Financial Performance of Islamic Versus Conventional Banks a Comparative Analysis for Jordan

This paper contributes to the empirical literature on interest-free finance by investigating the financial performance of interest-free and conventional banks in Jordan over the period 2005–2014 covering GFC period. Three models, two sub-periods, and 11 ratios are considered to compare bank performa...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Malika Neifar [verfasserIn] Sameh Charfeddine [verfasserIn] Aida Kammoun [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2022

Schlagwörter:	Jordan; Islamic banks vs Conventional banks, univariate and multivariate analysis, GFC of 2008

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues - EconJournals, 2011, 12(2022), 6
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:12 ; year:2022 ; number:6

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.32479/ijefi.13539

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ080356818

Internformat


LEADER	01000naa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ080356818
003	DE-627
005	20230310185517.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230310s2022 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.32479/ijefi.13539 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ080356818
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJd5958523bc364c0383b57a2616940ff1
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
050		0	\|a HF5001-6182
050		0	\|a HB71-74
100	0		\|a Malika Neifar \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Financial Performance of Islamic Versus Conventional Banks a Comparative Analysis for Jordan
264		1	\|c 2022
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a This paper contributes to the empirical literature on interest-free finance by investigating the financial performance of interest-free and conventional banks in Jordan over the period 2005–2014 covering GFC period. Three models, two sub-periods, and 11 ratios are considered to compare bank performance evolutions. We give first a univariate based t-test analysis, and then a discriminant analysis is presented in order to determine which variables differentiate between conventional and Islamic banks. Finally, a multivariate nonlinear analysis from Binary outcome panel data models such as Probit and Logit model is conducted. Based on t-test univariate analysis, there is significant evidence that Islamic Banks (IBs) are in average less stable and more risky than conventional banks (CBs) for the three considered periods: full period, pre Global Financial Crisis(GFC) and post GFC. Pre GFC, IBs are more capitalized, more liquid, and more profitable in average. However, post GFC, IBs are in average only more liquid in addition to excess of instability and credit risk. From the results of Pooled Probit model, interest free banks seem again to be less stable, but less liquid, and riskier for the total period. The failure to find more stability for IBs is due to assumption of a stable relationships. Once we introduce interaction effect variables to take into account of behavior instability (due to Subprime crisis (GFC)), we show that IBs are rather more stable, more liquid but less profitable post GFC.
650		4	\|a Jordan; Islamic banks vs Conventional banks, univariate and multivariate analysis, GFC of 2008
653		0	\|a Business
653		0	\|a Economics as a science
700	0		\|a Sameh Charfeddine \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Aida Kammoun \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues \|d EconJournals, 2011 \|g 12(2022), 6 \|w (DE-627)670216879 \|w (DE-600)2632572-X \|x 21464138 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:12 \|g year:2022 \|g number:6
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.32479/ijefi.13539 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/d5958523bc364c0383b57a2616940ff1 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://econjournals.com/index.php/ijefi/article/view/13539 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/2146-4138 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_70
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_370
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4326
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4335
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 12 \|j 2022 \|e 6

Indexfelder

author_variant	m n mn s c sc a k ak
matchkey_str	article:21464138:2022----::iacapromnefsaivrucnetoabnscmaa
hierarchy_sort_str	2022
callnumber-subject-code	HF
publishDate	2022
allfields	10.32479/ijefi.13539 doi (DE-627)DOAJ080356818 (DE-599)DOAJd5958523bc364c0383b57a2616940ff1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng HF5001-6182 HB71-74 Malika Neifar verfasserin aut Financial Performance of Islamic Versus Conventional Banks a Comparative Analysis for Jordan 2022 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier This paper contributes to the empirical literature on interest-free finance by investigating the financial performance of interest-free and conventional banks in Jordan over the period 2005–2014 covering GFC period. Three models, two sub-periods, and 11 ratios are considered to compare bank performance evolutions. We give first a univariate based t-test analysis, and then a discriminant analysis is presented in order to determine which variables differentiate between conventional and Islamic banks. Finally, a multivariate nonlinear analysis from Binary outcome panel data models such as Probit and Logit model is conducted. Based on t-test univariate analysis, there is significant evidence that Islamic Banks (IBs) are in average less stable and more risky than conventional banks (CBs) for the three considered periods: full period, pre Global Financial Crisis(GFC) and post GFC. Pre GFC, IBs are more capitalized, more liquid, and more profitable in average. However, post GFC, IBs are in average only more liquid in addition to excess of instability and credit risk. From the results of Pooled Probit model, interest free banks seem again to be less stable, but less liquid, and riskier for the total period. The failure to find more stability for IBs is due to assumption of a stable relationships. Once we introduce interaction effect variables to take into account of behavior instability (due to Subprime crisis (GFC)), we show that IBs are rather more stable, more liquid but less profitable post GFC. Jordan; Islamic banks vs Conventional banks, univariate and multivariate analysis, GFC of 2008 Business Economics as a science Sameh Charfeddine verfasserin aut Aida Kammoun verfasserin aut In International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues EconJournals, 2011 12(2022), 6 (DE-627)670216879 (DE-600)2632572-X 21464138 nnns volume:12 year:2022 number:6 https://doi.org/10.32479/ijefi.13539 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/d5958523bc364c0383b57a2616940ff1 kostenfrei https://econjournals.com/index.php/ijefi/article/view/13539 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2146-4138 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 12 2022 6
spelling	10.32479/ijefi.13539 doi (DE-627)DOAJ080356818 (DE-599)DOAJd5958523bc364c0383b57a2616940ff1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng HF5001-6182 HB71-74 Malika Neifar verfasserin aut Financial Performance of Islamic Versus Conventional Banks a Comparative Analysis for Jordan 2022 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier This paper contributes to the empirical literature on interest-free finance by investigating the financial performance of interest-free and conventional banks in Jordan over the period 2005–2014 covering GFC period. Three models, two sub-periods, and 11 ratios are considered to compare bank performance evolutions. We give first a univariate based t-test analysis, and then a discriminant analysis is presented in order to determine which variables differentiate between conventional and Islamic banks. Finally, a multivariate nonlinear analysis from Binary outcome panel data models such as Probit and Logit model is conducted. Based on t-test univariate analysis, there is significant evidence that Islamic Banks (IBs) are in average less stable and more risky than conventional banks (CBs) for the three considered periods: full period, pre Global Financial Crisis(GFC) and post GFC. Pre GFC, IBs are more capitalized, more liquid, and more profitable in average. However, post GFC, IBs are in average only more liquid in addition to excess of instability and credit risk. From the results of Pooled Probit model, interest free banks seem again to be less stable, but less liquid, and riskier for the total period. The failure to find more stability for IBs is due to assumption of a stable relationships. Once we introduce interaction effect variables to take into account of behavior instability (due to Subprime crisis (GFC)), we show that IBs are rather more stable, more liquid but less profitable post GFC. Jordan; Islamic banks vs Conventional banks, univariate and multivariate analysis, GFC of 2008 Business Economics as a science Sameh Charfeddine verfasserin aut Aida Kammoun verfasserin aut In International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues EconJournals, 2011 12(2022), 6 (DE-627)670216879 (DE-600)2632572-X 21464138 nnns volume:12 year:2022 number:6 https://doi.org/10.32479/ijefi.13539 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/d5958523bc364c0383b57a2616940ff1 kostenfrei https://econjournals.com/index.php/ijefi/article/view/13539 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2146-4138 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 12 2022 6
allfields_unstemmed	10.32479/ijefi.13539 doi (DE-627)DOAJ080356818 (DE-599)DOAJd5958523bc364c0383b57a2616940ff1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng HF5001-6182 HB71-74 Malika Neifar verfasserin aut Financial Performance of Islamic Versus Conventional Banks a Comparative Analysis for Jordan 2022 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier This paper contributes to the empirical literature on interest-free finance by investigating the financial performance of interest-free and conventional banks in Jordan over the period 2005–2014 covering GFC period. Three models, two sub-periods, and 11 ratios are considered to compare bank performance evolutions. We give first a univariate based t-test analysis, and then a discriminant analysis is presented in order to determine which variables differentiate between conventional and Islamic banks. Finally, a multivariate nonlinear analysis from Binary outcome panel data models such as Probit and Logit model is conducted. Based on t-test univariate analysis, there is significant evidence that Islamic Banks (IBs) are in average less stable and more risky than conventional banks (CBs) for the three considered periods: full period, pre Global Financial Crisis(GFC) and post GFC. Pre GFC, IBs are more capitalized, more liquid, and more profitable in average. However, post GFC, IBs are in average only more liquid in addition to excess of instability and credit risk. From the results of Pooled Probit model, interest free banks seem again to be less stable, but less liquid, and riskier for the total period. The failure to find more stability for IBs is due to assumption of a stable relationships. Once we introduce interaction effect variables to take into account of behavior instability (due to Subprime crisis (GFC)), we show that IBs are rather more stable, more liquid but less profitable post GFC. Jordan; Islamic banks vs Conventional banks, univariate and multivariate analysis, GFC of 2008 Business Economics as a science Sameh Charfeddine verfasserin aut Aida Kammoun verfasserin aut In International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues EconJournals, 2011 12(2022), 6 (DE-627)670216879 (DE-600)2632572-X 21464138 nnns volume:12 year:2022 number:6 https://doi.org/10.32479/ijefi.13539 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/d5958523bc364c0383b57a2616940ff1 kostenfrei https://econjournals.com/index.php/ijefi/article/view/13539 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2146-4138 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 12 2022 6
allfieldsGer	10.32479/ijefi.13539 doi (DE-627)DOAJ080356818 (DE-599)DOAJd5958523bc364c0383b57a2616940ff1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng HF5001-6182 HB71-74 Malika Neifar verfasserin aut Financial Performance of Islamic Versus Conventional Banks a Comparative Analysis for Jordan 2022 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier This paper contributes to the empirical literature on interest-free finance by investigating the financial performance of interest-free and conventional banks in Jordan over the period 2005–2014 covering GFC period. Three models, two sub-periods, and 11 ratios are considered to compare bank performance evolutions. We give first a univariate based t-test analysis, and then a discriminant analysis is presented in order to determine which variables differentiate between conventional and Islamic banks. Finally, a multivariate nonlinear analysis from Binary outcome panel data models such as Probit and Logit model is conducted. Based on t-test univariate analysis, there is significant evidence that Islamic Banks (IBs) are in average less stable and more risky than conventional banks (CBs) for the three considered periods: full period, pre Global Financial Crisis(GFC) and post GFC. Pre GFC, IBs are more capitalized, more liquid, and more profitable in average. However, post GFC, IBs are in average only more liquid in addition to excess of instability and credit risk. From the results of Pooled Probit model, interest free banks seem again to be less stable, but less liquid, and riskier for the total period. The failure to find more stability for IBs is due to assumption of a stable relationships. Once we introduce interaction effect variables to take into account of behavior instability (due to Subprime crisis (GFC)), we show that IBs are rather more stable, more liquid but less profitable post GFC. Jordan; Islamic banks vs Conventional banks, univariate and multivariate analysis, GFC of 2008 Business Economics as a science Sameh Charfeddine verfasserin aut Aida Kammoun verfasserin aut In International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues EconJournals, 2011 12(2022), 6 (DE-627)670216879 (DE-600)2632572-X 21464138 nnns volume:12 year:2022 number:6 https://doi.org/10.32479/ijefi.13539 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/d5958523bc364c0383b57a2616940ff1 kostenfrei https://econjournals.com/index.php/ijefi/article/view/13539 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2146-4138 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 12 2022 6
allfieldsSound	10.32479/ijefi.13539 doi (DE-627)DOAJ080356818 (DE-599)DOAJd5958523bc364c0383b57a2616940ff1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng HF5001-6182 HB71-74 Malika Neifar verfasserin aut Financial Performance of Islamic Versus Conventional Banks a Comparative Analysis for Jordan 2022 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier This paper contributes to the empirical literature on interest-free finance by investigating the financial performance of interest-free and conventional banks in Jordan over the period 2005–2014 covering GFC period. Three models, two sub-periods, and 11 ratios are considered to compare bank performance evolutions. We give first a univariate based t-test analysis, and then a discriminant analysis is presented in order to determine which variables differentiate between conventional and Islamic banks. Finally, a multivariate nonlinear analysis from Binary outcome panel data models such as Probit and Logit model is conducted. Based on t-test univariate analysis, there is significant evidence that Islamic Banks (IBs) are in average less stable and more risky than conventional banks (CBs) for the three considered periods: full period, pre Global Financial Crisis(GFC) and post GFC. Pre GFC, IBs are more capitalized, more liquid, and more profitable in average. However, post GFC, IBs are in average only more liquid in addition to excess of instability and credit risk. From the results of Pooled Probit model, interest free banks seem again to be less stable, but less liquid, and riskier for the total period. The failure to find more stability for IBs is due to assumption of a stable relationships. Once we introduce interaction effect variables to take into account of behavior instability (due to Subprime crisis (GFC)), we show that IBs are rather more stable, more liquid but less profitable post GFC. Jordan; Islamic banks vs Conventional banks, univariate and multivariate analysis, GFC of 2008 Business Economics as a science Sameh Charfeddine verfasserin aut Aida Kammoun verfasserin aut In International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues EconJournals, 2011 12(2022), 6 (DE-627)670216879 (DE-600)2632572-X 21464138 nnns volume:12 year:2022 number:6 https://doi.org/10.32479/ijefi.13539 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/d5958523bc364c0383b57a2616940ff1 kostenfrei https://econjournals.com/index.php/ijefi/article/view/13539 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2146-4138 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 12 2022 6
language	English
source	In International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues 12(2022), 6 volume:12 year:2022 number:6
sourceStr	In International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues 12(2022), 6 volume:12 year:2022 number:6
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Jordan; Islamic banks vs Conventional banks, univariate and multivariate analysis, GFC of 2008 Business Economics as a science
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Malika Neifar @@aut@@ Sameh Charfeddine @@aut@@ Aida Kammoun @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2022-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	670216879
id	DOAJ080356818
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ080356818</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230310185517.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230310s2022 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.32479/ijefi.13539</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ080356818</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJd5958523bc364c0383b57a2616940ff1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">HF5001-6182</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">HB71-74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Malika Neifar</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Financial Performance of Islamic Versus Conventional Banks a Comparative Analysis for Jordan</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2022</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">This paper contributes to the empirical literature on interest-free finance by investigating the financial performance of interest-free and conventional banks in Jordan over the period 2005–2014 covering GFC period. Three models, two sub-periods, and 11 ratios are considered to compare bank performance evolutions. We give first a univariate based t-test analysis, and then a discriminant analysis is presented in order to determine which variables differentiate between conventional and Islamic banks. Finally, a multivariate nonlinear analysis from Binary outcome panel data models such as Probit and Logit model is conducted. Based on t-test univariate analysis, there is significant evidence that Islamic Banks (IBs) are in average less stable and more risky than conventional banks (CBs) for the three considered periods: full period, pre Global Financial Crisis(GFC) and post GFC. Pre GFC, IBs are more capitalized, more liquid, and more profitable in average. However, post GFC, IBs are in average only more liquid in addition to excess of instability and credit risk. From the results of Pooled Probit model, interest free banks seem again to be less stable, but less liquid, and riskier for the total period. The failure to find more stability for IBs is due to assumption of a stable relationships. Once we introduce interaction effect variables to take into account of behavior instability (due to Subprime crisis (GFC)), we show that IBs are rather more stable, more liquid but less profitable post GFC.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Jordan; Islamic banks vs Conventional banks, univariate and multivariate analysis, GFC of 2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Business</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Economics as a science</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sameh Charfeddine</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Aida Kammoun</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues</subfield><subfield code="d">EconJournals, 2011</subfield><subfield code="g">12(2022), 6</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)670216879</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2632572-X</subfield><subfield code="x">21464138</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:12</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2022</subfield><subfield code="g">number:6</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.32479/ijefi.13539</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/d5958523bc364c0383b57a2616940ff1</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://econjournals.com/index.php/ijefi/article/view/13539</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2146-4138</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">12</subfield><subfield code="j">2022</subfield><subfield code="e">6</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	H - Social Science
author	Malika Neifar
spellingShingle	Malika Neifar misc HF5001-6182 misc HB71-74 misc Jordan; Islamic banks vs Conventional banks, univariate and multivariate analysis, GFC of 2008 misc Business misc Economics as a science Financial Performance of Islamic Versus Conventional Banks a Comparative Analysis for Jordan
authorStr	Malika Neifar
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)670216879
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	HF5001-6182
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	21464138
topic_title	HF5001-6182 HB71-74 Financial Performance of Islamic Versus Conventional Banks a Comparative Analysis for Jordan Jordan; Islamic banks vs Conventional banks, univariate and multivariate analysis, GFC of 2008
topic	misc HF5001-6182 misc HB71-74 misc Jordan; Islamic banks vs Conventional banks, univariate and multivariate analysis, GFC of 2008 misc Business misc Economics as a science
topic_unstemmed	misc HF5001-6182 misc HB71-74 misc Jordan; Islamic banks vs Conventional banks, univariate and multivariate analysis, GFC of 2008 misc Business misc Economics as a science
topic_browse	misc HF5001-6182 misc HB71-74 misc Jordan; Islamic banks vs Conventional banks, univariate and multivariate analysis, GFC of 2008 misc Business misc Economics as a science
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues
hierarchy_parent_id	670216879
hierarchy_top_title	International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)670216879 (DE-600)2632572-X
title	Financial Performance of Islamic Versus Conventional Banks a Comparative Analysis for Jordan
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ080356818 (DE-599)DOAJd5958523bc364c0383b57a2616940ff1
title_full	Financial Performance of Islamic Versus Conventional Banks a Comparative Analysis for Jordan
author_sort	Malika Neifar
journal	International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues
journalStr	International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues
callnumber-first-code	H
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2022
contenttype_str_mv	txt
author_browse	Malika Neifar Sameh Charfeddine Aida Kammoun
container_volume	12
class	HF5001-6182 HB71-74
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Malika Neifar
doi_str_mv	10.32479/ijefi.13539
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	financial performance of islamic versus conventional banks a comparative analysis for jordan
callnumber	HF5001-6182
title_auth	Financial Performance of Islamic Versus Conventional Banks a Comparative Analysis for Jordan
abstract	This paper contributes to the empirical literature on interest-free finance by investigating the financial performance of interest-free and conventional banks in Jordan over the period 2005–2014 covering GFC period. Three models, two sub-periods, and 11 ratios are considered to compare bank performance evolutions. We give first a univariate based t-test analysis, and then a discriminant analysis is presented in order to determine which variables differentiate between conventional and Islamic banks. Finally, a multivariate nonlinear analysis from Binary outcome panel data models such as Probit and Logit model is conducted. Based on t-test univariate analysis, there is significant evidence that Islamic Banks (IBs) are in average less stable and more risky than conventional banks (CBs) for the three considered periods: full period, pre Global Financial Crisis(GFC) and post GFC. Pre GFC, IBs are more capitalized, more liquid, and more profitable in average. However, post GFC, IBs are in average only more liquid in addition to excess of instability and credit risk. From the results of Pooled Probit model, interest free banks seem again to be less stable, but less liquid, and riskier for the total period. The failure to find more stability for IBs is due to assumption of a stable relationships. Once we introduce interaction effect variables to take into account of behavior instability (due to Subprime crisis (GFC)), we show that IBs are rather more stable, more liquid but less profitable post GFC.
abstractGer	This paper contributes to the empirical literature on interest-free finance by investigating the financial performance of interest-free and conventional banks in Jordan over the period 2005–2014 covering GFC period. Three models, two sub-periods, and 11 ratios are considered to compare bank performance evolutions. We give first a univariate based t-test analysis, and then a discriminant analysis is presented in order to determine which variables differentiate between conventional and Islamic banks. Finally, a multivariate nonlinear analysis from Binary outcome panel data models such as Probit and Logit model is conducted. Based on t-test univariate analysis, there is significant evidence that Islamic Banks (IBs) are in average less stable and more risky than conventional banks (CBs) for the three considered periods: full period, pre Global Financial Crisis(GFC) and post GFC. Pre GFC, IBs are more capitalized, more liquid, and more profitable in average. However, post GFC, IBs are in average only more liquid in addition to excess of instability and credit risk. From the results of Pooled Probit model, interest free banks seem again to be less stable, but less liquid, and riskier for the total period. The failure to find more stability for IBs is due to assumption of a stable relationships. Once we introduce interaction effect variables to take into account of behavior instability (due to Subprime crisis (GFC)), we show that IBs are rather more stable, more liquid but less profitable post GFC.
abstract_unstemmed	This paper contributes to the empirical literature on interest-free finance by investigating the financial performance of interest-free and conventional banks in Jordan over the period 2005–2014 covering GFC period. Three models, two sub-periods, and 11 ratios are considered to compare bank performance evolutions. We give first a univariate based t-test analysis, and then a discriminant analysis is presented in order to determine which variables differentiate between conventional and Islamic banks. Finally, a multivariate nonlinear analysis from Binary outcome panel data models such as Probit and Logit model is conducted. Based on t-test univariate analysis, there is significant evidence that Islamic Banks (IBs) are in average less stable and more risky than conventional banks (CBs) for the three considered periods: full period, pre Global Financial Crisis(GFC) and post GFC. Pre GFC, IBs are more capitalized, more liquid, and more profitable in average. However, post GFC, IBs are in average only more liquid in addition to excess of instability and credit risk. From the results of Pooled Probit model, interest free banks seem again to be less stable, but less liquid, and riskier for the total period. The failure to find more stability for IBs is due to assumption of a stable relationships. Once we introduce interaction effect variables to take into account of behavior instability (due to Subprime crisis (GFC)), we show that IBs are rather more stable, more liquid but less profitable post GFC.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	6
title_short	Financial Performance of Islamic Versus Conventional Banks a Comparative Analysis for Jordan
url	https://doi.org/10.32479/ijefi.13539 https://doaj.org/article/d5958523bc364c0383b57a2616940ff1 https://econjournals.com/index.php/ijefi/article/view/13539 https://doaj.org/toc/2146-4138
remote_bool	true
author2	Sameh Charfeddine Aida Kammoun
author2Str	Sameh Charfeddine Aida Kammoun
ppnlink	670216879
callnumber-subject	HF - Commerce
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.32479/ijefi.13539
callnumber-a	HF5001-6182
up_date	2024-07-03T14:13:03.619Z
_version_	1803567480056053760
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ080356818</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230310185517.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230310s2022 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.32479/ijefi.13539</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ080356818</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJd5958523bc364c0383b57a2616940ff1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">HF5001-6182</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">HB71-74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Malika Neifar</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Financial Performance of Islamic Versus Conventional Banks a Comparative Analysis for Jordan</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2022</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">This paper contributes to the empirical literature on interest-free finance by investigating the financial performance of interest-free and conventional banks in Jordan over the period 2005–2014 covering GFC period. Three models, two sub-periods, and 11 ratios are considered to compare bank performance evolutions. We give first a univariate based t-test analysis, and then a discriminant analysis is presented in order to determine which variables differentiate between conventional and Islamic banks. Finally, a multivariate nonlinear analysis from Binary outcome panel data models such as Probit and Logit model is conducted. Based on t-test univariate analysis, there is significant evidence that Islamic Banks (IBs) are in average less stable and more risky than conventional banks (CBs) for the three considered periods: full period, pre Global Financial Crisis(GFC) and post GFC. Pre GFC, IBs are more capitalized, more liquid, and more profitable in average. However, post GFC, IBs are in average only more liquid in addition to excess of instability and credit risk. From the results of Pooled Probit model, interest free banks seem again to be less stable, but less liquid, and riskier for the total period. The failure to find more stability for IBs is due to assumption of a stable relationships. Once we introduce interaction effect variables to take into account of behavior instability (due to Subprime crisis (GFC)), we show that IBs are rather more stable, more liquid but less profitable post GFC.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Jordan; Islamic banks vs Conventional banks, univariate and multivariate analysis, GFC of 2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Business</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Economics as a science</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sameh Charfeddine</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Aida Kammoun</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues</subfield><subfield code="d">EconJournals, 2011</subfield><subfield code="g">12(2022), 6</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)670216879</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2632572-X</subfield><subfield code="x">21464138</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:12</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2022</subfield><subfield code="g">number:6</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.32479/ijefi.13539</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/d5958523bc364c0383b57a2616940ff1</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://econjournals.com/index.php/ijefi/article/view/13539</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2146-4138</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">12</subfield><subfield code="j">2022</subfield><subfield code="e">6</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.401634

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Financial Performance of Islamic Versus Conventional Banks a Comparative Analysis for Jordan

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?