Does capital adequacy ratio influence risk-taking behaviour of conventional and Islamic banks differently? Empirical evidence from dual banking system of Malaysia

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of capital adequacy ratio (CAR) prescribed in Basel III on the risk-taking behaviour of Islamic and conventional commercial banks in Malaysia. It also investigates the claim that the risk-taking behaviour of Islamic banks (IBs) and conventional banks (CBs) managers is identically influenced by CAR. Design/methodology/approach Secondary data for all CBs operating in the Malaysian banking sector are gathered from FitchConnect database for the 2011–2017 period. Both dynamic ordinary least squares and generalised method of moments techniques are used to estimate a panel data of 43 commercial banks, namely, 17 IBs and 26 CBs. Findings The findings of this study lend support to the favourable influence of CAR set in Basel III accord on risk-taking behaviour of both types of banks. CBs appeared to be remarkably better off in terms of capital buffers. Evidence is established on the identicality of the risk-taking behaviour of IBs and CBs managers under CAR influence. Practical implications Even though a high CAR is observed to hamper risk-taking of banks, the findings may serve as a signal to regulators to be mindful of the implications of holding a high CAR. Similarly, managers may capitalise on the findings in terms of strategising for efficient use of the considerable capital buffers. Shareholders are also concerned about managers’ use of the considerable capital buffers. Originality/value This study is among a few studies that endeavoured to provide empirical evidence on the claim that IBs mimic the conduct of CBs in light of the influence of CAR prescribed in Basel III on risk-taking behaviour, particularly banks operating within the same banking environment.

Does Islamic Banking Promote Financial Stability? Evidence From an Agent-Based Model

“…However, Kabir, Worthington, and Gupta (2015) find no significant difference in credit risk between Islamic and conventional banking systems. A similar finding was made by Harkati, Alhabshi, and Kassim (2020) who stress that the risktaking behaviour of Islamic banks is no different to that of conventional banks. These mixed findings on risk reflect the results of the studies that focus on the performance of Islamic and conventional banks during the GFC.…”

Fintech-based Financial Inclusion and Risk-taking of Microfinance Institutions (MFIs): Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa

“…Concerning the control variables, our study documented that size and capital adequacy ratio (CAR) have a negative effect on the default risk of MFIs. These significant results obtained for CAR variable are similar to Harkati et al (2020) who suggest that CAR reduces the risk-taking behavior of financial institutions and reduces overall financial performance of MFIs (Afrifa et al, 2019). However, our result for size variable contradict the earlier findings by Bokpin (2016).…”

Capital Adequacy Ratio and Financial Performance of Commercial Banks in Nepal

“…There is low degree of positive relation in between return on assets and capital adequacy related variables are at 1 % LOS. This result is disagreed with study of Harkati, Alhabshi & Kassim (2019). Low degree of positive relationship in between return on equity and supplementary capital and low degree of inverse relationship in between return on equity and core capital ratio at 1 % LOS.…”

“…During the four-year period from 2001 to 2004, the productivity was increased by 1.85 % due to non-performing loan decreased by 1 % and productivity increased by 2.15 % due to capital adequacy ratio increased by 1 % in commercial bank of Thailand (Huang, Hsiao & Cheng 2008). Favorable impact of capital adequacy ratio is on risk taking behavior of Islamic and conventional banks (Harkati, Alhabshi & Kassim 2019). Capital guidelines of central bank of state have positive effect on financial performance of commercial banks (Jamali 2020).…”