Profitability Comparison of Islamic and Conventional Banks Tariq Alzoubi * The study examines 33 conventional banks and 10 Islamic banks from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Jordan, between 2007-2013. The research tends to make a comparison between the profitability of Islamic and conventional banks. The results show that there is no significant differences between the profitability of Islamic and conventional banks. Additionally, the results also show that the growth rate of Islamic banks assets is more than 170% higher than conventional banks assets. Field of Research: Banking. Keywords: Islamic Banks, Conventional Banks, Profitability. 1. Introduction The late financial crisis brought an important question as to whether the current financial system is adequate and convenient to face such a crisis. Regulators and researchers tried to find ways and solutions within the current conventional financial system to solve the financial crisis and prevent future crises from happening. Even with all efforts made the current financial system and their institutions cannot be regarded as a perfect solution for the financial crisis. While regulators and researchers investigated the financial crisis to understand its reasons and causes, they discovered something very important; some financial institutions and some corporations have not been affected by financial crisis as much as others. These institutions and corporations did not depend mainly on the conventional financial system. Many of these institutions and corporations were using Islamic financing and Islamic financing tools to finance their operations. Even for these financial institutions and corporations who did not use Islamic financing and Islamic financing tools to run their operations, there ways to operate were closer to Islamic financing than conventional financing. See also, (Čihák and Hesse, 2010; Hennieand Zamir, 2008; Zamir and Abbas, 2011) As a result of this investigation, more attention has been brought to Islamic finance and Islamic finance institutions. Many countries and firms have started to use Islamic financial tools to finance their needs. As these tools present an alternative source of financing, this source could help to prevent the financial system from facing financial crises. Islamic finance system, institutions, firms and tools based their operations on interest-free transactions, and profit and losses sharing. Accordingly, all parties share the risks, returns and losses. As this system and operations present fairness to all * Dr. Tariq Alzoubi, Assistant Professor, Department of Finance, Business School, Jordan University, Amman, Jordan, Email: tariq.alzoubi@gmail.com, +962 79 0680861.
parties by rewarding all parities the actual return on their invested capital, as well as, distributing the losses and risks among all participants. In spite of the fact that most Islamic finance tools have existed and used even before Islam, Islamic banks as independent financial institutions started to operate in the 1970s. Islamic banks operate in a way which is significantly different than how conventional banks operate. As conventional banks provide their clients with direct credit facilities (Loans) with fixed interest, Islamic banks participates with their clients in projects and investments; as they finance their clients needs and share the profits, the risks, and losses with their clients through Islamic financing tools including; Musharkah (Joint Venture contract), Mudarabah (A trustee financing contract), Murabaha (cost-plus sale), Ijara (Leases), and Istisna (manufacturing order). In this research, we will compare the profitability of Islamic and conventional banks, after the financial crisis to understand whether Islamic banks perform better than conventional banks or whether they can survive and compete with these conventional banks. The rest of this paper will be organised as follows; section 2, will provide the literature about the topic. The data and methodology will be presented in section 3. After that, section 4, will discuss the results and findings of this paper. Subsequently, the conclusion of this paper will be presented in section 5. 2. Literature Review Jaffar and Manarvi (2011) examined the performance of conventional and Islamic banks in Pakistan between 2005 to 2009, based on a sample of 5 Islamic and 5 conventional banks. In accordance with this examination, Jaffar and Manarvi found that A) conventional banks have a better earning ability and management quality. B) Islamic banks have a better liquidity position and adequate capital. Bashir (2000) studied the performance of 18 Islamic banks from Egypt, Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Sudan, Turkey and United Arab Emirates between 1993 to 1998. Using the net non-interest margin, profit before tax to total assets, return on equities, return on assets, and an external variables, the results showed that for Islamic banks there is a positive relationship between capital to assets ratio and banks profitability. Brown (2003) used a sample of 19 countries between 1998 to 2001 to study the Islamic banks performance across countries. Using the return on assets and return on equities to measure the profitability, the results varied among countries each year. Hassan and Bashir (2004) based on a sample of 43 Islamic banks between 1994 to 2000. They studied determinants of profitability for the Islamic banks. The results showed that high capital to assets as well as high loan to assets ratios lead to higher profitability. Alkassim (2005) used net non-interest margin, return on equities, and return on assets to measure the profitability of 16 Islamic and 18 conventional banks in the Gulf Cooperation Council Countries. The results showed that the bank size has
positive effect on the profitability of Islamic banks but not conventional. The total expenses positively impact the profitability of Islamic banks and negatively for conventional banks, and non-interest expenses assist the profitability for both conventional and Islamic banks. Moin (2008) evaluated the performance of one Islamic bank compared to 5 conventional banks in Pakistan between 2003 to 2007. Using return on assets, return on equity, and operating profit to operating expenses ratio, the results showed that the average profitability of the 5 conventional banks was higher than the one Islamic bank. Samad (2004) compared the performance of Islamic and conventional banks in Bahrain between 1991 to 2001. The results showed that there were no statistical differences between the profitability of these two groups. Onakoya and Onakoya (2013) examine 4 Islamic and 5 conventional banks in the United Kingdom between 2007 to 2011. The results showed that conventional banks were more profitable compared to Islamic banks. Ansari and Rehman (2011) used the data between 2006 to 2009 of 3 Islamic and 3 conventional banks to measure the deferences between these two groups performance. Using the return on assets, return on equity, and profit expense margin to measure the profitability, the results showed that there was no significant deferent between the two groups. Siraj and Sudarsanan (2012) examine 6 Islamic and 6 conventional banks in Gulf Cooperation Council Countries between 2005 to 2009. The results showed that Islamic banks were more profitable compared to conventional banks. The literature provides us with a vary results regarding the differences between the profitability of Islamic and conventional banks. As some papers showed Islamic banks were more profitable than conventional banks, other papers showed that better performance of conventional banks, and there are some paper showed that there is no significant deferent between the profitability of the these two groups. H 1 : Islamic banks are more profitable than conventional banks. 3. Data and Methodology Based on a sample of 10 Islamic banks and 33 conventional banks, which have been taken from 4 countries (Saudi, Kuwait, UAE, and Jordan), between 2007 to 2013. The researcher used ANOVA to compare the differences between the profitability of Islamic and conventional banks. We used 3 measures of profitability and the growth of the bank s assets, as well as, growth of the bank s equities. The profitably measures were; Return on Assets (ROA); measured as net income/losses after taxes divided by the total assets for both Islamic and conventional banks. This ratio measures the bank s
ability to generate profit for each unit of money invested in assets. As the return on assets increases, this means the bank is more profitable. Return on Equities (ROE); measured as income/losses after taxes divided by the total equities for both Islamic and conventional banks. This ratio measures the bank s ability to generate profit for each unit of money invested by the bank s owners. As the return on equities increases, this shows that the bank is more profitable. Net Interest Margin (NIM); for conventional banks this ratio measured as interest income minus interest expenses all divided by total assets. For Islamic banks, this ratio measured as Income from Islamic financing tools include (Murabaha, Mudaraba, Ijara and any other Islamic financing tool) minus distribution to depositors and Sukuk holders all divided by total assets. This ratio measures the bank s ability to generate income from its core business after covering the expenses of money acquired to operate. As the net interest margin increases, this means the bank is more profitable. The growth of the bank s assets: measured as the value of assets at time t minus the value of assets at time t-1 all divided by the value of assets at time t-1. The growth of the bank s equities: measured as the value of equities at time t minus the value of equities at time t-1 all divided by the value of equities at time t-1. All variables have been calculated based on annual numbers, taken from annual reports of banks. 4. Results and Analysis Table 1 shows the results of Islamic banks between 2007 to 2013. Table 1 Results of Islamic Banks The profitability measures for the Islamic and Conventional banks, including: Return on Assets (ROA); Return on Equity (ROE); Net Interest Margin (NIM); Growth in Assets (G Assets ); Growth in Equities (G Equities ). Between 2007-2013. ***, **, * indicate that coefficients are significant at the 1%, 5% and 10% levels respectively. Average Max Min Standard deviation ROA 1.43% 5.16% -2.09% 1.26% ROE 9.65% 27.32% -18.10% 8.36% NIM 2.92% 6.18% 0.10% 1.04% G Assets 15.78% 73.45% -34.39% 17.43% G Equities 12.87% 86.94% -17.96% 19.58% Observations 61 61 61 61 Source: Calculated from banks annual reports, period 2007-2013. From table 1 we can notice that the research variables are widely range, the most likely reason for this wide range is that the sample included banks from different countries, with different sizes, and some of these banks were new while the other were relatively older.
Table 2 shows the results of conventional banks between 2007 to 2013. Table 2 Results of Conventional Banks The profitability measures for the Islamic and Conventional banks, including: Return on Assets (ROA); Return on Equity (ROE); Net Interest Margin (NIM); Growth in Assets (G Assets ); Growth in Equities (G Equities ). Between 2007-2013. ***, **, * indicate that coefficients are significant at the 1%, 5% and 10% levels respectively. Average Max Min Standard deviation ROA 1.54% 4.01% -2.74% 0.94% ROE 10.17% 22.34% -34.18% 6.51% NIM 2.85% 4.96% 0.77% 0.78% G Assets 9.08% 60.66% -35.26% 11.94% G Equities 9.91% 75.00% -13.08% 11.94% Observations 195 195 195 195 Source: Calculated from banks annual reports, period 2007-2013. From table 2 we can notice that the research variables are also widely range, for the same reason mentioned above. Table 3 shows the results for both groups between 2007 to 2013. Table 3 Differences between Islamic and Conventional banks The profitability measures for the Islamic and Conventional banks, including: Return on Assets (ROA); Return on Equity (ROE); Net Interest Margin (NIM); Growth in Assets (G Assets ); Growth in Equities (G Equities ). Between 2007-2013. ***, **, * indicate that coefficients are significant at the 1%, 5% and 10% levels respectively. Islamic Banks Conventional Banks Different t-statistics ROA 1.43% 1.54% -0.11% 0.7324 ROE 9.65% 10.17% -0.53% 0.5123 NIM 2.92% 2.85% 0.06% -0.5144 G Assets 15.78% 9.08% 6.70% -3.3970*** G Equities 12.87% 9.91% 2.95% -1.4248 Observations 61 195 Source: Calculated from banks annual reports, period 2007-2013. Table 3 indicates the ROA for conventional banks is higher than ROA for Islamic banks by 0.11% but the difference is not significant statistically. The same for ROE, conventional banks have an average value of 10.17% compare to a value of 9.65% for Islamic banks, which is also not significant statistically. For NIM, Islamic banks achieve higher than conventional banks by 0.06%, again the difference is not significant statistically. From these results we can conclude that there are no differences between Islamic and conventional banks from profitability aspect. The most likely reason of this result, is that Islamic banks operate under the control and monitor of central banks which
are conventional banks. Therefore, Islamic banks are still controlled by the regulations of central banks, which built for conventional banks and conventional financial systems. This clearly means Islamic banks cannot operate totally according to Islamic rules. The growth of assets for Islamic banks was 15.78%, which is 174% greater than the growth of assets for conventional banks. The difference was statistically significant at better than 1% significant level. This result can be explained based on the fact that Islamic banking is relatively new banks, especially if we compare them with conventional banks. Conventional banks were operated for hundreds of years, while Islamic banks only started to operate in the last 40 years. This means most of Islamic banks are still under early stage of their life. This means that Islamic banks still operate under low profit stage; when these banks start the rapid growth stage, their profitability will start to increase significantly. The growth of equities of Islamic banks was about 3% higher than the growth rate of conventional banks. This different was not significant statistically. 5. Conclusion The last 40 years witnessed the born of Islamic banks, and since then they have started to operate as strong competitors to conventional banks. Few papers studied the performance of Islamic banks and compare their performance with conventional banks. The results were varying from these researches, mainly because the sample sizes were small. This research used a larger sample of 33 conventional banks and 10 Islamic banks between 2007 to 2013 with 265 observations (195 from conventional banks and 61 from Islamic banks), taken from 4 countries which are Saudi, Kuwait, UAE, and Jordan. The results showed that there are no significant statistical differences between the profitability of Islamic and conventional banks, as Islamic banks are relatively new compare to conventional banks they still under the low profit stage. This result has been confirmed by the significance higher growth rate in the Islamic banks assets compare to conventional banks. From this result, we can predict that Islamic banks can perform better than conventional banks as soon as they enter their high growth stage. The main limitation of this research is the small size of the sample. Another limitation is related to analysis period as it only covers the period after the financial crisis. It is recommended to confirm the results of this paper on a sample before the financial crisis period. It is also recommended to compare Islamic and conventional banks performance not only from profitability based on large sample size but also from different performance aspects.
References Alkassim, F. 2005, The Profitability of Islamic and Conventional Banking in the GCC Countries: A Comparative Study. Master degree, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta. Ansari, S. and Rehman, A. 2011, Financial Performance of Islamic and Conventional Banks in Pakistan: A Comparative Study 8 th International Conference on Islamic Economics and Finance, Doha, 2011, pp. 1-19 Bashir, A. 2000, Assessing the Performance of Islamic Banks: Some Evidence from the Middle East, ERF Annual meeting, Amman, Jordan, 26 October 2000. Brown, K. 2003, Islamic Banking Comparative Analysis The Arab Bank Review, Volume 5, Issue 2, pp. 43-50. Čihák, M. Hesse, H. 2010, Islamic banks and financial stability: An empirical analysis Journal Financial Services Research, Volume 38, pp. 95-113. Hassan, M. and Bashir, A. 2004, Determinants of Islamic banking profitability In: Munawar Iqbal and Rodney Wilson (ed.) Islamic Perspectives on Wealth Creation, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh: 118-141. Hennie, V. and Zamir, A. 2008, Risk analysis for Islamic banks, 1 st ed, World Bank publication, Washington DC. Jaffar, M. and Manarvi, I. 2011, Performance comparison of Islamic and Conventional banks in Pakistan Global Journal of Management And Business Research, Volume 11, Issue 1, pp. 60-66. Moin, S. 2008, Performance of Islamic Banking and Conventional Banking in Pakistan: A Comparative Study. Masters Degree, University of Skovde. Onakoya, A. and Onakoya, A. 2013, The Performance of Conventional and Islamic Banks in the United Kingdom: A Comparative Analysis Journal of Research in Economics and International Finance, Volume 2, Issue 2, pp. 29-38. Samad, A. 2004, Performance of Interest-free Islamic banks vis-à-vis Interest-based Conventional Banks of Bahrain Journal of Economics and Management, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp. 1-15. Siraj, K. and Sudarsanan, P. 2012, Comparative study on performance of Islamic banks and conventional banks in GCC region Journal o Applied Finance and Banking, Volume 2, Issue 3, pp. 123-161. Zamir, I. and Abbas, M. 2011, An introduction to Islamic finance: Theory and practice, 2 nd ed., John Wiley & Sons (Asia), Singapore.