نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه حسابداری، دانشکده کسب‌وکار و اقتصاد، دانشگاه خلیج‌فارس، بوشهر، ایران

2 گروه حسابداری دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران

چکیده

هدف پژوهش حاضر بررسی اثر شاخص‌های سلامت مالی بر میزان تسهیلات دریافتی مشتریان در بانک‌ها با لحاظ کردن نقش رقابت در صنعت است. جامعه آماری موردمطالعه بانک‌های پذیرفته‌شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران و دوره موردمطالعه از سال 1393 الی 1402 است. با اعمال شرایط حذف سیستماتیک 10 بانک در غربال نهایی از جامعه آماری به‌عنوان نمونه نهایی لحاظ شده‌اند. درنهایت دوازده فرضیه برای پژوهش حاضر طرح گردید که با کمک آزمون رگرسیون خطی چندگانه مبتنی بر داده‌های تلفیقی در نرم‌افزار ایویوز 12، آزمون شد. نتایج آزمون فرضیه‌های پژوهش نشان داد که کفایت سرمایه، کیفیت دارایی، وضعیت سودآوری و کیفیت نقدینگی تأثیر مستقیم و معناداری بر تسهیلات دریافتی مشتریان از بانک دارد؛ اما حساسیت به مخاطرات بازار تأثیر معکوس و معناداری بر تسهیلات دریافتی مشتریان از بانک دارد و کیفیت مدیریت تأثیری بر تسهیلات دریافتی مشتریان ندارد. رقابت در صنعت بانکداری بر رابطه میان شاخص‌های سلامت مالی و میزان تسهیلات مالی دریافتی به‌جز کیفیت نقدینگی و حساسیت به مخاطرات بازار تأثیرگذار است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Impact of Financial Health Indicators on the Amount of Loans Received by Customers in Banks, Considering the Role of Competition in the Industry

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mehdi Rezaei 1
  • Hamed Kargar 2

1 Department of Accounting, Faculty of Business and Economics, Persian Gulf University, Bushehr, Iran

2 Department of Accounting, Payam Noor University, Tehran, Iran

چکیده [English]

The present study aims to investigate the impact of financial health indicators on the amount of loans received by customers from banks, considering the role of competition in the industry. The statistical population consists of banks listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange, with the study period ranging from 2014 to 2023. After applying systematic exclusion criteria, 10 banks were included as the final sample. Ultimately, twelve hypotheses were formulated and tested using multiple linear regression analysis based on pooled data in EViews 12. The results of testing the research hypotheses indicated that capital adequacy, asset quality, profitability status, and liquidity quality have a direct and significant impact on the loans received by customers from banks. However, market risk sensitivity has an inverse and significant impact on the loans received by customers from banks, while management quality has no effect on the loans received by customers. Competition in the banking industry influences the relationship between financial health indicators and the amount of loans received, except for liquidity quality and market risk sensitivity.

Introduction

Banks play a vital role in the economy by providing credit and loans to individuals, institutions, and businesses—an essential element for economic growth and stability. Bank loans enable individuals and firms to finance various objectives such as purchasing homes, starting or expanding businesses, and investing in education. Access to credit is particularly crucial for businesses, allowing them to fund operating expenses, maintain inventories, and expand their workforce. Without access to bank loans, many firms face obstacles to growth or even survival, limiting overall employment and economic development. For individuals, credit provides opportunities for major life events such as buying homes or covering educational expenses, thereby contributing to long-term financial security and well-being. To assess the health and stability of banks, various tools have been developed. The CAMELS rating system is a vital instrument used by financial experts and researchers to evaluate the financial soundness and stability of banks. This model assesses banks based on six key components: Capital Adequacy, Asset Quality, Management Quality, Earnings, Liquidity, and Sensitivity to Market Risk. Such an evaluation can affect banks’ credit growth, since it directly influences their lending capacity and attractiveness to investors. Banks with strong financial health ratings generally enjoy better access to capital markets, enabling them to extend greater credit to customers. A high capital adequacy rating ensures sufficient capital reserves to absorb potential losses, supporting lending operations. High asset quality indicates a relatively low-risk loan portfolio, increasing the bank’s willingness to provide credit. Moreover, banks with strong management and earnings are better equipped to face economic challenges and maintain sustainable credit expansion.

Hypotheses

H1. Capital adequacy affects the amount of loans received by bank customers.
H2. Asset quality affects the amount of loans received by bank customers.
H3. Management quality affects the amount of loans received by bank customers.
H4. Profitability affects the amount of loans received by bank customers.
H5. Liquidity quality affects the amount of loans received by bank customers.
H6. Sensitivity to market risk affects the amount of loans received by bank customers.
H7. Competition in the banking industry affects the relationship between capital adequacy and customer loans.
H8. Competition in the banking industry affects the relationship between asset quality and customer loans.
H9. Competition in the banking industry affects the relationship between management quality and customer loans.
H10. Competition in the banking industry affects the relationship between profitability and customer loans.
H11. Competition in the banking industry affects the relationship between liquidity quality and customer loans.
H12. Competition in the banking industry affects the relationship between sensitivity to market risk and customer loans.

Research Methodology

This is an applied study and methodologically a causal-correlational (ex post facto) study. The statistical population consists of all banks listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange, covering the period from 2014 to 2023. The systematic elimination sampling method was employed to arrive at the final sample of 10 banks. Data analysis was performed using panel data methodology in EViews 12 to test the research hypotheses.

Findings

The results reveal that capital adequacy, asset quality, profitability, and liquidity have a direct and significant impact on the amount of loans received by bank customers. However, sensitivity to market risk has a negative and significant effect, while management quality shows no significant relationship. Moreover, competition in the banking industry affects the relationship between financial health indicators and the amount of loans received, except for liquidity and sensitivity to market risk, where the effect is insignificant.

Discussion & Conclusion

The findings suggest that banks’ financial soundness, particularly in terms of capital adequacy, asset quality, profitability, and liquidity, has a significant positive influence on their ability to extend more loans to customers. This underscores the importance of financial stability and robustness in banks in effectively contributing to national economic performance. Conversely, sensitivity to market risk exhibits a significant negative relationship, reflecting banks’ caution under high-risk conditions. In contrast, management quality alone does not significantly affect the volume of loans. Interaction analysis also unveils complex dynamics: competition amplifies the influence of capital adequacy and profitability on bank lending, indicating that healthier banks may compete more actively by offering greater credit to attract customers. Meanwhile, competition combined with management quality shows a negative effect on loan levels, and interactions with asset quality, liquidity, and market risk sensitivity remain insignificant.
 
 
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Financial loans
  • Bank financial health
  • Industry competition
  • Financial ratios
  • Financial accounting
  1. امیری، حسین؛ قلیچ، وهاب. (1399). تحلیلی بر نقش رقابت‌پذیری بانک‌ها در مقاوم‌سازی صنعت بانکی؛ شواهدی از بانک‌های منتخب ایران. مطالعات راهبردی بسیج سال بیست و سوم پاییز 1399 شماره 88. https://bsrq.cuir.ac.ir/article_129100.html
  2. پوستین­چی، مجتبی؛ تحصیلی، حسن؛ کریم­زاده مصطفی. (1395). تأثیر رقابت بانکداری بر ثبات بانک­ها. دو فصلنامه اقتصاد پولی و مالی. 23(11)، 123-145. doi: 10.22067/pm.v23i11.33737
  3. حسینی، نیلوفر سادات. (۱۴۰۳). ارزیابی تأثیر شاخص‌های سلامت بانکی بر سودآوری بانک‌های تجاری غیردولتی ایران. مطالعات راهبردی مالی و بانکی، ۲ (۳)، ۱۶۳-۱۷۶. doi: 10.22105/fbs.2024.473358.1108
  4. زنگنه، احسان؛ زمانیان، غلامرضا؛ شهیکی تاش، محمدنبی؛ چشمی، علی. (1401). بررسی اثرات نامتقارن عوامل اقتصادی بر سطح تسهیلات بانکی. پژوهشنامه اقتصادی 22(87)، 109-156. doi: 10.22054/joer.2023.67862.1063
  5. سبحانی، حسن و رزم آهنگ، مهدی. (1397). تبعات ریسک‌پذیری و رقابت بانک‌ها در جذب سپرده در شرایط عدم تقارن اطلاعات؛ مطالعه موردی نظام بانکی ایران. راهبرد اقتصادی 7(26)، 1-19. https://econrahbord.csr.ir/article_103342.html?lang=en
  6. عبداللهی پور، محمدصادق، بت‌شکن، محمدهاشم و سرگلزایی، مصطفی. (۱۳۹۹). ارزیابی اثر شاخص‌های کملز (CAMELS) بر بازده سرمایه تعدیل‌شده به ریسک (RAROC) در بانک‌های پذیرفته‌شده در بازار سرمایه ایران. چشم‌انداز مدیریت مالی، ۱۰ (۳۲)، ۵۷-۸۰. doi: 10.52547/JFMP.10.32.57
  7. محمدی، معصومه و ملکیان، اسفندیار. (۱۳۹۸). ارائه مدلی جهت سنجش سلامت مالی در بانکداری ایران با در نظر گرفتن شاخص‌های کملز و حاکمیت شرکتی. اقتصاد پولی مالی، ۲۶ (۱۸)، ۱۲۱-۱۵۴. doi: 10.22067/pm.v26i17.74511
  8. مهربان پور، محمدرضا؛ نادری نورعینی، محمدمهدی؛ اینالو، عفت و اشعری، الهام. (1396). عوامل مؤثر بر سودآوری بانک‌ها. مطالعات تجربی حسابداری مالی، 14(54)، -. doi: 10.22054/qjma.2017.11251.1369
  9. نمکی، علی؛ راعی، رضا و پورطالبی جاغرق، محمد. (1402). رقابت بانکی و ریسک سیستمی نظام بانکداری ایران. فصلنامه تحقیقات اقتصادی، 58(3), 459-485. doi: 10.22059/jte.2023.362423.1008835
  10. نیکبخت، محمدرضا و قربانی، محمود. (1399). شناسایی شاخص‌های بانک‌های در معرض بحران ورشکستگی بر اساس روش تحلیلتم. مطالعات تجربی حسابداری مالی، 17(66)، 51-86. doi: 10.22054/qjma.2019.46817.2058
  11. Adjei-Frimpong, K., Gan, C., & Hu, B. (2021). Competition in the banking industry: Empirical evidence from Ghana. Journal of Banking Regulation, 17(3), 159-175. https://doi.org/10.1057/jbr.2014.24
  12. Altunbas, Y., Gambacorta, L., & Marques-Ibanez, D. (2020). Bank risk and monetary policy. Journal of Financial Stability, 6(3), 121–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfs.2009.07.001
  13. Aysan, A. F., & Disli, M. (2019). Small business lending and credit risk: Granger causality evidence. Economic Modelling, 83, 245–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2019.02.014
  14. Bain, J. S. (1956). Barriers to New Competition. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674188037.c15
  15. Becker, G. S. (1976). The Economic Approach to Human Behavior. University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226217062.001.0001
  16. Ben Naceur, S., Marton, K., & Roulet, C. (2018). Basel III and bank lending: Evidence from the United States and Europe. Journal of Financial Stability, 39, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfs.2018.08.002
  17. Berrospide, J. M., & Edge, R. M. (2010). The effects of bank capital on lending: What do we know, and what does it mean? International Journal of Central Banking, 6(4), 5–54. https://doi.org/10.17016/feds.2010.44
  18. Broner, F., Erce, A., Martin, A., & Ventura, J. (2014). Sovereign debt markets in turbulent times: Creditor discrimination and crowding-out effects. Journal of Monetary Economics, 61(1), 114–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2013.11.009
  19. Bustamante, J., Cuba, W., & Nivin, R. (2019). Determinants of credit growth and the bank-lending channel in Peru: A loan level analysis (BIS Working Papers No. 803). The Bank for International Settlements. https://www.bis.org/publ/work803.pdf
  20. Carlson, M., Shan, H., & Warusawitharana, M. (2020). Capital ratios and bank lending: A matched bank approach. Journal of Financial Intermediation, 22(4), 663–687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfi.2013.06.003
  21. Cornett, M. M., McNutt, J. J., Strahan, P. E., & Tehranian, H. (2011). Liquidity risk management and credit supply in the financial crisis. Journal of Financial Economics, 101(2), 297–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2011.03.001
  22. Debreu, G. (1951). The Coefficient of Resource Utilization. Econometrica, 19(3), 273-292. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1906814
  23. Dilla, S., Shahrin, A. R., & Zainir, F. (2024). Banking competition in Indonesia: does Fintech lending matters?. Journal of Financial Economic Policy, 16(4), 540-556. doi.10.1108/JFEP-12-2023-0365
  24. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57-74. https://doi.org/10.2307/258191
  25. El Moussawi, C., & Mansour, R. (2022). Competition, cost efficiency and stability of banks in the MENA region. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 84, 143-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2021.12.005
  26. Freixas, X., & Rochet, J. C. (2008). Microeconomics of Banking. MIT Press. Financial Stability. (2023). 53, Handle: RePEc:mtp:titles:0262062704
  27. Gennaioli, N., Martin, A., & Rossi, S. (2020). Sovereign default, domestic banks, and financial institutions. Journal of Finance, 69(2), 819–866. https://doi.org/10.1111/jofi.12124
  28. Gibbons, R. (1992). Game Theory for Applied Economists. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400835881
  29. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.94043
  30. Kim, D., & Sohn, W. (2017). The effect of bank capital on lending: Does liquidity matter? Journal of Banking and Finance, 77, 95–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2017.01.011
  31. Košak, M., Li, S., Lončarski, I., & Marinč, M. (2015). Quality of bank capital and bank lending behavior during the global financial crisis. International Review of Financial Analysis, 37, 168–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2014.11.008
  32. Laidroo, L. (2010). Lending growth determinants and cyclicality: Evidence from CEE banks (RBI Staff Studies). https://old.taltech.ee/public/l/laivi_laidroo/Paper_2012_04_20_final.pdf
  33. Louhichi, A., & Boujelbene, Y. (2017). Bank capital, lending and financing behaviour of dual banking systems. Journal of Multinational Financial Management, 41, 61–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mulfin.2017.05.009
  34. Markowitz, H. (1952). Portfolio Selection. Journal of Finance. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1952.tb01525.x
  35. Mong, M. (2025). The Impact of CAMELS on Banks’ Credit in Cambodia: A Two-Step GMM Method. Journal of Ecohumanism, 4(1), 3080-3088. doi:10.62754/joe.v4i1.6105
  36. Nier, E., & Zicchino, L. (2023). Bank weakness, loan supply and monetary policy. The Bank of England. SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1278443
  37. Nippani, S., Muldoon, J., Yonai, D., & Matricano, D. (2024). Small-business owners and their choice of banks: Some lessons from the banking literature and game theory in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Small Business Management, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2024.2399191
  38. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808678
  39. Roulet, C. (2022). Basel III: Effects of capital and liquidity regulations on European bank lending. Journal of Economics and Business, 95, 26–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconbus.2017.10.001
  40. Sifrain, R. (2024). The Effect of CAMEL Model on Loan Portfolio Quality of the Haitian Banking Sector. Journal of Financial Risk Management, 13(1), 42-57. doi.10.4236/jfrm.2024.131002
  41. Wang, H., Sua, L. S., & Dolar, B. (2024). CAMELS-DEA in assessing the role of major factors in achieving higher efficiency levels: evidence from Turkish banks. Applied Economics, 1-18. doi. 10.1080/00036846.2024.2339186
  42. Xie, C., & Hu, S. (2024). Open banking: an early review. Journal of Internet and Digital Economics, 4(2), 73-82. doi.10.1108/JIDE-03-2024-0009
  43. Tan, Y., Charles, V., Belimam, D., & Dastgir, SH. (2021). Risk, competition, efficiency and its interrelationships: evidence from the Chinese banking industry. Asian Review of Accounting, 29(4), 579-598. DOI 10.1108/ARA-06-2020-0100.