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.