Statewide CU Performance Shows Success Even in Troubled States

California. Florida. Nevada. Michigan. Ohio. If you've turned on the television at all in the past 9 months, you've certainly heard how much the local economies in these states have struggled. For the credit unions in these states the current market has created its fair share of market challenges, but it has also created opportunities for success.

 
 

California. Florida. Nevada. Michigan. Ohio. If you've turned on the television at all in the past 9 months, you've certainly heard how much the local economies in these states have struggled. For the credit unions in these states the current market has created its fair share of market challenges, but it has also created opportunities for success.

Loan and Share Balances Increase Despite Slowed Membership Growth

To get the bad news out of the way first, one of the challenges these states continue to face is the ability to drive new members into the credit union. As the markets struggle and consumers become more wary of financial institutions, these credit unions have seen minimal success. Of the five states, only two managed to add members during the year. The greatest success was seen in Nevada as membership totals increased 75 basis points during the year. For the rest of the states, membership remained relatively unchanged hovering within 5 basis points of their 2007 levels. Although growth may have slowed, even the bad press leveled at most financial institutions was not enough to make members leave their credit unions to begin relationships with another institution. It is also worth noting that many credit unions clean out their records at year-end to remove inactive members, which may play a role in the total membership count of the states at year-end.

Although membership continues to be a struggle, the good news is that the members that remained a part of the credit union have continued to seek out financing opportunities and increase their deposits. With only one exception, credit unions in these five states saw increases in both loan growth and share growth in 2008. Highlights include credit unions in Ohio and Michigan, with loan growth in Ohio surpassing the national credit union average. This increase in Ohio is largely due to double-digit growth in the state-wide mortgage portfolio as Ohio credit unions saw first mortgage originations increase nearly 12% from balances in 2007.


State

Member Growth

Loan Growth

Share Growth

CA

-0.01%

0.61%

2.53%

FL

0.01%

0.76%

-0.30%

MI

-0.05%

5.23%

6.33%

NV

0.75%

1.94%

1.74%

OH

-0.03%

7.44%

6.87%

 

 

 

 

          Source: Callahan & Associates' Peer-to-Peer Software

Comparing Yourself to Your Statewide Peers

As a credit union in one of the above mentioned states, how should you measure your performance? If you were a California credit union with 3% loan growth, are you falling behind based on national averages, or succeeding based on a comparison to other credit unions in your state? No credit union is "average". There are components of each credit union that make it unique, which can make financial comparisons difficult. Are two credit unions performing equally if their growth numbers are the same, but they are located 3,000 miles apart? While averages are a crucial part of data analysis and performance comparison, they cannot tell you the whole story. Using a peer group that more accurately reflects the climate and challenges that face your credit union may give you a better gauge to measure your own performance.

Below we have listed the three metrics mentioned above for credit unions in each individual state. You may want to consider using this list as a baseline when measuring your credit union’s performance in 2008. And, for additional information about using custom peer groups to benchmark performance, year-end data is now available in our Peer-to-Peer 2.0 Software.


State

Member Growth

Loan Growth

Share Growth

Alaska

7.22%

15.29%

15.58%

Alabama

2.51%

6.39%

8.09%

Arkansas

3.50%

13.57%

12.79%

Arizona

0.26%

2.59%

4.94%

California

-0.01%

0.61%

2.53%

Colorado

1.63%

10.72%

9.09%

Connecticut

-0.18%

5.26%

8.59%

Dist. of Columbia

0.72%

1.72%

7.98%

Delaware

-0.99%

-2.11%

2.22%

Florida

0.01%

0.76%

-0.30%

Georgia

2.07%

8.06%

9.63%

Guam

-8.03%

6.89%

24.24%

Hawaii

0.31%

6.92%

7.47%

Iowa

1.91%

12.21%

11.54%

Idaho

2.61%

10.35%

10.44%

Illinois

1.50%

9.70%

12.02%

Indiana

0.98%

4.39%

5.88%

Kansas

1.17%

9.78%

10.72%

Kentucky

-0.78%

7.20%

11.79%

Louisiana

2.27%

7.27%

8.15%

Massachusetts

0.53%

6.37%

5.21%

Maryland

0.26%

6.17%

7.40%

Maine

-0.13%

5.16%

6.39%

Michigan

-0.05%

5.23%

6.33%

Minnesota

1.45%

1.65%

6.86%

Missouri

1.69%

5.68%

8.63%

Mississippi

0.25%

4.56%

6.65%

Montana

1.91%

9.80%

11.30%

North Carolina

3.06%

10.56%

9.63%

North Dakota

0.25%

9.48%

8.65%

Nebraska

0.55%

3.82%

7.55%

New Hampshire

5.71%

13.22%

9.13%

New Jersey

-1.39%

3.87%

5.40%

New Mexico

2.19%

9.03%

10.11%

Nevada

0.75%

1.94%

1.74%

New York

1.73%

7.39%

9.15%

Ohio

-0.03%

7.44%

6.87%

Oklahoma

1.69%

8.93%

10.21%

Oregon

1.73%

4.61%

6.17%

Pennsylvania

1.08%

8.16%

9.89%

Puerto Rico

2.65%

3.84%

7.82%

Rhode Island

-0.74%

7.52%

6.77%

South Carolina

0.25%

6.22%

5.03%

South Dakota

1.15%

8.40%

9.01%

Tennessee

3.12%

7.56%

7.70%

Texas

2.92%

8.77%

12.09%

Utah

5.77%

11.54%

9.35%

Virginia

4.75%

14.77%

5.13%

Virgin Islands

-8.31%

10.22%

13.44%

Vermont

1.35%

9.66%

16.07%

Washington

4.24%

9.03%

9.60%

Wisconsin

1.82%

10.69%

9.04%

West Virginia

-0.65%

2.97%

4.27%

U.S. Totals

1.58%

6.71%

6.96%

          Source: Callahan & Associates' Peer-to-Peer Software

 

 

 

March 9, 2009


Comments

 
 
 

No comments have been posted yet. Be the first one.