Turnitin Artikel Analisis perbandingan kinerja Keuangan BNI Syariah dan Bank Mandiri Syariah di Masa Pandemi Covid 19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Financial performance as a measurement to determine the process of implementing financial resources owned by the company. Covid-19 pandemic has an impact on the banking sector, resulting in non-performing financing due to debtor arrears as a result of many people losing their jobs and difficulties in paying credit. This study has the objective of analyzing the comparative financial performance between Mandiri Shariah Bank and BNI Shariah Bank during the Covid-19 pandemic, using quarterly financial statements 1, 2, 3 and 4 for 2019 and quarter 1 for 2020 and through Independent testing T-Test sample. There are financial performance differences between BNI Shariah Bank and Mandiri Shariah Bank from ROA, NPF and BOPO aspects, whereas in terms of CAR and ROE aspects show significantly there are no differences performances between BNI Shariah Bank dan Mandiri Shariah Bank. This paper recommends that BNI Syariah pay attention to the ROE and NPF ratio, while to Bank Syariah Mandiri to pay attention to the CAR, ROA and BOPO ratios. \nKata Kunci: Financial Performance, Bank Syariah, Covid-19
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".