




































American Finance & Banking Review 

 Vol. 6, No. 1; 2021 

ISSN 2576-1226    E-ISSN 2576-1234 

Published by CRIBFB, USA 

 

1 

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL 

PERFORMANCE OF NON-BANK FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS 

IN BANGLADESH 

 
S. M. Akber 

Lecturer 
 Department of Business Administration 

 Ranada Prasad Shaha University, Bangladesh  

 M.Phil Researcher  

Department of Finance, Jagannath University, Bangladesh 

E-mail: akber@rpsu.edu.bd 

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0267-3626 

 

Dhiman Barua  

Assistant Professor 

 Faculty of Business Administration 

 BGC Trust University Bangladesh, Bangladesh 

 M.Phil Researcher  

Department of Finance, Jagannath University, Bangladesh 

E-mail: dhiman@bgctub.ac.bd 
 

 

Received: October 01, 2021  Accepted: October 30, 2021  Online Published: November 26, 2021 

 

DOI: 10.46281/amfbr.v6i1.1455         URL: https://doi.org/10.46281/amfbr.v6i1.1455 

 

 

ABSTRACT 

NBFIs play an important role in economic development through ensuring proper mobilization of 

funds in Bangladesh. This study represents a comparison of nine NBFIs operating their business 

in Bangladesh within the period from 2016 to 2019 through using financial ratios and other 

measures. To analyze the financial performance this study has used ratio analysis, such as ROA, 

ROE, ROCE, Institutional size/ Total assets and total equity etc. The outcome of this study says 

that for generating return the NBFIs performance based on efficiency ratio is different from the 

performance based on liquidity ratio, capital ratio and other financial measures. This study 

suggests to NBFIs to be more conscious about loan selection and establish a brand image 

through providing more efficient services. It also suggests the NBFIs to finds more income 

generating areas to be more competitive. In the coming years NBFIs will have more prospects 

that will ensure the economic development of our country.  

 

Keywords: NBFIs, Financial Performance, Efficiency, Liquidity, Profitability, ROA, ROE, 

ROCE. 

 

JEL Classification Codes: F36, L25, G23.  

mailto:akber@rpsu.edu.bd


https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/amfbr       American Finance & Banking Review         Vol. 6, No. 1; 2021 

2 

INTRODUCTION 

An efficient financial system is essential to ensure economic development for any nation because 

it ensures a smooth transfer of fund from the surplus to deficit unit. To ensure an interruption 

free production, keeping the market competitive and assist the economic transaction properly a 

well-functioning financial system has no substitute. An efficient financial system means 

allocating the resources efficiently. It is the foundation of enhancing the performance of the 

organizations. Non-bank financial institutions are a part of the financial system. Through serving 

the economy, it ensures the economic development of a country. NBFI supports the economy 

through investment in the capital market, entrepreneurs’ by giving short term or long term loans 

and through providing many other activities. Asset management (AM), institution size (IS), and 

operating efficiency three principal factors are important for enhancing the financial performance 

(Miskhin, 2019). 

Non-bank financial institutions (NBFI) plays an important role in the financial sector of a 

country. There could be various institutions that act a NBFI but this paper works with finance 

companies. Finance companies are a part of NBFI. They don’t collect a deposit like banks. They 

raised funds through selling their shares and invest the funds through providing direct and 

indirect loans. They also invest a portion of the funds in the capital market. That’s why finance 

companies play a significant role in the performance of capital markets. Most of the finance 

companies are vertically integrated organizations. They are incorporated with various services 

such as merger and acquisition, advisory services, capital raising services, securities trading 

services, and research coverage (Madura, 2018). 

The purpose of this study is to analyze the financial performance of the selected NBFI in 

Bangladesh within the period of 2016-2019.  

To measure the performance, financial ratios and financial measures that have an impact 

over the performance of NBFI are used as a basis. So evaluating the financial performance of 

NBFI and comparing the relative market position of the selected NBFI in Bangladesh is the 

prime objective of this study. To measure the financial performance several ratios such as return 

on equity (ROE), return on assets (ROA), institution size/ total assets & total equity, earnings per 

share (EPS), current ratio, capital ratio, return on capital employed (ROCE), and Interest 

Coverage Ratio are used. This study will analyze the financial performance of selected finance 

companies (NBFI) in Bangladesh. Then, based on the result it will identify their competitive 

position in Bangladesh. It also involves the managers and investors with important information 

about operating efficiency of finance companies so that it would be helpful for them to take 

decision for future development and investment. 

 

LITERATURE REVIEW 

Usually financial ratios, measuring performance against budget, benchmarking are used to 

measure the financial performance of any financial institutions (Avkiran, 1995). Through 

published financial statement one can get different types of ratios and it helps to determine the 

financial performance of that company. In Pakistan to classify financial institutions based on 

their performance different types of  financial ratios such as return on equity (ROE), return on 

assets (ROA), total assets, total equity, earnings per share (EPS), current ratio, capital ratio, 

return on capital employed (ROCE), and administration expenses to profit before tax ratio are 

used (Ali Reza, 2011). Several studies have been conducted that are relevant to analyzing the 

company’s performance that focus the operational effectiveness and efficiency to ensure the 

development of the company.  



https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/amfbr       American Finance & Banking Review         Vol. 6, No. 1; 2021 

3 

Tarawneh (2006) conduct a research and came with an outcome that having better 

efficiency a company may not have a better effectiveness always. Elizabeth. D (2004) suggested 

through his study that the financial measures of performance, such as return on equity (ROE), 

capital adequacy ratio (CAR) and net interest margins (NIM) should be calculated positively 

with scores of customer service quality. Alsamaree (2013) worked in the same area within the 

period from 2007- 2010 based on the commercial banks of Kuwait. In his study he showed that 

because of distributing the profits properly banks in Kuwait were able to overcome the crisis and 

was able to draw the attention of National Bank of Kuwait. 

Almumani (2014) made a research to analyze and compare the performance of Saudi 

banks listed in their stock market for the period 2007-2011. He measured the financial 

performance by two approaches such as trend analysis and inter-firm analysis. He came up with 

an outcome that Saudi Banks’ profitability increase, due to increase of their operating income 

and their profitability decrease due to increase their assets, operating expense and cost of income. 

He also came up with an outcome that Saudi joint venture banks are more efficient to generate 

profits, absorb loan losses and to dominate in ROE. But the Saudi established banks are more 

capable to absorb asset losses and to dominate in ROA. 

Akber (2019) conducted a research on the relationship between profitability and non-

performing loan on sharia based banks of Bangladesh. He used a sample of five sharia based 

banks in Bangladesh where return on equity was used as a proxy for profitability. He came up 

with an outcome that a consciousness of the authority on loan disbursement will lead to reduce 

the non-performing loan and increase the bank’s profitability. Akber (2020) conducted another 

research on comparing the performance of traditional private commercial banks and Islamic 

banks in Bangladesh. He used a sample of five traditional commercial private banks and five 

Islamic banks and the performance were measured based on camels. He came with an outcome 

that in term of management quality private commercial banks perform better while in term of 

capital adequacy and liquidity position Islamic banks perform better.  

Fukuyama (1995) researched among countries in Asia, to employ DEA and to analyze 

banking efficiency. In his research, he considered the efficiency of 143 Japanese banks as a 

sample. He came up with an outcome that the pure technical efficiency to average around 86% 

and scale efficiency around 98%. It means that the major source of overall technical inefficiency 

is pure technical inefficiency. He said that the scale inefficiency is because of increasing returns 

to scale. He also said that banks with different organizational status perform differently and the 

scale efficiency is positively but weakly associated with bank size. 

Tandon et al. (2019) conducted a research in the same field. In his research he showed 

non-performing loans and their impact on bank profitability. He focused on banks' specific 

macroeconomic determinants. Finally, he came with an outcome that to increase the profitability 

more attention is required for NPL management. 

An efficient financial system reduces liquidity risk and it is done through a proper 

combination of different types of illiquid assets and proper securitization. Usually the presence 

of financial intermediary reduces information asymmetries and transaction cost. Through 

investment banks convert their liquid short-term assets to long-term illiquid investments 

(Diamond, 1983). Here   the financial comparison of NBFIs in Bangladesh is based on return on 

equity (ROE), return on asset (ROA), institution size (IS) and many other activities.  

Based on the above discussion, it can be said that most of the research worked with the 

banks or investment banks. A very few works have done with NBFIs which contributes a 

significant portion to the economic development of our country. So a research gap has created. 



https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/amfbr       American Finance & Banking Review         Vol. 6, No. 1; 2021 

4 

That’s why this study deals with the NBFIs and tries to analyze a comparative financial position 

of NBFIs in Bangladesh.   

 

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY 

The prime objective of this study is to analyze the financial performance of the finance 

companies (NBFI) in Bangladesh to ensure growth and prosperity of this sector. So the specific 

objectives of this study are to provide the insights of performance of the selected finance 

companies (NBFI) in Bangladesh. Based on the performance their competitive position will be 

analyzed. So that it will be helpful for the investor as well the management for taking the right 

decisions.  

 

RATIONALE OF THE STUDY 

This study is important because it will improve the NBFIs financial performance in Bangladesh. 

So it will contribute to the economic growth of Bangladesh. The worldwide growth of NBFIs 

and its impact over the economy gives is a clear indication how much it is important in 

Bangladesh economy. The reasons inspires to analyze this issue in Bangladesh. 

 

METHODOLOGY 

This study followed a quantitative research method to bring the best outcome. Most of the data 

used to analyze the performances are secondary data.  It also used a comparative study of the 

NBFIs based on their individual financial performances.   

 

Sample Size & Sources of Data: The data used in this study consists of nine finance companies 

(NBFI) that are listed on the Dhaka Stock Exchange. So the sample size is nine. The duration for 

analyzing the data is the period from 2016-2019. These data are collected from the company’s 

annual report as well from their websites.  

 

Indicators for Performance Measurement: To measure the financial performance the 

following ratios are used: 

 Profitability ratios: Return on equity (ROE), Return on Assets (ROA), Admin Expenses 

to Profit before Tax Ratio, Earnings per Share (EPS), and Return on Capital Employed 

(ROCE).  

 Liquidity Ratio: Current Ratio   

 Leverage ratio: Capital Ratio  

 Institution Size: Total Assets, Total Equity 

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 

To get a sound outcome of the financial performance analysis this study used time series data 

analysis for different types of ratios such as ROA, ROE, ROCE, Interest Coverage Ratio, Current 

Ratio, and Capital Ratio and measures their result. The results with discussion are as follows.   

 

Return on Asset (ROA): The term return on asset means how much return is generated from 

using one unit of assets. It denotes the earning capacity of the NBFI by using its assets (Rose, 

2016). It is calculated dividing net income by total assets. The calculated results for ROA shows 

IDLC generates the highest ROA (13.46) and PLFSL generates the lowest ROA (3.57) for their 



https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/amfbr       American Finance & Banking Review         Vol. 6, No. 1; 2021 

5 

shareholders and overall it has an increasing trend from 2016 to 2019. It indicates a good earning 

capacity for NBFIs [see Appendix Table-01]. 

 

Return on Equity (ROE): Return on equity is an indicator to measure the financial performance 

of a company (Rose, 2016). It is calculated dividing net income by shareholders' equity. Here the 

calculated result for ROE shows IDLC generates the highest ROE (14.22) and PLFSL generates 

the lowest ROE (4.63) for their shareholders and overall it has an increasing trend from 2016 to 

2019. It indicates a good sign for NBFIs. [See Appendix Table-02]. 

 

Return on Capital Employed (ROCE): The term return on capital employed is a financial ratio 

used to assess a company's profitability and efficiency of using capital (Rose, 2016). It helps to 

understand how well a company is generating profits from its using capital. Here the calculated 

result for ROCE shows that IDLC generates the highest ROE (17.04) and PLFSL generates the 

lowest ROE (7.15) and overall it has an increasing trend from 2016 to 2019. It is a good 

indication for NBFIs. [See Appendix Table-03].  

 

Earnings per Share (EPS): The term earnings per share means how much earning the company 

is generating against each share. It measures the operating efficiency of a company (Besley, 

2017). Here the calculated result for EPS shows that GSPFIN generates the highest EPS (5.20) 

and NHFIL generates the lowest EPS (1.71) and overall it has an increasing trend from 2016 to 

2019. It is a good sign for NBFIs. [See Appendix Table-04]. 

 

Institution Size/ Total Assets: The term asset means anything that can generate business for a 

company. But for any financial institution’s assets means financial assets. It shows the financial 

strength of a company (Gitman, 2020). Here the calculated result of total assets shows that LBFL 

maintains the highest level of total assets (5850.75 million) and IPDC maintains the lowest level 

of total assets (2459.75 million). But for the growth rate DBH is in the highest position (55%) 

whereas PLFSL is in lowest the position (-12%) during the selected period. [See Appendix 

Table-05]. 

 

Institution Size/ Total Owners’ Equity: Equity is essentially the owner's interest in the 

company's assets. It is what remains for the owner once he has deducted all liabilities from the 

assets (Gitman, 2020). Here the calculated result of total equity shows that LBFL maintains the 

highest level of total equity (1393 million) and PLFSL maintains the lowest level of total equity 

(1126.75 million). But for the growth rate ICB is in the highest position (24.86%) whereas 

PLFSL is in lowest the position (-9.46) during the selected period. [See Appendix Table-06]. 

 

Current Ratio: Current ratio is an indicator that specifies the firm’s ability to pay its current 

liability with its current assets. It measures the financial health of a company based on its 

liquidity (Besley, 2017). Here the calculated result for current ratio shows LBFL has the highest 

current ratio (12.76) and PLFSL has the lowest current ratio (2.92) and overall it shows a 

fluctuation trend from 2016 to 2019. It is not a good sign for NBFIs. [See Appendix Table-07]. 

 

Capital Ratio: The term capital ratio means the extent of using the equities and retaining profits 

for a financial institution to its operations. It represents the percentage of owners’ equity in the 

total assets of any financial institutions (Besley, 2017). Here the calculated result for capital ratio 

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/062215/what-are-financial-risk-ratios-and-how-are-they-used-measure-risk.asp


https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/amfbr       American Finance & Banking Review         Vol. 6, No. 1; 2021 

6 

shows DBH has the highest capital ratio (70.34) and IDLC has the lowest capital ratio (22.05) 

and overall it shows a fluctuation trend from 2016 to 2019 which is not a good sign for NBFIs 

[See Appendix Table-08]. 

 

Non-Preforming Loan (NPL): A non-performing loan (NPL) is a loan where the borrower is in 

default and has not paid the monthly payment of principal and interest for a certain amount. Non-

performing loans arise when borrowers lack the money to make repayments or are in situations 

that make it difficult for them to continue to make repayments (Rose, 2016). Here the calculated 

result for non-performing loan shows LBFL has the highest NPL (166.75 million) and IPDC has 

the lowest NPL (88.25 million) and overall it shows an increasing trend from 2016 to 2019 

which is an alarming sign for NBFIs [See Appendix Table-09]. 

 

Interest Coverage Ratio (ICR): The term interest coverage ratio is a debt and the profitability 

ratio. It is used to determine the capacity of a company to pay interest on its outstanding debt. 

Interest coverage ratio is calculated by dividing a company's EBIT by its interest expense during 

a given period (Besley, 2017). Here the calculated result of interest coverage ratio shows that 

most of the companies are financially capable to pay their financial obligation.  Here LBFL has 

the highest interest coverage ratio (2.12) and GSPFIN has the lowest interest coverage ratio 

(1.09) [See Appendix Table-10]. 

 

COMPARISON OF FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE OF INVESTMENT BANK 

To evaluate the market position of NBFIs scores is assigned on the basis of financial ratio of 

different NBFIs in Bangladesh.  The scoring system is based on the performance of different 

ratios. The best performer will scored from 1 and the worst performer will be scored with 9. Here 

the score is given by 

1 = Best Performer 

2   

.  

. 

9 = Worst Performer 

If any value not available, in that case it will be scored by 9 for undesirable performance.  

The comparison table is available in the appendix section. [See Appendix Table-11].  

 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

As NBFIs are one of the major sources of funds for the corporations so it contributes a lot to the 

economic development of the country. In Bangladesh the operation of sector is developing 

gradually. Based on the calculated result, it can be said that the performance for most of NBFIs 

in Bangladesh in continuously improving and they are playing a significant role in the market. 

 Based on ROA, ROE and ROCE the financial performance of the NBFIs shows an 

increasing trend which is a good sign for this industry. Based on EPS the financial performance 

of NBFIs also shows an increasing trend but for current ratio, capital ratio it shows a fluctuating 

trend which means that at any time it can go downward. So to overcome this situation they have 

to be more efficient to utilize their funds.  

 One of the major findings of this study is the non-performing (NPL) shows an 

increasing trend of NBFIs. NPL creates obstacle for the development both for the company and 

also for the economy. Selecting the adverse loan was the main reason to increase the non-

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/interest.asp


https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/amfbr       American Finance & Banking Review         Vol. 6, No. 1; 2021 

7 

performing loan. So to reduce the amount they have to be careful in loan distribution and take 

proper initiative to collect the existing loans.  

 In Bangladesh the main sources of generating earning for NBFIs is to provide loans 

and investing in capital market. Although in recent time performance of capital market is good 

but still it follows a huge fluctuations. So to be more competitive and to compete with banks they 

have to identify others options to invest funds and generate more secured income.  

 

CONCLUSION 

This study focuses to analyze the efficiency of NBFIs in Bangladesh within the period from 2019 

to 2019. For this it has applied different types of performance measurement tools and techniques. 

Different types of ratios are used to analyze the performance of NBFIs in Bangladesh. Finally, 

based on their performances a rank has been created. This study says that NBFIs in Bangladesh 

are doing well for some ratios while for others it has to improve their performance. The main 

area where they have to improve is the loan selection. They have to reduce the number of 

adverse loan selection. At the same time they have to identify other income generating areas to 

be more competitive.   

 Although there are a lot of obstacle NBFIs has a huge scope to develop themselves. 

Bangladesh is moving to a developing country from under developed country and it has become 

possible for the economic revolution. So NBFIs can take the advantage of this revolution. For 

this they need to build a strong brand image by providing efficient services to their customers. So 

in the coming years they have a huge potential to perform. Due to the unavailability of data this 

study compiles the results of using only nine NBFIs which is a major limitation of this study. In 

future, by incorporating other NBFIs and other financial measure more accurate results can be 

created and that is the scope for future research of this study. This study will help the managers 

to take more accurate decisions related to their operations and the investors to take their 

investment decision in the capital market.  

 

REFERENCES 
Akber, S. M. (2019). Relationship between profitability and non-performing loan and a 

comparative financial performance analysis of shari’ah based banks of Bangladesh. 

Indian Journal of Finance and Banking, 3(2), 32-42. 

 

Akber, S. M. & Dey, A. (2020). Evaluation of the financial performance between traditional 

private commercial banks and Islamic banks in Bangladesh. International Journal of 

Islamic Banking and Finance Research, 4(2), 1-10. 

 

Almumani, M. A. (2014). A comparison of financial performance of Saudi banks. Asian Journal 

of Research in Banking and Finance, 4(2), 20-29. 

 

Alsamaree, A. H. (2013). Financial ratios and performance of banks. Journal of Research on 

International Business and Management, 3(1), 17-19. 

 

Avkiran, N. (1995). Developing an instrument to measure customer service quality in branch 

banking. International Journal of Bank’s marketing, 12(6), 10-18. 

 



https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/amfbr       American Finance & Banking Review         Vol. 6, No. 1; 2021 

8 

Besley, S. & Bringham, E.F. (2017). Essentials of managerial finance.14th Edition, South-

Western: Thomson Higher Education. 

 

Diamond, D. D. P. (1983). Bank runs, deposit insurance and liquidity. Journal of political 

Economy, 91(3), 41-49. 

 

Elizabeth, D. E. G. (2004). Efficiency customer service and financial performance among 

Australian financial institutions. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 22(5), 31-42. 

 

Fukuyama, H. (1995). Measuring efficiency and productivity growth in Japanese Banking: A 

nonparametric Approach. Journal of Applied Financial Economics, 3(2), 95-107. 

 

Gitman,L.J., Zutter, C.H., & Smart, S.B. (2020). Principles of managerial finance. 15th Edition, 

New York: Pearson PLC. 

 

Madura, J. (2018). Financial institutions and markets, 11th Edition, New York: Pearson PLC. 

 

Miskhin, F. (2019). The economics of money, banking and financial markets. 11th Edition, New 

York: Pearson PLC. 

 

Raza, A., & Farhan, M. (2011). A comparison of financial performance in investment banking 

sector in Pakistan. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(9), 35-45. 

 

Rose, P. (2016). Commercial bank management. 4th Edition.  New York: McGraw-Hill. 

 

Tarawneh, M. (2006). A comparison of financial performance in the banking sector: Some 

Evidence from Omani Commercial banks. International Research Journal of Finance 

and Economics, 3(1), 21-31. 

 

Tandon, D., Chaturvedi, A., & Vidyarthi, H. (2019). Non-performing assets and profitability of 

Indian banks: an econometric study. International Journal of Business Competition and 

Growth, 6(1), 60-76. 

 

APPENDICES 

 

Appendix A: Table 1. Return on Asset (ROA) 

 

Banks/Year 2016 (%) 2017 (%) 2018 (%) 2019 (%) 
Average 

(%) 

LBFL 11.31 12.91 13.06 13.30 12.65 

IDLC 14.54 10.68 13.68 14.95 13.46 

BIFC 11.12 12.85 10.86 5.70 10.13 

GSPFIN 2.41 6.02 5.64 6.72 5.20 

DBH 4.01 3.25 5.71 5.89 4.72 

ICB 2.47 4.28 4.32 5.53 4.15 

NHFIL 2.44 3.93 4.68 5.79 4.21 



https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/amfbr       American Finance & Banking Review         Vol. 6, No. 1; 2021 

9 

PLFSL 2.98 3.77 3.46 4.06 3.57 

IPDC 4.96 6.30 6.11 7.30 6.17 

Average 6.25 7.11 7.50 7.69 7.14 

Source: Annual report of NBFIS’ (2016-2019) 

 

Appendix B: Table 2. Return on Equity (ROE) 

 

Banks/Year 2016 (%) 2017 (%) 2018 (%) 2019 (%) 
Average 

(%) 

LBFL 12.29 13.89 14.04 14.28 13.63 

IDLC 15.3 11.44 14.44 15.71 14.22 

BIFC 12.12 13.85 11.86 6.7 11.13 

GSPFIN 3.91 7.52 7.14 8.22 6.70 

DBH 5.11 4.35 6.81 6.99 5.82 

ICB 3.29 5.1 5.14 6.35 4.97 

NHFIL 3.79 5.28 6.03 7.14 5.56 

PLFSL 4.04 4.83 4.52 5.12 4.63 

IPDC 6.31 7.65 7.46 8.65 7.52 

Average 7.35 8.21 8.60 8.80 8.24 

Source: Annual report of NBFIS’ (2016-2019) 

 

Appendix C: Table 3. Return on Capital Employed (ROCE) 

 

Banks/Year 2016 (%) 2017 (%) 2018 (%) 2019 (%) 
Average 

(%) 

LBFL 14.79 6.39 6.54 7.18 8.73 

IDLC 18.02 14.16 17.16 18.83 17.04 

BIFC 14.6 16.33 14.34 9.58 13.71 

GSPFIN 5.89 9.5 9.12 10.6 8.78 

DBH 7.49 6.73 9.19 9.77 8.30 

ICB 5.95 7.76 7.8 9.41 7.73 

NHFIL 5.92 7.41 8.16 9.67 7.79 

PLFSL 6.46 7.25 6.94 7.94 7.15 

IPDC 8.44 9.78 9.59 11.18 9.75 

Average 9.73 9.48 9.87 10.46 9.89 

Source: Annual report of NBFIS’ (2016-2019) 

 

Appendix D: Table 4. Earnings per Share (EPS) 

 

Banks/Year 2016 (%) 2017 (%) 2018 (%) 2019 (%) 
Trend Average 

(%) 

LBFL 3.3 3.35 3.5 4.05 22.73 3.55 

IDLC 3.54 3.68 3.75 3.95 11.58 3.73 

BIFC 2.12 2.85 2.86 3.20 50.94 2.76 

GSPFIN 2.41 6.02 5.64 6.72 178.84 5.20 



https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/amfbr       American Finance & Banking Review         Vol. 6, No. 1; 2021 

10 

DBH 2.51 2.75 3.21 3.39 35.06 2.97 

ICB 1.47 1.28 1.32 2.53 72.11 1.65 

NHFIL 1.44 1.93 1.68 1.79 24.31 1.71 

PLFSL 1.98 1.77 1.46 1.06 -46.46 1.57 

IPDC 3.76 3.10 2.91 3.10 -17.55 3.22 

Average 2.50 2.97 2.93 3.31  2.93 

Source: Annual report of NBFIS’ (2016-2019) 

 

Appendix E: Table 5. Institution Size/ Total Assets 

 

Banks/Year 
2016 

TK(Million) 

2017 

TK(Million) 

2018  

TK(Million) 

2019 

TK(Million) 

Average 

Growth 

% 

Average  

TK(Million) 

LBFL 5576 5477 6245 6105 9.49 5850.75 

IDLC 5719 5521 5599 6068 6.10 5726.75 

BIFC 4533 4953 4912 5295 16.81 4923.25 

GSPFIN 5709 5511 5589 6058 6.11 5716.75 

DBH 2915 3032 4414 4537 55.64 3724.50 

ICB 33624 4004 4458 4604 27.04 4172.50 

NHFIL 2324 2327 2739 2990 28.66 2595.00 

PLFSL 2647 3050 2847 2328 -12.05 2718.00 

IPDC 2446 2462 2464 2467  2459.75 

Source: Annual report of NBFIS’ (2016-2019) 

 

Appendix F: Table 6. Institution Size/ Total Owners’ Equity 

 

Banks/Year 
2016 

TK(Million) 

2017 

TK(Million) 

2018 

TK(Million) 

2019 

TK(Million) 

Average 

growth % 
Average  

TK 

(Million) 

LBFL 1337 1310 1435 1490 11.44 1393.00 

IDLC 1260 1303 1289 1343 6.59 1298.75 

BIFC 1287 1326 1266 1240 -3.65 1279.75 

GSPFIN 993 1115 1289 1059 6.65 1114.00 

DBH 1098 1112 1250 1257 14.48 1179.25 

ICB 1633 1767 1947 2039 24.86 1846.50 

NHFIL 1023 1202 1252 1273 24.44 1187.50 

PLFSL 1152 1086 1226 1043 -9.46 1126.75 

IPDC 1324 1342 1319 1315 -0.68 1325.00 

Source: Annual report of NBFIS’ (2016-2019) 

 

Appendix G: Table 7. Current Ratio 

 

Banks/Year 2016 (%) 2017 (%) 2018 (%) 2019 (%) Average(Times) 

LBFL 11.75 16.50 11.95 10.83 12.76 

IDLC 11.33 12.30 12.62 13.45 12.43 



https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/amfbr       American Finance & Banking Review         Vol. 6, No. 1; 2021 

11 

BIFC 1.53 1.58 1.50 1.73 1.59 

GSPFIN 2.48 2.55 2.50 2.61 2.54 

DBH 19.93 13.80 5.71 3.78 10.81 

ICB 1.31 2.85 2.85 3.10 2.53 

NHFIL 7.95 10.88 7.57 8.73 8.78 

PLFSL 2.93 2.85 2.82 3.07 2.92 

IPDC 12.93 13.59 16.67 16.82 15.00 

Average 8.02 8.54 7.13 7.12 7.70 

Source: Annual report of NBFIS’ (2016-2019) 

 

Appendix H: Table 8. Capital Ratio 

 

Banks/Year 2016 (%) 2017 (%) 2018 (%) 2019 (%) Average(Times) 

LBFL 9.74 18.45 33.99 30.00 23.05 

IDLC 11.50 12.24 9.70 54.76 22.05 

BIFC 35.57 35.65 30.77 29.17 32.79 

GSPFIN 23.73 27.46 30.86 23.53 26.40 

DBH 56.42 71.54 77.92 75.47 70.34 

ICB 50.76 46.33 45.80 46.45 47.34 

NHFIL 57.92 57.63 56.30 56.77 57.16 

PLFSL 43.99 41.05 43.84 44.32 43.30 

IPDC 60.91 59.50 59.20 58.40 59.50 

Average 38.95 41.09 43.15 46.54 42.43 

Source: Annual report of NBFIS’ (2016-2019) 

 

Appendix I: Table 9. Non-Preforming loan 

 

Banks/Year 
2016 

TK(Million) 

2017 

TK(Million) 

2018 

TK(Million) 

2019 

TK(Million) 

Average 

TK(Million) 

LBFL 140 158 185 184 166.75 

IDLC 127 115 188 150 145.00 

BIFC 98 116 114 118 111.50 

GSPFIN 95 98 102 106 100.25 

DBH 86 88 92 98 91.00 

ICB 130 138 144 151 140.75 

NHFIL 95 102 108 116 105.25 

PLFSL 187 206 202 198 198.25 

IPDC 84 86 89 94 88.25 

Average 116.00 123.00 136.00 135.00 127.00 

Source: Annual report of NBFIS’ (2016-2019) 

 

Appendix J: Table 10: Interest Coverage Ratio 

 

Banks/Year 2016 (%) 2017 (%) 2018 (%) 2019 (%) Average(Times) 

LBFL 1.85 1.97 2.28 2.39 2.12 



https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/amfbr       American Finance & Banking Review         Vol. 6, No. 1; 2021 

12 

IDLC 1.41 1.39 1.68 1.94 1.61 

BIFC 1.58 2.01 1.73 1.89 1.80 

GSPFIN 1.01 1.26 1.55 0.55 1.09 

DBH 1.13 1.25 1.39 1.48 1.31 

ICB 1.42 1.60 1.94 1.86 1.71 

NHFIL 1.67 1.74 1.05 1.06 1.38 

PLFSL 1.79 1.84 1.32 1.28 1.56 

IPDC 1.87 2.89 2.95 3.14 2.71 

Average 1.53 1.77 1.77 1.73 1.70 

Source: Annual report of NBFIS’ (2016-2019) 

 

Appendix K: Table 11: Ranks of Investment Banks Based on Financial Performance 

 

Performance 

Indicators 

Investment Banks 

LBFL IDLC BIFC GSPFIN DBH ICB NHFIL PLFSL IPDC 

Financial Measures 

ROA 2 1 3 5 6 8 7 9 3 

ROE 2 1 3 5 6 8 7 9 4 

ROCE 4 1 2 3 5 7 6 8 9 

EPS 3 2 6 1 5 8 7 9 4 

Total Assets 2 3 5 4 4 1 8 7 9 

Total Equity 2 4 5 9 7 1 6 8 3 

Current 

ratio 

2 3 9 7 4 8 5 6 1 

Capital 

Ratio 

8 9 6 7 1 4 3 5 2 

NPL 8 7 5 3 2 6 4 9 1 

Interest 

Coverage 

2 5 3 9 8 4 7 6 1 

Source: Authors Own Contribution 

 

Appendix L: Table 12: Samples used in the study 

 

SL. Symbol Full Name 

1 LBFL LankaBangla Finance Ltd. 

2 IDLC IDLC Finance Ltd. 

3 BIFC Bangladesh Industrial Fin. Co. Ltd. 

4 GSPFIN GSP Finance Company (Bangladesh) limited 

5 DBH Delat Brac Housing Finance Corp. Ltd. 

6 ICB Investment Corporation of Bangladesh 

7 NHFIL National Housing Fin. and Inv. Ltd. 

8 PLFSL Peoples Leasing and Fin. Services Ltd. 

9 IPDC IPDC Finance Limited. 

 



https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/amfbr       American Finance & Banking Review         Vol. 6, No. 1; 2021 

13 

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS  

Conceptualization: S. M. Akber, Dhiman Barua  

Data curation: S. M. Akber, Dhiman Barua  

Formal analysis: S. M. Akber 

Funding Acquisition: S. M. Akber, Dhiman Barua 

Project Administration: S. M. Akber 

Software: S. M. Akber 

Validation: S. M. Akber, Dhiman Barua 

Writing – Original Draft: S. M. Akber, Dhiman Barua 

Writing – Review & Editing: S. M. Akber, Dhiman Barua 

 

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT 

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.  

 

COPYRIGHTS  

Copyright for this article is retained by the author(s), with first publication rights granted to the 

journal. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative 

Commons Attribution license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0). 

 
 


