Bank of America (BAC) Offering Possible 10.66% Return Over the Next 20 Calendar Days

Bank of America's most recent trend suggests a bullish bias. One trading opportunity on Bank of America is a Bull Put Spread using a strike $27.50 short put and a strike $22.00 long put offers a potential 10.66% return on risk over the next 20 calendar days. Maximum profit would be generated if the Bull Put Spread were to expire worthless, which would occur if the stock were above $27.50 by expiration. The full premium credit of $0.53 would be kept by the premium seller. The risk of $4.97 would be incurred if the stock dropped below the $22.00 long put strike price.

The 5-day moving average is moving down which suggests that the short-term momentum for Bank of America is bearish and the probability of a decline in share price is higher if the stock starts trending.

The 20-day moving average is moving up which suggests that the medium-term momentum for Bank of America is bullish.

The RSI indicator is at 60.56 level which suggests that the stock is neither overbought nor oversold at this time.

To learn how to execute such a strategy while accounting for risk and reward in the context of smart portfolio management, and see how to trade live with a successful professional trader, view more here

LATEST NEWS for Bank of America

Deutsche Bank Whistle-Blower Raised Flags About Another Bank
Fri, 28 Jun 2019 08:00:00 +0000
(Bloomberg) — Tammy McFadden spent most of her career far from Wall Street, in banks and back offices in Jacksonville, Florida. She was let go three times, including last year by Deutsche Bank AG.Now she’s poised to become a bank-compliance celebrity.McFadden is the whistle-blower who went public last month, telling the New York Times she had notified federal officials about her concerns with the Deutsche Bank accounts of President Donald Trump and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner.It’s not her first time accusing a major bank of turning a blind eye to activities in the accounts of rich clients. She made similar allegations more than a decade ago against Bank of America Corp., in litigation that parallels the legal battle she’s pursuing against Deutsche Bank.Democratic lawmakers are eager to hear more about what she saw at the German lender, with two House committees already digging into its dealings with the president and his family members. The FBI has also expressed interest in her story, her lawyer told the Times. McFadden stands to capture the sort of attention that once went to the accountant who flagged problems in Enron’s books, Sherron Watkins, if she has anything to add.That’s a significant “if.” McFadden’s utility to lawmakers may hinge on her credibility and motivations, as is often the case with would-be whistle-blowers. Many allegations of corporate wrongdoing emerge from workers who’ve been dismissed, as she was, making it tempting to doubt the purity of their intentions. Their cases often fade away when allegations or legal funding don’t hold up. Few whistle-blowers end up like Watkins, celebrated on the cover of Time magazine.McFadden’s previous flag-raising episode is detailed in documents filed in a federal court in Jacksonville, Florida, part of the suit she filed against Bank of America in 2006. Calling her 2005 dismissal from the bank’s compliance department a case of wrongful termination, she said bank management ignored her warnings about compliance problems in the accounts of wealthy foreigners. She also expressed frustration, according to her lawyer, at her inability to track the results of so-called suspicious activity reports, which banks file to alert the government of unusual transactions in client accounts.The filings show that McFadden persisted despite setbacks (her first lawyer insisted on withdrawing) and weathered disclosures about her work history, including the bank’s assertion that she avoided taking phone calls by claiming to have “phone phobia.” Along the way she clashed with bosses at a new banking job she held for less than a year, according to court papers. She ultimately reached a settlement with Bank of America. Terms weren’t disclosed.McFadden’s lawyer in the Deutsche Bank matter, Brian McCafferty, declined to comment.Contacted by telephone, McFadden said the Deutsche Bank matter was “very different” from the Bank of America case. She otherwise declined to comment about either matter or about any interest by federal authorities. The FBI didn’t respond to requests for comment.Representatives of Deutsche Bank and Bank of America also declined to comment.Support RolesMcFadden, known as Tammy Hill before getting married, entered the banking industry through a side door. She took mass communications courses at the University of Georgia and also studied fashion merchandising, doing stints at retailers including K-Mart, The Limited and Rich’s. In the 1990s, she made the jump to marketing and financial-services work.She landed a job at Bank of America in Jacksonville in 1998. After six years in support roles, she became an associate in the compliance department.McFadden, now 55 years old, was generally liked by her colleagues there and met expectations overall, a manager said later in a deposition. But she was overwhelmed by the volume of work, the manager said. While the unit was responsible for examining unusual account activity, McFadden’s job was administrative in nature and she didn’t exhibit the analytical skills required to advance, the manager testified.After six months on the job, McFadden and her immediate colleagues learned that their group would be phased out and that only a small number of them would be promoted. After 11 months in the group, McFadden was informed she didn’t make the cut and would be let go. Her manager offered to help her find another position in the bank, according to the filings.Shortly afterward, McFadden sounded an alarm internally about her department — saying, among other things, that Bank of America’s know-your-customer program was deficient. She flagged activity in the accounts of some wealthy foreign clients of the bank, the complaint said, without providing more specifics.She took those concerns to the top, emailing then-Chief Executive Officer Ken Lewis and other senior officials and claiming that her department could be in violation of some of the fundamental rules governing bank compliance, the Bank Secrecy Act and the USA Patriot Act.About two weeks later, McFadden told supervisors she needed some time at home. Over several days, she downloaded some 2,400 documents from Bank of America’s internal computer system to her personal Hotmail account -– including the same sort of sensitive client information protected by the Bank Secrecy Act — according to the bank’s filings in the case.McFadden, in the filings, denied the mass removal of bank records, saying she downloaded emails that had to do with personal business.Discrimination ComplaintMcFadden, who is African-American and was 41 years old when she was let go, filed an equal-opportunity complaint, alleging she was the victim of race and age discrimination. In her 2006 complaint, she also alleged she was wrongfully terminated after she raised concerns about the bank’s compliance department.The bank denied it discriminated against her. An African-American co-worker of McFadden’s was promoted around the time their job classification was phased out, according to court documents.As for the compliance claims, the executive overseeing the entire department said that as a result of a failed audit at the unit in 2004, compliance associates in McFadden’s department were being actively encouraged to raise questions about problematic accounts as part of a clean-up effort.McFadden kicked off her 31-month legal battle herself, filing an early version of her complaint on her own, or “pro se.” She had a relative drop off a copy with a security guard at Bank of America headquarters in Charlotte, North Carolina. Because the complaint hadn’t been served properly, the bank found about it only after McFadden filed a notice of default.Forced to restart the process, she hired a local lawyer, who then quit a year later. The judge in McFadden’s case urged the lawyer to see the case through, but he refused -– offering, even, to return her $2,500 retainer. The lawyer, who declined to comment for this article, explained his reason for pulling out to the judge in private, not in open court.Accused of PryingBy 2007, with her battle against Bank of America still simmering, McFadden landed a job as an assistant branch manager with Fidelity Bank, a Florida lender unrelated to the mutual-fund giant.Within a few months, McFadden received behavior and performance warnings, according to materials Fidelity Bank turned over the Bank of America’s lawyers in the proceedings.Fidelity managers accused McFadden of being a troublemaker in the office and prying into conversations that didn’t involve her. Her managers also criticized her for relaying complaints she said were raised by other staff members, who, when questioned by managers, denied having voiced such concerns.McFadden’s Fidelity managers also wrote her up for service infractions including failing to make eye contact with customers, one of whom came into the bank to collect a prize from the bank’s “ice cream social drawing.” Asked to sign a form memorializing the problematic behavior, she refused, saying she disagreed strongly, according to her Fidelity Bank personnel file, which was filed as part of the Bank of America matter.Her managers convened an October 2007 conference call to address her concerns about the write-up. She “became confrontational with management” during the call and “refused to acknowledge that immediate improvement was possible,” according to her personnel file. She was terminated after the call, having been on the job six months.McFadden pressed on with her case against Bank of America. A court-ordered attempt at mediation resulted in an impasse.Hired at Deutsche BankBy November 2008, with a trial scheduled for the following year, McFadden received a job offer from Deutsche Bank. The Bank of America suit was settled within weeks, its terms confidential.The settlement allowed McFadden to move on to her new loan-operations job without her new employer learning of her litigation against Bank of America, a general concern her lawyer had raised a year earlier. Though the Bank of America litigation was public, her new employers at Deutsche Bank weren’t aware of it, according to a person familiar with the matter.In 2013, after four years in various jobs at Deutsche Bank, McFadden joined the anti-money-laundering unit of the lender’s private banking arm, returning to work she’d done a decade earlier at Bank of America.According to the Times, in 2016 McFadden reviewed a series of transactions involving the account of Jared Kushner’s real estate company. The bank’s internal software system had identified the transfers as money sent from the Kushner account to Russian nationals. McFadden drafted a suspicious activity report, but managers from Deutsche Bank’s private banking group, where Trump and Kushner did their banking, overruled her and the SAR was never filed, the Times reported.McFadden also complained to her superiors that the accounts of Trump, his family members and other politically exposed individuals weren’t receiving the in-depth scrutiny they deserved, according to the Times.McFadden was eventually moved to another department, she said, and fired in 2018. The newspaper said she has since shared information about her experience at Deutsche Bank with the Securities and Exchange Commission and other regulators. The SEC runs a program that rewards people who come forward to expose wrongdoing.Disclosures of potentially suspicious activities at the bank are “of deep concern to us,” said Representative Adam Schiff, who said his House Intelligence Committee, in conjunction with the Financial Services Committee, are examining transactions involving the bank. “We would want an opportunity to talk” to current or former employees with knowledge of the matter, Schiff, a Democrat, said last month.To contact the reporter on this story: Greg Farrell in New York at gregfarrell@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Jeffrey D Grocott at, David S. JoachimFor more articles like this, please visit us at©2019 Bloomberg L.P.

JPMorgan and Capital One had to lower shareholder payouts to get Fed approval
Fri, 28 Jun 2019 03:58:00 +0000
Capital One Financial and JPMorgan Chase had to reduce their planned shareholder payouts in order to get the Federal Reserve to approve the distributions, the central bank said Thursday.

United Airlines president: 'The sleeping giant has awakened' as it expands SFO service to Asia
Thu, 27 Jun 2019 23:55:00 +0000
The president of United Airlines recently held a Bay Area dinner for CEOs of tech startups as the company courts millennials and tries to change its own culture to embrace innovation faster.

Bank of America Announces Planned Capital Distributions
Thu, 27 Jun 2019 20:45:00 +0000
Bank of America today announced that the Federal Reserve did not object to its capital plan following completion of the 2019 Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review and that the company’s Board of Directors approved plans to increase capital returns to shareholders. The Board approved plans for the company to return as much as $37 billion to common stockholders over the next four quarters through an increased quarterly common stock dividend and common stock repurchases, based on the company’s current number of outstanding shares and share price. The company plans to increase by 20 percent its quarterly common stock dividend, to $0.18 per share, beginning in the third quarter of 2019.

Bank that finances Homestead detention center exits private prison industry
Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:54:34 +0000
The decision comes barely a week after Sen. Elizabeth Warren rolled out a plan to end all private prison contracts with federal agencies.

Related Posts


MarketTamer is not an investment advisor and is not registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. Further, owners, employees, agents or representatives of MarketTamer are not acting as investment advisors and might not be registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or the Financial Industry Regulatory.

This company makes no representations or warranties concerning the products, practices or procedures of any company or entity mentioned or recommended in this email, and makes no representations or warranties concerning said company or entity’s compliance with applicable laws and regulations, including, but not limited to, regulations promulgated by the SEC or the CFTC. The sender of this email may receive a portion of the proceeds from the sale of any products or services offered by a company or entity mentioned or recommended in this email. The recipient of this email assumes responsibility for conducting its own due diligence on the aforementioned company or entity and assumes full responsibility, and releases the sender from liability, for any purchase or order made from any company or entity mentioned or recommended in this email.

The content on any of MarketTamer websites, products or communication is for educational purposes only. Nothing in its products, services, or communications shall be construed as a solicitation and/or recommendation to buy or sell a security. Trading stocks, options and other securities involves risk. The risk of loss in trading securities can be substantial. The risk involved with trading stocks, options and other securities is not suitable for all investors. Prior to buying or selling an option, an investor must evaluate his/her own personal financial situation and consider all relevant risk factors. See: Characteristics and Risks of Standardized Options. The educational training program and software services are provided to improve financial understanding.

The information presented in this site is not intended to be used as the sole basis of any investment decisions, nor should it be construed as advice designed to meet the investment needs of any particular investor. Nothing in our research constitutes legal, accounting or tax advice or individually tailored investment advice. Our research is prepared for general circulation and has been prepared without regard to the individual financial circumstances and objectives of persons who receive or obtain access to it. Our research is based on sources that we believe to be reliable. However, we do not make any representation or warranty, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy of our research, the completeness, or correctness or make any guarantee or other promise as to any results that may be obtained from using our research. To the maximum extent permitted by law, neither we, any of our affiliates, nor any other person, shall have any liability whatsoever to any person for any loss or expense, whether direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or otherwise, arising from or relating in any way to any use of or reliance on our research or the information contained therein. Some discussions contain forward looking statements which are based on current expectations and differences can be expected. All of our research, including the estimates, opinions and information contained therein, reflects our judgment as of the publication or other dissemination date of the research and is subject to change without notice. Further, we expressly disclaim any responsibility to update such research. Investing involves substantial risk. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results, and a loss of original capital may occur. No one receiving or accessing our research should make any investment decision without first consulting his or her own personal financial advisor and conducting his or her own research and due diligence, including carefully reviewing any applicable prospectuses, press releases, reports and other public filings of the issuer of any securities being considered. None of the information presented should be construed as an offer to sell or buy any particular security. As always, use your best judgment when investing.