IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/applec/v53y2021i43p4950-4961.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Leverage and balance-sheet size: a comparative study between Islamic and conventional banks

Author

Listed:
  • Yacine Hammami
  • Youssef Riahi

Abstract

We carry out a comparative analysis of procyclical leverage between Islamic banks and conventional banks in the GCC countries and Malaysia. We collect an unbalanced panel data set including 57 conventional banks and 73 Islamic banks covering the period 2000–2019. First, we document strong evidence of procyclical leverage for our sample banks. Second, our results highlight that conventional banks have statistically stronger leverage procyclicality than Islamic banks, even after controlling for accounting profitability, economic conditions, bank regulations, and wholesale funding. Moreover, we document that the differential in the leverage procyclicality across Islamic banks and conventional banks has been stronger after the global financial crisis, and seems to be more pronounced in small banks compared with large banks. Our findings suggest that the differential in the leverage procyclicality across the two types of banks is related to their different business models. An implication of our results is that the low leverage procyclicality of Islamic banks is a key factor contributing to the stability of a dual banking system.

Suggested Citation

  • Yacine Hammami & Youssef Riahi, 2021. "Leverage and balance-sheet size: a comparative study between Islamic and conventional banks," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(43), pages 4950-4961, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:53:y:2021:i:43:p:4950-4961
    DOI: 10.1080/00036846.2021.1912283
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00036846.2021.1912283
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00036846.2021.1912283?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:53:y:2021:i:43:p:4950-4961. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEC20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.