IBJNews

Regional bank Fifth Third sees 58-percent rise in profit

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Regional banking company Fifth Third Bancorp's second-quarter earnings rose 58 percent, thanks partly to the sale of shares of its Vantiv payment-processing subsidiary.

Cincinnati-based Fifth Third, which has more than 800 employees at roughly 45 branches in Indianapolis, on Thursday reported net income available to common shareholders of $594 million, or 66 cents per share, for the three months ended June 30. That compares with $376 million, or 40 cents per share, a year earlier.

Excluding benefits tied to the Vantiv stock sales, earnings were 44 cents per share. The results beat Wall Street expectations for 42 cents per share, according to FactSet.

Its shares rose 25 cents, or 1.3 percent, to $19.24 in premarket trading.

Net interest income, or income from loans and deposits, fell 1.6 percent, to $885 million compared with last year. Net charge-offs of bad loans fell 62 percent, to $112 million.

Earnings from fees and other charges, or noninterest income, rose 56 percent, to $1.06 billion, partly because of a $242 million benefit from sales of Vantiv shares. Fifth Third spun off Vantiv in an initial public offering in March 2012 and has continued to sell its remaining stake.

Fifth Third's business has rebounded after the nation's financial and housing crisis hit key markets in Florida and Michigan particularly hard. In June, Fifth Third raised its second-quarter cash dividend on common shares to 12 cents per share.

Fifth Third operates more than 1,300 banks in 12 states: Ohio, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Tennessee and West Virginia.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Once a Marion Co. commuter tax is established, I'm moving my organization out of Indianapolis. Face it, with the advancement in technology, it's getting more cost effective to have people work out of their homes. The clock is running out on the need for much of the office space in Indianapolis. Establishing a commuter tax will only advance the hands of the clock and the residents of Indianapolis will be left to clean up the mess they created on their own, with much less resources.

  2. The 2013 YE financial indicates the City of Indianapolis has over $2 B in assets and net position of $362.7 M. All of these assets have been created and funded by taxpayers. In 2013 they took in $806 M in revenues. Again, all from tax payers. Think about this, Indianapolis takes in $800 M per year and they do not have enough money? The premise that government needs more money for services is false.

  3. As I understand it, the idea is to offer police to live in high risk areas in exchange for a housing benefit/subsidy of some kind. This fact means there is a choice for the officer(s) to take the offer and receive the benefit. In terms of mandating living in a community, it is entirely reasonable for employers to mandate public safety officials live in their community. Again, the public safety official has a choice, to live in the area or to take another job.

  4. The free market will seek its own level. If Employers cannot hire a retain good employees in Marion Co they will leave and set up shop in adjacent county. Marion Co already suffers from businesses leaving I would think this would encourage more of the same.

  5. We gotta stop this Senior crime. Perhaps long jail terms for these old boozers is in order. There are times these days (more rather than less) when this state makes me sick.

ADVERTISEMENT