A Comparative Study of Financial Performance with special reference of Co-Operative Banks

 

Dr. Manvinder Singh Tandon¹, Dr. Narender Nath Sharma², Vipan Kumar Bhulal³

¹Director/ Principal, Rimt University Mandi-Govindgarh, Fatehgarhsahib (Punjab)

²Dean Management and Academic, Himachal Pradesh Technical University, Hamirpur (H.P)

³Research Scholar, I. K. Gujral Punjab Technical University, Jalandhar (Punjab)

 

ABSTRACT:

This paper explores the Financial Performance and importance of Co-operative banks in Himachal Pradesh. The present study is based on secondary data. The main objective of the study is to compare the performance and study the present financial position of the two Co-operative Banks in Himachal Pradesh i.e. HPSCB and KCCB. HPSCB and KCCB are the two largest Co-operative sector Banks of the state. Performance and efficiency of Co-operative banks are the key elements of the country’s Financial system at primary level. The co-operative societies in India in fact are playing multifunctional role in both rural as well as urban areas the basic structure of cooperative societies is organised on three tier basis. There are primary credits societies working at village level, above them are central Co-operative Bank workings at the district level and then at the top, there are State Co-operative banks, the apex co-operative institutions working at state level. The study is set out to apply growth rate for evaluate performance of banks through different variables like Share capital, Shareholder funds, Deposits, Outstanding advances, Borrowing, Profit and Profitability and check the management efficiency of the banks through operating ratio.

This comparative study of HPSCB and KCCB demonstrates that there are significant differences on the performance of the banks in term of share capital, deposits, borrowing and profitability, market coverage but their performance is equally in term of outstanding advances, profits, shareholder funds and management quality.

 

 

 

1. INTRODUCTION:

Each country should try to build the most advanced banking system, because the better banking system the state has, the more competitive the state is (Zuzana, 2014). The main objective of banking system is to provide the financial services to common man in the Urban as well as Rural area. In this sector Cooperative banking play significant role in India. Cooperative means working together. The principle of cooperative is as old as human society.

.

 

It is purely the basic of domestic and social life. Cooperative efforts is ultimately the group in man, which enables, him to live together , work together and help each together. Financial sector is imperative for economic growth and industrialization via channelling funds, providing proficient financial system, sociable investor’s treatment, and optimal utilization of resources (Raza, 2011). Financial analysis is mainly done to compare the growth, profitability and financial soundness of the respective banks by diagnosing the information contained in the financial statements. Financial analysis is done to identify the financial strength and weakness of the two banks by properly establishing relationship between the items of Balance Sheet and Profit and Loss Account. It helps in better understanding of banks financial position, growth and performance by analysing the financial statements with various tools and evaluating the relationship between various elements of financial statements (Sing and Tandon, 2012).

 

Co-operative Banking in India:

Cooperative banking is a kind of banking that play very important role in our financial system. Providing financial facilities in the rural and far-flung area, the Indian banking introduced cooperative banking in 1904, under the Cooperative Societies Act, 1904.  It is also regulated and controlled by the Central bank (RBI in India) as well as Commercial and Private Banks. Cooperative means working together. The principle of cooperative is as old as human society. It is purely the basic of domestic and social life. Cooperative efforts is ultimately the group in man, which enables, him to live together , work together and help each together. The co-operative movement in India was accepted as the most relevant, appropriate and effective means for the achievement of the goals of economic progress. In a developing and vast country like India, the co-operative is of great importance because it is an organization established for the poor, illiterate and unskilled people for their mutual help and sharing means of development and to overcome the constraints of agricultural development because agriculture has its maximum contribution in national income of the country.

 

Co-operative Societies	Societies at different level	Function
Primary Cooperative Societies	Village Level	These Societies members invest funds in a pool and needy members are given financial assistance from the pool.
Central Cooperative Societies	District Level	These banks have a significant role in relation to cooperatives credit structure at the district level.
State Cooperative Societies	State Level	These banks are apex bank for rural credit in any state and also given financial assistance to Central cooperative bank and Primary cooperative societies.

 

In recent years, banking sector all over the world has been undergoing rapid transformations. Same in the case of India; the wave of deregulation in 1990’s has created heightened competition and risk for banks and financial intuitions. At present Himachal Pradesh has presence of quite a good number of Public sector banks, Private sector banks, Cooperative banks and RRB and their ATM (Automated Teller Machine). The state had a network of 2037 branches and 1792 ATMs as on 31.06.2016. Out of which1190 branches of public sector banks, 123 branches of private sector banks, 487 of Cooperative banks and 237 of RRB. There are 1639 branches are in rural areas, 307 branches in Semi-urban areas and 92 branches in urban areas.

 

District Level Co-operative Banking Overview in Himachal Pradesh

Sr. No.	Name of Cooperative Bank in H.P	District where Co-operative Banks Operate
1	Himachal Pradesh State Co-operative Bank	Shimla, Chamba, Kinnour, Sirmour, Mandi and Bilaspur
2	Kangra Central Co-operative Bank.	Kangra, Kullu, Hamirpur, Una and Lahul and Spiti
3	Jogindra Central Co-operative Bank.	Solan

 

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE:

ZhaoHailinz and Kang Sangmok (2015) analysed performance of eighteen main Chinese commercial banks including five state-owned banks and thirteen joint stock banks. This measure will rank those banks on their performance 2006 and 2012.  This study has used non-oriented super-efficiency model using slack based measures to calculate efficiencies of eighteen main Chinese Commercial bank and to rank those banks. Concluded that, the ABC’s (agriculture Bank of china) has been improved significantly since 2007 and currently rank much higher than the other state-owned banksand that of the BOC (Bank of China) is relatively worst. The overall mean of efficiencies of the state owned banks exceeds that of the joint-stock banks since 2008 with the exception of 2009.

 

Padma D. and Arulmathi V. (2013) studied financial performance ofSBI (State Bank of India) and ICICI (Industrial credit and Investment Corporation of India) Banktwo largest banks in India in public and privatesectors respectively. Researcher analysed that both the banks are maintaining the required standards and running profitability. The study found that, the comparisons are significant difference between performance of SBI and ICICI Bank in term of Deposits, Advances, Investments, Net Profit and Total Assets. It is inferred that SBI have an extensive operation that ICICI Bank.

 

Mohi-ud-Din Sagmi. A. and T. Nazir (2010) stated that sound financial health of a bank is the guarantee not only to its depositors but is equally significant for the shareholders, employees and whole economy as well. In this paper, an effort has been made to evaluate the financial performance of the two major banks in northern India. This evaluation has been done by using CAMEL Parameters, the latest model of financial analysis. Through this model, it is highlighted that the position of the banks, under study is satisfactory so far as their Capital adequacy, Assets quality, Management capabilities and Liquidity is concerned.

 

 

3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:

Objective of the study:

1.        To study the growth and performance of Himachal Pradesh State Cooperative Bank and Kangra Central Co-operative Bank.

2.        To assess the operational efficiency of the Himachal Pradesh State Cooperative Bank and Kangra Central Co-operative bank in the state.

 

Hypothesis:

Ho – There is no significant variance in the growth of performance of HPSCB and

KCCB.

H₁ – There is significant variance in the growth of performance of HPSCB and

KCCB.

 

Research Design:

Descriptive Research Design is used for the study and it is essentially a fact-finding approach. The study has been conducted with references to the data related to HPSCB and KCCB. These banks have been studies with that they are the largest co-operative banks in the state of Himachal Pradesh. The study examines the Performance Evaluation of States Co-operative banks based on CAMEL (Capital Adequacy, Assets Quality, Management Efficiency, Earning/ Profit Ratio and Liquidity) variable and compare the performance of HPSCB and KCCB.

 

The Study:

The study is an exploratory and analytical in nature with an attempt to explore the performance of co-operative banks with special reference to HPSCB and KCCB.

The sampling Plan:

The study, data covers Profit and Loss A/C, Balance Sheets, Financial Statements for a period of five years from 2011-12 to 2015-16 of HPSCB and KCCB.

 

Source of Data collection:

This research proposal used secondary source of data collection was used in the form of reports through: Annual reports of respective banks, Journal and reports on trends, Newspapers, magazines, Progress of Banking in India, Government publications, Books and websites.

 

Tools for Data Analysis:

For the analysis of collected secondary data following tools were used to know financial performance and business model of HPSCB and KCCB Banks were different financial ratios, comparative tables, t-test, and percentage.

 

5. DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION:

Share Capital:

Share Capital indicates the wealth of any organisation. If it is increase it shows that the organisation increasing their wealth that mean the organisation is achieving their objective wealth maximization as well as profit maximization.

 

In the Table 1 shows that HPSCB showing decrease growth rate in comparison to KCCB is increase their share capital except the year 2014-15.

 

 

 

Table 1: Growth of Share Capital of the banks for the period 2011-2016. (Amount in Crores)

Years	HPSCB	KCCB
	Authorized Capital	Paid-up Capital	Growth	Growth in %	Authorized Capital	Paid-up Capital	Growth	Growth in %
2011-12	10.00	8.43	-	-	3.00	2.10	-	-
2012-13	10.00	8.47	0.04	0.47	3.00	2.12	0.02	0.95
2013-14	10.00	8.52	0.05	0.59	3.00	2.15	0.03	1.415
2014-15	10.00	8.57	0.05	0.58	3.00	2.16	0.01	1.388
2015-16	10.00	8.58	0.01	0.11	3.00	2.23	0.7	3.24

Source: Data compiled from the annual reports of the banks.

 

 

Table 2 shows mean growth rate for HPSCB is 0.437% with S.D. of 0.225 and for KCCB it is 1.748% with S.D. of 1.017. So it clearly indicates that KCCB has performed better in growth of Share Capital.

 

Table 2:‘t’ value of the Data

Bank	Mean	SD	‘t’ Value
HPSCB	0.437	0.225	-2.516
KCCB	1.748	1.017

 

The calculate ‘t’ Value is -2.516 and at 0.05 level of significance i.e.- 2.447 the difference is significant. Therefore the Null Hypothesis stands rejected and we chose alternate hypothesis i.e. Performance of KCCB is better in this parameter as compared to HPSCB.

 

Branch Expansion:

Branch expansion shows the market coverage of the Banks. The Table 3 gives the details regarding the branch expansion figures of the Co-operative Banks in Himachal Pradesh. It tells us to the actual area cover by the banks in different districts of the state. The data is up to financial year 2015-16.

Table3: Growth in Branch Expansion of the Co-operative Banks in H.P for the period 2011-2016.

Years	HPSCB			KCCB
	No. of Branches	Growth in Branches	Growth in %	No. of Branches	Growth in Branches	Growth in %
2011-12	175	_	_	184	_	_
2012-13	175	00	00	184	00	00
2013-14	184	09	5.14	194	10	5.43
2014-15	192	08	4.34	198	04	2.06
2015-16	193	01	0.52	204	06	3.03

Source: Data compiled from the annual reports of the banks.

 

The Table 3 shows that the number of branches it is in case of HPSCB is 193 and in case of KCCB it is 204. KCCB is performing better than HPSCB in this parameter but growth% in respect of Branch expansion of both the banks going to decline year on year. The actual expansion of the branches of the banks is increased in 2013-14 to 2015-16, that clearly indicate the number of branches increasing in last three year of the study time period.

 

 

 

Share Holder’s Funds- Shareholder’s funds show how much money the investors have accrued till date. Increasing funds would mean that the value of the investors is going up. These values have been calculated by adding the share capital and reserves and surpluses figures for both the banks. Table 4 shows that the banks increasing the growth rate of the banks in the fourth year but it is decreasing the growth rate in third and fifth year, of the study period. In case of KCCB in 2013-14 and 2015-16 it reached to 0.62 and 2.92 respectively.

 

Table 4: Progress in term Shareholder’s Funds of the banks of the period 2011-2016.  (Amount in Crores)

Years	HPSCB			KCCB
	HPSCB	Growth	Growth in %	KCCB	Growth	Growth in %
2011-12	5076152	-	-	7023907	-	-
2012-13	5591912	515760	10.16	7186430	162523	2.31
2013-14	6050066	458154	8.19	7230856	44426	0.62
2014-15	6699979	649913	10.74	7959764	728908	10.08
2015-16	7296020	596041	8.89	8192716	232952	2.92

Source: Data compiled from the annual reports of the banks.

 

Table 5 shows mean growth rate for HPSCB is 9.495% and for KCCB it is 3.982% with S.D. of 1.163 and 4.179 respectively. The‘t’ value comes out to be 2.54 at 0.05 level of significance the Table value is 2.447.

 

Table 5:‘t’ Value of the Data

Bank	Mean	SD	‘t’ Value
HPSCB	9.495	1.163	2.54
KCCB	3.982	4.179

Since calculated ‘t’ value 2.54 and at 0.05 level of significance (‘t’ value 2.447) the difference is

significant. Therefore the Null Hypothesis stands rejected and we choose alternate hypothesis i.e. performance of HPSCB is better in this parameter as compared to KCCB.

 

Deposits:

Deposits are the back bone for any bank. Its main source of funds is deposits from the public. In this parameter Table 6 indicates that the growth rate of HPSCB has been less than the KCCB.

 

 

Table 6: Growth of Deposit Trend of the banks for the period 2011-2016.     (Amount in Crores)

Years	HPSCB			KCCB
	Deposits	Growth	Growth in%	Deposits	Growth	Growth in%
2011-12	5242.19	-	-	5200.67	-	-
2012-13	5817.92	575.75	10.98	5982.48	781.81	15.03
2013-14	6327.92	510.00	8.77	6614.51	632.03	10.56
2014-15	7159.88	831.96	13.14	7419.82	805.31	12.17
2015-16	8197.66	1037.78	14.49	8427.57	1007.75	13.58

Source: Data compiled from the annual reports of the banks.

 

In fact the growth rate of KCCB is also going down marginally year 2013-14, but the growth rate of both banks increasing in the year 2014-15 and 2015-16. The mean growth rate for HPSCB is 11.84% with S.D. 2.50 and KCCB it is 12.84% with S.D. of 1.91. So it clearly

 

 

indicates that KCCB has performed little better in deposit mobilization.

 

Table 7:‘t’ value of the Data

Bank	Mean	SD	‘t’ Value
HPSCB	11.845	2.50	-0.627
KCCB	12.84	1.91

 

The calculated ‘t’ Value is -0.627 and at 0.05 level of significance (‘t’ value 2.447) the difference is significant. Therefore the Null Hypothesis stands rejected and we choose alternate hypothesis i.e. performance of KCCB is better in this parameter as compared to HPSCB.

 

 

 

Advances:

In Outstanding advances parameter, HPSC bank performing better than KCCB. In the year 2013-14 and 2015-16 KCCB going marginally decrease their performance. In case of KCCB in 2015, in year 2015-16 KCCB it reached to 8.31. Statistically there is not much difference between the two banks in this parameter shows in Table 8.

Table 8: Growth of Outstanding Advance of the banks period 2011-2016  (Amout in Crores)

Years	HPSCB			KCCB
	HPSCB	Growth	Growth in %	KCCB	Growth	Growth in %
2011-12	2361.67	-	-	2421.58	-	-
2012-13	2653.74	292.07	12.36	2855.33	433.75	17.91
2013-14	3023.13	369.39	13.92	3141.77	286.44	10.03
2014-15	3591.75	568.62	18.80	3527.41	385.64	12.27
2015-16	4361.50	769.75	21.43	3820.57	293.16	8.31

Source: Data compiled from the annual reports of the banks.

 

Table 9 shows mean growth rate for HPSCB is 16.63% with S.D. 4.21 and for KCCB it is 12.14% with S.D. 4.18. The‘t’ Value comes out to be 1.514, at 0.05 level of significance the Table value is 2.447.

 

Table 9:‘t’ value of the Data

Bank	Mean	SD	‘t’ Value
HPSCB	16.63	4.21	1.514
KCCB	12.14	4.18

The ‘t’ value is 1.514 as shown in Table 9 is less than 2.447 which shows that both the means are not

 

significantly different. So the Null Hypothesis is accepted which mean both the banks are performing equally in term of Advances.

 

Borrowings:

Table 10 indicates Borrowing of both the banks. In this parameter HPSCB has not done so well. The growth rate in term of Borrowing HPSCB has been less than the KCCB.

 

 

Table 10: Progress in term Borrowings of the banks period 2011-2016.        (Amount in Crores)

Years	HPSCB			KCCB
	Borrowing	Growth in Rs.	Growth in %	Borrowing	Growth in Rs.	Growth in %
2011-12	749.27	-	-	74.92	-	-
2012-13	488.87	-260.40	-34.75	119.97	45.05	60.13
2013-14	596.16	107.29	21.95	193.89	73.92	61.61
2014-15	866.52	270.36	45.35	317.42	123.53	63.71
2015-16	1095.09	228.57	26.37	539.87	222.45	70.08

Source: Data compiled from the annual reports of the banks.

 

The growth rate of KCCB is going up marginally year on year. The mean growth rate of HPSCB is 14.73% with S.D. of 34.51 and for KCCB it is 63.88% with S.D. of 4.38. It is clearly indicates that KCCB has performed better in term Borrowing.

 

Table 11:‘t’ value of the Data

Bank	Mean	SD	‘t’ Value
HPSCB	14.73	34.51	-2.82
KCCB	63.88	4.38

 

 

 

 

The calculated ‘t’ value is -2.82 and at 0.05 level of significance (‘t’ value 2.447) the difference is significant. Therefore the Null Hypothesis stand rejected and we chose alternate hypothesis i.e. Performance of KCCB is better in this parameter as compared to HPSCB.

 

Profits –The performance of any organisation is decided on the basis of its earning capacity. Table 12 below shows the growth % in term of profits for both the banks during the period under the study.

Table 12: Progress in term of Profit of the banks period 2011-2016. (Amount in Crores)

Years	HPSCB				KCCB
	Income	Expenditure	Profit/Loss	Growth in %	Income	Expenditure	Profit/Loss	Growth in %
2011-12	559.95	518.53	41.42	-	489.67	460.40	29.27	-
2012-13	623.88	573.41	50.46	21.83	592.09	566.23	25.86	-11.65
2013-14	683.45	642.77	40.68	-19.38	658.87	640.14	18.73	-27.57
2014-15	771.88	712.02	59.80	47.00	774.19	731.54	42.65	127.70
2015-16	826.28	774.38	51.90	-13.21	874.38	824.44	49.94	17.09

Source: Data compiled from the annual reports of the banks.

In this case both the banks performing positive in one year their performance is very good but next year their performance is going marginally negative. Table 12 shows that the average growth rate of Profit, the mean growth rate in term of profit HPSCB is 9.06% with S.D. 31.13 and in case of KCCB it is 26.39% with S.D. of 70.02.

 

Table 13:‘t’ value of the Data

Bank	Mean	SD	‘t’ Value
HPSCB	9.06	31.13	-0.452
KCCB	26.39	70.02

‘t’ value here is -0.452 as shown in Table 13, which is very less as compared to table value at 0.05 level of significance which is +/- 2.447. So the Null Hypothesis is accepted which means both the banks are performing equally in term of Profits.

 

Profitability Performance:

Profitability of any organisation is explaining the earning Performance of that organisation. Table 14 below shows the growth % in profitability and accumulated profit of both the banks during the study period, year 2011-12 to 2015-16.

 

Table14: Progress in term Profitability Performance of the banks of the period 2011-2016.  (Amount in Crores)

Years	HPSCB				KCCB
	Profit	Accumulated Profit/Loss	Growth	Growth in %	Profit	Accumulated Profit/Loss	Growth	Growth in %
2011-12	41.42	361.02	-	-	29.27	599	-	-
2012-13	50.46	411.48	50.46	13.97	25.86	628.27	25.86	4.88
2013-14	40.68	452.16	40.68	9.88	18.73	654.13	18.73	4.11
2014-15	59.80	511.96	59.80	13.22	42.65	696.78	42.65	6.52
2015-16	51.90	563.86	51.90	10.13	49.94	746.76	49.94	7.16

Source: Data compiled from the annual reports of the banks.

 

Table 14 shows that the average growth rate in term profitability in case of HPSCB is 11.80% with S.D. of 2.09 and In case of KCCB it is 5.66% with S.D. of 1.41.

 

Table 15: ‘t’ value of the Data

Bank	Mean	SD	‘t’ Value
HPSCB	11.80	2.09	4.848
KCCB	5.66	1.41

 

Statistically there is marginally difference between the two banks in this parameter. ‘t’ value is 4.848 as shows in Table 15, which is high as compared to the table value at 0.05 level of significance which is 2.447. So Null Hypothesis stands rejected and we chose alternate hypothesis i.e. Performance of HPSCB is better in this parameter as compared to KCCB.

 

Management/ Operational Efficiency:

Management efficiency ratio is calculated through operating ratio of the banks. This ratio tells us how efficiently the banks are being run by the management. This ratio establishes the relationship between the operating expenses and advance during the year. The ratio can be calculated as:

 

Lower the ratio the better it is. Higher the ratio less favourable it is because it would have a smaller margin of operating profit for the payment of divined and creation of reserve.

 

Table16: Progress in term Operational Efficiency of the banks of the period 2011-2016.    (Amount in Crores)

Years	Operating Cost	Advances	Ratio (%)	Operating Cost	Advances	Ratio (%)
2011-12	80.16	2361.67	3.33	9.98	2421.58	0.412
2012-13	94.66	2653.75	3.57	11.4	2855.00	0.399
2013-14	118.16	3023.14	3.90	13.9	3142.00	0.440
2014-15	135.03	3591.75	3.75	14.2	3527.41	0.402
2015-16	154.22	4361.5	3.53	14.0	3820.57	0.366

Source: Data compiled from the annual reports of the banks.

 

 

Table 16 shows operating ratio of the two banks HPSCB and KCCB. In the year 2011-12 it was lowest 3.33 and it is increased in the year 2013-14 to 3.90of HPSCB and KCCB shows highest in the year 2013-14 it is 0.440 which is declined to the lowest 0.366 in the year 2015-16. It is concluded from the analysis of Operating ratio of both the banks, HPSCB performed better from KCCB in this parameter.

 

 

 

5. FINDING AND CONCLUSION:

The present study made an attempt to evaluate both banks from different angles so that their relative performance can be gauged. After going through all the parameters it is calculated that HPSCB showing decrease growth it need to increase the bank Share Capital. The mean growth rate for HPSCB is 0.437% and for KCCB it is 1.748%, performance of KCCB is better in this parameter as compared to HPSCB. Branch expansion growth of both the banks is positively increased in last four year during the study period.

 

In term of deposits the mean growth rate for HPSCB is 11.84% and KCCB it is 12.84%, it clearly indicates that KCCB has performed little better in deposit mobilization. Outstanding advances performing equal with mean growth rate of HPSCB is 16.63% and KCCB it is 12.14%. In case of borrowing parameter HPSCB has not done so well. The growth rate in term of Borrowing has been less than the KCCB. The growth rate of KCCB is going up marginally year on year with 14.73% and 63.88% respectively. Performance of KCCB is better than HPSCB in term of borrowing parameter. In term of Shareholder’s funds growth rate is increased in the fourth year, but it decreasing the growth rate in third and fifth year. During the study period both the banks performing positive in one year their performance is very good but next year their performance is going marginally negative and the growth rate in term of profit HPSCB is 9.06% and it is KCCB is 26.39% and the average growth rate in term of profitability HPSCB is 11.80% and KCCB 5.66%.

 

It is analyse operating ratio of HPSCB performed better from KCCB in term of Management efficiency ratio. There is huge need to adopt various strategies for the improvement, such as adoption of new technology in the Co-operative bank, Opening new branch in rural areas, prepare themselves for competition with other Nationalized Banks, introduction new financial scheme to every segment of the society etc.

 

6. REFERENCES:

1.        Barwal, N., and Kumar, K. Comparative Performance Evaluation Of Himachal Pradesh Co-Operative Bank And Kangra Central Co-Operative Bank.

2.        Debnath, R. M., and Shankar, R. (2008). Measuring performance of Indian banks: an application data envelopment analysis. International Journal of Business Performance Management, 10(1), 57-85.

3.        Kumbirai, M., and Webb, R. (2010). A financial ratio analysis of commercial bank performance in South Africa. African Review of Economics and Finance, 2(1), 30-53.

4.        Mishra, P., and Yadav, A. S. (2015). A Comparative Study of Financial Performance of SBI and ICICI Bank. The Indian Journal Of Commerce, 68(2).

5.        Nazir, T. (2010). Analyzing Financial Performance of Commercial Banks in India: Application of CAMEL Model. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences, 4(1).

6.        Padma, D., and Arulmathi, V. (2013). Financial Performance of State Bank of India And ICICI Bank-A Comparative Study. International Journal on Customer Relations, 1(1), 16.

7.        Raza, A., Farhan, M., and Akram, M. (2011). A comparison of financial performance in investment banking sector in Pakistan. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(9).

8.        Saluja, J., and Kaur, R. (2010). Profitability performance of public sector banks in India. Indian Journal of Finance, 4(4), 17-25.

9.        Shah, S. Q., and Jan, R. (2014). Analysis of financial performance of private banks in Pakistan. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 109, 1021-1025.

10.     Singh, A., and Tandon, P. (2012). A study of financial performance: A comparative analysis of SBI and ICICI Bank. International Journal of Marketing, Financial Services and Management Research, 1(11), 56-71.

11.     Svitalkova, Z. (2014). Comparison and evaluation of bank efficiency in selected countries in EU. Procedia Economics and Finance, 12, 644-653.

12.     Zhao, H., and Kang, S. (2015). Banking Performance Evaluation in China Based on Non-radial Super-efficiency Data Envelopment Analysis. Procedia Economics and Finance, 23, 197-202.

13.     Cooper, D. R., Schindler, P. S., and Sun, J. (2003). Business research methods.

14.     Gupta, S. P., and Gupta, M. P. (2010). Business Statistics. Sultan Chand and Sons.

15.     Khan, M. Y. (2004). Financial services. Tata McGraw-Hill Education.

16.     Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research methodology: Methods and techniques. New Age International.

17.     Malhotra, N. K. (2008). Marketing research: An applied orientation, 5/e. Pearson Education India.

18.     Pandey, I. M. (1995). Essentials of Financial Management, 4th Edition. Vikas Publishing House.

 

 

 

Accepted on 04.05.2017          © A&V Publications all right reserved