[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-310226-105":59,"doc-detail-310226-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","re-review-of-the-federal-reserves-supervision-and-regulation-of-silicon-valley-bank","Re - Review of the Federal Reserve’s Supervision and Regulation of Silicon Valley Bank","","Review outlines the causes of Silicon Valley Bank’s failure, emphasizing mismanagement of interest-rate and liquidity risk, weak board oversight, and insufficiently forceful Federal Reserve supervisory action. It argues that while the banking system remains resilient, SVB exposed regulatory and supervisory weaknesses, including standards set too low and supervisory tailoring reducing urgency and effectiveness. The document presents a self-assessment, summarizes four key takeaways, and proposes stronger supervision speed, continuity, and tailored attention to evolving risks.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/re-review-of-the-federal-reserves-supervision-and-regulation-of-silicon-valley-bank/310226/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/re-review-of-the-federal-reserves-supervision-and-regulation-of-silicon-valley-bank/310226.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Evangeline","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-23","2026-09-20",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":44},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What does the review identify as the main reasons Silicon Valley Bank failed?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"It attributes the failure to SVB’s mismanagement of interest rate and liquidity risk, insufficient board oversight, and Federal Reserve supervisors not taking forceful enough action. The review also highlights weaknesses in regulation and supervision that must be addressed.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"Why does the report say the banking system is still sound and resilient?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"The report states that the system is sound and resilient with strong capital and liquidity. It also notes SVB was an outlier due to a highly concentrated business model, significant interest-rate risk, and reliance on uninsured deposits.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What supervision changes does the report propose after the SVB failure?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"It focuses on improving the speed, force, and agility of supervision, ensuring supervision intensifies at the right pace as firms grow. It also calls for more continuity between supervisory portfolios, quicker issue remediation, and additional supervisory attention for risks from rapid growth or concentrated business models.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},310226,1790155553,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":44,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},13056703019662,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/be000253a8e92610077?_k=1778726343310543188","April 28, 2023  \nRe: Review of the Federal Reserve’s Supervision and Regulation of Silicon Valley Bank  \nSilicon Valley Bank (SVB) failed because of a textbook case of mismanagement by the bank. Its senior leadership failed to manage basic interest rate and liquidity risk. Its board of directors failed to oversee senior leadership and hold them accountable. And Federal Reserve supervisors failed to take forceful enough action, as detailed in the report.  \nOur banking system is sound and resilient, with strong capital and liquidity. And in some respects, SVB was an outlier because of the extent of its highly concentrated business model, interest rate risk, and high level of reliance on uninsured deposits; however, SVB’s failure demonstrates that there are weaknesses in regulation and supervision that must be addressed. Regulatory standards for SVB were too low, the supervision of SVB did not work with sufficient force and urgency, and contagion from the firm’s failure posed systemic consequences not contemplated by the Federal Reserve’s tailoring framework.  \nFollowing SVB’s failure, we must strengthen the Federal Reserve’s supervision and regulation based on what we have learned. This report represents the first step in that process—a self-assessment that takes an unflinching look at the conditions that led to the bank’s failure, including the role of Federal Reserve supervision and regulation. Individuals who were not involved in the supervision of SVB conducted the review, and I oversaw it.  \nThe four key takeaways of the report are:  \n1. Silicon Valley Bank’s board of directors and management failed to manage their risks.  \n2. Supervisors did not fully appreciate the extent of the vulnerabilities as Silicon Valley Bank grew in size and complexity.  \n3. When supervisors did identify vulnerabilities, they did not take sufficient steps to ensure that Silicon Valley Bank fixed those problems quickly enough.  \n4. The Board’s tailoring approach in response to the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act (EGRRCPA) and a shift in the stance of supervisory policy impeded effective supervision by reducing standards, increasing complexity, and promoting a less assertive supervisory approach.  \nBefore discussing specific supervisory and regulatory changes that we should consider, I would like to touch on broader issues exposed by the failure of the bank.  \nFirst, the combination of social media, a highly networked and concentrated depositor base, and technology may have fundamentally changed the speed of bank runs. Social media enabled depositors to instantly spread concerns about a bank run, and technology enabled immediate withdrawals of funding.  \nSecond, as I have previously stated, a firm’s distress may have systemic consequences through contagion—where concerns about one firm spread to other firms—even if the firm is not extremely large, highly connected to other financial counterparties, or involved in critical financial services.  \nThird, this experience has emphasized why strong bank capital matters. While the proximate cause of SVB’s failure was a liquidity run, the underlying issue was concern about its solvency.  \nAs risks in the financial system continue to evolve, we need to continuously evaluate our supervisory and regulatory framework and be humble about our ability to assess and identify new and emerging risks. That is why we need to bolster resiliency broadly in the financial system, and not focus solely on specific risk drivers. Some steps already in progress include the holistic review of our capital framework; implementation of the Basel III endgame rules; the use of multiple scenarios in stress testing; and a long-term debt rule to improve the resiliency and resolvability of large banks. We plan to seek comment on these proposals soon. Other possible steps based on what we have learned from the SVB report, SVB’s failure, and its contagion, will follow later.  \nStronger Supervisory Framework ","cbCailNiKcMf7z7k","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCailNiKcMf7z7k","pdf",4079524,118,"English","# Review Summary\n## Key Takeaways\n## Broader Issues Exposed\n# Stronger Supervisory Framework\n## Improve Speed, Force, and Agility\n## Portfolio Continuity\n## Targeted Attention to Special Risks","[{\"question\":\"What does the review identify as the main reasons Silicon Valley Bank failed?\",\"answer\":\"It attributes the failure to SVB’s mismanagement of interest rate and liquidity risk, insufficient board oversight, and Federal Reserve supervisors not taking forceful enough action. The review also highlights weaknesses in regulation and supervision that must be addressed.\"},{\"question\":\"Why does the report say the banking system is still sound and resilient?\",\"answer\":\"The report states that the system is sound and resilient with strong capital and liquidity. It also notes SVB was an outlier due to a highly concentrated business model, significant interest-rate risk, and reliance on uninsured deposits.\"},{\"question\":\"What supervision changes does the report propose after the SVB failure?\",\"answer\":\"It focuses on improving the speed, force, and agility of supervision, ensuring supervision intensifies at the right pace as firms grow. It also calls for more continuity between supervisory portfolios, quicker issue remediation, and additional supervisory attention for risks from rapid growth or concentrated business models.\"}]","Re - Review of the Federal Reserve’s Supervision and Regulation of Silicon Valley Bank | PDF",1789878321,297]