最大的银行倒闭自2008年以来，危机引发了美国政府的重大干预，以保护金融体系。

硅谷银行美国第16大银行花旗银行周五倒闭，迫使政府接管，并对近1750亿美元客户存款的命运提出质疑。

周日，美国第29大银行Signature Bank关门，表明金融恐慌已经蔓延。

周一早盘，许多银行股暴跌。第一共和国银行在交易停止前下跌了65%;西部联盟银行下跌近60%。美国第八大银行查尔斯·施瓦布股价下跌近10%。

“这几天就像坐过山车一样，”国际律师事务所多尔西(Dorsey)的合伙人乔·林亚克(Joe Lynyak)说& Whitney和银行破产专家告诉ABC新闻。“突然间，我们陷入了危机。”

以下是你需要知道的硅谷银行倒闭的原因，它已经蔓延了多远，对你意味着什么。

硅谷银行为什么会倒闭?

德克萨斯州立大学金融学教授威廉·奇滕登告诉ABC新闻，硅谷银行的失败类似于“老式的银行挤兑”。

该银行的存款基础主要来自科技行业的初创公司，在2020年至2022年疫情时代的科技繁荣期间，其规模增加了两倍。该银行没有将所有存款投资于其他创业公司或风险公司，而是将相当大一部分资金投入长期国债和抵押贷款债券，这些债券通常在低利率下提供小额但可靠的回报。

然而，低利率环境很快就消失了。在过去的一年里，美联储提高其基准利率为4.5%，为20世纪80年代以来的最快速度。突然的长钉2004年，利率降低了硅谷银行的国债和抵押债券的价值，在其资产负债表上打了一个洞。

面临艰难的生意环境对于科技公司来说，一些大客户上周从银行提款，银行被迫出售一些不良证券，以提供现金。

斯坦福大学商学院教授阿娜特·阿德马蒂告诉美国广播公司新闻，“当银行开始出售这些资产时，它就成了他们失去价值的更多证据。”。

“想象一下，你的全部资产就是你的房子，你只付了很少的首付就买了房子，然后房价就下跌了，”阿德马蒂补充道。“你基本上是在水下，这意味着如果你卖掉资产，你就无法偿还债务。”

该银行资产负债表的脆弱状况吓坏了其他主要储户，他们转而从该银行撤出资金，导致银行挤兑迅速加剧，因为该银行依赖于相对较少的大型储户。几天之内就崩溃了。

“银行手头没有足够的现金来满足所有储户的需求，”Chittenden说。

总部位于纽约的Signature Bank在州政府官员的命令下于周日关闭，这加剧了金融风险。奇滕登说，该银行最近欢迎加密货币存款，但由于担心风险资产持有人出现银行挤兑，该银行成了牺牲品。

“硅谷银行的挤兑有点吓到了那些客户，”奇滕登补充道。"所以签名银行倒闭了."

政府在应对硅谷银行倒闭时做了什么?

美国政府已经采取了快速和非同寻常的措施来限制金融系统面临的风险。

“政府措手不及，不得不采取极端紧急行动，”多尔西的林亚克说&惠特尼。

几乎立刻，保护金融系统稳定的联邦存款保险公司周五接管了硅谷银行，以努力保护储户。

由于该银行有联邦存款保险公司的保险，储户每持有一个不同类型的账户，就能获得高达25万美元的资金保障。

硅谷银行的储户群体由相对较少的风险投资公司、初创公司和其他大型投资者组成，其中许多人持有的存款远远超过25万美元。反过来，这些储户冒着失去部分或全部超过这一门槛的存款的风险。

“每个人都很恐慌，”阿德马蒂说。“他们整个周末都在担心是否能拿到工资，是否能把钱取出来，因为钱卡在那里了。”

为了应对抗议和担心危机蔓延，FDIC、财政部和美联储周日采取了进一步行动，告诉硅谷银行和Signature Bank的储户，FDIC将保护他们所有的资金，包括超过25万美元限额的资金。

周日晚些时候，美联储宣布了一项紧急贷款计划，以覆盖有问题的存款，并恢复对金融系统的更广泛信心。

2023年3月13日，美国总统乔·拜登在DC华府的罗斯福厅谈论美国银行系统。

索尔·勒布/法新社

根据该计划，美联储将允许陷入困境的银行以优惠条件直接从美联储借款，而不是像硅谷银行那样通过出售水下证券来产生现金。这些资金将使银行能够向那些可能希望在混乱中迅速提取资金的储户支付费用。

现在，银行可以使用不良证券作为抵押品，从紧急贷款计划中借款，就好像这些证券保留了它们的全部价值一样，从而允许银行筹集现金，并确保美联储将承担与银行资产下降相关的大部分风险。

回到衰退的房地产市场中的住房抵押贷款的类比，阿德马蒂说，该计划类似于房主以他们的抵押贷款获得贷款，好像条件仍然像他们购买房屋时一样强劲，而不是考虑到新的，更糟糕的市场。

“他们借给银行的钱超过了资产的价值，”阿德马蒂说。

紧急应对措施背后的联邦机构驳斥了这些举措等同于纳税人救助的观点。财政部、美联储和联邦存款保险公司的官方声明称:“与硅谷银行决议相关的任何损失都不会由纳税人承担。”。

著名的批评家们断言，政府的反应应该被认为是一种救助，包括华尔街日报的编辑委员会。

硅谷银行倒闭引发了银行业危机吗?

硅谷银行(Silicon Valley Bank)和Signature Bank的倒闭引发了对整个金融业蔓延的担忧。

然而，一些专家告诉ABC新闻，金融危机的传播仍然有限，部分原因是硅谷银行服务于集中在初创科技公司的狭窄经济领域。其他专家警告说，局势仍在不断变化，可能会大幅升级。

Chittenden淡化了更广泛的金融危机的风险，他说，硅谷银行服务于一个脱离整体经济的利基市场。

“这确实是相对孤立的，”他说。“它没有所有那些可互换的关系。”

“这不是很多很多银行将要面临的系统性问题，”他补充道。

斯坦福大学商学院(Stanford ' s Graduate School of Business)教授达雷尔·达菲(Darrell Duffie)也表达了同样的观点，他指出，与业内最大的银行相比，倒闭银行的规模相对较小。

“在这一点上，它看起来不像一个大范围的危机，”达菲说。“受影响的银行比大多数其他银行承担了更多风险，而且它们不在最大的银行之列，这些银行受到更严格的监管，小储户也多得多。”

阿德马蒂不同意，他说最近的事件应该被视为金融危机，其结果仍然不确定。

在拯救硅谷银行的储户时，联邦机构援引了“系统性风险例外”，这是一项允许政府代表储户进行干预的规定。

“这肯定是一场危机，因为该银行不被认为是系统性的，突然之间就被认为是系统性的，”阿德马蒂说。"他们自己将它定义为不仅仅是一家倒闭的银行."

“这些事情很难预测，”她补充说，并指出结果部分取决于储户的情绪反应和行为，这与潜在的金融损害无关。

当前的银行业危机对你来说意味着什么?

Lynyak说，绝大多数银行客户持有的存款低于25万美元的FDIC保险门槛，确保了资金的保护，尽管潜在的银行崩溃。

最近的银行倒闭提醒人们，客户应该仔细审查持有他们钱的银行。

Lynyak说:“人们可能应该谨慎看待他们特定银行的资本水平和商业计划。”"一些小的询问总是非常有用的."

他补充称，随着大大小小的储户对金融危机进行监控，他们的评估最终将决定整体经济的结果。

“只要公众相信他们的存款是安全的，我们的系统就是安全的，”Lynyak说。

Is this a banking crisis? What to know about the Silicon Valley Bank collapse

The largestbank failuresince the 2008 crisis has triggered a major U.S. government intervention to protect the financial system.

Silicon Valley Bank, the nation's 16th largest bank, collapsed on Friday, forcing a government takeover and calling into question the fate of almost $175 billion in customer deposits.

On Sunday, Signature Bank, the 29th-largest bank in the U.S., closed its doors, suggesting the financial panic had spread.

Many bank stocks plummeted in early trading on Monday. First Republic Bank dropped 65% before trading was halted; Western Alliance Bancorp fell almost 60%. Charles Schwab, the eight-largest U.S. bank, dropped nearly 10%.

"This has been riding on a roller coaster the last couple of days," Joe Lynyak, a partner at the international law firm Dorsey& Whitney and an expert on bank failures, told ABC News. "Suddenly, we're in a crisis."

Here's what you need to know about what caused the Silicon Valley Bank failure, how far it has spread and what it means for you.

Why did Silicon Valley Bank collapse?

The failure of Silicon Valley Bank resembles an "old-fashioned bank run," William Chittenden, a professor of finance at Texas State University, told ABC News.

The bank's deposit base, which draws heavily from startup firms in the tech industry, tripled in size during the pandemic-era tech boom between 2020 and 2022. Rather than invest all of the deposits into other startups or venture firms, the bank placed a sizable share of the funds into long-term Treasury bonds and mortgage bonds, which typically deliver small but reliable returns amid low interest rates.

In short order, however, the low-interest rate environment evaporated. Over the last year, the Federal Reserveraisedits benchmark interest rate 4.5%, the fastest pace since the 1980s. The suddenspikein interest rates dropped the value of Silicon Valley Bank's Treasury bonds and mortgage bonds, punching a hole in its balance sheet.

Facing a difficult businessenvironmentfor tech companies, some large clients pulled money from the bank last week and it was forced to sell some of the distressed securities in order to provide the cash.

"When the bank started selling the assets, it became more evidence of the value that they'd lost," Anat Admati, a professor at Stanford's Graduate School of Business, told ABC News.

"Imagine that your entire assets are your house and you bought the house with very little down payment and housing prices go down," Admati added. "You're basically under water, meaning if you sell the assets, you can't pay your debt."

The vulnerable condition of the bank's balance sheet scared other major depositors, who in turn pulled their funds from the bank, prompting a bank run that gained momentum quickly since the bank depended on a relatively small number of large depositors. It collapsed within days.

"The bank simply didn't have enough cash on hand to meet all of their depositor needs," Chittenden said.

Escalating the financial risk, New York-based Signature Bank shuttered on Sunday at the order of state officials. The bank, which had recently welcomed cryptocurrency deposits, fell prey to fears of a bank run among those who held risky assets, Chittenden said.

"The run on Silicon Valley Bank kind of spooked those customers," Chittenden added. "So Signature Bank went under."

What did the government do in response to the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank?

The U.S government has taken speedy and extraordinary steps to limit the risk posed to the financial system.

"The government was caught unawares and had to take extreme emergency action," said Lynyak of Dorsey& Whitney.

Almost immediately, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, which protects the stability of the financial system, took over Silicon Valley Bank on Friday in an effort to protect depositors.

Since the bank is FDIC-insured, depositors are guaranteed protection of up to $250,000 in funds for each different type of account held.

The group of depositors in Silicon Valley Bank is made up of a relatively small set of venture capital firms, startups and other large investors, many of whom held deposits that far exceeded $250,000. In turn, those depositors risked losing a portion of or all of their money that exceeded that threshold.

"Everybody panicked," Admati said. "They were anxious all weekend long about whether they could make payroll and pull money out because it's stuck there."

In response to the outcry and fearing wider spread of the crisis, the FDIC, the Treasury Department and the Fed took further action on Sunday, telling depositors in Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank that the FDIC would protect all of their funds, including those that exceed the $250,000 limit.

Later on Sunday, the Fed announced an emergency lending program to cover the deposits at issue and restore wider confidence in the financial system.

Under the program, the Federal Reserve will allow distressed banks to borrow funds on favorable terms directly from the Fed, instead of generating cash by selling underwater securities, as Silicon Valley Bank had done. Those funds will equip banks to pay depositors who may want to quickly pull out funds amid the turmoil.

Now, the banks can use distressed securities as collateral to borrow from the emergency lending program as if the securities had retained their full value, allowing the banks to raise cash and ensuring the Fed will take on much of the risk tied to the banks' declining assets.

Returning to the analogy of a home mortgage in a declining housing market, Admati said the program resembles a homeowner getting a loan against their mortgage as if conditions had remained as strong as they were when the house was purchased rather than taking into account the new, worse market.

"They're lending to the bank more than the assets are worth," Admati said.

The federal agencies behind the emergency response refuted notions that the moves amount to a taxpayer bailout. "No losses associated with the resolution of Silicon Valley Bank will be borne by the taxpayer," said the official statement from Treasury, the Fed, and the FDIC.

Prominent critics have asserted instead that the government response should be considered a bailout, including the editorial board at The Wall Street Journal.

Has the Silicon Valley Bank collapse triggered a banking crisis?

The collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank has prompted fears of a wider contagion throughout the financial industry.

However, the spread of financial distress remains limited, in part because Silicon Valley Bank served a narrow swathe of the economy concentrated in startup tech firms, some experts told ABC News. Other experts cautioned that the situation continues to be in flux and could escalate significantly.

MORE: Silicon Valley Bank collapse: Treasury, Fed and FDIC announce steps to ensure deposits will be paid in full

Chittenden, who downplayed the risk of a wider financial crisis, said Silicon Valley Bank serves a niche market set apart from the economy as a whole.

"It really is relatively isolated," he said. "It doesn't have all those interchangeable relationships."

"It's not a systemic problem that lots and lots of banks are going to be facing," he added.

Darrell Duffie, a professor at Stanford's Graduate School of Business, echoed the sentiment, citing the relatively small size of the failed banks compared to the largest in the sector.

"At this point, it doesn't look like a broadspread crisis," Duffie said. "The affected banks have taken more risks than most others and they are not among the very biggest banks, which are more heavily regulated and have a lot more small depositors."

Admati disagreed, saying recent events should be considered a financial crisis and the outcome remains uncertain.

In rescuing depositors in Silicon Valley Bank, federal agencies invoked the "systemic risk exception," a stipulation that allows the government to intervene on behalf of depositors.

"It's certainly a crisis because the bank wasn't considered systemic and all of a sudden it is considered systemic," Admati said. "They themselves defined it as bigger than just one failed bank."

"These things are very hard to predict," she added, noting that the outcome depends in part on the emotional response and behavior of depositors, which stands apart from the underlying financial damage.

What does the current banking emergency mean for you?

The vast majority of banking customers hold deposits below the FDIC insurance threshold of $250,000, ensuring the protection of funds, regardless of a potential bank collapse, Lynyak said.

The recent bank collapses offer an important reminder that customers should scrutinize the banks that hold their money.

"People should probably be careful about looking at the capital levels and the business plan of their particular bank," Lynyak said. "Some small inquiry is always very useful."

As depositors big and small monitor a financial emergency, their assessment ultimately determines the outcome for the wider economy, he added.

"As long as the public believes their deposits are safe, our system is safe," Lynyak said.