Abstract
AbstractBank survival is essential to economic growth and development because banks mediate the financing of the economy. A bank's overall condition is often assessed by a supervisory rating system called CAMELS, an acronym for the components Capital adequacy, Asset quality, Management quality, Earnings, Liquidity, and Sensitivity to market risk. Estimates of the impact of CAMELS components on bank survival vary widely. We perform a metasynthesis and metaregression analysis (MRA) using 2120 estimates collected from 50 studies. In the MRA, we account for uncertainty in moderator selection by employing Bayesian model averaging. The results of the synthesis indicate an economically negligible impact of CAMELS variables on bank survival; in addition, the effect of bank‐specific, (macro)economic, and market factors is virtually absent. The results of the heterogeneity analysis and publication bias analysis are consistent in terms that they do not find an economically significant impact of the CAMELS variables. Moreover, best practice estimates show a small economic impact of CAMELS components and no impact of other factors. The study concludes that caution should be exercised when using CAMELS rating to predict bank survival or failure.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
