A Holistic Perspective on Bank Performance Using Regulation, Profitability, and Risk-Taking with a View on Ownership Concentration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a lack of a holistic perspective on bank performance. This study proposes a multidimensional (three-pronged) approach encompassing regulation, profitability, and nonperforming assets (NPAs) and their interactions as a measure of the performance of a bank. Moreover, the impact of equity holdings of promoters, institutional investors, and retail investors on the proposed three-pronged approach of the bank performance are also explored. Values of the concerned variables were gathered from 2016 to 2019. The dynamic panel data method was applied to empirically test the proposed model. The main findings supported the premises of the proposed approach to bank performance. Furthermore, various ownership classes provided mixed results for their impact on bank performance. Unfavorable roles of promoters and institutional investors and an indifferent role of the retail investors group were startling outcomes of the study. Successful empirical endorsement of the proposed approach for bank performance provides a fresh perspective and has varied policy- and managerial-level implications. The findings regarding various shareholder groups (ownership classes) can be a catalyst to set the policy for ownership distribution in banks, as well as shareholder protection and activism, which are conspicuously absent in India.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".