The "cat is out of the bag" - the regulators performing the 'not too stressful stress tests' will take a harsher view of loans than other trouble assets. So, if a bank does more traditional banking such as loans the 'not too stressful stress tests' will scrutinized them more than a financial conglomerate who may have all kinds of securitized assets and "off-balance" exposure.
Some analysts said regulators are favoring the largest banks because if even one failed that would pose a severe economic risk. Banks that deal in securities are more interconnected to other corners of the global financial system.
I don't buy that excuse. There are politics at play here. The financial oligarchy has great interest in preserving financial conglomerates. The Obama Administration apparently does not want to take on the financial oligarchy.
This is a better excuse:
Regulators also face pressure to highlight the weaknesses of some banks, or critics will dismiss the tests as a whitewash. That would undermine the goal of improving confidence in the financial system.
It is the regional banks that will be sacrificed in order to preserve the financial oligarchy. The regional banks and banks that do more traditional banking are easier targets. It is sad that a bank, in the true sense of the word, will be scrutinized more than a financial conglomerate who negligently underestimated risk and did whatever it could to spread risk through out the global financial system.