Non-Performing
Loan in Bangladesh: A Comparative Study on the Islamic Banks and Conventional
Banks
Sonia Rezina
Assistant Professor
Department
of Business Administration
Uttara University,
Dhaka, Bangladesh
E-mail: [email protected]
Rubaiyat Shaimom Chowdhury
Assistant Professor
�Department of Business Administration
Bangladesh
University, Dhaka, Bangladesh
E-mail: [email protected]
Nusrat Jahan
Assistant Professor
Department
of Business Administration
Uttara
University, Dhaka, Bangladesh
E-mail: [email protected]
Abstract
The
banking business is one of the booming businesses in Bangladesh. But at
present, the sector is struggling to be on the growth path due to the growing
proportion of Non-Performing Loan (NPL). The NPL has instigated a negative
influence on the growth of Banking Business. This study has compared the
severity of the impact of operational modes between these two banking systems
that may affect Non-performing loans. Other variables such as governance of the
banks, bureaucracy, and size of the banks, the difference in reserve ratio,
capital adequacy ratio, and interest rates have different impacts on NPL. We
have explained the impact of the variables on the bank performance representing
the two mainstream banking system of Bangladesh, traditional banking and sharia
banking. Finally, we have proposed some evocative measures through which the non-performing
loan can be minimized.
� Keywords: � �Conventional Bank, Islamic Bank,
Non-Performing Loan, Operational Mode of Banks. . . � �
1. Introduction
The reasons behind loan default vary
across countries which tend to upset commercial banks' financial results.
Commercial banks of Bangladesh are licensed and regulated by its central bank
named as Bangladesh Bank. There are currently 59 scheduled banks, 6 of which
are State-owned commercial banks (SOCBs), 3 are specialized banks, 33 are
traditional private commercial banks (PCBs), 8 are PCBs based on Islamic
Shariah and 9 are Foreign Commercial Banks (FCB).
Our banking industry is encountering a
serious problem of NPL because of ineffective lending practices despite taking
many reform measures. It has become a challenged term in Bangladesh as a majority
portion of the loans has ceased to generate profit from the collection of
principal and interest payments from the borrowers. For defining NPL, till now
we don't have any fixed global standard. Based on their conditions and rules,
there are differences in the classification scheme, scope, and contents across
countries. Normally by Non-performing loan, we generally understand a loan
which is already in default or going to be in default very soon. A
Non-Performing loan is a loan that does not perform as planned, interest and
principal payments have become due by 90 days or more, or in the case of interest,
interest payments have been capitalized, refinanced or postponed by arrangement
by at least 90 days. And if the payments have been overdue for less than 90
days, there is still doubt that full payment may not be made the loan is still
under the non-performing loan.
Because
of the increase in the NPL, the banking sector is hampered. As of March 2019,
the NPL rose to Tk 110,874 crore, which had been reported as the highest ever
in the country (Uddin, 2019). According to Bangladesh
Bank reports, eight state-run banks accounted for more than 52 percent of the
bad loans.
The
remaining banks are classified under private and foreign-owned banks. The
defaulted loans were 11 percent of the total outstanding loans. The share of
NPL goes up to about 20 percent when restructured and rescheduled loans are
included. (Mahmood, 2019).
If this scenario continues, then this might be a threat to
this sector. As we know that the operational modes of Islamic and Conventional
banks differ, so they might be affected differently due to the rise in NPL. The
reserve ratio and capital requirement for these banks are different, which
might be a cause for the difference. But whatever the situation is, both the
criteria of banks are experiencing hassle caused by NPL. So, to sustain in a
market with intense competition, they need to come forward with effective
measures to control NPL, which may have a progressive impact on their financial
performance. Our motto is to find out the exact reasons for which NPL differs
in both the banks. Suggestive measures will be given as well. As our economy
depends on the banking sector to a great extent, so it is high time we focus on
this issue. Otherwise, it will have a huge adverse impact on our banking sector
as well as on our economy. To decrease NPL, the liquidity reserve ratio has
already been decreased. The impact is yet to be observed. Many other corrective
measures are needed to be implemented. And if the gap between traditional banks
'NPL and Islamic banks is too high, then it needs to be reduced.
1.1 Objectives of the Research
The broad purpose of this study is to conduct a comparative
analysis of the Islamic Banks and Traditional Banks in Bangladesh on
Non-Performing Loan (NPL). The main goals are:
� To determine the factors
related to banks that have an impact on the Non-Performing Loan (NPL) of
commercial banks in Bangladesh.
� To examine the effect of
the factors related to banks on the Non-Performing Loan (NPL) by considering
variables such as Lending Rate (LR), Loan to Deposit Ratio (LTD), Bank Size
(BS) and Reserve Ratio (RR).
� To identify the
difference between the extent of the �impact of the factors related to banks�
on NPL of the two banking systems in Bangladesh.
2. Literature Review
Though globally, there is no
static definition of NPL as there are variations exist in the term of the
method of classification, the possibility, and subjects but we have tried to
find some parameters to measure. IMF‟s
Compilation Guide on Financial Soundness Indicators defined NPLs as follows:
����� NPL
refers to the loans that stopped generating income for an extensive period (Caprio & Klingebiel, 2002).�
Banks' performance can be decreased by NPL as we can treat NPL as
undesirable outputs or costs of loaning for banks. If NPL increases naturally
there will be a downward trend of the bank's performance. (Tesfaye, 2012).
NPLs can be measured by non-performing
loans net of the provision of capital. This is measured by considering the NPL
value minus the specific loan provisions divided by the capital (Waweru & Spraakman, 2012). Another approach to calculating NPLs
is by dividing non-performing loans to total gross loans. Here we considered
the NPLs as the numerator and the total loan portfolio (covering NPLs before
any loan-loss provisions are deducted) as the denominator.
����� Kateregga (2013) found
that despite being following the procedures and regulations on administering
credit, commercial banks in Uganda still tend increasing Non-Performing loans
means a larger number of clients are not repaying the loans. After conducting a
thorough study on the reasons for NPLs among commercial banks in Kenya Muriithi (2013)
explained that, before the financial crises started in 2007-2008, over the past
decade almost in every country the credit quality of the loan portfolio was
relatively stable. As a result of the financial crisis, the average bank asset
quality deteriorated sharply.� He also
acknowledged that, due to the nature of producing the largest portion of
operating income, loans can be considered as the leading asset and advancing as
the soul of the banking industry. This threat of NPL can be mitigated by
functional credit risk assessment and having enough facilities for prospective
bad and doubtful debt.�
As described by Karim et al.
(2010) the key outcome of bad loans is the
capacity to deter the bank to grow commercially. This is because bad loans
cause liquidity problems and make the banks unqualified to extend their
resources to potentially feasible concerns. Moreover, they pointed out the
unattainability of procreative venture prospects due to the capital that has
been locked-up because of the bad loans. According to Fofack (2005) the
entire banking sector is facing this crisis because of the inefficient
supervision of credit risk which has become the reason for economic failure.
The
study of Rahman & Jahan (2018) found an insignificant
relationship between profitability and NPIs. The required SLR (Statutory
Liquidity Reserve) of the Islamic banks was 11.5%, which was lower than that of
conventional banks.
Bhattarai (2016) identified that the NPL ratio has an inverse effect on ROA
whereas it has an affirmative effect on ROE in the Nepalese commercial banks.
The findings of Akter & Roy (2017) again identified an inverse effect of NPL on profitability
(Net Interest Margin) while considering 30 bank data of Bangladesh for the year
2008 to 2013.
After analyzing the time series data Lata (2015) found
NPL among the principal factors which influence banks' profitability having a
considerable negative impact on Net Interest Income of the nationalized
Commercial Banks in Bangladesh.
Adeusi et
al. (2014) performed a study on the impact of
credit risk over the financial result of the commercial banks in Nigeria from
2008 to 2012. They found an inverse relationship that was not significant
between loan ratio and total advances in terms of deposits and has revealed a
negative and significant relationship between the rate of nonperforming loans
and advances with the profitability of banks.
Haron (2004)
considers internal bank factors as bank-specific factors that can be either
financial factors such as bank size, capital ratios, liquidity, asset quality,
deposits, operational performance, risk management, etc. or non-financial
factors such as some branches, staff, ATMs, clients, bank age, ownership, etc.
The internal factors are said to be the factors that are considered to be under
the control and influence of the bank.�
Earning ability, capital adequacy, and
bank size; these all were recognized by Langrin
(2001) as significant factors of a bank�s
non-performing loans. Wheelock & Wilson (2000) illustrated that the quality of the asset and bank size
meaningfully govern the non-performing loan level.
A study by Waweru (2009) on
Kenyan commercial banks specified that higher interest rates may lead a bank to
non-performing loans. High-risk borrowers of the banks are also causing loan
default (Muriithi, 2013). As per Gorter
& Bloem (2002) variations in interest rate has an
influence to significantly increase in �bad loans�. Again Espinoza & Prasad (2010) emphasized both external and internal features influence
the non-performing loans and the GCC Banking system.
The study of Awuor (2015) explored
an inverse relationship between bank size and NPLs that was weak as well as
insignificant. A unit rise in bank size may lead to a decrease in the levels of
NPLs which is clarified by economies of scale in bank operations.
(Masood & Ashraf, 2012) suggested
that generally, the banks that are small in size tend to adopt lesser business
loan underwriting practices though the risk associated is higher compared to
larger banks. Big banks get an advantage from diversification chances. Salas & Saurina (2002) also identified an inverse relationship lying within bank
size and Non-Performing Loan means the bigger the bank size the lesser the
NPL.� He contends that the bigger size of
those banks permits them for having more diversified investment opportunities. HU et al.
(2004) report the same evidence. Mahmudur (2012)
identified the Basel Capital Accord (Basel-II) as the origin of NPL as well as
the credit crisis.
The
banks� credit policy has been crucially influencing the non-performing loans.
According to Adhikary (2006) some of
the reasons for the loans being non-performing are deficiency of efficient
monitoring, effective lenders' options, and effective debt recovery strategies.
It has been noticed that Pre-election
has a swaying control in the financial sector�s regulatory side. This is
creating pressure on the Government and Bangladesh Bank. This is not a smooth
atmosphere for functioning and to save the banking sector from deteriorating,
necessary steps should be taken (Wallich,
2006).
�
3. Methodology
In this
study, we have tried to examine the internal factors which influence NPLs and
whether those factors have a different impact on Islamic Banks (IB) and
Commercial Banks (CB). For this, we have used secondary data for 5 Years
(2014-2018) form 10 different banks. The data was retrieved from the Bangladesh
bank website and banks� annual reports. We took 7 conventional CBs (Dhaka Bank Limited,
Dutch Bangla Bank Limited, Eastern Bank Limited,
Mutual Trust Bank Limited, NCC Bank Limited, One Bank Limited, Prime Bank
Limited) and 3 IBs (Islami Bank
Bangladesh Limited, Export-Import Bank of Bangladesh Limited, First Security
Islami Bank Limited) for the analysis considering the
random sampling. Because of the higher market share of commercial banks we gave
commercial banks more weight.
�Table 1. List of
selected banks
Private Commercial Banks |
Islamic Commercial Banks |
DBL |
IBBL |
DBBL |
EIBBL |
EBL |
FSIBL |
MTBL |
|
NCCBL |
|
OBL |
|
PBL |
|
The research used Statistical software 'Stata' for panel
data analysis. This research used the model of fixed-effect (FE) and the model
of random-effects (RE) to evaluate the relationship between dependent variables
and independents. The FE model and the RE model have been used over time to
evaluate the effect of the explanatory variables. In our study, the dependent
variable is Nonperforming loan ratio (NPL) and Lending Rate (LR), Loan to
Deposit Ratio (LTD), Bank Size (BS) and Statutory Liquidity Rate Ratio (SLR)
are used as the independent variable.
3.1 Description of Variables
3.1.1 Non-Performing Loan Ratio (NPLR)
For
Non-Performing Loan, we found loans where the debtor refused to pay the
scheduled payments for a specified time. We divide Total Non-Performing Loan by
Total Loan to determine the NPLR.
3.1.2 Lending Rate (LR)
Generally
for banks, the Lending Rate is an interest rate used by banks for their
customers who are borrowing the money from the bank. As at present, banks are
using several products to increase their income from time to time. It is very
difficult to find a single LR for a bank for the whole year. We have used
interest income from loans/ total loans as a proxy for lending rates.
3.1.3 Loan to Deposit Ratio (LDR)
LDR is
used to access the liquidity condition of a bank. Those banks are considered as
strong banks that have a good liquidity condition. We have calculated the total
loan divided by total deposit to find out LDR.
3.1.4 Bank Size (BS)
All the
10 banks we have considered our listed banks. So we consider the paid-up
capital of the banks. To avoid the extreme effects, we consider a log of
paid-up capital.
��
3.1.5 Reserve Ratio (RR)
All banks
have to maintain a minimum portion of cash, gold or other liquid assets to meet
the need of their Net Demand and Time Liabilities (NDTL). Reserve Ratio is said
to be the ratio of these liquid assets to the demand and time liabilities. We
have taken SLR as Reserve Ratio.
3.2
Equation
Panel
data is used for analysis. The results are found by fixed effect and random
effect models.
Model the generic equation as follows
for pulled Ordinary Least Square (OLS)
For determining the Fixed effect generic equation was used
as below
Where
And for the random effect, we have used
4. Analysis and Findings
4.1
Pooled OLS Estimation
To understand the relation with the
overall picture of the independent variables we run the pooled OLS for all the
banks. The result was not very much convincing.
Table 2.
The output of Pooled OLS
Number of obs |
����� 50 |
|
Source |
SS |
df������ MS |
|
F(� 4,�� �45) |
3.34 |
|
|
|||
Prob
> F |
0.01 |
|
Model |
0.05 |
4�������� .01 |
|
R-squared |
0.22 |
|
Residual |
0.18 |
45������ .00 |
|
Adj
R-squared |
0.16 |
|
|
|||
Root
MSE |
0.06 |
|
Total |
0.24 |
49������ .00 |
|
|
|
|||||
NPLR |
Coef. |
Std.
Err.����� T |
P>t |
[95%
Conf. |
Interval] |
|
|
||||||
BS |
-0.01 |
.00������ ���-2.25 |
0.02 |
-0.02 |
-0.00 |
|
LR |
-0.01 |
.68��������� -0.02 |
0.98 |
-1.39 |
1.36 |
|
LTD |
0.05 |
.11���������� 0.45 |
0.65 |
-0.17 |
0.27 |
|
RR |
-0.06 |
.38�������� -0.18 |
0.85 |
-0.83 |
0.70 |
|
_cons |
0.15 |
.15��������� 0.94 |
0.35 |
-0.17 |
0.47 |
|
Most of the dependent variables are not significant and also
the coefficient is not explaining the relations properly. It is expected.
Because the Pooled OLS estimation is one of the OLS techniques which runs on
Panel data. Therefore all different effects were ignored individually. For this
reason, a lot of basic assumptions have been violated, such as orthogonality of
the error term. Therefore, the result is not very much accurate.� So we have tried to find the issue and try to
find a suitable model for the data.
4.2
Fixed Effects Model
We have
tested the Heteroscedasticity and normality of the data and have found that
those are not as good expected. So we address the issue and then run the FE
model where we have found the below result:
��� Table 3. The output
of Fixed-Effects Model
Fixed-effects
(within) regression������������������� ����Number of obs����� =��
50 |
|||||
Group
variable: IDBank������������������������������������ Number
of groups =� 10 |
|||||
|
|||||
R-sq:� within�
= 0.36���������������������������������
���������Obs per group: min
=� 5 |
|||||
������ between = 0.26�������������������������������������������
avg =������ 5.0 |
|||||
������ overall = 0.22����������������������������������������������
max =�������� 5 |
|||||
|
|||||
�����������������������������������������������
F(4,36)����������� =����� 5.07 |
|||||
corr(u_i,
Xb)� = -0.99�����������������������������������������
Prob > F���������� =��� 0.002 |
|||||
NPLR |
Coef. |
Std.
Err. |
t���������� P>t |
|
[95%
Conf. Interval] |
|
|
||||
BS |
0.27 |
0.09 |
2.98�� 0.005 |
.08������ .46 |
|
LR |
1.58 |
0.38 |
4.12�� 0.000 |
.80������ 2.37 |
|
LTD |
0.16 |
0.08 |
1.92�� 0.063 |
-.00���� .32 |
|
RR |
3.05 |
1.15 |
2.65�� 0.012 |
.71����� 5.39 |
|
_cons |
-3.13 |
0.92 |
-3.38�� 0.002 |
-5.01�� -1.25 |
|
sigma_u |
0.79 |
|
|||
sigma_e |
0.02 |
|
|||
rho |
0.99 |
(fraction
of variance due to u_i) |
|||
F test
that all u_i=0:������ F(9, 36) =
28.44��� Prob > F = 0.00 |
All the variables are positively related to the NPLR though
Loan to deposit Ratio plays an insignificant role to explain the NPL of the
banks in case of Bangladesh. This is quite understandable as the Loan to
Deposit ratio is not always maintained properly by the banks for making their
plans to disburse the loans.
The interesting result is that NPL and Bank Size are
positively related. That indicates the bigger the bank the more NPL they have.
It is rejecting the theory that big banks are more efficient. In the concept of
Bangladesh big banks have more NPL as they have given a big amount of bad
loans. That is a direct effect of inefficiency.
Loan to Deposit ratio has a positive impact as per
literature (Wood & Skinner, 2018). The justification regarding this is, if
customers deposited more money in banks, the banks will perform more with their
lending activities. But in our country, this activity is not performed
efficiently. So NPL increases.
Also when we have run the Housman test we find that the FE
is better than the random effect.
4.3
Comparative Analysis of Conventional Banks and Islamic Banks
Now we
want to analyze the influence of these variables separately on commercial banks
and Islamic banks. So we have run two separate FE model to compare. The results
are as below:
������� Table 4. Fixed
Effect Result for Commercial Banks only
NPLR |
Coef. |
Std.
Err. |
t |
P>t |
[95%
Conf. |
Interval] |
BS |
.15 |
.03 |
4.21 |
0.000 |
.07 |
.22 |
LR |
.54 |
.14 |
3.86 |
0.001 |
.25 |
.82 |
LTD |
.03 |
.03 |
1.22 |
0.233 |
-.02 |
.10 |
RR |
.72 |
.41 |
1.74 |
0.004 |
-.13 |
1.57 |
_cons |
-1.67 |
.40 |
-4.14 |
0.000 |
-2.50 |
-.84 |
����� Table 5. Fixed
Effect Result for Islamic Banks only
NPLR |
Coef. |
Std.
Err. |
t |
P>t |
[95%
Conf. |
Interval] |
BS |
.49 |
.18 |
2.60 |
0.003 |
.08 |
.90 |
LR |
2.98 |
.81 |
3.68 |
0.003 |
1.21 |
4.75 |
LTD |
.31 |
.18 |
1.72 |
0.112 |
-.08 |
.72 |
RR |
6.39 |
2.62 |
2.44 |
0.001 |
.67 |
12.10 |
_cons |
-4.82 |
1.61 |
-2.98 |
0.011 |
-8.35 |
-1.29 |
From the result, we have seen that for both categories of
banks separately, LTD has no significant impact on NPLR. But in the case of
other variables, those have a bigger effect on Islamic banks than conventional
banks. We have seen that BS and LR have almost four times higher impact on NPLR
of Islamic Banks compared to conventional banks. But the Reserve Ratio has the
biggest difference compared to commercial Banks. Bangladesh's banking law may
have a big impact on this.
4.4
Hadri LM Unit Root Test
When we
checked unit-roots through the Hadri LM test for commercial banks, we find that
we can accept the null hypothesis. This means we can say all panels are
stationary. We also get the same result for the Islamic Banks though the
p-value is smaller compare to conventional banks. So we can say our data is
good.�
Table 6. Unit Root Test
Commercial Banks |
Islamic Banks |
||||
Hadri
LM test for NPLR |
Hadri
LM test for NPLR |
||||
Ho:
All panels are stationary |
Number
of panels |
7 |
Ho:
All panels are stationary |
Number
of panels |
4 |
Ha:
Some panels contain unit roots |
Number
of periods |
5 |
Ha:
Some panels contain unit roots |
Number
of periods |
5 |
Time
trend: Not included |
Asymptotics:
T, N |
->
Infinity |
Time
trend: Not included |
Asymptotics:
T, N |
->
Infinity |
Heteroskedasticity:
����Not robust |
sequentially |
Heteroskedasticity:
Not robust |
sequentially |
||
LR
variance: (not used) |
|
|
LR
variance: (not used) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Statistic |
p-value |
|
Statistic |
p-value |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
z
2.38 |
0.008 |
|
z
3.16 |
0.000 |
|
There is a common understanding about the Islamic banks is
Islamic Banks are less influenced by the bank's internal variables in case of
NPL. This study disagrees with this understanding and finds that Islamic Banks
are even more influenced by the BS, LR, and RR compared to conventional
banks.��
5. Policy Implications and Conclusion
From this
paper, we can say that the independent variables (Bank internal Variable) have
some impact on NPLR. But still, this impact is not as big as we think. Also,
the sample size both in sense of some banks and the observed year is small
compared to the total industry. So we need to review the things before putting
our final comments.
In the case of comparing the IBs� and CBs� NPLRs dependency
on the selected variables, we have seen that Islamic Banks are more dependent
on the variables compared to the commercial banks. But still, there is scope
for further analysis.
Financial institutions in almost every
country of the world face several risks of nonperforming loans; it is, however,
prudent for these institutions to introduce monitoring mechanisms to follow up
with the activities of borrowers. McNulty
et al. (2001) noted that NPL is thought to be significant for individual
bank performance and the economy�s financial setting. Commercial banks are very
disposed to the default risk from borrowers for the nature of their business.
To reduce the bank risk, practical credit risk assessment and the creation of
enough provisions are very important.
The security of the fund funds of
commercial banks should be taken care of from getting too much profit from
risky investments. Any kind of diversion of loan policy should be restricted,
which may reduce the non-performing loan.
6. Scope for Further Research
This study has considered only
four independent variables to define relationships. In a further study
increased number of variables (i.e., the impact of credit information sharing,
Credit officers' demographic attributes) can be used to explain the model. We
chose only five years of study. The paper, however, suggests that a study be
done to increase the time under study. Moreover, all the listed banks can be
taken into consideration to achieve a more significant result.
References
Adeusi, S. O., Akeke, N. I., Adebisi, O. S., & Oladunjoye, O.
(2014). Risk management and financial performance of banks in Nigeria. Risk
Management, 6(31).
Adhikary, B. K. (2006). Nonperforming loans in the banking sector of
Bangladesh: realities and challenges. Bangladesh Institute of Bank Management,
4(26), 75-95.
Akter, R., & Roy, J. K. (2017). The impacts of non-performing loan
on profitability: An empirical study on banking sector of Dhaka stock exchange.
International Journal of Economics and Finance, 9(3), 126-132.
Awuor, F. (2015). Effects of Selected Bank Specific Factors on None
Performing Loans amongst Commercial Banks in Kenya. Unpublished MBA Project.
Bhattarai, Y. R. (2016). Effect of non-performing loan on the
profitability of commercial banks in Nepal. Prestige International Journal
of Management and Research, 1-9.
Caprio, G., & Klingebiel, D. (2002). Episodes of systemic and
borderline banking crises. Managing the real and fiscal effects of banking
crises, World Bank Discussion Paper, 428, 31-49.
Espinoza, R. A., & Prasad, A. (2010). Nonperforming loans in the
GCC banking system and their macroeconomic effects (No. 10-224).
International Monetary Fund.
Fofack, H. L. (2005). Nonperforming loans in Sub-Saharan Africa:
causal analysis and macroeconomic implications. The World Bank.
Gorter, N., & Bloem, M. (2002). The macroeconomic
statistical treatment of NPLs. Publication of the Organization for
Economic corporation & Development.
Haron, S. (2004). Determinants of Islamic bank
profitability. Global Journal of Finance and Economics, 1(1),
11-33.
HU, J. L., Li, Y., & CHIU, Y. H. (2004). Ownership and
nonperforming loans: Evidence from Taiwan's banks. The Developing
Economies, 42(3), 405-420.
Kateregga, S. K. (2013). Interest rates and loan portfolio
performance in commercial banks: a case study of Centenary Bank Entebbe Road
Branch Uganda.
Langrin, B.R. (2001). Financial Crises: Theory and
Evidence. The Determinants of Banking System Distress: A Microeconomic
and Macroeconomic Empirical Examination of the Recent Jamaican Banking Crisis. The Pennsylvania State University.
Lata, R. S. (2015). Non-Performing Loan and Profitability:
The Case of State-Owned Commercial Banks in Bangladesh. World Review of
Business Research, 5(3), 171-182.
Mahmood,
M. (2019). The Current State of the Banking industry in Bangladesh. Retrieved from: https://thefinancialexpress.com.bd/views/views/the-current-state-of-the-banking-industry-in-bangladesh-556380055?fbclid=IwAR3ZfNn3rpcd5ddGxsXoIfUSvyNkWYNEXAnb8EpcrPop0puLzYn4o1hjo28.
Masood, O., & Ashraf, M. (2012). Bank‐specific and
macroeconomic profitability determinants of Islamic banks. Qualitative
Research in Financial Markets, 4(2/3), 255-268.
McNulty, J. E., Akhigbe, A. O., & Verbrugge, J. A.
(2001). Small bank loan quality in a deregulated environment: the information
advantage hypothesis. Journal of Economics and Business, 53(2-3),
325-339.
Muriithi, M. W. (2013). The causes of non-performing
loans in commercial banks in Kenya (Doctoral dissertation, University
of Nairobi).
Mahmudur, R. Q. (2012). All about Non-performing Loans: The
Bangladesh Scenario. The Financial Express, November.
Rahman, B., & Jahan, N. (2018). Roots
of Non-Performing Investments (NPIs) in Islamic banks of Bangladesh: An
Empirical Study. World Review of Business
Research, 8(3), 12-23.
Salas, V., & Saurina, J. (2002). Credit
risk in two institutional regimes: Spanish commercial and savings banks. Journal
of Financial Services Research, 22(3), 203-224.
Tesfaye, T. (2012). Determinants of
Banks Liquidity and their Impact on Financial Performance: empirical study on
commercial banks in Ethiopia (Doctoral dissertation, Addis Ababa
University).
Uddin Z. (2019). Bad Loans Soar. Retrieved from: https://www.thedailystar.net/frontpage/bangladesh-bank-reports-defaulted-loans-soar-1755172.
Wallich, C. I.
(2006). Status of Non-Performing Loans in Banking Sector in Bangladesh. 1st
Edition.
Waweru, N. M. (2009). Commercial Banking Crisis in Kenya:
Causes and Remedies. (Unpublished MBA Thesis). New York University, United
States.
Waweru, N., & Spraakman, G. (2012). The use of
performance measures: case studies from the microfinance sector in Kenya. Qualitative
Research in Accounting & Management.
Wheelock, D. C., & Wilson, P. W.
(2000). Why do banks disappear? The determinants of US bank failures and
acquisitions. Review of Economics and Statistics, 82(1), 127-138.
Wood, A., & Skinner, N. (2018).
Determinants of non-performing loans: evidence from commercial banks in
Barbados. The Business & Management Review, 9(3), 44-64.
Copyrights
Copyright for this article is retained by the
author(s), with first publication rights granted to the journal. This is an
open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative
Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).