Comparative Study of Profitability and Liquidity Analysis of Islamic Banks in Bangladesh

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/334657841
Comparative study of Proﬁtability and Liquidity analysis of

Islamic Banks in Bangladesh
Article · July 2013
CITATIONS READS
0 173
2 authors:
Nazneen Fatema Abdullah Mohammed Ibrahim

International Islamic University Chittagong Northern University Bangladesh
2 PUBLICATIONS 1 CITATION 3 PUBLICATIONS 1 CITATION
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
MBA Dissertation View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Nazneen Fatema on 24 July 2019.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Global Disclosure of Economics and Business, Volume 2, No 1 (2013) ISSN 2305-9168
Comparative study of Profitability and

Liquidity analysis of Islamic Banks in
Bangladesh
Nazneen Fatema & Abdullah Mohammed Ibrahim
Lecturer in Finance, International Islamic University Chittagong, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Assistant Professor of Marketing, Northern University Bangladesh, Dhaka, Bangladesh
ABSTRACT
In this depressed world financial scenario, Islamic banking has emerged as
a strong alternate financial system. Its growth is not restricted to the
Muslim societies but Islamic financial products are also gaining popularity
among non-Muslim countries. The objective of this paper is to scrutinize
and compare the liquidity and profitability performances of five Islamic
banks in Bangladesh in between the period 2005 and 2011. In order to scan
the performances, this study highlights on different standards of liquidity
and profitability measurements logical to Islamic philosophy; such as
liquidity and profitability ratios, liquidity reserves by the banks, net
liquidity gap, profit creation from different sectors of the banks, etc.
Multiple correlations among liquidity and profitability ratios are shown
here. The results of all these measurements are quite apparent. In
particular, among all the independent variables, at 90% confidence level
only investment to total assets is found to be significantly affecting Return
on Assets (a measurement of profitability ratio) for Islami Bank Bangladesh
Ltd., Shahjalal Islami Bank Ltd. and EXIM Bank Ltd., whereas with Return
on Equity for only Shahjalal Islami Bank Ltd. However, multicollinearity
has been found to be a great issue when considering liquidity impact on
profitability for Islami Bank Bangladesh Ltd., EXIM Bank Ltd. and Social
Islami Bank Ltd. Overall P-values suggest that at 95% confidence level
liquidity model proves significant on ROA for Islami Bank Bangladesh Ltd.
and Social Islami Bank Ltd., while on ROE for Islami Bank Bangladesh Ltd.
and Shahjalal Islami Bank Ltd.
Key word: Islamic banking system, Profitability analysis, Liquidity

analysis
JEL Classification Code: G21; G30; M20
INTRODUCTION
Islamic banking system has been expanding so rapidly over the past few years. In addition,
it has been developing significantly around the world including Middle Eastern countries,
Southeast Asian countries, European countries and even in North American countries. It is
Copyright © 2012, Asian Business Consortium | GDEB Page 29

surprising to note that global conventional banks like HSBS, Standard Chartered Bank,
Deutsche Bank, Citibank, etc, have also set up separate Windows/Divisions to structure
Islamic financial products and are offering Islamic banking services to their Muslim clients and
even to those non-Muslim clients who are interested in profit and loss sharing (PLS) financial
instruments (Awan, 2009). The actual role of Islamic bank inherits in promoting and
empowering the banking services and product based on Islamic principles. The main
principles of Islamic banking comprise of prohibition of interest in all forms of transactions,
and undertaking business and trade activities on the basis of fair and legitimate profit (Haron
and Shanmugan, 1997). But according to Islamic principles, reward, i.e. profit without sharing
the risks or hazards in the economic understandings is totally prohibited. Perhaps, the most
significant risk of an Islamic bank is to build a sound liquidity management. So, what should
be the crucial choice of an Islamic bank; whether to take fundamental choice of profit
maximization or to concern more on assurance of liquidity in any banking business under
Islamic principles? Possibly the answer could rise when we examine the real world scenario;
i.e. real Islamic banks and their performance to see how they perform to manage noise
liquidity in accordance with maintaining handsome profitability.
The objective of this study is to enlighten on the comparative liquidity and profitability
performance of Islamic banks and to measure the weight of significance of Islamic banks‟
liquidity on profitability. This study considers five (5) among seven (7) Islamic banks
currently incorporating in Bangladesh along with their seven year‟s data. From that ground
the study is rational to meet the need of different users.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Islamic Banking System is defined as those banks that claim to follow Shari‟a (Islamic law) in
their business transactions, Shari‟a requires these transactions to be in lawful (Halal) form and
prohibits transactions that involving interest (Riba) (Maali, Casson, and Napier, 2006). The core
concept of Islamic banking is to provide services to its customers free from interest and the
giving and taking of interest (riba) is prohibited in all transactions (Lewis and Algaoud, 2001).
Prohibition of interest (riba) makes Islamic banking system differ from conventional banking
system. In other words, the main difference between Islamic and conventional banks is the use
of money. In conventional banks, money is used as a commodity that is bought and sold
through the interest‟s usage according to Alkassim (2005).
Rejection of interest‟s usage raises the question of the alternatives of interest mechanism
adopted in Islamic system. If dealing with interest rate is prohibited, how Islamic banking
works? Here Profit-Loss Sharing System (PLS) takes the place as a method of resource
allocation; it will be explained deeply in the following section. Beside the absence of interest
in all financial transactions, there are religious rules or principles should each Islamic
financial institution applies in investment behavior to achieve Islamic norms. There are four
main areas where the Islamic banks find it difficult to finance under profit-loss sharing (PLS)
scheme: a) participating in long-term low yield projects, b) financing the small businessman,
c) granting non-participating loans to running businesses and , d) financing government
borrowing (Ali and Howlader, 2005).
A study by Haron (2004) found that liquidity, total expenditures, funds invested in Islamic
securities, and the percentage of the profit-sharing ratio between the bank and the borrower
of funds are highly correlated with the level of total income received by the Islamic banks.
Similar effects are also found for external factors such as interest rates, market share and size
of the banks. Other determinants such as funds deposited into current accounts, total capital

and reserves, the percentage of profit sharing between bank and depositors, and money
supply also play a major role in influencing the profitability of Islamic banks.
While making significant progress in return on assets (ROA) and return on equity (ROE), the
liquidity performance of Bank Islam Malaysia (BIMB, the single full-fledged Islamic bank in
Malaysia) between 1984-89 and 1990-97 in various measures such as cash deposit ratio, loan-
deposit ratio and current ratio showed neither deterioration nor improvement (Samad and
Hassan, 1999). Chowdhury and Ahmed (2009) investigated that total deposits of Islamic
Bank Bangladesh Ltd. was higher in comparison to some non-Islamic banks during 2002 to
2006 period. Saifullah (2010) argued that Islamic banks in Bangladesh are superior to
Conventional banks after an overall assessment of financial performance including liquidity
and profitability position.
Sudin Haron (1996), while discussing external determinants of the profitability of Islamic
Banks, argued that conventional banking theory postulates that the bigger the market, the
more profit the banks earn, this theory is not necessarily true for Islamic banks. Islamic
banks perform well due to efficient use of capital in short-term financing. Similarly, Islamic
banks in a competitive market are better managed than those in the monopolistic markets.
This finding is also in line with general assumption. Those businesses which operate in a
competitive environment must be alert to the changes and produce innovative strategies and
policies, if they wish to remain in the market. In contrast, conventional banks perform better
in monopolistic environment as competitive environment involve them in moral hazard and
adverse selection, causing high rate of default and less profitability.
Bashir and Hassan (2004) research study is a comprehensive piece of literature covering
every aspect of examining profitability of Islamic banks. Similar to Bashir (2000), Bashir and
Hassan (2004) studied the determinants of Islamic baking profitability between 1994 and
2001 for 21 countries. Their findings show that Islamic banks have a better capital asset ratio
as compared to commercial banks which means that Islamic banks are well capitalized. Also,
their paper used internal and external banks characteristics to determine profitability as well
as economic measures, financial structure variables, and country variables. Bashir and
Hassan also found total assets to have a negative relationship with profitability which
amazingly means that smaller banks are more profitable. In addition, during an economic
boom, banks profitability seems to improve because there are fewer non-performing loans.
Inflation, on the other hand, does not have any effect on Islamic bank profitability. The
results also indicate that overhead expenses for Islamic banks have a positive relation with
profitability which means if expenses increase; profitability also increases.
The essence of liquidity management problem arises from the fact that there is a trade-off
between liquidity and profitability and mismatch between demand and supply (Khan and
Ahmed, 2001). While the bank has no control over the sources of fund (deposits), it can control
the use of funds. Most banks now keep protective reserves on top of planned reserves. Excess
liquidity is reported in nearly all Islamic banks (Ali and Howlader, 2005). Due to unavailability of
local capital market, Islamic banking sectors have been suffering from investing idle fund in
liquid venture (Rashid and Nishat, 2009). Surplus liquidity with Islamic banks cannot be easily
transferred to conventional banks since the Islamic banks do not accept interest; however there is
room for exchange of surplus funds among the Islamic banks on a Mudarabah / Musharakah
basis. The greater the number of Islamic banks and wider their activities, the greater will be the
scope of cooperation in this field. When making comparisons across firms (or over time), it is
useful to control for differences in their resource base (Foster, 2002). At the same time liquidity of
those resources/ assets is of paramount significance for banks (Maheshwari and Maheshwari,

2002). Akhtar, Ali and Sadaqat (2011) found positive but insignificant relationship of size of the
bank and net-working capital to net assets with liquidity risk in Islamic banks. In addition return
on assets (ROE) in Islamic banks is found to be positive and significant with liquidity risk at 10%
significance level. While there are lots of works being done on performance comparison between
Islamic banks and Conventional banks, to the best of my knowledge, not many works have yet
focused on performance evaluation among Islamic banks in Bangladesh in particular. Therefore,
the current study emphasizes on liquidity and profitability performance evaluation of Islamic
banks in Bangladesh and leaves lots of rooms for upcoming researchers to improve and enrich
the current issue in future.
MEASURES OF VARIABLES
The banks are compared in this study based on multiple liquidity and profitability variables.
Banks‟ liquidity position is compared through examining the liquidity reserves kept by the
banks, performance of liquidity ratios and the results of net liquidity gap. Profitability of banks is
compared through scanning the ability of creating profits from different sectors, as well as
through performance of profitability ratios. Coefficient of variation (CV) is defined as the ratio of
the standard deviation to the mean. To compare the influence of Islamic bank‟s liquidity on
profitability using multiple regression analysis, variables were assigned into two sections :
Dependent Variables (Profitability Ratios)
 Return on Assets (ROA) = Net Income after Taxes/ Total Assets
 Return on Equity (ROE) = Net Income after Taxes/ Total Equity Capital Account
Independent Variables (Liquidity Ratios)
 Cash & Due from Banks to Total Assets = Cash & Due from Banks/ Total Assets
 Cash & Due from Banks to Deposits = Cash & Due from Banks/ Total Deposits
 Investment (Loans & Advances) to Total Assets = Investment/ Total Assets
 Investment (Loans & Advances) to Deposits = Investment/ Total Deposits
To do the analysis following two hypotheses were designed:
 There is an insignificant relationship between liquidity and profitability; (null hypothesis)
 There is a significant relationship between liquidity and profitability; (alternative hypothesis)
DATA COLLECTION & SAMPLE DESIGN

Among 7 (seven) Islamic banks in Bangladesh, 5 (five) largest Islamic banks have been
selected for conducting this research1. This study basically depends on the secondary data.
The data used here are compiled from bank‟s each year annual report during 2005 to 2011.
The selected banks for this study include the following:
Table : List of Selected Banks
No. Name of the Selected banks DSE Trading Code**
1. Islami Bank Bangladesh Limited ISLAMIBANK
2. Shahjalal Islami Bank Limited SHAHJABANK
3. Al-Arafah Islami Bank Limited ALARABANK
4. EXIM Bank Limited EXIMBANK
5. Social Islami Bank Limited SIBL
1 Other two Islamic banks have been excluded from this study as because their history is not that
long as the selected banks.
**Throughout this study the banks‟ names are presented according to their Dhaka Stock Exchange
(DSE) Trading Code.
DATA ANALYSIS
Different financial and statistical tools and techniques, namely average, standard deviation,
coefficient of variation, Pearson‟s correlation coefficients (correlation matrix), multiple
regressions etc. have been used here to analyze the collected data and make the comparison.
In addition descriptive analyses of all statistical findings are also included in this study.
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS

1. Liquidity Performance Analysis of Islamic BankS
Simply stating, liquidity is the ability to meet any instant need in the form of cash or cash
equivalent by selling assets; as we know cash is the most liquid asset by its nature. For bank,
liquidity is the ability to meet its financial obligations as they come due. It illustrates that a
bank must keep a sufficient amount in reserves to cover any unavoidable circumstance of
economy. Islamic bank is not an exception in this regard.
1.1 Liquidity Maintenance Requirement of Islamic Banks in Bangladesh
Each Islamic Bank is required to maintain a minimum amount of their total time and
demand deposits with Bangladesh (Central) Bank in two different categories, such as, Cash
Reserve Requirement (CRR) and Statutory Liquidity Requirement (SLR) 2. Below, we will see
how these requirements were met by all five selected Islamic banks.
Table 1.1: Year-wise CRR maintenance by Islamic Banks (2005-2011)
Actual Reserve (%) Required
Year ISLAMI SHAHJA ALARA EXIM Reserve (%)
SIBL
BANK BANK BANK BANK
2005 14.65% 5.94% 6.03% 9.51% 6.30%
2006 16.13% 5.36% 6.00% 5.91% 6.57% 5.00%
2007 6.17% 5.54% 6.56% 7.72% 7.05%
2008 10.67% 6.09% 6.14% 7.19% 6.80%
2009 13.23% 5.53% 8.27% 9.54% 6.80%
Average 12.17% 5.69% 6.60% 7.97% 6.70%
2010 11.39% 8.08% 5.66% 8.26% 9.81% 6.00%
2011 9.59% 8.22% 7.13% 8.44% 7.38%
Average 10.49% 8.15% 6.40% 8.35% 8.60%
Source: Bangladesh Bank Annual Report, 2005-2011
Table 1.2: Year-wise SLR maintenance by Islamic Banks (2005-2011)
Actual Reserve (%) Required
Year ISLAMI SHAHJA ALARA EXIM Reserve (%)
SIBL
BANK BANK BANK BANK
2005 20.17% 11.57% 12.07% 16.67% 11.57%
2006 20.63% 10.59% 12.01% 12.25% 11.14% 10.00%
2007 21.27% 12.82% 13.11% 12.84% 10.95%
2As per section 25 & 33 of the Bank Company Act 1991, the requirement for Islamic banks‟ CRR is
6.00% and SLR is 11.50% (including 6.00% CRR), dated 15.12.2010. However, till the financial year
2009, the requirement of CRR & SLR was 5.00% and 10.00% respectively.
2008 16.58% 12.45% 12.27% 11.21% 10.64%

2009 19.40% 11.02% 14.19% 13.26% 11.85%
Average 19.61% 11.69% 12.73% 13.25% 11.23%
2010 17.33% 13.98% 11.50% 11.50% 14.90% 11.50%
2011 15.78% 14.50% 12.87% 11.70% 13.86%
Average 16.56% 14.24% 12.19% 11.60% 14.38%
Source: Bangladesh Bank Annual Report, 2005-2011
From the above two tables (Table 1.1 & Table 1.2) it is certain that all the banks meet their
CRR and SLR requirements quite successfully from the year 2005 to 2011, except that one
deficit in CRR by ALARABANK in 2010. Banks‟ average3 values are telling the similar
stories also. By varying CRR, the central bank can either broaden the monetary base or
curtail part of the commercial banks‟ money creating powers. Among all, ISLAMIBANK‟s
CRR tells the best story, except the year 2007, when EXIMBANK has the best performance.
Actually, CRR is only a portion of SLR (a prescribed percentage of deposits in eligible
securities), which the banks need to maintain in cash with central bank4. This is in fact,
closely related to short-term liquidity requirements. Because vault cash needs are
determined by customer preferences, according to their variation in payment pattern and
need of the bank‟s customers and local businesses. However, there are all surplus results in
maintenance of SLR by the banks. Here, also ISLAMIBANK is representing the best
performance; for some years, far beyond the requirements.
1.2 Analysis of Liquidity Ratios of Islamic Banks
Liquidity ratios indicate the ability of the firm to meet recurring financial obligations.
Actually, through liquidity ratios, we can measure the degree of banks‟ access to meet the
liquidity through a quick response to immediate cash need.
Table 1.3: Year-wise Liquidity Ratio Performance (2005-2011)
Ratios Year ISLAMI SHAHJA ALARA EXIM
SIBL
BANK BANK BANK BANK
Cash and Due from Banks to Total Assets Ratio
2005 16.44% 21.83% 20.15% 13.75% 20.49%
2006 16.54% 23.24% 13.02% 11.34% 15.01%
2007 11.02% 21.27% 15.58% 11.47% 25.68%
2008 16.01% 20.36% 15.46% 12.83% 22.63%
2009 16.23% 17.82% 15.32% 12.90% 23.48%
2010 13.83% 16.11% 17.58% 10.14% 21.03%
2011 14.44% 16.58% 17.74% 15.54% 20.21%
Average 14.93% 19.60% 16.41% 12.57% 21.22%
CV 12.51% 13.09% 12.92% 13.13% 14.59%
Cash and Due from Banks to Deposit Ratio
2005 18.74% 25.84% 26.54% 16.37% 24.73%
3
Average values have been calculated here, considering two different periods (2005-2009 &
2010-2011), because of the differences of requirements for Islamic bank‟s CRR & SLR by the
Central Bank.
4
Dated 01 December, 2010, as per Bangladesh Bank MPD Circular No. 04 & 05, Islamic
banks‟ CRR should not be less than 5.50% in any day. This requirement was 4.00% till 2009.
2006 18.76% 27.41% 16.58% 13.53% 18.28%

2007 12.68% 26.66% 20.44% 14.22% 32.08%
2008 18.45% 25.24% 20.38% 15.25% 27.99%
2009 18.49% 22.12% 19.38% 14.55% 29.72%
2010 15.67% 20.16% 24.49% 12.07% 25.87%
2011 16.44% 21.32% 22.28% 18.71% 25.52%
Average 17.03% 24.11% 21.44% 14.96% 26.31%
CV 12.39% 10.97% 14.33% 13.19% 15.44%
Investment (Loans & Advances) to Total Assets Ratio
2005 76.21% 73.30% 74.82% 77.25% 74.15%
2006 75.59% 72.70% 81.54% 78.10% 77.76%
2007 75.73% 72.73% 75.89% 78.04% 66.98%
2008 77.99% 72.80% 75.91% 78.36% 66.93%
2009 77.12% 74.61% 74.48% 82.34% 66.48%
2010 79.62% 77.97% 71.09% 82.51% 66.49%
2011 78.58% 75.16% 70.94% 76.77% 63.87%
Average 77.26% 74.18% 74.95% 79.05% 68.95%
CV 1.84% 2.42% 4.41% 2.77% 6.73%
Investment (Loans & Advances) to Deposit Ratio
2005 86.89% 86.77% 98.55% 91.97% 89.53%
2006 85.77% 85.77% 103.86% 93.18% 94.70%
2007 87.13% 91.15% 99.55% 96.75% 83.67%
2008 89.87% 90.23% 100.11% 93.14% 82.79%
2009 87.85% 92.62% 94.21% 92.92% 84.15%
2010 90.17% 97.58% 99.06% 98.26% 81.78%
2011 89.47% 96.69% 89.07% 92.42% 80.64%
Average 88.16% 91.54% 97.77% 94.09% 85.32%
CV 1.78% 4.56% 4.52% 2.37% 5.44%
Source: Calculating values using Bangladesh Bank Annual Report, 2005-2011
In the above (Table 1.3) four liquidity ratios have been calculated, considering banks‟ last
seven years performance. Here, as per variation in percentages (CV), ISLAMIBANK is
showing the best performance in almost all the cases except in their cash and due from banks
to total deposits ratio, where SHAHJABANK is representing the best result. Below, we will
see another liquidity determinant of Islamic bank, seven year‟s liquid assets5 of the banks in
amount (Table 1.4), and the percentage of those liquid assets to total assets.
Table 1.4: Liquid Assets of the Banks During 2005-2011
(Amount in Million Taka)
Year ISLAMI SHAHJA ALARA EXIM
SIBL
BANK BANK BANK BANK
2005 23,730.70 3,353.41 3,090.76 6,135.74 4,670.83
2006 28,382.08 5,459.00 2,781.90 6,738.55 3,456.53
5 Liquid assets are defined as cash, interbank deposits and government-issued and insured
securities.
2007 41,430.73 6,830.57 5,502.19 8,158.08 6,804.35

2008 44,461.50 10,008.30 7,052.26 11,030.74 7,495.11
2009 56,276.04 11,600.28 8,931.97 12,749.03 10,136.60
2010 57,401.96 14,093.62 15,249.90 14,216.69 12,653.80
2011 70,136.38 19,773.97 20,367.13 22,950.34 19,111.31
Average 45,974.20 10,159.88 8,996.59 11,711.31 9,189.79
CV 0.33 0.51 0.67 0.46 0.54
Highest percentage of liquid assets goes for ISLAMIBANK as per their last seven years‟
performance in comparison to others (Table 1.4). In fact, their coefficient of variation in
maintaining those assets also reflects least fluctuation. But, the result instantly changes when
we measure the proportion of liquid assets to total assets. Here, SIBL represents the best
performance, if we ignore the year 2006. In 2006 SHAHJABANK experiences the best
percentage of liquid assets to total assets.
1.3 Analysis of Net Liquidity Gap of Islamic Banks
In this section, we have analyzed the banks‟ last seven years net liquidity gap6 (Table 1.5).
Table 1.5: Year-wise Net Liquidity Gap (NLG) During 2005-
2011 (Amount in Million Taka)
SIBL
BANK BANK BANK BANK
2005 8,216 742 1,220 1,912 923
2006 10,007 1,205 1,690 3,112 981
2007 11,220 2,788 2,037 4,043 1,665
2008 14,060 3,605 2,706 4,989 1,867
2009 20,106 4,927 3,565 6,717 3,556
2010 23,494 6,748 7,821 12,475 4,199
2011 27,800 7,917 9,593 14,484 9,412
Average 16,415 3,990 4,090 6,819 3,229
CV 0.42 0.63 0.74 0.65 0.86
To overcome volatile liability, ISLAMIBANK generates most excess value in their assets
among all the banks (Table 1.5). ISLAMIBANK‟s NLG experiences little variation in between
the selected years, concerning the coefficient of variation. If we take a closer look at the
individual banks‟ growth rate of NLG (year by year), then it is clear that there are lots of ups
and downs in performance by all the banks. However, among all, perhaps the best growth
rate can be found in the year of 2006-2007 by SHAHJABANK; climbing top up the line
leaving all other banks behind them.
2 Profitability Performance Analyses of Islamic BankS
In Islam, profit is simply a reward of taking risk. So, it should be a natural outcome of the
fair play of the twin forces of demand and supply in the market. Most probably, this unique
feature leads them to do well even in financial crisis. But have they all been maintaining a
6The term Net Liquidity Gap (NLG), often called the net liquid assets of a firm, is the excess
value of the firm's liquid assets over its volatile liabilities.
continuous improvement in profit making performance over the last seven years? That we
will see in next two sub-sections.
2.1 Analysis of Profit Creation and Allocation from Different Sectors of the Banks
Profit, the decisive goal of Islamic bank, is an important signal, not only to the entrepreneurs
or shareholders but also to other providers of finance to a bank. Profits may generate from
different sectors of the bank. Bank‟s return on investment is shown under (Table 2.1).
Table 2.1: Profit Receipt on Investment During 2005-2011
SIBL
BANK BANK BANK BANK
2005 8,336 1,351 1,118 2,461 1,678
2006 11,158 2,145 1,701 3,808 1,899
2007 14,572 2,973 2,243 4,943 2,093
2008 19,544 4,236 3,502 6,575 2,732
2009 21,371 5,531 4,005 8,147 3,079
2010 24,766 6,417 4,244 9,606 3,886
2011 32,020 10,108 8,975 13,123 6,922
Average 18,824 4,680 3,684 6,952 3,184
CV 0.40 0.59 0.66 0.49 0.53
ISLAMIBANK has most receipt and least variation on investment over the seven years'
study period, in comparison to other banks. On the other hand, the fluctuation in profit on
investment is greater for ALARABANK. Each year, a portion of each Islamic bank‟s profit
must go for deposit amount (Table 2.2).
Table 2.2: Profit Paid on Deposits During 2005-2011
SIBL
BANK BANK BANK BANK
2005 5,885 944 551 1,822 1,400
2006 8,019 1,491 820 2,954 1,597
2007 9,411 1,960 1,629 3,588 1,705
2008 12,162 2,962 2,220 4,807 2,071
2009 13,077 4,200 2,667 5,943 2,064
2010 14,472 4,658 3,134 6,020 2,435
2011 18,401 7,376 5,543 9,358 4,541
Average 11,632 3,370 2,366 4,927 2,259
CV 0.34 0.61 0.66 0.47 0.44
On an average ISLAMIBANK is subject to high payment of profit on deposits, while SIBL is
just showing the reverse performance. Profit may also be generated from bank‟s operating
activities, referred to as operating profit (Table 2.3) 7.
7 Operating profit is calculated by deducting the total operating expenses from total
operating income.
Table 2.3: Operating Profit During 2005-2011

SIBL
BANK BANK BANK BANK
2005 2,869 502 548 1,176 214
2006 3,315 845 970 1,379 296
2007 5,162 1,315 756 1,908 481
2008 7,952 1,810 1,528 2,518 787
2009 7,781 2,041 1,730 3,182 1,064
2010 9,570 3,529 3,161 5,894 1,639
2011 12,732 2,998 3,655 3,956 2,769
Average 7,054 1,863 1,764 2,859 1,036
CV 0.46 0.55 0.63 0.54 0.81
Here, SIBL‟s operating profit fluctuates so much over the years, resulting in the lowest
amount on an average among all. In contrast, ISLAMIBANK is indicating the best result on
an average, as well as in variation over the years. However, all the earnings of a bank are
subject to taxation before calculating the final net profit (Table 2.4).
Table 2.4: Provision for Taxation During 2005-2011
SIBL
BANK BANK BANK BANK
2005 1,037 210 215 508 40
2006 1,508 324 385 549 63
2007 2,353 569 236 688 118
2008 3,673 748 591 893 153
2009 3,114 725 730 1,108 295
2010 3,991 888 870 1,833 494
2011 5,506 1,219 1,520 1,466 818
Average 3,026 669 650 1,006 283
CV 0.47 0.47 0.65 0.46 0.93
Tax imposed on Islamic bank is against its philosophy and poses the greatest difficulty.
Profit, which is an earned income, are taxed twice, once from seller to bank and then from
bank to buyer in trade financing. Here, on an average provision for taxation is highest for
ISLAMIBANK and lowest for SIBL. The variation in tax provision among all is lowest for
EXIMBANK. Now we will take a look at the net profit after taxation, the amount determines
the banks‟ ultimate value to all partners related to the bank (Table 2.5).
Table 2.5: Net Profit after Taxation During 2005-2011
SIBL
BANK BANK BANK BANK
2005 1,126 256 263 555 14

2006 1,401 463 470 650 58

2007 1,427 647 347 931 150
2008 2,675 818 668 1,097 202
2009 3,404 1,071 859 1,694 432
2010 4,463 2,072 1,920 3,476 643
2011 4,841 1,168 1,772 2,009 1,083
Average 2,762 928 900 1,487 369
CV 0.51 0.60 0.70 0.64 0.97
In spite of the controversy regarding tax laws on Islamic banks‟ profit, all the banks have
been maintaining attractive amount, if we disregard some bad performances in early years.
It is clear from the above table that ISLAMIBANK generates more profit in all selected years
in respect to all other banks. The fluctuation in generating net profit after tax is greater for
SIBL, reflecting greater risk for partners of the bank.
2.2 Analysis of Profitability Ratios of Islamic Banks
Profitability ratios are the greater indicators to measure banks‟ access over controlling
expenses and generating profit (Table 2.6).
Table 2.6: Year-wise Profitability Ratio Performance
(2005-2011)
Ratios Year ISLAMI SHAHJA ALARA EXIM
SIBL
BANK BANK BANK BANK
Net Operating Margin (NOM)8
2005 2.33% 3.47% 3.57% 3.49% 1.05%
2006 2.21% 3.96% 4.54% 3.30% 1.50%
2007 2.70% 4.64% 2.51% 3.71% 1.96%
2008 3.44% 4.00% 3.90% 3.68% 2.64%
2009 2.80% 3.46% 3.57% 3.82% 2.66%
2010 2.89% 4.48% 4.19% 5.21% 2.97%
2011 3.27% 2.80% 3.53% 3.05% 3.28%
Average 2.81% 3.83% 3.69% 3.75% 2.29%
CV 14.91% 15.45% 16.13% 17.22% 32.84%
Net Profit Margin (NPM)9
2005 23.94% 37.81% 29.15% 34.46% 2.67%
2006 23.27% 43.20% 34.74% 32.29% 9.12%
2007 17.22% 39.72% 26.17% 33.00% 16.62%
2008 22.16% 35.20% 30.84% 30.90% 15.64%
2009 27.61% 36.70% 32.56% 38.15% 25.12%
2010 28.51% 42.72% 42.77% 45.12% 24.42%
2011 24.21% 25.23% 34.58% 31.18% 26.13%
Average 23.85% 37.23% 32.97% 35.01% 17.10%
8 NOM is calculated by using the formula, Total Operating Profit / Total Assets.
9 NPM is calculated by using the formula, Net Income after Taxes / Total Operating Income.
CV 14.45% 15.08% 14.82% 13.46% 48.10%

Return on Deposits (ROD)10
2005 1.04% 2.09% 2.26% 1.96% 0.08%
2006 1.06% 2.56% 2.80% 1.86% 0.36%
2007 0.86% 2.86% 1.51% 2.24% 0.76%
2008 1.34% 2.24% 2.25% 1.90% 0.84%
2009 1.39% 2.26% 2.24% 2.29% 1.37%
2010 1.53% 3.29% 3.55% 3.66% 1.43%
2011 1.42% 1.40% 2.15% 1.86% 1.62%
Average 1.23% 2.39% 2.39% 2.25% 0.92%
CV 18.49% 23.31% 24.49% 26.51% 57.96%
Return on Assets (ROA)11
2005 0.92% 1.77% 1.71% 1.65% 0.07%
2006 0.93% 2.17% 2.20% 1.56% 0.29%
2007 0.75% 2.28% 1.15% 1.81% 0.61%
2008 1.16% 1.81% 1.71% 1.60% 0.68%
2009 1.22% 1.82% 1.77% 2.03% 1.08%
2010 1.35% 2.63% 2.55% 3.07% 1.17%
2011 1.24% 1.09% 1.71% 1.55% 1.28%
Average 1.08% 1.94% 1.83% 1.90% 0.74%
CV 18.72% 23.33% 22.25% 26.76% 57.42%
Return on Equity (ROE)12
2005 13.70% 34.46% 21.55% 29.04% 1.51%
2006 14.00% 38.44% 27.81% 20.90% 5.88%
2007 12.72% 23.21% 17.05% 23.03% 9.01%
2008 19.02% 22.68% 24.70% 21.98% 10.82%
2009 16.93% 21.73% 24.10% 25.22% 12.14%
2010 19.00% 30.71% 24.55% 27.86% 15.31%
2011 17.42% 14.76% 18.47% 13.87% 11.51%
Average 16.11% 26.57% 22.60% 23.13% 9.45%
CV 15.01% 28.79% 15.56% 20.26% 44.47%
Profitability ratios indicate how much profit is produced in terms of income and capital
generated from different sectors of the bank (Table 2.6). Here, on an average, NOM is higher
for SHAHJABANK among all, showing highest operating profit against total assets. The
smallest fluctuation (CV) exists in ISLAMIBANK‟s NOM. For NPM, the best performance
also goes to SHAHJABANK as per their average performance over seven year‟s period. But
during the same period, EXIMBANK‟s NPM is showing the lowest variation in percentage
over the years. ROD can be a great concern for potential depositors. This ratio shows
10 ROD is calculated by using the formula, Net Income after Taxes / Total Deposits.
11 ROA is calculated by using the formula, Net Income after Taxes / Total Assets.
12
ROE is calculated by using the formula, Net Income after Taxes / Total Shareholders’
Equity.
percentage return of each taka of customers‟ deposits. Here, the depositors‟ choice may
either SHAHJABANK or ALARABANK, having the highest percentage return on deposits
among all the banks. ISLAMIBANK has least variation in ROD over the study period.
Actually ROD indicates how effectively the management of a bank is able to turn deposits
into net earnings. Generally, the higher the ROA, the higher should be the ROD and vice
versa. That is why as the case in ROD; SHAHJABANK is also showing the best performance
on an average in percentage return on assets (ROA). As expected, the slightest rise and fall
over the study period reflects in ISLAMIBANK‟s ROA. A higher positive percentage in ROA
proves greater efficiency of financial instructions by the banks‟ management. Like ROA,
ROE is another indicator for managerial efficiency. As in earlier cases, here also
SHAHJABANK carries highest average percentage return on equity (ROE), while
ISLAMIBANK has little fluctuation in ROE in comparison to other banks.
3. LIQUIDITY AND PROFITABILITY TRADE-OFF IN ISLAMIC BANKS

There is a trade-off between liquidity and profitability; gaining more of one ordinarily means
giving up some of the other. However, in this section, we will see this relationship through
multiple correlation and regression analysis between liquidity and profitability ratios
(shown in Table 1.3 & Table 2.6).
3.1 Correlation Matrix
The correlation coefficients are stated in Table 4.12. This gives information on the degree of
correlation between all the liquidity and profitability ratios to each other.
Table 3.1: Correlation Matrix of Financial Ratios used in the Analysis
Islami Bank Bangladesh Limited
C&D-TA C&D-Dep Invst-TA Invst-Dep NOM NPM ROD ROA ROE
C&D-TA 1
C&D-Dep .999** 1
Invst-TA -.050 -.057 1
Invst-Dep -.154 -.145 .943** 1
NOM -.166 -.143 .708 .875** 1
NPM .507 .482 .606 .368 .047 1
ROD .264 .255 .910** .806* .619 .801* 1
ROA .267 .256 .909** .795* .593 .820* .999** 1
ROE .209 .213 .907** .899** .772* .610 .940** .930** 1
Shahjalal Islami Bank Limited
C&D-TA 1
C&D-Dep .984** 1
Invst-TA -.863* -.911** 1
Invst-Dep -.958** -.907** .831* 1
NOM .250 .283 .001 -.078 1
NPM .433 .362 -.019 -.394 .789* 1
ROD .070 .052 .275 .041 .927** .878** 1
ROA .160 .128 .216 -.062 .916** .926** .993** 1
ROE .597 .466 -.127 -.629 .378 .805* .493 .588 1
Al-Arafah Islami Bank Limited
C&D-TA 1
C&D-Dep .974** 1
Invst-TA -.691 -.687 1
Invst-Dep -.422 -.273 .740 1
NOM -.233 -.168 .253 .324 1
NPM .020 .124 -.357 -.061 .701 1

ROD .022 .160 -.124 .255 .826* .925** 1
ROA -.046 .070 -.060 .227 .881** .923** .989** 1
ROE -.457 -.370 .487 .543 .890** .485 .686 .736 1
EXIM Bank Limited
C&D-TA 1
C&D-Dep .981** 1
Invst-TA -.558 -.678 1
Invst-Dep -.778* -.706 .498 1
NOM -.717 -.741 .796* .805* 1
NPM -.572 -.637 .864* .640 .913** 1
ROD -.655 -.666 .768* .831* .969** .941** 1
ROA -.634 -.665 .819* .786* .969** .964** .995** 1
ROE -.532 -.587 .511 .315 .619 .631 .506 .524 1
Social Islami Bank Limited
C&D-TA 1
C&D-Dep .996** 1
Invst-TA -.697 -.736 1
Invst-Dep -.691 -.716 .984** 1
NOM .278 .335 -.862* -.836* 1
NPM .356 .422 -.843* -.781* .939** 1
ROD .300 .363 -.849* -.802* .962** .988** 1
ROA .300 .361 -.849* -.806* .964** .987** 1.00** 1
ROE .338 .384 -.778* -.756* .916** .927** .907** .916** 1
Pearson Correlation Coefficient
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Source: Calculating values using SPSS V 15.0
The correlation matrix above shows there is a strong correlation (positive/negative,

somewhere near to 1.00) among many of the liquidity and profitability variables from two
different significant level, 0.01 & 0.05 (Table 3.1). However, the matrix not only showing
results of correlation between liquidity and profitability ratios but also the correlation in
respect to each liquidity and profitability indicators themselves. This opportunity has been
tested with the Pearson correlation coefficient test. The figures, stating the relationships are
quite well defining the effect of changes in one liquidity variable to another profitability
variable. The most significant correlation may be observed in ISLAMIBANK‟s (1%
significance level) liquidity and profitability ratios among all the selected banks.
CONCLUSION
This study dealt with multiple liquidity and profitability indicators of Islamic banks
throughout the performance assessment. It also tries to focus on each bank‟s liquidity
strength and its relationship to profitability based on correlation matrix. After overall
comparison it is clear that for most cases of liquidity and profitability measurements Islami
Bank Bangladesh Ltd.‟s performance beats all, as they show least fluctuation in performance
over the study period. However, all the Islamic banks selected for this paper, are very much
alert of meeting their liquidity reserve with Central Bank as reflected in their CRR and SLR
maintenance over the study period.
Depositors are always in favour of higher SLR, which not only improves the risk factor but
also provides safety to the depositors‟ money; facilitate comfort ability when they keep
deposits in an Islamic bank. While, discussing about the depositors‟ need, the short-term
liquidity requirement, banks should not ignore long-term liquidity planning also. A bank‟s
long-term liquidity planning includes forecasting funds needs over the coming year and
beyond if necessary. Here, a bank‟s liquidity performance may be viewed to the extent to
which it ensures appropriate use of funds, which illustrates bank‟s ability to satisfying
depositors‟ demand while accommodating legitimate investment requests. To support their
depositors‟ demand, banks need money, or in other sense the power to create money. That‟s
why Akkas (1982, p.127) suggested that commercial banks should be compelled to keep
reserves up to the full amount of their deposits, a reserve of 100 percent. But in doing so,
they cannot ignore their potential investment opportunities.
Central bank provides a range to all commercial banks including Islamic banks, in the form of
CRR and SLR, which each bank must maintain to meet both short-term and long-term liquidity
crisis. Though Islamic banking and its products are totally interest free, aiming to create a non-
inflationary economy, the performance on average over the last 7 (seven) years for all selected
Islamic banks, reflect their success in liquidity maintenance with Bangladesh (Central) Bank.
A lower profitability may arise due to the lack of control over the expenses (Maheshwari and
Maheshwari, 2002, p.38). If we summarise the profitability performance in accordance with
the ratios that are evaluated in this study, then the best result goes to Shahjalal Islami Bank.
According to multiple regression results overall liquidity variables are found most
significant with Return on Assets (ROA) of Islami Bank Bangladesh Ltd. and Return on
Equity (ROE) of Shahjalal Islami Bank Ltd. among all. At the mean time none of Al-Arafah
Islami Bank Ltd.‟s liquidity (independent) variables is found significant to any of the two
dependent (ROA/ROE) variables. At 90% confidence level liquidity variable investment to
total asset results in only statistically significant independent variable with ROA for Islami
Bank Bangladesh Ltd., Shahjalal Islami Bank Ltd. and EXIM Bank Ltd., while with ROE for
only Shahjalal Islami Bank Ltd. among all the liquidity variables used in the analysis.
It should be addressed that this paper marks an introductory attempt to empirically make
the comparison among Islamic banks in Bangladesh. In interpreting all the results, this study
uses a reduced model (liquidity and profitability with only 7 year‟s data). However, in any
affair, current study serves as initial movement, leaving spaces for future researches to
enhance and enrich its outlook.
REFERENCES
Ahmed, N., Ahmed, Z. and Naqvi, I. H., 2011, ‘Liquidity Risk and Islamic Banks: Evidence from
Pakistan’, Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business, vol.1, issue.9, September,
pp.99-102.
Akhtar, M. F., Ali, K. and Sadaqat, S., 2011, ‘Liquidity Risk Management: A Comparative Study
between Conventional and Islamic Banks of Pakistan’, Interdisciplinary Journal of
Research in Business, vol.1, issue.1, January, pp.35-44.
Akhter, Dr. W., Raza, A., Orangzab and Akram, M., 2011, ‘Efficiency and Performance of Islamic
Banking: The Case of Pakistan’, Far East Journal of Psychology and Business, vol.2, no.2,
February, pp.54-70.
Akkas, Ali, 1982, ‘Problem of Credit Creation by Commercial Banks in the Islamic Framework’,
Thoughts on Islamic Banking, 1st Edition, February, Islamic Economics Research
Bureau, Dhaka, pp.127-129.
Al-Arafah Islami Bank Ltd., 2005-2011, Annual Report 2005-2011, Al-Arafah Islami Bank Ltd.,
Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Ali, S. A. and Howlader, R. A., 2005, Banking Law and Practice, 1st Edition, November, Osman
Gani of Agamee Prakashani, Bangla Bazar, Dhaka, pp.110-126, 390-419.
Faisal A. Alkassim (2005), ‚The Profitability of Islamic and Conventional Banking in the GCC
Countries: A Comparative Study‛, Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business,
vol.II, issue.1, June, pp.15-24.
Anup, A. H., 2009, ‘Economic Crisis and the Overview’, New Straits Times, 21 March 2012.
Athanasoglou, Panayiotis P., Delis, Matthaios D. and Staikouras, Christos K., 2008,
‘Determinants of Bank Profitability in South Eastern European Region’, MPRA Paper No.
10274, September 2008 viewed 9 May 2012,
<http://mpra.ub.unimuenchen.de/10274/1/MPRA_paper_10274.pdf>.
Awan, A.G., 2009, ‘Comparison of Islamic and Conventional Banking in Pakistan’, viewed September 28, 2012,
http://www.scribd.com/doc/37430208/ISlamic-Banking
http://www.ciitlahore.edu.pk/pl/abrc/Proceedings/All%20papers/COMPARISON%20
OF%20ISLAMIC%20AND%20CONVENTIONAL(Abdul%20Ghafoor%20Awan).pdf>.
Bashir, Abdel-Hameed M., 1999, ‘Risk and Profitability Measures in Islamic Banks: The Case of two
Sudanese Banks’, Islamic Economic Studies, vol.6, no.2, May, pp.1-24, viewed 19
June 2012.
Bashir, A. (2000),‛ Assessing the Performance of Islamic Banks: Some Evidence from The
Middle East‛ presented at ERF Annual meeting, Amman, Jordan, October 26-26, 2000.
Bashir, A., Hassan, M. (2004),‛Determinants of Islamic Banking Profitability‛, ERF Paper, 10th
Conference.
Bordeleau, Étienne and Graham, Christopher, 2010,‘The Impact of Liquidity on Bank Profitability’,
Working Paper/Document de travail 2010-xx Draft, December, pp.4-22, viewed 17
July 2012.
Chowdhury, Tanbir A. and Ahmed, Kashfia, 2009, ‘Performance Evaluation of Selected Private
Commercial Banks in Bangladesh’, International Journal of Business and Management,
vol.4, no.4, April, pp.86-97, viewed 15 May 2012,
<http://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijbm/article/download/1179/1127>.
Demerguç-Kunt, A. and Huizinga, H., 1999, ‘Determinants of Commercial Bank Interest Margins
and Profitability: Some International Evidence’, World Bank Economic Review, vol.
13, no.2, May, pp. 379-408.
EXIM Bank Ltd., 2005-2011, Annual Report 2005-2011, EXIM Bank Ltd., Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Foster, George, 2002, Financial Statement Analysis, 2nd Edition, Pearson Education (Singapore)
Pte. Ltd., Indian Branch, New Delhi, pp.57-94.
Hamid, Mohamad A. and Azmi, Shaja M., 2011, ‘The Performance of Banking During 2000- 2009:
Bank Islam Malaysia Berhad and Conventional Banking in Malaysia’, International Journal
of Economics and Management Sciences, vol.1, no.1, pp.9-19, viewed 25 June 2012.
Haron, Sudin, 2004, ‘Determinants of Islamic Bank Profitability’, Working Paper Series 002, March,
pp.1-18,viewed 23 April 2012.
Haron, Sudin and Shanmugan, Bala, 1997, Islamic Banking System- Concepts & Applications,
Pelanduk Publications, Malaysia, pp. 35-42.
Hasan, Zulfiqar and Saimoon, Ayesha, 2012, Principles of Islamic Economics, 1st Edition, February,
University Publications, Dhaka, Bangladesh, pp.47-60.
Hassoune, Anouar, 2002, ‘Islamic Banks’ Profitability in an Interest Rate Cycle’, International
Journal of Islamic Financial Service, vol.4, no.2, July-September, viewed 17 March
2012, <http://www.iiibf.org/journals/journal14/vol4no2art2.pdf>.

Ika, Siti Rochmah and Abdullah, Norhayati, 2011, ‘A Comparative Study of Financial Performance
of Islamic Banks and Conventional Banks in Indonesia’, International Journal of Business
and Social Science, vol.2, no.15, August, pp.199-207, viewed 5 May 2012,
<http://www.ijbssnet.com/journals/Vol_2_No_15_August_2011/22.pdf>.
Islam, M. Muzahidul, 2008, ‘Liquidity Management’, Text Book on Islamic Banking, 2nd Edition,
November, Islamic Economics Research Bureau, Dhaka, Bangladesh, pp.101- 111.
Islam, M. Muzahidul and Chowdhury, Hasibul Alam, 2009, ‘A Comparative Study of Liquidity
Management of an Islamic Bank and a Conventional Bank: The Evidence from Bangladesh’,
Journal of Islamic Economics, Banking and Finance, vol.5, no.1, January-April, pp.89-108.
Islami Bank Bangladesh Ltd., 2005-2011, Annual Report 2005-2011, Islami Bank Bangladesh
Ltd., Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Khan, Dr. Tariqullah and Ahmed, Dr. Habib, 2001,‘Risk Management: An Analysis of Issues in
Islamic Financial Industry’, Occasional Paper, no.5, pp.38-39, viewed 7 July 2012.
Khrawish, H. A., Siam, W. Z. and Khrawish, A. H., 2011, ‘Determinants of Islamic Bank
Profitability: Evidence from Jordan’, Middle Eastern Finance and Economics, issue.13,
May, pp. 43-57.
Kuppusamy, M., Saleh, Ali S. and Samudhram, Ananda, 2010, ‘Measurement of Islamic Banks
Performance using a Shariah Conformity and Profitability Model’, Review of Islamic
Economics, vol.13, no.2, pp.35-48, viewed 21 May 2012,
<http://www.islamicfoundation.org.uk/JournalsPDF/IslamicEconomicsReviewAd.pdf>
Latif, Muhammad Abdul, 1982, ‘Is Indexation of Loan Permitted?’, Thought on Islamic Banking, 1st
Edition, February, Islamic Economics Research Bureau, Dhaka, Bangladesh, pp.112-113.
Lau, M. S., 2008, ‘The Recent Crisis: Economic Review’, New Straits Times, 3rd April 2012.
Levin, Richard I. and Rubin, David S., 2003, Statistics for Management, 7th Edition, Prentice Hall
of India Private Limited, New Delhi, India, pp.717-790.
Lewis M. And Algaoud L. (2001), ‚Islamic Banking‛, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
Lind, Douglas A., Marchal, Willian G. and Warthen, Samuel A., 2005, Statistical Techniques in
Business & Economics, 12th Edition, McGraw-Hill Companies, U.S.A, pp.474-521.
Maheshwari, Dr. S. N. and Maheshwari, Dr. S. K., 2002, Banking, 11th Edition, Kalyani
Publishers, New Delhi, Section VII, pp.37-84.
Mahmud, Abdullah Al and Islam, M. Muzahidul, 2008, ‘A Comparative Study on Performance
Evaluation of Conventional Banks and Islamic Banks in Bangladesh with Special Reference to
Islamic Bank Bangladesh Ltd.’, Journal of Thoughts on Economics, vol.18, no.5,
October-December, pp.25-43.
Maali, B. Casson, P. and Napier C. (2006),‛ Social Reporting by Islamic Banks‛, Accounting
Foundation, The University of Sydney.
Naceur, Samy Ben and Goaied, Mohamed, 2008, ‘The Determinants of Commercial Bank Interest
Margin and Profitability: Evidence from Tunisia’, Frontiers in Finance and Economics,
vol.5, issue.1, pp. 106-130.
Raquib, A., 2006, Emergence of Islamic Banking in Bangladesh and Related Financial Issues, 1st
Edition, February, Sabdarup Publications, Dhaka, Bangladesh, pp.1-62.
Rashid, Hafiz A. and Ashraf, Mian M., 2011, ‘Achievement Anecdote of Islamic Banking Practices in
Pakistan: A Review of Past, Present and Future Performance with Pragmatic and Analytical
Approach’, Journal of Money, Investment and Banking, issue.22, Eurojournals
Publishing Inc., pp.70-86, viewed 13 July 2012.

Rashid, Mamunur and Nishat, Ainun, 2009, ‘Disparity of Performance Indicators of Islamic Banks:
Study on Bangladesh’, International Journal of Business and Management, vol.4, no.8,
August, pp.52-72, viewed 9 May 2012.
Rose, Peter S., 2004-2005, Commercial Bank Management, Irwin/McGraw-Hill, U.S.A, pp.149-198.
Rosly, Saiful A. and Bakar, Mohd. A. A., 2003, ‘Performance of Islamic and Mainstream Banks in
Malaysia’, International Journal of Social Economics, vol.30, no.12, pp.1249-1265,
viewed 1 June 2012.
Rosly, Saiful A. and Zaini, Mohammad Ashadi Mohd., 2008, ‘Risk-return analysis of Islamic banks’
investment deposits and shareholders’ fund’, Managerial Finance, vol.34, no.10, pp.695-
707, viewed 11 July 2012, <http://www.kantakji.com/fiqh/files/banks/c1017.pdf>.
Sadeq, Dr. Abul H. M., 2006, Readings in Islamic Economic Thought, 1st Edition, October, Islamic
Foundation Bangladesh, Agargaon, Dhaka, pp.17-18.
Safiullah, Md., 2010, ‘Superiority of Conventional Banks & Islamic Banks of Bangladesh: A
Comparative Study’, International Journal of Economics and Finance, vol.2, no.3,
August, pp.199-207, viewed 29 April 2012.
Saleem, Qasim and Rehman, Ramiz Ur, 2011, ‘Impacts of Liquidity Ratios on Profitability (Case of
Oil and Gas Companies of Pakistan)’, Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business,
vol.1, issue.7, July, pp.95-98, viewed 3 August 2012,
<http://www.idjrb.com/articlepdf/idjrb7n9.pdf>.
Samad, Abdus, 2004, ‘Performance of Interest-Free Islamic Banks VIS-À-VIS Interest Based
Conventional Banks of Bahrain’, IIUM Journal of Economics and Management, vol.12,
no.2, pp.1-15, viewed 21 May 2012, <http://iium.edu.my/enmjournal/122art1.pdf>.
Samad, Abdus and Hasan, M. Kabir, 1999, ‘The Performance of Malaysian Islamic Bank During
1984-1997: An Explanatory Study’, International Journal of Islamic Financial Services,
vol.1, no.3, October-December, viewed 13 June 2012.
Siddiqui, S. A., 2010, ‘Establishing the Need and Suggesting a Strategy to Develop Profit and Loss
Sharing Islamic Banking’, Journal of Islamic Economics- Banking and Finance, vol.6,
no.4, October-December, pp.29-52.
Shahchera, Mahshid, 2012, ‘The Impact of Liquidity Asset on Iranian Bank Profitability’,
International Conference on Management, Behavioral Sciences and Economics Issues
(ICMBSE'2012), Penang, Malaysia, pp. 131-135.
Shahjalal Islami Bank Ltd., 2005-2011, Annual Report 2005-2011, Shahjalal Islami Bank Ltd.,
Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Social Islami Bank Ltd., 2005-2011, Annual Report 2005-2011, Social Islami Bank Ltd., Dhaka,
Bangladesh.
Toni, Uhomoibhi, 2008, ‘Determinants of Bank Profitability: Macroeconomic Evidence from Nigeria’,
Deakin university, (working paper).
Usmani, Muhammad Taqi, 1993, An Introduction to Islamic Finance, March, IDATARUL
Asian Business Consortium is an independent research house committed to publishing

and delivering superior, Peer-reviewed standard research
View publication stats

Comparative Study of Profitability and Liquidity Analysis of Islamic Banks in Bangladesh

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Comparative Study of Profitability and Liquidity Analysis of Islamic Banks in Bangladesh

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Comparative Study of Profitability and Liquidity Analysis of Islamic Banks in Bangladesh

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Comparative study of Proﬁtability and Liquidity analysis of

Article · July 2013

Nazneen Fatema Abdullah Mohammed Ibrahim

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

MBA Dissertation View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Comparative study of Profitability and

Key word: Islamic banking system, Profitability analysis, Liquidity

JEL Classification Code: G21; G30; M20

Copyright © 2012, Asian Business Consortium | GDEB Page 29

Copyright © 2012, Asian Business Consortium | GDEB Page 30

Copyright © 2012, Asian Business Consortium | GDEB Page 31

DATA COLLECTION & SAMPLE DESIGN

FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS

2008 16.58% 12.45% 12.27% 11.21% 10.64%

2006 18.76% 27.41% 16.58% 13.53% 18.28%

2007 41,430.73 6,830.57 5,502.19 8,158.08 6,804.35

Table 2.3: Operating Profit During 2005-2011

Copyright © 2012, Asian Business Consortium | GDEB Page 38

2006 1,401 463 470 650 58

CV 14.45% 15.08% 14.82% 13.46% 48.10%

3. LIQUIDITY AND PROFITABILITY TRADE-OFF IN ISLAMIC BANKS

Copyright © 2012, Asian Business Consortium | GDEB Page 41

The correlation matrix above shows there is a strong correlation (positive/negative,

Copyright © 2012, Asian Business Consortium | GDEB Page 43

Copyright © 2012, Asian Business Consortium | GDEB Page 44

Copyright © 2012, Asian Business Consortium | GDEB Page 45

Asian Business Consortium is an independent research house committed to publishing

Copyright © 2012, Asian Business Consortium | GDEB Page 46

View publication stats

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.