DETERMINANTS OF BANK-SPECIFIC AND MACROECONOMIC FACTORS THAT ARE AFFECTING THE PROFITABILITY OF COMMERCIAL BANKS A STUDY ON THE BRIC FROM THE EMERGING MARKET

Running Head: Finance Dissertation 1

DETERMINANTS OF BANK-SPECIFIC AND MACROECONOMIC FACTORS THAT ARE

AFFECTING THE PROFITABILITY OF COMMERCIAL BANKS A STUDY ON THE BRIC

FROM THE EMERGING MARKET.

Institution Affiliation:

Students Name:

Date:

Finance Dissertation 2

Abstract

Analyzing principle determinants affecting bank profitability is of critical significance for

improving internal institutional administration and carries out banking reforms. Nonetheless, past

research studies accord little focus to the accruing effects of financial institutions industrial

framework, the constitution of the banks, as well as monitoring within BRIC countries on bank

performance, specifically paying attention to local against international banks. Subsequently,

employing both institutional as well as national level information on the banking industry from

sampled countries for a period of over ten years, this research study empirically points out multi-

national determinants of bank profitability in on banks from the BRIC on emerging markets with

consideration to institutional characteristics, macroeconomics surrounding, the standards of the

bank, exposure to risk, financial regulations, and monitoring across BRIC of critical importance,

this study further seeks to establish the collective effects of variations in macroeconomic

environment, and the association between local and host region on international institutions. The

experimental findings show that financial institutions exhibit improved performance as compared

to local banks. Banks serving in a more analogous market report fewer profits whereas the multi-

national variation in regulation and monitoring as well influence foreign bank’s profits. In

particular, our results show that foreign banks performances are partially and inversely

associated with the rate of inflation.

Introduction

Banks reserve a very crucial role to play in the economic development of any nation as

financial mediator. The purpose of availing funds in the economy makes their service a

significant objective of whichever state. Subsequently, focusing on the factors that influence


banks profitability is needed and is essential to the sustainability of the economy (Benjamin,

Tabak, Leyi, João, & Daniel, 2013).The financial mechanism is viewed as the source of growth

and establishment in many countries. This occurs as a function of their capability to control the

financial mechanisms in those economies, by conducting some crucial responsibilities, for

instance, making feasible the applicability of fiscal policies and payment mechanism (Gibson,

2008). Therefore, it is of significant importance to focus on this topic and come up with an

analysis of how it functions, to oversee an efficient financial mechanism and safeguard the

economy.

The proliferation and non-interference of financial markets transposed the profitability

requirements and competition appearance in the banking sector. Banking and financial sector

operations grew through freeing capital transactions. Financial institutions aim to variegate

operations and to acquire enough capacity to survive the globalization of the market. The

banking industry takes part in the improvement of securities activities (Lensink & Meesters,

2008).By paying attention to research conducted by the banking industry in many countries in

Europe and presented with the economic significance of the banking industry, it is necessary to

evaluate the determinants of the profitability in the banking industry considering incorporation of

exposure. It should be acknowledged that these determinants could either be internal or external.

Determinants that fall in the internal category concern specific financial traits to bank whereas,

external determinants are macroeconomic in nature.

The main purpose of this research is to analyze the determinants of banks' productivity by

precisely analyzing, regulations, possession structure, and the record monetary environment.

Comprehension of determinants of banks' performance could be exceptionally profitable for

banks' administrators in day to day business decisions. Therefore, banks' managers could


evaluate and decrease the effect of new regulation on merit since future laws will probably

influence determinants of profitability. What's more, the scholastic examination could utilize the

discoveries of this proposition to test whether the presentation of new regulation changes

determinants of banks' profitability.

As earlier mentioned, this theory looks at the impact of regulation, the proprietorship

structure, and the accounting report structure on execution. Regulation is inspected in the subtle

element since current endeavors to change regulation, and a changing arrangement atmosphere

could significantly impact the keeping money part. Moreover, former research broadly examined

the impact of the possession structure outside the keeping money area. Results for the managing

an account division could be diverse in light of the fact that controllers set necessities on the

degree of capitalization. At last, the record monetary structure is essential in today's

administration, both for interior and exterior purposes. To be specific, the accounting report

structure legitimates everyday business choices and serves as the intermediary for sound and

judicious danger administration. Plus, regulation regularly concentrates on the accounting report

structure through which it could influence banks' productivity. In this setting, determinants of

gainfulness mostly identify with the record monetary structure because of the exceptional way of

banks.

For the past twenty years, the banking industry has undergone drastic transformations all

over the world regarding operations. The external and internal determinants influenced its

formation and productivity. Regardless of the increasing pattern in bank disintermediation in the

countries of interest, the responsibility of banks in providing funds continues to be of importance

essential to economic growth and development. An efficient and profitable banking industry is

capable of countering severe shocks and play the role to the dynamism of the economic system.


Hence, therefore, the determinants of bank’s performance caught my attention, that of

researchers and other stakeholders in the banking industry and as such this research was

necessary.

Several years ago, the financial systems of established countries experienced key

transformations on their sources of income. Revenue and interest were substituted by

commissions as well as trading income together with fees. Referring to past records, these

changes could result into reduced resilience of banking income to severe shocks. Nonetheless,

several financial systems have gone through financial crises surviving through risks they were

exposed to. Other financial systems have gone ahead to record impressive returns after

undergoing severe shocks. To begin with, productivity is the major source bank (Gropp &

Heider, 2010) and as such, any challenge on the profitability of financial institutions bears the

probability of transmitting to solvency ratios and has a likelihood of exposing the banking

system to risks.

Taking into account the decline in profits and hardships in issuing extra shares, financial

institutions are obliged to control ending and advance to credit rationing so as to comply with the

rules, therefore, as a result, have an impact on economic growth and development (Demirguc-

Kunt, Laeven, & Levine, 2004). It is critical to the authority responsible for pointing out the

major determinants of banking profits as well as conducting timely and accurate projections.

The advantages are referred to as reliable prior warning signals of financial distress

(Dietrich & Wanzenried, 2011). It is of principle importance for the financial controllers to point

out the major determinants of profits to conduct timely projections and point out more probable

risks. This research, therefore, purposes to point out the determinants of bank-specific and


macroeconomic factors that are affecting the profitability of commercial banks focusing on the

BRIC from the emerging market. In so doing the researcher will figure out the correlation

between dynamics in bank profitability and managing risks by banking organizations.

Literature Review

The profitability of the banking industry is a subject that has gotten a ton of consideration as of

late. All in all, research findings have for the most part assumed two probable concepts, in

particular, the dealership and the firm theoretic methodology. On the one hand, the dealership

approach initially proposed by and further reached out by (European Central Bank, 2010) sees

banks as dynamic merchants, setting financing costs on credits and stores to adjust the topsy-

turvy landing of credit requests and store supplies. Then again, the firm hypothetical approach

initially created by (Baltagi B. H., 2008) sees financial institutions in a static setting where

request and supply of stores and credits at the same time clear both markets (Altunbas, Evans, &

Molyneux, 2001). Despite the fact that the dealership approach recognizes the impact of business

sectors and establishments, these elements couldn't be straightforwardly fused into the model. To

address this worry, the later studies have likewise inspected the impact of other internal (bank

particular) as well as external (macroeconomic and business sector particular) variables on bank

benefit. Besides, the dealership approach accepts that paying little heed to their proprietorship;

banks apply comparative business procedures and are presented with a similar set of productivity

determinants.

Nonetheless, the suspicion has all the earmarks of being unseemly, especially to BRIC nations,

which have continuously grasped changes and liberalization of the money related division. To

defeat the inadequacies, a few studies expand the experimental detail of the dealership way to


deal with holding the effect of bank possession by presenting sham variables into the estimation

models (Gompers, Ishi, & Metrick, 2003). The study that inspected the action taken by the

management of assets in deciding bank execution is limitless. It is widely concurred that better

quality management of assets is the primary element adding to bank profitability, as evidenced

by various studies concentrating on the US managing an accounting framework (Windmeijer,

2005) as well as the banking frameworks in the Western and developing nations (Micco,

Panizza, & Yaňez, 2007).

By distinction, fewer studies have taken a gander at bank profitability in growing economies.

(Arellano & Bond, Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an

Application to Employment Equations, 1991) Explored the determinants of bank productivity in

Malaysia. They utilized an example of 17 business banks amid the period 1986 to 1995. They

partitioned the profitability determinants in two principle classifications, in particular, internal

determinants (liquidity, capital ampleness, and costs administration) and external determinants

(possession, firm size, and monetary conditions). The discoveries show that effective costs

administration has been huge in clarifying high bank productivity. Among the large-scale

pointers, a high premium proportion is connected with low bank benefit, while expansion

appears to apply a positive effect on bank execution.

(Schildbach, 2011) Explored the profitability of local and international financial institutions in

Thailand from 1995 for five years. All banks were found to have diminished their credit

introduction amid the crisis period and have continuously enhanced their productivity amid the

post-emergency years. The outcomes demonstrate that the remote banks have displayed higher

benefits levels contrasted with the normal residential banks. The discoveries additionally

demonstrate that the crevice in the middle of remote and suburban banks' gainfulness has shut


amid the post-emergency period, inferring that the monetary rebuilding program has yielded

some positive results.

In a study on the Chinese banking industry, (García-Herrero, Gavilá, & Santabárbara, 2009)

analyzed the profitability of various sorts of banks working in the Chinese banking division amid

the period somewhere around 1999 and 2006. The outcomes propose that monetary quality was

included, and net interest edges showed improvement over the most routine measures of bank

productivity, in particular, return on assets (ROA) as well as return on equity (ROE). Some

macroeconomic variables and money related proportions are noteworthy with the normal signs.

In spite of the fact that the sort of bank is powerful, bank size is most certainly not. Neither the

rate of remote proprietorship nor bank postings have discernable impacts. (Goddard J.,

Molyneux, Wilson, & Tavakoli, 2007) Inspected the effect of bank attributes, money related

structure, and macroeconomic conditions on Tunisian banks' net-premium edge and productivity

amid the period from 1980 to 2000. They recommend that institutions with a high measure of

capital and overhead costs tend to display higher net interest ratio and performance while size is

contrarily identified with bank benefit. Amid the period under study, they established that

securities exchange benefit has a positive effect on bank productivity. The observational

discoveries recommend that private banks are moderately more profitable than their state-

claimed partners. The outcomes recommend that macroeconomic conditions have no noteworthy

sway on Tunisian banks' benefit.

The study by (Demirgüç-Kunt & Huizinga, 1999) is the first to investigate cumulatively the

determinants of bank productivity considering several nations. They utilized a sample of 18

European nations amid the period from 1986 to 1989. They found a huge positive relationship

between profit for value (ROE) and the level of loan costs in every nation, bank fixation, and


government proprietorship. In another far-reaching study, (Kimball, 1998) inspected the

determinants of premium bank surplus and productivity in 80 nations amid 1988 to 1995. They

found that a bigger proportion of bank resources for GDP and a lower market fixation proportion

prompted lower surplus and benefits. The findings propose that international banks have higher

margins and benefits compared to the local banks in growing economies while the reverse holds

in developing countries.

In the recent past, (Rime, 2001) analyzed the execution of local and outside business banks in 15

EU nations from 1995 for six years. They found that the performance of both local international

financial institutions was influenced not just by a bank's particular qualities, rather by monetary

business sector structure and macroeconomic conditions. The outcomes propose that all variables

have a sententious association with the institutions performance, in spite of the fact that the

effects and relations are most certainly not continuously uniform for local and international

institutions.

Bank regulation profoundly affects banks' monetary record structures by setting capital, liquidity,

and financing necessities. Thus, regulation obliges everyday business choices when banks are

near these base prerequisites. Studies for the mostly pays attention to the effect of regulation on

danger taking and to a less degree on effect on profitability. Nonetheless, (Barth, Nolle, & Rice,

1997) inspect regulation, the structure and execution of the banking part in the EU and G-10

nations utilizing information from 1993. Completing a cross-segment investigation they establish

that there is noteworthy variety in bank regulation, structure, and profitability.

Their examination on regulation, keeping money structure and execution depends on a

hypothetical investigation of comparison in the European banking industry. The distinct


examination of (Valverde & Fernández, 2007) point out that there are still some considerable

differences among bank regulation between nations, in spite of the fact that, there is a

development to more uniform universal regulation. Moreover, they perform an exploratory

examination of individual bank profitability, measured by return on equity (ROE), including

institutions'-specific, nation particular and administrative particular variables. They discover

material connections of a few bank-particular variables. Similarly, they find that the regulatory

system under which banks works could somewhat clarify the variety in individual bank

profitability between nations.

Theoretical explanations for the relationship between the equity-to-asset ratio and bank

performance have earlier been outlined. The first possible explanation from theoretical literature

is that a higher equity-to-asset ratio is associated with lower risk taking (decreasing leverage will

reduce risks of financial distress). Corporate finance literature suggests that lower risk taking will

negatively influence the expected return. In contrary to this explanation, (Berger, The

Relationship between Capital and Earnings in Banking, 1995) find a positive Granger-causality

relationship for U.S.A. banks between 1983 and 1992. He investigated the signaling and the

expected bankruptcy costs hypothesis as possible explanations for the remarkable result. For the

signaling hypothesis, that states that an increase in the equity-to-asset ratio signal a better

profitability to the market, no support is found. In contrary, some support is found for the

expected bankruptcy costs hypothesis. Banks with many low-interest uninsured debts adjust their

equity to higher levels due to an exogenous change in bank failure probabilities. Although, one

should be careful with generalizing the results from (Goddard J., Molyneux, Wilson, & Tavakoli,

2007) since the findings could be caused by an exogenous shift in failure probabilities due to

deteriorating financial condition amid 1980-1990. So to indicate, the correlation between equity-


to-asset ratio and profitability during the years of 1990-1992 compared to the eighties. Findings

from different research did establish balance sheet ratios like the equity-to-asset ratio that had a

negative correlation.

The investigation of (Demirgüç-Kunt & Huizinga, 1999) explores European banks in a period

somewhere around 1995 and 2001, producing an aggregate example of 584 financial institutions

with 4,088 perceptions. They apply a straight model for the aggregate specimen; in any case,

moreover, they independently run relapses for remote and local banks in their respective

countries. The straight model of (Dietrich & Wanzenried, 2011) uses return overall resources as

a subordinate variable. Logical variables are sorted in inside (bank-particular) elements and outer

(macroeconomic and money related structure) elements. Bank-specific components included

intermediaries for the capital (e.g. asset-to-equity proportion) and liquidity structure (e.g. credit

to clients and transient financing ratios). What's more, the expense to-salary proportion and size

of a bank are incorporated into bank-particular variables. (Santos, 2001) use macroeconomic

variables, for example, expansion and development of total national output (GDP), and

budgetary structure variables, for example, fixation.

In the aggregate bank tests, all bank-particular determinants are measurably noteworthy. They

portray a positive relationship between the equity-to-asset proportion and profitability. Besides,

the coefficient of equity-to-asset proportion has the most informative force for productivity

inside of the model of local institutions. Proposing a clarification, the creators express that all

around promoted banks confronted lower financing costs in light of the fact that these banks

lessened liquidation costs and had less requirement for outer subsidizing. Discoveries of this

relationship of the capital ratio are predictable to (Molyneux & Thornton, 1992). Besides, the

proportion between advances to clients and transient financing, as an intermediary for the


liquidity structure, is contrarily identified with profitability for local banks however emphatically

identified with the benefit of international banks. No clarification is given for this repudiating

result. Different variables that showed significant negative connections are the expense to wage

and size. The negative coefficient for size implies that huge banks don't face economies of scale

but instead diseconomies of scale. (Goddard J., Molyneux, Wilson, & Tavakoli, 2007) suggest

that upcoming banks accomplish economies of scale up to a specific level, and the established

banks even face diseconomies of scale past a specific level.

Interactions between the external factors (identifying with the large scale economy and monetary

structure) and performance are numerically sufficient in the entire example. Looking at the local

and international samples, a few coefficients change in sign. The researchers find that there is a

little positive relationship in the inflation and productivity for local financial institutions,

however, a negative interaction for international banks. The researchers recommend that local

banks alter the financing costs to the expected levels of expansion while remote banks may not.

Moreover, fixation is noteworthy in clarifying profitability in the remote banks evaluation,

however, inconsequential for the local subsample. To close the coefficient of GDP development

is additionally equivocal; in the local examination, GDP development is emphatically identified

with profitability yet in the external illustration contrarily related. Nonetheless, both expansion

and GDP development are in the cumulative sample, significant and positive, however, bear

small coefficients. In the larger sample, most illustrative force is found by expense to salary and

equity-to-asset proportion.

(Ayadi, Llewellyn, Schmidt, Arbak, & De Groen, 2010) Inspects an assortment of determinants and

profitability of financial institutions utilizing information gathered between 1990-2000.

Additionally, they consider the effect of the economic crunch on the determinants of bank


profitability. (Athanasoglou, Sophocles, & Delis, 2008) Investigate the performance of three

hundred and seventy-two business banks in Switzerland both in the pre-emergency period, 1999-

2006 and in the time of the emergency, 2007-2009. They perform separate relapses for both

periods (pre-emergency and emergency) concerning the aggregate period. They likewise run two

relapses in which the principal relapse incorporates just bank-specific determinants while the last

relapse incorporates both bank-specific and macroeconomic determinants.

Amidst others, their paper looks at a growing number of elements, including bank-particular,

industry-particular and macroeconomic determinants. To test which determinants of institutional

profitability exist they apply a direct element model with ward variables return on average assets

(ROAA), return on average equity (ROAE) and net premium margin (NPM) as an intermediary

for productivity and they join a slacked subordinate variable together with the logical variables to

represent benefit constancy. Other than the illustrative variables that prior studies employed, for

example, equity-to-assets proportion, expense to-wage proportion, size and proprietorship

structure, (Dietrich & Wanzenried, 2011) extend bank-specific determinants by fusing advances

misfortune procurements over aggregate loans (credit quality), financing expenses and premium

wage offer. Besides, they extend external determinants, for example, successful duty rate, real

GDP development and the term structure of interest on loans.

Findings propose that coefficients and significances vary between the two examples, pre-

emergency, and emergency. Some fascinating and astoundingly results are worth to specify:

To begin with, the experimental results demonstrate that there is a high level of productivity

steadiness inside of the banking industry, which legitimizes the utilization of a slacked

subordinate variable.


Subsequently, the coefficient of equity-to-asset proportion is inconsequential before the

economic crunch, however, ends up being significant and negative in the emergency period.

These outcomes stand in sharp complexity to the discoveries of (Athanasoglou, Sophocles, &

Delis, 2008) and (Ayadi, Llewellyn, Schmidt, Arbak, & De Groen, 2010) who found a positive

relationship. (Iannotta, Nocera, & Sironi, 2007) Propose as clarification that more secure Swiss

banks acquired extra reserves that couldn't be changed over into credits since interest diminished

amid the financial crunch. For the aggregate sample, the evaluation of the equity-to-asset

proportion was similarly negative and critical.

The loss loan procurements to aggregate loans as an intermediary for credit exposure is

inconsequential before the financial crunch and ends up being enormous and negative amid the

crunch. The researchers recommend that Swiss banks reported minimum credit loss

procurements before the crisis while these acquisitions expanded considerably amid the financial

crunch period. This impact is as anyone might expect, saves money with low credit quality are

more influenced when markets fall, a bigger measure of loans is not reimbursed then. In the total

example, the variable is inconsequential.

As a result, financing costs have a huge negative effect on profitability; financial institutions that

raised less expensive assets are more profitable. Amid the financial difficulties, this relationship

does not hold any longer, (Iannotta, Nocera, & Sironi, 2007) recommend that amid the crunch

financing costs for all banks dropped to low levels.

Similarly, as one would anticipate that the expense to income proportion is noteworthy and

negative both in the aggregate sample as in the two separate subsamples. The finding is fairly

direct considering the relationship that higher cost results in decreased profits.


Consequently, (Dietrich & Wanzenried, 2011) discover no relationship between ownership

structure and bank performance before the financial crunch, vindicating studies by (Goddard,

Molyneux, & Wilson, 2004), (Pasiouras & Kosmidou, 2007) and (van Greuning & Bratanovic,

2009). Nonetheless, amid the financial crunch, the coefficient is positive yet significant,

suggesting that banks owned by the state are more profitable than private banks amid the

budgetary crunch, vindicating the study by (Dietrich & Wanzenried, 2011). The findings are not

in line with findings by (Dietrich & Wanzenried, 2011), in which a negative relationship between

administrative, common claimed banks and productivity is found. The researchers recommended

that banks owned by the state are considered as more secure amid the crisis, which could prompt

lower financing costs or extra clients.


References

Albertazzi, U., & Gambacorta, L. (2009). Bank-Specific and Macroeconomic Indicators of

Profitability - Empirical Evidence from the Commercial Banks of Pakistan. Journal of

Financial Stability, 393-409.

Altunbas, Y., Evans, L., & Molyneux, P. (2001). Bank Ownership and Efficiency. Journal of

Money, Credit, and Banking, 33(4), 926-954.

Athanasoglou, P. P., Sophocles, N. B., & Delis, M. D. (2008). Bank-specific, industry-specific

and macroeconomic determinants of bank profitability. International Financial Markets,

Institutions and Money, 18(2), 121-136.

Ayadi, R., Llewellyn, D. T., Schmidt, R. H., Arbak, E., & De Groen, W. P. (2010). Investigating

Diversity in the Banking Sector in Europe: Key Developments, Performance, and Role of

Cooperative Banks. Brussels: Centre for European Policy Studies.

Barry, T. A., Lepetit, L., & Tarazi, A. (2011). Ownership structure and risk in publicly held and

privately owned banks. Journal of Banking & Finance, 35(5), 1327-1340.

Barth, J. R., Caprio Jr., G., & Levine, R. (2004). Bank regulation and supervision: what works

best? Journal of Financial Intermediation, 13(2), 205-248.

Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. (2010). Basel III: A Global Regulatory framework for

more resilient banks and banking systems. Basel: Bank for Internation Settlements.

Benjamin, M., Tabak, D., Leyi, L., João, V. L., & Daniel, O. (2013). Do Capital Buffers Matter?

A Study on the Profitability and Funding Costs Determinants of the Brazilian Banking

System. General Control Publishers: Banco Central Brazil.


Berger, A. N., Clarke, G. R., Cull, R., Klapper, L., & Udell, G. F. (2005). Corporate governance

and bank performance: A joint analysis of the static, selection, and dynamic effects of

domestic, foreign, and state ownership. Journal of Banking & Finance, 29(8-9), 2179-

2221.

Bourke, P. (1989). Concentration and other determinants of bank profitability in Europe, North

America and Australia. Journal of Banking and Finance, 65-77.

Bourke, P. (1989). Concentration and other determinants of bank profitability in Europe, North

America and Australia. Journal of Banking and Finance, 13(1), 65-79.

Collin-Dufresne, P., Goldstein, R. S., & Martin, S. (2001). The Determinants of Credit Spread

Changes. Journal of Finance, 2170-2210.

Demirgüç-Kunt, A., & Huizinga, H. (1999). Determinants of Commercial Bank Interest Margins

and Profitability: Some International Evidence. The World Bank Economic Review,

13(2), 379-408.

Demirguc-Kunt, A., Laeven, L., & Levine, R. (2004). Regulations, Market Structure, Institutions

and the Cost of Financial Intermediation. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 590-

623.

Demsetz, H., & Villalonga, B. (2001). Ownership structure and corporate performance. Journal

of Corporate Finance, 7(3), 209-233.

Dietrich, A., & Wanzenried, G. (2011). Determinants of Bank Profitability Before and After

Crisis: Evidence from Switzerland. Journal of International Financial Markets

Indicators, 300-330.


Ericsson, J., Jacobs, K., & Oviedo, R. (2009). The Determinants of Credit Default Swap Premia.

Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 100-140.

European Central Bank. (2010). Beyond ROE - How to measure bank performance: Appendix to

the report on EU banking structures. Frankfurt is Main: ECB.

Fleming, M. (2012). Federal Reserve Liquidity Provision during the Financial Crisis of 2007-

2009. Annual Review of Financial Economics, 160-175.

García-Herrero, A., Gavilá, S., & Santabárbara, D. (2009). What explains the low profitability of

Chinese banks? Journal of Banking & Finance, 33(11), 2080-2092.

Gibson, H. (2008). Developments in the profitability of Greek banks. Bank of Greece Economic

Bulletin, 7-18.

Gillan, S. L. (2006). Recent Developments in Corporate Governance: An Overview. Journal of

Corporate Finance, 12(3), 381-402.

Goddard, J. P., Molyneux, H. L., & J, O. S. (2011). The Persistence of bank profit. Journal of

Banking & Finance, 58-91.

Goddard, J. P., Molyneux, H. L., & J, O. W. (2011). The Persistence of bank profit. Journal of

Banking & Finance, 2880-2890.

Goddard, J., Molyneux, P., & Wilson, J. (2004). The profitability of European Banks: A cross-

sectional and dynamic panel analysis. The Manchester School, 72(3), 363-381.

Goddard, J., Molyneux, P., Wilson, J. O., & Tavakoli, M. (2007). European banking: An

overview. Journal of Banking & Finance, 31(7), 1911-1935.


Gompers, P., Ishi, J., & Metrick, A. (2003). Corporate Governance and Equity Prices. The

Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(1), 107-155.

Gropp, R., & Heider, F. (2010). The Determinants of Bank Capital Structure. Review of Finance,

580-625.

Haruna, I., Yazidu, U., & Domanban, P. (2013). Macroeconomic variables and stock market

return in Ghana. Journal of Finance and Banking, 101-126.

Heid, F., Porath, D., & Stolz, S. (2004). Does capital regulation matter for bank behavior?

Evidence for German savings banks. Frankfurt is Main: Deutsche Bundesbank.

Hull, J., & White, A. (2000). Valuing Credit Default Swaps I: No Counterparty Default Risk.

Working Paper, 1-30.

Iannotta, G., Nocera, G., & Sironi, A. (2007). Ownership structure, risk, and performance in the

European banking industry. Journal of Banking & Finance, 31(7), 2127-2149.

Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency

costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360.

Kimball, R. C. (1998). Economic Profit and Performance Measurement in Banking. New

England Economic Review, 9(July/Augusts), 35-53.

Laeven, L., & Levine, R. (2009). Bank governance, regulation, and risk taking. Journal of

Financial Economics, 93(2), 259-275.

Lensink, R., & Meesters, A. (2008). Bank efficiency and foreign ownership: Do good institutions

matter? Journal of Banking & Finance, 830-845.


Matthews, K., & Thompson, J. (2008). The Economics of Banking (2nd ed.). West Sussex: John

Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Merton, R. C. (1974). On the Pricing of Corporate Debt: The Risk Structure of Interest Rates.

Journal of Finance, 440-469.

Micco, A., Panizza, U., & Yanez, M. (2007). Bank ownership and performance. Does politics

matter? Journal of Banking and Finance, 220-240.

Micco, A., Panizza, U., & Yaňez, M. (2007). Bank ownership and performance. Does politics

matter? Journal of Banking & Finance, 31(1), 219-241.

Milne, A., & Whalley, A. E. (2001). Bank Capital Regulation and Incentives for Risk-Taking.

Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=299319

Modigliani, F., & Miller, M. H. (1958). The Cost of Capital, Corporation Finance and the Theory

of Investment. The American Review, 48(3), 261-297.

Molyneux, P., & Thornton, J. (1992). Determinants of European bank profitability: A note.

Journal of Banking and Finance, 16(6), 1173-1178.

Oesterreichische Nationalbank (OeNB) Financial Market Authority (FMA). (2008). Guidelines

on: Managing Interest Rate Risk in the Banking Book. Vienna: OeNB Printing Office.

Ommeren, S. V. (2011). AN EXAMINATION OF THE DETERMINANTS OF BANKS’

PROFITABILITY IN THE EUROPEAN BANKING SECTOR. Ekiti: Erasmus University.

Otker-Robe, I., & Podpiera, J. (2010). The fundamental determinants of credit default risk for

European large complex financial institutions. IMF Working Paper, Washington DC.


Pasiouras, F., & Kosmidou, K. (2007). Factors influencing the profitability of domestic and

commercial banks in the European Union. Journal of Banking and Finance, 220-240.

Pasiouras, F., & Kosmidou, K. (2007). Factors influencing the profitability of domestic and

foreign commercial banks in the European Union. Research in International Business

and Finance, 21(2), 222-237.

Rime, B. (2001). Capital requirements and bank behaviour: Empirical evidence for Switzerland.

Journal of Banking & Finance, 25(4), 789-805.

Saunders, A., & Cornett, M. M. (2008). Financial Institutions Management: A Risk Management

Approach. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Schooner, H. M., & Talyor, M. W. (2010). Bank insolvency. In Global Bank Regulation:

Principles and Policies (pp. 241-258). San Diego: Academic Press.

Valverde, S., & Fernández, F. (2007). The determinants of bank margins in European banking.

Journal of Banking & Finance, 31(7), 2043-2063.

van Greuning, H., & Bratanovic, S. B. (2009). Analyzing Banking Risk: A Framework for

Assessing Corporate Governance and Risk Management (3th ed.). Washington, D.C.:

The World Bank.

Wilko, B., Leo, d., Marco, H., Maarten, R. O., & Job, S. (2007). Bank profitability during

recessions. Journal of Banking & Finance, 2552-2564.

Yildirim, H. S., & Philippatos, G. (2007). Bank Efficiency: Evidence from the transition

economies of Europe. European Journal of Finance, 120-140.


Yuan, Y. (2006). The state of competition in the Chinese banking industry. Journal of Asian

Economics, 520-540.