Thats not true. It was said elsewhere in HN thread and also in several articles online.
The majority of avg deposits were NOT < 250K.
Only 3-7% of SVB accounts under FDIC limits.
Edit: corrected to have specific languange
The majority of avg deposits were NOT < 250K.
Only 3-7% of SVB accounts under FDIC limits.
Edit: corrected to have specific languange
According to [0], regulatory filings disclosed that 85% of deposits (not accounts) were uninsured.
[0]: https://time.com/6262009/silicon-valley-bank-deposit-insuran...
no one knows what it was as of 3.10.23
> As at the end of 2022, it had 37,466 deposit customers, each holding in excess of $250,000 per account -- and -- The bank does have another 106,420 customers whose accounts are fully insured but they only control $4.8 billion of deposits
So SVB had only about ~150k banking customers. And of those, less than 40k are actually affected by this debacle.
-- -- -- --
The numbers are being mixed up, it feels. Only 3% of total deposits are covered witn the guaranteed FDIC insurance. The rest are spread across less than 40k depositors. And the average (not median, but plain mathematical average) amount on those accounts appears to be $4M.
Not much different than what the US government is already doing. Reached the debt limit? Just raise it again, lol.
/s