Download - Theisis on comparative bank performence
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
1/72
Page 1of 72
Comparative Analysis of State Owned Bank's Performance in
Bangladesh & India
Prepared For
Muhammad Shahin Miah
Lecturer
Department of International Business
Faculty of Business
University of Dhaka.
Prepared By
Muksudul Hakim Md. Mustakim
Roll No: 13
Session: 2008-09
Department of international Business
B.B.A 15th batch
Date of Submission
20th
August, 2013
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
2/72
Page 2of 72
August 20, 2013
Muhammad Shahin Miah
Lecturer
Department of international business
University of Dhaka
Sub: Submission of Thesis Report
Sir,
First of all I would like to consider myself lucky for getting the chance to report named
Comparative Analysis of State Owned Bank's Performance in Bangladesh & India which I have
been assigned as a part of my BBA completion program.
Working on this report was very constructive to me. I had little knowledge regarding the Banks
performance in Bangladeshbefore starting working on this report. I thank you for giving me the
scope of developing a humble insight on this important area. I appreciated the assignment. I have
given my best efforts in preparing this report and to make it as comprehensive and informative as
possible. Due to various constraints, there may be some mistakes for which I beg your apology.
I hope this report will be able to meet the requirement of the course & should also be able to
satisfy your requirements.
Sincerely yours,
.......................................
Muksudul Hakim Md. Mustakim
Roll No. 13
BBA 15th
Batch & IB 2nd
Batch
Department of international business
University of Dhaka
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
3/72
Page 3of 72
Certification letter
This is to certify that the report on Comparative Analysis of State Owned Bank's Performance
in Bangladesh & India as a part to fulfill the requirement of Bachelor of Business
Administration, (B.B.A) degree from the Department of International Business, University of
Dhaka has been carried out by Muksudul Hakim Md. Mustakim, student ID# 13 a student of
BBA 15th
Batch under my supervision. No part of the report has been submitted for any degree
diploma, title, or recognition before.
Date:
Muhammad Shahin Miah
Lecturer
Department of international business
University of Dhaka
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
4/72
Page 4of 72
Students Declaration
I declare that the report on the topic of Comparative Analysis of State Owned Bank's
Performance in Bangladesh & Indiais only prepared for the requirement of BBA degree and
embodies the results of my own practical and individual research works pursued under the close
supervision of my supervisor Muhammad Shahin Miah, Lecturer of Department of International
Business, University of Dhaka. This report is a descriptive one where only narrative description
has been made on the topic based on the collected information from Balance Sheets. I have tried
my best to analyze the topic and to fulfill the study by highlighting the major aspects of it.
I acknowledge with thanks all valuable suggestions received from my honorable supervisor for
preparing the report successfully. I further affirm that the work reported in this report is original
and no part or whole of this report has been submitted, in any form, to any other university or
institution for any other degree or any other purpose in the past.
Yours faithfully
----------------------------------------
Muksudul Hakim Md. Mustakim
Roll No. 13
BBA 15th
Batch & IB 2nd
Batch
Department of international business
University of Dhaka
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
5/72
Page 5of 72
Acknowledgement
At first I would like to express my deepest gratitude to Almighty Allah for giving me the
strength and composure to finish the task.
I would like to express my deep sense of thankfulness and appreciation to all those who are
always a source of inspiration for their contribution, unconditional assistance and support in all
my academic activities. Without their encouragement, I would not be able to do my academic
works. I am indebted to all of them.
I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my advisor, supervisor Muhammad Shahin Miah,
Lecturer of Department of International Business, University of Dhaka., for his excellent
guidance, caring, patience, and providing me with an excellent atmosphere for doing research. I
would like to acknowledge her guidance and support that I needed throughout the time. Her
untiring cooperation, valuable suggestion and inspirations of creating a unique report enabled me
to overcome all the problems during the course of my internship program and while preparing
this report.
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
6/72
Page 6of 72
ContentsExecutive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 7
Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 8
1.1 Introduction: ................................................................................................................................. 8
1.2 Background: .................................................................................................................................. 8
1.3 Research Objective: .................................................................................................................... 10
1.4 Scope of the Research:................................................................................................................ 10
Chapter 2: Contextual Framework .............................................................................................................. 12
2.1 Context: ....................................................................................................................................... 12
2.2 Economic Scenario of Bangladesh: ............................................................................................. 12
2.3 Economic Scenario of India: ........................................................................................................ 12
2.4 Comparison Between these two countries:................................................................................ 132.5 Summary: .................................................................................................................................... 18
Chapter 3 Research Methodology .............................................................................................................. 19
3.1 Research Methodology: .............................................................................................................. 19
3.2 Research Paradigm: .................................................................................................................... 19
3.3 Research Method: ....................................................................................................................... 21
3.3.1 Data collection: ................................................................................................................... 21
3.3.2 Ratio Analysis: ..................................................................................................................... 21
3.3.3 Performance comparison & Interpretation: ....................................................................... 21
Chapter 4: Analysis & Findings .................................................................................................................... 22
Ratio Analysis: ......................................................................................................................................... 22
Result of the Analysis: ............................................................................................................................. 37
Limitations of This Study: ........................................................................................................................ 37
Chapter 5: Suggestion and Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 38
5.1 Suggestion: .................................................................................................................................. 38
5.2 Conclusion: ................................................................................................................................. 39
References: ................................................................................................................................................. 40
Bibliography: ............................................................................................................................................... 40
Appendix: .................................................................................................................................................... 41
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
7/72
Page 7of 72
Executive Summary
The broad objective of this study is Performance Evaluation. This paper finds the development and
growth picture of state owned commercial banks in Bangladesh. Data from the balance sheets was used
for the research. The study reveals all the state owned commercial banks in Bangladesh are not able to
achieve a stable growth, net profit, return on equity, return on assets but they are capable to achieve a
stable growth of deposit, loan and advances, equity.
Current Ratio and Quick Ratios are indicating how vulnerable our banks are to claims; Loans to Deposit
Ratios are indicating how efficiently liabilities are being converted to assets. Return on credit indicating
how much the given loans are earning.
ROE indicates that a bank convert its equity into net earnings. The higher ratio indicates higher abilityand indicates that the ROE of all the SCB are fluctuating from year to year. It is also indicates that all the
banks fail to maintain a satisfactory ROE. ROA indicates that a bank convert its assets into net earnings.
The higher ratio indicates higher ability and indicates that the ROA of all the state banks are fluctuating
from year to year. It is also indicates that all the banks fail to maintain a satisfactory ROA.
Finally net profit margin is indicating the profit scenario.
This report also indicates several suggestions that might be help our banks to perform like the Indian
banks with consistency.
However this study too has some limitations as for simple comparisons we have only compared 4Bangladeshi with 4 Indian banks. Amount of data tested was also little, only 5 years. More elaborate
study could indicate better results and conclusions.
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
8/72
Page 8of 72
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Introduction:
Banks especially state owned banks play a vital role in the development of a nation's
economy. Good performance of the state owned banks ensures that private banks are
kept in check with high service levels. That also ensures the healthy growth of economy
and indicates efficient use of the currency held by a nation. It is highly suggested to
monitor the performance of the state owned banks so that it helps the economic
strength of the country to grow.
India, our neighbor country is doing really good in economic terms. Their state owned
banks are doing really good when we see their annual reports. Those banks are strong
pillars of their economy. We need to compare performances of our banks with them to
understand where we stand in terms efficient banking.
1.2 Background:
Standard arguments for state intervention in the banking sector can be broadly
classified into four groups: (i) maintaining the safety and soundness of the banking
system;
(ii) Mitigating market failures due to the presence of asymmetric information;
(iii) Financing socially valuable (but financially unprofitable) projects; and
(iv) Promoting financial development and giving access to competitive banking services
to residents of isolated areas.
The first group of reasons has to do with the fact that banks are inherently fragile
institutions due to their maturity transformation role (namely, the funding of illiquidloans through short-term deposits), a situation that can lead to self-fulfilling bank runs
and widespread bank failures. However, banking fragility by itself would not justify
government intervention aimed at guaranteeing the stability of the banking system,
unless bank failures generate large negative externalities. It is precisely in this sense that
banks are special because, besides intermediating credit, they also provide two services
that have a public-good nature: they are the backup source of liquidity for all other
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
9/72
Page 9of 72
institutions and the transmission belt for monetary policy. The need for state
intervention also arises from the fact that, due to the large leverage ratios that
characterize financial institutions in general, bank managers and owners may have
strong incentives to pursue investment activities that are riskier than the ones that
would be preferred by depositors.
The second set of explanations concerns the fact that financial markets in general, and
banking in particular, are informational intensive activities. It is generally accepted that
the stock of information gathered by banks plays a role in increasing the pool of
domestic savings that is channeled to available investment opportunities. However, as
information has some public-good characteristics (non-rivalries in consumption and
costly excludability), it would be undersupplied by competitive markets and, to the
extent that information entails a fixed acquisition cost, it would lead to imperfectcompetition in the banking system. Moreover, information can be easily destroyed,
increasing the cost of bank failures as customers of the failed bank may lose access to
credit. In addition, asymmetric information may lead to credit rationing, that is, a
situation in which good projects are underfinanced (or not financed at all) due to the
lack of verifiable information.2 A similar case can be made for the relationship between
depositors and banks: lack of bank-specific information can dissuade savers from
depositing in banks, particularly in incipient banking systems where long-standing
customer relationships are still to be built.
The third group of reasons has to do with the fact that private lenders may have limited
incentive to finance projects that produce externalities. In this line, direct state
participation would be warranted to compensate for market imperfections that leave
socially profitable (but financially unattractive) investments underfinanced.
A last argument, often invoked by supporters of state intervention in the banking sector,
points out that private bank may not find it profitable to open branches in rural and
isolated areas and that state intervention is necessary in order to provide banking
services to residents of these areas. Underlying this argument are the beliefs that
granting access to banking services may increase financial development with positiveexternalities on growth or poverty reduction, and that access to financial services is, at
any rate, a right and that the state should make an effort to guarantee its universal
provision. Along similar lines, the presence of public banks has also been advocated as a
means to guarantee competitive behavior in an otherwise collusive banking sector. This
rationale, however, is likely to be relevant only when the regulatory and monitoring
capacity of the public sector is limited and prone to capture.
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
10/72
Page 10of 72
Apparently for these reasons it is essential for ourselves to know how we are doing in
our public or state owned banking sector. This paper focuses on the performance
analysis of four state owned banks, in each country.
1.3 Research Objective:
In order to evaluate the performance of state-owned bank, it is important to have a
clear idea of what state-owned banks are expectedto do, The social view would indicate
that state-owned banks should be more active in sectors where market failures are
likely to be more prevalent, namely, those associated with information asymmetries,
intangible assets, large external financing needs, and significant spillovers.
Candidates would include agriculture (plagued by asymmetric information and
aggregated shocks), R&D-intensive sectors like the pharmaceutical industry (with a large
share of intangible assets and potentially large spillovers), or capital intensive industries
with long start-up periods with negative cash-flows (like the aerospace industry, for
instance). It is also plausible that politicians may want to use public banks to limit
employment volatility. Therefore, one should expect them to lend to labor-intensive
sectors, particularly during recessions and in the presence of high unemployment rates.
This study will deal with following objectives-
Performance comparison using ratio analysis of financial statements.
Constructive recommendations for our state owned banks.
Establishing a benchmark for our state owned banks operations.
Suggest strategies, and modifications in current strategies.
Using unused techniques which growing countries are using.
Required government initiative.
1.4 Scope of the Research:
As banks serve as the pillars of economy in modern economic system our primary focus
should be on developing the banks. Specially state owned banks, which are not
performing well. To develop state owned banking first we need to find current status of
our state owned banking sector. The better way is to compare its status with the
successful neighbor India.
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
11/72
Page 11of 72
Trade patterns, volume etc are different in these two countries, this causes the
problem. But if we consider ratio analysis of financial statements, that gives us a clear
idea about a fair comparison and indication about our current capabilities. This study
will investigate and bring out the current performances of our state owned banks,
compared to the state owned banks of India. It will also indicate what should be done
to improve our condition.So this can serve as a future guideline.
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
12/72
Page 12of 72
Chapter 2: Contextual Framework
2.1 Context:
Bangladesh and India highly populated two countries. These two countries are
destination for MNCs (Multi National Company) as economy of these two countries are
growing. Banking business has grown in to in these two countries over the years. It is
proven that the state owned banks play a vital role in the development in the economy.
It appears that our neighbor India is doing very good in their state banking sector. It is
our need to find out what our state owned banks are doing in comparison to Indian
state owned banks.
2.2 Economic Scenario of Bangladesh:
In real terms Bangladesh's economy has grown 5.8% per year since 1996 despite political
instability, poor infrastructure, corruption, insufficient power supplies, and slow implementation
of economic reforms. Bangladesh remains a poor, overpopulated, and inefficiently-governed
nation. Although more than half of GDP is generated through the service sector, 45% of
Bangladeshis are employed in the agriculture sector with rice as the single-most-important
product. Bangladesh's growth was resilient during the 2008-09 global financial crisis and
recession. Garment exports, totaling $12.3 billion in FY09 and remittances from overseas
Bangladeshis, totaling $11 billion in FY10, accounted for almost 12% of GDP.
2.3 Economic Scenario of India:
India is developing into an open-market economy, yet traces of its past autarkic policies
remain. Economic liberalization, including industrial deregulation, privatization of state-
owned enterprises, and reduced controls on foreign trade and investment, began in the
early 1990s and has served to accelerate the country's growth, which has averagedmore than 7% per year since 1997. India's diverse economy encompasses traditional
village farming, modern agriculture, handicrafts, a wide range of modern industries, and
a multitude of services. Slightly more than half of the work force is in agriculture, but
services are the major source of economic growth, accounting for nearly two-thirds of
India's output, with less than one-third of its labor force. India has capitalized on its
large educated English-speaking population to become a major exporter of information
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
13/72
Page 13of 72
technology services and software workers. In 2010, the Indian economy rebounded
robustly from the global financial crisis - in large part because of strong domestic
demand - and growth exceeded 8% year-on-year in real terms. However, India's
economic growth began slowing in 2011 because of a tight monetary policy, intended to
address persistent inflation, and a decline in investment, caused by investor pessimismabout domestic economic reforms and about the global situation. High international
crude prices have exacerbated the government's fuel subsidy expenditures, contributing
to a higher fiscal deficit and a worsening current account deficit. In late 2012, the Indian
Government announced reforms and deficit reduction measures to reverse India's
slowdown. The outlook India's medium-term growth is positive due to a young
population and corresponding low dependency ratio, healthy savings and investment
rates, and increasing integration into the global economy. India has many long-term
challenges that it has not yet fully addressed, including poverty, inadequate physical and
social infrastructure, limited non-agricultural employment opportunities, inadequate
availability of quality basic and higher education, and accommodating rural-to-urban
migration.
2.4 Comparison Between these two countries:
Overall Statistical Comparison Between these two countries1:
Attribute India Bangladesh
GDP (purchasingpower parity)
$4.735 trillion (2012 est.)$4.492 trillion (2011 est.)$4.205 trillion (2010 est.)note:data are in 2012 US dollars
$305.5 billion (2012 est.)$288.1 billion (2011 est.)$270.5 billion (2010 est.)note:data are in 2012 US dollars
GDP - real growthrate
5.4% (2012 est.)6.8% (2011 est.)
10.1% (2010 est.)
6.1% (2012 est.)6.5% (2011 est.)
6.4% (2010 est.)
GDP - per capita(PPP)
$3,900 (2012 est.)$3,700 (2011 est.)$3,500 (2010 est.)note:data are in 2012 US dollars
$2,000 (2012 est.)$1,900 (2011 est.)$1,800 (2010 est.)note:data are in 2012 US dollars
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
14/72
Page 14of 72
GDP -composition bysector
agriculture: 17%industry:18%services:65% (2011 est.)
agriculture: 17.3%industry:28.6%services:54.1% (2012 est.)
Population belowpoverty line
29.8% (2010 est.) 31.51% (2010 est.)
Householdincome orconsumption bypercentage share
lowest 10%: 3.6%highest 10%:31.1% (2005)
lowest 10%: 4%highest 10%:27% (2010 est.)
Inflation rate(consumer prices)
9.2% (2012 est.)8.9% (2011 est.)
8.8% (2012 est.)10.7% (2011 est.)
Labor force 498.4 million (2012 est.) 77 millionnote:extensive export of laborto Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE,Oman, Qatar, and Malaysia;workers' remittances were $10.9billion in FY09/10 (2012 est.)
Labor force - byoccupation
agriculture: 53%industry:19%services:28% (2011 est.)
agriculture: 45%industry:30%services:25% (2008)
Unemploymentrate
9.9% (2012 est.)9.8% (2011 est.)
5% (2012 est.)5% (2011 est.)note:about 40% of thepopulation is underemployed;many participants in the laborforce work only a few hours aweek, at low wages
Distribution offamily income -Gini index
36.8 (2004)37.8 (1997)
33.2 (2005)33.6 (1996)
Budget revenues: $171.5 billionexpenditures:$281 billion (2012est.)
revenues: $13.98 billionexpenditures:$19.62 billion(2012 est.)
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
15/72
Page 15of 72
Industries textiles, chemicals, food processing,steel, transportation equipment,cement, mining, petroleum,machinery, software,pharmaceuticals
jute, cotton, garments, paper,leather, fertilizer, iron and steel,cement, petroleum products,tobacco, drugs andpharmaceuticals, ceramic, tea,
salt, sugar, edible oil, soap anddetergent, fabricated metalproducts, electricity and naturalgas
Industrialproductiongrowth rate
4.8% (2011 est.) 7.4% (2011 est.)
Agriculture -products
rice, wheat, oilseed, cotton, jute,tea, sugarcane, lentils, onions,potatoes; dairy products, sheep,goats, poultry; fish
rice, jute, tea, wheat,sugarcane, potatoes, tobacco,pulses, oilseeds, spices, fruit;beef, milk, poultry
Exports $309.1 billion (2012 est.)$305 billion (2011 est.)
$25.79 billion (2012 est.)$24.56 billion (2011 est.)
Exports -commodities
petroleum products, preciousstones, machinery, iron and steel,chemicals, vehicles, apparel
garments, knitwear, agriculturalproducts, frozen food (fish andseafood), jute and jute goods,leather
Exports - partners UAE 12.7%, US 10.8%, China 6.2%,Singapore 5.3%, Hong Kong 4.1%(2011)
US 19.4%, Germany 16.5%, UK10%, France 7.3%, Italy 4.4%,Spain 4.2%, Netherlands 4.2%(2011)
Imports $500.3 billion (2012 est.)$490 billion (2011 est.)
$35.06 billion (2012 est.)$32.58 billion (2011 est.)
Imports -commodities
crude oil, precious stones,machinery, fertilizer, iron and steel,chemicals
machinery and equipment,chemicals, iron and steel,textiles, foodstuffs, petroleumproducts, cement
Imports -partners
China 11.9%, UAE 7.7%, Switzerland6.8%, Saudi Arabia 6.1%, US 4.9%
China 18.2%, India 13.5%,Malaysia 4.9% (2011)
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
16/72
Page 16of 72
(2011)
Debt - external $299.2 billion (31 December 2012est.)
$287.5 billion (31 December 2011est.)
$36.21 billion (31 December 2012est.)
$33.84 billion (31 December 2011est.)
Exchange rates Indian rupees (INR) per US dollar -53.17 (2012 est.)46.671 (2011 est.)45.726 (2010 est.)48.405 (2009)43.319 (2008)
taka (BDT) per US dollar -82.17 (2012 est.)74.152 (2011 est.)69.649 (2010 est.)69.04 (2009)68.554 (2008)
Fiscal year 1 April - 31 March 1 July - 30 June
Investment (grossfixed)
30% of GDP (2012 est.) 25.1% of GDP (2012 est.)
Public debt 51.9% of GDP (2012 est.)50.5% of GDP (2011 est.)note:data cover centralgovernment debt, and exclude debtinstruments issued (or owned) bygovernment entities other than the
treasury; the data include treasurydebt held by foreign entities; thedata exclude debt issued bysubnational entities, as well asintra-governmental debt; intra-governmental debt consists oftreasury borrowings from surplusesin the social funds, such as forretirement, medical care, andunemployment; debt instrumentsfor the social funds are not sold atpublic auctions
32% of GDP (2012 est.)33.9% of GDP (2011 est.)
Reserves offoreign exchangeand gold
$287.2 billion (31 December 2012est.)$297.9 billion (31 December 2011est.)
$10.19 billion (31 December 2012est.)$9.192 billion (31 December 2011est.)
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
17/72
Page 17of 72
Current AccountBalance
-$80.15 billion (2012 est.)-$46.91 billion (2011 est.)
-$941.9 million (2012 est.)$243.6 million (2011 est.)
GDP (official
exchange rate)
$1.947 trillion (2012 est.) $118.7 billion (2012 est.)
Stock of directforeigninvestment - athome
$256.6 billion (31 December 2012est.)$232.7 billion (31 December 2011est.)
$7.849 billion (31 December 2012est.)$6.85 billion (31 December 2011est.)
Stock of directforeigninvestment -abroad
$121.3 billion (31 December 2012est.)$106.3 billion (31 December 2011est.)
$93.9 million (31 December 2012est.)$92.9 million (31 December 2011est.)
Market value ofpublicly tradedshares
$1.015 trillion (31 December 2011)$1.616 trillion (31 December 2010)$1.179 trillion (31 December 2009)
$23.55 billion (31 December2011)$15.68 billion (31 December2010)$7.068 billion (31 December2009)
Central bankdiscount rate
5.5% (31 December 2010 est.)6% (31 December 2009 est.)
note:the Indian central bank'spolicy rate - the repurchase rate -was 8% during December 2012
5% (31 December 2010 est.)5% (31 December 2009 est.)
Commercial bankprime lendingrate
10.8% (31 December 2012 est.)10.19% (31 December 2011 est.)
13.3% (31 December 2012 est.)13.25% (31 December 2011 est.)
Stock of money $278.8 billion (31 December 2009)$239.8 billion (31 December 2008)
$10.35 billion (30 September2009)$8.444 billion (31 December2007)
Stock of quasimoney
$853.4 billion (31 December 2009)$687.7 billion (31 December 2008)
$45.23 billion (30 September2009)$37.98 billion (31 December2008)
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
18/72
Page 18of 72
2.5 Summary:
In short from these comparisons we can understand in spite some differences both
countries have similar traits. That is why the comparison between these two countries
sate owned banking sector can clarify how well Indian state owned banks are doing?,
How well our banks are doing?& What should be our benchmark performance?
Stock of domesticcredit
$1.402 trillion (31 December 2012est.)$1.249 trillion (31 December 2011est.)
$80.81 billion (31 December 2012est.)$68.57 billion (31 December 2011est.)
Stock of narrowmoney
$342.3 billion (31 December 2012est.)$305.7 billion (31 December 2011est.)
$14.1 billion (31 December 2012est.)$13.19 billion (31 December 2011est.)
Stock of broadmoney
$1.451 trillion (31 December 2012est.)$1.293 trillion (31 December 2011est.)
$66.84 billion (31 December 2011est.)$66.14 billion (31 December 2010est.)
Taxes and otherrevenues
8.8% of GDP (2012 est.) 11.8% of GDP (2012 est.)
Budget surplus(+) or deficit (-)
-5.6% of GDP (2012 est.) -4.8% of GDP (2012 est.)
Unemployment,youth ages 15-24
total: 10.5%male:10.4%female:10.8% (2004)
total: 9.3%male:8%female:13.6% (2006)
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
19/72
Page 19of 72
Chapter 3 Research Methodology
3.1 Research Methodology:
Research methodology is a systematic way to solve a problem. It is also defined as the study of
methods by which knowledge is gained. Its aim is to give the work plan of research. This paper
studies the performance analysis of four state owned banks of Bangladesh and four state owned
banks of India. The methodology of the research shows the research paradigm, the design of the
research, the data collection method, the source of data and the process of analyzing the data.
In this chapter, methods followed to analyze data and its collection method is discussed to
structure the further analysis.
3.2 Research Paradigm:
A paradigm is a matrix of beliefs and perceptions. According to Taylor, Kermode, and
Roberts (2007,), a paradigm is a broad view or perspective of something. Additionally,
Weaver and Olsons (2006)definition of paradigm reveals how research could be
affected and guided by a certain paradigm by stating, Paradigms are patterns of beliefs
and practices that regulate inquiry within a discipline by providing lenses, frames and
processes through which investigation is accomplished.
According to Weaver and Olson (2006), the paradigms most commonly utilized in
nursing research are positivist, post-positivist, interpretive, and critical social theory.
The quantitative methodology shares its philosophical foundation with the positivist
paradigm (Weaver and Olson).The positivist philosophy argues that there is one
objective reality. Therefore, as a consequence, valid research is demonstrated only by
the degree of proof that can be corresponded to the phenomena that study results
stand for (Hope and Waterman, 2003).
The term post positivism, refers to the thinking after positivism, challenging thetraditional notion of the absolute truth of knowledge (Phiillips and Burbules, 2000) Post
positivism reflects deterministic philosophy in which causes probably determine effects
or outcomes. Thus, the problems studied by post-positivist reflect a need to examine
causes that influence outcomes, such as issues examined in experiments. It is also
reductionist in that the intent is to reduce he ideas into a small, discrete set of ides to
test, such as the variable that constitute hypotheses and research questions. The
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
20/72
Page 20of 72
knowledge that develops through a post positivist lens is based on careful observation
and measurement of the objective reality that exists out there in the world. Thus,
developing numeric measures of observations and studying the behavior of individual
become paramount for a post positivist.
According to Cresswell (1994) "A qualitative study is defined as an inquiry process of
understanding a social or human problem, based on building a complex, holistic picture,
formed with words, reporting detailed views of informants, and conducted in a natural
setting. The basis of qualitative research lies in the interpretive approach and also
known as interpretative approach. Qualitative researchers appear to undertake the very
suspect course of seriously studying the sentiments of their human subjects. Rather
than treating peoples utterances about themselves and their world as inaccurate
accounts of social reality, or as outcomes determined by environmental forces, or as
manifestations of cognitive processes, the qualitative researcher listens carefully to the
utterances. The researcher moves about in the lives of certain people, and subjects and
researcher become familiar to each other: they as something more than human
subjects, and he or she as possibly something less than a researcher. (Lindlof 1995, 9)
Mixed methods research has been established as a third methodological movement
over the past twenty years, complementing the existing traditions of quantitative and
qualitative movements (Tashakkori&Teddlie, 2003, Teddlie&Tashakkori, 2009). The term
mixed methods has come to be used to refer to the use of two or more methods in a
research project yielding both qualitative and quantitative data (e.g. Cresswell& Plano
Clark, 2007;Greene, 2007; Teddlie&Tashakkori, 2009). Mixed research is a synthesis thatincludes ideas from qualitative and quantitative research.
As this paper analyses and compares the performance of the state controlled banks.
This will require first the ratio analysis of the individual banks. Then based on the results
interpretations and comparative conclusions will be drawn. So both qualitative and
quantitative methods will be used.
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
21/72
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
22/72
Page 22of 72
Chapter 4: Analysis & Findings
Ratio Analysis:
Ratio Analysis is a tool used by individuals to conduct a quantitative analysis of
information in a company's financial statements. Ratios are calculated from current year
numbers and are then compared to previous years, other companies, the industry, or
even the economy to judge the performance of the company.
There are many ratios that can be calculated from the financial statements pertaining to
a company's performance, activity, financing and liquidity.
To compare between the state owned banks of India and Bangladesh a number of ratio
analysis has been conducted over 5 years of Data, ranging from 2007 to 20011. Mainlythe balance sheet items and some profit and loss account items have been considered.
The comparative analysis begins with traditional current ratio analysis.
1. Current Ratio: This ratio is mainly used to give an idea of the company's ability to
pay back its short-term liabilities (debt and payables) with its short-term assets. The
higher the current ratio, the more capable the company is of paying its obligations. A
ratio under 1 suggests that the company would be unable to pay off its obligations if
they came due at that point. While this shows the company is not in good financial
health.
But it does not necessarily mean that it will go bankrupt - as there are many ways to
access financing - but it is definitely not a good sign.
The current ratio can give a sense of the efficiency of a company's operating cycle or
its ability to turn its product into cash. Companies that have trouble getting paid on
their receivables or have long inventory turnover can run into liquidity problems
because they are unable to alleviate their obligations. Because business operations
differ in each industry, it is always more useful to compare companies within thesame industry.
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
23/72
Page 23of 72
Formula:
Situation in Bangladesh-
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Current Ratio
Shonali Bank
Janata Bank
Agrani Bank
Rupali Bank
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
24/72
Page 24of 72
Situation in India-
Interpretation:
As the charts indicate as per the current ratio is concerned, Indian banks are close to
the ideal standard of current ratio to 1. Though none of the banks have achieved the
ideal score but Bangladeshi banks are definitely are not much adept. It indicates
they are performing in a much more risky environment. Indian banks have shown
consistent development regarding Current Ratio.
2. Quick Ratio: The quick ratio is more conservative than the current ratio, a more well-
known liquidity measure, because it excludes inventory from current assets.Inventory is excluded because some companies have difficulty turning their
inventory into cash. In the event that short-term obligations need to be paid off
immediately, there are situations in which the current ratio would overestimate a
company's short-term financial strength.
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Current Ratio
Andhra Bank
Bank Of India
Indian Overseas Ba
Punjab National Ba
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
25/72
Page 25of 72
Formula:
Situation in Bangladesh-
Situation in India-
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Quick Ratio
Shonali Bank
Janata Bank
Agrani Bank
Rupali Bank
0
0.020.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Quick Ratio
Andhra Bank Bank Of India Indian Overseas Bank Punjab National Bank
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
26/72
Page 26of 72
Interpretation-
Again we see that Indian banks are performing more consistently where
Bangladeshi banks are facing fluctuations in their Quick Ratio achievement.
3. Working Capital: A measure of both a company's efficiency and its short-term
financial health. This ratio indicates whether a company has enough short term
assets to cover its short term debt. But as the institutions are bank it means it assets
will always increase with debts. So it will always generate a negative figure if
calculated for a bank.
The more the figure is negative it will it indicate the more money this bank is able to
collect from its customers.
Formula:
Situation in Bangladesh-
-500000000000.00
-400000000000.00
-300000000000.00
-200000000000.00
-100000000000.00
0.00
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Working Capital
Shonali Bank
Janata Bank
Agrani Bank
Rupali Bank
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
27/72
Page 27of 72
Situation in India-
Interpretation:
Scenario is a little different here. As we see, our banks and Indian banks are performing
in very close distance. In some years our banks are better. As we can see Punjab bank
the one with highest negative figure is lower than the highest negative figure of our
banks the Shonali Bank.
4. Interst Margin: it is a performance metric that examines how successful a firm's
investment decisions are compared to its debt situations. A negative value denotesthat the firm did not make an optimal decision, because interest expenses were
greater than the amount of returns generated by investments.
Formula:
Interest Margin= Interest Income Interest Expenses
-3500000000.00
-3000000000.00
-2500000000.00
-2000000000.00
-1500000000.00
-1000000000.00
-500000000.00
0.00
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Working Capital
Andhra Bank
Bank Of India
Indian Overseas Bank
Punjab National Bank
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
28/72
Page 28of 72
Situation in Bangladesh-
Situation in India-
Interpretation-Here we observe that the Indian banks are consistently generating profit from their
investments. But our state owned banks are having trouble in making efficient
investment decisions.
-2000000000.00
0.00
2000000000.00
4000000000.00
6000000000.00
8000000000.00
10000000000.00
12000000000.00
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Interest Margin
Shonali Ba
Janata Ban
Agrani Ba
Rupali Ban
0.00
20000000.00
40000000.00
60000000.00
80000000.00
100000000.00
120000000.00
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Intrest Margin
Andhra Bank
Bank Of India
Indian Overseas Bank
Punjab National Bank
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
29/72
Page 29of 72
5. Loan to Deposit Ratio: it is a commonly used statistic for assessing a bank's liquidity
by dividing the banks total loans by its total deposits. This number, also known as
the LTD ratio, is expressed as a percentage. If the ratio is too high, it means that
banks might not have enough liquidity to cover any unforeseen fund requirements;
if the ratio is too low, banks may not be earning as much as they could be.This ratio is often used by policy makers to determine the lending practices of
financial institutions.
Formula:
Situation in Bangladesh-
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Loan To Deposit Ratio
Shonali Bank Janata Bank Agrani Bank Rupali Bank
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
30/72
Page 30of 72
Situation In India-
Interpretation:
In this case our banks are more efficient with consistency in making lending
operations.
6. Return On Credit: It is another ratio measuring the proportion of interest generated
by specific credit operations or loans provided by the bank.
Formula:
Return on Credit= Interest Income / Loans and Advances
Situation in Bangladesh-
62.00%
64.00%
66.00%
68.00%
70.00%
72.00%
74.00%
76.00%
78.00%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Loan To Deposit Ratio
Andhra Bank
Bank Of India
Indian Overseas Ba
Punjab National Ba
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
31/72
Page 31of 72
Situation in India-
Interpretation-
Again the graphs are showing that the Indian banks are consistent in their
performances. On the other hand our banks are not consistent with their
performance.
7. ROA (return on assets) Ratio: An indicator of how profitable a company is relative to
its total assets. ROA gives an idea as to how efficient management is at using its
assets to generate earnings. Calculated by dividing a company's annual earnings by
its total assets, ROA is displayed as a percentage. Sometimes this is referred to as
"return on investment".
0.00%
2.00%
4.00%
6.00%
8.00%
10.00%
12.00%
14.00%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Return On Credit
Shonali Bank
Janata Bank
Agrani Bank
Rupali Bank
0.00%
2.00%
4.00%
6.00%
8.00%
10.00%
12.00%
14.00%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
AxisTitle
Return On Credit
Andhra Bank
Bank Of India
Indian Overseas Bank
Punjab National Bank
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
32/72
Page 32of 72
The formula for return on assets is:
ROA tells what earnings were generated from invested capital (assets). ROA for
public companies can vary substantially and will be highly dependent on the
industry. This is why when using ROA as a comparative measure, it is best to
compare it against a company's previous ROA numbers or the ROA of a similar
company.
The assets of the company are comprised of both debt and equity. Both of these
types of financing are used to fund the operations of the company. The ROA figure
gives investors an idea of how effectively the company is converting the money it
has to invest into net income. The higher the ROA number, the better, because the
company is earning more money on less investment.
The ROA is often referred to as ROI(return on investment).
Situation in Bangladesh-
-1.00%
-0.50%
0.00%
0.50%
1.00%
1.50%
2.00%
2.50%
3.00%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
ROA
Shonali Bank
Janata Bank
Agrani Bank
Rupali Bank
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
33/72
Page 33of 72
Situation in India-
Interpretation:
This one of the critical and vital statistic shows that if we ignore the past
performance of one of our banks (Rupali Bank), our banks are doing really good.
Our banks has performance has a tendency of being around 2.00% or more in recent
times. On the other hand the Indian banks are consistent in their performance but
they are below 1.60%.
8. Return on Equity: The amount of net income returned as a percentage ofshareholders equity. Return on equity measures a corporation's profitability by
revealing how much profit a company generates with the money shareholders have
invested.
ROE is expressed as a percentage and calculated as:
Return on Equity = Net Income/Shareholder's Equity
Net income is for the full fiscal year (before dividends paid to common stock holders
but after dividends to preferred stock.) Shareholder's equity does not include
preferred shares.
It is also known as "return on net worth" (RONW).
0.00%
0.20%
0.40%
0.60%
0.80%
1.00%
1.20%
1.40%
1.60%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
ROA
Andhra Bank
Bank Of India
Indian Overseas Bank
Punjab National Bank
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
34/72
Page 34of 72
The ROE is useful for comparing the profitability of a company to that of other firms
in the same industry.
There are several variations on the formula that investors may use to find out
different measures, but this paper will focus on only the general Formula.
Two important notes:
Forhigh growth companies one should expect a higher ROE.
AveragingROE over the past 5 to 10 years can give a better idea of the
historical growth.
Situation in Bangladesh-
Situation in India-
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
40.00%
45.00%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
ROE
Shonali Bank
Janata Bank
Agrani Bank
Rupali Bank
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
ROE
Andhra Bank
Bank Of India
Indian Overseas Bank
Punjab National Bank
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
35/72
Page 35of 72
Interpretation:
This important measurement indicates, those Indian banks are consistently keeping
their returns, but our banks are not efficiently managing their funding thus return isfluctuating. But both sides returns are on the base of equity are decreasing. These
signs will discourage investors to invest in these banks in our country.
9. Net Profit Margin: it is a ratio of profitability calculated as net income divided by
revenues, or net profits divided by sales. It measures how much out of every dollar
of sales a company actually keeps in earnings.
Profit margin is very useful when comparing companies in similar industries. A
higher profit margin indicates a more profitable company that has better control
over its costs compared to its competitors. Profit margin is displayed as a
percentage.
Looking at the earnings of a company often doesn't tell the entire story. Increased
earnings are good, but an increase does not mean that the profit margin of a
company is improving. For instance, if a company has costs that have increased at a
greater rate than sales, it leads to a lower profit margin. This is an indication that
costs need to be under better control.
It is also known as Net Profit Margin.
Formula:
Here for banking institution Sales has been recognized as Investments + Loans and
Advances.
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
36/72
Page 36of 72
Situation in Bangladesh-
Situation in India-
Interpretation:
This analysis again indicates the consistent profit making of Indian banks. Though
some of Bangladeshi banks are able to make some huge profits in specific years, butthey lost consistency. That indicates control is very weak in our state owned banks.
0.00% 0.50% 1.00% 1.50% 2.00% 2.50% 3.00%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Net Profit Margin
Rupali Bank
Agrani Bank
Janata Bank
Shonali Bank
0.00% 0.20% 0.40% 0.60% 0.80% 1.00% 1.20% 1.40% 1.60%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Net Profit Margin
Punjab National Bank Indian Overseas Bank Bank Of India Andhra Bank
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
37/72
Page 37of 72
Result of the Analysis:
From the analysis we see,
Current Ratio and Quick Ratios are indicating how vulnerable our banks are to claims;
Loans to Deposit Ratios are indicating how efficiently liabilities are being converted to
assets. Return on credit indicating how much the given loans are earning.
ROE indicates that a bank convert its equity into net earnings. The higher ratio indicates
higher ability and indicates that the ROE of all the SCB are fluctuating from year to year.
It is also indicates that all the banks fail to maintain a satisfactory ROE. ROA indicates
that a bank convert its assets into net earnings. The higher ratio indicates higher ability
and indicates that the ROA of all the state banks are fluctuating from year to year. It is
also indicates that all the banks fail to maintain a satisfactory ROA.
Finally net profit margin is indicating the profit scenario.
As the analysis shows the Indian banks are improving their performances constantly.
Consistent improving and successfully managing downward slopes in economy was the
key success factor of the Indian state owned banks. How our banks can achieve such
level of perfection will be suggested in the next chapter of this paper.
Limitations of This Study:
1) India has almost 30 state owned banks on the other hand Bangladesh has only 4
state owned banks (excluding some special purpose banks)2. Comparing them will
only provide an idea about the scenario not the whole picture.2) The idea is to get a benchmark for the Bangladeshi bank, for the sake of simple
comparative analysis four Bangladeshi and four Indian banks has been taken.
3) As time was short only five year data has been analyzed, analyzing more data could
give a more accurate picture.
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
38/72
Page 38of 72
Chapter 5: Suggestion and Conclusion
5.1 Suggestion:
The following suggestions will be helpful if our banks follow those3:
a) Fair dealings with the customers. More contribution from the employee
of the bank. The staff should be cooperative, friendly and must be
capable of understanding the problems of customers.
b) Internet banking facility must be made available in all the banks.
c) Prompt dealing with permanent customers and speedy transaction
without harassing the customers
d) Each section of every bank should be computerized even in rural areas
also.
e) More ATM coverage should be provided for the convenience of the
customers.
f) No limit on cash withdrawals on ATM cards.
g) The bank should bring out new schemes at time-to time so that more
people can be attracted. Even some gifts and prizes may be offered to
the customers for their retention.
h) 24 hours banking should be induced so as to facilitate the customers who
may not have a free time in the daytime. It will help in facing the
competition more effectively.
i) Bank should properly disclose the features of the product and services to
the customers. Moreover door to door services can also be introduced bybank.
j) Branch should promote cooperation and coordination among employees
which help them in efficient working.
k) Combining traditional wisdom with modern statistical tools like Value-at-
risk analysis and Markov Chain Analysis should be employed to assess the
borrowers. This is to be supplemented by information sharing among the
bankers about the credit history of the borrower. In case of new
borrowers, especially corporate borrowers, proper analysis of the cash
flow statement of last five years is to be done carefully.
l)
Assisting the borrowers in developing his entrepreneurial skills will notonly establish a good relation between the borrowers but also help the
bankers to keep a track of their funds.
m)Some tax incentives like capital gain tax exemption, carry forward the
losses to set off the same with other income of the Qualified Institutional
Borrowers (QIBs) should be granted so as to ensure their active
participation by way of investing sizeable amount in distressed assets of
banks and financial institutions.
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
39/72
Page 39of 72
5.2 Conclusion:
Evaluation of banks financial performance is important for all parties like
depositors, bank manager, stockholders, creditors, regulators and educationalist.
In a competitive market financial bank performance provides signals to depositor
investors whether to invest or withdraw fund from the bank. Similarly, it flashes
direction to bank manager whether to improve its deposit service or loan service
or both to improve its finance. Stockholders and creditors use the performance
to evaluate the attractiveness of the bank as an investment by examining its
ability to meets its current and expected future financial obligation. Regulator is
also interested to know its regulation purpose. Educationalist can use this article
for further research.
Current Ratio and Quick Ratios are indicating how vulnerable our banks are to
claims; Loans to Deposit Ratios are indicating how efficiently liabilities are being
converted to assets. Return on credit indicating how much the given loans are
earning.
ROE indicates that a bank convert its equity into net earnings. The higher ratio
indicates higher ability and indicates that the ROE of all the SCB are fluctuating
from year to year. It is also indicates that all the banks fail to maintain a
satisfactory ROE. ROA indicates that a bank convert its assets into net earnings.
The higher ratio indicates higher ability and indicates that the ROA of all the
state banks are fluctuating from year to year. It is also indicates that all the banks
fail to maintain a satisfactory ROA.
Finally net profit margin is indicating the profit scenario.
This study really helped out to find the weak links in our state owned banking
sector. If the authority takes necessary steps to improve these links, our state
owned banks will be able to perform at its best.
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
40/72
Page 40of 72
References:
1. CIA Factbook
http://www.indexmundi.com/factbook/compare/india.bangladesh/economy
2. Wikipedia.
3. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, Vol. 2, No. 3, June
2011
By: Kajal Chaudhary and Monika Sharma
&
Performance Evaluation and Competitive Analysis of State Owned Commercial Banks
in Bangladesh
Research Journal of Finance and Accounting
ISSN 2222-1697 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2847 (Online)
Vol 2, No 3, 2011By: Shah Johir Rayhan (Corresponding author)
Department of Management & Finance
Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University
S.M. Sohel Ahmed
Department of Marketing
Northern College Bangladesh
Ripon Kumar Mondal
Department of Agricultural Economics
Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University
Bibliography:Fundamentals of Financial Management. 12thEdition.
By: James C Van Horne and John M Wacowics JR.
http://www.indexmundi.com/factbook/compare/india.bangladesh/economyhttp://www.indexmundi.com/factbook/compare/india.bangladesh/economyhttp://www.indexmundi.com/factbook/compare/india.bangladesh/economy -
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
41/72
Page 41of 72
Appendix:
1)The 8 Balance Sheetssonali bank
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Property & Assets
Cash 23407815028 20641592198 28415953542 33230634571 65634773139
Balance B&F 7316574707 9979717359 10614726092 40099345277 13077936686
Money @call 1517463000 250857360 3079323200 5547312900 11742379680
Investments 88890899351 95093241199 113479966309 111745095461 132089167727
Loans and
Advance
206347592413 231166579465 254022504699 286098070161 348091755805
Fixed Asset 9839341127 9920927663 10047274621 10594092052 23060119998
other 125893233074 124644547313 131197680686 133200410488 101908464655
Total 461964232939 492946148318 550857429148 620514960910 695604597690
Liability and
Capital
Borrowings 6990041413 545955691 60124599 26385637 20926263206
Deposits 328997209441 364385970931 406151569403 478134084948 533123037103
other 104235253186 103596507559 107383753943 125333593203 104262013373
Equity 21741728899 24417714137 37261981202 45773859298 56123284007
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
42/72
Page 42of 72
janata bank
2007 2008 2009 2010 2
Property & Assets
Cash 15579764948 16527172701 16531848663 17597592643 24115279
Balance B&F 7328402871 5979793315 4123427486 6167291516 8888361
Money @call 8567349333 7088744458 5533529807 3607144341 18475731
Investments 55862930391 57823525987 72533203682 57514002747 90905865
Loans andAdvance 121204454973 144678183388 166359485619 225732208529 257801035
Fixed Asset 2424177100 2446425915 2685195290 6299906482 9634633
other 32121123227 32613451158 25896092822 28315781897 30568462
Total 243088202843 267157296922 293662783369 345233928155 440389369
Liability and
Capital
Borrowings 2531387633 587633 31565952 50488931 63498
Deposits 198635892054 221335750734 246175046479 286566890434 361676694
other 36241755883 36758590982 33595800525 38226221808 48496261
Equity 5679167273 9062367573 13860370413 20390326982 30152914
Total 243088202843 267157296922 293662783369 345233928155 440389369
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
43/72
Page 43of 72
Agrani bank
2007 2008 2009 2010 20
Property & Assets
Cash 1728000000 2079000000 9536303168 13016651219 189194798
Balance B&F 7966000000 7616000000 2985379481 3004978834 36129140
Money @call 1110000000 820000000 1700000000 10000000
Investments 21900000000 29330000000 40897186296 43916295003 853312528
Loans and
Advance
95090000000 95110000000 122236085269 163256184445 1940856561
Fixed Asset 2480000000 2530000000 2878697343 5435899358 112266497
other 56006000000 49835000000 33829220120 36222018059 346447560
Total 186280000000 187320000000 214062871677 264852026918 3488207088
Liability and
Capital
Borrowings 9427000000 2105000000 1192703306 6216816056 257581539
Deposits 135920000000 146810000000 166283624192 206326011342 2522083600
other 37593000000 31985000000 35145617167 36591914752 449115707
Equity 3340000000 6420000000 11440927012 15717284768 259426240
Total 186280000000 187320000000 214062871677 264852026918 3488207088
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
44/72
Page 44of 72
Rupali bank
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Property & Assets
Cash 6779310465 6608196961 5286406832 7542640873 7400358179
Balance B&F 308043540 2069676457 2688523347 6579820158
Money @call 4350000000 4474700000 3700000000 3200000000
Investments 14090649118 12545717273 14303004404 15717194721 23611153759
Loans and
Advance
47080319537 49030036101 52344171190 66048966139 76524922447
Fixed Asset 529763264 2323315942 2332537980 9520746146 9674607803
other 8681968105 7021822063 7755650032 19716430319 19242261581
Total 81512010489 82311831880 87791446895 124434501545 143033123927
Liability and
Capital
Borrowings 30137644 23303233 337206339 269497245 1604970053
Deposits 73302306480 71207978507 73803437188 91123755017 107233954572
other 19107442082 19249699782 19232576344 18889771623 20757222606
Equity -10927875717 -8169149642 -5581772976 14151477661 13436976685
Total 81512010489 82311831880 87791446895 124434501546 143033123916
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
45/72
Page 45of 72
Andhra
Bank
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011Assets
Cash 29490561 49016678 48533389 66986980 71844052
Balance B&F 8989747 4123330 4341626 4713723 9,768,927
+
Money @call 1761437 3803149 39975864 22,976,528
Investments 143007185 148982376 169111120 208809986 242039993
Loans and
Advance
278890663 342383852 441392597 561135072 714353582
Fixed Asset 1923459 2194634 3352951 3556567 3175002
other 11346925 15419877 17960393 18245831 24849111
Total 475,409,97
7
565,923,89
6
684,692,07
6
903,424,02
3
1,089,007,1
95
Liability and
Capital
Borrowings 7335347 5905095 33512347 58524426 76,397,408
Deposits 414540209 494365476 593900196 776882076 921,562,816
other 21971621 33160436 20809599 23917086 26,122,809
Equity 31562800 32492889 36469934 44100435 64924162
Total 475409977 565923896 684692076 903424023 1089007195
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
46/72
Page 46of 72
bank of India
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Property & Assets
Cash 71968894 117418505 89152845 156026240 217824332
Balance B&F 87022782 50657890 87410212 111209850 106066262
Money @call 15063674 9097499 41049499 45065248 49209296
Investments 354927618 418028767 526071791 670801795 858724176
Loans and
Advance
851158944 1134763264 1429093738 1684907098 2130961817
Fixed Asset 7892954 24260671 25319347 23518088 24807363
other 30135047 34073181 56920239 58136266 124132245
Total 1418169913 1788299777 2255017671 2749664585 3511725491
Liability and
Capital
Borrowings 66208269 71724490 94869763 223998955 220213756
Deposits 1198817362 1500119812 1897084797 2297619439 2988858063
other 94190529 110561565 128113898 85746253 129746875
Equity 58953753 105893910 134949213 142299938 172906797
Total 1418169913 1788299777 2255017671 2749664585 3511725491
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
47/72
Page 47of 72
Indian overseas bank
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Property & Assets
Cash 46861079 91242328 59404442 76664472 100108943
Balance B&F 31910810 9680915 36313189 14454255 18605114
Money @call 11021137 2489969 13501386 7127680 1472500
Investments 239744736 284747084 312154387 376505627 486104540
Loans and
Advance
470602860 604238440 748852726 789991593 1118329775
Fixed Asset 5106572 5585775 17098596 16995655 16811068
other 17321090 20612881 23409261 29177012 46410845
Total 822568284 1018597392 1210733987 1310916294 1787842785
Liability and
Capital
Borrowings 28962275 63536463 104945824 89822019 193564046
Deposits 687404149 843255829 1001158896 1107947110 1452287511
other 66298209 63238398 33119634 37901334 48751928
Equity 39903651 48566702 71509633 75245831 93249300
Total 822568284 1018597392 1210733987 1310916294 1787852785
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
48/72
Page 48of 72
Punjab bank
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Property & Assets
Cash 123720292 152581517 170582536 183275755 237768960
Balance B&F 13042619 31505971 41452838 41094724 50386381
Money @call 19692277 4219750 2096070 10365164 8756775
Investments 451898360 539917050 633851803 777244678 951623475
Loans and
Advance
965965186 1195015662 1547029887 1866012080 2421066661
Fixed Asset 10098255 23155219 23971073 25134690 31055961
other 39807976 43808437 50201966 63200681 82594189
Total 1624224965 1990203606 2469186173 2966327772 3783252402
Liability and
Capital
Borrowings 19488566 54465596 43743633 192623660 315896905
Deposits 1398596711 1664572260 2097604967 2493298030 3128987266
other 101785089 147982286 181301277 103176897 123282659
Equity 104354599 123183464 146536296 177229185 215085572
Total 1624224965 1990203606 2469186173 2966327772 3783252402
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
49/72
Page 49of 72
2) Ratio Calculations:
Sonali Bank
Current Ratio
current assets / current liabilities
Year Current Assets Current Liabilities Current Ratio
2007 32241852735.00 335987250854.00 0.095961536
2008 30872166917.00 364931926622.00 0.084597057
2009 42110002834.00 406211694002.00 0.103665166
2010 78877292748.00 478160470585.00 0.164959878
2011 90455089505.00 554049300309.00 0.163261806
Quick Ratio
(cash+ short notice money)/current liabilities
Year Quick Assets Current Liabilities Quick Ratio
2007 24925278028.00 335987250854.00 0.07418519
2008 20892449558.00 364931926622.00 0.057250265
2009 31495276742.00 406211694002.00 0.077534146
2010 38777947471.00 478160470585.00 0.081098187
2011 77377152819.00 554049300309.00 0.139657523
Net Working Capital Current Assets - Current Liabilities
Year Current Assets Current Liabilities Net Working Capital
2007 32241852735.00 335987250854.00 -303745398119.00
2008 30872166917.00 364931926622.00 -334059759705.00
2009 42110002834.00 406211694002.00 -364101691168.00
2010 78877292748.00 478160470585.00 -399283177837.00
2011 90455089505.00 554049300309.00 -463594210804.00
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
50/72
Page 50of 72
Interst Margin
Interest Income - interest paid
Year Interest Income interest paid Interst Margin
2007 8962089341.00 6625390799.00 2336698542.00
2008 13101861774.00 13965929070.00 -864067296.00
2009 17683108223.00 15800026939.00 1883081284.00
2010 22841408729.00 19131795895.00 3709612834.00
2011 28092050860.00 22415764284.00 5676286576.00
Loan To Deposits
Ratio
Loans / Deposits
Year Loans Deposits
Loan To Deposits
Ratio
2007 206347592413.00 328997209441.00 62.72%
2008 231166579465.00 364385970931.00 63.44%
2009 254022504699.00 406151569403.00 62.54%
2010 286098070161.00 478134084948.00 59.84%
2011 348091755805.00 533123037103.00 65.29%
Return On Credit Interest Income/Loans And Advances
Year Interest Income Loans And Advances Return On Credit
2007 8962089341.00 206347592413.00 4.34%
2008 13101861774.00 231166579465.00 5.67%
2009 17683108223.00 254022504699.00 6.96%
2010 22841408729.00 286098070161.00 7.98%
2011 28092050860.00 348091755805.00 8.07%
ROA
(Net Profit Before Tax/ Total Assets)*100
Year Net Profit Before Total Assets ROA
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
51/72
Page 51of 72
Tax
2007 -1834170743.00 461946232939.00 -0.40%
2008 1336400387.00 492949148318.00 0.27%
2009 2244267215.00 543969267865.00 0.41%
2010 1620358504.00 620514960910.00 0.26%
2011 9899181075.00 695604597690.00 1.42%
ROE
(Net Profit After Tax/Total Equity)*100
Year Net Profit After Tax Total Equity ROE
2007 2311114502.00 21741728899.00 10.63%
2008 973580120.00 24417714137.00 3.99%
2009 1536766608.00 37261981202.00 4.12%
2010 2737610402.00 45773859298.00 5.98%
2011 9981947683.00 56123284007.00 17.79%
Net Profit Margin
Net Profit after Tax/(Invesrment + Loans & Advances)
Year Net Profit After Tax (Invesrment + Loans & Advances) Net Profit Margin
2007 2311114502.00 295238491764.00 0.78%
2008 973580120.00 326259820664.00 0.30%
2009 1536766608.00 367502471008.00 0.42%
2010 2737610402.00 397843165622.00 0.69%
2011 9981947683.00 480180923532.00 2.08%
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
52/72
Page 52of 72
Janata Bank
Current Ratio
current assets / current liabilities
Year Current Assets Current Liabilities Current Ratio
2007 31475517152.00 201167279687.00 0.156464397
2008 29595710474.00 221336338367.00 0.133713744
2009 26188805956.00 246206612431.00 0.106369223
2010 27372028500.00 286617379365.00 0.09550024
2011 51479372034.00 361740192752.00 0.142310346
Quick Ratio
(cash+ short notice money)/current liabilities
Year Quick Assets Current Liabilities Quick Ratio
2007 24147114281.00 201167279687.00 0.120034999
2008 25495723837.00 221336338367.00 0.115189959
2009 22065378470.00 246206612431.00 0.089621389
2010 21204736984.00 286617379365.00 0.073982733
2011 42591010701.00 361740192752.00 0.117739227
Net Working Capital Current Assets - Current Liabilities
Year Current Assets Current Liabilities Net Working Capital
2007 31475517152.00 201167279687.00 -169691762535.00
2008 29595710474.00 221336338367.00 -191740627893.00
2009 26188805956.00 246206612431.00 -220017806475.00
2010 27372028500.00 286617379365.00 -259245350865.00
2011 51479372034.00 361740192752.00 -310260820718.00
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
53/72
Page 53of 72
Interst Margin
Interest Income - interest paid
Year Interest Income interest paid Interest Margin
2007 6017323687.00 4617377131.00 1399946556.00
2008 12953199215.00 9306491598.00 3646707617.00
2009 14869282150.00 10380072954.00 4489209196.00
2010 19058219576.00 11961473276.00 7096746300.00
2011 26266118212.00 17785817554.00 8480300658.00
Loan To Deposits
Ratio
Loans / Deposits
Year Loans Deposits
Loan To Deposits
Ratio
2007 121204454973.00 198635892054.00 61.02%
2008 144678183388.00 221335750734.00 65.37%
2009 166359485619.00 246175046479.00 67.58%
2010 225732208529.00 286566890434.00 78.77%
2011 257801035388.00 361676694608.00 71.28%
Return On Credit Interest Income/Loans And Advances
Year Interest Income Loans And Advances Return On Credit
2007 6017323687.00 121204454973.00 4.96%
2008 12953199215.00 144678183388.00 8.95%
2009 14869282150.00 166359485619.00 8.94%
2010 19058219576.00 225732208529.00 8.44%
2011 26266118212.00 257801035388.00 10.19%
ROA
(Net Profit Before Tax/ Total Assets)*100
Year
Net Profit Before
Tax Total Assets ROA
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
54/72
Page 54of 72
2007 1681033179.00 243088202843.00 0.69%
2008 4749323769.00 267157296922.00 1.78%
2009 5636819382.00 293662783369.00 1.92%
2010 7820431873.00 345233928155.00 2.27%
2011 8875669617.00 440389369132.00 2.02%
ROE
(Net Profit After Tax/Total Equity)*100
Year Net Profit After Tax Total Equity ROE
2007 15476452.00 5679167273.00 0.27%
2008 3145382406.00 9062367573.00 34.71%
2009 2784781440.00 13860370413.00 20.09%
2010 4907974833.00 20390326982.00 24.07%
2011 4444908801.00 30152914820.00 14.74%
Net Profit Margin
Net Profit after Tax/(Investment + Loans & Advances)
Year Net Profit After Tax (Investment + Loans & Advances) Net Profit Margin
2007 15476452.00 177067385364.00 0.01%
2008 3145382406.00 202501709375.00 1.55%
2009 2784781440.00 238892689301.00 1.17%
2010 4907974833.00 283246211276.00 1.73%
2011 4444908801.00 348706900987.00 1.27%
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
55/72
Page 55of 72
Agrani bank
Current Ratio
current assets / current liabilities
Year Current Assets Current Liabilities Current Ratio
2007 10804000000.00 145347000000.00 0.07433246
2008 10515000000.00 148915000000.00 0.070610751
2009 14221682649.00 167476327498.00 0.084917569
2010 16021630053.00 212542827398.00 0.075380714
2011 23532393988.00 277966514077.00 0.084659097
Quick Ratio
(cash+ short notice money)/current liabilities
Year Quick Assets Current Liabilities Quick Ratio
2007 2838000000.00 145347000000.00 0.019525687
2008 2899000000.00 148915000000.00 0.019467481
2009 11236303168.00 167476327498.00 0.067091889
2010 13016651219.00 212542827398.00 0.061242486
2011 19919479891.00 277966514077.00 0.071661437
Net Working Capital Current Assets - Current Liabilities
Year Current Assets Current Liabilities Net Working Capital
2007 10804000000.00 145347000000.00 -134543000000.00
2008 10515000000.00 148915000000.00 -138400000000.00
2009 14221682649.00 167476327498.00 -153254644849.00
2010 16021630053.00 212542827398.00 -196521197345.00
2011 23532393988.00 277966514077.00 -254434120089.00
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
56/72
Page 56of 72
Interst Margin
Interest Income - interest paid
Year Interest Income interest paid Interest Margin
2007 4380000000.00 2619000000.00 1761000000.00
2008 9547000000.00 5241000000.00 4306000000.00
2009 10122406610.00 6083558757.00 4038847853.00
2010 13997620160.00 7086680562.00 6910939598.00
2011 22434672794.00 11965996593.00 10468676201.00
Loan To Deposits
Ratio
Loans / Deposits
Year Loans Deposits
Loan To Deposits
Ratio
2007 95090000000.00 135920000000.00 69.96%
2008 95110000000.00 146810000000.00 64.78%
2009 122236085269.00 166283624192.00 73.51%
2010 163256184445.00 206326011342.00 79.13%
2011 194085656173.00 252208360096.00 76.95%
Return On Credit Interest Income/Loans And Advances
Year Interest Income Loans And Advances Return On Credit
2007 4380000000.00 95090000000.00 4.61%
2008 9547000000.00 95110000000.00 10.04%
2009 10122406610.00 122236085269.00 8.28%
2010 13997620160.00 163256184445.00 8.57%
2011 22434672794.00 194085656173.00 11.56%
ROA
(Net Profit Before Tax/ Total Assets)*100
Year
Net Profit Before
Tax Total Assets ROA
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
57/72
Page 57of 72
2007 1713176000.00 186280000000.00 0.92%
2008 2641212000.00 187320000000.00 1.41%
2009 3257680246.00 214062871677.00 1.52%
2010 6407246802.00 264852026918.00 2.42%
2011 7344983190.00 348820708845.00 2.11%
ROE
(Net Profit After Tax/Total Equity)*100
Year Net Profit After Tax Total Equity ROE
2007 986970000.00 3340000000.00 29.55%
2008 2650176000.00 6420000000.00 41.28%
2009 1355516965.00 11440927012.00 11.85%
2010 3516772268.00 15717284768.00 22.38%
2011 2499897603.00 25942624046.00 9.64%
Net Profit Margin
Net Profit after Tax/(Investment + Loans & Advances)
Year Net Profit After Tax (Investment + Loans & Advances) Net Profit Margin
2007 986970000.00 116990000000.00 0.84%
2008 2650176000.00 124440000000.00 2.13%
2009 1355516965.00 163133271565.00 0.83%
2010 3516772268.00 207172479448.00 1.70%
2011 2499897603.00 279416909049.00 0.89%
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
58/72
Page 58of 72
Rupali Bank
Current Ratio
current assets / current liabilities
Year Current Assets Current Liabilities Current Ratio
2007 11129310465.00 73332444124.00 0.151765165
2008 11390940501.00 71231281740.00 0.159914861
2009 11056083289.00 74140643527.00 0.149123109
2010 13431164220.00 91393252262.00 0.14696013
2011 13980178337.00 108838924625.00 0.128448332
Quick Ratio
(cash+ short notice money)/current liabilities
Year Quick Assets Current Liabilities Quick Ratio
2007 11129310465.00 73332444124.00 0.151765165
2008 11082896961.00 71231281740.00 0.155590307
2009 8986406832.00 74140643527.00 0.121207564
2010 10742640873.00 91393252262.00 0.117543042
2011 7400358179.00 108838924625.00 0.067993672
Net Working Capital Current Assets - Current Liabilities
Year Current Assets Current Liabilities Net Working Capital
2007 11129310465.00 73332444124.00 -62203133659.00
2008 11390940501.00 71231281740.00 -59840341239.00
2009 11056083289.00 74140643527.00 -63084560238.00
2010 13431164220.00 91393252262.00 -77962088042.00
2011 13980178337.00 108838924625.00 -94858746288.00
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
59/72
Page 59of 72
Interest Margin
Interest Income - interest paid
Year Interest Income interest paid Interest Margin
2007 3422541804.00 3022968993.00 399572811.00
2008 4090581930.00 3080511189.00 1010070741.00
2009 4978543342.00 3238758184.00 1739785158.00
2010 5552622912.00 3463821453.00 2088801459.00
2011 9382331618.00 5163924073.00 4218407545.00
Loan To Deposits
Ratio
Loans / Deposits
Year Loans Deposits
Loan To Deposits
Ratio
2007 47080319537.00 73302306480.00 64.23%
2008 49030036101.00 71207978507.00 68.85%
2009 52344171190.00 73803437188.00 70.92%
2010 66048966139.00 91123755017.00 72.48%
2011 76524922447.00 107233954572.00 71.36%
Return On Credit Interest Income/Loans And Advances
Year Interest Income Loans And Advances Return On Credit
2007 3422541804.00 47080319537.00 7.27%
2008 4090581930.00 49030036101.00 8.34%
2009 4978543342.00 52344171190.00 9.51%
2010 5552622912.00 66048966139.00 8.41%
2011 9382331618.00 76524922447.00 12.26%
ROA
(Net Profit Before Tax/ Total Assets)*100
Year
Net Profit Before
Tax Total Assets ROA
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
60/72
Page 60of 72
2007 -11017471483.00 81512010489.00
2008 874097696.00 82311831880.00 1.06%
2009 1668489322.00 87791446895.00 1.90%
2010 1425728455.00 124434501545.00 1.15%
2011 2498577157.00 143033123927.00 1.75%
ROE
(Net Profit After Tax/Total Equity)*100
Year Net Profit After Tax Total Equity ROE
2007 -11017471483.00 -10927875717.00
2008 874097696.00 -8169149642.00 10.70%
2009 1668489322.00 -5581772976.00 29.89%
2010 600292013.00 14151477661.00 4.24%
2011 1091310752.00 13436976685.00 8.12%
Net Profit Margin
Net Profit after Tax/(Investment + Loans & Advances)
Year Net Profit After Tax (Investment + Loans & Advances) Net Profit Margin
2007 -11017471483.00 61170968655.00
2008 874097696.00 61575753374.00 1.42%
2009 1668489322.00 66647175594.00 2.50%
2010 600292013.00 81766160860.00 0.73%
2011 1091310752.00 100136076206.00 1.09%
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
61/72
Page 61of 72
Andhra Bank
Current Ratio
current assets / current liabilities
Year Current Assets Current Liabilities Current Ratio
2007 40241745.00 421875556.00 0.095387714
2008 56943157.00 500270571.00 0.113824719
2009 52875015.00 627412543.00 0.084274718
2010 111676567.00 835406502.00 0.133679313
2011 104589507.00 997960224.00 0.104803282
Quick Ratio
(cash+ short notice money)/current liabilities
Year Quick Assets Current Liabilities Quick Ratio
2007 31251998.00 421875556.00 0.074078712
2008 52819827.00 500270571.00 0.105582519
2009 48533389.00 627412543.00 0.077354827
2010 106962844.00 835406502.00 0.128036882
2011 94820580.00 997960224.00 0.095014388
Net Working Capital Current Assets - Current Liabilities
Year Current Assets Current Liabilities Net Working Capital
2007 40241745.00 421875556.00 -381633811.00
2008 56943157.00 500270571.00 -443327414.00
2009 52875015.00 627412543.00 -574537528.00
2010 111676567.00 835406502.00 -723729935.00
2011 104589507.00 997960224.00 -893370717.00
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
62/72
Page 62of 72
Interst Margin
Interest Income - interest paid
Year Interest Income interest paid Interest Margin
2007 33153253.00 18977861.00 14175392.00
2008 42898681.00 28699959.00 14198722.00
2009 53746168.00 37477120.00 16269048.00
2010 63728657.00 41781287.00 21947370.00
2011 82912769.00 50703074.00 32209695.00
Loan To Deposits
Ratio
Loans / Deposits
Year Loans Deposits
Loan To Deposits
Ratio
2007 278890663.00 414540209.00 67.28%
2008 342383852.00 494365476.00 69.26%
2009 441392597.00 593900196.00 74.32%
2010 561135072.00 776882076.00 72.23%
2011 714353582.00 921562816.00 77.52%
Return On Credit Interest Income/Loans And Advances
Year Interest Income Loans And Advances Return On Credit
2007 33153253.00 278890663.00 11.89%
2008 42898681.00 342383852.00 12.53%
2009 53746168.00 441392597.00 12.18%
2010 63728657.00 561135072.00 11.36%
2011 82912769.00 714353582.00 11.61%
ROA
(Net Profit Before Tax/ Total Assets)*100
Year
Net Profit Before
Tax Total Assets ROA
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
63/72
Page 63of 72
2007 5663434.00 475409977.00 1.19%
2008 6085417.00 565923896.00 1.08%
2009 6901428.00 684692076.00 1.01%
2010 10861244.00 903424023.00 1.20%
2011 13170003.00 1089007195.00 1.21%
ROE
(Net Profit After Tax/Total Equity)*100
Year Net Profit After Tax Total Equity ROE
2007 5379025.00 31562800.00 17.04%
2008 5755714.00 32492889.00 17.71%
2009 6530512.00 36469934.00 17.91%
2010 10458482.00 44100435.00 23.72%
2011 12670725.00 64924162.00 19.52%
Net Profit Margin
Net Profit after Tax/(Investment + Loans & Advances)
Year Net Profit After Tax (Investment + Loans & Advances) Net Profit Margin
2007 5379025.00 421897848.00 1.27%
2008 5755714.00 491366228.00 1.17%
2009 6530512.00 610503717.00 1.07%
2010 10458482.00 769945058.00 1.36%
2011 12670725.00 956393575.00 1.32%
-
8/12/2019 Theisis on comparative bank performence
64/72
Page 64of 72
Bank Of India
Current Ratio
current assets / current liabilities
Year Current Assets Current Liabilities Current Ratio
2007 174055350.00 1265025631.00 0.137590374
2008 177173894.00 1571844302.00 0.112717203
2009 217612556.00 1991954560.00 0.109245743
2010 312301338.00 2521618394.00 0.123849564
2011 373