The Impact of Capital Adequacy, Financing Risk, and Profitability on the Market Share of Islamic Banks in Indonesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to analyze the effect of the Capital Adequacy Ratio, Net Non-Performing Financing, and Return on Assets on the market share of Islamic Commercial Banks in Indonesia. Market share is measured as the percentage of Islamic Commercial Banks assets relative to total national banking assets. The study employs a quantitative approach using multiple linear regression analysis with quarterly aggregate data of Islamic Commercial Banks from Q1 2010 to Q4 2024. Data were obtained from the Islamic Banking Statistics published by the Financial Services Authority. The results reveal that Capital Adequacy Ratio and Net Non-Performing Financing significantly influence market share, while Return on Assets does not. Simultaneously, the three variables significantly affect market share with a coefficient of determination of 70.4%. These findings highlight that capital adequacy and financing quality are the primary factors driving the competitiveness of BUS, while profitability Return on Assets does not have a direct impact on market share expansion
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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".