{"id":1259,"date":"2026-05-11T05:00:06","date_gmt":"2026-05-11T05:00:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/banking.deepdigitalventures.com\/blog\/?p=1259"},"modified":"2026-05-11T05:00:06","modified_gmt":"2026-05-11T05:00:06","slug":"a-practical-workflow-for-comparing-bank-ma-targets-by-franchise-quality","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/banking.deepdigitalventures.com\/blog\/a-practical-workflow-for-comparing-bank-ma-targets-by-franchise-quality\/","title":{"rendered":"A Practical Workflow for Comparing Bank M&#038;A Targets by Franchise Quality"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>Bank M&amp;A work for community-bank directors and executives evaluating an acquisition target usually gets pulled toward the announced price too early. Fintech founders choosing a sponsor-bank relationship, bank credit analysts, and financial journalists can use the same frame, but the buyer&#8217;s practical decision is narrower: would the deal add a durable franchise, a fragile funding base, a credit cleanup, or a control problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Executive summary:<\/strong> Compare a bank target by the markets, deposits, credit, controls, and contracts it would bring onto the buyer&#8217;s balance sheet before arguing about tangible-book or earnings multiples. A durable franchise adds relationship deposits and clean credit in markets where the buyer gains operating leverage; a fragile one brings rate-sensitive funding, credit migration, or compliance work that can consume the deal premium.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Start with legal identity, ownership, branches, and holding-company structure.<\/li>\n<li>Test whether deposits are relationship-based, rate-sensitive, uninsured, brokered, or tied to third-party programs.<\/li>\n<li>Read loan mix, credit migration, allowances, and capital together.<\/li>\n<li>Check CRE concentration, public orders, and material third-party contracts before valuation.<\/li>\n<li>Turn every finding into a diligence request, a pricing adjustment, an integration condition, or a reason to pause.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<figure class='wp-block-table'><table><thead><tr><th>Workflow step<\/th><th>Fast public check<\/th><th>Question before valuation<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Legal identity<\/td><td>BankFind, NIC, and holding-company records<\/td><td>Is the buyer acquiring a bank, a holding company, branches, or a platform with separate contracts?<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Market fit<\/td><td>Branch data, Summary of Deposits, and local deposit share<\/td><td>Do the target&#8217;s counties add strategic deposits or mostly create overlap and closure cost?<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Deposit durability<\/td><td>Call Report deposit, expense, average-balance, and uninsured-deposit schedules<\/td><td>Are balances relationship-based and stable, or fast-moving and rate-sensitive?<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Credit culture<\/td><td>Loan mix, delinquencies, charge-offs, allowances, and capital<\/td><td>Does growth look earned, or is the buyer inheriting future credit costs?<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Controls and contracts<\/td><td>Public orders, third-party programs, and management remediation history<\/td><td>Will compliance, onboarding, or vendor risk consume the deal premium?<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>Start with source discipline. The working file should cite the FFIEC Central Data Repository<sup><a href='#source-1'>[1]<\/a><\/sup>, the current FDIC Call Report forms and instructions page<sup><a href='#source-2'>[2]<\/a><\/sup>, FDIC BankFind Suite and FDIC data tools<sup><a href='#source-3'>[3]<\/a><\/sup>, the National Information Center<sup><a href='#source-4'>[4]<\/a><\/sup>, and any public FDIC, OCC, or Federal Reserve enforcement action that bears on the target. A multiple without those sources is not a franchise analysis. It is a price opinion with missing evidence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>For the Call Report shorthand used below, read the schedules this way once: RC is the balance sheet; RC-E is deposit detail; RC-O is deposit-insurance and uninsured-deposit context; RI is income; RC-K is quarterly averages; RC-C is loan mix; RC-N is past-due and nonaccrual loans; RI-B is charge-offs and recoveries; RI-C is allowances; and RC-R is regulatory capital.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class='wp-block-heading'>Compare Markets Before Multiples<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>A buyer should first ask what markets it would own after close. Use FDIC BankFind for institution history and branches, NIC for RSSD and holding-company structure, and FDIC Summary of Deposits and Deposit Market Share reports for branch deposits and county-level market context.<sup><a href='#source-3'>[3]<\/a><\/sup><sup><a href='#source-4'>[4]<\/a><\/sup> The question is not whether the target has branches. It is whether those branches add a market the buyer wants, deepen a market where the buyer already has operating leverage, or duplicate coverage that will require closures and customer retention work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>A durable market fit usually has two features: operating accounts that would survive a logo change, and local bankers whose relationships the buyer can retain. A fragile market fit often looks bigger on the branch map than in economics: overlapping lobbies, promotional certificates, or lenders whose customers are portable only if the people stay.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Put the buyer, the target, and local peers side by side in the <a href='https:\/\/banking.deepdigitalventures.com\/'>Deep Digital Ventures bank peer comparison tool<\/a> before building the valuation deck. A target that adds core operating accounts in a county where the buyer has limited share deserves a different discussion than a target whose branches sit on top of the buyer&#8217;s existing network. The same price-to-tangible-book or earnings multiple can mean strategic expansion in one case and conversion risk in another.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The market review should end with named branch and county questions: which offices are additive, which deposits are tied to local businesses or municipalities, which lenders own the customer relationships, and which markets would require divestitures or branch consolidation. Do this before arguing whether the headline multiple is cheap.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class='wp-block-heading'>Study Deposit Quality Carefully<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Deposits are central to franchise value, but the Call Report forces a more exact review than a broad &quot;low-cost deposits&quot; label. Schedule RC, the balance-sheet schedule, shows total deposits. Schedule RC-E breaks out deposit liabilities. Schedule RC-O reports other data for deposit insurance assessments, including estimated uninsured deposits for reporting institutions that meet the filing requirements. Schedule RI shows interest expense on deposits, and Schedule RC-K gives quarterly average balances that can be used to compare funding cost over time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The FDIC&#8217;s deposit insurance materials state the standard insurance amount as $250,000 per depositor, per insured bank, for each ownership category.<sup><a href='#source-5'>[5]<\/a><\/sup> That amount is not a deal cutoff. It is a diligence frame. If a target relies heavily on large operating accounts, municipal accounts, fintech program accounts, or other balances that may move quickly, the buyer should ask how those customers behave when rates rise or confidence falls.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>A durable deposit base is not just cheap. It is cheap across more than one rate environment, with balances tied to payroll, treasury, escrow, municipal, or local business relationships. A fragile base can show the same current cost but depend on a few large uninsured accounts, a rate special, a single relationship officer, or a third-party program that can reprice or leave quickly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Relationship deposit test: compare noninterest-bearing and interest-bearing deposits in Schedule RC and Schedule RC-E with interest expense in Schedule RI and average balances in Schedule RC-K. A franchise deposit base should show more than a single-quarter low cost.<\/li>\n<li>Uninsured deposit test: read Schedule RC-O and the FDIC&#8217;s estimated uninsured deposits reporting expectations.<sup><a href='#source-6'>[6]<\/a><\/sup> The memo should say whether uninsured-deposit estimates are reported, not guess from a headline deposit number.<\/li>\n<li>Brokered and third-party deposit test: review Schedule RC-E brokered deposit items and the FDIC&#8217;s brokered deposits resource, including Section 29 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act and 12 CFR 337.6.<sup><a href='#source-7'>[7]<\/a><\/sup> For sponsor-bank targets, the source of deposits can matter as much as the posted rate.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>The 2023 failures of Silicon Valley Bank on March 10, Signature Bank on March 12, and First Republic Bank on May 1 are listed on the FDIC&#8217;s 2023 failed-bank page.<sup><a href='#source-8'>[8]<\/a><\/sup> The lesson for M&amp;A review is narrow and practical: uninsured concentration, customer concentration, and liquidity planning belong in the franchise-quality file before price is negotiated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class='wp-block-heading'>Evaluate Credit Culture And Loan Mix<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The buyer is acquiring old underwriting decisions, not just current earnings. Schedule RC-C shows loan categories. Schedule RC-N shows past due and nonaccrual loans. Schedule RI-B shows charge-offs and recoveries. Schedule RI-C shows allowances for credit losses, and Schedule RC-R provides regulatory capital. Those schedules let the buyer separate clean loan growth from growth that may be borrowing from future credit costs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>A durable credit culture can explain why growth occurred and why problem-loan metrics stayed consistent. A fragile one asks the buyer to accept rapid growth, a flat allowance, and early delinquency pressure as unrelated facts. If the story needs perfect employment, perfect cap rates, and perfect refinance markets to work, the multiple should not carry a franchise premium.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Commercial real estate needs a separate pass. The December 2006 Interagency CRE Concentration Guidance says supervisors use two high-level indicators for possible CRE concentration risk: construction, land development, and other land loans at 100 percent or more of total capital, or total CRE loans at 300 percent or more of total capital with CRE growth of 50 percent or more during the prior 36 months.<sup><a href='#source-9'>[9]<\/a><\/sup> The guidance says these are not hard lending limits or safe harbors. For an acquirer, they are diligence triggers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Allowance analysis should also be tied to accounting rules, not just management tone. The Federal Reserve&#8217;s CECL FAQ notes that FASB issued ASU 2016-13, Topic 326, on June 16, 2016, introducing the current expected credit losses methodology.<sup><a href='#source-10'>[10]<\/a><\/sup> In a target review, compare RI-C allowance data with RC-C loan mix, RC-N delinquency and nonaccrual trends, and RI-B net charge-offs. If the allowance story does not match the loan mix and migration data, the next step is file-level diligence, not a higher multiple.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class='wp-block-heading'>Optional Sponsor-Bank And Embedded-Finance Checks<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>This subsection is optional for ordinary branch-bank acquisitions and mandatory when the target earns meaningful revenue from fintech, middleware, program-manager, or embedded-finance relationships. For sponsor-bank targets, compliance and control history is part of credit culture because the buyer may inherit onboarding limits, remediation spend, customer communications, and board-level reporting obligations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The OCC Formal Agreement with Blue Ridge Bank, N.A., dated August 29, 2022, cited unsafe or unsound practices related to third-party risk management, BSA\/AML risk management, suspicious activity reporting, and IT control and risk governance.<sup><a href='#source-11'>[11]<\/a><\/sup> The FDIC Cross River Bank consent order FDIC-22-0040b dated March 8, 2023, addressed fair-lending compliance, internal controls, information systems, and credit underwriting practices.<sup><a href='#source-12'>[12]<\/a><\/sup> The Federal Reserve&#8217;s June 14, 2024 action against Evolve Bancorp, Inc. and Evolve Bank &amp; Trust addressed AML, risk management, consumer compliance, and fintech-partnership oversight.<sup><a href='#source-13'>[13]<\/a><\/sup> A buyer does not need to treat every public order as disqualifying. It does need to price remediation, onboarding limits, and management bandwidth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Third-party deposit and ledger risk also deserves a named question. The CFPB&#8217;s Synapse Financial Technologies action page states that Synapse filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on April 22, 2024, and alleged recordkeeping failures that affected consumer access to funds.<sup><a href='#source-14'>[14]<\/a><\/sup> In a bank M&amp;A file, that turns into a simple question: who controls the ledger, who reconciles it, who owns customer communications, and what happens if the middleware provider fails?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class='wp-block-heading'>Turn Findings Into Deal Questions<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The workflow should end with a decision table and a short memo, not a pile of ratios. The early table gives the skeleton; the final memo should attach each finding to one action: a diligence request, a pricing adjustment, an integration condition, or a reason to pause. A finding that does not change the next diligence step is usually clutter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The best output says, in plain terms, what the buyer would own on day one. For example: &quot;Target A adds two counties we want, but its Schedule RC-O uninsured deposit exposure and sponsor-bank contracts require customer-by-customer retention work. Target B has less market growth, but its RC-N, RI-B, and RI-C pattern supports cleaner credit diligence and fewer integration surprises.&quot; That is the bridge from franchise quality to valuation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Two final source checks belong in the file. First, FDIC FIL-28-2020 is a historical reminder that filing timing can change under stress, so cite the report date and filing date when using Call Reports.<sup><a href='#source-15'>[15]<\/a><\/sup> Second, FDIC FIL-42-2024 and the June 2023 Interagency Third-Party Risk Guidance should be in the sponsor-bank diligence packet when the target depends on fintech, middleware, program-manager, or embedded-finance relationships.<sup><a href='#source-16'>[16]<\/a><\/sup><sup><a href='#source-17'>[17]<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Franchise quality is not a single ratio. A practical buyer can apply this rule tomorrow: do not move from &quot;interesting target&quot; to &quot;priced deal&quot; until markets, deposits, credit, capital, public orders, and third-party contracts have each produced a written diligence question with a named source behind it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class='wp-block-heading'>FAQ<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<h3 class='wp-block-heading'>What is the fastest way to compare two bank M&amp;A targets?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>Put them through the same five checks: market fit, deposit durability, credit culture, controls, and third-party contract exposure. The better target is not always the cheaper multiple; it is the one whose risks can be named, priced, and integrated without consuming the deal thesis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class='wp-block-heading'>When should public data trigger private diligence?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>When a public schedule shows concentration or migration. If RC-N shows stress in a loan segment, pull files. If RC-O or RC-E raises funding questions, review customer concentrations and contracts. If enforcement history appears, read the order and test management&#8217;s remediation plan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class='wp-block-heading'>How should a fintech founder adapt this workflow?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>Use the same workflow to compare sponsor-bank candidates before signing a program agreement. Focus on deposit classification, ledger control, third-party oversight, BSA\/AML capacity, consumer compliance, and whether any public order limits growth or requires remediation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div itemscope itemtype='https:\/\/schema.org\/BlogPosting'><meta itemprop='headline' content='A Practical Workflow for Comparing Bank M&amp;A Targets by Franchise Quality'><meta itemprop='datePublished' content='2026-04-23'><meta itemprop='dateModified' content='2026-04-24'><meta itemprop='description' content='A practical bank M&amp;A diligence workflow for comparing target markets, deposits, credit, controls, and sponsor-bank risks before valuation.'><span itemprop='author' itemscope itemtype='https:\/\/schema.org\/Organization'><meta itemprop='name' content='Deep Digital Ventures Research'><\/span><span itemprop='publisher' itemscope itemtype='https:\/\/schema.org\/Organization'><meta itemprop='name' content='Deep Digital Ventures'><\/span><\/div>\n\n\n\n<h2 class='wp-block-heading'>Sources<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ol class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li id='source-1'>FFIEC Central Data Repository: <a href='https:\/\/cdr.ffiec.gov\/public\/'>https:\/\/cdr.ffiec.gov\/public\/<\/a> &#8211; public Call Report filing access.<\/li>\n<li id='source-2'>FDIC Call Report forms and instructions: <a href='https:\/\/www.fdic.gov\/bank-financial-reports\/current-quarter-call-report-forms-instructions-and-related-materials'>https:\/\/www.fdic.gov\/bank-financial-reports\/current-quarter-call-report-forms-instructions-and-related-materials<\/a> &#8211; current reporting materials.<\/li>\n<li id='source-3'>FDIC BankFind Suite and data tools: <a href='https:\/\/www.fdic.gov\/resources\/data-tools'>https:\/\/www.fdic.gov\/resources\/data-tools<\/a> &#8211; institution, branch, deposit, and market data tools.<\/li>\n<li id='source-4'>National Information Center: <a href='https:\/\/www.ffiec.gov\/NPW'>https:\/\/www.ffiec.gov\/NPW<\/a> &#8211; RSSD and holding-company structure lookup.<\/li>\n<li id='source-5'>FDIC deposit insurance at a glance: <a href='https:\/\/www.fdic.gov\/consumer-resource-center\/deposit-insurance-glance'>https:\/\/www.fdic.gov\/consumer-resource-center\/deposit-insurance-glance<\/a> &#8211; standard insurance amount.<\/li>\n<li id='source-6'>FDIC FIL-37-2023: <a href='https:\/\/www.fdic.gov\/news\/financial-institution-letters\/2023\/estimated-uninsured-deposits-reporting-expectations'>https:\/\/www.fdic.gov\/news\/financial-institution-letters\/2023\/estimated-uninsured-deposits-reporting-expectations<\/a> &#8211; estimated uninsured deposits reporting expectations.<\/li>\n<li id='source-7'>FDIC brokered deposits resource: <a href='https:\/\/www.fdic.gov\/resources\/bankers\/brokered-deposits\/'>https:\/\/www.fdic.gov\/resources\/bankers\/brokered-deposits\/<\/a> &#8211; brokered deposit rules and guidance context.<\/li>\n<li id='source-8'>FDIC 2023 failed-bank page: <a href='https:\/\/www.fdic.gov\/resources\/resolutions\/bank-failures\/in-brief\/2023'>https:\/\/www.fdic.gov\/resources\/resolutions\/bank-failures\/in-brief\/2023<\/a> &#8211; 2023 bank failure dates.<\/li>\n<li id='source-9'>Interagency CRE Concentration Guidance: <a href='https:\/\/www.federalreserve.gov\/frrs\/guidance\/interagency-guidance-on-concentrations-in-commercial-real-estate-lending-sound-risk-management-practices.htm'>https:\/\/www.federalreserve.gov\/frrs\/guidance\/interagency-guidance-on-concentrations-in-commercial-real-estate-lending-sound-risk-management-practices.htm<\/a> &#8211; CRE concentration indicators.<\/li>\n<li id='source-10'>Federal Reserve CECL FAQ: <a href='https:\/\/www.federalreserve.gov\/supervisionreg\/topics\/faq-new-accounting-standards-on-financial-instruments-credit-losses.htm'>https:\/\/www.federalreserve.gov\/supervisionreg\/topics\/faq-new-accounting-standards-on-financial-instruments-credit-losses.htm<\/a> &#8211; ASU 2016-13 and CECL background.<\/li>\n<li id='source-11'>OCC Formal Agreement with Blue Ridge Bank, N.A.: <a href='https:\/\/www.occ.gov\/static\/enforcement-actions\/ea2022-043.pdf'>https:\/\/www.occ.gov\/static\/enforcement-actions\/ea2022-043.pdf<\/a> &#8211; third-party, BSA\/AML, SAR, and IT control findings.<\/li>\n<li id='source-12'>FDIC Cross River Bank consent order: <a href='https:\/\/orders.fdic.gov\/sfc\/servlet.shepherd\/document\/download\/0693d000007xEStAAM'>https:\/\/orders.fdic.gov\/sfc\/servlet.shepherd\/document\/download\/0693d000007xEStAAM<\/a> &#8211; fair-lending, internal-control, information-system, and underwriting issues.<\/li>\n<li id='source-13'>Federal Reserve action against Evolve Bancorp and Evolve Bank &amp; Trust: <a href='https:\/\/www.federalreserve.gov\/newsevents\/pressreleases\/enforcement20240614a.htm'>https:\/\/www.federalreserve.gov\/newsevents\/pressreleases\/enforcement20240614a.htm<\/a> &#8211; AML, risk management, consumer compliance, and fintech-partnership oversight.<\/li>\n<li id='source-14'>CFPB Synapse Financial Technologies action page: <a href='https:\/\/www.consumerfinance.gov\/enforcement\/actions\/synapse-financial-technologies-inc\/'>https:\/\/www.consumerfinance.gov\/enforcement\/actions\/synapse-financial-technologies-inc\/<\/a> &#8211; bankruptcy and recordkeeping allegations.<\/li>\n<li id='source-15'>FDIC FIL-28-2020: <a href='https:\/\/www.fdic.gov\/news\/inactive-financial-institution-letters\/2020\/fil20028.html'>https:\/\/www.fdic.gov\/news\/inactive-financial-institution-letters\/2020\/fil20028.html<\/a> &#8211; historical Call Report filing timing reminder.<\/li>\n<li id='source-16'>FDIC FIL-42-2024: <a href='https:\/\/www.fdic.gov\/news\/financial-institution-letters\/2024\/issuance-anti-money-launderingcountering-financing'>https:\/\/www.fdic.gov\/news\/financial-institution-letters\/2024\/issuance-anti-money-launderingcountering-financing<\/a> &#8211; AML\/CFT program rulemaking context.<\/li>\n<li id='source-17'>June 2023 Interagency Third-Party Risk Guidance: <a href='https:\/\/www.fdic.gov\/news\/financial-institution-letters\/2023\/fil23029.html'>https:\/\/www.fdic.gov\/news\/financial-institution-letters\/2023\/fil23029.html<\/a> &#8211; third-party risk management guidance.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>A practical workflow for comparing bank M&#038;A targets by franchise quality, deposits, markets, credit profile, and strategic fit.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":1961,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_titles_title":"Compare Bank M&A Targets by Franchise Quality","_seopress_titles_desc":"A practical bank M&A diligence workflow for comparing target markets, deposits, credit, controls, and sponsor-bank risks before valuation.","_seopress_robots_index":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[15],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1259","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-playbooks"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/banking.deepdigitalventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1259","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/banking.deepdigitalventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/banking.deepdigitalventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/banking.deepdigitalventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/banking.deepdigitalventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1259"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/banking.deepdigitalventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1259\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2181,"href":"https:\/\/banking.deepdigitalventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1259\/revisions\/2181"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/banking.deepdigitalventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1961"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/banking.deepdigitalventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1259"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/banking.deepdigitalventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1259"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/banking.deepdigitalventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1259"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}