MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3212334481 · doi:10.5539/jmr.v13n6p38

Determinants of Capital Adequacy Ratio of Banks in Botswana

2021· article· en· W3212334481 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hassan Kablay, Victor Gumbo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematics Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Reporting and Valuation Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapital adequacy ratioFinancial ratioReturn on equityVariablesEconometricsMathematicsRegression analysisLinear regressionEquity ratioEquity (law)Equity capitalBusinessEconomicsStatisticsActuarial scienceMonetary economicsFinancial systemFinanceProfitability index

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Capital Adequacy Ratio (CAR) plays a very important role in the financial success of banks and acts as a buffer to prevent and absorb any unexpected losses. This study examines explanatory variables that influence CAR for nine banks in Botswana. Multiple linear regression was used for analysis, with CAR as the dependent variable and thirteen financial ratios as the independent variables. The study period is 2015-2019. Based on the data for this period, it was established that out of the thirteen financial ratios utilised, only four were found to have significant impact on the CAR of the nine banks under study, which are: Asset to Equity Ratio (A E), Return on Equity (ROE), Non-Performing Loans Ratio (NPL RATIO) and the Cost-to-Income Ratio (C I). The A E Ratio was found to be the most influential driver of the CAR and the NPL Ratio was found to be the least influential driver of the CAR for the banks under study.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematics ResearchSame topicFinancial Reporting and Valuation ResearchFrench-language works237,207