MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200331807 · doi:10.3390/math9243178

An Econometric Approach on Performance, Assets, and Liabilities in a Sample of Banks from Europe, Israel, United States of America, and Canada

2021· article· en· W4200331807 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Larissa M. Batrancea

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicBanking stability, regulation, efficiency
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessCurrent liabilityFinancial systemReturn on assetsFinanceFinancial crisisSample (material)Investment (military)Economic shortageEconomicsMarket liquidity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 2008 financial crisis had a major impact on financial markets, especially on the banking system. Mortgage-backed security investments were among the causes that determined the tremendous shortage of cash. Before the crisis, American banks were considered important investors on these markets, as indicated by the structure of their assets and liabilities. How grounded were their investment decisions? To answer this question, the study examined the influence of financial performance on bank assets and liabilities of the most important 45 banks from Europe and Israel, United States of America, and Canada during the period 2006–2020. Through a panel generalized method of moments approach, empirical results indicated a strong impact of bank assets and liabilities ratios on financial performance indicators. The study emphasizes that bank managers, researchers, regulators, and supervisors should consider investment policies, especially for bank assets and liabilities. Therefore, a high level of interest income is an important tool for increasing assets and liabilities. At the same time, fees are other levers that could improve bank benefits and ultimately develop the lending activity when interest income enters a descending trend.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.687
Threshold uncertainty score0.629

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations55
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematicsSame topicBanking stability, regulation, efficiencyFrench-language works237,207