Whatâs going on here? Goldman Sachs reported better-than-expected results on Tuesday, but the big bankâs still far off the top spot. What does this mean? Goldman makes most of its money by taking commissions on its clientsâ trades and charging hefty fees from investment banking deals. But that only works if clients are trading and deals are being made, and right now, there isnât much to keep the big bank busy. Thatâs partly why Goldmanâs stock price has underperformed JPMorgan and Morgan Stanley this year. Although in fairness, while Goldmanâs third-quarter profit still landed a third lower than the same time last year, revenue in the big bankâs stock trading department was up 8%. Thatâs a small sign of energy after two years of lackluster stock performance â and the CEO thinks thatâs just the start, expecting a âcontinued recovery if conditions remain conduciveâ. Thatâs a big âifâ, mind you. Why should I care? Zooming out: Time to count on your laurels. Goldmanâs forecast to wrangle around $46 billion in revenue this year, which will have barely budged from the bankâs best pre-financial crisis results a whole 16 years ago. Thatâs not a result of laziness, though: the institutionâs been hunting for money-making opportunities for a while, but itâs slim pickings out there. So for now, investors will be watching to see if Goldmanâs expertise in trading and investment banking will be enough to pay dividends, metaphorically and literally speaking. The bigger picture: Jack of all trades, master of some. JPMorgan, on the other hand, is spinning plates, and the extra coordination is really coming in handy. The big bankâs cacophony of money-making routes means that if, say, corporate dealmaking drops off, another department â think trading, consumer lending, or wealth management â can pick up the slack. No wonder, then, that JPMorganâs earnings have almost tripled over the last 16 years while Goldmanâs have stood still. |