A very much more general observation is that it's usually not a great idea to hold a meaningful position in a bank you don't truly know and understand really well. Which in turn requires the ability to really understand banks, which is a rare skill. I don't have it, but at least I have learned (sometimes painfully) that I don't have it.

Banking is a great business if you merely avoid doing stupid stuff, but the problem is that bank managers are as likely to do stupid stuff as a kid is likely to eat candy. And you never know till after the fact.

The great majority of the time the stupid stuff is lending to people who can't pay it back (and which was probably obvious at the time), most likely against property which is cyclically overvalued. So in theory you can avoid a few problems by not investing in the "high" part of the cycle. But every cycle seems to include a brand new way of doing stupid stuff. Right now we seem to be in that part of the cycle that it has been long enough since a banking crisis that the banks are lobbying, mostly successfully, to weaken the rules put in after the last one.

Other than a couple of specific exceptions, I don't do banks except when it's a small position as part of a diversified "shotgun" portfolio.

None of that is to suggest that banks down under won't do well for you, just a general health warning to consider.

Jim