MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970939918 · doi:10.3390/jrfm12030138

Revenue Diversification, Risk and Bank Performance of Vietnamese Commercial Banks

2019· article· en· W2970939918 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Khanh Ngoc Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicBanking stability, regulation, efficiency
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiversification (marketing strategy)Profitability indexRevenueBusinessProfit (economics)Financial systemIndustrial organizationFinanceEconomicsMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the future, when the process of economic integration in the banking sector is more powerful, and competitive, diversifying revenue is an inevitable and objective trend to help the banks increase profits, minimize risks and improve their competitive position in the system. The research is on the relationship between revenue diversification, risk and bank performance using data from audited financial statements and annual reports of 26 commercial banks listed and unlisted in Vietnam during the period 2010–2018. The research method uses Generalized Method of Moment (GMM) modeling techniques to solve endogenous problems, variance and autocorrelation in the research model. Research results show that diversification negatively impacts profitability and the higher the diversification, the higher the risk of commercial banks. However, the more diversified listed banks, the more increased the bank’s stability. The banks show the weakness and lack of experience of the banking system in developing a reasonable profit transformation model. The revenue diversification of banks is currently passive and moves slowly. Interest income is still the motivation of bank development, boosting profit growth. Growth, as well as the contribution from service activities, is not commensurate with potentials; although there are many positive points, they are not enough to cover risks from net interest income activities.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.425

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.185 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations51
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicBanking stability, regulation, efficiencyFrench-language works237,207