Harel Issuances: Why The Equity Deficit Almost Matches The Credit Reserve
The main article already showed that Harel Issuances is a funding conduit, not a spread business. This follow-up shows that the 2025 equity deficit and reported profit are almost direct accounting translations of expected credit loss on the group's exposure, not signs of operating leakage.
What This Follow-Up Is Testing
The main article already established that Harel Issuances is not really an earnings story. It is a funding wrapper that raises debt and sends the proceeds back into the Harel group. This follow-up isolates one accounting point, but an important one: the 2025 equity deficit and the 2025 profit are almost telling the same story, the story of expected credit loss allowance.
That matters because on a first pass the company looks extremely thin. It has a NIS 6.24 billion balance sheet, a NIS 6.002 million equity deficit, and annual profit of only NIS 2.487 million. That can read like a weak issuer with almost no capital and no real earnings power. But a closer read shows that both numbers were driven far more by accounting translation of credit risk on the Harel-group exposure than by any operating failure inside the issuer itself.
The reason the conclusion is so sharp is that almost every other income-statement line closes against a matching opposite line. Interest income from Harel Insurance was NIS 256.521 million, exactly against interest expense of NIS 256.521 million. Fair-value finance income on the asset was NIS 94.262 million, exactly against fair-value finance expense on the liability in the same amount. A NIS 1.671 million gain from the bond exchange was offset by a NIS 1.671 million loss from the matching deferred-deposit exchange. Even the NIS 1.742 million reimbursement of expenses from the parent was closed against NIS 1.742 million of general and administrative expense.
What remains after all that symmetry closes? Almost one line only: NIS 2.487 million of income from expected credit loss allowance. That is also the full-year profit. This is the center of gravity.
2025 Profit Was Almost Entirely an Allowance Movement
The cleanest way to see it is through the offset table itself:
| Line | 2025 | Offsetting line | 2025 | Net impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Interest income from Harel Insurance | 256,521 | Interest expense | 256,521 | 0 |
| Fair-value finance income | 94,262 | Fair-value finance expense | 94,262 | 0 |
| Gain on bond exchange | 1,671 | Loss on deferred-deposit exchange | 1,671 | 0 |
| Parent expense reimbursement | 1,742 | General and administrative expense | 1,742 | 0 |
| Expected credit loss allowance income | 2,487 | No matching line | - | 2,487 |
The implication is blunt: without the allowance movement, the 2025 income statement would have closed at almost zero. There was no spread income, no new profit engine, and no operating improvement retained inside the issuer. There was mainly an allowance release.
The quarterly summary makes the point even more explicit. In the first quarter the company posted a loss of NIS 78 thousand, and in the same quarter it recorded an expected credit loss expense of NIS 78 thousand. In the second quarter it made NIS 52 thousand, exactly matching NIS 52 thousand of allowance income. In the third quarter profit was NIS 210 thousand, again identical to allowance income. In the fourth quarter profit jumped to NIS 2.303 million, and once again the number was identical to allowance income.
The chart almost looks too neat to be real, but that is exactly the point. In 2025 Harel Issuances' profit line did not really describe how well or how badly the mechanism worked. It described how the allowance on the Harel-group exposure moved.
It is also important to state what did not create profit. Series 21 did bring NIS 94.262 million of fair-value finance income into the filing, but at the same time it created NIS 94.262 million of symmetrical finance expense. The exchange of Series 16 into Series 22 and 23 created a NIS 1.671 million income line on one side and a NIS 1.671 million expense line on the other. So fair-value accounting noise is real, but it is not what explains the bottom line.
Why The Equity Deficit Almost Equals The Allowance
Note 13a gives the first half of the puzzle: related-party balances are shown before the expected credit loss allowance. At year-end 2025 the company had NIS 651.337 million in a current account with the parent and another NIS 5.594708 billion of deferred deposits with Harel Insurance. Together that is gross related-party exposure of NIS 6.246045 billion.
In the statement of financial position those assets are already shown net: NIS 650.580 million of current assets and NIS 5.589462 billion of deferred deposits. Together that is total net assets of NIS 6.240042 billion. The gap between the gross picture and the net picture is NIS 6.003 million. That is exactly the year-end expected credit loss allowance.
| Balance-sheet bridge | NIS thousand |
|---|---|
| Current account with the parent, gross | 651,337 |
| Deferred deposit with Harel Insurance, gross | 5,594,708 |
| Total gross related-party exposure | 6,246,045 |
| Less: expected credit loss allowance | 6,003 |
| Total net assets | 6,240,042 |
The second half of the puzzle sits on the liability side. The company had NIS 6.245776 billion of debentures and another NIS 268 thousand of payables and accrued expenses. Together that is NIS 6.246044 billion. In other words, before the allowance, the balance sheet almost closed on the company's NIS 1 thousand share capital alone.
That is why the equity deficit almost equals the allowance. Not because the company lost NIS 6 million through ordinary operations, but because the balance sheet is built almost back to back, so once NIS 6.003 million of allowance is deducted from assets, almost the same amount falls straight into equity. The tiny gap comes from the NIS 1 thousand share capital.
The same mechanism is visible through the allowance roll-forward. The opening balance for 2025 was NIS 8.490 million. During the year NIS 418 thousand was removed through deferred-deposit redemptions, NIS 1.193 million was added through new deposit placements, but remeasurement reduced the allowance by NIS 3.262 million. The result was a closing balance of NIS 6.003 million, a total decline of NIS 2.487 million. That is, again, the profit line.
What matters here is that profit and equity are tied to the same bridge. When the allowance balance falls, profit rises by the same amount. When the allowance remains on the balance sheet, it also explains almost the entire equity deficit.
This Is Not Operating Leakage, It Is A Credit Read
The main analytical takeaway is that Harel Issuances should not be read as though it were an ordinary standalone business that tried to earn a spread and failed. Under the agreement with Harel Insurance, issuance proceeds are deposited back with Harel Insurance on matching terms, and Harel Insurance also bears the company's expenses. That is why the income and expense lines close almost fully.
So the real question is not "why is profit so small?" but rather "how is credit risk on this exposure being measured?" Note 11a explains that the company measures the allowance on a 12-month expected-credit-loss basis, using probability of default and loss given default, with historical data from an international rating agency adjusted to the local credit rating of the deferred deposits at Harel Insurance. In other words, the allowance is not stray noise. It is the accounting translation of the credit read on the main counterparty.
That also means the equity deficit is not something to hand-wave away. It is real, but it needs to be read correctly. It does not show that the issuer burned capital through structurally unprofitable operations. It shows that the issuer carries almost no standalone cushion, so any change in the credit read on the Harel-group exposure flows directly into its equity.
This leaves the right reading in two layers. On one hand, there is no red flag here of a funding mechanism that is losing money on spread or overhead. On the other hand, there is also no standalone capital buffer that can absorb a worsening in expected credit loss. The balance sheet is thin not because of operating failure, but because of the architecture.
The Bottom Line
The central sentence of this continuation is simple: in Harel Issuances, the 2025 profit and the equity deficit are almost the same accounting story. Profit of NIS 2.487 million is the drop in the allowance. The NIS 6.002 million equity deficit is almost the same as the NIS 6.003 million allowance that remained on the balance sheet at year-end.
Anyone reading the company through net profit alone gets a misleading picture of a weak business. Anyone reading it through equity alone gets a misleading picture of a hole opened by operations. The right read is different: Harel Issuances is a back-to-back structure, so its equity line is almost a sensitivity gauge for expected credit loss on the Harel-group exposure.
That is exactly what makes this point thesis-relevant. It pulls the discussion away from the headline of "tiny profit" and back to the more important issue: the credit quality of the main counterparty and the way IFRS forces the company to translate that into both equity and earnings. In this case, accounting is not a footnote. It is almost the entire story.
Disclosure: Deep TASE analyses are general informational, research, and commentary content only. They do not constitute investment advice, investment marketing, a recommendation, or an offer to buy, sell, or hold any security, and are not tailored to any reader's personal circumstances.
The author, site owner, or related parties may hold, buy, sell, or otherwise trade securities or financial instruments related to the companies discussed, before or after publication, without prior notice and without any obligation to update the analysis. Publication of an analysis should not be read as a statement that any position does or does not exist.
The analysis may contain errors, omissions, or information that changes after publication. Readers should review official filings and primary sources before making decisions.