perform ethical hacks of key systems to help us better understand the effectiveness of our controls and to better implement more effective controls, and we engage with third parties to conduct reviews of our overall program to help us better align our cybersecurity program with what is required of a large financial services organization.
We have an incident response program in place that is designed to enable a well-coordinated response to mitigate the impact of cyber-attacks, recover from the attack and to drive the appropriate level of communication to internal and external stakeholders.
The TORC assesses and manages the effectiveness of our cybersecurity program, which is overseen by the TOPS of our Board. The TOPS receives regular cybersecurity updates throughout the year and is responsible for reviewing and approving the program on an annual basis.
Market Risk Management
Market risk is defined by U.S. banking regulators as the risk of loss that could result from broad market movements, such as changes in the general level of interest rates, credit spreads, foreign exchange rates or commodity prices. We are exposed to market risk in both our trading and certain of our non-trading, or asset-and-liability management, activities.
Information about the market risk associated with our trading activities is provided below under “Trading Activities.” Information about the market risk associated with our non-trading activities, which consists primarily of interest rate risk, is provided below under “Asset-and-Liability Management Activities.”
Trading Activities
In the conduct of our trading activities, we assume market risk, the level of which is a function of our overall risk appetite, business objectives and liquidity needs, our clients' requirements and market volatility and our execution against those factors.
We engage in trading activities primarily to support our clients' needs and to contribute to our overall corporate earnings and liquidity. In connection with certain of these trading activities, we enter into a variety of derivative financial instruments to support our clients' needs and to manage our interest rate and currency risk. These activities are generally intended to generate foreign exchange trading services revenue and to manage potential earnings volatility. In addition, we provide services related to derivatives in our role as both a manager and a servicer of financial assets.
Our clients use derivatives to manage the financial risks associated with their investment goals and business activities. With the growth of cross-border investing, our clients often enter into foreign exchange forward contracts to convert currency for international investments and to manage the currency risk in their international investment portfolios. As an active participant in the foreign exchange markets, we provide foreign exchange forward and option contracts in support of these client needs, and also act as a dealer in the currency markets.
As part of our trading activities, we assume positions in the foreign exchange and interest rate markets by buying and selling cash instruments and entering into derivative instruments, including foreign exchange forward contracts, foreign exchange and interest rate options and interest rate swaps, interest rate forward contracts and interest rate futures. As of December 31, 2022, the notional amount of these derivative contracts was $2.31 trillion, of which $2.28 trillion was composed of foreign exchange forward, swap and spot contracts. We seek to match positions closely with the objective of mitigating related currency and interest rate risk. All foreign exchange contracts are valued daily at current market rates.
State Street Corporation | 101
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Governance
Our assumption of market risk in our trading activities is an integral part of our corporate risk appetite. The RC of the Board reviews and oversees our management of market risk, including the approval of key market risk policies and the receipt and review of regular market risk reporting, as well as periodic updates on selected market risk topics.
The previously described CMRC (refer to "Risk Committees") oversees all market risk-taking activities across our business associated with trading. The CMRC, which reports to MRAC, is composed of members of ERM, our global markets business and our Global Treasury group, as well as our senior executives who manage our trading businesses and other members of management who possess specialized knowledge. The CMRC meets regularly to monitor the management of our trading market risk activities.
Our business units identify, manage and are responsible for the market risks inherent in their businesses. A dedicated market risk management group within ERM, and other groups within ERM, work with those business units to assist them in the identification, assessment, monitoring, management and control of market risk, and assist business unit managers with their market risk management and measurement activities. ERM provides an additional line of oversight, support and coordination designed to promote the consistent identification, measurement and management of market risk across business units, separate from those business units' discrete activities.
The ERM market risk management group is responsible for the management of corporate-wide market risk, the monitoring of key market risks and the development and maintenance of market risk management policies, guidelines and standards aligned with our corporate risk appetite. This group also establishes and approves market risk tolerance limits and trading authorities based on, but not limited to, measures of notional amounts, sensitivity, VaR and stress. Such limits and authorities are specified in our trading and market risk guidelines which govern our management of trading market risk.
Risk Appetite
Our corporate market risk appetite is specified in policy statements that outline the governance, responsibilities and requirements surrounding the identification, measurement, analysis, management and communication of market risk arising from our trading activities. These policy statements also set forth the market risk control framework designed to monitor, support, manage and control this portion of our risk appetite. All groups involved in the management and control of market risk associated
with trading activities are required to comply with the qualitative and quantitative elements of these policy statements. Our trading market risk control framework is composed of the following:
•A trading market risk management process led by ERM, separate from the business units' discrete activities;
•Defined responsibilities and authorities for the primary groups involved in trading market risk management;
•A trading market risk measurement methodology that captures correlation effects and allows aggregation of market risk across risk types, markets and business lines;
•Daily monitoring, analysis and reporting of market risk exposures associated with trading activities against market risk limits;
•A defined limit structure and escalation process in the event of a market risk limit excess;
•Use of VaR models to measure the one-day market risk exposure of trading positions;
•Use of VaR as a ten-day-based regulatory capital measure of the market risk exposure of trading positions;
•Use of non-VaR-based limits and other controls;
•Use of stressed-VaR models, stress-testing analysis and scenario analysis to support the trading market risk measurement and management process by assessing how portfolios and global business lines perform under extreme market conditions;
•Use of back-testing as a diagnostic tool to assess the accuracy of VaR models and other risk management techniques; and
•A new product approval process that requires market risk teams to assess trading-related market risks and apply risk tolerance limits to proposed new products and business activities.
We use our CAP to assess our overall capital and liquidity in relation to our risk profile and provide a comprehensive strategy for maintaining appropriate capital and liquidity levels. With respect to market risk associated with trading activities, our risk management and our calculations of regulatory capital are based primarily on our internal VaR models and stress testing analysis. As discussed in detail under “Value-at-Risk and Stressed VaR” below, VaR is measured daily by ERM.
The CMRC oversees our market risk exposure in relation to limits established within our risk appetite framework. These limits define threshold levels for
State Street Corporation | 102
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
VaR- and stressed VaR-based measures and are applicable to all trading positions subject to regulatory capital requirements. These limits are designed to mitigate undue concentration of market risk exposure, in light of the primarily non-proprietary nature of our trading activities. The risk appetite framework and associated limits are reviewed and approved by the Board's RC.
Covered Positions
Our trading positions are subject to regulatory market risk capital requirements if they meet the regulatory definition of a “covered position.” A covered position is generally defined by U.S. banking regulators as an on- or off-balance sheet position associated with the organization's trading activities that is free of any restrictions on its tradability, but does not include intangible assets, certain credit derivatives recognized as guarantees and certain equity positions not publicly traded. All FX and commodity positions are considered covered positions, regardless of the accounting treatment they receive. The identification of covered positions for inclusion in our market risk capital framework is governed by our trading and market risk guidelines, which outlines the standards we use to determine whether a trading position is a covered position.
Our covered positions consist primarily of the trading portfolios held by our global markets business. They also arise from certain positions held by our Global Treasury group. These trading positions include products such as foreign exchange spot, foreign exchange forwards, non-deliverable forwards, foreign exchange options, foreign exchange funding swaps, currency futures, financial futures and interest rate futures. New activities are analyzed to determine if the positions arising from such new activities meet the definition of a covered position and conform to our trading and market risk guidelines. This documented analysis, including any decisions with respect to market risk treatments, must receive approval from the CMRC.
We use spot rates, forward points, yield curves and discount factors imported from third-party sources to measure the value of our covered positions, and we use such values to mark our covered positions to market on a daily basis. These values are subject to separate validation by us in order to evaluate reasonableness and consistency with market experience. The mark-to-market gain or loss on spot transactions is calculated by applying the spot rate to the foreign currency principal and comparing the resultant base currency amount to the original transaction principal. The mark-to-market gain or loss on a forward foreign exchange contract or forward cash flow contract is determined as the difference between the life-to-date (historical) value of
the cash flow and the value of the cash flow at the inception of the transaction. The mark-to-market gain or loss on interest rate swaps is determined by discounting the future cash flows from each leg of the swap transaction.
Value-at-Risk and Stressed VaR
We use a variety of risk measurement tools and methodologies, including VaR, which is an estimate of potential loss for a given period within a stated statistical confidence interval. We use a risk measurement methodology to measure trading-related VaR daily. We have adopted standards for measuring trading-related VaR, and we maintain regulatory capital for market risk associated with our trading activities in conformity with currently applicable bank regulatory market risk requirements.
We utilize an internal VaR model to calculate our regulatory market risk capital requirements. We use a historical simulation model to calculate daily VaR- and stressed VaR-based measures for our covered positions in conformity with regulatory requirements. Our VaR model seeks to capture identified material risk factors associated with our covered positions, including risks arising from market movements such as changes in foreign exchange rates, interest rates and option-implied volatilities.
We have adopted standards and guidelines to value our covered positions which govern our VaR- and stressed VaR-based measures. Our regulatory VaR-based measure is calculated based on historical volatilities of market risk factors during a two-year observation period calibrated to a one-tail, 99% confidence interval and a ten-business-day holding period. We also use the same platform to calculate a one-tail, 99% confidence interval, one-business-day VaR for internal risk management purposes. A 99% one-tail confidence interval implies that daily trading losses are not expected to exceed the estimated VaR more than 1% of the time, or less than three business days out of a year.
Our market risk models, including our VaR model, are subject to change in connection with the governance, validation and back-testing processes described below. These models can change as a result of changes in our business activities, our historical experiences, market forces and events, regulations and regulatory interpretations and other factors. In addition, the models are subject to continuing regulatory review and approval. Changes in our models may result in changes in our measurements of our market risk exposures, including VaR, and related measures, including regulatory capital. These changes could result in material changes in those risk measurements and related measures as calculated and compared from period to period.
State Street Corporation | 103
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Value-at-Risk Measures
VaR measures are based on the most recent two years of historical price movements for instruments and related risk factors to which we have exposure. The instruments in question are limited to foreign exchange spot, forward and options contracts and interest rate contracts, including futures and interest rate swaps. Historically, these instruments have exhibited a higher degree of liquidity relative to other available capital markets instruments. As a result, the VaR measures shown reflect our ability to rapidly adjust exposures in highly dynamic markets. For this reason, risk inventory, in the form of net open positions, across all currencies is typically limited. In addition, long and short positions in major, as well as minor, currencies provide risk offsets that limit our potential downside exposure.
Our VaR methodology uses a historical simulation approach based on market-observed changes in foreign exchange rates, U.S. and non-U.S. interest rates and implied volatilities, and incorporates the resulting diversification benefits provided from the mix of our trading positions. Our VaR model incorporates approximately 5,000 risk factors and includes correlations among currency, interest rates and other market rates.
All VaR measures are subject to limitations and must be interpreted accordingly. Some, but not all, of the limitations of our VaR methodology include the following:
•Compared to a shorter observation period, a two-year observation period is slower to reflect increases in market volatility (although temporary increases in market volatility will affect the calculation of VaR for a longer period); consequently, in periods of sudden increases in volatility or increasing volatility, in each case relative to the prior two-year period, the calculation of VaR may understate current risk;
•Compared to a longer observation period, a two-year observation period may not reflect as many past periods of volatility in the markets, because such past volatility is no longer in the observation period; consequently, historical market scenarios of high volatility, even if similar to current or likely future market circumstances, may fall outside the two-year observation period, resulting in a potential understatement of current risk;
•The VaR-based measure is calibrated to a specified level of confidence and does not indicate the potential magnitude of losses beyond this confidence level;
•In certain cases, VaR-based measures approximate the impact of changes in risk factors on the values of positions and portfolios; this may happen because the number of inputs included in the VaR model is necessarily limited; for example, yield curve risk factors do not exist for all future dates;
•The use of historical market information may not be predictive of future events, particularly those that are extreme in nature; this “backward-looking” limitation can cause VaR to understate or overstate risk;
•The effect of extreme and rare market movements is difficult to estimate; this may result from non-linear risk sensitivities as well as the potential for actual volatility and correlation levels to differ from assumptions implicit in the VaR calculations; and
•Intra-day risk is not captured.
We calculate a stressed VaR-based measure using the same model we use to calculate VaR, but with model inputs calibrated to historical data from a range of continuous twelve-month periods that reflect significant financial stress. The stressed VaR model is designed to identify the second-worst outcome occurring in the worst continuous one-year rolling period since July 2007. This stressed VaR meets the regulatory requirement as the rolling ten-day period with an outcome that is worse than 99% of other outcomes during that twelve-month period of financial stress. For each portfolio, the stress period is determined algorithmically by seeking the one-year time horizon that produces the largest ten-business-day VaR from within the available historical data. This historical data set includes the financial crisis of 2008, the highly volatile period surrounding the Eurozone sovereign debt crisis and the Standard & Poor's downgrade of U.S. Treasury debt in August 2011. As the historical data set used to determine the stress period expands over time, future market stress events will be incorporated.
State Street Corporation | 104
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Stress Testing
We have a corporate-wide stress testing program in place that incorporates techniques to measure the potential loss we could suffer in a hypothetical scenario of adverse economic and financial conditions. We also monitor concentrations of risk such as concentration by branch, risk component, and currency pairs. We conduct stress testing on a daily basis based on selected historical stress events that are relevant to our positions in order to estimate the potential impact to our current portfolio should similar market conditions recur, and we also perform stress testing as part of the Federal Reserve's CCAR process. Stress testing is conducted, analyzed and reported at the corporate, trading desk, division and risk-factor level (for example, exchange risk, interest rate risk and volatility risk).
Stress testing results and limits are actively monitored on a daily basis by ERM and reported to the CMRC. Limit breaches are addressed by ERM risk managers in conjunction with the business units, escalated as appropriate, and reviewed by the CMRC if material. In addition, we have established several action triggers that prompt immediate review by management and the implementation of a remediation plan.
We perform scenario analysis daily based on selected historical stress events that are relevant to our positions in order to estimate the potential impact to our current portfolio should similar market conditions recur. Relevant scenarios are chosen from an inventory of historical financial stresses and applied to our current portfolio. These historical event scenarios involve spot foreign exchange, credit, equity, unforeseen geo-political events and natural disasters, and government and central bank intervention scenarios. Examples of the specific historical scenarios we incorporate in our stress testing program may include the Asian financial crisis of 1997, the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the U.S. and the 2008 financial crisis. We continue to update our inventory of historical stress scenarios as new stress conditions emerge in the financial markets.
As each of the historical stress events is associated with a different time horizon, we normalize results by scaling down the longer horizon events to a ten-day horizon and keeping the shorter horizon events (i.e., events that are shorter than ten days) at their original terms. We also conduct sensitivity analysis daily to calculate the impact of a large predefined shock in a specific risk factor or a group of
risk factors on our current portfolio. These predefined shocks include parallel and non-parallel yield curve shifts and foreign exchange spot and volatility surface shifts. In a parallel shift scenario, we apply a constant factor shift across all yield curve tenors. In a non-parallel shift scenario, we apply different shock levels to different tenors of a yield curve, rather than shifting the entire curve by a constant amount. Non-parallel shifts include steepening, flattening and butterflies.
Validation and Back-Testing
We perform frequent back-testing to assess the accuracy of our VaR-based model in estimating loss at the stated confidence level. This back-testing involves the comparison of estimated VaR model outputs to daily, actual profit-and-loss (P&L) outcomes observed from daily market movements. We back-test our VaR model using “clean” P&L, which excludes non-trading revenue such as fees, commissions and NII, as well as estimated revenue from intra-day trading.
Our VaR definition of trading losses excludes items that are not specific to the price movement of the trading assets and liabilities themselves, such as fees, commissions, changes to reserves and gains or losses from intra-day activity.
We experienced three back-testing exceptions in 2022 and one back-testing exception in 2021. At a 99% confidence interval, the statistical expectation for a VaR model is to witness one exception every hundred trading days (or two to three exceptions per year). Two 2022 back-testing exceptions occurred on days of higher volatility on the back of market concerns on economic outlook, inflation and central bank rate policy. A third back-testing exception occurred during the UK market turmoil in late September 2022. The 2021 back-testing exception has been attributed to dislocation in FX markets caused by greater demand for funding over year-end periods.
Our model validation process also evaluates the integrity of our VaR models through the use of regular outcome analysis. This outcome analysis includes back-testing, which compares the VaR model's predictions to actual outcomes using out-of-sample information. Consistent with regulatory guidance, the back-testing compared “clean” P&L, defined above, with the one-day VaR produced by the model. The back-testing was performed for a time period not used for model development. The number of occurrences where “clean” trading-book P&L exceeded the one-day VaR was within our expected VaR tolerance level.
State Street Corporation | 105
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Market Risk Reporting
Our ERM market risk management group is responsible for market risk monitoring and reporting. We use a variety of systems and controlled market feeds from third-party services to compile data for several daily, weekly and monthly management reports.
The following tables present VaR and stressed VaR associated with our trading activities for covered positions held during the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, as measured by our VaR methodology. Diversification effect in the tables below represents the difference between total VaR and the sum of the VaRs for each trading activity. This effect arises because the risks present in our trading activities are not perfectly correlated.
| TABLE 32: TEN-DAY VALUE-AT-RISK ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES FOR COVERED POSITIONS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended December 31, 2022 | As of December 31, 2022 | Year Ended December 31, 2021 | As of December 31, 2021 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Global Markets | $ | 8,567 | $ | 25,779 | $ | 2,631 | $ | 7,591 | $ | 15,214 | $ | 30,485 | $ | 5,252 | $ | 16,998 | ||||||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 2,661 | 7,255 | 559 | 5,632 | 3,189 | 9,762 | 220 | 3,556 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (2,591) | (6,959) | 311 | (6,075) | (2,115) | (7,958) | 1,024 | (4,519) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total VaR | $ | 8,637 | $ | 26,075 | $ | 3,501 | $ | 7,148 | $ | 16,288 | $ | 32,289 | $ | 6,496 | $ | 16,035 | ||||||||||||||||
| TABLE 33: TEN-DAY STRESSED VALUE-AT-RISK ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES FOR COVERED POSITIONS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Year Ended December 31, 2022 | As of December 31, 2022 | Year Ended December 31, 2021 | As of December 31, 2021 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Global Markets | $ | 35,391 | $ | 97,420 | $ | 16,413 | $ | 30,778 | $ | 41,698 | $ | 101,535 | $ | 13,037 | $ | 65,840 | ||||||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 4,629 | 17,695 | 778 | 8,431 | 9,601 | 29,651 | 814 | 12,419 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (5,693) | (19,176) | (1,014) | (12,206) | (5,607) | (20,018) | 2,918 | (17,505) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Stressed VaR | $ | 34,327 | $ | 95,939 | $ | 16,177 | $ | 27,003 | $ | 45,692 | $ | 111,168 | $ | 16,769 | $ | 60,754 |
The average and period-end stressed VaR-based measures were approximately $34 million and $27 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to $46 million and $61 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2021. The decrease in the average and period-end VaR-based and stressed VaR-based measures is primarily attributed to lower foreign exchange and interest rate risk positions.
The VaR-based measures as presented in the preceding tables are primarily a reflection of the overall level of market volatility and our appetite for taking market risk in our trading activities. While overall levels of volatility have varied over the historical observation periods, smaller residual market risk positions during the quarter have led to a reduction in VaR measures presented.
We have in the past and may in the future modify and adjust our models and methodologies used to calculate VaR and stressed VaR, subject to regulatory review and approval, and any future modifications and adjustments may result in changes in our VaR-based and stressed VaR-based measures.
The following tables present the VaR and stressed-VaR associated with our trading activities attributable to foreign exchange risk, interest rate risk and volatility risk as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. The totals of the VaR-based and stressed VaR-based measures for the three attributes in total exceeded the related total VaR and total stressed VaR presented in the foregoing tables as of each period-end, primarily due to the benefits of diversification across risk types. Diversification effect in the tables below represents the difference between total VaR and the sum of the VaRs for each trading activity. This effect arises because the risks present in our trading activities are not perfectly correlated.
| TABLE 34: TEN-DAY VaR ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES BY RISK FACTOR(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended December 31, 2022 | Year Ended December 31, 2021 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | ||||||||||||||||||
| By component: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Global Markets | $ | 5,562 | $ | 4,656 | $ | 358 | $ | 6,945 | $ | 16,424 | $ | 108 | ||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 5,602 | 1,442 | — | 531 | 3,688 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (6,344) | (1,155) | — | (877) | (3,682) | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total VaR | $ | 4,820 | $ | 4,943 | $ | 358 | $ | 6,599 | $ | 16,430 | $ | 108 |
State Street Corporation | 106
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 35: TEN-DAY STRESSED VaR ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES BY RISK FACTOR(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended December 31, 2022 | Year Ended December 31, 2021 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | ||||||||||||||||||
| By component: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Global Markets | $ | 9,527 | $ | 37,077 | $ | 565 | $ | 9,445 | $ | 63,368 | $ | 157 | ||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 7,623 | 9,941 | — | 667 | 13,218 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (8,189) | (15,328) | — | (1,551) | (17,500) | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total Stressed VaR | $ | 8,961 | $ | 31,690 | $ | 565 | $ | 8,561 | $ | 59,086 | $ | 157 |
(1) For purposes of risk attribution by component, foreign exchange refers only to the risk from market movements in period-end rates. Forwards, futures, options and swaps with maturities greater than period-end have embedded interest rate risk that is captured by the measures used for interest rate risk. Accordingly, the interest rate risk embedded in these foreign exchange instruments is included in the interest rate risk component.
Asset and Liability Management Activities
The primary objective of asset and liability management is to provide sustainable NII under varying economic conditions, while protecting the economic value of the assets and liabilities carried on our consolidated statement of condition from the adverse effects of changes in interest rates. While many market factors affect the level of NII and the economic value of our assets and liabilities, one of the most significant factors is our exposure to movements in interest rates. Most of our NII is earned from the investment of client deposits generated by our businesses. We invest these client deposits in assets that conform generally to the liquidity characteristics of our balance sheet liabilities, as well as the currency composition of our significant non-U.S. dollar denominated client deposits.
We quantify NII sensitivity using an earnings simulation model that includes our expectations for new business growth, changes in balance sheet mix and investment portfolio positioning. This measure compares our baseline view of NII over a twelve-month horizon, based on our internal forecast of interest rates, to a wide range of rate shocks. Our baseline view of NII is updated on a regular basis. Table 36, Key Interest Rates for Baseline Forecasts, presents the spot and 12-month forward rates used in our baseline forecasts at December 31, 2022 and 2021. Our baseline rate forecast as of December 31, 2022 was generally consistent with common market expectations for global central bank actions at that point in time, which implied rates to reach peak levels in the first half of 2023 and rate cuts to begin as early as the fourth quarter of 2023.
| TABLE 36: KEY INTEREST RATES FOR BASELINE FORECASTS | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2022 | December 31, 2021 | ||||||||||||||||
| Fed Funds Target | ECB Target(1) | 10-Year Treasury | Fed Funds Target | ECB Target(1) | 10-Year Treasury | ||||||||||||
| Spot rates | 4.50 | % | 2.00 | % | 3.87 | % | 0.25 | % | (0.50) | % | 1.77 | % | |||||
| 12-month forward rates | 4.75 | 3.00 | 3.81 | 1.00 | (0.50) | 1.95 |
(1) European Central Bank deposit facility rate.
In Table 37: Net Interest Income Sensitivity, we report the expected change in NII over the next twelve months from instantaneous shocks to various tenors on the yield curve relative to our baseline rate forecast, including the impacts from U.S. and non-U.S. rates. Each scenario assumes no management action is taken to mitigate the adverse effects of changes in interest rates on our financial performance. While investment securities balances and composition can fluctuate with the level of rates as prepayment assumptions change, for purposes of this analysis our deposit balances and mix are assumed to remain consistent with the baseline forecast which assumes client deposit balance rotation including reductions in non-interest-bearing deposit balances. In lower rate scenarios, the full impact of the shock is realized for all currencies even if the result is negative interest rates.
| TABLE 37: NET INTEREST INCOME SENSITIVITY | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2022 | December 31, 2021 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | U.S. Dollar | All Other Currencies | Total | U.S. Dollar | All Other Currencies | Total | ||||||||||||||||
| Rate change: | Benefit (Exposure) | Benefit (Exposure) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Parallel shifts: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| +100 bps shock | $ | (225) | $ | 432 | $ | 207 | $ | 447 | $ | 306 | $ | 753 | ||||||||||
| –100 bps shock | 207 | (419) | (212) | 384 | (39) | 345 | ||||||||||||||||
| Steeper yield curve: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| '+100 bps shift in long-end rates(1) | 42 | 23 | 65 | 114 | 16 | 130 | ||||||||||||||||
| '-100 bps shift in short-end rates(1) | 250 | (397) | (147) | 519 | (22) | 497 | ||||||||||||||||
| Flatter yield curve: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| '+100 bps shift in short-end rates(1) | (267) | 409 | 142 | 337 | 290 | 627 | ||||||||||||||||
| '-100 bps shift in long-end rates(1) | (43) | (22) | (65) | (132) | (16) | (148) |
(1) The short end is 0-3 months. The long end is 5 years and above. Interim term points are interpolated.
State Street Corporation | 107
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Our overall balance sheet, including all currencies, continues to be asset sensitive with an NII benefit in higher rate scenarios. However, our USD balance sheet has become liability sensitive driven by rising USD deposit betas and deposit balance rotation. Our NII sensitivities assumes no management actions are taken to change modeled outcomes including the +100 basis point scenario which assumes that the level of Fed Funds reaches a peak of 6.0%.
As of December 31, 2022,USD NII benefits in lower rate scenarios and is exposed to higher rates primarily driven by our sensitivities on the short-end of the yield curve. Compared to December 31, 2021, our short-end USD sensitivity has changed due to the higher level of market interest rates and the Federal Reserve’s quantitative tightening program resulting in higher deposit betas and deposit balance rotation and reductions. Long end USD sensitivities have decreased since December 31, 2021 as the implementation of investment portfolio risk reduction strategies lowered our forecasted long-end reinvestment.
As of December 31, 2022, non-USD NII benefits in higher rate scenarios and is exposed to lower rates primarily driven by our sensitivities on the short-end of the yield curve. Compared to December 31, 2021, our short-end non-USD sensitivity to higher rates has increased due to the ECB shifting from negative to positive interest rates resulting in lower deposit betas. Our short-end non-USD sensitivity to lower rates has become negative due to higher non-USD yield curves which are no longer impacted by negative interest rates in the -100bp scenario. The December 31, 2021 sensitivities included a significant NII benefit from negative rates by charging interest on client deposits and the impacts of contractual floors on loans and securities.
EVE sensitivity is a discounted cash flow model designed to estimate the fair value of assets and liabilities under a series of interest rate shocks over a long-term horizon. In the following table, we report our EVE sensitivity to 200 bps instantaneous rate shocks, relative to spot interest rates. Management compares the change in EVE sensitivity against our aggregate Tier 1 and Tier 2 risk-based capital, calculated in conformity with current applicable regulatory requirements. EVE sensitivity is dependent on the timing of interest and principal cash flows. Also, the measure only evaluates the spot balance sheet and does not include the impact of new business assumptions.
| TABLE 38: ECONOMIC VALUE OF EQUITY SENSITIVITY | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, | ||||||
| (In millions) | 2022 | 2021 | ||||
| Rate change: | Benefit (Exposure) | |||||
| +200 bps shock | $ | (917) | $ | (1,380) | ||
| –200 bps shock | 1,082 | 3,829 |
As of December 31, 2022, EVE sensitivity remains exposed to upward shifts in interest rates. Compared to December 31, 2021, our sensitivity in the up 200bp shock scenario decreased due to the implementation of investment portfolio risk reduction strategies resulting in lower securities duration, partially offset by-reduced deposit duration due to higher rates and modelling updates. Compared to December 31, 2021, the change in the down 200 bps scenario is primarily driven by deposit valuation changes between positive and negative rate environments.
Both NII sensitivity and EVE sensitivity are routinely monitored as market conditions change. For additional information about our Asset and Liability Management Activities, refer to Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, "Risk Management."
State Street Corporation | 108
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Model Risk Management
The use of models is widespread throughout the financial services industry, with large and complex organizations relying on sophisticated models to support numerous aspects of their financial decision making. The models contemporaneously represent both a significant advancement in financial management and a source of risk. In large banking organizations like us, model results influence business decisions, and model failure could have a harmful effect on our financial performance. As a result, the MRM Framework seeks to mitigate our model risk.
Our MRM program has three principal components:
•A model risk governance program that defines roles and responsibilities, including the authority to restrict model usage, provides policies and guidance, monitors compliance and reports regularly to the Board on the overall degree of model risk across the corporation;
•A model development process that focuses on sound design and computational accuracy, and includes activities designed to assess data quality, to test for robustness, stability and sensitivity to assumptions, and to conduct ongoing monitoring of model performance; and
•An independent model validation function designed to verify that models are conceptually sound, computationally accurate, are performing as expected, and are in line with their intended use.
The MRM Framework, highlighted above, also provides insight and guidance into addressing key model risks that arise.
Governance
Models used in the regulatory capital calculation can only be deployed for use after undergoing a model validation by ERM's MRM group. The model validation results and/or a decision by the Model Risk Committee must permit model usage or the model may not be used.
ERM’s MRM group is responsible for defining the corporate-wide model risk management framework, maintaining policies that are designed to achieve the framework’s objectives. All regulatory capital calculation models, including any artificial intelligence and machine learning models, must comply with the model risk management framework and corresponding policies. The team is responsible for overall model risk governance capabilities, with particular emphasis in the areas of model validation,
model risk reporting, model performance monitoring, tracking of new model development status and committee-level review and challenge.
MRC, which is composed of senior managers responsible for representing functional areas and business units with key models across the organization, reports to MRAC, and provides guidance and oversight to the MRM function.
Model Development and Ongoing Monitoring
Models are developed under standards governing data sourcing, methodology selection and model integrity testing. Model development includes a statement of purpose to align development with intended use. It may also include a comparison of alternative approaches to promote a sound modeling approach.
Model developers conduct an assessment of data quality and relevance. The development teams conduct a variety of tests of the accuracy, robustness and stability of each model.
Model owners submit models to the MVG for validation on a regular basis, as per the existing policy. The model owners also conduct ongoing monitoring of each model.
Model Validation
MVG is part of MRM within ERM and performs model validations and reviews. MVG is independent, as contemplated by applicable bank regulatory requirements, of both the developers and users of the models. MVG validates models through an evaluation process that assesses the appropriateness, accuracy, and suitability of data inputs, methodologies, documentation, assumptions, and processing code. Model validation also encompasses an assessment of model performance, sensitivity, and robustness, as well as a model’s potential limitations given its particular assumptions or deficiencies. Based on the results of its review, MVG issues a model use decision and may require remedial actions and/or compensating controls on model use. MVG also maintains a model risk rating system, which assigns a risk rating to each model based on an assessment of a model's inherent and residual risks. These ratings aid in the understanding and reporting of model risk across the model portfolio, and enable the triaging of needs for remediation.
Although model validation is the primary method of subjecting models to independent review and challenge, in practice, a multi-step governance process provides the opportunity for challenge by multiple parties. First, MVG conducts a model validation and issues a model use decision. MVG communicates their result as one of the following three outcomes: “Approved”, “Approved with conditions”, or “Not Approved”. There are three ways
State Street Corporation | 109
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
in which a model can be deemed “Not approved for Use” given a validation: 1) the aggregation of the model scoring within MRM’s model risk rating system is poor enough to result in a “high” rating, 2) the scoring of one or more model risk rating system element(s) is deemed “critical” resulting in an automatic “high” rating irrespective of the other elements as the “critical” element(s) undermines the model, or 3) the remediation action is not properly taken by the due date resulting in a severe compliance breach that undercuts the model rating. Second, these decisions may be reviewed, challenged, and confirmed by the MRC. Finally, model use decisions, risk ratings, and overall levels of model risk may be reported to and reviewed by MRAC. MRM also reports regularly on model risk issues to the Board.
Strategic Risk Management
We define strategic risk as the current or prospective impact on earnings or capital arising from adverse business decisions, improper implementation of strategic initiatives, or lack of responsiveness to industry-wide changes. Strategic risks are influenced by changes in the competitive environment; decline in market performance or changes in our business activities; and the potential secondary impacts of reputational risks, not already captured as market, interest rate, credit, operational, model or liquidity risks. We incorporate strategic risk into our assessment of our business plans and risk and capital management processes. Management of strategic risk is an integral component of all aspects of our business.
Separating the effects of a potential material adverse event into operational and strategic risk is sometimes difficult. For instance, the direct financial impact of an unfavorable event in the form of fines or penalties would be classified as an operational risk loss, while the impact on our reputation and consequently the potential loss of clients and corresponding decline in revenue would be classified as a strategic risk loss. An additional example of strategic risk is the integration of a major acquisition. Failure to successfully integrate the operations of an acquired business, and the resultant inability to retain clients and the associated revenue, would be classified as a loss due to strategic risk.
Strategic risk is managed with a long-term focus. Techniques for its assessment and management include the development of business plans, which are subject to review and challenge from senior management and the Board of Directors, as well as a formal review and approval process for all new business and product proposals. The potential impact of the various elements of strategic risk is difficult to quantify with any degree of precision. We use a
combination of historical earnings volatility, scenario analysis, stress-testing and management judgment to help assess the potential effect on us attributable to strategic risk. Management and control of strategic risks are generally the responsibility of the business units, with oversight from the control functions, as part of their overall strategic planning and internal risk management processes.
CAPITAL
Managing our capital involves evaluating whether our actual and projected levels of capital are commensurate with our risk profile, are in compliance with all applicable regulatory requirements, and are sufficient to provide us with the financial flexibility to undertake future strategic business initiatives. We assess capital adequacy based on relevant regulatory capital requirements, as well as our own internal capital goals, targets and other relevant metrics.
Framework
Our objective with respect to management of our capital is to maintain a strong capital base in order to provide financial flexibility for our business needs, including funding corporate growth and supporting clients’ cash management needs, and to provide protection against loss to depositors and creditors. We strive to maintain an appropriate level of capital, commensurate with our risk profile, on which an attractive return to shareholders is expected to be realized over both the short and long-term, while protecting our obligations to depositors and creditors and complying with regulatory capital requirements.
Our capital management focuses on our risk exposures, the regulatory requirements applicable to us with respect to multiple capital measures, the evaluations and resulting credit ratings of the major independent rating agencies, our return on capital at both the consolidated and line-of-business level and our capital position relative to our peers.
Assessment of our overall capital adequacy includes the comparison of capital sources with capital uses, as well as the consideration of the quality and quantity of the various components of capital. The assessment seeks to determine the optimal level of capital and composition of capital instruments to satisfy all constituents of capital, with the lowest overall cost to shareholders. Other factors considered in our assessment of capital adequacy are strategic and contingency planning, stress testing and planned capital actions.
Capital Adequacy Process (CAP)
Our primary federal banking regulator is the Federal Reserve. Both we and State Street Bank are subject to the minimum regulatory capital requirements established by the Federal Reserve and defined in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
State Street Corporation | 110
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Improvement Act. State Street Bank must exceed the regulatory capital thresholds for “well capitalized” in order for our Parent Company to maintain its status as a financial holding company. Accordingly, one of our primary objectives with respect to capital management is to exceed all applicable minimum regulatory capital requirements and for State Street Bank to be “well capitalized” under the PCA guidelines established by the FDIC. Our capital management activities are conducted as part of our corporate-wide CAP and associated Capital Policy and Guidelines.
We consider capital adequacy to be a key element of our financial well-being, which affects our ability to attract and maintain client relationships; operate effectively in the global capital markets; and satisfy regulatory, security holders and shareholder needs. Capital is one of several elements that affect our credit ratings and the ratings of our principal subsidiaries.
In conformity with our Capital Policy and Guidelines, we strive to achieve and maintain specific internal capital levels, not just at a point in time, but over time and during periods of stress, to account for changes in our strategic direction, evolving economic conditions, and financial and market volatility. We have developed and implemented a corporate-wide CAP to assess our overall capital in relation to our risk profile and to provide a comprehensive strategy for maintaining appropriate capital levels. The CAP considers material risks under multiple scenarios, with an emphasis on stress scenarios, and encompasses existing processes and systems used to measure our capital adequacy.
Capital Contingency Planning
Contingency planning is an integral component of capital management. The objective of contingency planning is to monitor current and forecast levels of select capital, liquidity and other measures that serve as early indicators of a potentially adverse capital or liquidity adequacy situation. These measures are one of the inputs used to set our internal capital adequacy level. We review these measures annually for appropriateness and relevance in relation to our financial budget and capital plan. In addition, we maintain an inventory of capital contingency actions designed to conserve or generate capital to support the unique risks in our business model, our client and investor demands and regulatory requirements.
Stress Testing
We administer a robust business-wide stress-testing program that executes stress tests each year to assess the institution’s capital adequacy and/or future performance under adverse conditions. Our stress testing program is structured around what we determine to be the key risks inherent in our
business, as assessed through a recurring material risk identification process. The material risk identification process represents a bottom-up approach to identifying the institution’s most significant risk exposures across all on- and off-balance sheet risk-taking activities, including credit, market, liquidity, interest rate, operational, fiduciary, business, reputation and regulatory risks. These key risks serve as an organizing principle for much of our risk management framework, as well as reporting, including the “risk dashboard” provided to the Board.
In connection with the focus on our key risks, each stress test incorporates idiosyncratic loss events tailored to our unique risk profile and business activities. Due to the nature of our business model and our consolidated statement of condition, our risks differ from those of a traditional commercial bank. Over the past few years, stress scenarios have included a deep recession in the U.S., including impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic, a break-up of the Eurozone, a severe recession in China and an oil shock precipitated by turmoil in the Middle East/North Africa region.
The Federal Reserve requires bank holding companies with total consolidated assets of $50 billion or more, which includes us, to submit a capital plan on an annual basis. The Federal Reserve uses its annual CCAR process, which incorporates hypothetical financial and economic stress scenarios, to review those capital plans and assess whether banking organizations have capital planning processes that account for idiosyncratic risks and provide for sufficient capital to continue operations throughout times of economic and financial stress. As part of its CCAR process, the Federal Reserve assesses each organization’s capital adequacy, capital planning process and plans to distribute capital, such as dividend payments or stock purchase programs. Management and Board risk committees review, challenge and approve CCAR results and assumptions before submission to the Federal Reserve.
Through the evaluation of our capital adequacy and/or future performance under adverse conditions, the stress testing process provides us important insights for capital planning, risk management and strategic decision-making.
Governance
In order to support integrated decision making, we have identified three management elements to aid in the compatibility and coordination of our CAP:
•Risk Management - identification, measurement, monitoring and forecasting of different types of risk and their combined impact on capital adequacy;
State Street Corporation | 111
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
•Capital management - determination of optimal capital levels; and
•Business Management - strategic planning, budgeting, forecasting and performance management.
We have a hierarchical structure supporting appropriate committee review of relevant risk and capital information. The ongoing responsibility for capital management rests with our Treasurer. The Capital Management group within Global Treasury is responsible for the Capital Policy and Guidelines, development of the Capital Plan, the oversight of global capital management and optimization.
The MRAC provides oversight of our capital management, our capital adequacy, our internal targets and the expectations of the major independent credit rating agencies. In addition, MRAC approves our balance sheet strategy and related activities. The Board’s RC assists the Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities related to the assessment and management of risk and capital. Our Capital Policy is reviewed and approved annually by the Board's RC.
Global Systemically Important Bank
We have been identified by the Financial Stability Board and the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision as a G-SIB. Our designation as a G-SIB is based on a number of factors, as evaluated by banking regulators, and requires us to maintain an additional capital surcharge above the minimum capital ratios set forth in the Basel III rule.
We and our depositary institution subsidiaries are subject to the current Basel III minimum risk-based capital and leverage ratio guidelines.
Additional information about G-SIBs is provided under "Regulatory Capital Adequacy and Liquidity Standards" in "Supervision and Regulation" in Business in this Form 10-K.
Regulatory Capital
We and State Street Bank, as advanced approaches banking organizations, are subject to the U.S. Basel III framework. We are also subject to the final market risk capital rule issued by U.S. banking regulators.
The Basel III rule provides for two frameworks for monitoring capital adequacy: the “standardized approach" and the “advanced approaches", applicable to advanced approaches banking organizations, like us. The standardized approach prescribes standardized calculations for credit risk RWA, including specified risk weights for certain on- and off-balance sheet exposures. The advanced approaches consist of the Advanced Internal Ratings-Based Approach used for the calculation of RWA
related to credit risk, and the Advanced Measurement Approach used for the calculation of RWA related to operational risk.
As required by the Dodd-Frank Act enacted in 2010, we and State Street Bank, as advanced approaches banking organizations, are subject to a "capital floor," also referred to as the Collins Amendment, in the assessment of our regulatory capital adequacy, such that our risk-based capital ratios for regulatory assessment purposes are the lower of each ratio calculated under the advanced approaches and the standardized approach. Under the advanced approaches, State Street and State Street Bank are subject to a 2.5% CCB requirement, plus any applicable countercyclical capital buffer requirement, which is currently set at 0%. Under the standardized approach, State Street Bank is subject to the same CCB and countercyclical capital buffer requirements, but for State Street, the 2.5% CCB requirement is replaced by the SCB requirement according to the SCB rule issued in 2020. In addition, State Street is subject to a G-SIB surcharge.
The SCB replaced, under the standardized approach, the CCB with a buffer calculated as the difference between the institution’s starting and lowest projected CET1 ratio under the CCAR severely adverse scenario plus planned common stock dividend payments (as a percentage of RWA) from the fourth through seventh quarter of the CCAR planning horizon. The SCB requirement can be no less than 2.5% of RWA. Breaching the SCB or other regulatory buffer or surcharge will limit a banking organization’s ability to make capital distributions and discretionary bonus payments to executive officers. The countercyclical capital buffer is currently set at zero by U.S. banking regulators.
Our minimum risk-based capital ratios as of January 1, 2022 include a CCB of 2.5% and a SCB of 2.5% for the advanced approaches and standardized approach, respectively, a G-SIB surcharge of 1.0%, and a countercyclical buffer of 0.0%. This results in minimum risk-based ratios of 8.0% for the Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) capital ratio, 9.5% for the tier 1 capital ratio, and 11.5% for the total capital ratio.
Our current G-SIB surcharge, through December 31, 2023, is 1.0%. Based upon preliminary calculations using data as of December 31, 2022, we currently anticipate that our surcharge will remain at 1% through December 31, 2024; however, that calculation has not yet been finalized and is subject to many financial, balance sheet, market and other factors, and consequently there is a risk that a higher G-SIB surcharge of 1.5% will result from the final calculation.
State Street Corporation | 112
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
To maintain the status of the Parent Company as a financial holding company, we and our insured depository institution subsidiaries are required, among other requirements, to be "well capitalized" as defined by Regulation Y and Regulation H.
The market risk capital rule requires us to use internal models to calculate daily measures of VaR, which reflect general market risk for certain of our trading positions defined by the rule as “covered positions,” as well as stressed-VaR measures to supplement the VaR measures. The rule also requires a public disclosure composed of qualitative and quantitative information about the market risk associated with our trading activities and our related VaR and stressed-VaR measures. The qualitative and quantitative information required by the rule is provided under "Market Risk Management" included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
The following table presents the regulatory capital structure and related regulatory capital ratios for us and State Street Bank as of the dates indicated. We are subject to the more stringent of the risk-based capital ratios calculated under the standardized approach and those calculated under the advanced approaches in the assessment of our capital adequacy under applicable bank regulatory standards.
| TABLE 39: REGULATORY CAPITAL STRUCTURE AND RELATED REGULATORY CAPITAL RATIOS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| State Street Corporation | State Street Bank | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2022 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2022 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2021 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2021 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2022 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2022 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2021 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2021 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common shareholders' equity: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common stock and related surplus | $ | 11,234 | $ | 11,234 | $ | 11,291 | $ | 11,291 | $ | 13,033 | $ | 13,033 | $ | 13,047 | $ | 13,047 | ||||||||||||||
| Retained earnings | 27,028 | 27,028 | 25,238 | 25,238 | 16,975 | 16,975 | 15,700 | 15,700 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) | (3,711) | (3,711) | (1,133) | (1,133) | (3,428) | (3,428) | (926) | (926) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Treasury stock, at cost | (11,336) | (11,336) | (10,009) | (10,009) | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | 23,215 | 23,215 | 25,387 | 25,387 | 26,580 | 26,580 | 27,821 | 27,821 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Regulatory capital adjustments: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Goodwill and other intangible assets, net of associated deferred tax liabilities | (8,545) | (8,545) | (8,935) | (8,935) | (8,288) | (8,288) | (8,667) | (8,667) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other adjustments(1) | (123) | (123) | (505) | (505) | (19) | (19) | (309) | (309) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital | 14,547 | 14,547 | 15,947 | 15,947 | 18,273 | 18,273 | 18,845 | 18,845 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Preferred stock | 1,976 | 1,976 | 1,976 | 1,976 | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital | 16,523 | 16,523 | 17,923 | 17,923 | 18,273 | 18,273 | 18,845 | 18,845 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Qualifying subordinated long-term debt | 1,376 | 1,376 | 1,588 | 1,588 | 542 | 542 | 752 | 752 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Allowance for credit losses | — | 120 | — | 108 | — | 120 | — | 108 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total capital | $ | 17,899 | $ | 18,019 | $ | 19,511 | $ | 19,619 | $ | 18,815 | $ | 18,935 | $ | 19,597 | $ | 19,705 | ||||||||||||||
| Risk-weighted assets: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Credit risk(2) | $ | 61,108 | $ | 105,739 | $ | 63,735 | $ | 109,554 | $ | 54,675 | $ | 104,184 | $ | 57,405 | $ | 106,405 | ||||||||||||||
| Operational risk(3) | 42,763 | NA | 45,550 | NA | 42,325 | NA | 42,813 | NA | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Market risk | 1,488 | 1,488 | 2,113 | 2,113 | 1,488 | 1,488 | 2,113 | 2,113 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total risk-weighted assets | $ | 105,359 | $ | 107,227 | $ | 111,398 | $ | 111,667 | $ | 98,488 | $ | 105,672 | $ | 102,331 | $ | 108,518 | ||||||||||||||
| Capital Ratios: | 2022 Minimum Requirements Including Capital Conservation Buffer and G-SIB Surcharge(4) | 2021 Minimum Requirements Including Capital Conservation Buffer and G-SIB Surcharge(4) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital | 8.0 | % | 8.0 | % | 13.8 | % | 13.6 | % | 14.3 | % | 14.3 | % | 18.6 | % | 17.3 | % | 18.4 | % | 17.4 | % | ||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital | 9.5 | 9.5 | 15.7 | 15.4 | 16.1 | 16.1 | 18.6 | 17.3 | 18.4 | 17.4 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Total capital | 11.5 | 11.5 | 17.0 | 16.8 | 17.5 | 17.6 | 19.1 | 17.9 | 19.2 | 18.2 |
(1) Other adjustments within CET1 capital include accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) on cash flow hedges that are not recognized at fair value on the balance sheet, the overfunded portion of our defined benefit pension plan obligation net of associated deferred tax liabilities, disallowed deferred tax assets, and other required credit risk-based deductions.
(2) Under the advanced approaches, credit risk RWA includes a CVA which reflects the risk of potential fair value adjustments for credit risk reflected in our valuation of over-the-counter (OTC) derivative contracts. We used a simple CVA approach in conformity with the Basel III advanced approaches.
(3) Under the current advanced approaches rules and regulatory guidance concerning operational risk models, RWA attributable to operational risk can vary substantially from period-to-period, without direct correlation to the effects of a particular loss event on our results of operations and financial condition and impacting dates and periods that may differ from the dates and periods as of and during which the loss event is reflected in our financial statements, with the timing and categorization dependent on the processes for model updates and, if applicable, model revalidation and regulatory review and related supervisory processes. An individual loss event can have a significant effect on the output of our operational RWA under the advanced approaches depending on the severity of the loss event and its categorization among the seven Basel-defined UOMs.
(4) Minimum requirements include a CCB of 2.5% and a SCB of 2.5% for the advanced approaches and the standardized approach, respectively, a G-SIB surcharge of 1.0% and a countercyclical capital buffer of 0%.
NA Not applicable
State Street Corporation | 113
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Our CET1 capital decreased $1.40 billion as of December 31, 2022 compared to December 31, 2021, primarily reflecting lower AOCI from unrealized losses related to AFS securities, largely recognized in the first half of 2022 driven by the significant increase in rates across the yield curve and the resumption of common share repurchases in the fourth quarter of 2022, partially offset by net income. We utilize a hedging program that is designed to minimize volatility in our capital ratios due to impacts of foreign exchange translation on both the numerator (capital) and denominator (RWA and leverage assets). This hedging program, which includes net investment hedging with derivatives, investing in foreign currency and capital repatriation, was generally effective in 2022, contributing to limit the foreign exchange translation impact on CET1 capital ratio. Our Tier 1 capital decreased $1.40 billion as of December 31, 2022 compared to December 31, 2021 under both the advanced approaches and standardized approach, primarily due to the decrease in CET1 capital.
Our Tier 2 capital decreased under the advanced approaches and standardized approach, as of December 31, 2022 compared to December 31, 2021, by $0.21 billion and $0.20 billion, respectively, mainly driven by the maturity of our Tier 2 qualifying debt.
Total capital decreased under the advanced approaches and standardized approach, as of December 31, 2022 compared to December 31, 2021, by $1.61 billion and $1.60 billion, respectively, mainly driven by the decrease in CET1 capital.
The table below presents a roll-forward of CET1 capital, Tier 1 capital and total capital for the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021.
| TABLE 40: CAPITAL ROLL-FORWARD | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2022 | Basel III Standardized Approach December, 31, 2022 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2021 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2021 | ||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital balance, beginning of period | $ | 15,947 | $ | 15,947 | $ | 14,377 | $ | 14,377 | ||||||
| Net income | 2,774 | 2,774 | 2,693 | 2,693 | ||||||||||
| Changes in treasury stock, at cost | (1,327) | (1,327) | 600 | 600 | ||||||||||
| Dividends declared | (984) | (984) | (897) | (897) | ||||||||||
| Goodwill and other intangible assets, net of associated deferred tax liabilities | 390 | 390 | 84 | 84 | ||||||||||
| Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)(1) | (2,578) | (2,578) | (1,320) | (1,320) | ||||||||||
| Other adjustments(1) | 325 | 325 | 410 | 410 | ||||||||||
| Changes in common equity tier 1 capital | (1,400) | (1,400) | 1,570 | 1,570 | ||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital balance, end of period | 14,547 | 14,547 | 15,947 | 15,947 | ||||||||||
| Additional tier 1 capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital balance, beginning of period | 17,923 | 17,923 | 16,848 | 16,848 | ||||||||||
| Changes in common equity tier 1 capital | (1,400) | (1,400) | 1,570 | 1,570 | ||||||||||
| Net issuance (redemption) of preferred stock | — | — | (495) | (495) | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 1 capital | (1,400) | (1,400) | 1,075 | 1,075 | ||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital balance, end of period | 16,523 | 16,523 | 17,923 | 17,923 | ||||||||||
| Tier 2 capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Tier 2 capital balance, beginning of period | 1,588 | 1,696 | 962 | 1,109 | ||||||||||
| Net issuance (redemption) and changes in long-term debt qualifying as tier 2 capital | (212) | (212) | 627 | 627 | ||||||||||
| Changes in allowance for credit losses | — | 12 | (1) | (40) | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 2 capital | (212) | (200) | 626 | 587 | ||||||||||
| Tier 2 capital balance, end of period | 1,376 | 1,496 | 1,588 | 1,696 | ||||||||||
| Total capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Total capital balance, beginning of period | 19,511 | 19,619 | 17,810 | 17,957 | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 1 capital | (1,400) | (1,400) | 1,075 | 1,075 | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 2 capital | (212) | (200) | 626 | 587 | ||||||||||
| Total capital balance, end of period | $ | 17,899 | $ | 18,019 | $ | 19,511 | $ | 19,619 |
(1) Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) includes losses on cash flow hedges where the hedged exposures are not recognized at fair value on the balance sheet, which, under the Capital Rule, must be excluded from CET1 capital. This adjustment is captured in the Other Adjustments line.
State Street Corporation | 114
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following table presents a roll-forward of the Basel III advanced approaches and standardized approach RWA for the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021.
| TABLE 41: ADVANCED & STANDARDIZED APPROACHES RISK-WEIGHTED ASSETS ROLL-FORWARD | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2022 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2021 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2022 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2021 | ||||||||||
| Total risk-weighted assets, beginning of period | $ | 111,398 | $ | 109,705 | $ | 111,667 | $ | 117,080 | ||||||
| Changes in credit risk-weighted assets: | ||||||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in investment securities-wholesale | (4,850) | (476) | (3,591) | (707) | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in loans | (3,054) | 2,017 | (5,387) | 946 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in securitization exposures | (5) | (404) | (5) | (489) | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in repo-style transaction exposures | (1,420) | (440) | (5,157) | (1,658) | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in over-the-counter derivatives exposures(1) | 2,161 | (1,353) | 6,295 | (863) | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in all other(2) | 4,541 | 1,024 | 4,030 | (2,567) | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in credit risk-weighted assets | (2,627) | 368 | (3,815) | (5,338) | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in market risk-weighted assets | (625) | (75) | (625) | (75) | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in operational risk-weighted assets | (2,787) | 1,400 | N/A | N/A | ||||||||||
| Total risk-weighted assets, end of period | $ | 105,359 | $ | 111,398 | $ | 107,227 | $ | 111,667 |
(1) Under the advanced approaches, includes CVA RWA.
(2) Includes assets not in a definable category, non-material portfolio, cleared transactions, other wholesale, cash and due from banks, interest-bearing deposits with banks and equity exposures.
NA Not applicable.
As of December 31, 2022, total advanced approaches RWA decreased $6.04 billion compared to December 31, 2021, mainly driven by a decrease in operational risk and credit risk RWA. The decrease in operational risk RWA was primarily due to a decrease in the frequency of certain operational loss events. The decrease in credit risk RWA was primarily driven by a net decrease in wholesale investment securities, loans, and repo-style transactions RWA, partially offset by an increase in all other and OTC derivatives RWA.
As of December 31, 2022, total standardized approach RWA decreased $4.44 billion compared to December 31, 2021, mainly driven by a decrease in credit risk RWA. The decrease in credit risk RWA was primarily driven by a net decrease in loans, repo-style transactions, and wholesale investment securities RWA, partially offset by an increase in OTC derivatives and all other RWA.
The regulatory capital ratios as of December 31, 2022, presented in Table 39: Regulatory Capital Structure and Related Regulatory Capital Ratios, are calculated under the advanced approaches and standardized approach in conformity with the Basel III final rule. The advanced approaches based ratios reflect calculations and determinations with respect to our capital and related matters as of December 31, 2022, based on our and external data, quantitative formulae, statistical models, historical correlations and assumptions, collectively referred to as “advanced systems,” in effect and used by us for those purposes as of the time we first reported such ratios in a quarterly report on Form 10-Q or an annual report on Form 10-K. Significant components of these advanced systems involve the exercise of judgment by us and our regulators, and our advanced systems may not, individually or collectively, precisely represent or calculate the scenarios, circumstances, outputs or other results for which they are designed or intended.
Our advanced systems are subject to update and periodic revalidation in response to changes in our business activities and our historical experiences, forces and events experienced by the market broadly or by individual financial institutions, changes in regulations and regulatory interpretations and other factors, and are also subject to continuing regulatory review and approval. For example, a significant operational loss experienced by another financial institution, even if we do not experience a related loss, could result in a material change in the output of our advanced systems and a corresponding material change in our risk exposures, our total RWA, and our capital ratios compared to prior periods. An operational loss that we experience could also result in a material change in our capital requirements for operational risk under the advanced approaches, depending on the severity of the loss event, its characterization among the seven Basel-defined UOM, and the stability of the distributional approach for a particular UOM, and without direct correlation to the effects of the loss event, or the timing of such effects, on our results of operations.
Due to the influence of changes in these advanced systems, whether resulting from changes in data inputs, regulation or regulatory supervision or interpretation, specific to us or market activities or experiences or other updates or factors, we expect that our advanced systems and our capital ratios calculated in conformity with the Basel III final rule will change and may be volatile over time, and that those latter changes or volatility could be material as calculated and measured from period to period. We and State Street Bank are subject to further regulatory guidance, action, and rule-making.
State Street Corporation | 115
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Tier 1 and Supplementary Leverage Ratios
We are subject to a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio and a supplementary leverage ratio. The Tier 1 leverage ratio is based on Tier 1 capital and adjusted quarterly average on-balance sheet assets. The Tier 1 leverage ratio differs from the SLR primarily in that the denominator of the Tier 1 leverage ratio is a quarterly average of on-balance sheet assets, while the SLR additionally includes off-balance sheet exposures. We must maintain a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio of 4%.
We are also subject to a minimum SLR of 3%, and as a U.S. G-SIB, we must maintain a 2% SLR buffer in order to avoid any limitations on distributions to shareholders and discretionary bonus payments to certain executives. If we do not maintain this buffer, limitations on these distributions and discretionary bonus payments would be increasingly stringent based upon the extent of the shortfall.
| TABLE 42: TIER 1 AND SUPPLEMENTARY LEVERAGE RATIOS | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in millions) | December 31, 2022 | December 31, 2021 | ||||
| State Street: | ||||||
| Tier 1 capital | $ | 16,523 | $ | 17,923 | ||
| Average assets | 284,346 | 303,007 | ||||
| Less: adjustments for deductions from tier 1 capital and other | (8,668) | (9,440) | ||||
| Adjusted average assets for Tier 1 leverage ratio | 275,678 | 293,567 | ||||
| Additional SLR exposure | 40,126 | 32,985 | ||||
| Adjustments for deductions of qualifying central bank deposits | (78,455) | (84,113) | ||||
| Total assets for SLR | $ | 237,349 | $ | 242,439 | ||
| Tier 1 leverage ratio(1) | 6.0 | % | 6.1 | % | ||
| Supplementary leverage ratio | 7.0 | 7.4 | ||||
| State Street Bank(2): | ||||||
| Tier 1 capital | $ | 18,273 | $ | 18,845 | ||
| Average assets | 281,527 | 299,379 | ||||
| Less: adjustments for deductions from tier 1 capital and other | (8,307) | (8,976) | ||||
| Adjusted average assets for Tier 1 leverage ratio | 273,220 | 290,403 | ||||
| Additional SLR exposure | 42,043 | 32,985 | ||||
| Adjustments for deductions of qualifying central bank deposits | (78,455) | (84,113) | ||||
| Total assets for SLR | $ | 236,808 | $ | 239,275 | ||
| Tier 1 leverage ratio (1) | 6.7 | % | 6.5 | % | ||
| Supplementary leverage ratio | 7.7 | 7.9 |
(1) Tier 1 leverage ratios were calculated in conformity with the Basel III final rule.
(2) The SLR rule requires that, as of January 1, 2018, (i) State Street Bank maintains an SLR of at least 6.0% to be well capitalized under the U.S. banking regulators’ Prompt Corrective Action Framework and (ii) we maintain an SLR of at least 5.0% to avoid limitations on capital distributions and discretionary bonus payments. In addition to the SLR, State Street Bank is subject to a well capitalized Tier 1 leverage ratio requirement of 5.0%.
Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity (TLAC)
The Federal Reserve's final rule on TLAC, LTD and clean holding company requirements for U.S. domiciled G-SIBs, such as us, is intended to improve the resiliency and resolvability of certain U.S. banking organizations through enhanced prudential standards, and requires us, among other things, to comply with minimum requirements for external TLAC (combined eligible tier 1 regulatory capital and LTD) and LTD. Specifically, we must hold:
| Amount equal to: | |
|---|---|
| External TLAC | Greater of:•21.5% of total RWA (18.0% minimum plus 2.5% plus a G-SIB surcharge calculated for these purposes under Method 1 of 1.0% plus any applicable counter- cyclical buffer, which is currently 0%); and •9.5% of total leverage exposure (7.5% minimum plus the SLR buffer of 2.0%), as defined by the SLR final rule. |
| Qualifying external LTD | Greater of:•7.0% of RWA (6.0% minimum plus a G-SIB surcharge calculated for these purposes under method 2 of 1.0%); and •4.5% of total leverage exposure, as defined by the SLR final rule. |
As of April 1, 2020, the TLAC and LTD requirements calibrated to the SLR denominator reflect the deduction of certain central bank balances as prescribed by the regulatory relief implemented under the EGRRCPA.
The following table presents external LTD and external TLAC as of December 31, 2022.
| TABLE 43: TOTAL LOSS-ABSORBING CAPACITY | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2022 | |||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | Actual | Requirement | |||||||||||
| Total loss-absorbing capacity: | |||||||||||||
| Risk-weighted assets | $ | 29,676 | 27.7 | % | $ | 23,054 | 21.5 | % | |||||
| Total leverage exposure | 29,676 | 12.5 | 22,548 | 9.5 | |||||||||
| Long-term debt: | |||||||||||||
| Risk-weighted assets | 12,403 | 11.6 | 7,506 | 7.0 | |||||||||
| Total leverage exposure | 12,403 | 5.2 | 10,681 | 4.5 |
Additional information about TLAC is provided under "Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity" in "Supervision and Regulation" in Business in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 116
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Regulatory Developments
In April 2018, the Federal Reserve issued a proposed rule which would replace the current 2.0% SLR buffer for G-SIBs, with a buffer equal to 50% of their G-SIB surcharge. This proposal would also make conforming modifications to our TLAC and eligible LTD requirements applicable to G-SIBs. At this point in time, it is unclear whether this proposal will be implemented as proposed.
In November 2019, the Federal Reserve and other U.S. federal banking agencies issued a final rule that, among other things, implemented the SA-CCR, a methodology for calculating the exposure amount for derivative contracts. Under the final rule, which became effective on January 1, 2022, we have the option to use the SA-CCR or the IMM to measure the exposure amount of our cleared and uncleared derivative transactions under our advanced approaches calculation. We have elected to use the SA-CCR for purposes of our advanced approach capital calculations. We are required to determine the amount of these exposures using the SA-CCR under our standardized approach capital calculation. Additionally, we have to apply a revised formula to determine the RWA amount of our central counterparty default fund contributions.
On March 4, 2020, the U.S. federal banking agencies issued the SCB final rule that replaces, under the standardized approach, the capital conservation buffer (2.5%) with a SCB calculated as the difference between an institution’s starting and lowest projected CET1 ratio under the CCAR severely adverse scenario plus planned common stock dividend payments (as a percentage of RWA) from the fourth through seventh quarter of the CCAR planning horizon.
The Federal Reserve and other U.S. federal banking agencies issued an interim final rule effective in March 2020 and later finalized on a permanent basis on August 26, 2020, which revised the definition of eligible retained income for all U.S. banking organizations. The revised definition of eligible retained income makes any automatic limitations on capital distributions, where a banking organization's regulatory ratios were to decline below the respective minimum requirements, take effect on a more gradual basis.
Effective April 1, 2020, the Federal Reserve and other U.S. federal banking agencies adopted a final
rule under EGRRCPA that establishes a deduction for qualifying central bank deposits from a custodial banking organization’s total leverage exposure equal to the lesser of (i) the total amount of funds the custodial banking organization and its consolidated subsidiaries have on deposit at qualifying central banks and (ii) the total amount of client funds on deposit at the custodial banking organization that are linked to fiduciary or custodial and safekeeping accounts. For the quarter ended December 31, 2022, we deducted $78.5 billion of average balances held on deposit at central banks from the denominator used in the calculation of our SLR, based on this custodial banking deduction.
On October 20, 2020, the Federal Reserve and other U.S. federal banking agencies issued a final rule that requires us and State Street Bank to make certain deductions from regulatory capital for investments in certain unsecured debt instruments, including eligible LTD under the TLAC rule, issued by the Parent Company and other U.S. and foreign G-SIBs. The final rule became effective on April 1, 2021.
On June 23, 2022, we were notified by the Federal Reserve of the results from the 2022 supervisory stress test. Our SCB calculated under this supervisory stress test was well below the 2.5% minimum, resulting in an SCB at that floor, which was effective starting October 1, 2022 and will run through September 30, 2023.
On September 7, 2022, the Federal Reserve's Vice Chair For Supervision stated that the Federal Reserve was undertaking a holistic review of U.S. capital requirements that will help the regulator consider adjustments to the current framework. In addition, on September 9, 2022, the U.S. Banking Agencies reaffirmed their commitment to implementing revised regulatory capital requirements that align with the final set of Basel III standards (Basel IV package) issued by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision in December 2017. They intend to seek public comments on a joint proposed rule in the coming months.
For additional information about regulatory developments, refer to the "Regulatory Capital Adequacy and Liquidity Standards" section of "Supervision and Regulation" in Business in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 117
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Capital Actions
Preferred Stock
The following table summarizes selected terms of each of the series of the preferred stock issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2022:
| TABLE 44: PREFERRED STOCK ISSUED AND OUTSTANDING | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preferred Stock(1): | Issuance Date | Depositary Shares Issued | Amount outstanding (in millions) | Ownership Interest Per Depositary Share | Liquidation Preference Per Share | Liquidation Preference Per Depositary Share | Per Annum Dividend Rate | Dividend Payment Frequency | Carrying Value as of December 31, 2022 (In millions) | Redemption Date(2) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Series D(3) | February 2014 | 30,000,000 | $ | 750 | 1/4,000th | $ | 100,000 | $ | 25 | 5.90% to but excluding March 15, 2024, then a floating rate equal to the three-month LIBOR plus 3.108% | Quarterly: March, June, September and December | $ | 742 | March 15, 2024 | |||||||||||||||
| Series F(4)(5) | May 2015 | 250,000 | 250 | 1/100th | 100,000 | 1,000 | 5.25% to but excluding September 15, 2020, then a floating rate equal to the three-month LIBOR plus 3.597%, or 8.366% effective December 15, 2022 | Quarterly: March, June, September and December | 247 | September 15, 2020 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Series G(6) | April 2016 | 20,000,000 | 500 | 1/4,000th | 100,000 | 25 | 5.35% to but excluding March 15, 2026, then a floating rate equal to the three-month LIBOR plus 3.709% | Quarterly: March, June, September and December | 493 | March 15, 2026 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Series H(7) | September 2018 | 500,000 | 500 | 1/100th | 100,000 | 1,000 | 5.625% to but excluding December 15, 2023, then a floating rate equal to the three-month LIBOR plus 2.539% | Semi-annually: June and December | 494 | December 15, 2023 |
(1) The preferred stock and corresponding depositary shares may be redeemed at our option in whole, but not in part, prior to the redemption date upon the occurrence of a regulatory capital treatment event, as defined in the certificate of designation, at a redemption price equal to the liquidation price per share and liquidation price per depositary share plus any declared and unpaid dividends, without accumulation of any undeclared dividends.
(2) On the redemption date, or any dividend payment date thereafter, the preferred stock and corresponding depositary shares may be redeemed by us, in whole or in part, at the liquidation price per share and liquidation price per depositary share plus any declared and unpaid dividends, without accumulation of any undeclared dividends.
(3) The dividend rate for the floating rate period of the Series D preferred stock that begins on March 15, 2024 and all subsequent floating rate periods will transition to a new, fixed rate in accordance with the LIBOR Act and the contractual terms of the Series D preferred stock.
(4) Series F preferred stock is redeemable on September 15, 2020 and on each succeeding dividend payment date.
(5) In accordance with the LIBOR Act, the benchmark interest rate used to calculate the dividend rate of the Series F preferred stock issued and outstanding will transition from LIBOR to CME Term SOFR, plus 0.26161%, beginning with the September 15, 2023 dividend period.
(6) The dividend rate for the floating rate period of the Series G preferred stock that begins on March 15, 2026 and all subsequent floating rate periods will remain at the current fixed rate in accordance with the LIBOR Act and the contractual terms of the Series G preferred stock.
(7) In accordance with the LIBOR Act, the benchmark interest rate to be used to calculate the dividend rate during the floating rate period of the Series H preferred stock that begins on December 15, 2023 will transition from LIBOR to CME Term SOFR, plus 0.26161%.
On March 15, 2021, we redeemed an aggregate of $500 million, or 5,000 of the 7,500 outstanding shares of our non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series F, for cash at a redemption price of $100,000 per share (equivalent to $1,000 per depositary share) plus all declared and unpaid dividends.
The following table presents the dividends declared for each of the series of preferred stock issued and outstanding for the periods indicated:
TABLE 45: PREFERRED STOCK DIVIDENDS
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 2021 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) | Dividends Declared per Share | Dividends Declared per Depositary Share | Total | Dividends Declared per Share | Dividends Declared per Depositary Share | Total | ||||||||||||||||
| Preferred Stock: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Series D | $ | 5,900 | $ | 1.48 | $ | 44 | $ | 5,900 | $ | 1.48 | $ | 44 | ||||||||||
| Series F | 5,208 | 52.08 | 13 | 3,808 | 38.08 | 15 | ||||||||||||||||
| Series G | 5,352 | 1.32 | 27 | 5,352 | 1.32 | 27 | ||||||||||||||||
| Series H | 5,625 | 56.25 | 28 | 5,625 | 56.25 | 28 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 112 | $ | 114 |
State Street Corporation | 118
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Common Stock
In July 2021, our Board approved a share repurchase program authorizing the purchase of up to $3.0 billion of our common stock through the end of 2022. We did not repurchase any common stock during the first three quarters of 2022. In October 2022, we resumed our share repurchases and purchased $1.5 billion of our common stock in the fourth quarter of 2022 under the 2021 Program. In January 2023, our Board approved a share repurchase program authorizing the purchase of up to $4.5 billion of our common stock through December 31, 2023.
The table below presents the activity under our common share repurchase program for the period indicated:
| TABLE 46: SHARES REPURCHASED | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||
| 2022 | |||||||||
| Shares Acquired (In millions) | Average Cost per Share | Total Acquired (In millions) | |||||||
| 2021 Program | 19.5 | $ | 76.81 | $ | 1,500 |
The table below presents the dividends declared on common stock for the periods indicated:
| TABLE 47: COMMON STOCK DIVIDENDS | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||
| 2022 | 2021 | |||||||||||||
| Dividends Declared per Share | Total (In millions) | Dividends Declared per Share | Total (In millions) | |||||||||||
| Common Stock | $ | 2.40 | $ | 871 | $ | 2.18 | $ | 779 |
Federal and state banking regulations place certain restrictions on dividends paid by subsidiary banks to the parent holding company. In addition, banking regulators have the authority to prohibit bank holding companies from paying dividends. For information concerning limitations on dividends from our subsidiary banks, refer to "Related Stockholder Matters" included under Item 5, Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities, and to Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K. Our common stock and preferred stock dividends, including the declaration, timing and amount thereof, are subject to consideration and approval by the Board at the relevant times.
Stock purchases under our common share repurchase program may be made using various types of transactions, including open market purchases, accelerated share repurchases or other transactions off the market, and may be made under Rule 10b5-1 trading programs. The timing and amount of any stock purchases and the type of transaction may not be ratable over the duration of the program, may vary from reporting period to reporting period and will depend on several factors, including our capital position and our financial performance, investment opportunities, market conditions, the nature and timing of implementation of revisions to the Basel III framework and the amount of common stock issued as part of employee compensation programs. The common share repurchase program does not have specific price targets and may be suspended at any time.
State Street Corporation | 119
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS
On behalf of clients enrolled in our securities lending program, we lend securities to banks, broker/dealers and other institutions. In most circumstances, we indemnify our clients for the fair market value of those securities against a failure of the borrower to return such securities. Though these transactions are collateralized, the substantial volume of these activities necessitates detailed credit-based underwriting and monitoring processes. The aggregate amount of indemnified securities on loan totaled $348.92 billion and $385.74 billion as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. We require the borrower to provide collateral in an amount in excess of 100% of the fair market value of the securities borrowed. We hold the collateral received in connection with these securities lending services as agent, and the collateral is not recorded in our consolidated statement of condition. We revalue the securities on loan and the collateral daily to determine if additional collateral is necessary or if excess collateral is required to be returned to the borrower. We held, as agent, cash and securities totaling $366.90 billion and $404.12 billion as collateral for indemnified securities on loan as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
The cash collateral held by us as agent is invested on behalf of our clients. In certain cases, the cash collateral is invested in third-party repurchase agreements, for which we indemnify the client against loss of the principal invested. We require the counterparty to the indemnified repurchase agreement to provide collateral in an amount in excess of 100% of the amount of the repurchase agreement. In our role as agent, the indemnified repurchase agreements and the related collateral held by us are not recorded in our consolidated statement of condition. Of the collateral of $366.90 billion and $404.12 billion, referenced above, $54.11 billion and $61.56 billion was invested in indemnified repurchase agreements as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. We or our agents held $57.90 billion and $67.01 billion as collateral for indemnified investments in repurchase agreements as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
Additional information about our securities finance activities and other off-balance sheet arrangements is provided in Notes 10, 12 and 14 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES
Our consolidated financial statements are prepared in conformity with U.S. GAAP, and we apply accounting policies that affect the determination of amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements.
Certain of our accounting policies, by their nature, require management to make judgments, involving significant estimates and assumptions, about the effects of matters that are inherently uncertain. These estimates and assumptions are based on information available as of the date of the consolidated financial statements, and changes in this information over time could materially affect the amounts of assets, liabilities, equity, revenue and expenses reported in subsequent consolidated financial statements.
Based on the sensitivity of reported financial statement amounts to the underlying estimates and assumptions, the more significant accounting policies identified by management are:
•Recurring fair value measurements;
•Allowance for credit losses;
•Impairment of goodwill and other intangible assets; and
•Contingencies.
These policies require the most subjective or complex judgments, and underlying estimates and assumptions could be most subject to revision as new information becomes available. An understanding of the judgments, estimates and assumptions underlying these accounting policies is essential to the understanding of our reported results of operations and financial condition.
The following is a discussion of the above-mentioned significant accounting estimates. Additional information on our significant accounting policies, including references to applicable footnotes, is provided in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Fair Value Measurements
We carry certain of our financial assets and liabilities at fair value in our consolidated financial statements on a recurring basis, including trading account assets and liabilities, AFS debt securities, certain equity securities and various types of derivative financial instruments.
Changes in the fair value of these financial assets and liabilities are recorded either as components of our consolidated statement of income or as components of other comprehensive income within shareholders' equity in our consolidated statement of condition. In addition to those financial assets and liabilities that we carry at fair value in our consolidated financial statements on a recurring basis, we estimate the fair values of other financial assets and liabilities that we carry at amortized cost in our consolidated statement of condition, and we disclose these fair value estimates in the notes to our consolidated financial statements. We estimate the
State Street Corporation | 120
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
fair values of these financial assets and liabilities using the definition of fair value described below.
U.S. GAAP defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in the principal or most advantageous market for an asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. When we measure fair value for our financial assets and liabilities, we consider the principal or the most advantageous market in which we would transact; we also consider assumptions that market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability. When possible, we look to active and observable markets to measure the fair value of identical, or similar, financial assets and liabilities. When identical financial assets and liabilities are not traded in active markets, we look to market-observable data for similar assets and liabilities. In some instances, certain assets and liabilities are not actively traded in observable markets; as a result, we use alternate valuation techniques to measure their fair value.
We categorize the financial assets and liabilities that we carry at fair value in our consolidated statement of condition on a recurring basis based on U.S. GAAP's prescribed three-level valuation hierarchy. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (level 1) and the lowest priority to valuation methods using significant unobservable inputs (level 3).
With respect to derivative instruments, we evaluate the fair value impact of the credit risk of our counterparties. We consider such factors as the market-based probability of default by our counterparties, and our current and expected potential future net exposures by remaining maturities, in determining the appropriate measurements of fair value.
Additional information with respect to the assets and liabilities carried by us at fair value on a recurring basis is provided in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Allowance for Credit Losses
We record an allowance for credit losses related to certain on-balance sheet credit exposures, including our financial assets held at amortized cost, as well as certain off-balance sheet credit exposures, including unfunded commitments and letters of credit.
Determining the appropriateness of the allowance is complex and requires judgment by management about the effect of matters that are inherently uncertain. In future periods, factors and forecasts then prevailing may result in significant changes in the allowance for credit losses in those future periods. We estimate credit losses over the
contractual life of the financial asset while factoring in prepayment activity where supported by data over a three year reasonable and supportable forecast period. We utilize baseline, upside and downside scenarios that are applied based on a probability weighting, in order to better reflect management’s expectation of expected credit losses given existing market conditions and the changes in the economic environment. The multiple scenarios are based on a three year horizon (or less depending on contractual maturity) and then revert linearly over a two year period to a ten-year historical average thereafter. The contractual term excludes expected extensions, renewals and modifications, but includes prepayment assumptions where applicable.
Our allowance for credit losses is sensitive to a number of inputs, including macroeconomic forecast assumptions and credit rating migrations during the period. Our macroeconomic forecasts used in determining the December 31, 2022 allowance for credit losses consisted of three scenarios reflecting contractions in GDP and rising unemployment of varying severity, with the baseline scenario generally in line with market consensus of economic forecasts for GDP and unemployment. We placed the most weight on our baseline scenario, with the remaining weighting split equally between the upside and downside scenarios.
Keeping all other factors constant, we estimate that if we had applied 100% weighting to the downside scenario, the allowance for credit losses as of December 31, 2022 would have been approximately $67 million higher. This estimate is intended to reflect the sensitivity of the allowance for credit losses to changes in our scenario weights and is not intended to be indicative of future changes in the allowance for credit losses.
Additional information about our allowance for credit losses is provided in Notes 3 and 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 121
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets
Goodwill represents the excess of the cost of an acquisition over the fair value of the net tangible and other intangible assets acquired at the acquisition date. Other intangible assets represent purchased long-lived intangible assets, primarily client relationships, core deposit intangible assets and technology that can be distinguished from goodwill because of contractual rights or because the asset can be exchanged on its own or in combination with a related contract, asset or liability. Other intangible assets are initially measured at their acquisition date fair value, the determination of which requires management judgment. Goodwill is not amortized, while other intangible assets are amortized over their estimated useful lives.
Management reviews goodwill for impairment annually or more frequently if circumstances arise or events occur that indicate an impairment of the carrying amount may exist. We begin our review by first assessing qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. Events that may indicate impairment include: significant or adverse changes in the business, economic or political climate; an adverse action or assessment by a regulator; unanticipated competition; and a more-likely-than-not expectation that we will sell or otherwise dispose of a business to which the goodwill or other intangible assets relate. If we conclude from the qualitative assessment of goodwill impairment that it is more likely than not that a reporting unit’s fair value is greater than its carrying amount, quantitative tests are not required. However, if we determine it is more likely than not that a reporting unit’s fair value is less than its carrying amount, then we complete a quantitative assessment to determine if there is goodwill impairment. We may elect to bypass the qualitative assessment and complete a quantitative assessment in any given year.
In 2022, we assessed goodwill for impairment using a qualitative assessment. Based on our evaluation of the qualitative factors noted above, we determined that it was more likely than not that the fair value of each of the reporting units exceeded its respective carrying amount. We determined there was no goodwill impairment in 2022.
Other intangible assets are supported by the future cash flows that are directly associated with and expected to arise as a direct result of the use of the intangible asset, less any costs associated with the intangible asset’s eventual disposition. We evaluate other intangible assets for impairment at the lowest level for which there are identifiable cash flows that are largely independent of the cash flows from other groups of assets using the following process. First,
we routinely assess whether impairment indicators are present. When impairment indicators are identified as being present, we compare the estimated future net undiscounted cash flows of the intangible asset with its carrying value. If the future net undiscounted cash flows are greater than the carrying value, then there is no impairment, but if the intangible asset's net undiscounted cash flows are less than its carrying value, we are required to calculate impairment. An impairment is recognized by writing the intangible asset down to its fair value. We evaluate intangible assets for indicators of impairment on a quarterly basis. There were no impairments taken on other intangible assets in 2022.
Additional information about goodwill and other intangible assets, including information by line of business, is provided in Note 5 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Contingencies
Information on significant estimates and judgments related with establishing litigation reserves is discussed in Note 13 of the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
RECENT ACCOUNTING DEVELOPMENTS
Information with respect to recent accounting developments is provided in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
OTHER MATTERS
Replacement of Interbank Offered Rates including LIBOR
On March 5, 2021, the Intercontinental Exchange Benchmark Administration (IBA) announced, in conjunction with the United Kingdom Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), that it would cease the publication of all EUR and Swiss Franc LIBOR settings, the overnight, one week, two week, two month and twelve month GBP LIBOR and Japanese yen (JPY) LIBOR settings, and the one week and two month USD LIBOR settings, as of December 31, 2021. Furthermore, the IBA announced that as of June 30, 2023, it would cease the publication of the overnight and twelve month USD LIBOR settings and that as of June 30, 2023 the one month, three month and six month USD LIBOR settings would become non-representative.
On September 29, 2021, the FCA announced that it would compel the IBA to continue the publication of the one month, three month and six month GBP and JPY LIBOR settings, on a synthetic, non-representative basis from year-end 2021 for a period of at least one year. On June 30, 2022, the FCA issued a consultation on winding down synthetic tenors of GBP LIBOR and on the potential introduction of a synthetic version of certain USD LIBOR settings as of June 30, 2023. On September
State Street Corporation | 122
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
29, 2022, the FCA confirmed the cessation of all synthetic JPY LIBOR settings as of December 31, 2022, and the cessation of the one month and six month synthetic GBP LIBOR settings as of March 30, 2023. On November 23, 2022, the FCA issued a proposal to compel publication of a synthetic version of the one month, three month and six month USD LIBOR settings until September 30, 2024, while also confirming that the publication of a synthetic version of the three month GBP LIBOR setting would end as of March 30, 2024. A final decision from the FCA on the status of a synthetic version of the one month, three month and six month USD LIBOR settings beyond June 30, 2023 is expected in early 2023.
On March 15, 2022, the U.S. Congress adopted, as part of the Consolidated Appropriation Act of 2022, the Adjustable Interest Rate (LIBOR) Act which provides certain statutory requirements and guidance for the selection and use of alternative reference rates in legacy financial contracts governed by U.S. law that do not provide for the use of a clearly defined or practicable alternative reference rate. On July 19, 2022, the Federal Reserve issued a notice of proposed rulemaking on a proposal to implement the LIBOR Act, as required by its terms. On December 16, 2022, the Federal Reserve adopted a final rule implementing the LIBOR Act. The final rule is effective February 27, 2023.
We have established a process to identify, assess, plan for and remediate the use of LIBOR and other reference rates affected by reference rate reform that addresses both direct exposures on our balance sheet, and, more importantly, the use of LIBOR in our various service provider roles to our customers.
This process is led by a multidisciplinary LIBOR program management office (LIBOR PMO), established in September 2018. The LIBOR PMO will continue to drive firm-wide results throughout 2023. The LIBOR PMO reports regularly to executive management of the firm, and our key regulators, on progress with respect to the adoption of alternative reference rates for various financial products and services, client communications, updating of our quantitative models and information technology systems, managing third-party vendors, contracts remediation, evaluation of fallback provisions contained in LIBOR-priced loans, investment securities, derivatives and long-term debt and general operational readiness for each stage of the transition.
Most of the LIBOR PMO's work for implementation of the transition to alternate reference rates is substantially complete, and contingency plans have been developed with respect to identified uncertainties. No incremental material investments are expected to be needed for systems and
processes related to the transition. Potential risks that could impact our remediation efforts include overall transition readiness across the industry, third-party vendor dependencies and resource constraints from the concentration of remediation activities at key points in the transition process.
Our direct on-balance sheet exposures to LIBOR are limited and primarily include assets held in the investment portfolio, certain loans made through Global Credit Finance and issuances of long-term debt and preferred stock. We have planned for, and are prepared to transition, our remaining balance sheet exposures in a manner consistent with regulatory guidance and the availability of interim solutions for various legacy LIBOR contracts. We will not originate or issue new LIBOR-based loans or long-term debt, and any purchases of LIBOR-based investment securities will be screened for adequate fallback language. Our remaining exposure outstanding at the end of June 2023 is largely governed by existing fallback language or the LIBOR Act which provides for appropriate fallback provisions. Substantial risks and uncertainties are associated with the market transition away from the use of LIBOR as an interest rate benchmark in financial instruments and contracts. Our financial performance depends, in part, on our ability to adapt to market changes promptly, while avoiding increased related expenses or operational errors.
FY 2021 10-K MD&A
SEC filing source: 0000093751-22-000424.
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
GENERAL
As of December 31, 2021, we had consolidated total assets of $314.62 billion, consolidated total deposits of $255.04 billion, consolidated total shareholders' equity of $27.36 billion and approximately 39,000 employees. We operate in more than 100 geographic markets worldwide, including the U.S., Canada, Latin America, Europe, the Middle East and Asia.
Our operations are organized into two lines of business, Investment Servicing and Investment Management, which are defined based on products and services provided. For the description of our lines of business, refer to "Lines of Business” in Item 1 in this Form 10-K.
For financial and other information about our lines of business, refer to “Line of Business Information” in this Management's Discussion and Analysis and Note 24 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
This Management's Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K. Certain previously reported amounts presented in this Form 10-K have been reclassified to conform to current-period presentation.
We prepare our consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions in its application of certain accounting policies that materially affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, equity, revenue and expenses.
The significant accounting policies that require us to make judgments, estimates and assumptions that are difficult, subjective or complex about matters that are uncertain and may change in subsequent periods include:
•accounting for fair value measurements;
•allowance for credit losses;
•impairment of goodwill and other intangible assets; and
•contingencies.
These significant accounting policies require the most subjective or complex judgments, and underlying estimates and assumptions could be subject to revision as new information becomes available. Additional information about these
significant accounting policies is included under “Significant Accounting Estimates” in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
Certain financial information provided in this Form 10-K, including this Management's Discussion and Analysis, is prepared on both a U.S. GAAP, or reported basis, and a non-GAAP basis, including certain non-GAAP measures used in the calculation of identified regulatory ratios. We measure and compare certain financial information on a non-GAAP basis, including information that management uses in evaluating our business and activities. Non-GAAP financial information should be considered in addition to, and not as a substitute for or superior to, financial information prepared in conformity with U.S. GAAP. Any non-GAAP financial information presented in this Form 10-K, including this Management’s Discussion and Analysis, is reconciled to its most directly comparable currently applicable regulatory ratio or U.S. GAAP-basis measure. We further believe that our presentation of fully taxable-equivalent NII, a non-GAAP measure, which reports non-taxable revenue, such as interest income associated with tax-exempt investment securities, on a fully taxable-equivalent basis, facilitates an investor's understanding and analysis of our underlying financial performance and trends.
This Management's Discussion and Analysis contains statements that are considered "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of U.S. securities laws. Forward-looking statements include statements about our goals and expectations regarding our business, financial and capital condition, results of operations, strategies, cost savings and transformation initiatives, investment portfolio performance, dividend and stock purchase programs, outcomes of legal proceedings, market growth, acquisitions (including, without limitation, our planned acquisition of Brown Brothers Harriman's Investor Services business), joint ventures and divestitures, client growth and new technologies, services and opportunities, as well as industry, governmental, regulatory, economic and market trends, initiatives and developments, the business environment and other matters that do not relate strictly to historical facts. These forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties which could cause actual results to differ materially. We undertake no obligation to revise the forward-looking statements contained in this Management's Discussion and Analysis to reflect events after the
State Street Corporation | 57
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
time we file this Form 10-K with the SEC. Additional information about forward-looking statements and related risks and uncertainties is provided in "Forward-Looking Statements", "Risk Factors Summary" and "Risk Factors" in this Form 10-K.
We provide additional disclosures required by applicable bank regulatory standards, including supplemental qualitative and quantitative information with respect to regulatory capital (including market risk associated with our trading activities) and the liquidity coverage ratio, summary results of State Street-run stress tests which we conduct under the Dodd-Frank Act and resolution plan disclosures required under the Dodd-Frank Act. These additional disclosures are available on the “Investor Relations” section of our website under "Filings and Reports."
In this Form 10-K, we reference various information and materials available on our corporate website. We have included our website address in this report as an inactive textual reference only. Information on our website is not incorporated by reference in this Form 10-K.
We use acronyms and other defined terms for certain business terms and abbreviations, as defined on the acronyms list and glossary in this Form 10-K.
OVERVIEW OF FINANCIAL RESULTS
| TABLE 1: OVERVIEW OF FINANCIAL RESULTS | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |||||||
| Total fee revenue | $ | 10,012 | $ | 9,499 | $ | 9,147 | ||||
| Net interest income | 1,905 | 2,200 | 2,566 | |||||||
| Total other income | 110 | 4 | 43 | |||||||
| Total revenue | 12,027 | 11,703 | 11,756 | |||||||
| Provision for credit losses(1) | (33) | 88 | 10 | |||||||
| Total expenses | 8,889 | 8,716 | 9,034 | |||||||
| Income before income tax expense | 3,171 | 2,899 | 2,712 | |||||||
| Income tax expense | 478 | 479 | 470 | |||||||
| Net income | $ | 2,693 | $ | 2,420 | $ | 2,242 | ||||
| Adjustments to net income: | ||||||||||
| Dividends on preferred stock(2) | $ | (119) | $ | (162) | $ | (232) | ||||
| Earnings allocated to participating securities(3) | (2) | (1) | (1) | |||||||
| Net income available to common shareholders | $ | 2,572 | $ | 2,257 | $ | 2,009 | ||||
| Earnings per common share: | ||||||||||
| Basic | $ | 7.30 | $ | 6.40 | $ | 5.43 | ||||
| Diluted | 7.19 | 6.32 | 5.38 | |||||||
| Average common shares outstanding (in thousands): | ||||||||||
| Basic | 352,565 | 352,865 | 369,911 | |||||||
| Diluted | 357,962 | 357,106 | 373,666 | |||||||
| Cash dividends declared per common share | $ | 2.18 | $ | 2.08 | $ | 1.98 | ||||
| Return on average common equity | 10.7 | % | 10.0 | % | 9.4 | % | ||||
| Pre-tax margin | 26.4 | 24.8 | 23.1 | |||||||
| Return on average assets | 0.9 | 0.9 | 1.0 | |||||||
| Common dividend payout | 30.3 | 32.9 | 36.8 | |||||||
| Average common equity to average total assets | 8.0 | 8.3 | 9.6 |
(1) We adopted ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses (ASC 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments, on January 1, 2020.
(2) Additional information about our preferred stock dividends is provided in Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
(3) Represents the portion of net income available to common equity allocated to participating securities, composed of unvested and fully vested SERP (Supplemental executive retirement plans) shares and fully vested deferred director stock awards, which are equity-based awards that contain non-forfeitable rights to dividends, and are considered to participate with the common stock in undistributed earnings.
State Street Corporation | 58
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following “Financial Results and Highlights” section provides information related to significant events, as well as highlights of our consolidated financial results for the year ended December 31, 2021 presented in Table 1: Overview of Financial Results. More detailed information about our consolidated financial results, including the comparison of our financial results for the year ended December 31, 2021 to those for the year ended December 31, 2020, is provided under “Consolidated Results of Operations”, "Line of Business Information" and "Capital" which follows these sections, as well as in our consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
The comparison of our financial results for the year ended December 31, 2020 to those for the year ended December 31, 2019 is included in our Management's Discussion and Analysis in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020 filed with the SEC on February 19, 2021.
In this Management’s Discussion and Analysis, where we describe the effects of changes in foreign currency translation, those effects are determined by applying applicable weighted average FX rates from the relevant 2020 period to the relevant 2021 period results.
Financial Results and Highlights
•2021 financial performance:
◦EPS of $7.19 in 2021 increased 14% compared to $6.32 in 2020.
◦Total fee revenue was up 5% in 2021 compared to 2020, including 1% due to currency translation.
◦Servicing and management fee revenues were up 7% and 9%, respectively, in 2021 compared to 2020.
◦In 2021, return on equity of 10.7% increased from 10.0% in 2020, primarily due to an increase in net income available to common shareholders. Pre-tax margin of 26.4% in 2021 increased from 24.8% in 2020, primarily due to an increase in total revenue.
◦Positive operating leverage of 0.8% points in 2021. Operating leverage represents the difference between the percentage change in total revenue and the percentage change in total expenses, in each case relative to the prior year period.
◦Positive fee operating leverage of 3.4% points in 2021. Fee operating leverage represents the difference between the percentage change in total fee revenue and the percentage change in total expenses, in each case relative to the prior year period.
•In September 2021, we announced that we had entered into a definitive agreement to acquire the BBH Investor Services business for $3.5 billion in cash. This announced acquisition is subject to regulatory approvals and the satisfaction or waiver of other closing conditions.
◦We expect to finance the planned acquisition of the BBH Investor Services business primarily with the proceeds of $1.9 billion from a common stock offering completed in September 2021, a temporary suspension of repurchases of our common stock and with cash on hand.
•During 2021, our business and financial results continued to reflect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic:
◦Approximately 79% of our employees globally continued to work remotely as of December 31, 2021.
◦We continued to experience high levels of client deposits in 2021 amidst the Federal Reserve's expansionary monetary policy and growth in AUC/A.
Revenue
•Total revenue increased 3% in 2021 compared to 2020. Total fee revenue increased 5% in 2021 compared to 2020, driven by increases across servicing fees, management fees, securities finance and software and processing fees.
•Servicing fee revenue increased 7% in 2021 compared to 2020, primarily due to higher average equity market levels, client activity and flows, and net new business, partially offset by normal pricing headwinds.
•Management fee revenue increased 9% in 2021 compared to 2020, primarily due to higher average equity market levels and net inflows from ETFs, partially offset by a previously reported idiosyncratic institutional client asset reallocation expected to be primarily reflected in 2022, and higher money market fee waivers.
State Street Corporation | 59
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
▪Foreign exchange trading services revenue decreased 11% in 2021 compared to 2020, primarily due to lower FX volatility, as compared to the high levels of volatility experienced in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, partially offset by higher client FX volumes.
•Securities finance revenue increased 17% in 2021 compared to 2020, reflecting higher client securities loan balances and new business wins in enhanced custody, partially offset by lower spreads.
▪Software and processing fees revenue increased 7% in 2021 compared to 2020, primarily due to higher CRD revenues.
•NII decreased 13% in 2021 compared to 2020, primarily due to lower investment portfolio yields, partially offset by growth in the investment portfolio and deposits, and higher loan balances.
Provision for Credit Losses
•There was a $33 million release of credit reserves in 2021, compared to an expense of $88 million in 2020, which is primarily driven by observed and expected improvements in both credit quality and economic outlook.
Expenses
•Total expenses increased 2% in 2021 compared to 2020, primarily reflecting the impact of notable items and currency translation. Currency translation increased expenses by 1% in 2021 compared to 2020.
Notable items
•The impact of notable items in 2021 includes:
◦$53 million gain on the sale of a majority share of our Wealth Management Services (WMS) business, recorded in other income;
◦$58 million gain on sale of investment securities related to a one-time transfer of LIBOR and Euro Interbank Offered Rate based securities from HTM to AFS, and the subsequent sale of the majority of those securities in 2021;
◦net repositioning release of approximately $3 million, consisting of $32 million release of previously accrued severance charges, partially offset by $29 million of occupancy charges related to footprint optimization;
◦deferred compensation expense acceleration of approximately
$147 million associated with an amendment of certain outstanding deferred cash incentive compensation awards;
◦acquisition and restructuring costs of approximately $65 million, of which $53 million related to CRD and $13 million related to our planned acquisition of the BBH Investor Services business;
◦net legal and other expenses of approximately $18 million, including $20 million in information systems and communications, $8 million in transaction processing services and $1 million in other expenses, partially offset by a legal accrual release of approximately $11 million associated with a settlement related to the invoicing matter; and
◦costs of $5 million due to the partial redemption of outstanding Series F non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock representing the difference between the redemption value and the net carrying value of the preferred stock.
•The impact of notable items in 2020 includes:
◦repositioning charges of approximately $133 million, consisting of $82 million of compensation and employee benefits expenses and $51 million of occupancy costs;
◦acquisition and restructuring costs of approximately $50 million, primarily related to CRD;
◦a $9 million accrual release; and
◦costs of $9 million due to the redemption of all outstanding Series C non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock representing the difference between the redemption value and the net carrying value of the preferred stock.
State Street Corporation | 60
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
AUC/A and AUM
•AUC/A of $43.68 trillion increased 13% as of December 31, 2021, compared to December 31, 2020, primarily due to higher market levels, client flows and net new business growth. In 2021, newly announced asset servicing mandates totaled approximately $3.52 trillion, with State Street AlphaSM representing a large proportion of the wins. Servicing assets remaining to be installed in future periods totaled approximately $2.80 trillion as of December 31, 2021.
•AUM of $4.14 trillion increased 19% as of December 31, 2021, compared to December 31, 2020, primarily due to higher market levels and net inflows, primarily from ETFs.
Capital
•In 2021, we returned a total of approximately $1.7 billion to our shareholders in the form of common stock dividends paid and share repurchases.
•We declared aggregate common stock dividends of $2.18 per share, totaling $779 million in 2021 compared to $2.08 per share, totaling $734 million in 2020.
•In 2021, we purchased an aggregate of 11.2 million shares of common stock, under share repurchase programs approved by our Board, at an average per share cost of $80.00 and an aggregate cost of approximately $900 million.
•In July 2021, our Board authorized a common share repurchase plan of up to $3.0 billion of our common stock through the end of 2022; however, as noted above, in connection with our planned acquisition of the BBH Investor Services business, we did not repurchase any common stock during the third and fourth quarters of 2021. We do not intend to repurchase any common stock during the first quarter of 2022. We intend to resume our common share repurchases during the second quarter of 2022.
•In September 2021, we completed a public offering of approximately 21.7 million shares of our common stock. The offering price was $87.60 per share and net proceeds totaled approximately $1.9 billion. As noted above, we expect to use these net proceeds to finance our planned acquisition of the BBH Investor Services business.
•Our standardized CET1 capital ratio increased to 14.3% as of December 31, 2021, compared to 12.3% as of December 31, 2020, primarily due to higher retained earnings and the issuance of common stock in September 2021. Our Tier 1 leverage ratio decreased to 6.1% as of December 31, 2021 compared to 6.4% as of December 31, 2020. We expect both our CET1 capital and Tier 1 leverage ratios to be at or near the lower end of our target ranges of 10-11% and 5.25-5.75%, respectively, for the first half of 2022, assuming a closing of our planned acquisition of the BBH Investor Services business during that period and inclusive of the implementation of SA-CCR.
•On March 15, 2021, we redeemed an aggregate of $500 million, or 5,000 of the 7,500 outstanding shares, of our noncumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series F, for cash at a redemption price of $100,000 per share (equivalent to $1,000 per depositary share) plus all declared and unpaid dividends.
Debt Issuances
•On March 3, 2021, we issued $850 million aggregate principal amount of 2.200% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2031.
•On November 18, 2021, we issued $500 million aggregate principal amount of 1.684% Fixed-to-Floating Rate Senior Notes due 2027.
•On February 7, 2022, we issued $300 million aggregate principal amount of fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2026, $650 million aggregate principal amount of fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2028 and $550 million aggregate principal amount of fixed-to-floating rate senior notes due 2033.
State Street Corporation | 61
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
CONSOLIDATED RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
This section discusses our consolidated results of operations for 2021 compared to 2020 and should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Total Revenue
| TABLE 2: TOTAL REVENUE | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | % Change 2020 vs. 2019 | ||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |||||||||||||||
| Fee revenue: | ||||||||||||||||||
| Servicing fees | $ | 5,549 | $ | 5,167 | $ | 5,074 | 7 | % | 2 | % | ||||||||
| Management fees | 2,053 | 1,880 | 1,824 | 9 | 3 | |||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange trading services | 1,211 | 1,363 | 1,058 | (11) | 29 | |||||||||||||
| Securities finance | 416 | 356 | 471 | 17 | (24) | |||||||||||||
| Software and processing fees | 783 | 733 | 720 | 7 | 2 | |||||||||||||
| Total fee revenue | 10,012 | 9,499 | 9,147 | 5 | 4 | |||||||||||||
| Net interest income: | ||||||||||||||||||
| Interest income | 1,908 | 2,575 | 3,941 | (26) | (35) | |||||||||||||
| Interest expense | 3 | 375 | 1,375 | (99) | (73) | |||||||||||||
| Net interest income | 1,905 | 2,200 | 2,566 | (13) | (14) | |||||||||||||
| Other income: | ||||||||||||||||||
| Gains (losses) related to investment securities, net | 57 | 4 | (1) | nm | nm | |||||||||||||
| Other income | 53 | — | 44 | nm | nm | |||||||||||||
| Total other income | 110 | 4 | 43 | nm | nm | |||||||||||||
| Total revenue | $ | 12,027 | $ | 11,703 | $ | 11,756 | 3 | — |
nm Not meaningful
Fee Revenue
Table 2: Total Revenue, provides the breakout of fee revenue for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019. Servicing and management fees collectively made up approximately 76%, 74% and 75% of the total fee revenue in 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively.
Servicing Fee Revenue
Generally, our servicing fee revenues are affected by several factors including changes in market valuations, client activity and asset flows, net new business and the manner in which we price our services. We provide a range of services to clients, including core custody, accounting, reporting and administration, and middle office services. The nature and mix of services provided and the asset classes for which the services are performed affect our servicing fees. The basis for fees will differ across regions and clients.
Changes in Market Valuations
Our servicing fee revenue is impacted by both our levels and the geographic and product mix of our AUC/A. Increases or decreases in market valuations have a corresponding impact on the level of our AUC/A and servicing fee revenues, though the degree of impact will vary depending on asset types and classes and geography of assets held within our clients’ portfolios. For certain asset classes where the valuation process is more complex, including alternative investments, or where our valuation is dependent on third party information, AUC/A is reported on a lag, typically one-month. For those asset classes, the impact of market levels on our reported AUC/A does not reflect current period-end market levels.
Over the five years ended December 31, 2021, we estimate that worldwide market valuations impacted our servicing fee revenues by approximately 3% on average with a range of 0% to 7% annually and approximately 7% and 2% in 2021 and 2020, respectively. See Table 3: Daily Averages, Month-End Averages and Year-End Equity Indices for selected indices. While the specific indices presented are indicative of general market trends, the asset types and classes relevant to individual client portfolios can and do differ, and the performance of associated relevant indices and of client portfolios can therefore differ from the performance of the indices presented. In addition, our asset classifications may differ from those industry classifications presented.
Assuming that all other factors remain constant, including client activity, asset flows and pricing, we estimate, using relevant information as of December 31, 2021 that a 10% increase or decrease in worldwide equity valuations, on a weighted average basis, over the relevant periods for which our servicing fees are calculated, would result in a corresponding change in our total servicing fee revenues, on average and over multiple quarters,
State Street Corporation | 62
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
of approximately 3%. We estimate, similarly assuming all other factors remain constant and using relevant information as of December 31, 2021, that changes in worldwide fixed income markets, which on a weighted average basis and over time are typically less volatile than worldwide equity markets, have a significantly smaller impact on our servicing fee revenues on average and over time.
| TABLE 3: DAILY AVERAGES, MONTH-END AVERAGES AND YEAR-END EQUITY INDICES(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Daily Averages of Indices | Month-End Averages of Indices | Year-End Indices | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Years Ended December 31, | Years Ended December 31, | Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2021 | 2020 | % Change | 2021 | 2020 | % Change | 2021 | 2020 | % Change | ||||||||||||||||||
| S&P 500® | 4,273 | 3,218 | 33 | % | 4,279 | 3,217 | 33 | % | 4,766 | 3,756 | 27 | % | ||||||||||||||
| MSCI EAFE® | 2,289 | 1,854 | 23 | 2,272 | 1,841 | 23 | 2,336 | 2,148 | 9 | |||||||||||||||||
| MSCI® Emerging Markets | 1,315 | 1,059 | 24 | 1,303 | 1,052 | 24 | 1,232 | 1,291 | (5) |
(1) The index names listed in the table are service marks of their respective owners.
| TABLE 4: YEAR-END DEBT INDICES(1) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, | ||||||||
| 2021 | 2020 | % Change | ||||||
| Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index® | 2,355 | 2,392 | (2) | % | ||||
| Barclays Capital Global Aggregate Bond Index® | 532 | 559 | (5) |
(1) The index names listed in the table are service marks of their respective owners.
Client Activity and Asset Flows
Client activity and asset flows are impacted by the number of transactions we execute on behalf of our clients, including FX settlements, equity and derivative trades, and wire transfer activity, as well as actions by our clients to change the asset class in which their assets are invested. Our servicing fee revenues are impacted by a number of factors, including transaction volumes, asset levels and asset classes in which funds are invested, as well as industry trends associated with these client-related activities.
Our clients may change the asset classes in which their assets are invested, based on their market outlook, risk acceptance tolerance or other considerations. Over the five years ended December 31, 2021, we estimate that client activity and asset flows, together, impacted our servicing fee revenues by approximately 0% on average with a range of (1)% to 2% annually and approximately 0% and 2% in 2021 and 2020, respectively. See Table 5: Industry Asset Flows for selected asset flow information. While the asset flows presented are indicative of general market trends, the asset types and classes relevant to individual client portfolios can and do differ, and our flows may differ from those market trends. In addition, our asset classifications may differ from those industry classifications presented.
| TABLE 5: INDUSTRY ASSET FLOWS | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||
| (In billions) | 2021 | 2020 | ||||
| North America - (US Domiciled) - Morningstar Direct Market Data(1)(2)(3) | ||||||
| Long-Term Funds(4) | $ | 564.2 | $ | (88.3) | ||
| Money Market | 423.8 | 676.1 | ||||
| Exchange-Traded Fund | 543.4 | 271.6 | ||||
| Total Flows | $ | 1,531.4 | $ | 859.4 | ||
| Europe - Morningstar Direct Market Data(1)(2)(5) | ||||||
| Long-Term Funds(4) | $ | 801.0 | $ | 414.4 | ||
| Money Market | (56.0) | 283.1 | ||||
| Exchange-Traded Fund | 183.7 | 113.7 | ||||
| Total Flows | $ | 928.7 | $ | 811.2 |
(1) Industry data is provided for illustrative purposes only. It is not intended to reflect our activity or our clients' activity and is indicative of only segments of the entire industry.
(2) Source: Morningstar. The data includes long-term mutual funds, ETFs and money market funds. Mutual fund data represents estimates of net new cash flow, which is new sales minus redemptions combined with net exchanges, while ETF data represents net issuance, which is gross issuance less gross redemptions. Data for Fund of Funds, Feeder funds and Obsolete funds were excluded from the series to prevent double counting. Data is from the Morningstar Direct Asset Flows database.
(3) The year ended December 31, 2021 data for North America (US domiciled) includes Morningstar direct actuals for January 2021 through November 2021 and Morningstar direct estimates for December 2021.
(4) The long-term fund flows reported by Morningstar direct in North America are composed of US domiciled market flows mainly in Equities, Allocation and Fixed-Income asset classes. The long-term fund flows reported by Morningstar direct in EMEA are composed of the European market flows mainly in Equities, Allocation and Fixed-Income asset classes.
(5) The year ended December 31, 2021 data for Europe is on a rolling twelve month basis for December 2020 through November 2021, sourced by Morningstar.
State Street Corporation | 63
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Net New Business
Over the five years ended December 31, 2021, net new business, which includes business both won and lost, has affected our servicing fee revenues by approximately 1% on average with a range of 0% to 3% annually and approximately 1% and 0% in 2021 and 2020, respectively. Gross investment servicing mandates were $3.52 trillion in 2021 and $1.8 trillion per year on average over the past five years. Over the five years ended December 31, 2021, gross annual investment servicing mandates ranged from $750 billion to $3.5 trillion.
Servicing fee revenue associated with new servicing mandates may vary based on the breadth of services provided, the time required to install the assets, and the types of assets installed.
Revenues associated with new mandates are not reflected in our servicing fee revenue until the assets have been installed. Our installation timeline, in general, can range from 6 to 36 months, with the average installation timeline being approximately 9 to 12 months over the past 2 years. Our more complex installations, including new State Street Alpha mandates, will generally be on the longer end of that range. With respect to the current asset mandates of approximately $2.80 trillion that are yet to be installed as of December 31, 2021, we expect the conversion will occur over the coming 12 to 24 months.
Pricing
The industry in which we operate has historically faced pricing pressure, and our servicing fee revenues are also affected by such pressures today. Consequently, no assumption should be drawn as to future revenue run rate from announced servicing wins, as the amount of revenue associated with AUC/A can vary materially. On average, over the five years ended December 31, 2021, we estimate that pricing pressure with respect to existing clients has impacted our servicing fees by approximately (2)% annually, with the impact ranging from (1)% to (4)% in any given year, and approximately (2)% in both 2021 and 2020. Pricing concessions can be a part of a contract renegotiation with a client including terms that may benefit us, such as extending the term of our relationship with the client, expanding the scope of services that we provide or reducing our dependency on manual processes through the standardization of the services we provide. The timing of the impact of additional revenue generated by anticipated additional services, and the amount of revenue generated, may differ from expectations due to the impact of pricing concessions on existing services due to the necessary time required to onboard those new services, the nature of those services and client
investment practices and other factors. These same market pressures also impact the fees we negotiate when we win business from new clients.
In order to offset the typical client attrition and normal pricing headwinds, we estimate that we need at least $1.5 trillion of new AUC/A per year; although, notwithstanding increases in AUC/A, servicing fees remain subject to several factors, including changes in market valuations, client activity and asset flows, the manner in which we price our services, the nature of the assets being serviced and the type of services and the other factors described in this Form 10-K.
Historically, and based on an indicative sample of revenue, we estimate that approximately 55%, on average, of our servicing fee revenues have been variable due to changes in asset valuations including changes in daily average valuations of AUC/A; another 15%, on average, of our servicing fees are impacted by the volume of activity in the funds we serve; and the remaining approximately 30% of our servicing fees tend not to be variable in nature nor impacted by market fluctuations or values.
Based on the impact of the above, client activity and asset flows, net new business and pricing, noted drivers of our servicing fee revenue will vary depending on the mix of products and services we provide to our clients. The full impact of changes in market valuations and the volume of activity in the funds may not be fully reflected in our servicing fee revenues in the periods in which the changes occur, particularly in periods of higher volatility.
Servicing fees, as presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, increased 7% in 2021 compared to 2020 primarily due to higher average equity market levels, client activity and flows, and net new business, partially offset by normal pricing headwinds. FX rates impacted servicing fees positively by 1% in 2021 relative to 2020 and 0.4% in 2020 relative to 2019.
Servicing fees generated outside the U.S. were approximately 48% of total servicing fees in 2021, compared to approximately 47% in each of 2020 and 2019.
State Street Corporation | 64
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 6: ASSETS UNDER CUSTODY AND/OR ADMINISTRATION BY PRODUCT(1)(2) | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2021 | December 31, 2020 | December 31, 2019 | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | % Change 2020 vs. 2019 | ||||||||||||||||
| Collective funds, including ETFs | $ | 15,722 | $ | 13,387 | $ | 11,986 | 17 | % | 12 | % | |||||||||||
| Mutual funds | 11,575 | 9,810 | 8,316 | 18 | 18 | ||||||||||||||||
| Pension products | 8,443 | 7,594 | 6,919 | 11 | 10 | ||||||||||||||||
| Insurance and other products | 7,938 | 8,000 | 7,137 | (1) | 12 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 43,678 | $ | 38,791 | $ | 34,358 | 13 | 13 |
| TABLE 7: ASSETS UNDER CUSTODY AND/OR ADMINISTRATION BY ASSET CLASS(2) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2021 | December 31, 2020 | December 31, 2019 | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | % Change 2020 vs. 2019 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Equities | $ | 25,974 | $ | 21,626 | $ | 19,301 | 20 | % | 12 | % | |||||||||||||
| Fixed-income | 12,587 | 12,834 | 10,766 | (2) | 19 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Short-term and other investments | 5,117 | 4,331 | 4,291 | 18 | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 43,678 | $ | 38,791 | $ | 34,358 | 13 | 13 |
| TABLE 8: ASSETS UNDER CUSTODY AND/OR ADMINISTRATION BY GEOGRAPHY(2)(3) | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2021 | December 31, 2020 | December 31, 2019 | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | % Change 2020 vs. 2019 | ||||||||||||
| Americas | $ | 32,427 | $ | 28,245 | $ | 25,018 | 15 | % | 13 | % | |||||||
| Europe/Middle East/Africa | 8,599 | 8,101 | 7,325 | 6 | 11 | ||||||||||||
| Asia/Pacific | 2,652 | 2,445 | 2,015 | 8 | 21 | ||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 43,678 | $ | 38,791 | $ | 34,358 | 13 | 13 |
(1) Certain previously reported amounts presented have been reclassified to conform to current-period presentation.
(2) Consistent with past practice, AUC/A values for certain asset classes are based on a lag, typically one-month.
(3) Geographic mix is generally based on the domicile of the entity servicing the funds and is not necessarily representative of the underlying asset mix.
Asset servicing mandates newly announced in 2021 totaled approximately $3.52 trillion, with State Street Alpha representing a large proportion of the wins. Servicing assets remaining to be installed in future periods totaled approximately $2.80 trillion as of December 31, 2021, which will be reflected in AUC/A in future periods after installation and will generate servicing fee revenue in subsequent periods. The full revenue impact of such mandates will be realized as the assets are installed and additional services are added over that period.
New asset servicing mandates may be subject to completion of definitive agreements, approval of applicable boards and shareholders and customary regulatory approvals. New asset servicing mandates and servicing assets remaining to be installed in future periods exclude certain new business which has been contracted, but for which the client has not yet provided permission to publicly disclose and the expected installation date extends beyond one quarter. These excluded assets, which from time to time may be significant, will be included in new asset servicing mandates and reflected in servicing assets remaining to be installed in the period in which the client provides its permission. Servicing mandates and servicing assets remaining to be installed in future periods are presented on a gross basis and therefore also do not include the impact of clients who have notified us during the period of their intent to terminate or reduce their relationship with us, which may from time to time be significant.
With respect to these new servicing mandates, once installed we may provide various services, including accounting, bank loan servicing, compliance reporting and monitoring, custody, depository banking services, FX, fund administration, hedge fund servicing, middle office outsourcing, performance and analytics, private equity administration, real estate administration, securities finance, transfer agency and wealth management services. Revenues associated with new servicing mandates may vary based on the breadth of services provided and the timing of installation, and the types of assets.
As a result of a decision to diversify providers, one of our large asset servicing clients has advised us it expects to move a significant portion of its ETF assets currently with State Street to one or more other providers, pending necessary approvals. We expect to continue as a significant service provider for this client after this transition and for the client to continue to be meaningful to our business. The transition is expected to begin in 2022, but will principally occur in 2023 and 2024. For the year ended December 31, 2021, the fee revenue associated with the transitioning assets represented approximately 1.9% of our total fee revenue. The actual total revenue and income impact of this transition will reflect a range of factors, including potential growth in our continuing business with the client and expense reductions associated with the transition.
State Street Corporation | 65
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Management Fee Revenue
Management fees generally are affected by our level of AUM, which we report based on month-end valuations. Management fees for certain components of managed assets, such as ETFs, mutual funds and UCITS, are affected by daily average valuations of AUM. Management fee revenue is more sensitive to market valuations than servicing fee revenue, as a higher proportion of the underlying services provided, and the associated management fees earned, are dependent on equity and fixed-income security valuations. Additional factors, such as the relative mix of assets managed, may have a significant effect on our management fee revenue. While certain management fees are directly determined by the values of AUM and the investment strategies employed, management fees may reflect other factors, including performance fee arrangements, as well as our relationship pricing for clients. In addition, in a prolonged low-interest rate environment, such as we are currently experiencing, we have waived and may in the future waive certain fees for our clients for money market products.
The impact of State Street Global Advisors gross money market fund fee waivers on total management fee revenue was approximately $80 million in 2021. Following the first expected rate hike by the Federal Reserve, we expect the impact of gross money market fee waivers on our management fees would be largely mitigated in the subsequent quarterly periods.
Asset-based management fees for passively managed products, to which our AUM is currently primarily weighted, are generally charged at a lower fee on AUM than for actively managed products. Actively managed products may also include performance fee arrangements which are recorded when the fee is earned, based on predetermined benchmarks associated with the applicable account's performance.
In light of the above, we estimate, using relevant information as of December 31, 2021 and assuming that all other factors remain constant, including the impact of business won and lost and client flows, that:
•A 10% increase or decrease in worldwide equity valuations, on a weighted average basis, over the relevant periods for which our management fees are calculated, would result in a corresponding change in our total management fee revenues, on average and over multiple quarters, of approximately 5%; and
•changes in worldwide fixed income markets, which on a weighted average basis and over time are typically less volatile than worldwide
equity markets, will have a significantly smaller impact on our management fee revenues on average and over time.
Daily averages, month-end averages and year-end indices demonstrate worldwide changes in equity and debt markets that affect our management fee revenue. Year-end indices affect the values of AUM as of those dates. See Table 3: Daily Averages, Month-End Averages and Year-End Equity Indices for selected indices. While the specific indices presented are indicative of general market trends, the asset types and classes relevant to individual client portfolios can and do differ, and the performance of associated relevant indices and of client portfolios can therefore differ from the performance of the indices presented. In addition, our asset classifications may differ from those industry classifications presented.
Management fees increased 9% in 2021 compared to 2020, primarily due to higher average equity market levels and net inflows from ETFs, partially offset by a previously reported idiosyncratic institutional client asset reallocation expected to be primarily reflected in 2022, and higher money market fee waivers.
Management fees generated outside the U.S. were approximately 26% of total management fees in 2021, compared to approximately 26% and 27% in 2020 and 2019, respectively.
State Street Corporation | 66
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 9: ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT BY ASSET CLASS AND INVESTMENT APPROACH | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2021 | December 31, 2020 | December 31, 2019 | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | % Change 2020 vs. 2019 | ||||||||||||||||
| Equity: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | $ | 80 | $ | 85 | $ | 90 | (6) | % | (6) | % | |||||||||||
| Passive | 2,594 | 2,086 | 1,900 | 24 | 10 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total equity(1) | 2,674 | 2,171 | 1,990 | 23 | 9 | ||||||||||||||||
| Fixed-income: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | 103 | 90 | 87 | 14 | 3 | ||||||||||||||||
| Passive | 520 | 459 | 392 | 13 | 17 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total fixed-income(1) | 623 | 549 | 479 | 13 | 15 | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash(1)(2) | 368 | 349 | 317 | 5 | 10 | ||||||||||||||||
| Multi-asset-class solutions: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | 34 | 40 | 41 | (15) | (2) | ||||||||||||||||
| Passive | 188 | 146 | 116 | 29 | 26 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total multi-asset-class solutions(1) | 222 | 186 | 157 | 19 | 18 | ||||||||||||||||
| Alternative investments(3): | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Active | 56 | 39 | 30 | 44 | 30 | ||||||||||||||||
| Passive | 195 | 173 | 143 | 13 | 21 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total alternative investments(1) | 251 | 212 | 173 | 18 | 23 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 4,138 | $ | 3,467 | $ | 3,116 | 19 | 11 |
(1) The implementation of an improved internal data management system for product level data in the first quarter of 2021 resulted in some AUM reclassifications between the categories presented for prior periods to align with the current presentation. There was no impact to the total level of reported AUM.
(2) Includes both floating- and constant-net-asset-value portfolios held in commingled structures or separate accounts.
(3) Includes real estate investment trusts, currency and commodities, including SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust. We are not the investment manager for the SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR®Gold MiniSharesSM Trust, but act as the marketing agent.
| TABLE 10: GEOGRAPHIC MIX OF ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT(1) | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2021 | December 31, 2020 | December 31, 2019 | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | % Change 2020 vs. 2019 | ||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 2,931 | $ | 2,411 | $ | 2,114 | 22 | % | 14 | % | |||||||
| Europe/Middle East/Africa | 592 | 512 | 493 | 16 | 4 | ||||||||||||
| Asia/Pacific | 615 | 544 | 509 | 13 | 7 | ||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 4,138 | $ | 3,467 | $ | 3,116 | 19 | 11 |
(1)Geographic mix is based on client location or fund management location.
.
| TABLE 11: EXCHANGE - TRADED FUNDS BY ASSET CLASS(1) | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | December 31, 2021 | December 31, 2020 | December 31, 2019 | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | % Change 2020 vs. 2019 | ||||||||||||||||
| Alternative Investments(2) | $ | 72 | $ | 83 | $ | 56 | (13) | % | 48 | % | |||||||||||
| Equity(3) | 970 | 708 | 617 | 37 | 15 | ||||||||||||||||
| Multi Asset | 1 | — | 1 | nm | nm | ||||||||||||||||
| Fixed-Income(3) | 135 | 115 | 94 | 17 | 22 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total Exchange-Traded Funds | $ | 1,178 | $ | 906 | $ | 768 | 30 | 18 |
(1) ETFs are a component of AUM presented in the preceding table.
(2) Includes real estate investment trusts, currency and commodities, including SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust. We are not the investment manager for the SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR®Gold MiniSharesSM Trust, but act as the marketing agent.
(3) The implementation of an improved internal data management system for product level data in the first quarter of 2021 resulted in some AUM reclassifications between the categories presented for prior periods to align with the current presentation. There was no impact to the total level of reported AUM.
State Street Corporation | 67
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 12: ACTIVITY IN ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT BY PRODUCT CATEGORY | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In billions) | Equity(1) | Fixed-Income(1) | Cash(1)(2) | Multi-Asset-Class Solutions(1) | Alternative Investments(1)(3) | Total | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2018 | $ | 1,542 | $ | 432 | $ | 280 | $ | 133 | $ | 124 | $ | 2,511 | ||||||||||
| Long-term institutional flows, net(4) | 26 | (6) | — | 4 | 14 | 38 | ||||||||||||||||
| Exchange-traded fund flows, net | 12 | 16 | — | — | 6 | 34 | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash fund flows, net | — | — | 31 | — | — | 31 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total flows, net | 38 | 10 | 31 | 4 | 20 | 103 | ||||||||||||||||
| Market appreciation (depreciation) | 406 | 36 | 6 | 20 | 28 | 496 | ||||||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange impact | 4 | 1 | — | — | 1 | 6 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total market/foreign exchange impact | 410 | 37 | 6 | 20 | 29 | 502 | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2019 | $ | 1,990 | $ | 479 | $ | 317 | $ | 157 | $ | 173 | $ | 3,116 | ||||||||||
| Long-term institutional flows, net(4) | (101) | 4 | (1) | 9 | (11) | (100) | ||||||||||||||||
| Exchange-traded fund flows, net | 12 | 16 | — | — | 16 | 44 | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash fund flows, net | — | — | 32 | — | — | 32 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total flows, net | (89) | 20 | 31 | 9 | 5 | (24) | ||||||||||||||||
| Market appreciation (depreciation) | 241 | 42 | (1) | 18 | 30 | 330 | ||||||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange impact | 29 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 45 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total market/foreign exchange impact | 270 | 50 | 1 | 20 | 34 | 375 | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2020 | $ | 2,171 | $ | 549 | $ | 349 | $ | 186 | $ | 212 | $ | 3,467 | ||||||||||
| Long-term institutional flows, net(4) | (25) | 70 | (2) | 16 | 10 | 69 | ||||||||||||||||
| Exchange-traded fund flows, net | 94 | 23 | — | — | (10) | 107 | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash fund flows, net | — | — | 20 | — | — | 20 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total flows, net | 69 | 93 | 18 | 16 | — | 196 | ||||||||||||||||
| Market appreciation (depreciation) | 476 | (7) | 2 | 22 | 43 | 536 | ||||||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange impact | (42) | (12) | (1) | (2) | (4) | (61) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total market/foreign exchange impact | 434 | (19) | 1 | 20 | 39 | 475 | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance as of December 31, 2021 | $ | 2,674 | $ | 623 | $ | 368 | $ | 222 | $ | 251 | $ | 4,138 |
(1) The implementation of an improved internal data management system for product level data in the first quarter of 2021 resulted in some AUM reclassifications between the categories presented for prior periods to align with the current presentation. There was no impact to the total level of reported AUM.
(2) Includes both floating- and constant-net-asset-value portfolios held in commingled structures or separate accounts.
(3) Includes real estate investment trusts, currency and commodities, including SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust. We are not the investment manager for the SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR®Gold MiniSharesSM Trust, but act as the marketing agent.
(4) Amounts represent long-term portfolios, excluding ETFs.
Foreign Exchange Trading Services
Foreign exchange trading services revenue, as presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, decreased 11% in 2021 compared to 2020, primarily due to lower FX volatility, as compared to the high levels of volatility experienced in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, partially offset by higher client FX volumes. Foreign exchange trading services revenue comprises revenue generated by FX trading and revenue generated by brokerage and other trading services, which made up 67% and 33%, respectively, of foreign exchange trading services revenue in 2021, and 68% and 32%, respectively in 2020. The impact of gross money market fund fee waivers on foreign exchange trading services was $53 million in 2021, compared to $8 million in 2020. This represents a reduction in revenue on the Fund Connect platform due to the impact of fee waivers by participating money market funds, including State Street Global Advisors funds.
We primarily earn FX trading revenue by acting as a principal market-maker through both "direct sales and trading” and “indirect FX trading.”
•Direct sales and trading: Represent FX transactions at negotiated rates with clients and investment managers that contact our trading desk directly. These principal market-making activities include transactions for funds serviced by third party custodians or prime brokers, as well as those funds under custody with us.
•Indirect FX trading: Represents FX transactions with clients, for which we are the funds' custodian, or their investment managers, routed to our FX desk through our asset-servicing operation. We execute indirect FX trades as a principal at rates disclosed to our clients.
Our FX trading revenue is influenced by multiple factors, including: the volume and type of client FX transactions and related spreads; currency volatility, reflecting market conditions; and our management of exchange rate, interest rate and other market risks associated with our FX activities. The relative impact of these factors on our total FX trading revenues often differs from period to period. For example, assuming all other factors remain constant, increases or decreases in volumes or bid-offer spreads across product mix tend to result in increases or decreases, as the case may be, in client-related FX revenue.
State Street Corporation | 68
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Our clients that utilize indirect FX trading can, in addition to executing their FX transactions through dealers not affiliated with us, transition from indirect FX trading to either direct sales and trading execution, including our “Street FX” service, or to one of our electronic trading platforms. Street FX, in which we continue to act as a principal market-maker, enables our clients to define their FX execution strategy and automate the FX trade execution process, both for funds under custody with us as well as those under custody at another bank.
We also earn foreign exchange trading services revenue through "electronic FX services" and "other trading, transition management and brokerage revenue."
•Electronic FX services: Our clients may choose to execute FX transactions through one of our electronic trading platforms. These transactions generate revenue through a “click” fee.
•Other trading, transition management and brokerage revenue: As our clients look to us to enhance and preserve portfolio values, they may choose to utilize our Transition or Currency Management capabilities or transact with our Equity Trade execution group. These transactions, which are not limited to foreign exchange, generate revenue via commissions charged for trades transacted during the management of these portfolios.
Fund Connect is another one of our electronic trading platforms: it is a global trading, analytics and cash management tool with access to more than 400 money market funds from leading providers.
Securities Finance
Our securities finance business consists of three components:
(1) an agency lending program for State Street Global Advisors managed investment funds with a broad range of investment objectives, which we refer to as the State Street Global Advisors lending funds;
(2) an agency lending program for third-party investment managers and asset owners, which we refer to as the agency lending funds; and
(3) security lending transactions which we enter into as principal, which we refer to as our enhanced custody business.
Securities finance revenue earned from our agency lending activities, which is composed of our split of both the spreads related to cash collateral and the fees related to non-cash collateral, is principally a function of the volume of securities on loan, the
interest rate spreads and fees earned on the underlying collateral and our share of the fee split.
As principal, our enhanced custody business borrows securities from the lending client or other market participants and then lends such securities to the subsequent borrower, either our client or a broker/dealer. We act as principal when the lending client is unable to, or elects not to, transact directly with the market and execute the transaction and furnish the securities. In our role as principal, we provide support to the transaction through our credit rating. While we source a significant proportion of the securities furnished by us in our role as principal from third parties, we have the ability to source securities through assets under custody from clients who have designated us as an eligible borrower.
Securities finance revenue, as presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, increased 17% in 2021 compared to 2020, primarily driven by higher client securities loan balances and new business wins in enhanced custody, partially offset by lower spreads.
Market influences may continue to affect client demand for securities finance, and as a result our revenue from, and the profitability of, our securities lending activities in future periods. In addition, the constantly evolving regulatory environment, including revised or proposed capital and liquidity standards, interpretations of those standards, and our own balance sheet management activities, may influence modifications to the way in which we deliver our agency lending or enhanced custody businesses, the volume of our securities lending activity and related revenue and profitability in future periods.
Software and Processing Fees
Software and processing fees revenue includes diverse types of fees and revenue, including fees from software licensing and maintenance, fees from our structured products business and other revenue including equity income from our joint venture investments, market-related adjustments and income associated with certain tax-advantaged investments.
Software and processing fees revenue, presented in Table 2: Total Revenue, increased 7% in 2021 compared to 2020 and includes approximately $435 million and $406 million from CRD in 2021 and 2020, respectively. CRD contributed approximately $13 million and $14 million in brokerage and other trading services within foreign exchange trading services in 2021, and 2020, respectively, and $448 million in total revenue in 2021, compared to $420 million in 2020. The increase in revenue is primarily driven by software as a service (SaaS) and professional services revenue. In addition, CRD revenue with affiliated entities, which is eliminated in our consolidated financial statements, was $62 million and $39 million in 2021 and 2020, respectively.
State Street Corporation | 69
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Revenue related to the front office solutions provided by CRD is primarily driven by the sale of term software licenses and SaaS, including professional services such as consulting and implementation services, software support and maintenance. Approximately 50%-70% of revenue associated with a sale of software to be installed on-premises is recognized at a point in time when the customer benefits from obtaining access to and use of the software license, with the percentage varying based on the length of the contract and other contractual terms. The remainder of revenue for on-premise installations is recognized over the length of the contract as maintenance and other services are provided. Upon renewal of an on-premises software contract, the same pattern of revenue recognition is followed with 50%-70% recognized upon renewal and the balance recognized over the term of the contract. Revenue for a SaaS related arrangement, where the customer does not take possession of the software, is recognized over the term of the contract as services are provided. Upon renewal of a SaaS arrangement, revenue continues to be recognized as services are provided under the new contract. As a result of these differences in how portions of CRD revenue are accounted for, CRD revenue may vary more than other business units quarter to quarter.
Amortization of tax advantage investments negatively impacted software and processing fees by approximately $94 million and $88 million in 2021 and 2020, respectively.
In addition, FX and market-related adjustments, which also includes certain fair value adjustments, impacted software and processing fees by approximately $20 million and $26 million in 2021 and 2020, respectively.
Additional information about fee revenue is provided under "Line of Business Information" included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
Net Interest Income
See Table 2: Total Revenue, for the breakout of interest income and interest expense for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019.
NII is defined as interest income earned on interest-earning assets less interest expense incurred on interest-bearing liabilities. Interest-earning assets, which principally consist of investment securities, interest-bearing deposits with banks, loans, resale agreements and other liquid assets, are financed primarily by client deposits, short-term borrowings and long-term debt.
NIM represents the relationship between annualized FTE NII and average total interest-earning assets for the period. It is calculated by dividing FTE NII by average interest-earning assets. Revenue that
is exempt from income taxes, mainly earned from certain investment securities (state and political subdivisions), is adjusted to a FTE basis using the U.S. federal and state statutory income tax rates.
NII on an FTE basis decreased in 2021 compared to 2020, primarily due to lower investment portfolio yields, partially offset by growth in the investment portfolio, deposits, and higher loan balances.
Investment securities net premium amortization, which is included in interest income, was $556 million in 2021, compared to $575 million in 2020 and $434 million in 2019. The decrease in MBS premium amortization is primarily due to lower prepayments.
Interest income related to debt securities is recognized in our consolidated statement of income using the effective interest method, or on a basis approximating a level rate of return over the contractual or estimated life of the security. The rate of return considers any non-refundable fees or costs, as well as purchase premiums or discounts, resulting in amortization or accretion, accordingly. The amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts are adjusted for prepayments when they occur, which primarily impact mortgage-backed securities.
State Street Corporation | 70
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following table presents the investment securities amortizable purchase premium net of discount accretion for the periods indicated:
| TABLE 13: INVESTMENT SECURITIES NET PREMIUM AMORTIZATION | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | MBS | Non-MBS | Total(1) | MBS | Non-MBS | Total(1) | MBS | Non-MBS | Total(1) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Unamortized premiums, net of discounts at period end | $ | 712 | $ | 502 | $ | 1,214 | $ | 1,173 | $ | 736 | $ | 1,909 | $ | 956 | $ | 629 | $ | 1,585 | ||||||||||||||||
| Net premium amortization(2) | 342 | 214 | 556 | 399 | 176 | 575 | 275 | 159 | 434 |
(1) The investment securities portfolio duration was 2.9 years in 2021, 3.0 years in 2020 and 2.7 years in 2019.
(2) Net of discount accretion on MMLF HTM securities.
See Table 14: Average Balances and Interest Rates - Fully Taxable-Equivalent Basis, for the breakout of NII on a FTE basis for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019.
| TABLE 14: AVERAGE BALANCES AND INTEREST RATES - FULLY TAXABLE-EQUIVALENT BASIS(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions; fully taxable-equivalent basis) | Average Balance | Interest Revenue/Expense | Rate | Average Balance | Interest Revenue/Expense | Rate | Average Balance | Interest Revenue/ Expense | Rate | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Interest-bearing deposits with banks(2) | $ | 89,996 | $ | (15) | (.02) | % | $ | 76,588 | $ | 76 | .10 | % | $ | 48,500 | $ | 416 | .86 | % | ||||||||||||||
| Securities purchased under resale agreements(3) | 4,193 | 27 | .63 | 3,452 | 126 | 3.64 | 2,506 | 364 | 14.54 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Trading account assets | 752 | — | .01 | 878 | — | — | 884 | 1 | .11 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment securities available for sale | 66,584 | 583 | .88 | 58,036 | 761 | 1.31 | 51,853 | 1,035 | 1.98 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment securities held-to-maturity | 44,832 | 665 | 1.48 | 42,956 | 830 | 1.93 | 39,915 | 974 | 2.44 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment securities held-to-maturity purchased under money market liquidity facility | 314 | 4 | 1.35 | 8,183 | 117 | 1.43 | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Investment securities | 111,730 | 1,252 | 1.12 | 109,175 | 1,708 | 1.56 | 91,768 | 2,009 | 2.19 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Loans | 31,009 | 640 | 2.07 | 27,525 | 627 | 2.28 | 24,073 | 775 | 3.22 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other interest-earning assets | 22,355 | 17 | .08 | 11,256 | 55 | .49 | 14,160 | 395 | 2.79 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Average total interest-earning assets | $ | 260,035 | $ | 1,921 | .74 | $ | 228,874 | $ | 2,592 | 1.13 | $ | 181,891 | $ | 3,960 | 2.18 | |||||||||||||||||
| Interest-bearing deposits: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| U.S. | $ | 104,848 | $ | 10 | .01 | % | $ | 87,444 | $ | 114 | .13 | % | $ | 67,547 | $ | 539 | .80 | % | ||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S.(2)(4) | 82,126 | (273) | (.33) | 68,806 | (231) | (.34) | 61,301 | 124 | .20 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total interest-bearing deposits(4)(5) | 186,974 | (263) | (.14) | 156,250 | (117) | (.07) | 128,848 | 663 | .51 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Securities sold under repurchase agreements | 667 | — | — | 2,615 | 4 | .14 | 1,616 | 31 | 1.90 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Short-term borrowings under money market liquidity facility | 315 | 4 | 1.21 | 8,207 | 101 | 1.22 | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other short-term borrowings | 788 | 2 | .21 | 2,226 | 18 | .78 | 1,524 | 21 | 1.37 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Long-term debt | 13,383 | 219 | 1.64 | 14,371 | 312 | 2.17 | 11,474 | 414 | 3.61 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other interest-bearing liabilities | 5,486 | 41 | .75 | 3,176 | 57 | 1.82 | 4,103 | 246 | 6.00 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Average total interest-bearing liabilities | $ | 207,613 | $ | 3 | — | $ | 186,845 | $ | 375 | .20 | $ | 147,565 | $ | 1,375 | .93 | |||||||||||||||||
| Interest rate spread | .74 | % | .93 | % | 1.25 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income, fully taxable-equivalent basis | $ | 1,918 | $ | 2,217 | $ | 2,585 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest margin, fully taxable-equivalent basis | .74 | % | .97 | % | 1.42 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tax-equivalent adjustment | (13) | (17) | (19) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income, GAAP basis | $ | 1,905 | $ | 2,200 | $ | 2,566 |
(1) Rates earned/paid on interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities include the impact of hedge activities associated with our asset and liability management activities where applicable.
(2) Negative values reflect the interest rate environment outside of the U.S. where central bank rates are below zero for several major currencies.
(3) Reflects the impact of balance sheet netting under enforceable netting agreements of approximately $62.15 billion, $100.45 billion and $86.67 billion for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively. Excluding the impact of netting, the average interest rates would be approximately 0.04%, 0.12% and 0.41% for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively.
(4) Average rate includes the impact of FX swap costs of approximately ($68) million, ($63) million and $153 million for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively. Average rates for total interest-bearing deposits excluding the impact of FX swap costs were (0.10)%, (0.03)% and 0.40% for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively.
(5) Total deposits averaged $235.40 billion, $193.23 billion and $158.26 billion for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively.
State Street Corporation | 71
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Changes in the components of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities are discussed in more detail below. Additional information about the components of interest income and interest expense is provided in Note 17 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Average total interest-earning assets were $260.04 billion in 2021 compared to $228.87 billion in 2020. The increase is primarily due to higher interest-bearing deposits with banks and investment securities.
Interest-bearing deposits with banks averaged $90.00 billion in 2021 compared to $76.59 billion in 2020. These deposits primarily reflect our maintenance of cash balances at the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank (ECB) and other non-U.S. central banks. The higher levels of average cash balances with central banks reflect higher levels of client deposits.
Securities purchased under resale agreements averaged $4.19 billion in 2021 compared to $3.45 billion in 2020. The impact of balance sheet netting decreased to $62.15 billion on average in 2021 compared to $100.45 billion in 2020. We maintain an agreement with FICC, a clearing organization that enables us to net all securities sold under repurchase agreements against those purchased under resale agreements with counterparties that are also members of the clearing organization when specific netting criteria are met. The decrease in average balance sheet netting in 2021 compared to 2020 is primarily due to lower FICC repo volumes from an increased cash supply and lower short-term interest rates driven by extensive Federal Reserve stimulus.
We have been a sponsoring member within FICC since 2005 and have continued to expand our client base as program eligibility parameters, including permissible client entity types and client jurisdictions, have broadened. We enter into repurchase and resale transactions in eligible securities with sponsored clients and with other FICC members and, pursuant to FICC Government Securities Division rules, submit, novate and net the transactions. We may sponsor clients to clear their eligible repurchase transactions with FICC, backed by our guarantee to FICC of the prompt and full payment and performance of our sponsored member clients’ respective obligations. We generally obtain a security interest from our sponsored clients in the high quality securities collateral that they receive, which is designed to mitigate our potential exposure to FICC.
Average investment securities increased to $111.73 billion in 2021 from $109.18 billion in 2020, primarily driven by MBS balances and foreign government bonds. The growth reflects our
deployment of higher structural deposit levels that resulted from the COVID-19 pandemic.
Loans averaged $31.01 billion in 2021 compared to $27.53 billion in 2020. Average core loans, which exclude overdrafts and highlight our efforts to grow our lending portfolio, averaged $26.76 billion in 2021 compared to $22.84 billion in 2020. The increase is primarily due to growth in CLOs in loan form and fund finance loans, such as our private equity capital call facilities. Additional information about these loans is provided in Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Average other interest-earning assets, largely associated with our enhanced custody business, increased to $22.36 billion in 2021 from $11.26 billion in 2020, primarily driven by an increase in the level of cash collateral posted. Enhanced custody is our securities financing business where we act as principal with respect to our custody clients and generate securities finance revenue. The NII earned on these transactions is generally lower than the interest earned on other alternative investments.
Aggregate average total interest-bearing deposits increased to $186.97 billion in 2021 from $156.25 billion in 2020. Average U.S. interest-bearing deposits increased amidst the market uncertainty due to the COVID-19 pandemic, U.S. monetary policy and the level of global interest rates. We expect deposits to remain elevated due to the current low interest rate environment and the size of the Federal Reserve's balance sheet. Future deposit levels will be influenced by the underlying asset servicing business, client deposit behavior and market conditions, including the general levels of U.S. and non-U.S. interest rates.
Average other short-term borrowings, typically associated with our tax-exempt investment program, decreased to $0.79 billion in 2021 from $2.23 billion in 2020.
Average long-term debt was $13.38 billion in 2021 compared to $14.37 billion in 2020. These amounts reflect issuances, redemptions and maturities of senior debt during the respective periods.
Average other interest-bearing liabilities were $5.49 billion in 2021 compared to $3.18 billion in 2020. Other interest-bearing liabilities primarily reflect our level of cash collateral received from clients in connection with our enhanced custody business, which is presented on a net basis where we have enforceable netting agreements.
Several factors could affect future levels of NII and NIM, including the volume and mix of client deposits and funding sources; central bank actions; balance sheet management activities; changes in the level and slope of U.S. and non-U.S. interest rates;
State Street Corporation | 72
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
revised or proposed regulatory capital or liquidity standards, or interpretations of those standards; the yields earned on securities purchased compared to the yields earned on securities sold or matured and changes in the type and amount of credit or other loans we extend.
Based on market conditions and other factors, including regulatory standards, we continue to reinvest the majority of the proceeds from pay-downs and maturities of investment securities in highly-rated U.S. and non-U.S. securities, such as federal agency MBS, sovereign debt securities and U.S. Treasury and agency securities. The pace at which we reinvest and the types of investment securities purchased will depend on the impact of market conditions, the implementation of regulatory standards, including interpretation of those standards and other factors over time. We expect these factors and the levels of global interest rates to impact our reinvestment program and future levels of NII and NIM.
Other Income
In the second quarter of 2021, we sold a majority share of our WMS business, which resulted in a pre-tax gain on sale of $53 million that was recorded in other income.
In the fourth quarter of 2021, we transferred $438 million of HTM debt securities that referenced LIBOR and other discontinued reference rates to AFS. Of those transferred securities, $378 million were subsequently sold, resulting in a pre-tax gain of $58 million.
Provision for Credit Losses
In 2021, we released $33 million of credit reserves related to loans and financial assets held at amortized cost and off-balance sheet commitments based on the CECL methodology, reflecting observed and expected improvements in both credit quality and economic outlook. This compares to a $88 million provision for credit losses in 2020 based on the CECL methodology, and $10 million in 2019, which was under the incurred loss model.
Additional information is provided under “Loans” in "Financial Condition" in this Management's Discussion and Analysis and in Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Expenses
Table 15: Expenses, provides the breakout of expenses for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019.
| TABLE 15: EXPENSES | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | % Change 2020 vs. 2019 | |||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | ||||||||||||||
| Compensation and employee benefits | $ | 4,554 | $ | 4,450 | $ | 4,541 | 2 | % | (2) | % | |||||||
| Information systems and communications | 1,661 | 1,550 | 1,465 | 7 | 6 | ||||||||||||
| Transaction processing services | 1,024 | 978 | 983 | 5 | (1) | ||||||||||||
| Occupancy | 444 | 489 | 470 | (9) | 4 | ||||||||||||
| Amortization of other intangible assets | 245 | 234 | 236 | 5 | (1) | ||||||||||||
| Acquisition costs | 66 | 54 | 79 | 22 | (32) | ||||||||||||
| Restructuring charges, net | (1) | (4) | (2) | (75) | 100 | ||||||||||||
| Other: | |||||||||||||||||
| Professional services | 334 | 364 | 321 | (8) | 13 | ||||||||||||
| Other | 562 | 601 | 941 | (6) | (36) | ||||||||||||
| Total other | 896 | 965 | 1,262 | (7) | (24) | ||||||||||||
| Total expenses | $ | 8,889 | $ | 8,716 | $ | 9,034 | 2 | (4) | |||||||||
| Number of employees at year-end | 38,784 | 39,439 | 39,103 | (2) | 1 |
Compensation and employee benefits expenses increased 2% in 2021 compared to 2020, primarily due to deferred compensation expense acceleration of $147 million associated with an amendment of the terms of certain outstanding deferred cash incentive compensation awards. This amendment removes continued service requirements for deferred cash incentive awards, thereby accelerating the future expense that would have been recognized over the remaining term of the awards (1 to 4 years, depending on the award) had the continued service requirement not been removed. The deferred portion of many of our bonus-eligible employees' total compensation had become disproportionate relative to our peer organizations. The expense that would otherwise have been associated with the amended awards will no longer be reflected in future periods. To make our pay practices more competitive, the acceleration is part of a plan to increase the immediate cash versus the deferred portion of total cash incentive compensation in future periods, which cash incentive compensation will be reflected in compensation and employee benefits expenses in those periods. The expense impact of future immediate and deferred incentive compensation awards will depend upon corporate performance and market, regulatory, and other factors and conditions, including the amount and form of those awards. The change did not affect deferred equity-settled incentive compensation awards (which, in the aggregate, represent a majority of the outstanding deferred compensation awards for the relevant employees), and we expect that future deferred cash-settled incentive compensation awards will retain a continued service requirement.
Total headcount decreased 2% as of December 31, 2021 compared to December 31, 2020, primarily driven by a reduction in high cost locations, partially offset by hiring in global hubs.
Information systems and communications expenses increased 7% in 2021 compared to 2020,
State Street Corporation | 73
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
primarily due to higher technology infrastructure investments and equipment expenses.
Transaction processing services expenses increased 5% in 2021 compared to 2020, primarily due to higher sub-custody costs and higher broker fees.
Occupancy expenses decreased 9% in 2021 compared 2020, primarily due to footprint optimization.
Amortization of other intangible assets increased 5% in 2021 compared to 2020, primarily due to the acquisition in the first quarter of 2021 of the depository bank and fund administrator activities of Fideuram Bank Luxembourg, a subsidiary of Intesa Sanpaolo.
Other expenses decreased 7% in 2021 compared to 2020, primarily driven by lower professional services, securities processing losses and travel costs.
Acquisition Costs
We recorded approximately $53 million of acquisition costs in 2021, compared to $54 million in 2020 and $79 million in 2019, related to our acquisition of CRD. As of December 31, 2021, we have incurred a total of $217 million of acquisition costs related to CRD. Starting in 2022, we will no longer distinguish certain CRD costs as acquisition costs.
In addition, we recorded approximately $13 million of acquisition costs in 2021 related to our planned acquisition of the BBH Investor Services business. We expect to incur up to approximately $590 million of total acquisition and integration costs related to the acquisition through the third year following its closing.
Restructuring and Repositioning Charges
Repositioning Charges
Expenses for 2021 included a net repositioning release of $3 million, consisting of a $32 million release of previously accrued severance charges, primarily due to higher attrition and redeployment rates during the COVID-19 pandemic, partially offset by $29 million of occupancy charges related to footprint optimization. Total repositioning charges were $133 million in 2020.
The following table presents aggregate activity for repositioning charges and activity related to previous Beacon restructuring charges for the periods
indicated:
| TABLE 16: RESTRUCTURING AND REPOSITIONING CHARGES | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | Employee Related Costs | Real Estate Actions | Asset and Other Write-offs | Total | ||||||||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2018 | $ | 303 | $ | 37 | $ | 1 | $ | 341 | ||||||||||
| Accruals for Beacon | (2) | — | — | (2) | ||||||||||||||
| Accruals for Repositioning Charges | 98 | 12 | — | 110 | ||||||||||||||
| Payments and Other Adjustments | (209) | (42) | — | (251) | ||||||||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2019 | 190 | 7 | 1 | 198 | ||||||||||||||
| Accruals for Beacon | (4) | — | — | (4) | ||||||||||||||
| Accruals for Repositioning Charges | 82 | 51 | — | 133 | ||||||||||||||
| Payments and Other Adjustments | (78) | (52) | (1) | (131) | ||||||||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2020 | 190 | 6 | — | 196 | ||||||||||||||
| Accruals for Beacon | (1) | — | — | (1) | ||||||||||||||
| Accruals for Repositioning Charges | (32) | 29 | — | (3) | ||||||||||||||
| Payments and Other Adjustments | (89) | (29) | — | (118) | ||||||||||||||
| Accrual Balance at December 31, 2021 | $ | 68 | $ | 6 | $ | — | $ | 74 |
Income Tax Expense
Income tax expense was $478 million in 2021 compared to $479 million in 2020. Our effective tax rate was 15.1% in 2021 compared to 16.5% in 2020. The decrease in the effective tax rate is primarily due to discrete benefits from the completion of tax audits and tax return finalization.
Additional information regarding income tax expense, including unrecognized tax benefits and tax contingencies, are provided in Notes 13 and 22 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
LINE OF BUSINESS INFORMATION
Our operations are organized into two lines of business: Investment Servicing and Investment Management, which are defined based on products and services provided. The results of operations for these lines of business are not necessarily comparable with those of other companies, including companies in the financial services industry. For the description of our lines of business, refer to "Lines of Business” in Item 1 in this Form 10-K. Certain costs are not allocated to our two lines of business, including repositioning charges, acquisition costs and certain legal accruals. In addition, the acceleration of deferred compensation of $147 million in 2021 was not allocated to our two lines of business. See Note 24 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 74
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Investment Servicing
| TABLE 17: INVESTMENT SERVICING LINE OF BUSINESS RESULTS | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in millions, except where otherwise noted) | Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | % Change 2020 vs. 2019 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Servicing fees | $ | 5,549 | $ | 5,167 | $ | 5,074 | 7 | % | 2 | % | |||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange trading services | 1,149 | 1,299 | 974 | (12) | 33 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Securities finance | 402 | 342 | 462 | 18 | (26) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Software and processing fees | 779 | 706 | 691 | 10 | 2 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total fee revenue | 7,879 | 7,514 | 7,201 | 5 | 4 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income | 1,919 | 2,211 | 2,590 | (13) | (15) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total other income | (1) | 4 | 43 | nm | nm | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total revenue | 9,797 | 9,729 | 9,834 | 1 | (1) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Provision for credit losses | (33) | 88 | 10 | (138) | 780 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total expenses | 7,182 | 7,071 | 7,140 | 2 | (1) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Income before income tax expense | $ | 2,648 | $ | 2,570 | $ | 2,684 | 3 | (4) | |||||||||||||||
| Pre-tax margin | 27 | % | 26 | % | 27 | % | |||||||||||||||||
| Average assets (in billions) | $ | 296.5 | $ | 266.4 | $ | 220.3 |
nm Not meaningful
Servicing Fees
Servicing fees, as presented in Table 17: Investment Servicing Line of Business Results, increased 7% in 2021 compared to 2020 primarily due to higher average equity market levels, client activity and flows, and net new business, partially offset by normal pricing headwinds. FX rates impacted servicing fees positively by 1% in 2021 relative to 2020 and 0.4% in 2020 relative to 2019.
Additional information about servicing fees is provided under "Fee Revenue" in "Consolidated Results of Operations" included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
For additional information about the impact of worldwide equity and fixed-income valuations on our fee revenue, as well as other key drivers of our servicing fee revenue, refer to "Fee Revenue" in "Consolidated Results of Operations" included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
Expenses
Total expenses for Investment Servicing increased 2% in 2021 compared to 2020, primarily reflecting higher technology infrastructure investments, equipment expenses, higher business volume related costs and unfavorable currency translation, partially offset by expense savings initiatives. Currency translation increased expenses for Investment Servicing by 1% in 2021 relative to 2020. Seasonal deferred incentive compensation expense and payroll taxes were $141 million in 2021 compared to $125 million in 2020. Total expenses contributed by CRD were approximately $287 million and $248 million in 2021 and 2020, respectively. Additional information about expenses is provided under "Expenses" in "Consolidated Results of Operations" included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
State Street Corporation | 75
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Investment Management
| TABLE 18: INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT LINE OF BUSINESS RESULTS | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in millions, except where otherwise noted) | Years Ended December 31, | % Change 2021 vs. 2020 | % Change 2020 vs. 2019 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Management fees(1) | $ | 2,053 | $ | 1,880 | $ | 1,824 | 9 | % | 3 | % | |||||||||||||
| Foreign exchange trading services(2) | 62 | 64 | 84 | (3) | (24) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Securities finance | 14 | 14 | 9 | — | 56 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Software and processing fees(3) | 4 | 27 | 29 | (85) | (7) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total fee revenue | 2,133 | 1,985 | 1,946 | 7 | 2 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income | (14) | (11) | (24) | 27 | (54) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total revenue | 2,119 | 1,974 | 1,922 | 7 | 3 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total expenses | 1,445 | 1,471 | 1,535 | (2) | (4) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Income before income tax expense | $ | 674 | $ | 503 | $ | 387 | 34 | 30 | |||||||||||||||
| Pre-tax margin | 32 | % | 25 | % | 20 | % | |||||||||||||||||
| Average assets (in billions) | $ | 3.2 | $ | 2.9 | $ | 3.0 |
(1) Includes revenues from SPDR® Gold Shares and SPDR® Gold MiniSharesSM Trust AUM where we are not the investment manager but act as the marketing agent.
(2) Includes revenue for reimbursements received for certain ETFs associated with State Street Global Advisors where we act as the distribution and marketing agent.
(3) Includes other revenue items that are primarily driven by equity market movements.
Investment Management total revenue increased 7% in 2021 compared to 2020.
Management Fees
Management fees increased 9% in 2021 compared to 2020, primarily due to higher average equity market levels and net inflows from ETFs, partially offset by a previously reported idiosyncratic institutional client asset reallocation expected to be primarily reflected in 2022, and higher money market fee waivers. FX rates impacted management fees positively by 1% in 2021 relative to 2020 and 0.5% in 2020 relative to 2019.
Additional information about management fees is provided under " Fee Revenue" in "Consolidated Results of Operations" included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
Expenses
Total expenses for Investment Management decreased 2% in 2021 compared to 2020, primarily due to savings from on-going expense management initiatives. Currency translation increased expenses for Investment Management by 1% in 2021 relative to 2020. Seasonal deferred incentive compensation expense and payroll taxes were $35 million in 2021, compared to $26 million in 2020.
Additional information about expenses is provided under "Expenses" in "Consolidated Results of Operations" included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
For additional information about our two lines of business, as well as the revenues, expenses and capital allocation methodologies associated with them, refer to Note 24 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 76
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
FINANCIAL CONDITION
The structure of our consolidated statement of condition is primarily driven by the liabilities generated by our Investment Servicing and Investment Management lines of business. Our clients' needs and our operating objectives determine balance sheet volume, mix and currency denomination. As our clients execute their worldwide cash management and investment activities, they utilize deposits and short-term investments that constitute the majority of our liabilities. These liabilities are generally in the form of interest-bearing transaction account deposits, which are denominated in a variety of currencies; non-interest-bearing demand deposits; and repurchase agreements, which generally serve as short-term investment alternatives for our clients.
Deposits and other liabilities resulting from client initiated transactions are invested in assets that generally have contractual maturities significantly longer than our liabilities; however, we evaluate the operational nature of our deposits and seek to maintain appropriate short-term liquidity of those liabilities that are not operational in nature and maintain longer-termed assets for our operational deposits. Our assets consist primarily of securities held in our AFS or HTM portfolios and short-duration financial instruments, such as interest-bearing deposits with banks and securities purchased under resale agreements. The actual mix of assets is determined by the characteristics of the client liabilities and our desire to maintain a well-diversified portfolio of high-quality assets.
The following information on our financial condition is based on our average balance sheet, which we believe is the better measure of our balance sheet trends as period-end balances can be impacted by the timing of client activities including deposits and withdrawals.
| TABLE 19: AVERAGE STATEMENT OF CONDITION(1) | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |||||||
| Assets: | ||||||||||
| Interest-bearing deposits with banks | $ | 89,996 | $ | 76,588 | $ | 48,500 | ||||
| Securities purchased under resale agreements | 4,193 | 3,452 | 2,506 | |||||||
| Trading account assets | 752 | 878 | 884 | |||||||
| Investment securities: | ||||||||||
| Investment securities available for sale | 66,584 | 58,036 | 51,853 | |||||||
| Investment securities held-to-maturity | 44,832 | 42,956 | 39,915 | |||||||
| Investment securities held-to-maturity purchased under money market liquidity facility | 314 | 8,183 | — | |||||||
| Total Investment securities | 111,730 | 109,175 | 91,768 | |||||||
| Loans | 31,009 | 27,525 | 24,073 | |||||||
| Other interest-earning assets | 22,355 | 11,256 | 14,160 | |||||||
| Average total interest-earning assets | 260,035 | 228,874 | 181,891 | |||||||
| Cash and due from banks | 5,057 | 3,849 | 3,390 | |||||||
| Other non-interest-earning assets | 34,651 | 36,611 | 38,053 | |||||||
| Average total assets | $ | 299,743 | $ | 269,334 | $ | 223,334 | ||||
| Liabilities and shareholders’ equity: | ||||||||||
| Interest-bearing deposits: | ||||||||||
| U.S. | $ | 104,848 | $ | 87,444 | $ | 67,547 | ||||
| Non-U.S. | 82,126 | 68,806 | 61,301 | |||||||
| Total interest-bearing deposits(2) | 186,974 | 156,250 | 128,848 | |||||||
| Securities sold under repurchase agreements | 667 | 2,615 | 1,616 | |||||||
| Short-term borrowings under money market liquidity facility | 315 | 8,207 | — | |||||||
| Other short-term borrowings | 788 | 2,226 | 1,524 | |||||||
| Long-term debt | 13,383 | 14,371 | 11,474 | |||||||
| Other interest-bearing liabilities | 5,486 | 3,176 | 4,103 | |||||||
| Average total interest-bearing liabilities | 207,613 | 186,845 | 147,565 | |||||||
| Non-interest-bearing deposits(2) | 48,430 | 36,975 | 29,414 | |||||||
| Other non-interest-bearing liabilities | 17,615 | 20,464 | 21,299 | |||||||
| Preferred shareholders’ equity | 2,076 | 2,569 | 3,653 | |||||||
| Common shareholders’ equity | 24,009 | 22,481 | 21,403 | |||||||
| Average total liabilities and shareholders’ equity | $ | 299,743 | $ | 269,334 | $ | 223,334 |
(1) Additional information about our average statement of condition, primarily our interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, is provided in "Net Interest Income" included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
(2) Total deposits averaged $235.40 billion in 2021 compared to $193.23 billion and $158.26 billion in 2020 and 2019, respectively.
State Street Corporation | 77
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Investment Securities
| TABLE 20: CARRYING VALUES OF INVESTMENT SECURITIES | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, | ||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |||||||
| Available-for-sale: | ||||||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 17,939 | $ | 6,575 | $ | 3,487 | ||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 18,208 | 14,305 | 17,838 | |||||||
| Total U.S. Treasury and federal agencies | 36,147 | 20,880 | 21,325 | |||||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 1,995 | 1,996 | 1,980 | |||||||
| Asset-backed securities(1) | 2,087 | 2,291 | 2,179 | |||||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 23,547 | 22,087 | 12,373 | |||||||
| Other(2) | 3,098 | 3,355 | 8,658 | |||||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 30,727 | 29,729 | 25,190 | |||||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||
| Student loans(3) | 211 | 314 | 531 | |||||||
| Collateralized loan obligations(4) | 2,155 | 2,966 | 1,820 | |||||||
| Non-agency CMBS and RMBS(5) | 52 | 78 | 104 | |||||||
| Other | 91 | 90 | 89 | |||||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 2,509 | 3,448 | 2,544 | |||||||
| State and political subdivisions | 1,272 | 1,548 | 1,783 | |||||||
| Other U.S. debt securities(6) | 2,744 | 3,443 | 2,973 | |||||||
| Total available-for-sale securities | $ | 73,399 | $ | 59,048 | $ | 53,815 | ||||
| Held-to-maturity: | ||||||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 2,170 | $ | 6,057 | $ | 10,311 | ||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 33,481 | 36,901 | 26,297 | |||||||
| Total U.S. Treasury and federal agencies | 35,651 | 42,958 | 36,608 | |||||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | — | 303 | 366 | |||||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 1,564 | 342 | 328 | |||||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 1,564 | 645 | 694 | |||||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||
| Student loans(3) | 4,908 | 4,774 | 3,783 | |||||||
| Non-agency CMBS and RMBS(7) | 307 | 554 | 697 | |||||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 5,215 | 5,328 | 4,480 | |||||||
| Total(7) | 42,430 | 48,931 | 41,782 | |||||||
| Held-to-maturity under money market mutual fund liquidity facility(8) | — | 3,300 | — | |||||||
| Total held-to-maturity securities(8) | $ | 42,430 | $ | 52,231 | $ | 41,782 |
(1) As of December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019, the fair value non-U.S. collateralized loan obligations of $0.83 billion, $0.96 billion and $0.89 billion, respectively.
(2) As of December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019, the fair value includes non-U.S. corporate bonds of $1.53 billion, $1.88 billion and $1.78 billion, respectively.
(3) Primarily comprised of securities guaranteed by the federal government with respect to at least 97% of defaulted principal and accrued interest on the underlying loans.
(4) Excludes collateralized loan obligations in loan form. Refer to Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K for additional information.
(5) Consists entirely of non-agency CMBS as of December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019.
(6) As of December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019, the fair value of U.S. corporate bonds was $2.44 billion, $3.44 billion and $2.97 billion, respectively.
(7) As of December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019, the total amortized cost included $292 million, $464 million and $573 million, respectively, of non-agency CMBS and $14 million, $90 million and $124 million, respectively, of non-agency RMBS.
(8) As of December 31, 2021 and 2020, we recognized an allowance for credit losses on all HTM securities of $0 million and $3 million, respectively, inclusive of $0 million and $1 million, respectively, related to HTM securities purchased under the money market mutual fund liquidity facility.
Additional information about our investment securities portfolio is provided in Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
We manage our investment securities portfolio to align with the interest rate and duration characteristics of our client liabilities and in the context of the overall structure of our consolidated statement of condition, in consideration of the global interest rate environment. We consider a well-diversified, high-credit quality investment securities portfolio to be an important element in the management of our consolidated statement of condition.
Average duration of our investment securities portfolio was 2.9 years and 3.0 years as of December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, respectively.
Approximately 92% of the carrying value of the portfolio was rated “AAA” or “AA” as of both December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020.
| TABLE 21: INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO BY EXTERNAL CREDIT RATING (EXCLUDING SECURITIES PURCHASED UNDER THE MMLF PROGRAM) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2021 | December 31, 2020 | ||||
| AAA(1) | 79 | % | 78 | % | |
| AA | 13 | 14 | |||
| A | 4 | 4 | |||
| BBB | 4 | 4 | |||
| 100 | % | 100 | % |
(1) Includes U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities that are split-rated, “AAA” by Moody’s Investors Service and “AA+” by Standard & Poor’s and also includes Agency MBS securities which are not explicitly rated but which have an explicit or assumed guarantee from the U.S. government.
As of December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, the investment portfolio was diversified with respect to asset class composition. The following table presents the composition of these asset classes.
| TABLE 22: INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO BY ASSET CLASS | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2021 | December 31, 2020 | ||||
| U.S. Agency Mortgage-backed securities | 33 | % | 39 | % | |
| Foreign sovereign | 21 | 20 | |||
| U.S. Treasuries | 17 | 11 | |||
| Asset-backed securities | 10 | 11 | |||
| Other credit(1) | 19 | 19 | |||
| 100 | % | 100 | % |
(1) Includes the securities purchased under the MMLF program.
Non-U.S. Debt Securities
Approximately 28% and 27% of the aggregate carrying value of our investment securities portfolio was non-U.S. debt securities as of December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, respectively.
State Street Corporation | 78
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 23: NON-U.S. DEBT SECURITIES(1) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | December 31, 2021 | December 31, 2020 | ||||
| Available-for-sale: | ||||||
| Canada | $ | 4,502 | $ | 3,163 | ||
| Australia | 3,019 | 2,809 | ||||
| France | 2,180 | 2,829 | ||||
| Germany | 2,130 | 2,155 | ||||
| United Kingdom | 1,961 | 1,209 | ||||
| Austria | 1,478 | 1,544 | ||||
| Japan | 1,332 | 560 | ||||
| Spain | 1,227 | 1,642 | ||||
| Netherlands | 1,109 | 1,528 | ||||
| Belgium | 1,050 | 1,618 | ||||
| Finland | 837 | 1,222 | ||||
| Italy | 803 | 1,014 | ||||
| Ireland | 744 | 1,226 | ||||
| Other(2) | 8,355 | 7,210 | ||||
| Total | $ | 30,727 | $ | 29,729 | ||
| Held-to-maturity: | ||||||
| Singapore | $ | 222 | $ | 342 | ||
| Australia | — | 90 | ||||
| Spain | — | 84 | ||||
| Other(2) | 1,342 | 129 | ||||
| Total | $ | 1,564 | $ | 645 |
(1) Geography is determined primarily based on the domicile of collateral or issuer.
(2) As of December 31, 2021, other non-U.S. investments include $7.4 billion supranational bonds in AFS securities and $1.3 billion supranational bonds in HTM securities.
Approximately 81% and 80% of the aggregate carrying value of these non-U.S. debt securities was rated “AAA” or “AA” as of December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, respectively. The majority of these securities comprised senior positions within the security structures; these positions have a level of protection provided through subordination and other forms of credit protection. As of December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, approximately 24% and 21%, respectively, of the aggregate carrying value of these non-U.S. debt securities was floating-rate.
As of December 31, 2021, our non-U.S. debt securities had an average market-to-book ratio of 100.0%, and an aggregate pre-tax net unrealized loss of $1 million, composed of gross unrealized gains of $145 million and gross unrealized losses of $146 million. These unrealized amounts included:
•a pre-tax net unrealized gain of $8 million, composed of gross unrealized gains of $145 million and gross unrealized losses of $137 million, associated with non-U.S. AFS debt securities; and
•a pre-tax net unrealized loss of $9 million associated with non-U.S. HTM debt securities.
As of December 31, 2021, the underlying collateral for non-U.S. MBS and ABS primarily included Australian, U.K., Netherlands, Spanish and Italian mortgages. The securities listed under
“Canada” were composed of Canadian government securities and provincial bonds, corporate debt and non-U.S. agency securities. The securities listed under “France” were composed of sovereign bonds, corporate debt, covered bonds, ABS and Non-U.S. agency securities. The securities listed under “Japan” were substantially composed of Japanese government securities.
Municipal Obligations
We carried approximately $1.3 billion of municipal securities classified as state and political subdivisions in our investment securities portfolio as of December 31, 2021, as shown in Table 20: Carrying Values of Investment Securities, all of which were classified as AFS. As of December 31, 2021, we also provided approximately $9.0 billion of credit and liquidity facilities to municipal issuers.
| TABLE 24: STATE AND MUNICIPAL OBLIGORS(1) | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in millions) | Total MunicipalSecurities(2) | Credit and Liquidity Facilities(2) | Total | % of Total Municipal Exposure | ||||||||||
| December 31, 2021 | ||||||||||||||
| State of Issuer: | ||||||||||||||
| Texas | $ | 221 | $ | 2,357 | $ | 2,578 | 25 | % | ||||||
| California | 108 | 2,005 | 2,113 | 21 | ||||||||||
| New York | 271 | 1,112 | 1,383 | 14 | ||||||||||
| Massachusetts | 245 | 696 | 941 | 9 | ||||||||||
| Tennessee | — | 491 | 491 | 5 | ||||||||||
| Total | $ | 845 | $ | 6,661 | $ | 7,506 | ||||||||
| December 31, 2020 | ||||||||||||||
| State of Issuer: | ||||||||||||||
| Texas | $ | 268 | $ | 2,282 | $ | 2,550 | 23 | % | ||||||
| California | 113 | 2,174 | 2,287 | 21 | ||||||||||
| New York | 297 | 1,363 | 1,660 | 15 | ||||||||||
| Massachusetts | 382 | 927 | 1,309 | 12 | ||||||||||
| Total | $ | 1,060 | $ | 6,746 | $ | 7,806 |
(1) Represented 5% or more of our aggregate municipal credit exposure of approximately $10.22 billion and $11.06 billion across our businesses as of December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, respectively.
(2) Includes municipal loans which are also presented within Table 26: U.S. and Non-U.S. Loans .
Our aggregate municipal securities exposure presented in Table 24: State and Municipal Obligors, was concentrated primarily with highly-rated counterparties, with approximately 88% of the obligors rated “AAA” or “AA” as of December 31, 2021. As of that date, approximately 26% and 74% of our aggregate municipal securities exposure was associated with general obligation and revenue bonds, respectively. The portfolios are also diversified geographically, with the states that represent our largest exposures widely dispersed across the U.S.
Additional information with respect to our assessment of impairment of our municipal securities is provided in Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 79
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 25: CONTRACTUAL MATURITIES AND YIELDS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2021 | Under 1 Year | 1 to 5 Years | 6 to 10 Years | Over 10 Years | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | Amount | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Available-for-sale(1): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 1,976 | .16 | % | $ | 14,912 | .68 | % | $ | 1,051 | 1.49 | % | $ | — | — | % | $ | 17,939 | ||||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 73 | 3.49 | 846 | 1.37 | 7,620 | .38 | 9,669 | 2.07 | 18,208 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total U.S. treasury and federal agencies | 2,049 | 15,758 | 8,671 | 9,669 | 36,147 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 164 | .76 | 527 | .51 | 33 | .38 | 1,271 | .93 | 1,995 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset-backed securities | 302 | .60 | 1,041 | .35 | 454 | .54 | 290 | .24 | 2,087 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 4,480 | 4.43 | 16,336 | 3.44 | 2,717 | 2.40 | 14 | 1.41 | 23,547 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Other | 826 | 4.52 | 1,943 | 3.34 | 275 | 3.76 | 54 | 2.22 | 3,098 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 5,772 | 19,847 | 3,479 | 1,629 | 30,727 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Student loans | 115 | 1.67 | — | — | — | — | 96 | .32 | 211 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Collateralized loan obligations | 147 | 1.07 | 483 | 1.02 | 1,084 | 1.08 | 441 | 1.33 | 2,155 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-agency CMBS and RMBS | — | — | — | — | — | — | 52 | 3.57 | 52 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Other | — | — | — | — | 91 | .88 | — | — | 91 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 262 | 483 | 1,175 | 589 | 2,509 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| State and political subdivisions(2) | 180 | 5.52 | 512 | 4.75 | 499 | 4.88 | 81 | 4.87 | 1,272 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Other U.S. debt securities | 1,002 | 1.68 | 1,699 | 2.23 | 43 | 3.07 | — | — | 2,744 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 9,265 | $ | 38,299 | $ | 13,867 | $ | 11,968 | $ | 73,399 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Held-to-maturity(1): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Direct obligations | $ | 2,150 | 1.73 | % | $ | 3 | .70 | % | $ | 1 | .63 | % | $ | 16 | .57 | % | $ | 2,170 | ||||||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 148 | 2.62 | 393 | 3.14 | 4,651 | 1.90 | 28,289 | 2.18 | 33,481 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total U.S. treasury and federal agencies | 2,298 | 396 | 4,652 | 28,305 | 35,651 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. debt securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-U.S. sovereign, supranational and non-U.S. agency | 345 | .59 | 1,218 | 2.30 | 1 | .50 | — | — | 1,564 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total non-U.S. debt securities | 345 | 1,218 | 1 | — | 1,564 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Student loans | 341 | .43 | 48 | .68 | 971 | 1.02 | 3,548 | .95 | 4,908 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-agency CMBS and RMBS | 87 | 1.35 | 144 | .83 | — | — | 76 | 1.34 | 307 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total asset-backed securities | 428 | 192 | 971 | 3,624 | 5,215 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 3,071 | $ | 1,806 | $ | 5,624 | $ | 31,929 | $ | 42,430 |
(1) The maturities of MBS, ABS and CMOs are based on expected principal payments.
(2) Yields were calculated on a FTE basis, using applicable statutory tax rates (21.0% as of December 31, 2021).
State Street Corporation | 80
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Loans
| TABLE 26: U.S. AND NON- U.S. LOANS | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, | ||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |||||||
| Domestic(1): | ||||||||||
| Commercial and financial: | ||||||||||
| Fund Finance(2) | $ | 12,396 | $ | 11,531 | $ | 10,270 | ||||
| Leveraged Loans | 3,106 | 2,923 | 3,342 | |||||||
| Overdrafts | 1,796 | 1,894 | 1,739 | |||||||
| Other(3) | 2,262 | 2,688 | 3,411 | |||||||
| Commercial real estate | 2,554 | 2,096 | 1,766 | |||||||
| Total domestic | 22,114 | 21,132 | 20,528 | |||||||
| Foreign(1): | ||||||||||
| Commercial and financial: | ||||||||||
| Fund Finance(2) | 7,778 | 4,432 | 3,145 | |||||||
| Leveraged Loans | 1,328 | 1,242 | 1,119 | |||||||
| Overdrafts | 1,312 | 1,088 | 1,517 | |||||||
| Other(3) | — | 31 | — | |||||||
| Total foreign | 10,418 | 6,793 | 5,781 | |||||||
| Total loans(4) | 32,532 | 27,925 | 26,309 | |||||||
| Allowance for loan losses | (87) | (122) | (74) | |||||||
| Loans, net of allowance | $ | 32,445 | $ | 27,803 | $ | 26,235 |
(1) Domestic and foreign categorization is based on the borrower’s country of domicile.
(2) Fund finance loans include primarily $9,147 million private equity capital call finance loans, $6,397 million loans to real money funds, $2,913 million collateralized loan obligations in loan form and $1,387 million loans to business development companies as of December 31, 2021, compared to $8,380 million and $6,076 million private equity capital call finance loans, $6,391 million and $6,040 million loans to real money funds and $821 million and $932 million loans to business development companies as of December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively.
(3) Includes $1,784 million securities finance loans, $455 million loans to municipalities and $23 million other loans as of December 31, 2021, $1,911 million securities finance loans, $754 million loans to municipalities and $54 million other loans as of December 31, 2020 and $2,537 million securities finance loans, $848 million loans to municipalities and $26 million other loans as of December 31, 2019.
(4) As of December 30, 2021. Excluding overdrafts, floating rate loans totaled $26,838 million and fixed rate loans totaled $2,583 million. We have entered into interest rate swap agreements to hedge the forecasted cash flows associated with LIBOR indexed floating-rate loans. See Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K for additional details.
In the second quarter of 2021, in addition to our CLOs in the investment portfolio, we began purchasing CLOs in loan form. The increase in the commercial and financial segment as of December 31, 2021 compared to December 31, 2020 was primarily driven by the purchase of $2,913 million CLOs in loan form in 2021.
As of December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, our leveraged loans totaled approximately $4.43 billion and $4.17 billion, respectively. We sold $181 million leveraged loans in 2021, of which $8 million remain unsettled and was held for sale as of December 31, 2021. We recorded a charge-off against the allowance for credit losses prior to the sale of these loans of $2 million in 2021.
In addition, we had binding unfunded commitments as of December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020 of $124 million and $149 million, respectively, to participate in such syndications.
Additional information about these unfunded commitments is provided in Note 12 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
These leveraged loans, which are primarily rated “speculative” under our internal risk-rating framework (refer to Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K), are externally rated “BBB,” “BB” or “B,” with approximately 94% and 85% of the loans rated “BB” or “B” as of December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, respectively. Our investment strategy involves generally limiting our investment to larger, more liquid credits underwritten by major global financial institutions, applying our internal credit analysis process to each potential investment and diversifying our exposure by counterparty and industry segment. However, these loans have significant exposure to credit losses relative to higher-rated loans in our portfolio.
Additional information about all of our loan segments, as well as underlying classes, is provided in Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
No loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings as of both December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020.
| TABLE 27: CONTRACTUAL MATURITIES FOR LOANS | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2021 | ||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Under 1 year | 1 to 5 years | 5 to 15 years | Total | ||||||||||
| Domestic: | ||||||||||||||
| Commercial and financial | $ | 10,188 | $ | 7,543 | $ | 1,829 | $ | 19,560 | ||||||
| Commercial real estate | 78 | 926 | 1,550 | 2,554 | ||||||||||
| Total domestic | 10,266 | 8,469 | 3,379 | 22,114 | ||||||||||
| Foreign: | ||||||||||||||
| Commercial and financial | 3,973 | 3,311 | 3,134 | 10,418 | ||||||||||
| Total foreign | 3,973 | 3,311 | 3,134 | 10,418 | ||||||||||
| Total loans | $ | 14,239 | $ | 11,780 | $ | 6,513 | $ | 32,532 |
| TABLE 28: CLASSIFICATION OF LOAN BALANCES DUE AFTER ONE YEAR | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2021 | ||||||
| (In millions) | Loans with predetermined interest rates | Loans with floating or adjustable interest rates | ||||
| Domestic: | ||||||
| Commercial and financial | $ | 384 | $ | 8,987 | ||
| Commercial real estate | 2,153 | 323 | ||||
| Total domestic | 2,537 | 9,310 | ||||
| Foreign: | ||||||
| Commercial and financial | 47 | 6,399 | ||||
| Total foreign | 47 | 6,399 | ||||
| Total loans | $ | 2,584 | $ | 15,709 |
State Street Corporation | 81
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Allowance for credit losses
| TABLE 29: ALLOWANCE FOR CREDIT LOSSES | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |||||||
| Allowance for credit losses: | ||||||||||
| Beginning balance(1) | $ | 148 | $ | 93 | $ | 83 | ||||
| Provision for credit losses (funded commitments)(2) | (29) | 83 | 10 | |||||||
| Provisions for credit losses (unfunded commitments)(3) | (2) | 3 | 3 | |||||||
| Provisions for credit losses (investment securities and all other) | (2) | 2 | — | |||||||
| Charge-offs(4) | (2) | (41) | (3) | |||||||
| FX translation | (5) | 8 | (2) | |||||||
| Ending balance | $ | 108 | $ | 148 | $ | 91 |
(1) Beginning January 1, 2020, we adopted ASC 326. Prior to 2020, we recognized an allowance for loan losses under an incurred loss model. Upon adoption, we increased the allowance and reduced retained earnings by approximately $2 million. As such, the 2020 beginning balance differs from the December 31, 2019 ending balance.
(2) The provision for credit losses is primarily related to commercial and financial loans.
(3) Prior to the adoption of ASC 326, the provision for unfunded commitments was recorded within other expenses in the consolidated statement of income. Upon adoption of ASC 326 in the first quarter of 2020, the provision for all assets within scope is recorded within the provision for credit losses in the consolidated statement of income.
(4) The charge-offs are related to commercial and financial loans.
We adopted ASC 326 in January 2020. The provision for credit losses related to loans and other financial assets held at amortized cost, including investment securities classified as HTM and off-balance sheet commitments, was a $33 million release of credit reserves in 2021, compared to $88 million reserve build in 2020.
As of December 31, 2021, approximately $61 million of our allowance for credit losses was related to leveraged loans included in the commercial and financial segment compared to $97 million as of December 31, 2020. The reduction in the allowance in 2021 was primarily driven by observed and expected improvements in both credit quality and economic outlook. As our view on current and future economic scenarios change, our allowance for credit losses related to these loans may be impacted through a change to the provisions for credit losses, reflecting credit migration within our loan portfolio, as well as changes in management's economic outlook as of year-end. The remaining $47 million and $51 million as of December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively, was related to other loans, commercial real estate loans, off-balance sheet commitments and other financial assets held at amortized cost, including investment securities held to maturity. As of December 31, 2021, the allowance for credit losses represented 0.3% of total loans.
An allowance for credit losses is recognized on HTM securities upon acquisition of the security, and on AFS securities when the fair value and expected future cash flows of the investment securities are less
than their amortized cost basis. Our assessment of impairment involves an evaluation of economic and security-specific factors. Such factors are based on estimates, derived by management, which contemplate current market conditions and security-specific performance. To the extent that market conditions are worse than management's expectations or due to idiosyncratic bond performance, the credit-related component of impairment, in particular, could increase and would be recorded in the provision for credit losses. Additional information with respect to the allowance for credit losses, net impairment losses and gross unrealized losses related to investment securities, is provided in Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Cross-Border Outstandings
Cross-border outstandings are amounts payable to us by non-U.S. counterparties which are denominated in U.S. dollars or other non-local currency, as well as non-U.S. local currency claims not funded by local currency liabilities. Our cross-border outstandings consist primarily of deposits with banks; loans and lease financing, including short-duration advances; investment securities; amounts related to FX and interest rate contracts; and securities finance. In addition to credit risk, cross-border outstandings have the risk that, as a result of political or economic conditions in a country, borrowers may be unable to meet their contractual repayment obligations of principal and/or interest when due because of the unavailability of, or restrictions on, FX needed by borrowers to repay their obligations.
As market and economic conditions change, the major independent credit rating agencies may downgrade U.S. and non-U.S. financial institutions and sovereign issuers which have been, and may in the future be, significant counterparties to us, or whose financial instruments serve as collateral on which we rely for credit risk mitigation purposes, and may do so again in the future. As a result, we may be exposed to increased counterparty risk, leading to negative ratings volatility.
The cross-border outstandings presented in Table 30: Cross-border outstandings, represented approximately 27% and 30% of our consolidated total assets as of December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, respectively.
State Street Corporation | 82
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 30: CROSS-BORDER OUTSTANDINGS(1) | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | Investment Securities and Other Assets | Derivatives and Securities on Loan | Total Cross-Border Outstandings | |||||||
| December 31, 2021 | ||||||||||
| Germany | $ | 30,263 | $ | 202 | $ | 30,465 | ||||
| United Kingdom | 13,075 | 1,287 | 14,362 | |||||||
| Japan | 10,713 | 878 | 11,591 | |||||||
| Canada | 8,201 | 999 | 9,200 | |||||||
| Australia | 6,862 | 534 | 7,396 | |||||||
| Luxembourg | 6,300 | 601 | 6,901 | |||||||
| Ireland | 2,822 | 852 | 3,674 | |||||||
| December 31, 2020 | ||||||||||
| United Kingdom | $ | 18,880 | $ | 1,797 | $ | 20,677 | ||||
| Japan | 19,537 | 560 | 20,097 | |||||||
| Germany | 18,734 | 2,163 | 20,897 | |||||||
| Canada | 5,997 | 3,113 | 9,110 | |||||||
| Australia | 5,790 | 2,908 | 8,698 | |||||||
| Luxembourg | 5,036 | 2,148 | 7,184 | |||||||
| France | 3,586 | 3,010 | 6,596 | |||||||
| December 31, 2019 | ||||||||||
| Germany | $ | 20,968 | $ | 217 | $ | 21,185 | ||||
| United Kingdom | 13,764 | 1,468 | 15,232 | |||||||
| Japan | 11,121 | 555 | 11,676 | |||||||
| Luxembourg | 3,399 | 668 | 4,067 | |||||||
| Canada | 2,955 | 783 | 3,738 | |||||||
| Australia | 3,100 | 597 | 3,697 | |||||||
| France | 2,813 | 240 | 3,053 | |||||||
| Ireland | 1,988 | 641 | 2,629 | |||||||
| Switzerland | 1,724 | 589 | 2,313 |
(1) Cross-border outstandings included countries in which we do business, and which amounted to at least 1% of our consolidated total assets as of the dates indicated.
As of December 31, 2021, aggregate cross-border outstandings in France amounted to between 0.75% and 1% of our consolidated assets, at approximately $2.83 billion. As of December 31, 2020, aggregate cross-border outstandings in each of Switzerland and Ireland amounted to between 0.75% and 1% of our consolidated assets, at approximately $3.13 billion and $2.93 billion, respectively. As of December 31, 2019, aggregate cross-border outstandings in the Netherlands amounted to between 0.75% and 1% of our consolidated assets, at approximately $1.89 billion.
Risk Management
General
In the normal course of our global business activities, we are exposed to a variety of risks, some inherent in the financial services industry, others more specific to our business activities. Our risk management framework focuses on material risks, which include the following:
•credit and counterparty risk;
•liquidity risk, funding and management;
•operational risk;
•information technology risk;
•market risk associated with our trading activities;
•market risk associated with our non-trading activities, which we refer to as asset and liability management, and which consists primarily of interest rate risk;
•strategic risk;
•model risk; and
•reputational, fiduciary and business conduct risk.
Many of these risks, as well as certain factors underlying each of these risks that could affect our businesses and our consolidated financial statements, are discussed in detail under "Risk Factors" in this Form 10-K.
The scope of our business requires that we balance these risks with a comprehensive and well-integrated risk management function. The identification, assessment, monitoring, mitigation and reporting of risks are essential to our financial performance and successful management of our businesses. These risks, if not effectively managed, can result in losses to us as well as erosion of our capital and damage to our reputation. Our approach, including Board and senior management oversight and a system of policies, procedures, limits, risk measurement and monitoring and internal controls, allows for an assessment of risks within a framework for evaluating opportunities for the prudent use of capital that appropriately balances risk and return.
Our objective is to optimize our return while operating at a prudent level of risk. In support of this objective, we have instituted a risk appetite framework that aligns our business strategy and financial objectives with the level of risk that we are willing to incur.
Our risk management is based on the following major goals:
•A culture of risk awareness that extends across all of our business activities;
•The identification, classification and quantification of our material risks;
•The establishment of our risk appetite and associated limits and policies, and our compliance with these limits;
•The establishment of a risk management structure at the “top of the house” that enables the control and coordination of risk-taking across the business lines;
•The implementation of stress testing practices and a dynamic risk-assessment capability;
State Street Corporation | 83
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
•A direct link between risk and strategic-decision making processes and incentive compensation practices; and
•The overall flexibility to adapt to the ever-changing business and market conditions.
Our risk appetite framework outlines the quantitative limits and qualitative goals that define our risk appetite, as well as the responsibilities for measuring and monitoring risk against limits, and for reporting, escalating, approving and addressing exceptions. Our risk appetite framework is established by ERM, a corporate risk oversight group, in conjunction with the MRAC and the RC of the Board. The Board formally reviews and approves our risk appetite statement annually, or more frequently as required.
The risk appetite framework describes the level and types of risk that we are willing to accommodate in executing our business strategy, and also serves as a guide in setting risk limits across our business units. In addition to our risk appetite framework, we use stress testing as another important tool in our risk management practice. Additional information with respect to our stress testing process and practices is provided under “Capital” in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
Governance and Structure
We have an approach to risk management that involves all levels of management, from the Board and its committees, including its E&A Committee, RC, the HRC and Tech & Ops Committee, to each business unit and each employee. We allocate responsibility for risk oversight so that risk/return decisions are made at an appropriate level, and are subject to robust and effective review and challenge. Risk management is the responsibility of each employee, and is implemented through three lines of defense: the business units, which own and manage
the risks inherent in their business, are considered the first line of defense; ERM and other support functions, such as Compliance, Finance and Vendor Management, provide the second line of defense. Corporate Audit is the third line of defense, reports to the E&A committee of the Board and is independent from the business units, ERM and other corporate functions. Corporate Audit provides independent assurance to the Board over the design and operating effectiveness of internal key controls included within the risk management framework.
The responsibilities for effective review and challenge reside with senior managers, management oversight committees, Corporate Audit and, ultimately, the Board and its committees. While we believe that our risk management program is effective in managing the risks in our businesses, internal and external factors may create risks that cannot always be identified or anticipated.
Corporate-level risk committees provide focused oversight, and establish corporate standards and policies for specific risks, including credit, sovereign exposure, market, liquidity, operational, information technology as well as new business products, regulatory compliance and ethics, vendor risk and model risks. These committees have been delegated the responsibility to develop recommendations and remediation strategies to address issues that affect or have the potential to affect us.
We maintain a risk governance committee structure which serves as the formal governance mechanism through which we seek to undertake the consistent identification, management and mitigation of various risks facing us in connection with its business activities. This governance structure is enhanced and integrated through multi-disciplinary involvement, particularly through ERM. The following chart presents this structure.
State Street Corporation | 84
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| Management Risk Governance Committee Structure | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Executive Management Committees: | ||||||||
| Management Risk and Capital Committee (MRAC) | Business Conduct Committee (BCC) | Technology and Operational Risk Committee (TORC) | ||||||
| Risk Committees: | ||||||||
| Asset-Liability Committee (ALCO) | Credit and Market Risk Committee (CMRC) | Fiduciary Review Committee | Operational Risk Committee | Technology Risk Committee | ||||
| RRP Executive Review Board | Basel Oversight Committee (BOC) | New Business and Product Committee | Global Third Party and Outsourcing Risk Committee | Enterprise Continuity Steering Committee | ||||
| CCAR Steering Committee | Model Risk Committee (MRC) | Core Compliance and Ethics Committee | Executive Operations Management Committee | Enterprise Data Management Committee | ||||
| Country Risk Committee | SSGA Risk Committee | Legal Entity Oversight Committee | ||||||
| Regulatory Reporting Oversight Committee | Conduct Standards Committee |
State Street Corporation | 85
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Enterprise Risk Management
The goal of ERM is to ensure that risks are proactively identified, well-understood and prudently managed in support of our business strategy. ERM provides risk oversight, support and coordination to allow for the consistent identification, measurement and management of risks across business units separate from the business units' activities, and is responsible for the formulation and maintenance of corporate-wide risk management policies and guidelines. In addition, ERM establishes and reviews limits and, in collaboration with business unit management, monitors key risks. Ultimately, ERM works to validate that risk-taking occurs within the risk appetite statement approved by the Board and conforms to associated risk policies, limits and guidelines.
The Chief Risk Officer (CRO) is responsible for our risk management globally, leads ERM and has a dual reporting line to our CEO and the Board’s RC. ERM manages its responsibilities globally through a three-dimensional organization structure:
•“Vertical” business unit-aligned risk groups that support business managers with risk management, measurement and monitoring activities;
•“Horizontal” risk groups that monitor the risks that cross all of our business units (for example, credit and operational risk); and
•Risk oversight for international activities, which combines intersecting “Verticals” and “Horizontals” through a hub and spoke model to provide important regional and legal entity perspectives to the global risk framework.
Sitting on top of this three-dimensional organization structure is a centralized group responsible for the aggregation of risk exposures across the vertical, horizontal and regional dimensions, for consolidated reporting, for setting the corporate-level risk appetite framework and associated limits and policies, and for dynamic risk assessment across our business.
Board Committees
The Board has four committees which assist it in discharging its responsibilities with respect to risk management: the Risk Committee (RC), the Examining and Audit Committee (E&A Committee), the Human Resources Committee (HRC) and the Technology and Operations Committee (Tech & Ops Committee). Each of the principal committees of the Board has oversight of ESG matters within their respective scope of responsibilities, including climate-related matters.
The RC is responsible for oversight related to the operation of our global risk management framework, including policies and procedures
establishing risk management governance and processes and risk control infrastructure for our global operations. The RC is responsible for reviewing and discussing with management our assessment and management of all risks applicable to our operations, including credit, market, interest rate, liquidity, operational, regulatory, technology, business, compliance and reputation risks, and related policies.
In addition, the RC provides oversight of capital policies, capital planning and balance sheet management, resolution planning and monitors capital adequacy in relation to risk. The RC is also responsible for discharging the duties and obligations of the Board under applicable Basel and other regulatory requirements.
The E&A Committee oversees management's operation of our comprehensive system of internal controls covering the integrity of our consolidated financial statements and reports, compliance with laws, regulations and corporate policies. The E&A Committee acts on behalf of the Board in monitoring and overseeing the performance of Corporate Audit and in reviewing certain communications with banking regulators. The E&A Committee has direct responsibility for the appointment, compensation, retention, evaluation and oversight of the work of our independent registered public accounting firm, including sole authority for the establishment of pre-approval policies and procedures for all audit engagements and any non-audit engagements.
The HRC has direct responsibility for the oversight of human capital management, all compensation plans, policies and programs in which executive officers participate and incentive, retirement, welfare as well as equity plans in which certain of our other employees participate. In addition, the HRC oversees the alignment of our incentive compensation arrangements with our safety and soundness, including the integration of risk management objectives, and related policies, arrangements and control processes consistent with applicable related regulatory rules and guidance.
The Tech & Ops Committee leads and assists in the Board’s oversight of technology and operational risk management and the role of these risks in executing our strategy and supporting our global business requirements. The Tech & Ops Committee reviews strategic initiatives from a technology and operational risk perspective and reviews and approves technology-related risk matters. In addition, Tech & Ops Committee reviews matters related to corporate information security and cybersecurity programs, operational and technology resiliency, data and access management and third-party risk management.
State Street Corporation | 86
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Executive Management Committees
MRAC is the senior management decision-making body for risk and capital issues, and oversees our financial risks, our consolidated statement of condition, and our capital adequacy, liquidity and recovery and resolution planning. Its responsibilities include:
•The approval of the policies of our global risk, capital and liquidity management frameworks, including our risk appetite framework;
•The monitoring and assessment of our capital adequacy based on internal policies and regulatory requirements;
•The oversight of our firm-wide risk identification, model risk governance, stress testing and Recovery and Resolution Plan programs; and
•The ongoing monitoring and review of risks undertaken within the businesses, and our senior management oversight and approval of risk strategies and tactics.
MRAC is co-chaired by our CRO and Chief Financial Officer, who regularly present to the RC on developments in the risk environment and performance trends in our key business areas.
BCC provides oversight of our business conduct and culture risks and standards, our commitments to clients and others with whom we do business, and our potential reputational risks, on an enterprise-wide basis. Management considers adherence to high ethical standards to be critical to the success of our business and to our reputation. The BCC is co-chaired by our Chief Compliance Officer and our General Counsel.
TORC provides oversight of, and assesses the effectiveness of, corporate-wide technology and operational risk management programs, and reviews areas of improvement to manage and control technology and operational risk consistently across the organization. TORC is co-chaired by the Chief Operating Officer and the Chief Risk Officer.
Risk Committees
The following risk committees, under the oversight of the respective executive management committees, have focused responsibilities for oversight of specific areas of risk management:
Management Risk and Capital Committee
•ALCO is the senior corporate oversight and decision-making body for balance sheet strategy, Global Treasury business activities and risk management for interest rate risk, liquidity risk and non-trading market risk. ALCO’s roles and responsibilities are designed to be complementary to, and in
coordination with the MRAC, which approves the corporate risk appetite and associated balance sheet strategy;
•CMRC is the independent risk oversight and decision-making body for our credit, counterparty, and trading-related activities. The CMRC is responsible, as part of the second line of defense within ERM, for overseeing alignment of these activities with our appetite for risk and prevailing policy and guidelines. This committee also serves as a forum to discuss, address, and escalate material risk issues;
•BOC provides oversight and governance over Basel related regulatory requirements, assesses compliance with respect to Basel regulations and approves all material methodologies and changes, policies and reporting;
•The Recovery and Resolution Planning Executive Review Board oversees the development of recovery and resolution plans as required by banking regulators;
•MRC monitors the overall level of model risk and provides oversight of the model governance process pertaining to financial models, including the validation of key models and the ongoing monitoring of model performance. The MRC may also, as appropriate, mandate remedial actions and compensating controls to be applied to models to address modeling deficiencies as well as other issues identified;
•The CCAR Steering Committee provides primary supervision of the stress tests performed in conformity with the Federal Reserve's CCAR process and the Dodd-Frank Act, and is responsible for the overall management, review, and approval of all material assumptions, methodologies, and results of each stress scenario;
•The State Street Global Advisors Risk Committee is the most senior oversight and decision making committee for risk management within State Street Global Advisors; the committee is responsible for overseeing the alignment of State Street Global Advisors' strategy, and risk appetite, as well as alignment with our corporate-wide strategies and risk management standards; and
•The Country Risk Committee oversees the identification, assessment, monitoring, reporting and mitigation, where necessary, of country risks.
State Street Corporation | 87
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
•The Regulatory Reporting Oversight Committee is responsible for providing oversight of regulatory reporting and related report governance processes and accountabilities.
Business Conduct Committee
•The Fiduciary Review Committee reviews and assesses the fiduciary risk management programs of those units in which we serve in a fiduciary capacity;
•The New Business and Product Committee provides oversight of the evaluation of the risk inherent in proposed new products or services and new business, and extensions of existing products or services, evaluations including economic justification, material risk, compliance, regulatory and legal considerations, and capital and liquidity analyses;
•The Core Compliance and Ethics Committee provides review and oversight of our compliance programs, including our culture of compliance and high standards of ethical behavior;
•The Legal Entity Oversight Committee establishes standards with respect to the governance of our legal entities, monitors adherence to those standards, and oversees the ongoing evaluation of our legal entity structure, including the formation, maintenance and dissolution of legal entities; and
•The Conduct Standards Committee provides oversight of our enforcement of employee conduct standards.
Technology and Operational Risk Committee
•The Operational Risk Committee, along with the support of regional business or entity-specific working groups and committees, is responsible for oversight of our operational risk programs, including determining that the implementation of those programs is designed to identify, manage and control operational risk in an effective and consistent manner across the firm;
•The Technology Risk Committee is responsible for the global oversight, review and monitoring of operational, legal and regulatory compliance and reputational risk that may result in a significant change to our Information Technology risk profile or a material financial loss or reputational impact to global technology services. The Committee serves as a forum to provide regular reporting
to TORC and escalate technology risk and control issues to TORC, as appropriate;
•The Enterprise Continuity Steering Committee considers matters pertaining to continuity and related risks, including oversight in determining the direction of the continuity program;
•The Global Third Party and Outsourcing Risk Committee is responsible for overseeing a clear and transparent framework and effective processes for the identification, assessment, and ongoing management of third party and outsourcing-related risks. This committee is also a decision-making body for outsourcing strategy, third party risk acceptance, and the end-to-end third party management process, including the oversight of appropriate controls and risk mitigants that comply with applicable regulatory standards;
•The Executive Operations Management Committee is a forum for the development of strategy, decision-making, and escalation for operations, regulatory remediation, product management, technology, and the operating model; and
•The Enterprise Data Management Committee oversees the enterprise-wide data management strategy, provides independent oversight of the programs associated with enterprise-wide data management, serves as an escalation point for material and emerging enterprise-wide data management issues, and determines / oversees enterprise-wide data management priorities and strategy.
Credit Risk Management
Core Policies and Principles
We define credit risk as the risk of financial loss if a counterparty, borrower or obligor, collectively referred to as a counterparty, is either unable or unwilling to repay borrowings or settle a transaction in accordance with underlying contractual terms. We assume credit risk in our traditional non-trading lending activities, such as overdrafts, loans and contingent commitments, in our investment securities portfolio, where recourse to a counterparty exists, and in our direct and indirect trading activities, such as securities purchased under a resale agreement, principal securities lending and foreign exchange and indemnified agency securities lending. We also assume credit risk in our day-to-day treasury and securities and other settlement operations, in the form of deposit placements and other cash balances, with central banks or private sector institutions and fees receivables.
We distinguish between three major types of credit risk:
State Street Corporation | 88
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
•Default risk - the risk that a counterparty fails to meet its contractual payment obligations;
•Country risk - the risk that we may suffer a loss, in any given country, due to any of the following reasons: deterioration of economic conditions, political and social upheaval, nationalization and appropriation of assets, government repudiation of indebtedness, exchange controls and disruptive currency depreciation or devaluation; and
•Settlement risk - the risk that the settlement or clearance of transactions will fail, which arises whenever the exchange of cash, securities and/or other assets is not simultaneous.
The acceptance of credit risk by us is governed by corporate policies and guidelines, which include standardized procedures applied across the entire organization. These policies and guidelines include specific requirements related to each counterparty's risk profile; the markets served; counterparty, industry and country concentrations; and regulatory compliance. These policies and procedures also implement a number of core principles, which include the following:
•We measure and consolidate credit risks to each counterparty, or group of counterparties, in accordance with a “one-obligor” principle that aggregates risks across our business units;
•ERM reviews and approves all material extensions of credit, and material changes to such extensions of credit (such as changes in term, collateral structure or covenants), in accordance with assigned credit-approval authorities;
•Credit-approval authorities are assigned to individuals according to their qualifications, experience and training, and these authorities are periodically reviewed. Our largest exposures require approval by the Credit Committee, a sub-committee of the CMRC. With respect to small and low-risk extensions of credit to certain types of counterparties, approval authority may be granted to individuals outside of ERM;
•We seek to avoid or limit undue concentrations of risk. Counterparty (or groups of counterparties), industry, country and product-specific concentrations of risk are subject to frequent review and approval in accordance with our risk appetite;
•We determine the creditworthiness of counterparties through a detailed risk
assessment, including the use of internal risk-rating methodologies;
•We review all extensions of credit and the creditworthiness of counterparties at least annually. The nature and extent of these reviews are determined by the size, nature and term of the extensions of credit and the creditworthiness of the counterparty; and
•We subject all corporate policies and guidelines to annual review as an integral part of our periodic assessment of our risk appetite.
Our corporate policies and guidelines require that the business units which engage in activities that give rise to credit and counterparty risk comply with procedures that promote the extension of credit for legitimate business purposes; are consistent with the maintenance of proper credit standards; limit credit-related losses; and are consistent with our goal of maintaining a strong financial condition.
Structure and Organization
The Credit and Global Markets Risk group within ERM is responsible for the assessment, approval and monitoring of credit risk across our business. The group is managed centrally, has dedicated teams in a number of locations worldwide, and is responsible for related policies and procedures, and for our internal credit-rating systems and methodologies. In addition, the group, in conjunction with the business units, establishes measurements and limits to control the amount of credit risk accepted across its various business activities, both at the portfolio level and for each individual counterparty or group of counterparties, to individual sectors, and also to counterparties by product and country of risk. These measurements and limits are reviewed periodically, but at least annually.
In conjunction with other groups in ERM, the Credit and Global Markets Risk group is jointly responsible for the design, implementation and oversight of our credit risk measurement and management systems, including data and assessment systems, quantification systems and the reporting framework.
Various key committees within our company are responsible for the oversight of credit risk and associated credit risk policies, systems and models. All credit-related activities are governed by our risk appetite framework and our credit risk guidelines, which define our general philosophy with respect to credit risk and the manner in which we control, manage and monitor such risks.
The previously described CMRC (refer to "Risk Committees") has primary responsibility for the oversight, review and approval of the credit risk
State Street Corporation | 89
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
guidelines and policies. Credit risk guidelines and policies are reviewed periodically, but at least annually.
The Credit Committee, a sub-committee of the CMRC, has responsibility for assigning credit authority and approving the largest and higher-risk extensions of credit to individual counterparties or groups of counterparties.
CMRC provides periodic updates to MRAC and the Board's RC.
Credit Ratings
We perform initial and ongoing reviews to exercise due diligence on the creditworthiness of our counterparties when conducting any business with them or approving any credit limits.
This due diligence process generally includes the assignment of an internal credit rating, which is determined by the use of internally developed and validated methodologies, scorecards and a 15-grade rating scale. This risk-rating process incorporates the use of risk-rating tools in conjunction with management judgment; qualitative and quantitative inputs are captured in a replicable manner and, following a formal review and approval process, an internal credit rating based on our rating scale is assigned. We generally rate our counterparties individually, although some counterparties defined by us as low-risk are rated on a pooled basis. Credit ratings are reviewed and approved by the Credit and Global Markets Risk group or its delegates. We evaluate and rate the credit risk of our counterparties on an ongoing basis. To facilitate comparability across the portfolio, counterparties within a given sector are rated using a risk-rating tool developed for that sector.
Our risk-rating methodologies are approved for use by the Portfolio Risk Committee, a subcommittee of the CMRC, after completion of internal model validation processes, and are subject to an annual review, including re-validation.
Risk Parameter Estimates
Our internal risk-rating system promotes a clear and consistent approach to the determination of appropriate credit risk classifications for our credit counterparties and exposures, tracking the changes in risk associated with these counterparties and exposures over time. This capability enhances our ability to more accurately calculate both risk exposures and capital, enabling better strategic decision making across the organization.
More specifically, our internal risk rating system is used for the following purposes:
•The assessment of the creditworthiness of new counterparties and, in conjunction with our risk appetite statement, the development
of appropriate credit limits for our products and services, including loans, foreign exchange, securities finance, placements and repurchase agreements;
•The automation of limit approvals for certain low-risk counterparties, as defined in our credit risk guidelines, based on the counterparty’s probability-of-default;
•The development of approval authority matrices based on PD; riskier counterparties with higher PDs require higher levels of approval for a comparable PD and limit size compared to less risky counterparties with lower PDs;
•The analysis of risk concentration trends using historical PD and exposure-at-default (or EAD), data;
•The determination of the level of management review of short-duration advances depending on PD; riskier counterparties with higher rating class values generally trigger higher levels of management escalation for comparable short-duration advances compared to less risky counterparties with lower rating-class values;
•The monitoring of credit facility utilization levels using EAD values and the identification of instances where counterparties have exceeded limits;
•The aggregation and comparison of counterparty exposures with risk appetite levels to determine if businesses are maintaining appropriate risk levels; and
•The determination of our regulatory capital requirements for the AIRB set forth in the Basel framework.
Credit Risk Mitigation
We seek to limit our credit exposure and reduce any potential credit losses through the use of various types of credit risk mitigation. The Basel III final rule permits us to reflect the application of credit risk mitigation when it meets the standards outlined therein. Examples of forms of credit risk mitigation include collateral, netting, guarantees and secured interest in non-financial assets. Where possible, we apply the recognition of collateral, guarantees and secured interest over non-financial assets to mitigate overall risk within our counterparty credit portfolio. While credit default swaps are permitted under the Basel III final rule, we do not actively use credit default swaps as a risk mitigation tool.
State Street Corporation | 90
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Collateral
In many parts of our business, we regularly require or agree for collateral to be received from or provided to clients and counterparties in connection with contracts that incur credit risk. In our trading businesses, this collateral is typically in the form of cash, as well as highly-rated and/or liquid securities (i.e. government securities and other bonds or equity securities). Credit risks in our non-trading and securities finance businesses are also often secured by bonds and equity securities and by other types of assets. Collateral serves to reduce the risk of loss inherent in an exposure. However, changing market values of the collateral we hold, unexpected increases in the credit exposure to a client or counterparty, reductions in the value or change in the type of securities held by us, as well as operational errors or errors in the manner in which we seek to exercise our rights, may reduce the risk mitigation effects of collateral or result in other security interests not being effective to reduce potential credit exposure. While collateral is often an alternative source of repayment, it does not replace the requirement within our policies and guidelines for high-quality underwriting standards. We also may choose to incur credit exposure without the benefit of collateral or other risk mitigating credits rights.
Our credit risk guidelines require that the collateral we accept for risk mitigation purposes is of high quality, can be reliably valued and is supported by a valid security interest that permits liquidation if or when required. Generally, when collateral is of lower quality, more difficult to value or more challenging to liquidate, higher discounts to market values are applied for the purposes of measuring credit risk. For certain less liquid collateral, longer liquidation periods are assumed when determining the credit exposure.
All types of collateral are assessed regularly by ERM, as is the basis on which the collateral is valued. Our assessment of collateral, including the ability to liquidate collateral in the event of a counterparty default, and also with regard to market values of collateral under a variety of hypothetical market conditions, is an integral component of our assessment of risk and approval of credit limits. We also seek to identify, limit and monitor instances of "wrong-way" risk, where a counterparty’s risk of default is positively correlated with the risk of our collateral eroding in value.
We maintain policies and procedures requiring that documentation used to collateralize a transaction is legal, valid, binding and enforceable in the relevant jurisdictions. We also conduct legal reviews to assess whether our documentation meets these standards on an ongoing basis.
Netting
Netting is a mechanism that allows institutions and counterparties to net offsetting exposures and payment obligations against one another through the use of qualifying master netting agreements. A master netting agreement allows for certain rights and remedies upon a counterparty default, including the right to net obligations arising under derivatives or other transactions under such agreement. In such an event, the netting of obligations would result in a single net claim owed by, or to, the counterparty. This is commonly referred to as "close-out netting,” and is pursued wherever possible. We may also enter into master agreements that allow for the netting of amounts payable on a given day and in the same currency, reducing our settlement risk. This is commonly referred to as “payment netting,” and is widely used in our foreign exchange activities.
As with collateral, we have policies and procedures in place to apply close-out and payment netting only to the extent that we have verified legal validity and enforceability of the master agreement. In the case of payment netting, operational constraints may preclude us from reducing settlement risk, notwithstanding the legal right to require the same under the master netting agreement. In the event we become unable, due to operational constraints, actions by regulators, changes in accounting principles, law or regulation (or related interpretations) or other factors, to net some or all of our offsetting exposures and payment obligations under those agreements, we would be required to gross up our assets and liabilities on our statement of condition and our calculation of RWA, accordingly. This would result in a potentially material change in our regulatory ratios, including LCR, and present increased credit, liquidity, asset-and-liability management and operational risks, some of which could be material.
Guarantees
A guarantee is a financial instrument that results in credit support being provided by a third party, (i.e., the protection provider) to the underlying obligor (the beneficiary of the provided protection) on account of an exposure owing by the obligor. The protection provider may support the underlying exposure either in whole or in part. Support of this kind may take different forms. Typical forms of guarantees provided to us include financial guarantees, letters of credit, bankers’ acceptances, purchase undertaking agreement contracts and insurance.
We have established a review process to evaluate guarantees under the applicable requirements of our policies and Basel III requirements. Governance for this evaluation is covered under policies and procedures that require regular reviews of documentation, jurisdictions and credit quality of protection providers.
State Street Corporation | 91
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Credit Limits
Central to our philosophy for our management of credit risk is the approval and imposition of credit limits, against which we monitor the actual and potential future credit exposure arising from our business activities with counterparties or groups of counterparties. Credit limits are a reflection of our risk appetite, which may be determined by the creditworthiness of the counterparty, the nature of the risk inherent in the business undertaken with the counterparty, or a combination of relevant credit factors. Our risk appetite for certain sectors and certain countries and geographic regions may also influence the level of risk we are willing to assume to certain counterparties.
The analysis and approval of credit limits is undertaken in a consistent manner across our businesses, although the nature and extent of the analysis may vary, based on the type, term and magnitude of the risk being assumed. Credit limits and underlying exposures are assessed and measured on both a gross and net basis where appropriate, with net exposure determined by deducting the value of any collateral held. For certain types of risk being assumed, we will also assess and measure exposures under a variety of hypothetical market conditions. Credit limit approvals across our business are undertaken by the Credit and Global Markets Risk group, by individuals to whom credit authority has been delegated, or by the Credit Committee.
Credit limits are re-evaluated annually, or more frequently as needed, and are revised periodically on prevailing and anticipated market conditions, changes in counterparty or country-specific credit ratings and outlook, changes in our risk appetite for certain counterparties, sectors or countries, and enhancements to the measurement of credit utilization.
Reporting
Ongoing active monitoring and management of our credit risk is an integral part of our credit risk management framework. We maintain management information systems to identify, measure, monitor and report credit risk across businesses and legal entities, enabling ERM and our businesses to have timely access to accurate information on credit limits and exposures. Monitoring is performed along the dimensions of counterparty, industry, country and product-specific risks to facilitate the identification of concentrations of risk and emerging trends.
Key aspects of this credit risk reporting structure include governance and oversight groups and policies that define standards for the reporting of credit risk, data aggregation and sourcing systems.
The Credit and Global Markets Risk group routinely assesses the composition of our overall credit risk portfolio for alignment with our stated risk appetite. This assessment includes routine analysis and reporting of the portfolio, monitoring of market-based indicators, the assessment of industry trends and developments and regular reviews of concentrated risks. The Credit and Global Markets Risk group is also responsible, in conjunction with the business units, for defining the appetite for credit risk in the major sectors in which we have a concentration of business activities. These sector-level risk appetite statements, which include counterparty selection criteria and granular underwriting guidelines, are reviewed periodically and approved by the CMRC.
Monitoring
Regular surveillance of credit and counterparty risks is undertaken by our business units, the Credit and Global Markets Risk group and designees with ERM, allowing for frequent and extensive oversight. This surveillance process includes, but is not limited to, the following components:
•Annual Reviews. A formal review of counterparties is conducted at least annually and includes a thorough review of operating performance, primary risk factors and our internal credit risk rating. This annual review also includes a review of current and proposed credit limits, an assessment of our ongoing risk appetite and verification that supporting legal documentation remains effective.
•Interim Monitoring. Monitoring of our largest and riskiest counterparties is undertaken more frequently, utilizing financial information, market indicators and other relevant credit and performance measures. The nature and extent of this interim monitoring is individually tailored to certain counterparties and/or industry sectors to identify material changes to the risk profile of a counterparty (or group of counterparties) and assign an updated internal risk rating in a timely manner.
We maintain an active "watch list" for all counterparties. The watch list status denotes a concern with some aspect of a counterparty's risk profile that warrants closer monitoring of the counterparty's financial performance and related risk factors. Our ongoing monitoring processes are designed to facilitate the early identification of counterparties whose creditworthiness is deteriorating; any counterparty may be placed on the watch list by ERM at its sole discretion.
Counterparties on the watch list generally correspond with the non-investment grade or near
State Street Corporation | 92
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
non-investment grade ratings established by the major independent credit-rating agencies. The watch list also includes any counterparties rated “Special Mention,” “Substandard,” “Doubtful” and “Loss.”
The Credit and Global Markets Risk group maintains primary responsibility for our watch list processes, and generates a quarterly report of all watch list counterparties. The watch list is formally reviewed at least on a quarterly basis, with participation from senior ERM staff, and representatives from the business units and our corporate finance and legal groups as appropriate. These meetings include a review of individual watch list counterparties, together with credit limits and prevailing exposures, and are focused on actions to contain, reduce or eliminate the risk of loss to us. Identified actions are documented and monitored.
Controls
GCR provides a separate level of surveillance and oversight over the integrity of our credit risk management processes, including the internal risk-rating system. GCR reviews counterparty credit ratings for all identified sectors on an ongoing basis. GCR is subject to oversight by the CMRC, and provides periodic updates to the Board’s RC.
Specific activities of GCR include the following:
•Perform separate and objective assessments of our credit and counterparty exposures to determine the nature and extent of risk undertaken by the business units;
•Execute periodic credit process and credit product reviews to assess the quality of credit analysis, compliance with policies, guidelines and relevant regulation, transaction structures and underwriting standards, and risk-rating integrity;
•Identify and monitor developing counterparty, market and/or industry sector trends to limit risk of loss and protect capital;
•Deliver regular and formal reporting to stakeholders, including exam results, identified issues and the status of requisite actions to remedy identified deficiencies;
•Allocate resources for specialized risk assessments (on an as-needed basis); and
•Liaise with assurance partners and regulatory personnel on matters relating to risk rating, reporting and measurement.
Allowance for Credit Losses
We maintain an allowance for credit losses to support our financial assets held at amortized cost. We also maintain an allowance for unfunded commitments and letters of credit to support our off-
balance sheet credit exposure. The two components together represent the Allowance for Credit Losses. Review and evaluation of the adequacy of the Allowance for Credit Losses is ongoing throughout the year, but occurs at least quarterly, and is based, among other factors, on our evaluation of the level of risk in the portfolio and the estimated effects of our forecasts on our counterparty risk. We utilize multiple economic scenarios, consisting of a baseline, upside and downside scenarios, to develop management's forecast of expected losses.
The economic forecast utilized throughout 2021 reflects observed and expected improvements in both credit quality and economic outlook. Allowance estimates remain subject to continued model and economic uncertainty and management may use qualitative adjustments. If future data and forecasts deviate relative to the forecasts utilized to determine our allowance for credit losses as of December 31, 2021, or if credit risk migration is higher or lower than forecasted for reasons independent of the economic forecast, our allowance for credit losses will also change.
Additional information about the allowance for credit losses is provided in Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Liquidity Risk Management
Our liquidity framework contemplates areas of potential risk based on our activities, size and other appropriate risk-related factors. In managing liquidity risk we employ limits, maintain established metrics and early warning indicators and perform routine stress testing to identify potential liquidity needs. This process involves the evaluation of a combination of internal and external scenarios which assist us in measuring our liquidity position and in identifying potential increases in cash needs or decreases in available sources of cash, as well as the potential impairment of our ability to access the global capital markets.
We manage our liquidity on a global, consolidated basis. We also manage liquidity on a stand-alone basis at our Parent Company, as well as at certain branches and subsidiaries of State Street Bank. State Street Bank generally has access to markets and funding sources limited to banks, such as the federal funds market and the Federal Reserve's discount window. The Parent Company is managed to a more conservative liquidity profile, reflecting narrower market access. Additionally, the Parent Company typically holds, or has direct access to, primarily through SSIF, a direct subsidiary of the Parent Company, and the support agreement, as discussed in "Supervision and Regulation" in Business in this Form 10-K, enough cash to meet its current debt maturities and cash needs, as well as those projected over the next one-year period. Absent
State Street Corporation | 93
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
financial distress at the Parent Company, the liquid assets available at SSIF continue to be available to the Parent Company. As of December 31, 2021, the value of our Parent Company's net liquid assets totaled $482 million, compared with $492 million as of December 31, 2020, which amount does not include available liquidity through SSIF. As of December 31, 2021, our Parent Company and State Street Bank had no senior notes or subordinated debentures outstanding that will mature in the next twelve months.
As a SIFI, our liquidity risk management activities are subject to heightened and evolving regulatory requirements, including interpretations of those requirements, under specific U.S. and international regulations and also resulting from published and unpublished guidance, supervisory activities, such as stress tests, resolution planning, examinations and other regulatory interactions. Satisfaction of these requirements could, in some cases, result in changes in the composition of our investment portfolio, reduced NII or NIM, a reduction in the level of certain business activities or modifications to the way in which we deliver our products and services. If we fail to meet regulatory requirements to the satisfaction of our regulators, we could receive negative regulatory stress test results, incur a resolution plan deficiency or determination of a non-credible resolution plan or otherwise receive an adverse regulatory finding. Our efforts to satisfy, or our failure to satisfy, these regulatory requirements could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Governance
Global Treasury is responsible for our management of liquidity. This includes the day-to-day management of our global liquidity position, the development and monitoring of early warning indicators, key liquidity risk metrics, the creation and execution of stress tests, the evaluation and implementation of regulatory requirements, the maintenance and execution of our liquidity guidelines and contingency funding plan (CFP), and routine management reporting to ALCO, MRAC and the Board's RC.
Global Treasury Risk Management, part of ERM, provides separate oversight over the identification, communication and management of Global Treasury’s risks in support of our business strategy. Global Treasury Risk Management reports to the CRO. Global Treasury Risk Management’s responsibilities relative to liquidity risk management include the development and review of policies and guidelines; the monitoring of limits related to adherence to the liquidity risk guidelines and associated reporting.
Liquidity Framework
Our liquidity framework contemplates areas of potential risk based on our activities, size and other appropriate risk-related factors. In managing liquidity risk we employ limits, maintain established metrics and early warning indicators, and perform routine stress testing to identify potential liquidity needs. This process involves the evaluation of a combination of internal and external scenarios which assist us in measuring our liquidity position and in identifying potential increases in cash needs or decreases in available sources of cash, as well as the potential impairment of our ability to access the global capital markets.
We manage liquidity according to several principles that are equally important to our overall liquidity risk management framework:
•Structural liquidity management addresses liquidity by monitoring and directing the composition of our consolidated statement of condition. Structural liquidity is measured by metrics such as the percentage of total wholesale funds to consolidated total assets, and the percentage of non-government investment securities to client deposits. In addition, on a regular basis and as described below, our structural liquidity is evaluated under various stress scenarios.
•Tactical liquidity management addresses our day-to-day funding requirements and is largely driven by changes in our primary source of funding, which are client deposits. Fluctuations in client deposits may be supplemented with short-term borrowings, repurchase agreements, FHLB products and certificates of deposit.
•Stress testing and contingent funding planning are longer-term strategic liquidity risk management practices. Regular and ad hoc liquidity stress testing are performed under various severe but plausible scenarios at the consolidated level and at significant subsidiaries, including State Street Bank. These tests contemplate severe market and events specific to us under various time horizons and severities. Tests contemplate the impact of material changes in key funding sources, credit ratings, additional collateral requirements, contingent uses of funding, systemic shocks to the financial markets and operational failures based on market and assumptions specific to us. The stress tests evaluate the required level of funding versus available sources in an adverse environment. As stress testing contemplates potential forward-looking scenarios, results also serve
State Street Corporation | 94
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
as a trigger to activate specific liquidity stress levels and contingent funding actions.
CFPs are designed to assist senior management with decision-making associated with any contingency funding response to a possible or actual crisis scenario. The CFPs define roles, responsibilities and management actions to be taken in the event of deterioration of our liquidity profile caused by either an event specific to us or a broader disruption in the capital markets. Specific actions are linked to the level of stress indicated by these measures or by management judgment of market conditions.
Liquidity Risk Metrics
In managing our liquidity, we employ early warning indicators and metrics. Early warning indicators are intended to detect situations which may result in a liquidity stress, including changes in our common stock price and the spread on our long-term debt. Additional metrics that are critical to the management of our consolidated statement of condition and monitored as part of our routine liquidity management include measures of our fungible cash position, purchased wholesale funds, unencumbered liquid assets, deposits and the total of investment securities and loans as a percentage of total client deposits.
Asset Liquidity
Central to the management of our liquidity is asset liquidity, which consists primarily of HQLA. HQLA is the amount of liquid assets that qualify for inclusion in the LCR. As a banking organization, we are subject to a minimum LCR under the LCR rule approved by U.S. banking regulators. The LCR is intended to promote the short-term resilience of internationally active banking organizations, like us, to improve the banking industry's ability to absorb shocks arising from market stress over a 30 calendar day period and improve the measurement and management of liquidity risk. The LCR measures an institution’s HQLA against its net cash outflows. HQLA primarily consists of unencumbered cash and certain high quality liquid securities that qualify for inclusion under the LCR rule. We report LCR to the Federal Reserve daily. For the quarters ended December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, daily average LCR for the Parent Company was 105% and 108%, respectively, with the lower daily average LCR for the quarter ended December 31, 2021 driven primarily by higher deposits. The Parent Company LCR does not benefit from the increase in higher deposits as their HQLA is partially restricted by a cap on the HQLA from State Street Bank and Trust under the U.S. LCR final rule as it prohibits the upstreaming of liquidity to the Parent Company under stress. The average HQLA for the Parent Company under the LCR final rule definition was $159.36 billion and $143.61 billion, post-prescribed haircuts, for the
quarters ended December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, respectively. The increase in average HQLA for the quarter ended December 31, 2021, compared to the quarter ended December 31, 2020, was primarily due to a higher level of client deposits. For the quarter ended December 31, 2021, LCR for State Street Bank and Trust was approximately 129%. State Street Bank and Trust's LCR is higher than the Parent Company's LCR, primarily due to application of the transferability restriction in the LCR final rule to the calculation of the Parent Company's LCR. This restriction limits the HQLA used in the calculation of the Parent Company's LCR to the amount of net cash outflows of its principal banking subsidiary (State Street Bank and Trust). This transferability restriction does not apply in the calculation of State Street Bank and Trust's LCR, and therefore State Street Bank and Trust's LCR reflects the benefit of all of its HQLA holdings.
We maintained average cash balances in excess of regulatory requirements governing deposits with the Federal Reserve of approximately $83.48 billion at the Federal Reserve, the ECB and other non-U.S. central banks for the quarter ended December 31, 2021, and $75.68 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2020. The higher levels of average cash balances with central banks reflect higher levels of client deposits.
Liquid securities carried in our asset liquidity include securities pledged without corresponding advances from the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston (FRBB), the FHLB, and other non-U.S. central banks. State Street Bank is a member of the FHLB. This membership allows for advances of liquidity in varying terms against high-quality collateral, which helps facilitate asset-and-liability management. As of December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, we had no outstanding borrowings from the FHLB.
Access to primary, intra-day and contingent liquidity provided by these utilities is an important source of contingent liquidity with utilization subject to underlying conditions. As of December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, we had no outstanding primary credit borrowings from the FRBB discount window or any other central bank facility.
In addition to the securities included in our asset liquidity, we have significant amounts of other unencumbered investment securities. These securities are available sources of liquidity, although not as rapidly deployed as those included in our asset liquidity.
The average fair value of total unencumbered securities was $99.47 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2021, compared to $89.12 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2020.
State Street Corporation | 95
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Measures of liquidity include LCR and NSFR, which are described in "Supervision and Regulation" in Business in this Form 10-K.
Uses of Liquidity
Significant uses of our liquidity could result from the following: withdrawals of client deposits; draw-downs by our custody clients of lines of credit; advances to clients to settle securities transactions; increases in our investment and loan portfolios; or other permitted purposes. Such circumstances would generally arise under stress conditions including deterioration in credit ratings. A recurring use of our liquidity involves our deployment of HQLA from our investment portfolio to post collateral to financial institutions serving as sources of securities under our enhanced custody program.
We had unfunded commitments to extend credit with gross contractual amounts totaling $33.03 billion and $34.21 billion and standby letters of credit totaling $3.24 billion and $3.33 billion as of December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, respectively. These amounts do not reflect the value of any collateral. As of December 31, 2021, approximately 76% of our unfunded commitments to extend credit and 43% of our standby letters of credit expire within one year. Since many of our commitments are expected to expire or renew without being drawn upon, the gross contractual amounts do not necessarily represent our future cash requirements.
Information about our resolution planning and the impact actions under our resolution plans could have on our liquidity is provided in "Supervision and Regulation" in Business in this Form 10-K.
Funding
Deposits
We provide products and services including custody, accounting, administration, daily pricing, FX services, cash management, financial asset management, securities finance and investment advisory services. As a provider of these products and services, we generate client deposits, which have generally provided a stable, low-cost source of funds. As a global custodian, clients place deposits with our entities in various currencies. As of both December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, approximately 65% of our average total deposit balances were denominated in U.S. dollars, approximately 15% in EUR, 10% in GBP and 10% in all other currencies.
Short-Term Funding
Our on-balance sheet liquid assets are also an integral component of our liquidity management strategy. These assets provide liquidity through maturities of the assets, but more importantly, they provide us with the ability to raise funds by pledging the securities as collateral for borrowings or through outright sales. In addition, our access to the global capital markets gives us the ability to source incremental funding from wholesale investors. As discussed earlier under “Asset Liquidity,” State Street Bank's membership in the FHLB allows for advances of liquidity with varying terms against high-quality collateral.
Short-term secured funding also comes in the form of securities lent or sold under agreements to repurchase. These transactions are short-term in nature, generally overnight and are collateralized by high-quality investment securities. These balances were $1.58 billion and $3.41 billion as of December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, respectively.
State Street Bank currently maintains a line of credit with a financial institution of CAD $1.40 billion, or approximately $1.11 billion, as of December 31, 2021, to support its Canadian securities processing operations. The line of credit has no stated termination date and is cancellable by either party with prior notice. As of both December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, there was no balance outstanding on this line of credit.
Long-Term Funding
We have the ability to issue debt and equity securities under our current universal shelf registration statement to meet current commitments and business needs, including accommodating the transaction and cash management needs of our clients. The total amount remaining for issuance under the registration statement is $3.75 billion as of December 31, 2021. In addition, State Street Bank also has current authorization from the Board to issue up to $5 billion in unsecured senior debt.
On March 3, 2021, we issued $850 million aggregate principal amount of 2.200% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2031.
In September 2021, we completed a public offering of approximately 21.7 million shares of our common stock to provide partial funding for our $3.5 billion planned acquisition of the BBH Investor Services business. The offering price was $87.60 per share and net proceeds totaled approximately $1.9 billion.
On November 18, 2021, we issued $500 million aggregate principal amount of 1.684% Fixed-to-Floating Rate Senior Notes due 2027.
State Street Corporation | 96
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Agency Credit Ratings
Our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment grade ratings as measured by the major independent credit rating agencies. Factors essential to maintaining high credit ratings include:
•diverse and stable core earnings;
•relative market position;
•strong risk management;
•strong capital ratios;
•diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and client deposits;
•strong liquidity monitoring procedures; and
•preparedness for current or future regulatory developments.
High ratings limit borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by:
•providing assurance for unsecured funding and depositors;
•increasing the potential market for our debt and improving our ability to offer products;
•serving markets; and
•engaging in transactions in which clients value high credit ratings.
A downgrade or reduction of our credit ratings could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity by restricting our ability to access the capital markets, which could increase the related cost of funds. In turn, this could cause the sudden and large-scale withdrawal of unsecured deposits by our clients, which could lead to draw-downs of unfunded commitments to extend credit or trigger requirements under securities purchase commitments; or require additional collateral or force terminations of certain trading derivative contracts.
A majority of our derivative contracts have been entered into under bilateral agreements with counterparties who may require us to post collateral or terminate the transactions based on changes in our credit ratings. We assess the impact of these arrangements by determining the collateral that would be required assuming a downgrade by all rating agencies. The additional collateral or termination payments related to our net derivative liabilities under these arrangements that could have been called by counterparties in the event of a downgrade in our credit ratings below levels specified in the agreements is provided in Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K. Other funding sources, such as secured financing transactions and other margin requirements, for which there are no explicit triggers, could also be adversely affected.
| TABLE 31: CREDIT RATINGS | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2021 | |||||
| Standard & Poor’s | Moody’s Investors Service | Fitch | |||
| State Street: | |||||
| Senior debt | A | A1 | AA- | ||
| Subordinated debt | A- | A2 | A | ||
| Junior subordinated debt | BBB | A3 | NR | ||
| Preferred stock | BBB | Baa1 | BBB+ | ||
| Outlook | Stable | Stable | Stable | ||
| State Street Bank: | |||||
| Short-term deposits | A-1+ | P-1 | F1+ | ||
| Long-term deposits | AA- | Aa1 | AA+ | ||
| Senior debt/Long-term issuer | AA- | Aa3 | AA | ||
| Subordinated debt | A | Aa3 | A+ | ||
| Outlook | Stable | Stable | Stable |
State Street Corporation | 97
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Contractual Cash Obligations and Other Commitments
The long-term contractual cash obligations included within Table 32: Long-Term Contractual Cash Obligations were recorded in our consolidated statement of condition as of December 31, 2021, except for the interest portions of long-term debt and finance leases.
| TABLE 32: LONG-TERM CONTRACTUAL CASH OBLIGATIONS | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2021 | Payments Due by Period | |||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Less than 1 year | 1-3 years | 4-5 years | Over 5 years | Total | |||||||||||||
| Long-term debt(1)(2) | $ | — | $ | 5,131 | $ | 3,816 | $ | 4,364 | $ | 13,311 | ||||||||
| Operating leases | 158 | 257 | 172 | 162 | 749 | |||||||||||||
| Finance lease obligations(2) | 71 | 89 | 10 | — | 170 | |||||||||||||
| Tax liability | — | 35 | 27 | — | 62 | |||||||||||||
| Total contractual cash obligations | $ | 229 | $ | 5,512 | $ | 4,025 | $ | 4,526 | $ | 14,292 |
(1) Long-term debt excludes finance lease obligations (presented as a separate line item) and the effect of interest rate swaps. Interest payments were calculated at the stated rate with the exception of floating-rate debt, for which payments were calculated using the indexed rate in effect as of December 31, 2021.
(2) Additional information about contractual cash obligations related to long-term debt and operating and finance leases is provided in Notes 9 and 20 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Total contractual cash obligations shown in Table 32: Long-Term Contractual Cash Obligations do not include:
•Obligations which will be settled in cash, primarily in less than one year, such as client deposits, federal funds purchased, securities sold under repurchase agreements and other short-term borrowings. Additional information about deposits, federal funds purchased, securities sold under repurchase agreements and other short-term borrowings is provided in Note 8 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
•Obligations related to derivative instruments because the derivative-related amounts recorded in our consolidated statement of condition as of December 31, 2021 did not represent the amounts that may ultimately be paid under the contracts upon settlement. Additional information about our derivative instruments is provided in Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K. We have obligations under pension and other post-retirement benefit plans, with additional information provided in Note 19 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K, which are not included in Table 32: Long-Term Contractual Cash Obligations.
| TABLE 33: OTHER COMMERCIAL COMMITMENTS | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duration of Commitment as of December 31, 2021 | ||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Less than 1 year | 1-3 years | 4-5 years | Over 5 years | Total amountscommitted(1) | |||||||||||||
| Indemnified securities financing | $ | 385,740 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 385,740 | ||||||||
| Unfunded credit facilities | 22,082 | 6,410 | 4,252 | 282 | 33,026 | |||||||||||||
| Standby letters of credit | 1,377 | 1,287 | 573 | — | 3,237 | |||||||||||||
| Purchase obligations(2) | 86 | 158 | 114 | 15 | 373 | |||||||||||||
| Total commercial commitments | $ | 409,285 | $ | 7,855 | $ | 4,939 | $ | 297 | $ | 422,376 |
(1) Total amounts committed reflect participations to independent third parties, if any.
(2) Amounts represent obligations pursuant to legally binding agreements, where we have agreed to purchase products or services with a specific minimum quantity defined at a fixed, minimum or variable price over a specified period of time.
Additional information about the commitments presented in Table 33: Other commercial commitments, except for purchase obligations, is provided in Note 12 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 98
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Operational Risk Management
Overview
Operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people and systems or from external events. Operational risk encompasses fiduciary risk and legal risk. Fiduciary risk is defined as the risk that we fail to properly exercise our fiduciary duties in our provision of products or services to clients. Legal risk is the risk of loss resulting from failure to comply with laws and contractual obligations.
Operational risk is inherent in the performance of investment servicing and investment management activities on behalf of our clients. Whether it be fiduciary risk, risk associated with execution and processing or other types of operational risk, a consistent, transparent and effective operational risk framework is key to identifying, monitoring and managing operational risk.
We have established an operational risk framework that is based on three major goals:
•Strong, active governance;
•Ownership and accountability; and
•Consistency and transparency.
Governance
Our Board is responsible for the approval and oversight of our overall operational risk framework. It does so through its TOPS, which reviews our operational risk framework and approves our operational risk policy annually.
Our operational risk policy establishes our approach to our management of operational risk across our business. The policy identifies the responsibilities of individuals and committees charged with oversight of the management of operational risk, and articulates a broad mandate that supports implementation of the operational risk framework.
ERM and other control groups provide the oversight, validation and verification of the management and measurement of operational risk.
Executive management actively manages and oversees our operational risk framework through membership on various risk management committees, including MRAC, the BCC, TORC, the Operational Risk Committee, the Executive Information Security Steering Committee, the Enterprise Continuity Steering Committee, the Compliance and Ethics Committee, the Vendor Management Lifecycle Executive Review Board and the Fiduciary Review Committee, all of which ultimately report to the appropriate committee of the Board.
The Operational Risk Committee, chaired by the global head of Operational Risk, provides cross-business oversight of operational risk, operational risk programs and their implementation to identify, measure, manage and control operational risk in an effective and consistent manner and reviews and approves operational risk guidelines intended to maintain a consistent implementation of our corporate operational risk policy and framework.
Ownership and Accountability
We have implemented our operational risk framework to support the broad mandate established by our operational risk policy. This framework represents an integrated set of processes and tools that assists us in the management and measurement of operational risk, including our calculation of required capital and RWA.
The framework takes a comprehensive view and integrates the methods and tools used to manage and measure operational risk. The framework utilizes aspects of the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) framework and other industry leading practices, and is designed foremost to address our risk management needs while complying with regulatory requirements. The operational risk framework is intended to provide a number of important benefits, including:
•A common understanding of operational risk management and its supporting processes;
•The clarification of responsibilities for the management of operational risk across our business;
•The alignment of business priorities with risk management objectives;
•The active management of risk and early identification of emerging risks;
•The consistent application of policies and the collection of data for risk management and measurement; and
•The estimation of our operational risk capital requirement.
The operational risk framework employs a distributed risk management infrastructure executed by ERM groups aligned with the business units, which are responsible for the implementation of the operational risk framework at the business unit level.
As with other risks, senior business unit management is responsible for the day-to-day operational risk management of their respective businesses. It is business unit management's responsibility to provide oversight of the implementation and ongoing execution of the operational risk framework within their respective
State Street Corporation | 99
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
organizations, as well as coordination and communication with ERM.
Consistency and Transparency
A number of corporate control functions are directly responsible for implementing and assessing various aspects of our operational risk framework, with the overarching goal of consistency and transparency to meet the evolving needs of the business:
•The global head of Operational Risk, a member of the CRO’s executive management team, leads ERM’s corporate ORM group. ORM is responsible for the strategy, evolution and consistent implementation of our operational risk guidelines, framework and supporting tools across our business. ORM reviews and analyzes operational key risk information, events, metrics and indicators at the business unit and corporate level for purposes of risk management, reporting and escalation to the CRO, senior management and governance committees;
•ERM’s Centralized Modeling and Analytics group develops and maintains operational risk capital estimation models, and ORM's Capital Analysis group calculates our required capital for operational risk;
•ERM’s MVG independently validates the quantitative models used to measure operational risk, and ORM performs validation checks on the output of the model;
•CIS establishes the framework, policies and related programs to measure, monitor and report on information security risks, including the effectiveness of cybersecurity program protections. CIS defines and manages the enterprise-wide information security program. CIS coordinates with Information Technology, control functions and business units to support the confidentiality, integrity and availability of corporate information assets. CIS identifies and employs a risk-based methodology consistent with applicable regulatory cybersecurity requirements and monitors the compliance of our systems with information security policies; and
•Corporate Audit performs separate reviews of the application of operational risk management practices and methodologies utilized across our business.
Our operational risk framework consists of five components, each described below, which provide a working structure that integrates distinct risk programs into a continuous process focused on
managing and measuring operational risk in a coordinated and consistent manner.
Risk Identification and Assessments
The objective of risk identification and assessments is to understand business unit strategy, risk profile and potential exposures. It is achieved through a series of risk assessments across our business using techniques for the identification, assessment and measurement of risk across a spectrum of potential frequency and severity combinations, including business-specific programs to identify, assess and measure risk, such as new business and product review and approval, new client screening, and, as deemed appropriate, targeted risk assessments. Two primary risk assessment programs, which occur annually, augmented by other business-specific programs, are the core of this component:
•The risk and control assessment program seeks to understand the risks associated with day-to-day activities, and the effectiveness of controls intended to manage potential exposures arising from these activities. These risks are typically frequent in nature but generally not severe in terms of exposure; and
•The Material Risk Identification process utilizes a bottom-up approach to identify our most significant risk exposures across all on- and off-balance sheet risk-taking activities. The program is specifically designed to consider risks that could have a material impact irrespective of their likelihood or frequency. This can include risks that may have an impact on longer-term business objectives, such as significant change management activities or long-term strategic initiatives.
Capital Analysis
The primary measurement tool used is an internally developed loss distribution approach (LDA) model. We use the LDA model to quantify required operational risk capital, from which we calculate RWA related to operational risk. Such required capital and RWA totaled $3.64 billion and $45.60 billion, respectively, as of December 31, 2021, compared to $3.53 billion and $44.15 billion, respectively, as of December 31, 2020; refer to the "Capital" section in "Financial Condition," of this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
The LDA model incorporates the three required operational risk elements described below:
•Internal loss event data is collected from across our business in conformity with our operating loss policy that establishes the
State Street Corporation | 100
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
requirements for collecting and reporting individual loss events. We categorize the data into seven Basel-defined event types and further subdivide the data by business unit, as deemed appropriate. Each of these loss events are represented in a UOM which is used to estimate a specific amount of capital required for the types of loss events that fall into each specific category. Some UOMs are measured at the corporate level because they are not “business specific,” such as damage to physical assets, where the cause of an event is not primarily driven by the behavior of a single business unit. Internal losses of $500 or greater are captured, analyzed and included in the modeling approach. Loss event data is collected using a corporate-wide data collection tool, Incident Capture and Management System (ICAMS), to support processes related to analysis, management reporting and the calculation of required capital. Internal loss event data provides our frequency and severity information to our capital calculation process for historical loss events experienced by us. Internal loss event data may be incorporated into our LDA model in a future quarter following the realization of the losses, with the timing and categorization dependent on the processes for model updates and, if applicable, model revalidation and regulatory review and related supervisory processes. An individual loss event can have a significant effect on the output of our LDA model and our operational risk RWA under the advanced approaches depending on the severity of the loss event, its categorization among the seven Basel-defined UOMs and the stability of the distributional approach for a particular UOM;
•External loss event data provides information with respect to loss event severity from other financial institutions to inform our capital estimation process of events in similar business units at other banking organizations. This information supplements the data pool available for use in our LDA model. Assessments of the sufficiency of internal data and the relevance of external data are completed before pooling the two data sources for use in our LDA model; and
•Business environment and internal control factors are gathered from internal loss event data and business-relevant metrics, such as risk assessment program results, along with industry loss event data and case studies where appropriate. Business environment
and internal control factors are those characteristics of a bank’s internal and external operating environment that bear an exposure to operational risk. The use of this information indirectly influences our calculation of required capital by providing additional relevant data to workshop participants when reviewing specific UOM risks.
Monitoring, Reporting and Analytics
The objective of risk monitoring is to proactively monitor the changing business environment and corresponding operational risk exposure. It is achieved through a series of quantitative and qualitative monitoring tools that are designed to allow us to understand changes in the business environment, internal control factors, risk metrics, risk assessments, exposures and operating effectiveness, as well as details of loss events and progress on risk initiatives implemented to mitigate potential risk exposures.
Operational risk reporting is intended to provide transparency, thereby enabling management to manage risk, provide oversight and escalate issues in a timely manner. It is designed to allow the business units, executive management, and the Board's control functions and committees to gain insight into activities that may result in risks and potential exposures. Reports are intended to identify business activities that are experiencing processing issues, whether or not they result in actual loss events. Reporting includes results of monitoring activities, internal and external examinations, regulatory reviews and control assessments. These elements combine in a manner designed to provide a view of potential and emerging risks facing us and information that details its progress on managing risks.
Effectiveness and Testing
The objective of effectiveness and testing is to verify that internal controls are designed appropriately, are consistent with corporate and regulatory standards, and are operating effectively. It is achieved through a series of assessments by both internal and external parties, independent registered public accounting firms, business self-assessments and other control function reviews, such as a Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) testing program.
Consistent with our standard model validation process, the operational risk LDA model is subject to a detailed review, overseen by the MRC. In addition, the model is subject to a rigorous internal governance process. All changes to the model or input parameters, and the deployment of model updates, are reviewed and approved by the Operational Risk Committee, which has oversight responsibility for the model, with technical input from the MRC.
State Street Corporation | 101
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Documentation and Guidelines
Documentation and guidelines allow for consistency and repeatability of the various processes that support the operational risk framework across our business.
Operational risk guidelines document our practices and describe the key elements in a business unit's operational risk management program. The purpose of the guidelines is to set forth and define key operational risk terms, provide further detail on our operational risk programs, and detail the business units' responsibilities to identify, assess, measure, monitor and report operational risk. The guideline supports our operational risk policy.
Data standards have been established to maintain consistent data repositories and systems that are controlled, accurate and available on a timely basis to support operational risk management.
Information Technology Risk Management
Overview and Principles
We define technology risk as the risk associated with the use, ownership, operation, involvement, influence and adoption of information technology. Technology risk includes risks potentially triggered by technology non-compliance with regulatory obligations, information security and privacy incidents, business disruption, technology internal control and process gaps, technology operational events and adoption of new business technologies.
The principal technology risks within our technology risk policy and risk appetite framework include:
•Third party and vendor management risk;
•Business disruption and technology resiliency risk;
•Technology change management risk;
•Cyber and information security risk;
•Technology asset and configuration risk; and
•Technology obsolescence risk.
Governance
Our Board is responsible for the approval and oversight of our overall technology risk framework and program. It does so through its TOPS, which reviews and approves our technology risk policy and appetite framework annually.
Our technology risk policy establishes our approach to our management of technology risk across our business. The policy identifies the responsibilities of individuals and committees charged with oversight of the management of technology risk and articulates a broad mandate that supports implementation of the technology risk framework.
Risk control functions in the business are responsible for adopting and executing the information technology risk framework and reporting requirements. They do this, in part, by developing and maintaining an inventory of critical applications and supporting infrastructure, as well as identifying, assessing and measuring technology risk utilizing the technology risk framework. They are also responsible for monitoring and evaluating risk on a continual basis using key risk indicators, risk reporting and adopting appropriate risk responses to risk issues.
The Chief Technology Risk Officer, a member of the CRO’s executive management team, leads the Enterprise Technology Risk Management (ETRM) function. ETRM is the separate risk function responsible for the technology risk strategy and appetite, and technology risk framework development and execution. ETRM also performs overall technology risk monitoring and reporting to the Board, and provides a separate view of the technology risk posture to executive leadership.
We manage technology risks by:
•Coordinating various risk assessment and risk management activities, including ERM operational risk programs;
•Establishing, through TORC and TOPS of the Board, the enterprise level technology risk and cyber risk appetite and limits;
•Producing enterprise level risk reporting, aggregation, dashboards, profiles and risk appetite statements;
•Validating appropriateness of reporting of information technology risks and risk acceptance to senior management risk committees and the Board;
•Promoting a strong technology risk culture through communication;
•Serving as an escalation and challenge point for technology risk policy guidance, expectations and clarifications;
•Assessing effectiveness of key enterprise information technology risk and internal control remediation programs; and
•Providing risk oversight, challenge and monitoring for the Global Continuity and Third Party Vendor Management Program, including the collection of risk appetite, metrics and key risk indicators, and reviewing issue management processes and consistent program adoption.
State Street Corporation | 102
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Cybersecurity Risk Management
Cybersecurity risk is managed as part of our overall information technology risk framework as outlined above under the direction of our Chief Information Security Officer.
We recognize the significance of cyber-attacks and have taken steps to mitigate the risks associated with them. We have made significant investments in building a mature cybersecurity program to leverage people, technology and processes to protect our systems and the data in our care. We have also implemented a program to help us better measure and manage the cybersecurity risk we face when we engage with third parties for services.
All employees are required to adhere to our cybersecurity policy and standards. Our centralized information security group provides education and training. This training includes a required annual online training class for all employees, multiple simulated phishing attacks and regular information security awareness materials.
We employ Information Security Officers to help the business better understand and manage their information security risks, as well as to work with the centralized Information Security team to drive awareness and compliance throughout the business.
We use independent third parties to perform ethical hacks of key systems to help us better understand the effectiveness of our controls and to better implement more effective controls, and we engage with third parties to conduct reviews of our overall program to help us better align our cybersecurity program with what is required of a large financial services organization.
We have an incident response program in place that is designed to enable a well-coordinated response to mitigate the impact of cyber-attacks, recover from the attack and to drive the appropriate level of communication to internal and external stakeholders.
The TORC assesses and manages the effectiveness of our cybersecurity program, which is overseen by the TOPS of our Board. The TOPS receives regular cybersecurity updates throughout the year and is responsible for reviewing and approving the program on an annual basis.
Market Risk Management
Market risk is defined by U.S. banking regulators as the risk of loss that could result from broad market movements, such as changes in the general level of interest rates, credit spreads, foreign exchange rates or commodity prices. We are exposed to market risk in both our trading and certain of our non-trading, or asset-and-liability management, activities.
Information about the market risk associated with our trading activities is provided below under “Trading Activities.” Information about the market risk associated with our non-trading activities, which consists primarily of interest rate risk, is provided below under “Asset-and-Liability Management Activities.”
Trading Activities
In the conduct of our trading activities, we assume market risk, the level of which is a function of our overall risk appetite, business objectives and liquidity needs, our clients' requirements and market volatility and our execution against those factors.
We engage in trading activities primarily to support our clients' needs and to contribute to our overall corporate earnings and liquidity. In connection with certain of these trading activities, we enter into a variety of derivative financial instruments to support our clients' needs and to manage our interest rate and currency risk. These activities are generally intended to generate foreign exchange trading services revenue and to manage potential earnings volatility. In addition, we provide services related to derivatives in our role as both a manager and a servicer of financial assets.
Our clients use derivatives to manage the financial risks associated with their investment goals and business activities. With the growth of cross-border investing, our clients often enter into foreign exchange forward contracts to convert currency for international investments and to manage the currency risk in their international investment portfolios. As an active participant in the foreign exchange markets, we provide foreign exchange forward and option contracts in support of these client needs, and also act as a dealer in the currency markets.
As part of our trading activities, we assume positions in the foreign exchange and interest rate markets by buying and selling cash instruments and entering into derivative instruments, including foreign exchange forward contracts, foreign exchange and interest rate options and interest rate swaps, interest rate forward contracts and interest rate futures. As of December 31, 2021, the notional amount of these derivative contracts was $2.60 trillion, of which $2.58 trillion was composed of foreign exchange forward, swap and spot contracts. We seek to match positions closely with the objective of mitigating related currency and interest rate risk. All foreign exchange contracts are valued daily at current market rates.
Governance
Our assumption of market risk in our trading activities is an integral part of our corporate risk appetite. Our Board reviews and oversees our management of market risk, including the approval of key market risk policies and the receipt and review of
State Street Corporation | 103
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
regular market risk reporting, as well as periodic updates on selected market risk topics.
The previously described CMRC (refer to "Risk Committees") oversees all market risk-taking activities across our business associated with trading. The CMRC, which reports to MRAC, is composed of members of ERM, our global markets business and our Global Treasury group, as well as our senior executives who manage our trading businesses and other members of management who possess specialized knowledge and expertise. The CMRC meets regularly to monitor the management of our trading market risk activities.
Our business units identify, actively manage and are responsible for the market risks inherent in their businesses. A dedicated market risk management group within ERM, and other groups within ERM, work with those business units to assist them in the identification, assessment, monitoring, management and control of market risk, and assist business unit managers with their market risk management and measurement activities. ERM provides an additional line of oversight, support and coordination designed to promote the consistent identification, measurement and management of market risk across business units, separate from those business units' discrete activities.
The ERM market risk management group is responsible for the management of corporate-wide market risk, the monitoring of key market risks and the development and maintenance of market risk management policies, guidelines and standards aligned with our corporate risk appetite. This group also establishes and approves market risk tolerance limits and trading authorities based on, but not limited to, measures of notional amounts, sensitivity, VaR and stress. Such limits and authorities are specified in our trading and market risk guidelines which govern our management of trading market risk.
We are subject to regular monitoring, reviews and supervisory exams of our market risk function by the Federal Reserve. In addition, we are regulated by, among others, the SEC, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority and the U.S. Commodities Futures Trading Commission.
Risk Appetite
Our corporate market risk appetite is specified in policy statements that outline the governance, responsibilities and requirements surrounding the identification, measurement, analysis, management and communication of market risk arising from our trading activities. These policy statements also set forth the market risk control framework to monitor, support, manage and control this portion of our risk appetite. All groups involved in the management and control of market risk associated with trading activities
are required to comply with the qualitative and quantitative elements of these policy statements. Our trading market risk control framework is composed of the following:
•A trading market risk management process led by ERM, separate from the business units' discrete activities;
•Defined responsibilities and authorities for the primary groups involved in trading market risk management;
•A trading market risk measurement methodology that captures correlation effects and allows aggregation of market risk across risk types, markets and business lines;
•Daily monitoring, analysis and reporting of market risk exposures associated with trading activities against market risk limits;
•A defined limit structure and escalation process in the event of a market risk limit excess;
•Use of VaR models to measure the one-day market risk exposure of trading positions;
•Use of VaR as a ten-day-based regulatory capital measure of the market risk exposure of trading positions;
•Use of non-VaR-based limits and other controls;
•Use of stressed-VaR models, stress-testing analysis and scenario analysis to support the trading market risk measurement and management process by assessing how portfolios and global business lines perform under extreme market conditions;
•Use of back-testing as a diagnostic tool to assess the accuracy of VaR models and other risk management techniques; and
•A new product approval process that requires market risk teams to assess trading-related market risks and apply risk tolerance limits to proposed new products and business activities.
We use our CAP to assess our overall capital and liquidity in relation to our risk profile and provide a comprehensive strategy for maintaining appropriate capital and liquidity levels. With respect to market risk associated with trading activities, our risk management and our calculations of regulatory capital are based primarily on our internal VaR models and stress testing analysis. As discussed in detail under “Value-at-Risk and Stressed VaR” below, VaR is measured daily by ERM.
The CMRC oversees our market risk exposure in relation to limits established within our risk appetite framework. These limits define threshold levels for
State Street Corporation | 104
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
VaR- and stressed VaR-based measures and are applicable to all trading positions subject to regulatory capital requirements. These limits are designed to prevent any undue concentration of market risk exposure, in light of the primarily non-proprietary nature of our trading activities. The risk appetite framework and associated limits are reviewed and approved by the Board's RC.
Covered Positions
Our trading positions are subject to regulatory market risk capital requirements if they meet the regulatory definition of a “covered position.” A covered position is generally defined by U.S. banking regulators as an on- or off-balance sheet position associated with the organization's trading activities that is free of any restrictions on its tradability, but does not include intangible assets, certain credit derivatives recognized as guarantees and certain equity positions not publicly traded. All FX and commodity positions are considered covered positions, regardless of the accounting treatment they receive. The identification of covered positions for inclusion in our market risk capital framework is governed by our trading and market risk guidelines, which outlines the standards we use to determine whether a trading position is a covered position.
Our covered positions consist primarily of the trading portfolios held by our global markets business. They also arise from certain positions held by our Global Treasury group. These trading positions include products such as foreign exchange spot, foreign exchange forwards, non-deliverable forwards, foreign exchange options, foreign exchange funding swaps, currency futures, financial futures and interest rate futures. New activities are analyzed to determine if the positions arising from such new activities meet the definition of a covered position and conform to our trading and market risk guidelines. This documented analysis, including any decisions with respect to market risk treatments, must receive approval from the CMRC.
We use spot rates, forward points, yield curves and discount factors imported from third-party sources to measure the value of our covered positions, and we use such values to mark our covered positions to market on a daily basis. These values are subject to separate validation by us in order to evaluate reasonableness and consistency with market experience. The mark-to-market gain or loss on spot transactions is calculated by applying the spot rate to the foreign currency principal and comparing the resultant base currency amount to the original transaction principal. The mark-to-market gain or loss on a forward foreign exchange contract or forward cash flow contract is determined as the difference between the life-to-date (historical) value of
the cash flow and the value of the cash flow at the inception of the transaction. The mark-to-market gain or loss on interest rate swaps is determined by discounting the future cash flows from each leg of the swap transaction.
Value-at-Risk and Stressed VaR
We use a variety of risk measurement tools and methodologies, including VaR, which is an estimate of potential loss for a given period within a stated statistical confidence interval. We use a risk measurement methodology to measure trading-related VaR daily. We have adopted standards for measuring trading-related VaR, and we maintain regulatory capital for market risk associated with our trading activities in conformity with currently applicable bank regulatory market risk requirements.
We utilize an internal VaR model to calculate our regulatory market risk capital requirements. We use a historical simulation model to calculate daily VaR- and stressed VaR-based measures for our covered positions in conformity with regulatory requirements. Our VaR model seeks to capture identified material risk factors associated with our covered positions, including risks arising from market movements such as changes in foreign exchange rates, interest rates and option-implied volatilities.
We have adopted standards and guidelines to value our covered positions which govern our VaR- and stressed VaR-based measures. Our regulatory VaR-based measure is calculated based on historical volatilities of market risk factors during a two-year observation period calibrated to a one-tail, 99% confidence interval and a ten-business-day holding period. We also use the same platform to calculate a one-tail, 99% confidence interval, one-business-day VaR for internal risk management purposes. A 99% one-tail confidence interval implies that daily trading losses are not expected to exceed the estimated VaR more than 1% of the time, or less than three business days out of a year.
Our market risk models, including our VaR model, are subject to change in connection with the governance, validation and back-testing processes described below. These models can change as a result of changes in our business activities, our historical experiences, market forces and events, regulations and regulatory interpretations and other factors. In addition, the models are subject to continuing regulatory review and approval. Changes in our models may result in changes in our measurements of our market risk exposures, including VaR, and related measures, including regulatory capital. These changes could result in material changes in those risk measurements and related measures as calculated and compared from period to period.
State Street Corporation | 105
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Value-at-Risk Measures
VaR measures are based on the most recent two years of historical price movements for instruments and related risk factors to which we have exposure. The instruments in question are limited to foreign exchange spot, forward and options contracts and interest rate contracts, including futures and interest rate swaps. Historically, these instruments have exhibited a higher degree of liquidity relative to other available capital markets instruments. As a result, the VaR measures shown reflect our ability to rapidly adjust exposures in highly dynamic markets. For this reason, risk inventory, in the form of net open positions, across all currencies is typically limited. In addition, long and short positions in major, as well as minor, currencies provide risk offsets that limit our potential downside exposure.
Our VaR methodology uses a historical simulation approach based on market-observed changes in foreign exchange rates, U.S. and non-U.S. interest rates and implied volatilities, and incorporates the resulting diversification benefits provided from the mix of our trading positions. Our VaR model incorporates approximately 5,000 risk factors and includes correlations among currency, interest rates and other market rates.
All VaR measures are subject to limitations and must be interpreted accordingly. Some, but not all, of the limitations of our VaR methodology include the following:
•Compared to a shorter observation period, a two-year observation period is slower to reflect increases in market volatility (although temporary increases in market volatility will affect the calculation of VaR for a longer period); consequently, in periods of sudden increases in volatility or increasing volatility, in each case relative to the prior two-year period, the calculation of VaR may understate current risk;
•Compared to a longer observation period, a two-year observation period may not reflect as many past periods of volatility in the markets, because such past volatility is no longer in the observation period; consequently, historical market scenarios of high volatility, even if similar to current or likely future market circumstances, may fall outside the two-year observation period, resulting in a potential understatement of current risk;
•The VaR-based measure is calibrated to a specified level of confidence and does not indicate the potential magnitude of losses beyond this confidence level;
•In certain cases, VaR-based measures approximate the impact of changes in risk factors on the values of positions and portfolios; this may happen because the number of inputs included in the VaR model is necessarily limited; for example, yield curve risk factors do not exist for all future dates;
•The use of historical market information may not be predictive of future events, particularly those that are extreme in nature; this “backward-looking” limitation can cause VaR to understate or overstate risk;
•The effect of extreme and rare market movements is difficult to estimate; this may result from non-linear risk sensitivities as well as the potential for actual volatility and correlation levels to differ from assumptions implicit in the VaR calculations; and
•Intra-day risk is not captured.
We calculate a stressed VaR-based measure using the same model we use to calculate VaR, but with model inputs calibrated to historical data from a range of continuous twelve-month periods that reflect significant financial stress. The stressed VaR model is designed to identify the second-worst outcome occurring in the worst continuous one-year rolling period since July 2007. This stressed VaR meets the regulatory requirement as the rolling ten-day period with an outcome that is worse than 99% of other outcomes during that twelve-month period of financial stress. For each portfolio, the stress period is determined algorithmically by seeking the one-year time horizon that produces the largest ten-business-day VaR from within the available historical data. This historical data set includes the financial crisis of 2008, the highly volatile period surrounding the Eurozone sovereign debt crisis and the Standard & Poor's downgrade of U.S. Treasury debt in August 2011. As the historical data set used to determine the stress period expands over time, future market stress events will be incorporated.
Stress Testing
We have a corporate-wide stress testing program in place that incorporates an array of techniques to measure the potential loss we could suffer in a hypothetical scenario of adverse economic and financial conditions. We also monitor concentrations of risk such as concentration by branch, risk component, and currency pairs. We conduct stress testing on a daily basis based on selected historical stress events that are relevant to our positions in order to estimate the potential impact to our current portfolio should similar market conditions recur, and we also perform stress testing as part of the Federal Reserve's CCAR process.
State Street Corporation | 106
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Stress testing is conducted, analyzed and reported at the corporate, trading desk, division and risk-factor level (for example, exchange risk, interest rate risk and volatility risk).
Stress testing results and limits are actively monitored on a daily basis by ERM and reported to the CMRC. Limit breaches are addressed by ERM risk managers in conjunction with the business units, escalated as appropriate, and reviewed by the CMRC if material. In addition, we have established several action triggers that prompt immediate review by management and the implementation of a remediation plan.
We perform scenario analysis daily based on selected historical stress events that are relevant to our positions in order to estimate the potential impact to our current portfolio should similar market conditions recur. Relevant scenarios are chosen from an inventory of historical financial stresses and applied to our current portfolio. These historical event scenarios involve spot foreign exchange, credit, equity, unforeseen geo-political events and natural disasters, and government and central bank intervention scenarios. Examples of the specific historical scenarios we incorporate in our stress testing program may include the Asian financial crisis of 1997, the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the U.S. and the 2008 financial crisis. We continue to update our inventory of historical stress scenarios as new stress conditions emerge in the financial markets.
As each of the historical stress events is associated with a different time horizon, we normalize results by scaling down the longer horizon events to a ten-day horizon and keeping the shorter horizon events (i.e., events that are shorter than ten days) at their original terms. We also conduct sensitivity analysis daily to calculate the impact of a large predefined shock in a specific risk factor or a group of risk factors on our current portfolio. These predefined shocks include parallel and non-parallel yield curve shifts and foreign exchange spot and volatility surface shifts. In a parallel shift scenario, we apply a constant factor shift across all yield curve tenors. In a non-parallel shift scenario, we apply different shock levels to different tenors of a yield curve, rather than shifting the entire curve by a constant amount. Non-parallel shifts include steepening, flattening and butterflies.
Validation and Back-Testing
We perform frequent back-testing to assess the accuracy of our VaR-based model in estimating loss at the stated confidence level. This back-testing involves the comparison of estimated VaR model outputs to daily, actual profit-and-loss (P&L) outcomes observed from daily market movements. We back-test our VaR model using “clean” P&L, which excludes non-trading revenue such as fees, commissions and NII, as well as estimated revenue from intra-day trading.
Our VaR definition of trading losses excludes items that are not specific to the price movement of the trading assets and liabilities themselves, such as fees, commissions, changes to reserves and gains or losses from intra-day activity.
We experienced one back-testing exception in 2021 and three back-testing exceptions in 2020. At a 99% confidence interval, the statistical expectation for a VaR model is to witness one exception every hundred trading days (or two to three exceptions per year). The 2021 back-testing exception has been attributed to dislocation in FX markets caused by greater demand for funding over year-end periods. The 2020 back-testing exceptions were all noted during the March 2020 market turmoil where some of the largest risk factor shifts since the 2007/2008 financial crisis were observed.
Our model validation process also evaluates the integrity of our VaR models through the use of regular outcome analysis. This outcome analysis includes back-testing, which compares the VaR model's predictions to actual outcomes using out-of-sample information. Consistent with regulatory guidance, the back-testing compared “clean” P&L, defined above, with the one-day VaR produced by the model. The back-testing was performed for a time period not used for model development. The number of occurrences where “clean” trading-book P&L exceeded the one-day VaR was within our expected VaR tolerance level.
State Street Corporation | 107
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Market Risk Reporting
Our ERM market risk management group is responsible for market risk monitoring and reporting. We use a variety of systems and controlled market feeds from third-party services to compile data for several daily, weekly and monthly management reports.
The following tables present VaR and stressed VaR associated with our trading activities for covered positions held during the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively, as measured by our VaR methodology. Diversification effect in the tables below represents the difference between total VaR and the sum of the VaRs for each trading activity. This effect arises because the risks present in our trading activities are not perfectly correlated.
| TABLE 34: TEN-DAY VALUE-AT-RISK ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES FOR COVERED POSITIONS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended December 31, 2021 | As of December 31, 2021 | Year Ended December 31, 2020 | As of December 31, 2020 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Global Markets | $ | 15,214 | $ | 30,485 | $ | 5,252 | $ | 16,998 | $ | 12,430 | $ | 33,991 | $ | 5,220 | $ | 9,321 | ||||||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 3,189 | 9,762 | 220 | 3,556 | 2,899 | 8,874 | 112 | 4,015 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (2,115) | (7,958) | 1,024 | (4,519) | (2,253) | (9,062) | (121) | (4,068) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total VaR | $ | 16,288 | $ | 32,289 | $ | 6,496 | $ | 16,035 | $ | 13,076 | $ | 33,803 | $ | 5,211 | $ | 9,268 | ||||||||||||||||
| TABLE 35: TEN-DAY STRESSED VALUE-AT-RISK ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES FOR COVERED POSITIONS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Year Ended December 31, 2021 | As of December 31, 2021 | Year Ended December 31, 2020 | As of December 31, 2020 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | Average | Maximum | Minimum | VaR | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Global Markets | $ | 41,698 | $ | 101,535 | $ | 13,037 | $ | 65,840 | $ | 35,031 | $ | 84,755 | $ | 15,399 | $ | 35,999 | ||||||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 9,601 | 29,651 | 814 | 12,419 | 7,895 | 23,533 | 587 | 8,555 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (5,607) | (20,018) | 2,918 | (17,505) | (6,330) | (23,570) | 1,620 | (1,106) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Stressed VaR | $ | 45,692 | $ | 111,168 | $ | 16,769 | $ | 60,754 | $ | 36,596 | $ | 84,718 | $ | 17,606 | $ | 43,448 |
The average and period-end stressed VaR-based measures were approximately $46 million and $61 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to $37 million and $43 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2020. The increase in the average and period-end VaR-based and stressed VaR-based measures was primarily due to higher residual interest rate positions throughout the year. With regards to our VaR-based measure, the model uses a two-year historical observation period, and as such, the measure is still driven by the heightened market volatility experienced during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, primarily with respect to FX rates and interest rates.
The VaR-based measures presented in the preceding tables are primarily a reflection of the overall level of market volatility and our appetite for taking market risk in our trading activities. Overall levels of volatility have been low both on an absolute basis and relative to the historical information observed at the beginning of the period used for the calculations. Both the ten-day VaR-based measures and the stressed VaR-based measures are based on historical changes observed during rolling ten-day periods for the portfolios as of the close of business each day over the past one-year period.
We have in the past and may in the future modify and adjust our models and methodologies used to calculate VaR and stressed VaR, subject to regulatory review and approval, and any future modifications and adjustments may result in changes in our VaR-based and stressed VaR-based measures.
The following tables present the VaR and stressed-VaR associated with our trading activities attributable to foreign exchange risk, interest rate risk and volatility risk as of December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively. The totals of the VaR-based and stressed VaR-based measures for the three attributes in total exceeded the related total VaR and total stressed VaR presented in the foregoing tables as of each period-end, primarily due to the benefits of diversification across risk types. Diversification effect in the tables below represents the difference between total VaR and the sum of the VaRs for each trading activity. This effect arises because the risks present in our trading activities are not perfectly correlated.
| TABLE 36: TEN-DAY VaR ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES BY RISK FACTOR(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2021 | As of December 31, 2020 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | ||||||||||||||||||
| By component: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Global Markets | $ | 6,945 | $ | 16,424 | $ | 108 | $ | 2,977 | $ | 8,880 | $ | 179 | ||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 531 | 3,688 | — | 33 | 4,257 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (877) | (3,682) | — | (42) | (2,246) | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total VaR | $ | 6,599 | $ | 16,430 | $ | 108 | $ | 2,968 | $ | 10,891 | $ | 179 |
State Street Corporation | 108
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 37: TEN-DAY STRESSED VaR ASSOCIATED WITH TRADING ACTIVITIES BY RISK FACTOR(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2021 | As of December 31, 2020 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | Foreign Exchange Risk | Interest Rate Risk | Volatility Risk | ||||||||||||||||||
| By component: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Global Markets | $ | 9,445 | $ | 63,368 | $ | 157 | $ | 5,102 | $ | 39,615 | $ | 265 | ||||||||||||
| Global Treasury | 667 | 13,218 | — | 83 | 8,465 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Diversification | (1,551) | (17,500) | — | (51) | (8,102) | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total Stressed VaR | $ | 8,561 | $ | 59,086 | $ | 157 | $ | 5,134 | $ | 39,978 | $ | 265 |
(1) For purposes of risk attribution by component, foreign exchange refers only to the risk from market movements in period-end rates. Forwards, futures, options and swaps with maturities greater than period-end have embedded interest rate risk that is captured by the measures used for interest rate risk. Accordingly, the interest rate risk embedded in these foreign exchange instruments is included in the interest rate risk component.
Asset and Liability Management Activities
The primary objective of asset and liability management is to provide sustainable NII under varying economic conditions, while protecting the economic value of the assets and liabilities carried on our consolidated statement of condition from the adverse effects of changes in interest rates. While many market factors affect the level of NII and the economic value of our assets and liabilities, one of the most significant factors is our exposure to movements in interest rates. Most of our NII is earned from the investment of client deposits generated by our businesses. We invest these client deposits in assets that conform generally to the characteristics of our balance sheet liabilities, including the currency composition of our significant non-U.S. dollar denominated client liabilities.
We quantify NII sensitivity using an earnings simulation model that includes our expectations for new business growth, changes in balance sheet mix and investment portfolio positioning. This measure compares our baseline view of NII over a twelve-month horizon, based on our internal forecast of interest rates, to a wide range of rate shocks. The baseline view of NII is updated on a regular basis. Relative to December 31, 2020, the December 31, 2021 baseline forecast reflects an increased balance sheet size. Table 38, Key Interest Rates for Baseline Forecasts, presents the spot and 12-month forward rates used in our baseline forecasts at December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020. Our December 31, 2021 baseline forecast includes the expectation of three rate hikes by the Federal Reserve over the next 12 months.
| TABLE 38: KEY INTEREST RATES FOR BASELINE FORECASTS | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2021 | December 31, 2020 | ||||||||||
| Fed Funds Target | 10-Year Treasury | Fed Funds Target | 10-Year Treasury | ||||||||
| Spot rates | 0.25 | % | 1.77 | % | 0.25 | % | 0.93 | % | |||
| 12-month forward rates | 1.00 | 1.95 | 0.25 | 1.12 |
In Table 39: Net Interest Income Sensitivity, we report the expected change in NII over the next twelve months from instantaneous shocks to various tenors on the yield curve, including the impacts from U.S. and non-U.S. rates. Each scenario assumes no management action is taken to mitigate the adverse effects of interest rate changes on our financial performance. While investment securities balances and composition can fluctuate with the level of rates as prepayment assumptions change, for purposes of this analysis our deposit balances are assumed to remain consistent with the baseline forecast. In lower rate scenarios, the full impact of the shock is realized for all currencies even if the result is negative interest rates.
State Street Corporation | 109
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| TABLE 39: NET INTEREST INCOME SENSITIVITY | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2021(2) | December 31, 2020 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | U.S. Dollar | All Other Currencies | Total | U.S. Dollar | All Other Currencies | Total | ||||||||||||||||
| Rate change: | Benefit (Exposure) | Benefit (Exposure) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Parallel shifts: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| +100 bps shock | $ | 447 | $ | 306 | $ | 753 | $ | 410 | $ | 172 | $ | 582 | ||||||||||
| –100 bps shock | 384 | (39) | 345 | 591 | 196 | 787 | ||||||||||||||||
| Steeper yield curve: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| '+100 bps shift in long-end rates(1) | 114 | 16 | 130 | 135 | 3 | 138 | ||||||||||||||||
| '-100 bps shift in short-end rates(1) | 519 | (22) | 497 | 743 | 199 | 942 | ||||||||||||||||
| Flatter yield curve: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| '+100 bps shift in short-end rates(1) | 337 | 290 | 627 | 282 | 168 | 450 | ||||||||||||||||
| '-100 bps shift in long-end rates(1) | (132) | (16) | (148) | (141) | (3) | (144) |
(1) The short end is 0-3 months. The long end is 5 years and above. Interim term points are interpolated.
(2) Does not reflect any impact of our planned acquisition of the BBH Investor Services business.
As of December 31, 2021, NII is expected to benefit from an increase in interest rates. Compared to December 31, 2020, our NII is more sensitive to parallel rate increases primarily driven by higher levels of deposits partially offset by higher expected client deposit betas as rates rise. Our projection of an NII benefit to an upward rate shock of +100bps assumes deposit betas are similar to the 2016-2017 rising rate cycle. Our projection also assumes that baseline deposit levels remain relatively consistent with fourth quarter 2021 averages. We expect that our NII benefit in the +100bps scenarios would be lower if either deposit levels decline relative to our baseline or client deposit betas are higher than the prior rising rate cycle.
Our NII is expected to benefit from a -100 bps rate shock due to assets with contractual floors, primarily in our lending portfolio, but compared to December 31, 2020, the benefit has decreased primarily due to the expectation that some central banks will raise rates over the next 12 months. This expectation widens the margin on client deposits in our baseline, but compresses them in lower rate scenarios.
EVE sensitivity is a discounted cash flow model designed to estimate the fair value of assets and liabilities under a series of interest rate shocks over a long-term horizon. In the following table, we report our EVE sensitivity to 200 bps instantaneous rate shocks, relative to spot interest rates. Management compares the change in EVE sensitivity against our aggregate Tier 1 and Tier 2 risk-based capital, calculated in conformity with current applicable regulatory requirements. EVE sensitivity is dependent on the timing of interest and principal cash flows. Also, the measure only evaluates the spot balance sheet and does not include the impact of new business assumptions.
| TABLE 40: ECONOMIC VALUE OF EQUITY SENSITIVITY | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, | ||||||
| (In millions) | 2021 | 2020 | ||||
| Rate change: | Benefit (Exposure) | |||||
| +200 bps shock | $ | (1,380) | $ | (1,603) | ||
| –200 bps shock | 3,829 | 5,538 |
As of December 31, 2021, EVE sensitivity remains exposed to upward shifts in interest rates. Compared to December 31, 2020, our sensitivity in the up 200 bps shock scenario decreased due to higher client deposits and an increase in expected prepayment speeds on agency RMBS, partially offset by growth in our securities portfolio and interest rate hedging activity.
Both NII sensitivity and EVE sensitivity are routinely monitored as market conditions change. For additional information about our Asset and Liability Management Activities, refer to Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, "Risk Management."
State Street Corporation | 110
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Model Risk Management
The use of models is widespread throughout the financial services industry, with large and complex organizations relying on sophisticated models to support numerous aspects of their financial decision making. The models contemporaneously represent both a significant advancement in financial management and a source of risk. In large banking organizations like us, model results influence business decisions, and model failure could have a harmful effect on our financial performance. As a result, the MRM Framework seeks to mitigate our model risk.
Our MRM program has three principal components:
•A model risk governance program that defines roles and responsibilities, including the authority to restrict model usage, provides policies and guidance, monitors compliance and reports regularly to the Board on the overall degree of model risk across the corporation;
•A model development process that focuses on sound design and computational accuracy, and includes activities designed to assess data quality, to test for robustness, stability and sensitivity to assumptions, and to conduct ongoing monitoring of model performance; and
•An independent model validation function designed to verify that models are conceptually sound, computationally accurate, are performing as expected, and are in line with their intended use.
The MRM Framework, highlighted above, also provides insight and guidance into addressing key model risks that arise.
Governance
Models used in the regulatory capital calculation can only be deployed for use after undergoing a model validation by ERM's MRM group. The model validation results and/or a decision by the Model Risk Committee must permit model usage or the model may not be used.
ERM’s MRM group is responsible for defining the corporate-wide model risk management framework, maintaining policies that achieve the framework’s objectives. All regulatory capital calculation models, including any artificial intelligence and machine learning models, must comply with the model risk management framework and corresponding policies. The team is responsible for overall model risk governance capabilities, with particular emphasis in the areas of model validation, model risk reporting, model performance monitoring,
tracking of new model development status and committee-level review and challenge.
MRC, which is composed of senior managers responsible for representing functional areas and business units with key models across the organization, reports to MRAC, and provides guidance and oversight to the MRM function.
Model Development and Ongoing Monitoring
Models are developed under standards governing data sourcing, methodology selection and model integrity testing. Model development includes a statement of purpose to align development with intended use. It may also include a comparison of alternative approaches to promote a sound modeling approach.
Model developers conduct an assessment of data quality and relevance. The development teams conduct a variety of tests of the accuracy, robustness and stability of each model.
Model owners submit models to the MVG for validation on a regular basis, as per the existing policy. The model owners also conduct ongoing monitoring of each model.
Model Validation
MVG is part of MRM within ERM and performs model validations and reviews. MVG is independent, as contemplated by applicable bank regulatory requirements, of both the developers and users of the models. MVG validates models through an evaluation process that assesses the appropriateness, accuracy, and suitability of data inputs, methodologies, documentation, assumptions, and processing code. Model validation also encompasses an assessment of model performance, sensitivity, and robustness, as well as a model’s potential limitations given its particular assumptions or deficiencies. Based on the results of its review, MVG issues a model use decision and may require remedial actions and/or compensating controls on model use. MVG also maintains a model risk rating system, which assigns a risk rating to each model based on an assessment of a model's inherent and residual risks. These ratings aid in the understanding and reporting of model risk across the model portfolio, and enable the triaging of needs for remediation.
Although model validation is the primary method of subjecting models to independent review and challenge, in practice, a multi-step governance process provides the opportunity for challenge by multiple parties. First, MVG conducts a model validation and issues a model use decision. MVG communicates their result as one of the following three outcomes: “Approved”, “Approved with conditions”, or “Not Approved”. There are three ways in which a model can be deemed “Not approved for
State Street Corporation | 111
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Use” given a validation: 1) the aggregation of the model scoring within MRM’s Model Risk Rating System (MRRS) model is poor enough to result in a “high” rating, 2) the scoring of one or more MRRS model element(s) is deemed “critical” resulting in an automatic “high” rating irrespective of the other elements as the “critical” element(s) undermines the model, or 3) the remediation action is not properly taken by the due date resulting in a severe compliance breach that undercuts the model rating. Second, these decisions may be reviewed, challenged, and confirmed by the MRC. Finally, model use decisions, risk ratings, and overall levels of model risk may be reported to and reviewed by MRAC. MRM also reports regularly on model risk issues to the Board.
Strategic Risk Management
We define strategic risk as the current or prospective impact on earnings or capital arising from adverse business decisions, improper implementation of strategic initiatives, or lack of responsiveness to industry-wide changes. Strategic risks are influenced by changes in the competitive environment; decline in market performance or changes in our business activities; and the potential secondary impacts of reputational risks, not already captured as market, interest rate, credit, operational, model or liquidity risks. We incorporate strategic risk into our assessment of our business plans and risk and capital management processes. Active management of strategic risk is an integral component of all aspects of our business.
Separating the effects of a potential material adverse event into operational and strategic risk is sometimes difficult. For instance, the direct financial impact of an unfavorable event in the form of fines or penalties would be classified as an operational risk loss, while the impact on our reputation and consequently the potential loss of clients and corresponding decline in revenue would be classified as a strategic risk loss. An additional example of strategic risk is the integration of a major acquisition. Failure to successfully integrate the operations of an acquired business, and the resultant inability to retain clients and the associated revenue, would be classified as a loss due to strategic risk.
Strategic risk is managed with a long-term focus. Techniques for its assessment and management include the development of business plans, which are subject to robust review and challenge from senior management and the Board of Directors, as well as a formal review and approval process for all new business and product proposals. The potential impact of the various elements of strategic risk is difficult to quantify with any degree of precision. We use a combination of historical earnings volatility, scenario
analysis, stress-testing and management judgment to help assess the potential effect on us attributable to strategic risk. Management and control of strategic risks are generally the responsibility of the business units, with oversight from the control functions, as part of their overall strategic planning and internal risk management processes.
On March 5, 2021, the Intercontinental Exchange Benchmark Administration announced, in conjunction with the United Kingdom Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), that it would cease the publication of GBP, EUR, Swiss Franc and the Japanese Yen LIBOR settings for all tenors, as well as one week and two months U.S. dollar LIBOR settings, on December 31, 2021 and would cease the publication of overnight and twelve months U.S. dollar LIBOR settings on June 30, 2023.
We have established a process to identify, assess, plan for and remediate the use of LIBOR and other reference rates affected by reference rate reform that addresses both direct exposures on our balance sheet, and, more importantly, the use of LIBOR in our various service provider roles to our customers. This process is led by a wide, multi-disciplinary LIBOR program management office (“LIBOR PMO”), established in September 2018, that will continue to lead our transition efforts through June of 2023.
The LIBOR PMO reports regularly to executive management of the firm and our key regulators on progress with respect to client communications, updating quantitative models and information technology systems, managing vendors, contracts remediation, adoption of alternative reference rates for various financial products and services, evaluation of fallback provisions contained in LIBOR-priced loans, investment securities, derivatives and long-term debt and general operational readiness for each stage of the transition.
Most of the work identified by the LIBOR PMO for implementation of the transition is substantially complete, and contingency plans have been developed to deal with identified uncertainties. No incremental material investments are expected to be needed for systems and processes related to the transition. Potential risks that could impact our remediation efforts include overall transition readiness across the industry, third party vendor dependencies and resource constraints from the concentration of remediation activities at key points in the transition process.
Our direct on balance sheet exposures to LIBOR are limited and primarily include assets held in the investment portfolio, certain loans made through Global Credit Finance and issuances of long-term debt and preferred stock. We have planned for, and are prepared to transition our remaining on balance sheet exposures in a manner consistent with regulatory guidance and the availability of interim solutions for various legacy LIBOR contracts. We will not originate or issue new LIBOR-based loans or
State Street Corporation | 112
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
long-term debt, and any purchases of LIBOR-based investment securities will be screened for adequate fallback language. Our remaining exposure outstanding at June 2023 is largely governed by existing fallback language, or jurisdictional legislation that provides for appropriate fallback provisions. Our financial performance depends, in part, on our ability to adapt to market changes promptly, while avoiding increased related expenses or operational errors. Substantial risks and uncertainties are associated with the market transition away from the use of LIBOR as an interest rate benchmark used to determine amounts payable under, and the value of, relevant financial instruments and contracts.
Capital
Managing our capital involves evaluating whether our actual and projected levels of capital are commensurate with our risk profile, are in compliance with all applicable regulatory requirements, and are sufficient to provide us with the financial flexibility to undertake future strategic business initiatives. We assess capital adequacy based on relevant regulatory capital requirements, as well as our own internal capital goals, targets and other relevant metrics.
Framework
Our objective with respect to management of our capital is to maintain a strong capital base in order to provide financial flexibility for our business needs, including funding corporate growth and supporting clients’ cash management needs, and to provide protection against loss to depositors and creditors. We strive to maintain an appropriate level of capital, commensurate with our risk profile, on which an attractive return to shareholders is expected to be realized over both the short and long-term, while protecting our obligations to depositors and creditors and complying with regulatory capital requirements.
Our capital management focuses on our risk exposures, the regulatory requirements applicable to us with respect to multiple capital measures, the evaluations and resulting credit ratings of the major independent rating agencies, our return on capital at both the consolidated and line-of-business level and our capital position relative to our peers.
Assessment of our overall capital adequacy includes the comparison of capital sources with capital uses, as well as the consideration of the quality and quantity of the various components of capital. The assessment seeks to determine the optimal level of capital and composition of capital instruments to satisfy all constituents of capital, with the lowest overall cost to shareholders. Other factors considered in our assessment of capital adequacy are strategic and contingency planning, stress testing and planned capital actions.
Capital Adequacy Process (CAP)
Our primary federal banking regulator is the Federal Reserve. Both we and State Street Bank are subject to the minimum regulatory capital requirements established by the Federal Reserve and defined in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act. State Street Bank must exceed the regulatory capital thresholds for “well capitalized” in order for our Parent Company to maintain its status as a financial holding company. Accordingly, one of our primary objectives with respect to capital management is to exceed all applicable minimum regulatory capital requirements and for State Street Bank to be “well capitalized” under the PCA guidelines established by the FDIC. Our capital management activities are conducted as part of our corporate-wide CAP and associated Capital Policy and Guidelines.
We consider capital adequacy to be a key element of our financial well-being, which affects our ability to attract and maintain client relationships; operate effectively in the global capital markets; and satisfy regulatory, security holders and shareholder needs. Capital is one of several elements that affect our credit ratings and the ratings of our principal subsidiaries.
In conformity with our Capital Policy and Guidelines, we strive to achieve and maintain specific internal capital levels, not just at a point in time, but over time and during periods of stress, to account for changes in our strategic direction, evolving economic conditions, and financial and market volatility. We have developed and implemented a corporate-wide CAP to assess our overall capital in relation to our risk profile and to provide a comprehensive strategy for maintaining appropriate capital levels. The CAP considers material risks under multiple scenarios, with an emphasis on stress scenarios, and encompasses existing processes and systems used to measure our capital adequacy.
Capital Contingency Planning
Contingency planning is an integral component of capital management. The objective of contingency planning is to monitor current and forecast levels of select capital, liquidity and other measures that serve as early indicators of a potentially adverse capital or liquidity adequacy situation. These measures are one of the inputs used to set our internal capital adequacy level. We review these measures annually for appropriateness and relevance in relation to our financial budget and capital plan. In addition, we maintain an inventory of capital contingency actions designed to conserve or generate capital to support the unique risks in our business model, our client and investor demands and regulatory requirements.
State Street Corporation | 113
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Stress Testing
We administer a robust business-wide stress-testing program that executes stress tests each year to assess the institution’s capital adequacy and/or future performance under adverse conditions. Our stress testing program is structured around what we determine to be the key risks inherent in our business, as assessed through a recurring material risk identification process. The material risk identification process represents a bottom-up approach to identifying the institution’s most significant risk exposures across all on- and off-balance sheet risk-taking activities, including credit, market, liquidity, interest rate, operational, fiduciary, business, reputation and regulatory risks. These key risks serve as an organizing principle for much of our risk management framework, as well as reporting, including the “risk dashboard” provided to the Board.
In connection with the focus on our key risks, each stress test incorporates idiosyncratic loss events tailored to our unique risk profile and business activities. Due to the nature of our business model and our consolidated statement of condition, our risks differ from those of a traditional commercial bank. Over the past few years, stress scenarios have included a deep recession in the U.S., including impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic, a break-up of the Eurozone, a severe recession in China and an oil shock precipitated by turmoil in the Middle East/North Africa region.
The Federal Reserve requires bank holding companies with total consolidated assets of $50 billion or more, which includes us, to submit a capital plan on an annual basis. The Federal Reserve uses its annual CCAR process, which incorporates hypothetical financial and economic stress scenarios, to review those capital plans and assess whether banking organizations have capital planning processes that account for idiosyncratic risks and provide for sufficient capital to continue operations throughout times of economic and financial stress. As part of its CCAR process, the Federal Reserve assesses each organization’s capital adequacy, capital planning process and plans to distribute capital, such as dividend payments or stock purchase programs. Management and Board risk committees review, challenge and approve CCAR results and assumptions before submission to the Federal Reserve.
Through the evaluation of our capital adequacy and/or future performance under adverse conditions, the stress testing process provides us important insights for capital planning, risk management and strategic decision-making.
Governance
In order to support integrated decision making, we have identified three management elements to aid in the compatibility and coordination of our CAP:
•Risk Management - identification, measurement, monitoring and forecasting of different types of risk and their combined impact on capital adequacy;
•Capital management - determination of optimal capital levels; and
•Business Management - strategic planning, budgeting, forecasting and performance management.
We have a hierarchical structure supporting appropriate committee review of relevant risk and capital information. The ongoing responsibility for capital management rests with our Treasurer. The Capital Management group within Global Treasury is responsible for the Capital Policy and Guidelines, development of the Capital Plan, the oversight of global capital management and optimization.
The MRAC provides oversight of our capital management, our capital adequacy, our internal targets and the expectations of the major independent credit rating agencies. In addition, MRAC approves our balance sheet strategy and related activities. The Board’s RC assists the Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities related to the assessment and management of risk and capital. Our Capital Policy is reviewed and approved annually by the Board's RC.
Global Systemically Important Bank
We have been identified by the Financial Stability Board and the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision as a G-SIB. Our designation as a G-SIB is based on a number of factors, as evaluated by banking regulators, and requires us to maintain an additional capital surcharge above the minimum capital ratios set forth in the Basel III rule.
We and our depositary institution subsidiaries are subject to the current Basel III minimum risk-based capital and leverage ratio guidelines.
Additional information about G-SIBs is provided under "Regulatory Capital Adequacy and Liquidity Standards" in "Supervision and Regulation" in Business in this Form 10-K.
Regulatory Capital
We and State Street Bank, as advanced approaches banking organizations, are subject to the U.S. Basel III framework. Provisions of the Basel III rule became effective with full implementation on January 1, 2019. We are also subject to the final market risk capital rule issued by U.S. banking regulators effective as of January 2013.
State Street Corporation | 114
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The Basel III rule provides for two frameworks for monitoring capital adequacy: the “standardized” approach and the “advanced” approaches, applicable to advanced approaches banking organizations, like us. The standardized approach prescribes standardized calculations for credit risk RWA, including specified risk weights for certain on- and off-balance sheet exposures.
The advanced approaches consist of the Advanced Internal Ratings-Based Approach used for the calculation of RWA related to credit risk, and the Advanced Measurement Approach used for the calculation of RWA related to operational risk.
The market risk capital rule requires us to use internal models to calculate daily measures of VaR, which reflect general market risk for certain of our trading positions defined by the rule as “covered positions,” as well as stressed-VaR measures to supplement the VaR measures. The rule also requires a public disclosure composed of qualitative and quantitative information about the market risk associated with our trading activities and our related VaR and stressed-VaR measures. The qualitative and quantitative information required by the rule is provided under "Market Risk" included in this Management's Discussion and Analysis.
As required by the Dodd-Frank Act enacted in 2010, and the Stress Capital Buffer (SCB) rule enacted in 2020, we and State Street Bank, as advanced approaches banking organizations, are subject to a "capital floor," also referred to as the Collins Amendment, in the assessment of our regulatory capital adequacy, including the capital conservation buffer (CCB) and the SCB, for the advanced approach and standardized approach, respectively, and a countercyclical capital buffer. The countercyclical buffer is currently set to zero by the U.S. federal banking agencies. In addition, we are
subject to a G-SIB surcharge. Our risk-based capital ratios for regulatory assessment purposes are the lower of each ratio calculated under the standardized approach and the advanced approaches.
The SCB replaced, under the standardized approach, the capital conservation buffer with a buffer calculated as the difference between the institution’s starting and lowest projected CET1 ratio under the CCAR severely adverse scenario plus planned common stock dividend payments (as a percentage of RWA) from the fourth through seventh quarter of the CCAR planning horizon. The SCB requirement, which became effective October 1, 2020, can be no less than 2.5% of RWA. Breaching the SCB or other regulatory buffer or surcharge will limit a banking organization’s ability to make capital distributions and discretionary bonus payments to executive officers. The countercyclical capital buffer is currently set at zero by U.S. banking regulators.
Our minimum risk-based capital ratios as of January 1, 2021 include a CCB of 2.5% and a SCB of 2.5% for the advanced approaches and standardized approach, respectively, a G-SIB surcharge of 1.0%, and a countercyclical buffer of 0.0%. This results in minimum risk-based ratios of 8.0% for the Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) capital ratio, 9.5% for the tier 1 capital ratio, and 11.5% for the total capital ratio.
Based on a calculation date of December 31, 2019, our current G-SIB surcharge, through December 31, 2022, is 1.0%. Based on a calculation date of December 31, 2020, our G-SIB surcharge beginning January 1, 2023 could have been 1.5%. However, in May 2021, the Federal Reserve granted our request for relief relating to the effects of the MMLF program on the calculation of our G-SIB surcharge. As a result of this relief, our G-SIB surcharge for 2023 will remain at 1.0%.
State Street Corporation | 115
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following table presents the regulatory capital structure and related regulatory capital ratios for us and State Street Bank as of the dates indicated. We are subject to the more stringent of the risk-based capital ratios calculated under the standardized approach and those calculated under the advanced approaches in the assessment of our capital adequacy under applicable bank regulatory standards.
| TABLE 41: REGULATORY CAPITAL STRUCTURE AND RELATED REGULATORY CAPITAL RATIOS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| State Street Corporation | State Street Bank | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2021 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2021 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2020 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2020 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2021 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2021 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2020 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2020 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common shareholders' equity: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common stock and related surplus | $ | 11,291 | $ | 11,291 | $ | 10,709 | $ | 10,709 | $ | 13,047 | $ | 13,047 | $ | 12,893 | $ | 12,893 | ||||||||||||||
| Retained earnings | 25,238 | 25,238 | 23,442 | 23,442 | 15,700 | 15,700 | 12,939 | 12,939 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) | (1,133) | (1,133) | 187 | 187 | (926) | (926) | 371 | 371 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Treasury stock, at cost | (10,009) | (10,009) | (10,609) | (10,609) | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | 25,387 | 25,387 | 23,729 | 23,729 | 27,821 | 27,821 | 26,203 | 26,203 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Regulatory capital adjustments: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Goodwill and other intangible assets, net of associated deferred tax liabilities | (8,935) | (8,935) | (9,019) | (9,019) | (8,667) | (8,667) | (8,745) | (8,745) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other adjustments(1) | (505) | (505) | (333) | (333) | (309) | (309) | (152) | (152) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital | 15,947 | 15,947 | 14,377 | 14,377 | 18,845 | 18,845 | 17,306 | 17,306 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Preferred stock | 1,976 | 1,976 | 2,471 | 2,471 | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital | 17,923 | 17,923 | 16,848 | 16,848 | 18,845 | 18,845 | 17,306 | 17,306 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Qualifying subordinated long-term debt | 1,588 | 1,588 | 961 | 961 | 752 | 752 | 966 | 966 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Allowance for credit losses | — | 108 | 1 | 148 | — | 108 | 10 | 148 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total capital | $ | 19,511 | $ | 19,619 | $ | 17,810 | $ | 17,957 | $ | 19,597 | $ | 19,705 | $ | 18,282 | $ | 18,420 | ||||||||||||||
| Risk-weighted assets: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Credit risk(2) | $ | 63,735 | $ | 109,554 | $ | 63,367 | $ | 114,892 | $ | 57,405 | $ | 106,405 | $ | 58,960 | $ | 110,797 | ||||||||||||||
| Operational risk(3) | 45,550 | NA | 44,150 | NA | 42,813 | NA | 43,663 | NA | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Market risk | 2,113 | 2,113 | 2,188 | 2,188 | 2,113 | 2,113 | 2,188 | 2,188 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total risk-weighted assets | $ | 111,398 | $ | 111,667 | $ | 109,705 | $ | 117,080 | $ | 102,331 | $ | 108,518 | $ | 104,811 | $ | 112,985 | ||||||||||||||
| Adjusted quarterly average assets | $ | 293,567 | $ | 293,567 | $ | 263,490 | $ | 263,490 | $ | 290,403 | $ | 290,403 | $ | 260,489 | $ | 260,489 | ||||||||||||||
| Capital Ratios: | 2021 Minimum Requirements Including Capital Conservation Buffer and G-SIB Surcharge(4) | 2020 Minimum Requirements Including Capital Conservation Buffer and G-SIB Surcharge(4) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital | 8.0 | % | 8.0 | % | 14.3 | % | 14.3 | % | 13.1 | % | 12.3 | % | 18.4 | % | 17.4 | % | 16.5 | % | 15.3 | % | ||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital | 9.5 | 9.5 | 16.1 | 16.1 | 15.4 | 14.4 | 18.4 | 17.4 | 16.5 | 15.3 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Total capital | 11.5 | 11.5 | 17.5 | 17.6 | 16.2 | 15.3 | 19.2 | 18.2 | 17.4 | 16.3 |
(1) Other adjustments within CET1 capital primarily include the overfunded portion of our defined benefit pension plan obligation net of associated deferred tax liabilities, disallowed deferred tax assets, and other required credit risk based deductions.
(2) Under the advanced approaches, credit risk RWA includes a CVA which reflects the risk of potential fair value adjustments for credit risk reflected in our valuation of over-the-counter (OTC) derivative contracts. We used a simple CVA approach in conformity with the Basel III advanced approaches.
(3) Under the current advanced approaches rules and regulatory guidance concerning operational risk models, RWA attributable to operational risk can vary substantially from period-to-period, without direct correlation to the effects of a particular loss event on our results of operations and financial condition and impacting dates and periods that may differ from the dates and periods as of and during which the loss event is reflected in our financial statements, with the timing and categorization dependent on the processes for model updates and, if applicable, model revalidation and regulatory review and related supervisory processes. An individual loss event can have a significant effect on the output of our operational RWA under the advanced approaches depending on the severity of the loss event and its categorization among the seven Basel-defined UOMs.
(4) Minimum requirements include a CCB of 2.5% and a SCB of 2.5% for the advanced approaches and the standardized approach, respectively, a G-SIB surcharge of 1.0% and a countercyclical buffer of 0%.
NA Not applicable
Our CET1 capital increased $1.57 billion as of December 31, 2021 compared to December 31, 2020, primarily driven by net income and the issuance of common stock, partially offset by accumulated other comprehensive income and dividend distributions in the year ended December 31, 2021.
Our Tier 1 capital increased $1.08 billion as of December 31, 2021 compared to December 31, 2020 under both the advanced approaches and standardized approach due to the increase in CET1 capital, partially offset by the partial redemption of the Series F preferred stock.
Our Tier 2 capital increased under the advanced approaches and standardized approach, as of December 31, 2021 compared to December 31, 2020, by $0.63 billion and $0.59 billion, respectively, mainly driven by the issuance of our Tier 2 qualifying debt.
State Street Corporation | 116
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Total capital increased under the advanced approaches and standardized approach, as of December 31, 2021 compared to December 31, 2020, by $1.70 billion and $1.66 billion, respectively, mainly driven by the increase in our Tier 1 capital and Tier 2 capital.
The table below presents a roll-forward of CET1 capital, Tier 1 capital and total capital for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020.
| TABLE 42: CAPITAL ROLL-FORWARD | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2021 | Basel III Standardized Approach December, 31, 2021 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2020 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2020 | ||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital balance, beginning of period | $ | 14,377 | $ | 14,377 | $ | 12,213 | $ | 12,213 | ||||||
| Net income | 2,693 | 2,693 | 2,420 | 2,420 | ||||||||||
| Changes in treasury stock, at cost | 600 | 600 | (400) | (400) | ||||||||||
| Dividends declared | (897) | (897) | (886) | (886) | ||||||||||
| Goodwill and other intangible assets, net of associated deferred tax liabilities | 84 | 84 | 93 | 93 | ||||||||||
| Effect of certain items in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) | (1,320) | (1,320) | 1,057 | 1,057 | ||||||||||
| Other adjustments | 410 | 410 | (120) | (120) | ||||||||||
| Changes in common equity tier 1 capital | 1,570 | 1,570 | 2,164 | 2,164 | ||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital balance, end of period | 15,947 | 15,947 | 14,377 | 14,377 | ||||||||||
| Additional tier 1 capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital balance, beginning of period | 16,848 | 16,848 | 15,175 | 15,175 | ||||||||||
| Changes in common equity tier 1 capital | 1,570 | 1,570 | 2,164 | 2,164 | ||||||||||
| Net issuance (redemption) of preferred stock | (495) | (495) | (491) | (491) | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 1 capital | 1,075 | 1,075 | 1,673 | 1,673 | ||||||||||
| Tier 1 capital balance, end of period | 17,923 | 17,923 | 16,848 | 16,848 | ||||||||||
| Tier 2 capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Tier 2 capital balance, beginning of period | 962 | 1,109 | 1,100 | 1,185 | ||||||||||
| Net issuance and changes in long-term debt qualifying as tier 2 | 627 | 627 | (134) | (134) | ||||||||||
| Changes in allowance for credit losses | (1) | (40) | (4) | 58 | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 2 capital | 626 | 587 | (138) | (76) | ||||||||||
| Tier 2 capital balance, end of period | 1,588 | 1,696 | 962 | 1,109 | ||||||||||
| Total capital: | ||||||||||||||
| Total capital balance, beginning of period | 17,810 | 17,957 | 16,275 | 16,360 | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 1 capital | 1,075 | 1,075 | 1,673 | 1,673 | ||||||||||
| Changes in tier 2 capital | 626 | 587 | (138) | (76) | ||||||||||
| Total capital balance, end of period | $ | 19,511 | $ | 19,619 | $ | 17,810 | $ | 17,957 |
The following table presents a roll-forward of the Basel III advanced approaches and standardized approach RWA for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020.
| TABLE 43: ADVANCED & STANDARDIZED APPROACHES RISK-WEIGHTED ASSETS ROLL-FORWARD | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (In millions) | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2021 | Basel III Advanced Approaches December 31, 2020 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2021 | Basel III Standardized Approach December 31, 2020 | ||||||||||
| Total risk-weighted assets, beginning of period | $ | 109,705 | $ | 104,364 | $ | 117,080 | $ | 104,005 | ||||||
| Changes in credit risk-weighted assets: | ||||||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in investment securities-wholesale | (476) | 3,008 | (707) | 1,762 | ||||||||||
| Net increase in loans | 2,017 | 2,973 | 946 | 3,638 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in securitization exposures | (404) | 578 | (489) | 351 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in repo-style transaction exposures | (440) | 1,763 | (1,658) | 3,895 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in over-the-counter derivatives exposures(1) | (1,353) | 780 | (863) | 457 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in all other(2) | 1,024 | (498) | (2,567) | 2,422 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in credit risk-weighted assets | 368 | 8,604 | (5,338) | 12,525 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in market risk-weighted assets | (75) | 550 | (75) | 550 | ||||||||||
| Net increase (decrease) in operational risk-weighted assets | 1,400 | (3,813) | N/A | N/A | ||||||||||
| Total risk-weighted assets, end of period | $ | 111,398 | $ | 109,705 | $ | 111,667 | $ | 117,080 |
(1) Under the advanced approaches, includes CVA RWA.
(2 )Includes assets not in a definable category, non-material portfolio, cleared transactions, other wholesale, cash and due from banks, interest-bearing deposits with banks and equity exposures.
NA Not applicable.
State Street Corporation | 117
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
As of December 31, 2021, total advanced approaches RWA increased $1.69 billion compared to December 31, 2020, primarily due to an increase in operational risk RWA and credit risk RWA. The increase in operational risk RWA was primarily due to an increase in the frequency of certain operational loss events. The increase in credit risk RWA was primarily driven by an increase in loans RWA, partially offset by a decrease in over-the-counter derivatives RWA.
As of December 31, 2021, total standardized approach RWA decreased $5.41 billion compared to December 31, 2020, primarily due to lower credit risk RWA. The decrease in credit risk RWA was primarily driven by a decrease in all other RWA, repo-style transactions RWA, and over-the-counter derivatives RWA, partially offset by an increase in loans RWA.
The regulatory capital ratios as of December 31, 2021, presented in Table 41: Regulatory Capital Structure and Related Regulatory Capital Ratios, are calculated under the advanced approaches and standardized approach in conformity with the Basel III final rule. The advanced approaches based ratios reflect calculations and determinations with respect to our capital and related matters as of December 31, 2021, based on our and external data, quantitative formulae, statistical models, historical correlations and assumptions, collectively referred to as “advanced systems,” in effect and used by us for those purposes as of the time we first reported such ratios in a quarterly report on Form 10-Q or an annual report on Form 10-K. Significant components of these advanced systems involve the exercise of judgment by us and our regulators, and our advanced systems may not, individually or collectively, precisely represent or calculate the scenarios, circumstances, outputs or other results for which they are designed or intended.
Our advanced systems are subject to update and periodic revalidation in response to changes in our business activities and our historical experiences, forces and events experienced by the market broadly or by individual financial institutions, changes in regulations and regulatory interpretations and other factors, and are also subject to continuing regulatory review and approval. For example, a significant operational loss experienced by another financial institution, even if we do not experience a related loss, could result in a material change in the output of our advanced systems and a corresponding material change in our risk exposures, our total RWA, and our capital ratios compared to prior periods. An operational loss that we experience could also result in a material change in our capital requirements for operational risk under the advanced approaches, depending on the severity of the loss event, its characterization among the seven Basel-defined
UOM, and the stability of the distributional approach for a particular UOM, and without direct correlation to the effects of the loss event, or the timing of such effects, on our results of operations.
Due to the influence of changes in these advanced systems, whether resulting from changes in data inputs, regulation or regulatory supervision or interpretation, specific to us or market activities or experiences or other updates or factors, we expect that our advanced systems and our capital ratios calculated in conformity with the Basel III final rule will change and may be volatile over time, and that those latter changes or volatility could be material as calculated and measured from period to period. We and State Street Bank are subject to further regulatory guidance, action, and rule-making.
State Street Corporation | 118
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Tier 1 and Supplementary Leverage Ratios
We are subject to a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio and a supplementary leverage ratio. The Tier 1 leverage ratio is based on Tier 1 capital and adjusted quarterly average on-balance sheet assets. The Tier 1 leverage ratio differs from the SLR primarily in that the denominator of the Tier 1 leverage ratio is a quarterly average of on-balance sheet assets, while the SLR includes both on-balance sheet and certain off-balance sheet exposures. We must maintain a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio of 4%.
We are also subject to a minimum SLR of 3%, and as a U.S. G-SIB, we must maintain an additional 2% SLR buffer in order to avoid any limitations on distributions to shareholders and discretionary bonus payments to certain executives. If we do not maintain this buffer, limitations on these distributions and discretionary bonus payments would be increasingly stringent based upon the extent of the shortfall.
| TABLE 44: TIER 1 AND SUPPLEMENTARY LEVERAGE RATIOS | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in millions) | December 31, 2021 | December 31, 2020 | ||||
| State Street: | ||||||
| Tier 1 capital | $ | 17,923 | $ | 16,848 | ||
| Average assets | 303,007 | 277,055 | ||||
| Less: adjustments for deductions from tier 1 capital and other | (9,440) | (13,565) | ||||
| Adjusted average assets for Tier 1 leverage ratio | 293,567 | 263,490 | ||||
| Derivatives and repo-style transactions and off-balance sheet exposures | 32,985 | 34,379 | ||||
| Adjustments for deductions of qualifying central bank deposits | (84,113) | (90,322) | ||||
| Total assets for SLR | $ | 242,439 | $ | 207,547 | ||
| Tier 1 leverage ratio(1) | 6.1 | % | 6.4 | % | ||
| Supplementary leverage ratio | 7.4 | 8.1 | ||||
| State Street Bank(2): | ||||||
| Tier 1 capital | $ | 18,845 | $ | 17,306 | ||
| Average assets | 299,379 | 273,599 | ||||
| Less: adjustments for deductions from tier 1 capital and other | (8,976) | (13,110) | ||||
| Adjusted average assets for Tier 1 leverage ratio | 290,403 | 260,489 | ||||
| Off-balance sheet exposures | 32,985 | 38,591 | ||||
| Adjustments for deductions of qualifying central bank deposits | (84,113) | (80,935) | ||||
| Total assets for SLR | $ | 239,275 | $ | 218,145 | ||
| Tier 1 leverage ratio (1) | 6.5 | % | 6.6 | % | ||
| Supplementary leverage ratio | 7.9 | 7.9 |
(1) Tier 1 leverage ratios were calculated in conformity with the Basel III final rule.
(2) The SLR rule requires that, as of January 1, 2018, (i) State Street Bank maintains an SLR of at least 6.0% to be well capitalized under the U.S. banking regulators’ Prompt Corrective Action Framework and (ii) we maintain an SLR of at least 5.0% to avoid limitations on capital distributions and discretionary bonus payments. In addition to the SLR, State Street Bank is subject to a well capitalized Tier 1 leverage ratio requirement of 5.0%.
Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity (TLAC)
The Federal Reserve's final rule on TLAC, LTD, and clean holding company requirements for U.S. domiciled G-SIBs, such as us, is intended to improve the resiliency and resolvability of certain U.S. banking organizations through enhanced prudential standards, and requires us, among other things, to comply with minimum requirements for external TLAC and LTD. Specifically, we must hold:
| Amount equal to: | |
|---|---|
| Combined eligible tier 1 regulatory capital and LTD | Greater of:•21.5% of total RWA (18.0% minimum plus 2.5% plus a G-SIB surcharge calculated for these purposes under Method 1 of 1.0% plus any applicable counter- cyclical buffer, which is currently 0%); and •9.5% of total leverage exposure (7.5% minimum plus the SLR buffer of 2.0%), as defined by the SLR final rule. |
| Qualifying external LTD | Greater of:•7.0% of RWA (6.0% minimum plus a G-SIB surcharge calculated for these purposes under method 2 of 1.0%); and •4.5% of total leverage exposure, as defined by the SLR final rule. |
As of April 1, 2020, the TLAC and LTD requirements calibrated to the SLR denominator to reflect the deduction of certain central bank balances as prescribed by the regulatory relief implemented under the EGRRCPA.
The following table presents external LTD and external TLAC as of December 31, 2021.
| TABLE 45: TOTAL LOSS-ABSORBING CAPACITY | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of December 31, 2021 | |||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | Actual | Requirement | |||||||||||
| Total loss-absorbing capacity (eligible Tier 1 regulatory capacity and long-term debt): | |||||||||||||
| Risk-weighted assets | $ | 31,231 | 28.0 | % | $ | 24,008 | 21.5 | % | |||||
| Supplementary leverage exposure | 31,231 | 12.9 | 23,032 | 9.5 | |||||||||
| Long-term debt: | |||||||||||||
| Risk-weighted assets | 13,308 | 11.9 | 7,817 | 7.0 | |||||||||
| Supplementary leverage exposure | 13,308 | 5.5 | 10,910 | 4.5 |
Additional information about TLAC is provided under "Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity" in "Supervision and Regulation" in Business in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 119
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Regulatory Developments
In April 2018, the Federal Reserve issued a proposed rule which would replace the current 2.0% SLR buffer for G-SIBs, with a buffer equal to 50% of their G-SIB surcharge. This proposal would also make conforming modifications to our TLAC and eligible LTD requirements applicable to G-SIBs. At this point in time, it is unclear whether this proposal will be implemented as proposed.
In November 2019, the Federal Reserve and other U.S. federal banking agencies issued a final rule that, among other things, implements the SA-CCR, a new methodology for calculating the exposure amount for derivative contracts. Under the final rule, which became effective on January 1, 2022, we will have the option to use the SA-CCR or the IMM to measure the exposure amount of our cleared and uncleared derivative transactions under our advanced approaches calculation. We will be required to determine the amount of these exposures using the SA-CCR under our standardized approach capital calculation. Additionally, we will have to apply a revised formula to determine the RWA amount of our central counterparty default fund contributions. Applying the SA-CCR to our derivative exposures as of December 31, 2021, in place of then-applicable Current Exposure Method (CEM), under the standardized approach, with all else equal, would on a pro- forma basis increase our total RWA as of that date by approximately 10%. As part of a plan to partially offset these SA-CCR RWA impacts, various business actions have been identified for optimization and completion in the first half of 2022.
On March 4, 2020, the U.S. federal banking agencies issued the SCB final rule that replaces, under the standardized approach, the capital conservation buffer (2.5%) with a SCB calculated as the difference between an institution’s starting and lowest projected CET1 ratio under the CCAR severely adverse scenario plus planned common stock dividend payments (as a percentage of RWA) from the fourth through seventh quarter of the CCAR planning horizon. Based on our results from the 2021 supervisory stress test, our SCB for the period of October 1, 2021 through September 2022 is set at the minimum of 2.5% of RWA.
The Federal Reserve and other U.S. federal banking agencies issued an interim final rule effective in March 2020 and later finalized on a permanent basis on August 26, 2020, which revised the definition of eligible retained income for all U.S. banking organizations. The revised definition of eligible retained income makes any automatic limitations on capital distributions, where a banking organization's regulatory ratios were to decline below the respective minimum requirements, take effect on a more gradual basis.
Following the launch of the MMLF program, which we participated in, the Federal Reserve issued an interim final rule on March 19, 2020 (followed by a final rule on September 29, 2020), allowing Bank Holding Companies (BHCs) to exclude assets purchased with the MMLF program from their RWA, total leverage exposure and average total consolidated assets. No new credit extensions were made after March 31, 2021, as the program had expired.
On March 27, 2020, the BCBS announced the deferral of the implementation of the revisions to the Basel III framework to January 1, 2023. As of now, the U.S. federal banking agencies have not formally proposed the implementation of the BCBS revisions.
Effective April 1, 2020, the Federal Reserve and other U.S. federal banking agencies adopted a final rule as part of EGRRCPA that establishes a deduction for qualifying central bank deposits from a custodial banking organization’s total leverage exposure equal to the lesser of (i) the total amount of funds the custodial banking organization and its consolidated subsidiaries have on deposit at qualifying central banks and (ii) the total amount of client funds on deposit at the custodial banking organization that are linked to fiduciary or custodial and safekeeping accounts. For the quarter ended December 31, 2021, we deducted $84.1 billion of average balances held on deposit at central banks from the denominator used in the calculation of our SLR, based on this custodial banking deduction.
On October 20, 2020, the Federal Reserve and other U.S. federal banking agencies issued a final rule that requires us and State Street Bank to make certain deductions from regulatory capital for investments in certain unsecured debt instruments, including eligible LTD under the TLAC rule, issued by the Parent Company and other U.S. and foreign G-SIBs. The final rule became effective on April 1, 2021.
In light of the decision to administer a new stress test, the Federal Reserve limited the ability of all CCAR banking organizations to make capital distributions in the third and fourth quarters of 2020, although banking organizations were permitted to pay common stock dividends at previous levels provided such distributions did not exceed an amount determined by a formula based on the banking organization's recent income. As a result, CCAR banking organizations, including us, were not permitted to return capital to shareholders in the form of common share repurchases during the third quarter and fourth quarter of 2020.
On August 10, 2020, the Federal Reserve confirmed that our SCB was 2.5% for the period starting on October 1, 2020 and ending on September 30, 2021.
State Street Corporation | 120
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
On December 18, 2020, following the release of a second round of stress test results for 2020, the Federal Reserve modified the restrictions on capital distributions for the first quarter of 2021. Common stock dividends and share repurchases in the first quarter of 2021 were limited to the average of our net income for the four preceding quarters plus a number of shares equal to the share issuances in the quarter related to expensed employee compensation, provided that we did not increase the amount of our common stock dividends to be larger than the level paid in the second quarter of 2020. On March 25, 2021, the Federal Reserve extended these restrictions through the second quarter of 2021.
On June 24, 2021, we were notified by the Federal Reserve of the results from the 2021 supervisory stress test. Our SCB calculated under this supervisory stress test was well below the 2.5% minimum, resulting in an SCB at that floor, which was effective starting October 1, 2021 and will run through September 30, 2022. The Federal Reserve also lifted the restrictions on capital distributions implemented in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and we are currently governed in our capital distributions by minimum capital requirements inclusive of the SCB.
For additional information about regulatory developments, refer to the "Regulatory Capital Adequacy and Liquidity Standards" section of "Supervision and Regulation" in Business in this Form 10-K.
Capital Actions
Preferred Stock
The following table summarizes selected terms of each of the series of the preferred stock issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2021:
| TABLE 46: PREFERRED STOCK ISSUED AND OUTSTANDING | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preferred Stock(1): | Issuance Date | Depositary Shares Issued | Amount outstanding (in millions) | Ownership Interest Per Depositary Share | Liquidation Preference Per Share | Liquidation Preference Per Depositary Share | Per Annum Dividend Rate | Dividend Payment Frequency | Carrying Value as of December 31, 2021 (In millions) | Redemption Date(2) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Series D | February 2014 | 30,000,000 | $ | 750 | 1/4,000th | $ | 100,000 | $ | 25 | 5.90% to but excluding March 15, 2024, then a floating rate equal to the three-month LIBOR plus 3.108% | Quarterly: March, June, September and December | $ | 742 | March 15, 2024 | |||||||||||||||
| Series F(3) | May 2015 | 250,000 | 250 | 1/100th | 100,000 | 1,000 | 5.25% to but excluding September 15, 2020, then a floating rate equal to the three-month LIBOR plus 3.597%, or 3.7998% effective December 15, 2021 | Quarterly: March, June, September and December | 247 | September 15, 2020 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Series G | April 2016 | 20,000,000 | 500 | 1/4,000th | 100,000 | 25 | 5.35% to but excluding March 15, 2026, then a floating rate equal to the three-month LIBOR plus 3.709% | Quarterly: March, June, September and December | 493 | March 15, 2026 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Series H | September 2018 | 500,000 | 500 | 1/100th | 100,000 | 1,000 | 5.625% to but excluding December 15, 2023, then a floating rate equal to the three-month LIBOR plus 2.539% | Semi-annually: June and December | 494 | December 15, 2023 |
(1) The preferred stock and corresponding depositary shares may be redeemed at our option in whole, but not in part, prior to the redemption date upon the occurrence of a regulatory capital treatment event, as defined in the certificate of designation, at a redemption price equal to the liquidation price per share and liquidation price per depositary share plus any declared and unpaid dividends, without accumulation of any undeclared dividends.
(2) On the redemption date, or any dividend payment date thereafter, the preferred stock and corresponding depositary shares may be redeemed by us, in whole or in part, at the liquidation price per share and liquidation price per depositary share plus any declared and unpaid dividends, without accumulation of any undeclared dividends.
(3) Series F preferred stock is redeemable on September 15, 2020 and on each succeeding dividend payment date.
State Street Corporation | 121
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
On March 15, 2021, we redeemed an aggregate of $500 million, or 5,000 of the 7,500 outstanding shares of our non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series F, for cash at a redemption price of $100,000 per share (equivalent to $1,000 per depositary share) plus all declared and unpaid dividends.
The following table presents the dividends declared for each of the series of preferred stock issued and outstanding for the periods indicated:
TABLE 47: PREFERRED STOCK DIVIDENDS
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 2020 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) | Dividends Declared per Share | Dividends Declared per Depositary Share | Total | Dividends Declared per Share | Dividends Declared per Depositary Share | Total | ||||||||||||||||
| Preferred Stock: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Series C | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 1,313 | $ | 0.33 | $ | 6 | ||||||||||
| Series D | 5,900 | 1.48 | 44 | 5,900 | 1.48 | 44 | ||||||||||||||||
| Series F | 3,808 | 38.08 | 15 | 6,223 | 62.23 | 47 | ||||||||||||||||
| Series G | 5,352 | 1.32 | 27 | 5,352 | 1.32 | 27 | ||||||||||||||||
| Series H | 5,625 | 56.25 | 28 | 5,625 | 56.25 | 28 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 114 | $ | 152 |
Common Stock
In September 2021, we completed a public offering of approximately 21.7 million shares of our common stock. The offering price was $87.60 per share and net proceeds totaled approximately $1.9 billion. We expect to use these net proceeds to finance our planned acquisition of the BBH Investor Services business.
In June 2019, the Federal Reserve issued a non-objection to our capital plan submitted as part of the 2019 CCAR submission; and in connection with that capital plan, our Board approved a common share repurchase program authorizing the repurchase of up to $2.0 billion of our common stock from July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2020 (the 2019 Program). We repurchased $500 million of our common stock in each of the third and fourth quarters of 2019 and the first quarter of 2020 under the 2019 Program.
On March 16, 2020, we, along with the other U.S. G-SIBs, suspended common share repurchases and maintained this suspension through the fourth quarter of 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This suspension was consistent with limitations imposed by the Federal Reserve beginning in the second quarter of 2020. As a result, we had no repurchases of our common stock in the second, third or fourth quarters of 2020. In December 2020, the Federal Reserve issued results of 2020 resubmission stress tests and authorized us to continue to pay common stock dividends at current levels and to resume repurchasing common shares in the first quarter of 2021. In January 2021, our Board authorized a common share repurchase program for the repurchase of up to $475 million of our common stock through March 31, 2021. We repurchased $475 million of our common stock in the first quarter of 2021. In April 2021, our Board authorized a common share repurchase program for the repurchase of up to $425 million of our common stock through June 30, 2021, in compliance with the limit set by the Federal Reserve. We repurchased $425 million of our common stock in the second quarter of 2021. In July 2021, our Board authorized a share repurchase program for the repurchase of up to $3.0 billion of our common stock through the end of 2022.
In connection with our planned acquisition of the BBH Investor Services business, we did not repurchase any common stock during the third and fourth quarters of 2021 under the common share repurchase plan approved by our Board in July 2021, and we do not intend to repurchase any common stock during the first quarter of 2022. We intend to resume our common share repurchases during the second quarter of 2022.
The table below presents the activity under our common share repurchase program for the period indicated:
| TABLE 48: SHARES REPURCHASED | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended December 31, 2021 | |||||||||||||||
| Shares Acquired (In millions) | Average Cost per Share | Total Acquired (In millions) | |||||||||||||
| 11.2 | $ | 80.00 | $ | 900 | |||||||||||
| Year Ended December 31, 2020 | |||||||||||||||
| Shares Acquired (In millions) | Average Cost per Share | Total Acquired (In millions) | |||||||||||||
| 2019 Program | 6.5 | $ | 77.35 | $ | 500 |
State Street Corporation | 122
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The table below presents the dividends declared on common stock for the periods indicated:
| TABLE 49: COMMON STOCK DIVIDENDS | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||
| 2021 | 2020 | |||||||||||||
| Dividends Declared per Share | Total (In millions) | Dividends Declared per Share | Total (In millions) | |||||||||||
| Common Stock | $ | 2.18 | $ | 779 | $ | 2.08 | $ | 734 |
Federal and state banking regulations place certain restrictions on dividends paid by subsidiary banks to the parent holding company. In addition, banking regulators have the authority to prohibit bank holding companies from paying dividends. For information concerning limitations on dividends from our subsidiary banks, refer to "Related Stockholder Matters" included under Item 5, Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities, and to Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K. Our common stock and preferred stock dividends, including the declaration, timing and amount thereof, are subject to consideration and approval by the Board at the relevant times.
Stock purchases may be made using various types of transactions, including open market purchases, accelerated share repurchases or other transactions off the market, and may be made under Rule 10b5-1 trading programs. The timing and amount of any stock purchases and the type of transaction will depend on several factors, including investment opportunities, our capital position, our financial performance, market conditions and the amount of common stock issued as part of employee compensation programs. The common share repurchase program does not have specific price targets and may be suspended at any time.
OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS
On behalf of clients enrolled in our securities lending program, we lend securities to banks, broker/dealers and other institutions. In most circumstances, we indemnify our clients for the fair market value of those securities against a failure of the borrower to return such securities. Though these transactions are collateralized, the substantial volume of these activities necessitates detailed credit-based underwriting and monitoring processes. The aggregate amount of indemnified securities on loan totaled $385.74 billion and $440.88 billion as of December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, respectively. We require the borrower to provide collateral in an amount in excess of 100% of the fair market value of the securities borrowed. We hold the collateral received in connection with these securities lending services as agent, and the collateral is not
recorded in our consolidated statement of condition. We revalue the securities on loan and the collateral daily to determine if additional collateral is necessary or if excess collateral is required to be returned to the borrower. We held, as agent, cash and securities totaling $404.12 billion and $463.27 billion as collateral for indemnified securities on loan as of December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, respectively.
The cash collateral held by us as agent is invested on behalf of our clients. In certain cases, the cash collateral is invested in third-party repurchase agreements, for which we indemnify the client against loss of the principal invested. We require the counterparty to the indemnified repurchase agreement to provide collateral in an amount in excess of 100% of the amount of the repurchase agreement. In our role as agent, the indemnified repurchase agreements and the related collateral held by us are not recorded in our consolidated statement of condition. Of the collateral of $404.12 billion and $463.27 billion, referenced above, $61.56 billion and $54.43 billion was invested in indemnified repurchase agreements as of December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, respectively. We or our agents held $67.01 billion and $58.09 billion as collateral for indemnified investments in repurchase agreements as of December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, respectively.
Additional information about our securities finance activities and other off-balance sheet arrangements is provided in Notes 10, 12 and 14 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 123
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES
Our consolidated financial statements are prepared in conformity with U.S. GAAP, and we apply accounting policies that affect the determination of amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements. Additional information on our significant accounting policies, including references to applicable footnotes, is provided in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Certain of our accounting policies, by their nature, require management to make judgments, involving significant estimates and assumptions, about the effects of matters that are inherently uncertain. These estimates and assumptions are based on information available as of the date of the consolidated financial statements, and changes in this information over time could materially affect the amounts of assets, liabilities, equity, revenue and expenses reported in subsequent consolidated financial statements.
Based on the sensitivity of reported financial statement amounts to the underlying estimates and assumptions, the more significant accounting policies applied by us have been identified by management as those associated with recurring fair value measurements, allowance for credit losses, impairment of goodwill and other intangible assets, and contingencies. These accounting policies require the most subjective or complex judgments, and underlying estimates and assumptions could be most subject to revision as new information becomes available. An understanding of the judgments, estimates and assumptions underlying these accounting policies is essential in order to understand our reported consolidated results of operations and financial condition.
The following is a discussion of the above-mentioned significant accounting estimates. Management has discussed these significant accounting estimates with the E&A Committee of the Board.
Fair Value Measurements
We carry certain of our financial assets and liabilities at fair value in our consolidated financial statements on a recurring basis, including trading account assets and liabilities, AFS debt securities, certain equity securities and various types of derivative financial instruments.
Changes in the fair value of these financial assets and liabilities are recorded either as components of our consolidated statement of income or as components of other comprehensive income within shareholders' equity in our consolidated statement of condition. In addition to those financial assets and liabilities that we carry at fair value in our consolidated financial statements on a recurring
basis, we estimate the fair values of other financial assets and liabilities that we carry at amortized cost in our consolidated statement of condition, and we disclose these fair value estimates in the notes to our consolidated financial statements. We estimate the fair values of these financial assets and liabilities using the definition of fair value described below. Additional information with respect to the assets and liabilities carried by us at fair value on a recurring basis is provided in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
U.S. GAAP defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in the principal or most advantageous market for an asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. When we measure fair value for our financial assets and liabilities, we consider the principal or the most advantageous market in which we would transact; we also consider assumptions that market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability. When possible, we look to active and observable markets to measure the fair value of identical, or similar, financial assets and liabilities. When identical financial assets and liabilities are not traded in active markets, we look to market-observable data for similar assets and liabilities. In some instances, certain assets and liabilities are not actively traded in observable markets; as a result, we use alternate valuation techniques to measure their fair value.
We categorize the financial assets and liabilities that we carry at fair value in our consolidated statement of condition on a recurring basis based on U.S. GAAP's prescribed three-level valuation hierarchy. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (level 1) and the lowest priority to valuation methods using significant unobservable inputs (level 3).
With respect to derivative instruments, we evaluate the fair value impact of the credit risk of our counterparties. We consider such factors as the market-based probability of default by our counterparties, and our current and expected potential future net exposures by remaining maturities, in determining the appropriate measurements of fair value.
State Street Corporation | 124
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Allowance for Credit Losses
In January 2020, we adopted ASC 326, which replaces the incurred loss methodology with an expected loss methodology. We maintain an allowance for credit losses to support our on-balance sheet credit exposures, including financial assets held at amortized cost. We also maintain an allowance for unfunded commitments and letters of credit to support our off-balance credit exposure. The two components together represent the allowance for credit losses.
Determining the appropriateness of the allowance is complex and requires judgment by management about the effect of matters that are inherently uncertain. In future periods, factors and forecasts then prevailing may result in significant changes in the allowance for credit losses in those future periods. We estimate credit losses over the contractual life of the financial asset while factoring in prepayment activity where supported by data over a three year reasonable and supportable forecast period. We utilize a baseline, upside and downside scenario which are applied based on a probability weighting, in order to better reflect management’s expectation of expected credit losses given existing market conditions and the changes in the economic environment. The multiple scenarios are based on a three year horizon (or less depending on contractual maturity) and then revert linearly over a two year period to a ten-year historical average thereafter. The contractual term excludes expected extensions, renewals and modifications, but includes prepayment assumptions where applicable.
Our allowance for credit losses is sensitive to a number of inputs, including macroeconomic forecast assumptions and credit rating migrations during the period. Our macroeconomic forecasts used in determining the December 31, 2021 allowance for credit losses consisted of three scenarios. The baseline scenario reflects ongoing GDP growth and falling unemployment in 2022, generally in line with market expectations, and consistent with waning COVID transmission and improved supply chains. The upside scenario reflects a faster recovery in consumer spending and stronger productivity growth in 2022 relative to the baseline scenario. The downside scenario contemplates a double-dip recession due to resurgent COVID infections that results in negative GDP growth, rising unemployment, and deteriorating credit conditions in early 2022. We placed the most weight on our baseline scenario, with the remaining weighting split equally between the upside and downside scenarios.
Keeping all other factors constant, we estimate that if we had applied 100% weighting to the downside scenario, the allowance for credit losses as
of December 31, 2021 would have been approximately $50 million higher. This estimate is intended to reflect the sensitivity of the allowance for credit losses to changes in our scenario weights and is not intended to be indicative of future changes in the allowance for credit losses.
Additional information about our allowance for credit losses is provided in Notes 3 and 4 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets
Goodwill represents the excess of the cost of an acquisition over the fair value of the net tangible and other intangible assets acquired at the acquisition date. Other intangible assets represent purchased long-lived intangible assets, primarily client relationships, core deposit intangible assets and technology that can be distinguished from goodwill because of contractual rights or because the asset can be exchanged on its own or in combination with a related contract, asset or liability. Other intangible assets are initially measured at their acquisition date fair value, the determination of which requires management judgment. Goodwill is not amortized, while other intangible assets are amortized over their estimated useful lives.
Management reviews goodwill for impairment annually or more frequently if circumstances arise or events occur that indicate an impairment of the carrying amount may exist. We begin our review by first assessing qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. Events that may indicate impairment include: significant or adverse changes in the business, economic or political climate; an adverse action or assessment by a regulator; unanticipated competition; and a more-likely-than-not expectation that we will sell or otherwise dispose of a business to which the goodwill or other intangible assets relate. If we conclude from the qualitative assessment of goodwill impairment that it is more likely than not that a reporting unit’s fair value is greater than its carrying amount, quantitative tests are not required. However, if we determine it is more likely than not that a reporting unit’s fair value is less than its carrying amount, then we complete a quantitative assessment to determine if there is goodwill impairment. We may elect to bypass the qualitative assessment and complete a quantitative assessment in any given year.
In 2021, we assessed goodwill for impairment using a qualitative assessment. Based on our evaluation of the qualitative factors noted above, we determined that it was more likely than not that the fair value of each of the reporting units exceeded its
State Street Corporation | 125
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
respective carrying amount. We determined there was no goodwill impairment in 2021.
Other intangible assets are supported by the future cash flows that are directly associated with and expected to arise as a direct result of the use of the intangible asset, less any costs associated with the intangible asset’s eventual disposition. We evaluate other intangible assets for impairment at the lowest level for which there are identifiable cash flows that are largely independent of the cash flows from other groups of assets using the following process. First, we routinely assess whether impairment indicators are present. When impairment indicators are identified as being present, we compare the estimated future net undiscounted cash flows of the intangible asset with its carrying value. If the future net undiscounted cash flows are greater than the carrying value, then there is no impairment, but if the intangible asset's net undiscounted cash flows are less than its carrying value, we are required to calculate impairment. An impairment is recognized by writing the intangible asset down to its fair value. We evaluate intangible assets for indicators of impairment on a quarterly basis. There were no impairments taken on other intangible assets in 2021.
Additional information about goodwill and other intangible assets, including information by line of business, is provided in Note 5 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
Contingencies
Information on significant estimates and judgments related with establishing litigation reserves is discussed in Note 13 of the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
RECENT ACCOUNTING DEVELOPMENTS
Information with respect to recent accounting developments is provided in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K.
State Street Corporation | 126