biggest banks in the world 2018

In the near-term, banks believe credit risk will be the No. Seven of the top 10 emerging risks according to CROs relate to technology. Despite Brexit uncertainty, HSBC rose in the ranks of the world's top banks from the tenth spot (which it held in 2018) to the ninth in 2019. Industrial & Commercial Bank of China (ICBC).
biggest banks in the world 2018

: Biggest banks in the world 2018

Https m facebook com story php story_fbid download
Biggest banks in the world 2018

Related Videos

Top 10 Biggest Banks in the world 2021 🏦 - Total Assets - Mr Famous
biggest banks in the world 2018

TOP-15 Biggest Banks in South Africa

The banking industry in South Africa is second to none in the Continent. The industry biggest banks in the world 2018 well-groomed and developed that about four of its leading banks are amongst the top ten biggest banks in Africa, and they have been leading the pack for quite a while now.

Biggest Banks South Africa

Below is a list of the biggest banks in South Africa:

  1. Standard Bank Group
  2. FirstRand
  3. ABSA Group
  4. Nedbank Group
  5. Capitec
  6. Investec Bank
  7. African Bank Limited
  8. Grindrod Bank
  9. Mercantile Bank
  10. Bidvest Bank
  11. Sasfin Bank Limited
  12. Al Baraka Bank Limited
  13. Ubank Limited
  14. HBZ Bank South Africa
  15. South African Bank of Athens (SABA)

1. Standard Bank Group

The South African bank ranks the biggest in South Africa and even in Africa as a whole. It has a tier 1 capital of $9.8 billion. The bank stands out on many grounds. It is the top-earning institution, bringing in a total income of about R100 million. The bank has continues to soar above others over the tears. It serves about 8.1 million customers and has the highest number of employees. The bank is also considered one of the largest banks in Africa.

2. FirstRand

FirstRand is the second biggest bank in South Africa. It has fingerhut 1 800 phone number Tier 1 capital of $8.2 billion. Considering just headline earnings as a criterion for judgment, FirstRand will most likely come first among banks in South Africa with an earning of R27.89 billion for the 2019 financial year. But it emerged second on the basis of the combination of yardsticks.

3. ABSA Group

Absa is the third biggest bank in both South Africa and the African continent, although this last financial year was not too much of a good year in that it faced a double-digit fall in its Tier 1 capital position. It fell from 170th position to 184th position in the global ranking, and now has a Tier 1 biggest banks in the world 2018 of $6.8 billion.

Before becoming Absa Bank, this bank was initially an entirely different banking institution. In the first instance, it was referred to as the Barclays Africa Bank. Right from its inception, the bank has provided its clients a wide range of banking services, which include personal accounts, corporate accounts, investment banking, assurance, and several types of card services.

Absa Bank’s financial success had led it to acquire several financial institutions within many African countries such as Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, to name a few. In addition, it has offices in countries such as Nigeria and Namibia. From 2018 till date, the bank has successfully opened several offices within England and the United States.

4. Nedbank Group

The Nedbank Group ranks fourth in South Africa, fourth in Africa, and 240th in the world, on the basis of its Tier 1 capital which is about $5.1 billion.

5. Capitec

Capitec runs on a market capitalization of R114.8 billion. With this, it ranks fifth biggest in the South African banking industry. Although on the basis of its market capitalization, it qualifies to be in third place. Meanwhile, only two years ago, the bank was in the fifth position on the basis of its market capitalization. Also, in terms of share price, Capitec remains one of the biggest with its 2018 R1,000 per share price.

6. Investec Bank

Investec Bank is a financial institution that offers its clients both banking and wealth management services within South Africa. In addition, Investec Bank offers other financial services to its clients in international countries within Asia and Europe.

Investec Bank began operations in 1974 with its headquarters in Sandton. Since then, the bank has been at the forefront of providing individual services, investment banking, and corporate services. In addition, Investec Bank provides custom banking services to specific private clients.

Investec Bank has a total workforce of almost 10,000 staff. The bank averages an annual income that is close to R11 billion. Likewise, it has a total asset of over R11 trillion.

7. African Bank Limited

The current African Bank Limited or ABL is a bank that came into existence in 2016 after a restructuring effort. The restructuring of the bank was because of the curatorship by the country’s apex bank, which forced several changes to its operations. Initially, the bank was opened in 1975 and was related to the African Bank Investment Limited.

The bank has its head office in Midrand, South Africa. African Bank Limited is heavily involved in retail banking in the country. Also, the bank has several branches all across the country. It offers several banking services such as savings accounts, current accounts, and more through its fully evolved digital services.

8. Grindrod Bank

Grindrod Bank is considered a South African bank that operates as a commercial financial institution. This bank began its operations in 1994. In 2004, the bank was incorporated as a financial institution that is related to the mother company Grindrod Financial Group. Two years after its incorporation, Grindrod Bank purchased all shares of Marriot Merchant Bank.

In general, Grindrod Bank provides its services to high-earning clients. With its head office in Durban, Grindrod Bank has several branches within Cape Town, Pretoria, Johannesburg, and other provinces within South Africa. The bank has a staff base of over 6,000 employees. Also, Grindrod Bank has a total asset of over R30 billion.

9. Mercantile Bank

Mercantile Bank operates as a commercial bank, which has been in operation since 1965. Its head office in Sandton, offers its clients individual banking corporate services, retail services, brokerage, and asset management to name a few. Mercantile Bank operates as a subsidiary of a Portuguese financial institution.

Mercantile Bank has over 1000 workers across several branches within South Africa. The bank has a total average net income of over R200 million and a total asset of over R10 billion.

10. Bidvest Bank

Bidvest Bank is a type of bank that provides specialized banking services to specific clients. In particular, the bank provides insurance services, car purchase financing, retail banking services, and foreign exchange to local businesses.

Bidvest Bank began its operation in 1946, and it is owned by Bidvest Group, which is an international financial institution. The bank has a total asset of over R9 billion and a yearly average net profit of over R300 million. At the moment, Bidvest Bank employs directly and indirectly over 100,000 staff.

11. Sasfin Bank Limited

Sasfin Bank is the 11th largest bank in South Africa, and it was founded in 1951. It got listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange in 1987. Its main clients are wealthy individuals and corporate entities. Some of its products include Loans, checking, credit and debit cards, and investment services.

It employs over 616 workers and operates 4 branches. For the year ended June 30, 2021, it reported a net income of R141.071 million, up from the previous year’s R48.617 million. In the same period, its assets totaled R12.155 billion, a drop from the previous year’s R14.006 billion.

12. Al Baraka Bank Limited

Al Baraka Bank Limited offers full Islamic banking, and it’s a subsidiary of Bahrain’s Al Baraka Banking Group (ABG). It was founded in 1989 and offers Islamic banking products that include corporate saver accounts, participation accounts, haj investment schemes, monthly investment plans, Sharia-compliant unit trusts, and online banking, among other financial-related services.

It employs 94 workers in its 14 branches across South Africa, and as of May 2020, it had over R8.674 billion in assets. Its total comprehensive income for the year 2020 was R36 million, which is a drop from the R75 million from the previous year.

13. Ubank Limited

Ubank Limited was formerly known as Teba Bank and operates in the microfinance sector. Some of its services include transaction and savings accounts, debit cards, home, and personal loans, funeral plan products, mobile banking, and airtime contracts. It has over 50 branches and 100 ATM branches, spread out in the rural mining communities, where it employees over 840 workers.

Ubank Limited received its banking license in 2000, after operating under the exemption of Banks Acts for 24 years. In 2019 its assets totaled R5.7 billion, up from 2019’s R5.6 billion. During the same period, it advanced R719.2 million to customers. However, it made a loss before tax of R163.5 million, a drop from the previous year’s R257.4 million in profit.

14. HBZ Bank South Africa

HBZ Bank was launched in South Africa in 1995 and is owned by the Habib Bank AG Zurich. It operates branches in Gauteng and Kwa-Zulu, as well as and Islamic Banking. Its products include personal banking, business banking, Islamic banking, and online banking. It also offers trade finance and related baking services.

It operates 9 branches in South Africa and employs 159 workers across its branches. In 2020, it made a pre-tax profit of R109 million, which was a drop from the previous year’s R138 million. However, it made a gain of 15% in asset growth, from 2019″s R5.916 billion to R6.826 billion. As of 2020, it had a total of R6.183 in customer deposits.

15. South African Bank of Athens (SABA)

South African Bank of Athens was founded in 1947, and it provides banking services to SMEs. As of 2020, it had 99 employees and operated some of the 700 traditional retail branches, which it operates in partnership with ABSA and G4S. SABA’s focus is mainly on business banking, alliance banking, and agricultural and associated banking markets.

The decision to diversify and serve clients in the agricultural industry came in 2018. That’s after it was acquired by AFGRI Holdings Proprietary Limited, after it purchased 99.81% of SABA’s shares, for R300 million. As of 2018, SABA’s total assets were valued at R170.2 billion, and it had a market capitalization of R223.3 billion.




(R billion)

Headline earnings

(R billion)

Tier1 capital

($ billion)

EmployeesBranchesCustomer satisfaction


1.Standard Bank98.927.99.7553 178120077.0
2.FirstRand94.127.98.2340 85664081.5
3.Absa Bank75.716.16.8548 78061976.3
4.Ned Bank54.813.55.7131 27770279.3
5.Capitec19.05.31.5113 77484084.9


Deciding which bank is the biggest was such a tricky one. As td bank express loan review banks superseded on some grounds and lost on others. Capitec, for instance, will pass as the biggest bank in the country based on customer numbers, but then, Standard Bank has the biggest income base and ranks top by core capital, and Absa has the widest reach.

Now, you’ve learned about the biggest banks in South Africa. Each of them ranks the biggest on different grounds. The bit we were only to arrive at this list on the basis of comparison of the different grounds on which each bank earns points.


The nation’s largest banks enjoyed $111 billion in record profits last year — with more to come

The six biggest U.S. banks have never had a $100-billion year. Until now.

Goldman Sachs Group, JPMorgan Chase and their peers have already reported more than $111 billion of profit for 2018. Morgan Stanley will only make that number bigger when it releases its fourth-quarter results Thursday.

They have Republican tax cuts to thank, along with rising interest rates, a surge in deal-making and a retail banking boom.

JPMorgan and Bank of America Corp. both had record years, while Goldman Sachs and Citigroup Inc. had their biggest hauls since the financial crisis. The impressive numbers and upbeat commentary from bank leaders may quell fears that rate hikes and trade wars risk bringing an end to good times for the biggest lenders.

“Is it the end of a cycle? We don’t think so,” JPMorgan Chief Financial Officer Marianne Lake said Tuesday on a call with analysts. “We think the outlook for growth in the economy is still strong. The consumer is still strong and healthy, and we’re expecting to see maybe slower but still global growth going forward.”

The bank results came even though Wells Fargo & Co. and Chase both missed fourth-quarter revenue expectations. Wells Fargo’s profit also fell slightly as the biggest banks in the world 2018 continued to deal with a cap on its assets put in place by federal regulators after a series of scandals — a restriction that is now expected to remain in place through the end of the year.

Chase, the nation’s largest bank, reported quarterly profits that missed analyst expectations for the first time in nearly four years. Trading revenue was down about 6% amid the stock market gyrations.

However, on Wednesday Bank of America reported record profit in the fourth quarter.

“We see in the U.S. strong indications of continued growth,’’ Chief Executive Brian Moynihan said on a call with analysts.

While customer activity “strongly supports a solid growth view,” the company is watching for potential negative impacts from trade wars, the partial U.S. government shutdown, Brexit and economic slowdowns in China and Europe, he said.

Bank stocks sank 18% last quarter as investors grew concerned about the potential for a U.S. recession and slowdown in global economic growth. That pessimism, alongside worries about trade tensions between the U.S. and China, triggered big price swings across equities, bonds and foreign exchange.

While turbulence can sometimes spur banks’ market-making activities, so-called “bad volatility,” typified by extreme and short-lived price moves, kept wary clients on the sidelines.

However, the closely watched KBW Bank Index gained 10% this month, spurred higher by fourth-quarter results.

Times staff writer Jim Puzzanghera contributed to this report.


World Bank Group to Discontinue Doing Business Report 

WASHINGTON, September 16, 2021—The World Bank Group today issued the following statement on the Doing Business report: 

“Trust in the research of the World Bank Group is vital. World Bank Group research informs the actions of policymakers, helps countries make better-informed decisions, and allows stakeholders to measure economic and social improvements more accurately. Such research has also been a valuable tool for the private sector, civil society, academia, journalists, and others, broadening understanding of global issues.

After data biggest banks in the world 2018 on Doing Business 2018 and 2020 were reported internally in June 2020, World Bank management paused the next Doing Business report and initiated a series of reviews and audits of the report and its methodology. In addition, because the internal reports raised ethical matters, including the conduct of former Board officials as well as current and/or former Bank staff, management reported the allegations to the Bank’s appropriate internal accountability mechanisms. 

After reviewing all the information available to date on Doing Business, including the findings of past reviews, audits, and the report the Bank released today on behalf of the Board of Executive Directors, World Bank Group management has taken the decision to discontinue the Doing Business report. The World Bank Group remains firmly committed to advancing the role of the private sector in development and providing support to governments to design the regulatory environment that supports this. Going forward, we will be working on a new approach to assessing the business and investment climate. We are deeply grateful to the efforts of the many staff members who have worked diligently to advance the business climate agenda, and we look forward to harnessing their energies and abilities in new ways.”


Related: Statement on Release of Investigation into Data Irregularities in Doing Business 2018 and 2020


Please create an employee account to be able to mark statistics as favorites. biggest banks in the world 2018 Then you can access your favorite statistics via the star in the header.

Register now
Create Employee Account

tennessee state bank powell tn Please authenticate by going to "My account" → "Administration". Then you will be able to mark statistics as favourites and use personal statistics alerts.


Basic Account

Get to know the platform

You only have access to basic statistics.

Single Account

The ideal entry-level account for individual users

  • Instant access to 1m statistics
  • Download in XLS, PDF & PNG format
  • Detailed references

$59 $39 / Month *

in the first 12 months

biggest banks in the world 2018 Corporate Account

Full access

Corporate solution including all features.

* Prices do not include sales tax.

The most important statistics

The most important statistics

The most important statistics

The most important statistics

The most important statistics

The most important statistics

Learn more about how Statista can support your business.


The Global Financial Crisis

The global financial crisis (GFC) refers to the period of extreme stress in global financial markets and banking systems between mid 2007 and early 2009. During the GFC, a downturn in the US housing market was a catalyst for a financial crisis that spread from the United States to the rest of the world through linkages in the global financial system. Many banks around the world incurred large losses and relied on government support to avoid bankruptcy. Millions of people lost their jobs as the major advanced economies experienced their deepest recessions since the Great Depression in the 1930s. Recovery from the crisis was also much slower than past recessions that were not associated with a financial crisis.

Main Causes of the GFC

As for all financial crises, a range of factors explain the GFC and its severity, and people are still debating the relative importance of each factor. Some of the key aspects include:

1. Excessive risk-taking in a favourable macroeconomic environment

In the years leading up to the GFC, economic conditions in the United States and other countries were favourable. Economic growth was strong and stable, and rates of inflation, unemployment and interest were relatively low. In this environment, house prices grew strongly.

Expectations that house prices would continue to rise led households, in the United States especially, to borrow imprudently to purchase and build houses. A similar expectation on house prices also led property developers and households in European countries (such as Iceland, Ireland, Spain and some countries in Eastern Europe) to borrow excessively. Many of the mortgage loans, especially in the United States, were for amounts close to (or even above) the purchase price of a house. A large share of such risky borrowing was done by investors seeking to make short-term profits by ‘flipping’ houses and by ‘subprime’ borrowers (who have higher default risks, mainly because their income and wealth are relatively low and/or they have missed loan repayments in the past).

Banks and other lenders were willing to make increasingly large volumes of risky loans for a range of reasons:

  • Competition increased between individual lenders to extend ever-larger amounts of housing loans that, because of the good economic environment, seemed to be very profitable at the time.
  • Many lenders providing housing loans did not closely assess borrowers’ abilities to make loan repayments. This also reflected the widespread presumption that favourable conditions would continue. Additionally, lenders had little incentive to take care in their lending decisions because they did not expect to bear any losses. Instead, they sold large amounts of loans to investors, usually in the form of loan packages called ‘mortgage-backed securities’ (MBS), which consisted of thousands of individual mortgage loans of varying quality. Over time, MBS products became increasingly complex and opaque, but continued to be rated by external agencies as if they were very safe.
  • Investors who purchased MBS products mistakenly thought that they were buying a very low risk asset: even if some mortgage loans in the package were not repaid, it was assumed that most loans would continue to be repaid. These investors included large US banks, as well as foreign banks from Europe and other economies that sought higher returns than could be achieved in their local markets.

2. Increased borrowing by banks and investors

In the lead up to the GFC, banks and other investors in the United States and abroad borrowed increasing amounts to expand their lending and purchase MBS products. Borrowing money to purchase an asset (known as an increase in leverage) magnifies potential profits but also magnifies potential losses. As a result, when house prices began to fall, banks and investors incurred large losses because they had borrowed so much.

Additionally, banks and some investors increasingly borrowed money for very short periods, including overnight, to purchase assets that could not be sold quickly. Consequently, they became increasingly reliant on lenders – which included other banks – extending new loans as existing short-term loans were repaid.

3. Regulation and policy errors

Regulation of subprime lending and MBS products was too lax. In particular, there was insufficient regulation of the institutions that created and sold the complex and opaque MBS to investors. Not only were many individual borrowers provided with loans so large that they were unlikely to be able to repay them, but fraud was increasingly common – such as overstating a borrower's income and over-promising investors on the safety of the MBS products they were being sold.

In addition, as the crisis unfolded, many central banks and governments did not fully recognise the extent to which bad loans had been extended during the boom and the many ways in which mortgage losses were spreading through the financial system.

How the GFC Unfolded

US house prices fell, borrowers missed repayments

The catalysts for the GFC were falling US house prices and a rising number of borrowers unable to repay their loans. House prices in the United States peaked around mid 2006, coinciding with a rapidly rising supply of newly built houses in some areas. As house prices began to fall, the share of borrowers that failed to make their loan repayments began to rise. Loan repayments were particularly sensitive to house prices in the United States because the proportion of US households (both owner-occupiers and investors) with large debts had risen a lot during the boom and was higher than in other countries.

Stresses in the financial system

Stresses in the financial system first emerged clearly around mid 2007. Some lenders and investors began to incur large losses because many of the houses they repossessed after the borrowers missed repayments could only be sold at prices below the loan balance. Relatedly, investors became less willing to purchase MBS products and were actively trying to sell their holdings. As a result, MBS prices declined, which reduced the value of MBS and thus the net worth of MBS investors. In turn, investors who had purchased MBS with short-term loans found it much more difficult to roll over these loans, which further exacerbated MBS selling and declines in MBS prices.

Spillovers to other countries

As noted above, foreign banks were active participants in the US housing market during the boom, including purchasing MBS (with short-term US dollar funding). US banks also had substantial operations in other countries. These interconnections provided a channel for the problems in the US housing market to spill over to financial systems and economies in other countries.

Failure of financial firms, panic in financial markets

Financial stresses peaked following the failure of the US financial firm Lehman Brothers in September 2008. Together with the failure or near failure of a range of other financial firms around that time, this triggered a panic in financial markets globally. Investors began pulling their money out of banks and investment funds around the world as they did not know who might be next to fail and how exposed each institution was to subprime and other distressed loans. Consequently, financial markets became dysfunctional as everyone tried to sell at the same time and many institutions wanting new financing could not obtain it. Businesses also became much less willing to invest and households less willing to spend as confidence collapsed. As a result, the United States and some other economies fell into their deepest recessions since the Great Depression.

Policy Responses

Until September 2008, the main policy response to the crisis came from central banks that lowered interest rates to stimulate economic activity, which began to slow in late 2007. However, the policy response ramped up following the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the downturn in global growth.

Lower interest rates

Central banks lowered interest rates rapidly to very low levels (often near zero); lent large amounts of money to banks and other institutions with good assets that could not borrow in financial markets; and purchased a substantial amount of financial securities to support dysfunctional markets and to stimulate economic activity once policy interest rates were near zero (known as ‘quantitative easing’).

Increased government spending

Governments increased their spending to stimulate demand and support employment throughout the economy; guaranteed deposits and bank bonds to shore up confidence in financial firms; and purchased ownership stakes in some banks and other financial firms to prevent bankruptcies that could have exacerbated the panic in financial markets.

Although the global economy experienced its sharpest slowdown since the Great Depression, the policy response prevented a global depression. Nevertheless, millions of people lost their jobs, their homes and large amounts of their wealth. Many economies also recovered much more slowly from the GFC than previous recessions that were not associated with financial crises. For example, the US unemployment rate only returned to pre-crisis levels in 2016, about nine years after the onset of the crisis.

Stronger oversight of financial firms

In response to the crisis, regulators strengthened their oversight of banks and other financial institutions. Among many new global regulations, banks must now assess more closely the risk of the loans they are providing and use more resilient funding sources. For example, banks must now operate with lower leverage and can’t use as many short-term loans to fund the loans that they make to their customers. Regulators are also more vigilant about the ways in which risks can spread throughout the financial system, and require actions to prevent the spreading of risks.

Australia and the GFC

Relatively strong economic performance

Australia did not experience a large economic downturn or a financial crisis during the GFC. However, the pace of economic growth did slow significantly, the unemployment rate rose sharply and there was a period of heightened uncertainty. The relatively strong performance of the Australian economy and financial system during the GFC, compared with other countries, reflected a range of factors, including:

  • Australian banks had very small exposures to the US housing market and US banks, partly because domestic lending was very profitable.
  • Subprime and other high-risk loans were only a small share of lending in Australia, partly because of the historical focus on lending standards by the Australian banking regulator (the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA)).
  • Australia's economy was buoyed by large resource exports to China, whose economy rebounded quickly after the initial GFC shock (mainly due to expansionary fiscal policy).

Also a large policy response

Despite the Australian financial system being in a much better position before the GFC, given the magnitude of the shock to the global economy and to confidence more broadly, there was also a large biggest banks in the world 2018 response in Australia to ensure that the economy did not suffer a major downturn. In particular, the Reserve Bank lowered the cash rate significantly, and the Australian Government undertook expansionary fiscal policy and provided guarantees on deposits at and bonds issued by Australian banks.

Following the crisis, APRA implemented the stronger global banking regulations in Australia. Together, APRA and the financial market and corporate regulator, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, have also strengthened lending standards to make the financial and private sectors more resilient.


Investors want the world’s largest banks to be sliced up

Investors are trying to do what Janet Yellen can’t.

They are circling around some of the world’s largest banks, pushing for a breakup into as many as four different companies, as expensive regulations from Yellen’s Federal Reserve make “too big to fail” a heavy burden for shareholders.

While JPMorgan — the largest US bank by assets — has been called upon to split up, Bank of America, Deutsche Bank and HSBC are also in the too-big-to-fail camp and shareholders say they’re getting less bang for their biggest banks in the world 2018, Ryan Mendy, chief operating officer of analyst firm The Edge Group, told The Post.

And those banks could get broken up by 2018, he added.

“At the end of the day, who cares about the bank as it is?” Mendy said. “It’s about the shareholder, it’s about the pension funds.”

Investors would get the most value if banks like JPM, HSBC and other gargantuans were broken up into a commercial bank for lending, an investment bank and an asset management company, Mendy said.

Break-up fever broke out on Wall Street in January after How to tell if your pokemon cards are worth money Sachs analysts said that rival JPMorgan could be worth as much as 25 percent more if it were broken up into as many as four companies.

Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan’s CEO, pushed back against those calls during an investor conference last week, arguing that clients are calling for a one-stop banking shop.

“In a capitalist world, OK, you better be giving the customer more — better, faster, quicker — or you lose,” he said then.

While Mendy said that his clients are starting to sniff blood in the water, not all activist investors have signed onto the plan.

One activist investor told The Post that breaking up the banks would be a goal for funds like Calpers, the largest public pension. Another advocated for decreasing bank leverage rather than breaking them up.


The World's 15 Largest Banks

Banking & Finance

Paul Ausick

May 17, 2018 1:00 pm

Last Updated: January 11, 2020 11:28 pm

Of the world’s 15 largest banks, the top four are based in China. These four giants topped the list in 2016 and in 2017, so it’s no surprise at all that there has been no change at the top.

The top four banks — Industrial & Commercial Bank of China, China Construction Bank, Agricultural Bank of China, Bank of China — have combined assets totaling $13.637 trillion, up by $1.727 trillion (12.7%) from the 2017 total.

The data were published on Tuesday by S&P Global Market Intelligence and are based on assets as of December 2017, adjusted for pending mergers, acquisitions, divestitures and other deals that closed through March 2018 “on a best-efforts basis.”

In this year’s report, S&P Global Intelligence ranked the world’s 100 largest banks. Of that total, 18 were based in China and posted a combined total of $23.761 trillion. The United States placed 11 banks in the top 100, holding assets totaling $12.196 trillion.

J.P. O’Sullivan, Managing Director of Financial Institutions at S&P Global Market Intelligence, said:

As bank profitability improves in terms of return on average equity, we expect banks to move away from cost-cutting and towards sustainable growth. In this low rate environment, growing the balance sheet can be an effective way to generate earnings. Moreover, as interest rates rise, we can expect a boost to bottom line earnings and this bodes well for future growth prospects within the banking sector.

Four U.S. banks finished the year among the top 15, led by JPMorgan Chase & Co. (NYSE: JPM) at number six with $2.534 trillion in assets, about $250 billion behind fourth-place Mitsubishi UFJ of Japan. The only other U.S. bank in the top 10 was Bank of America Corp. (NYSE: BAC) at number nine with assets of $2.281 trillion. Both maintained their 2017 rankings.

Wells Fargo & Co. (NYSE: WFC) dropped out of the top 10 to end the year in 11th place, and Citigroup Inc. (NYSE: C) ranked 13th, as it did in 2016.

Here are the top 15 and their total assets converted to dollars as of the exchange rate at the end of December.

  1. Industrial & Commercial Bank of China: $4.009 trillion
  2. China Construction Bank: $3.400 trillion
  3. Agricultural Bank of China: $3.236 trillion
  4. Bank of China: $2.992 trillion
  5. Mitsubishi UFJ: $2.788 trillion
  6. JPMorgan Chase: $2.534 trillion
  7. HSBC Holdings: biggest banks in the world 2018 trillion
  8. BNP Paribas: $2.357 trillion
  9. Bank of America: $2.281 trillion
  10. Crédit Agricole: $2.117 trillion
  11. Wells Fargo: $1.952 trillion
  12. Japan Post Bank: $1.874 trillion
  13. Citigroup: $1.842 trillion
  14. Sumitomo Mitsui: $1.775 trillion
  15. Deutsche Bank: $1.766 trillion

For the full list of the world’s 100 largest banks, visit the S&P Global Intelligence website.

Get Our Free Investment Newsletter

Read more: Banking & Finance, BAC, C, JPM, WFC, Corporate Performance, Research


1 Replies to “Biggest banks in the world 2018”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *