Finance began, and ends, this decade in the doghouse. With hindsight, the charges against banks following the dotcom bust – that conflicted analysts helped propel flaky tech stocks to ridiculous heights – seem reasonably benign. Banks, fuelled by cheap funding and an inadequate regulatory regime, are now accused of going on a debt-fuelled rampage, until ever-greater leverage eventually brought the financial system to the brink of collapse. Awarding rosettes among this bunch of mongrels, then, seems inapt.

Merrill Lynch perhaps deserves a mention for embodying a perverse esprit de corps. Not only was it central to then-New York attorney-general Eliot Spitzer's probe into stock ratings, Merrill finished the decade (and itself) off in fine fashion. After ramping up total leverage from under 20 times in 2005 to 34 times in 2008, it then collapsed into the arms of Bank of America. Remember, too, that Merrill's deal-making wizardry created the Royal Bank of Scotland-led deal to buy ABN Amro, helping take out another couple of Europe's banks. Barclays walked away with the “Luck Trumps Judgment” prize.

What about relative success stories? Japan's banks languished after their last crisis, but their caution meant little renewed pain. China's banks now lead the world by market value. Meanwhile, remember the US banks, such as Bank of Hawaii, which avoided subprime lending and thus government support. Among the big dogs, JPMorgan joined forces with Chase Manhattan in 2000, supersizing itself yet staying clear of trouble. Goldman Sachs, meanwhile, just proved itself a better risk manager than its rabid peers. Ultimately, however, all of the above when in crisis fell back on another type of bank – the central ones. They stoked the credit boom but were left clearing up the mess that ensued. The bank of the decade award, a booby prize, goes to them.