MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389525091 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v16n1p15

Micro and Macro Determinants of Non-Performing Loan (NPL) in Banking Sector of Bangladesh

2023· article· en· W4389525091 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mobasshir Anjum

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReturn on assetsNon-performing loanLoanCapital adequacy ratioReturn on equityFinancial systemEconomicsMacroMonetary economicsPanel dataBusinessCredit riskInterest ratePrivate sectorFinanceEconometricsStock exchange

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study seeks to determine the drivers of Non-performing Loans in the Bangladeshi banking system. To achieve this, panel data from four types of Bangladeshi banks from 2008 to 2021 are utilized. It has employed a fixed effect regression model to analyze the influence of bank-related variables and variables related to macroeconomics on the NPL ratio. This study utilizes return on assets (ROA), return on equity (ROE), and capital to risk-weighted assets (CRAR) as bank-specific variables, whereas GDP Growth, broad money supply, real interest rate, and domestic credit to private sector by banks are employed as macroeconomic variables. The study demonstrates that ROA and ROE have little bearing on the NPL situation of banks, however an increase in the CRAR ratio can enhance the NPL position of banks. Furthermore, the analysis demonstrates that GDP growth and domestic credit to the private sector are the most influential macroeconomic determinants on the NPL condition of the banking system. In addition, the study gives some recommendations that could be crucial in addressing the NPL situation in the Bangladeshi banking system.

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)0.002
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207