FYI: An Update on Emerging Issues in Banking

Highlights from the 2005 Summary of Deposits Data

October 26, 2005

This FYI has been revised to reflect updates in the Summary of Deposits data as of 

October 26, 2005. See endnote 6 for details.

Today marks the official release of the 2005 Summary of Deposits (SOD) data, a 

report detailing total deposits at the individual office level for every FDIC-insured 

institution. Collected each June by the FDIC and the Office of Thrift Supervision 

(OTS), the SOD represents a rich resource for analyzing deposit market trends at the 

national and local levels.1 This issue of FYI highlights some preliminary conclusions 

from this year’s SOD data. 

Despite Industry Consolidation, Offices and Deposits Continue to Grow

Consolidation in the number of U.S. banking charters and banking organizations is a 

well-documented trend that has been ongoing since the mid-1980s.2 However, despite 

long-term consolidation in the industry, the number of U.S. banking offices and their 

total deposits continue to grow steadily. As of June 30, FDIC-insured institutions 

reported having 91,407 domestic offices located in the United States, an annual 

increase of 2,255 offices (3 percent) over the past year, with $5.9 trillion in deposits, 

an increase of $460 billion (8 percent) in domestic deposits over the same period (see 

Chart 1).3

d
The growth rate of deposits has exceeded the growth rate in total offices in each of the 

past 10 years. This is true even if deposit growth is adjusted for the effects of inflation 

over the same period using the gross domestic product price index, as in Chart 2. As 

of 1995, there were just $3.2 trillion in deposits held by 80,473 offices. 

d

Most New Offices Were Full-Service Locations

The largest single source of increase in the number of banking offices during 2005 

was standalone full-service locations, which increased by 2,078, or 3 percent. These 

standard brick-and-mortar branches provide customers with a place to visit for 

personalized service and represent 93 percent of the total increase in offices for the 

year. Another 228 new full-service offices appeared in shared space within retail 

locations across the country for an increase of 5 percent. The fastest-growing office 

type in percentage terms was limited-service operations that were mobile or seasonal 

in nature. Limited-service offices increased by 13 percent, or 54 offices, during the 

year. The largest decline was in home-banking offices, which declined by 27 (16 

percent) over the year.4 However, despite this decline, the remaining home-banking 

offices were able to increase deposits faster than any other office type, up by 39 

percent, or $17.8 billion.

Growth in Offices Has Been Fastest in Metropolitan Areas 

A common set of questions that analysts seek to answer using the SOD data involves 

where branch offices are growing the fastest and why. Since 1994, the SOD data have 

assisted in answering these questions by designating the local geography of each 

office in terms of street address, zip code, county, state, and core based statistical 

area, or CBSA, designation of the Bureau of the Census.5 This year the SOD data also 

make use of the Census Bureau definition for micropolitan statistical areas, clusters of 

counties with populations of 10,000 to 50,000 located mostly around larger 

metropolitan areas.
As in previous years, metropolitan areas were the drivers of growth in offices during 

the year. The numbers of offices in metropolitan areas increased 3 percent during the 

year, and have risen by 15 percent since 1995 (see Table 1). Areas designated under 

the new micropolitan area definition showed a 1 percent increase in offices for the 

year, which was consistent with their 10-year average rate of growth. By contrast, 

other non-metro counties showed no appreciable growth in offices since 2004 and just 

a 6 percent increase since 1995. 

Table 1

U.S. Banking Offices in Metropolitan, Micropolitan, and Other 

Statistical Areas

Type of Area 

Count of Offices One Year

Percentage

Change

10 Year

Percentage 1995 2004 2005 Change

Metropolitan 

Statistical Areas 60,454 67,634 69,711 3% 15%

Micropolitan 

Statistical Areas 10,795 11,728 11,892 1% 10%

Other Areas 9,224 9,790 9,804 0% 6%

Total 80,473 89,152 91,407 3% 13%

Source: FDIC

Metropolitan areas also outpaced micropolitan and non-metro areas in terms of 

deposit growth (Table 2). Deposits grew by 9 percent in metropolitan areas during the 

most recent year (a rate similar to their annual average since 1995), while deposit 

growth in micropolitan areas was 5 percent. As was the case for growth in the number 

of branch offices, non-metro areas also lagged the nation in terms of deposit growth, 

registering an increase of just 3 percent for the year. 

Table 2 

Domestic Deposits of U.S. Banking Offices in Metropolitan, 

Micropolitan, and Other Statistical Areas

Type of Area 

Deposits ($ 

Billions)

One Year

Percentage

Change

10 Year

Percentage

Change 1995 2004 2005

Metropolitan 

Statistical Areas 2,709 4,745 5,177 9% 91%

Micropolitan 

Statistical Areas 286 412 431 5% 51%

Other Areas 194 259 267 3% 38%

Total 3,190 5,416 5,876 8% 84%

Source: FDIC
The headquarters location of new charters may also indicate what types of markets 

are attractive locations for banks and thrifts. During the year ending in June, there was 

an increase of 147 new charters, of which 127, or 86 percent, were headquartered in 

metropolitan areas. Micropolitan areas gained 11 new charters and other non-metro 

counties picked up the remaining nine.

Mergers Have Shifted Deposits Between Markets

Trends in SOD totals at the state and market levels can be distorted by mergers and 

restructurings. There were 351 charter mergers between the last two surveys, and 

buyers absorbed over $1 trillion in assets and just over $600 billion in total deposits. 

Two-thirds of these transactions involved mergers with charters from different markets.

Charter mergers tend to skew the results because of shifts in main office deposittaking activities, such as large corporate deposit operations.6 One way to compensate 

for the geographic shifts induced in the SOD data by mergers is to restrict analyses of 

changes across time to branch offices only and omit all headquarters offices. 

Removing main offices from the analysis reduces the total number of offices by 10 

percent and the level of total deposits by 27 percent. The remaining branch offices 

showed deposit growth of almost 10 percent for the year. While this is higher than the 

8-percent increase in total office deposits, much of the difference can be explained by 

the fact that some 351 main offices were converted to branches during the year. 

To access the full capabilities of the Summary of Deposits data, please consult the 

SOD main page on the FDIC web site at: 

https://www5.fdic.gov/sod/sodInstBranch.asp?barItem=1

Endnotes

1 All institutions that operate branch offices beyond their home office and must file a 

financial report are required to submit SOD surveys to the FDIC or the Office of Thrift 

Supervision. Unit banks, which are banks with just a single headquarters office, have 

been combined with the branch office data to form the SOD database. The entire SOD 

database can be accessed through the FDIC web site at www.fdic.gov. 

2 The FDIC published a series of studies analyzing consolidation and other long-term 

banking trends in its 2004 Future of Banking study.

3 Offices here include those in the 50 states and the District of Columbia but not those 

in U. S. territories. The SOD database captures domestic deposits only, and for 

convenience we refer to these as deposits in this report. 

4 Full-service home banking offices are operations centers where a customer can 

access their accounts through a phone, PC or web site to apply for loans, make fund 

transfers, and other types of electronic transactions. 

5 CBSA's, which include both Metropolitan and Micropolitan Areas, are defined by the 

new Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) which are based on the 2000 Census. For 

more information, see MSA

6 The initial release of this FYI report indicated that deposits in Ohio increased on net 

by $106 billion during the year--more than any other state. A subsequent revision to 
the SOD data has reduced the net increase in Ohio to less than $1 billion. California's 

net deposit increase of $83 billion is now the largest of any state during the year 

ending in June 2005. 

About FYI

FYI is an electronic bulletin summarizing current information about the trends that are 

driving change in the banking industry, plus links to the wide array of other FDIC 

publications and data tools. 

Disclaimer

The views expressed in FYI are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect 

official positions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Some of the 

information used in the preparation of this publication was obtained from publicly 

available sources that are considered reliable. However, the use of this information 

does not constitute an endorsement of its accuracy by the Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation.

Last Updated 10/26/2005
Chart 1: Total Offices and Domestic Deposits 

Report 

Date Total Offices Domestic Deposits ($ Billions) 

1996 80,827 3301.1 

1997 81,541 3470.8 

1998 82,722 3629.6 

1999 83,703 3752.7 

2000 84,871 3970.1 

2001 85,440 4289.4 

2002 85,952 4563.8 

2003 87,149 5087.9 

2004 89,152 5416.4 

2005 91,407 5875.8 

Source: FDIC 
Chart 2 Percentage Change in Inflation-Adjusted Domestic Deposits and Total Offices 

Report 

Date 

Percentage Change in Total 

Offices 

Percentage Change in InflationAdjusted Domestic Deposits 

1996 0.3% 0.7% 

1997 0.9% 3.1% 

1998 1.4% 2.8% 

1999 1.2% 2.3% 

2000 1.4% 4.3% 

2001 0.7% 5.7% 

2002 0.6% 3.8% 

2003 1.4% 9.6% 

2004 2.3% 4.5% 

2005 2.5% 6.2% 

Source: FDIC