BackCustomers Bancorp- 5.375% NT REDEEM 30/12/2034 USD 25 Overview

Customers Bancorp- 5.375% NT REDEEM 30/12/2034 USD 25 Receivables

Latest receivables for CUBB: $100M.

Get informed when a big investor buys or sells

+ Follow
Receivables
$103.13M
99.33% YoYΔ $-15.23B vs prior year quarter

Peer average

Loading

Customers Bancorp- 5.375% NT REDEEM 30/12/2034 USD 25 Receivables History

Loading

Customers Bancorp- 5.375% NT REDEEM 30/12/2034 USD 25 vs. peers: Receivables Comparison

Loading

Customers Bancorp- 5.375% NT REDEEM 30/12/2034 USD 25 Receivables Growth (YoY per quarter)

Latest change versus the prior comparable period (same company).

Loading

Customers Bancorp- 5.375% NT REDEEM 30/12/2034 USD 25 (CUBB) FAQ

Customers Bancorp- 5.375% NT REDEEM 30/12/2034 USD 25 posts a receivables of $100M as of June 2026. That compares with $15B in the prior-year period — down 99.3% year over year. Comparing that reading with peers and prior periods is usually more useful than looking at the number in isolation.

In the prior comparable period, Customers Bancorp- 5.375% NT REDEEM 30/12/2034 USD 25's receivables was $15B. The latest reading is $100M — a 99.3% year-over-year decrease (period ending June 2026). Use the history and growth charts on this page for a longer lookback.

Receivables is one piece of Customers Bancorp- 5.375% NT REDEEM 30/12/2034 USD 25's financial statement story. At $100M, it should be interpreted next to related metrics — for example revenue with costs, assets with liabilities, or income with margins. Stockcircle links those related pages so you can move from this number to the surrounding context quickly.

Context for CUBB's receivables usually means three checks: (1) trend versus prior periods, (2) level versus peers, and (3) consistency with growth and profitability. This page covers the first two; Customers Bancorp- 5.375% NT REDEEM 30/12/2034 USD 25's other metric pages and overview cover the third.

Judging Customers Bancorp- 5.375% NT REDEEM 30/12/2034 USD 25 against Finance peers is usually better than using a market-wide rule of thumb. Business models inside Finance are more comparable, which makes gaps in receivables easier to interpret. Start with $100M here, then scan peer and history charts to see if the gap is persistent.