Report descriptions

This Uniform Performance Report (UPR) presents information from an FCS institution's financial statement in various relational formats, including key financial ratios, percentages, and dollar amounts. The UPR shows a condensed balance sheet and income statement as well as capital, assets, earnings and profitability, and liquidity. Four reporting periods are represented to show trends.

The Uniform Peer Performance Report (UPPR) provides consistent financial analysis of FCS direct-lender institutions. Direct-lender institutions—Production Credit Associations (PCAs), Federal Land Credit Associations (FLCAs), and Agricultural Credit Associations (ACAs)—provide services directly to farmers and ranchers. UPPRs are available from 1993 to the present.

The UPPR compares one institution to a group of institutions of similar asset size to assess the institution’s overall performance, capital adequacy, asset quality, earnings, and liquidity. The comparison—financial information in the form of key ratios, percentages, and dollar amounts— is based on peer averages and percentile rankings. The comparison comes from data from the Uniform Call Reports that are submitted quarterly by the FCS institutions.

The UPPR is not, by itself, a complete analysis of the conditions and trends in an institution. Rather, the UPPR facilitates peer group comparisons to identify areas of performance that require a more detailed analysis. In fact, proper use of the UPPR requires a thorough understanding of

• how the various ratios are calculated,
• how they interrelate with other ratios,
• what significance they have in evaluating the financial condition of the institution,
• what the charter/structure differences are between FCS institutions, and
• how these differences affect operating performance.

The UPPR does not analyze the quality or performance of the institution’s management.

How an institution’s peers are determined

FCS direct-lender institutions are placed in one of four peer groups that are characterized by their total asset size:

The top of each page of the UPPR indicates the institution’s peer group along with the number of institutions in the peer group. An institution can change peer groups from one reporting period to the next if its asset size changes.

How peer averages and peer percentiles are computed

Peer averages are computed by using a peer-adjusted arithmetic mean. For each variable, the values in the peer group are sorted in ascending order. Excluded from the calculation are institutions in liquidation, items having no (null) value, and values that fall above the 90th percentile and below the 10th percentile in the peer group. The adjusted mean is calculated by adding the remaining values and dividing the sum by the number of institutions in that range.

Peer percentile rankings are used to show where an institution stands relative to its peers. To obtain the percentile rankings for a particular variable, the corresponding variables for all institutions in the peer group are arranged in order from the lowest to the highest value. All institutions having the same value are assigned the same percentile ranking. If an institution has a percentile ranking of 43 based on its gross loan amount, it means that 57 percent of the institutions in its peer group have a gross loan amount that is greater.

A peer percentile ranking is a statement of statistical fact and does not imply a satisfactory or unsatisfactory condition. While percentile rankings can be useful when analyzing an institution’s performance, you must use them with caution.

Critical analytical considerations

To effectively use the UPPR, you must consider the level and trend of individual ratios, the interrelationships among related ratios, and the comparison of ratios among peer group institutions. A single ratio, ranking, or trend is not, in and of itself, a conclusive indicator of the institution’s financial health.

You must also consider the particular institution’s internal operating conditions, economic conditions, management policies, and accounting methods that affect ratios, as well as the following:

Charter/structure differences. Use caution when comparing data of institutions within the same peer group. Institutions within the same peer group will often have different lending authorities and structures. Since the peer groups are based only on asset size, the groups will include FLCAs, PCAs, and ACAs. Each type of lending institution has different lending authorities, operating expense functions, and tax structure. FLCAs make long-term loans; PCAs make short- and intermediate-term loans; and ACAs make short-, intermediate-, and long-term loans. Consequently, when comparing earning ratios of FLCAs with those of PCAs and ACAs within the same peer group, consider the different effects that lending authorities have on operational performance.

Changing peer groups. If from one quarter to the next an institution with $249 million in total assets increases its assets by $2 million to $251 million, it will move to the next peer group, which may result in significant changes in its percentile rankings. The changes do not necessarily indicate a decline or improvement in performance; rather, they indicate that you should carefully review the institution’s performance through ratio and trend analysis over several periods of time.

Peer average. The peer average on the UPPR may or may not represent a satisfactory level of performance; rather, you should review the institution’s overall condition.

Mergers and consolidations. For all institutions, UPPR data are available only from the effective date of merger/consolidation and forward. Therefore, to perform any historical trend analysis, you must manually combine the previous institutions’ individual UPPRs.

Unusual/infrequent events. Trends in data and peer rankings can be affected by unusual or infrequent events. For instance, changes in tax laws may require large adjustments to the tax provisions; new accounting pronouncements may often require large retroactive applications; and mergers can result in large capital adjustments. You should review the institution’s published financial report to help identify such events.

Technical considerations

Reporting periods. A year-end report produces financial/peer group information for the subject year and the previous three years. A quarter-end report produces financial/peer group information for the subject quarter, the same quarter for the previous year, and year-end information for the previous two years.

Year to date (YTD). The term “year to date” refers to income statement items for report dates as follows:

1st quarter (ending March 31) = data for first quarter
2nd quarter (ending June 30) = the sum of data for first and second quarters
3rd quarter (ending September 30) = the sum of data for first, second, and third quarters
4th quarter (ending December 31) = the sum of data for first, second, third, and fourth quarters

Annualizing. The dollar amounts displayed for many income and expense items are shown for the YTD period. For the interim quarter UPPRs (March, June, and September reports), the YTD income and expense data used in producing ratios are often annualized for comparison with other periods. The annualization is done by using the YTD income and expense figure, dividing it by the number of days in the period, and multiplying this result by 365 (366 for leap year). For example, if an institution’s net interest income for the end of the first quarter (March 31) is $100, annualized net interest income would be as follows:

($100/90) x 365 = $405.50

If there are no data reported for part of the calendar year, the number of days used to divide the YTD income and expense is reduced to reflect the number of days for all quarters in which data were reported.

Calculated averages. When data for any quarter are not available for an institution (e.g., due to merger or consolidation), the UPPR uses only the available quarters of data to calculate an average.

These reports are identical to the UPR in format and content; however, the information is presented in six consecutive reporting periods to help you analyze trends.

This report is also identical to the UPR in format and content, but it presents the information for the specified reporting period for up to any six institutions you choose.

The Young, Beginning, and Small Farmers and Ranchers (YBS) Report provides annual data on the lending activities of the FCS for these farmers and ranchers. The annual data are reported at four different FCS levels: individual institution, type of lender institution, district wide, and the entire FCS.

Section 4.19 of the Farm Credit Act of 1971, as amended, requires the Farm Credit Bank (FCB) or Agricultural Credit Bank (ACB) for each district to annually obtain, from associations under its supervision, reports of YBS activities. On the basis of such data, the FCB or ACB is further required to provide to FCA an annual report summarizing the operations and achievements in its district for YBS activities by its respective associations.

The YBS report is arranged to easily provide information on both the current year’s activity, and the year-end overall portfolio level. This information is provided both in terms of number of loans and loan volume. In addition, percentage calculations are given to show the relative scale of YBS activity in comparison to various aggregate totals. Participations are reported on a net purchase/sold basis. Loans to rural home owners are not included.

Definitions

The definitions used to identify and then report YBS activities are the same as those defined in FCA Bookletter BL-040 (PDF) to the FCS, dated December 29, 2023.

Following are the definitions of the three YBS categories:
 
Young: A farmer, rancher, or producer or harvester of aquatic products who is age 35 or younger as of the date the loan is originally made.

Beginning: A farmer, rancher, or producer or harvester of aquatic products who has 10 years or less of farming, ranching, or aquatic experience as of the date the loan is originally made.

Small: A farmer, rancher, or producer or harvester of aquatic products who normally generates less than $350,000 in annual gross cash farm income of agricultural or aquatic products.

For the purpose of the YBS Report, FCA defines loans as loans and commitments. Loans represent the sum of accrual loans and leases; notes receivable; sales contracts; and nonaccrual loans, contracts, and receivables. Commitments are legally binding obligations to extend credit, enter into lease financing, purchase or participate in loans or leases, or pay the obligation of another, which becomes effective at the time such commitments are made. An individual note representing a commitment to lend or lease constitutes a loan. Each note signed by the borrower counts as a loan for the purposes of this report.

Loans and accompanying loan volumes are reported in each category that applies. This practice allows FDA to report on the total amount of lending to young, beginning, and small borrowers. Each loan may be reported in more than one category, depending on the borrower's characteristics. Therefore, it is not meaningful to add two or three YBS categories together since the categories are not mutually exclusive. This practice is consistent with reporting by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac on their annual housing goals.

The determination on whether a loan meets the criteria for being reported as a YBS loan is made at loan origination and applies until the loan is paid off, refinanced, or otherwise discharged.

YBS data

The individual FCS institutions, through their respective affiliated FCB or ACB, provide the data found in their respective YBS reports. The reports that are done at levels other than at the individual institution are simply aggregations of the applicable individual FCS institution data.

YBS data are certified to be correct by each individual FCS institution. Although FCA routinely reviews YBS data for accuracy and believes the YBS data are reliable, it does not audit the data, nor does it express an opinion on the accuracy of the data.

The data are available for each calendar year beginning with 1999. However, the data collected for calendar years before 2001 may not be comparable because there was a phase-in period for FCS institutions to begin using the new YBS definitions in reporting annual YBS activities. In addition, the availability of individual FCS institution data over time will vary widely, as numerous institutions went through corporate restructuring during 1999 to 2001. Therefore, data most likely will not be available for all institutions for all calendar years.