Comparación entre mucositis y periimplantitis

Table 4.4 shows the results for the share of PLS in banks major earning assets (PLS- MEA) in Islamic and conventional banks with and without Islamic windows (column 1, 2 and 3 respectively). The average PLS-MEA for Islamic banks is 14%, which is nearly four times larger than the average PLS-MEA for conventional banks and this difference is highly statistically significant. Thus, Islamic banks105 do on average, place a greater emphasis on PLS forms of financing and investment assets than their conventional counterparts. Nevertheless, this result cannot refute the criticism that Islamic banks rely heavily on debt instruments, since on average, less than 15% of Islamic banks’ major earning assets (MEA) are in PLS form.

105 _{Industry level results refer to full-fledged Islamic banks only, as Islamic windows are included as part}

of the parent conventional bank

126

A closer look at the results shows the significant variation between Islamic banks. PLS- MEA ranges from less than 1% to over 53% in the single year. For 8 of the 23 banks (35% of the sample), PLS-MEA is higher than the average and for 3 of these banks, PLS-MEA comprises 40% or more, representing a considerable proportion of the banks’ MEA. For the highest ranking Islamic bank, ASB, PLS assets exceed more than 50% of its financing and investment portfolio. Contrary to the criticism of Islamic banks, these results provide empirical evidence to suggest that some Islamic banks follow a different, more PLS-oriented banking model than conventional banks.

On the other hand, there are also Islamic banks for which PLS-MEA is negligible (less than 2%). These banks exhibit an overall low risk-sharing approach to their operations. Moreover, comparison with conventional banks reveals that several Islamic banks are even less PLS-oriented than their conventional counterparts. For 5 Islamic banks PLS- MEA is lower than the average PLS-MEA of conventional banks, with the highest ranking conventional bank with (without) Islamic window holding PLS-MEA share greater than 8 (15) Islamic banks.

Table 4.4: PLS-MEA Levels in Islamic and Conventional Banks

Banks PLS-MEA Banks PLS-MEA Banks PLS-MEA

AHB 0.47% SHB 0.09% RAK 0.00%

NIB 0.69% UABa 0.19% FB 0.01%

ARB 0.73% ABC 0.89% NBF 0.22%

AB 1.85% ADCB 1.22% BD 0.65%

BAJa 2.06% ANB 1.53% NBO 1.04%

MAR 3.28% NBAD 1.71% OAB 1.33%

BWB 4.33% CBD 1.73% GB 1.75%

QIB 6.80% DBa 1.93% BS 1.77%

ADIB 7.34% ENBD 2.67% OIBa 1.89%

BAB 8.80% RB 2.80% BM 2.63% ABG 9.05% BSF 3.17% IVB 2.67% QIIB 9.06% UNB 3.60% NCB 2.74% WB 9.50% SIVB 3.61% ABK 2.76% KIB 9.50% AUB 4.12% NBB 3.45% BYB 9.98% QNBb 4.44% BB 3.48% SIB 15.03% MB 5.15% NBK 4.67% KFH 18.63% SFG 6.74% BBK 6.49% AJBa 23.50% FGB 7.14% CBI 6.85% DIB 23.64% BOS 8.97% ITB 24.71% CBK 11.54% BISB 39.85% KCB 44.51% ASB 53.72%

Min. 0.47% Min. 0.091% Min. 0.00%

Max. 53.72% Max. 7.14% Max. 11.54%

Mean 14.22% Mean 2.93% Mean 3.24%

St. dev 14.71% St. dev 2.04% St. dev 3.08%

Difference in means

IB-CBIW 11.29% CBIW-CB -0.31% IB-CB 10.98%

p value 0.001 p value 0.711 p value 0.002

a

2011 data, b 2010; T-test for equality of means is calculated assuming unequal sample variances, two-sided p values are reported.

Conventional Banks

With Islamic Windows Without Islamic Windows

Islamic Banks

Taking PLS levels as an important indicator of banks’ Islamicness as in prior literature (Khan, 2010; Azmat et al., 2015), then these results show that with a broader definition of PLS, some conventional banks appear to be more ‘Islamic’ than the self-proclaimed Islamic banks106, as they are operating closer to the PLS principle strongly advocated to be the cornerstone of Islamic banking (Iqbal and Molyneux, 2005). The variation in PLS-MEA levels across Islamic banks again emphasises that it is important to take a nuanced approach towards evaluation of Islamic banks, as opposed to relying on industry averages.

Looking at the results from table 4.3 and 4.4 together shows evidence to suggest that some Islamic banks substitute away from the costlier PLS financing contracts towards cheaper forms of PLS assets, such as equity securities which do not incur the sort of origination and monitoring costs of higher agency problems associated with PLS financing. Despite zero PLS-F, banks such as KFH (19%) and SIB (15%) hold above average PLS-MEA, higher than all conventional banks. PLS-MEA levels for these banks are completely driven by the non-financing forms of equity investments. High PLS-MEA levels in Islamic banks therefore are not always a result of PLS-F but similar to conventional banks can be determined only by other equity investment assets107. Most importantly, these results also suggest that there is considerable heterogeneity in the Islamic banking industry regarding the strategies adopted by individual Islamic banks to follow the PLS principle. Whilst some focus entirely on non-financing PLS investments, others hold substantial portions of their financing portfolio in PLS form as shown in table 4.3.

Intra-industry variation in PLS-MEA also exists in the conventional banking industry and there is some difference in PLS-MEA levels between conventional banks with and without Islamic windows, the former’s ranging from 0% to 7% and the latter’s between 0% to over 11%. However, this difference in averages is not statistically significant.

106

Such a conclusion must be treated with caution, as it implicitly assumes 1) risk-sharing as the sole determinant of Islamicness and 2) debt-based financing instruments and sukuk are equivalent to conventional debt contracts in line with the view expressed by notable academics in the Islamic banking literature (see for example, Kuran, 1995, 2004; El-Gamal 2006; Khan 2010).

107

For five out of the eight banks with above average PLS-MEA, the level of PLS-F is also above average. However, KFH and SIB are notable exceptions which imply that high PLS-MEA is not a necessary condition for a bank to hold high PLS-F.

129