SVB failed in two days after unrealised bond losses and a deposit run
Silicon Valley Bank · Bank (listed)
The case in brief
Visible before detection
Checks that could have surfaced it, on hindsight
Drawing power vs books
Would have compared unrealised losses with capital.
Can mislead when: CARO is annual, so the signal comes late. It covers only borrowers above the ₹5 crore limit.
Operating-metric verification
Would have measured how concentrated and uninsured deposits were.
Can mislead when: Contract staff do not appear in EPFO. Vahan access needs licensed APIs. Some businesses have no physical trace.
Third-party confirmation
Would have confirmed deposit concentration with the largest depositors.
Can mislead when: Counterparties can collude or ignore requests. A non-response is logged as a gap, never as a pass.
Where Kubr services would have helped
Financial diligence
Offered in India- C10 Would have measured how concentrated and uninsured deposits were.
- C14 Would have compared unrealised losses with capital.
Model check
Offered in India- C10 Would have measured how concentrated and uninsured deposits were.
- C14 Would have compared unrealised losses with capital.
Valuation context
Offered in India- Peer multiples and the exit-multiple bridge would have shown how much of the story relied on valuation holding.
Portfolio monitor
Offered in India- C10 Would have measured how concentrated and uninsured deposits were.
Mapped from the checks each service runs. A hindsight reading of public records, not a promise that the failure would have been found.
Same pattern
A summary of public documents. It reports what the sources say. It is not Kubr's finding and not a statement of guilt.