Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Management
Islamic bank vs conventional bank: intermediation, fee based service activity and
efficiency
Dimas Satria Hardianto Permata Wulandari
Article information:
To cite this document:
Dimas Satria Hardianto Permata Wulandari , (2016),"Islamic bank vs conventional bank:
intermediation, fee based service activity and efficiency", International Journal of Islamic and Middle
Eastern Finance and Management, Vol. 9 Iss 2 pp. 296 - 311
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IMEFM-01-2015-0003
Downloaded on: 25 September 2016, At: 16:58 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 45 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 191 times since 2016*
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emeraldsrm:551360 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1753-8394.htm
IMEFM
9,2
296
Received 5 January 2015
Revised 11 November 2015
1 February 2016
Accepted 15 February 2016
1. Introduction
A bank is a financial institution which is crucial for a countrys economic growth
because it connects to the monetary and real sectors (Mishkin, 2010). In Indonesia, the
bank is popular financial institution and is the first place for providing funding for
economic activities. This can also be seen from the banking industry assets that control
79.5 per cent of the total assets in the financial industry (Bank Indonesia, 2012). As an
intermediary institution, a bank generally gives profit to depositors and vice versa.
Moreover, the Indonesian banking industry adopts a dual banking system based on
which commercial banks can conduct business activities and Islamic banks, which
operate under Islamic principles, are regulated under Bank Indonesia regulation No.
10/16/PBI/2008. Islamic banks were established because although the majority of the
Indonesian population are Muslim, none of the banks implemented Islamic bank
principles (Sutan, 2010).
Nowadays, there is a growth in Islamic banks in Indonesia and world over. The total
assets of the Islamic finance industry in the world from 2006 to 2011 have doubled and
reached $900bn. The growth of an Islamic bank is very fast and it is referred to as the
fastest growing industry in Indonesia but still faces many obstacles. The most
important problem is dealing with lack of understanding of financial institution
knowledge among the Indonesian people (only 20 per cent of the adult population have
an account in any formal financial institutions) (World Bank, 2012). With this problem,
only a small portion of Indonesian people know about banking products, especially
Islamic banking which is still new in Indonesia. The other problem is the limited number
of Islamic banks and lack of a office network and human resources (Siamat, 2005).
Furthermore, the Islamic bank model is similar to the conventional bank model in
terms of raising fund, funding and providing other banking services. But, in practice, the
Islamic banks apply Shariah principles that forbid riba, gharar and maysir and
prohibited financing for the sale of weapons, narcotics, alcohol and others according to
the Islamic law and hence different from conventional banks. Distribution of funds in
Islamic banks is conducted by using the principle of sale and purchase, lease and profit
sharing. Besides, getting revenue from intermediation activities, both Islamic and
conventional banks get additional income through the provision of financial services
such as inter-bank money, transfer, bill payment, safety deposit box and other services.
Good income diversification conducted by the bank, both Islamic and conventional, is
very useful to improve the profitability of banks, increase the number of customers and
also reduce the impact of bad credit. Because of many limitations of fund distribution in
Islamic banks, Islamic banks will find other alternatives to increase profitability by
raising fee-based income.
Another issue is how to increase efficiency. A banks always tries to get many
customers to achieve good efficiency. With good efficiency, a bank will have low cost of
fund and therefore it can provide a competitive lending rate and get higher profitability.
In the case of the banking industry, the size to measure efficiency is BOPO (ratio of
operating expenses per operating income). This is the common measurement of
efficiency in banking institutions. Based on data from Bank Indonesia during 2008-2012,
BOPO has been shown to be higher compared to that in banks of countries in Southeast
Asia (Bank Indonesia, 2012). This means that low inefficiency which is the function of
intermediation is not working optimally and because banks are no longer attractive as
sources of fund. One of the reasons is low market share, as only 20 per cent of the
Indonesian people have a formal account in a formal banking system (World Bank,
2012).
As a comparison between Islamic and conventional intermediation, fee-based income
and efficiency are shown in Table I.
As a consequence, research which focuses on the intermediation function is useful for
analyzing the business model which has capabilities of converting third-party fund for
financing. This research tries to contribute to this area. Fee-based service research
between conventional and Islamic banking is useful to observe income diversification
capability between two kinds of banks, as Islamic banks have a limitation of fund
distribution. The high inefficiency in the Indonesian banking industry has resulted in
high costs of funds, causing competitiveness among Indonesian banks; this
phenomenon is relatively lower than other countries. Several researches have discussed
this problem (Beck et al., 2013; Johnes et al., 2013; Abdul-Majid et al., 2009; Rindawati,
Islamic
bank vs
conventional
bank
297
IMEFM
9,2
298
2007; Saragih, 2013; Nugroho, 2013; Hasniawati, 2012), but no study has discussed
intermediation, fee-based service activity and efficiency in Indonesian Islamic and
conventional banking contexts.
This study focuses on Indonesian Islamic and conventional banking and aims to
conduct a comparison study about intermediation, fee-based service activity, efficiency,
impact of control variable (size, inefficiency and nonloan-learning asset) on the
intermediation level, impact of control variables (size, credit efficiency and credit risk)
on fee-based service and impact of variable control (size and credit risk) on efficiency
between Islamic and conventional banks in Indonesia from 2011 to 2013.
Last, it employs a quantitative analysis using secondary data of 39 conventional
banks and 8 Islamic banks. Data processed using panel regression and statistical tests
using MS Excel, Stata and also Eviews 7. Moreover, this paper is structured as follows.
Section 2 provides a conceptual background, while Section 3 explains the methodology
used in this study. Section 4 presents the results and findings and the related discussion.
Section 5 concludes and highlights the important implications of the study.
2. Intermediation, fee-based service and efficiency concept in Islamic
banks
Financial intermediation is an activity to distribute funding from a surplus unit to a
deficit unit (Saunders and Cornett, 2010). This intermediation activity is a traditional
activity which is commonly conducted by all banks, both conventional and Islamic.
Products which are offered by Islamic banks include financial engineering similar to
conventional bank, but this has been adjusted according to Islamic principles. It can be
concluded that Islamic banking products are more varied than those of conventional
banks.
Besides financial intermediation, Islamic banks also provide other financial services
to create income diversification and add value to customers. Fee-based services that are
provided by Islamic banks to their customers are divided into three groups: financial
service, agent service and non-financial service. Wakalah (financial representative),
Kafalah (guarantee), Hiwalah (account receivable transfer), Rahn (pawn) and Sharf
Period
March 2011
June 2011
September 2011
December 2011
March 2012
June 2012
September 2012
Table I.
Indonesian Islamic
December 2012
and conventional
March 2013
banking performance June 2013
comparison
September 2013
Intermediation
LDR
FDR
conventional
Islamic
bank (%)
bank (%)
83.56
84.80
84.91
82.59
78.70
79.83
79.24
80.97
80.33
81.23
77.44
90.47
91.24
106.73
108.32
90.65
110.70
120.87
99.02
98.99
103.21
111.31
Fee-based income
FEE
FEE
conventional
Islamic
bank (%)
bank (%)
4.71
5.27
6.27
5.19
5.27
4.73
4.60
4.71
5.58
5.10
5.33
4.88
3.14
2.26
4.86
4.77
4.12
3.80
3.94
2.98
3.20
2.93
Efficiency
BOPO
BOPO
conventional
Islamic
bank (%)
bank (%)
82.82
83.70
83.18
84.01
81.75
81.11
81.44
81.38
81.18
81.54
84.37
77.42
79.39
79.10
84.32
81.12
78.86
78.53
78.85
79.87
80.33
87.31
(foreign exchange) are fee-based service activities under the financial service group.
Mudharabah muqqayyadah (profit-sharing activity) is a fee-based service under the
agent group. Last, Wadiah yad dhamanah (product or money deposit) is a fee-based
service under the non-financial service group.
Efficiency is a performance measurement which figures the banking ability to
manage their input to get output. In the process of conducting efficiency measurement,
a bank will face a condition of how to get optimal output with existing input. There are
three concepts to measure efficiency (technical efficiency, cost efficiency and allocative
efficiency). Technical efficiency is the comparison between input that is being used to
get a certain output. Production process will be technically efficient if the output will not
increase without additional input. This will measure the banking financial performance
(Farrell, 1957). Cost efficiency is a concept that uses input pricing, while allocative
efficiency is the efficiency measurement of banking financial ability that uses input in
optimal proportion.
Research about the bank intermediation level, fee-based service activity and
efficiency is not new. Researches on three things are widely used by various researches.
The most recent study was conducted by Beck et al. (2013) which examines a business
model, efficiency, asset quality and stability of Islamic and conventional banks. In this
study, the efficiency measurement is conducted using traditional approaches (BOPO
ratio and overhead cost per operating income). The result shows that the level of
efficiency in conventional banks is better than that in Islamic banks. Besides efficiency,
the study also examined the business model that is measured by intermediation,
fee-based service and the source of funds. In this study, the intermediary function of
Islamic banks is better than that of conventional banks. This condition occurred because
of the nature of Islamic bank financing which always involves both physical assets and
the principles of Islamic banks that do not let idle money. In addition, although the level
of Islamic bank intermediation is higher compared to that of conventional banks,
Islamic banks as a whole turned out to not only rely on financing activities as a source
of income because the service income proportion of Islamic banks is higher than that of
conventional banks.
Besides Beck, Johnes et al. (2013) also conducted a research about Islamic banks and
conventional efficiency. This research study about bank efficiency using the data
envelopment analysis method and about external factors using regression that affects
the efficiency level of the bank. This research stated that Islamic banks have the same
level of gross efficiency with conventional banks. Islamic banks have significantly
higher net efficiency of conventional banks. Moreover, Islamic banks also have a lower
efficiency type than conventional banks because the product is not standardized. Other
efficiency researches have been conducted by Abdul-Majid et al. (2009) who stated that
the efficiency level depended on the country in which the bank operated. There is no
clear correlation between the banking efficiency level and the business model.
An intermediation ratio comparison between Islamic and conventional banks was
also conducted by Rindawati (2007), Saragih (2013), and Nugroho (2013) using
Indonesian samples. These researches study about the comparison between Islamic and
conventional banks using the CAMEL ratio which resulted in different findings,
although they used the same method. t-Test is used to compare the loan-to-deposit ratio
to measure the intermediation and liquidity levels, while BOPO is also used to measure
the efficiency level. Research from Rindawati (2007) found that the intermediation level
Islamic
bank vs
conventional
bank
299
IMEFM
9,2
300
of Islamic banks is better than that of conventional banks, while the efficiency of Islamic
banks is lower than that of conventional banks. In contrast, Saragih (2013) found that no
significant differences in the intermediation level between Islamic and conventional
banks. While, research from Nugroho (2013) found that the intermediation level of
conventional banks is better than that of Islamic bank and the efficiency level of Islamic
banks is lower that that of conventional banks. Such varying results depend on the
sample used.
Research regarding fee-based service in Indonesia was also conducted by Hasniawati
(2012). The results show that total asset and profitability influence bank service income
positively, while negatively influencing non-performing financing banks. Banks that
have a bigger total asset will be ready to implement new technology to support their
banking services. Non-performing financing variables which become a proxy of credit
risk have a negative correlation because the bank which has a high credit risk will focus
on traditional banking activity (lending and funding).
3. Research method
This study used secondary data obtained mainly from the quarterly financial
statements published by each bank which routinely audited. A purposive sampling
method was used to collect sample data. The data required are collected using the
following criteria: first, in Indonesia, commercial banks operated from Quarter 1 2011 to
Quarter 3 2013 and routinely issued audited financial statements. Second, conventional
banks were already listed in the Indonesia Stock Exchange no later than December 31,
2010, and were recorded until Quarter 3 of 2013.
Based on these criteria, 39 banks, including 31 conventional banks and 8 Islamic
banks, were used for observation in this study. Thus, the total sample was 429 (39
companies with 11 quarterly observations). The samples used are shown in Tables II
and III.
First, this study uses stochastic frontier approach to measure the inefficiency of
commercial banks. Meanwhile, to perform three comparisons, three models are used.
The first model using generalized least squares with fixed effect model (FEM), the
second model using a generalized least squares with pooled least squares (PLS), while
the third model using random effect models (REM). The stochastic frontier approach
was used to refer to the functions that were created by Battese and Coelli (1995),
Bank code
Bank
147
422
425
427
451
506
517
536
Table II.
Islamic bank samples Source: Bank Indonesia, 2013a, 2013b
Bank code
Bank
2
8
9
11
13
14
16
19
22
28
36
37
54
76
87
95
97
110
145
146
153
167
200
212
213
426
441
485
494
558
566
(1)
(2)
(3)
Islamic
bank vs
conventional
bank
301
Table III.
Conventional bank
samples
IMEFM
9,2
Sample selection
Descriptive statistics
302
Panel Regression
SFA Score
Likelihood Ratio
Hausmann Test
Figure 1.
Methodology
framework
Heteroscedasticity
Multicollinierit
y
Regression Analysis
R2 Test
Partial test
Global Test
Table IV.
4. Findings and discussion
4.1 Statistic descriptive
Tables I and II show the descriptive statistic of both conventional and Islamic banks
(Table V).
The descriptive statistics mentioned above consist of 429 observations, including 31
and 8 conventional commercial banks and commercial bank, respectively, during the
period from March 2011 to September 2013. Data descriptive statistics mentioned above
do not contain outliers which have been discarded because it uses techniques winsorize
Table IV.
Variables definition
Variable
Definition
INTit
BUSit
Sizeit
Bank size
EFFit
NLEAit
FEEit
Riskit
Calculation
Source
(Beck et al., 2013)
Total credit/Deposit
Total financing/Deposit
1 if Islamic bank
0 if conventional bank
ln(total asset)
by cutting 5 per cent upper limit and below. Descriptive statistical data already contain
no outliers.
The intermediation ratio for commercial banks as a whole had an average of 84.5 per
cent. The maximum value of 205.31 per cent owned by Panin Syariah in September 2011
received more financing than deposit, while the minimum amount of 44.25 per cent was
owned by the Capital Bank in December 2011, with a standard deviation of 0.150737.
The average proportion of service revenue per operating income for commercial banks
as a whole was 4.7 per cent. The maximum value held by Bank Mega in March 2013 was
20.3 per cent, while the minimum value owned by Bank Panin Syariah in June 2011 was
0.03 per cent. The standard deviation of the observation was 0.0441.
Inefficiencies scores for commercial banks as a whole was 1.304. The maximum
value owned by Bank Rakyat Indonesia (BRI) Shariah in September 2012 was 4.17,
while the minimum value held by Bank Ekonomi Raharja in September 2011 was 1. The
high inefficiency owned by BRI Shariah can also be confirmed from BOPO which is also
high, reaching 89 per cent. The standard deviation for all observations was 0.459. The
average efficiency for BUK was 1.2, and the average efficiency for Islamic banks is 1.72.
The average NPL (NPF) for commercial banks as a whole was 2.62 per cent. The
maximum value held by Bank Pundi in March 2011 was 25.14 per cent, while the
minimum value owned by Bank Panin Syariah in December 2011 was 0 per cent.
The standard deviation of the observation is 0.07 per cent.
The average non-earning asset loans to commercial banks as a whole was 8.9 trillion.
The maximum value owned by BRI in March 2011 was 101 trillion, while the minimum
value owned by Capital Bank in December 2011 was 19 billion. The standard deviation
of the observation was 18 trillion. The average total assets for commercial banks as a
whole amounted 78.1 trillion. The maximum value of 616.3 trillion was owned by the
Bank in September 2013, while the minimum value of 518.7 million was owned by Bank
Panin Syariah in March 2011, with a standard deviation of 127 trillion.
Islamic
bank vs
conventional
bank
303
Mean
MED
Maximum
Minimum
SD
Observation
INT
FEE
EFF
RISK
NLEA
TA
94.30%
92.33%
127.52%
74.14%
13.10%
88
4.54%
3.19%
17.60%
0.06
4.91%
88
1.94
1.79
2.70
1.05
0.6
88
2.39%
2.75%
5.68%
0.37%
1.35%
88
8.31%
6.13%
23.58%
2.25%
6.04%
88
13.457.697
7.532.542
61.810.295
1.903.873
15.711.881
88
Table V.
Statistic descriptive
Islamic bank
IMEFM
9,2
304
No.
1
2
3
Table VI.
Model decision
Model
Intermediation
Fee-Based
Service
Efficiency
INT
BUS
SIZE
NLEA
0.000
0.999
0.000
FEM
PLS
0.000
0.875
REM
Result
INT
BUS
SIZE
NLEA
1
0.39
0.07
0.34
1
0.35
0.09
1
0.13
FEE
BUS
SIZE
RISK
1
0.06
0.58
0.00
1
0.35
0.00
1
0.01
Variable
Table VIII.
Second correlation
model matrix
Probability
(Hausman)
Test
Variable
Table VII.
First correlation
model matrix
Probability
(Chow)
Test
FEE
BUS
SIZE
RISK
Source: Output Eviews
than 0.05. Based on the statistical results, we can conclude that this model contains
autocorrelations. Violations of this assumption can be handled by generalized least
square test (Gujarati, 2009).
4.4 Result (Table XII)
Based on the results of the first model estimation (FEM), the value of the BUS coefficient
is 0.164. The interpretation of these results is the relationship between the BUS variables
with the level of intermediation that is positive, and if banks are Islamic, then the
average will have higher levels of intermediation at 0.164 per cent compared to
conventional banks. Tests of significance showed variable results for BUS with a
probability of 0.000 (significant at the 1 per cent level). Based on these results, the
decision was to reject H0, and the BUS variables has a significant influence on the level
of bank intermediation which is common in Indonesia (Table XIII).
Based on the results of model estimation (pooled least square), the value of the BUS
variable coefficient is 0.011. The interpretation of these results is the relationship
between BUS variables with the proportion of fee income to operating income being
positive, and if banks are Islamic, then the average fee income-to-total operating income
proportion is higher at 0.011 per cent compared to conventional bank. Tests of
significance showed variable results for BUS with a probability of 0.004 (significant at
the 1 per cent level). Based on these results, the decision was to reject H0 and BUS
Variable
EFF
BUS
SIZE
RISK
EFF
BUS
SIZE
RISK
1
0.47
0.00
0.12
1
0.35
0.00
1
0.01
No.
Model
1
2
Intermediation
Fee-based
service
Efficiency
Value
Probability
666,756
1,089,490
0.000
0.000
Heteroskedasticity
Heteroskedasticity
1,169,549
0.000
Heteroskedasticity
Model
1
2
3
Intermediation
Fee-based service
Efficiency
Probability
0.001
0.000
0.000
305
Table IX.
Third correlation
model matrix
Result
No.
Islamic
bank vs
conventional
bank
Table X.
Breusch-pagan LM
test
Result
autocorrelation
autocorrelation
autocorrelation
Table XI.
Autocorrelation
IMEFM
9,2
306
Variabel
Table XII.
First model
estimation
C
BUS
SIZE
NLEA
EFF
C
BUS
SIZE
RISK
Probability
0.730
0.164
0.010
0.043
0.706
0.000*
0.000
0.000*
0.000
0.009*
Hypothesis
Coefficient
Probability
0.259
0.011
0.018
0.096
0.000
0.000*
0.000*
0.08***
Variable
Table XIV.
Third model
estimation
Coefficient
Variable
Table XIII.
Second model
estimation
Hypothesis
C
BUS
SIZE
RISK
Hypothesis
Coefficient
Probability
0.162
0.756
0.033
1.982
0.038
0.000*
0.000*
0.040*
Islamic
bank vs
conventional
bank
307
IMEFM
9,2
308
5. Conclusion
This study aims to conduct a comparison study about intermediation, fee-based service
activity, efficiency, the impact of control variable (size, inefficiency and nonloan-learning asset) on the intermediation level, the impact of control variable (size,
credit efficiency and credit risk) on fee-based service and the impact of variable control
(size and credit risk) on efficiency between Islamic and conventional banks in Indonesia
from 2011 to 2013. It employs quantitative analysis using secondary data of 39
conventional banks and 8 Islamic banks.
The result shows that there are differences in the level of intermediation between
Islamic banks and conventional banks in Indonesia for 2011-2013. Islamic commercial
banks have an intermediation level higher than conventional commercial banks.
Moreover, there are also differences in the level of efficiency between Islamic banks and
conventional banks. Islamic banks have worse efficiency levels compared to
conventional banks. Furthermore, the control variables of non-earning assets and
inefficiency loan are negatively related to the level of bank intermediation in Indonesia,
while the variable size is positively related to the level of the intermediary banks in
Indonesia from 2011 to 2013. Size control variables are positively related to fee-based
service activities of commercial bank in Indonesia, while the risk variable has no
significant relationship with the activities of fee-based services in Indonesia. Last, the
size and risk control variables are positively related to the inefficiency of commercial
banks.
Implication
Conventional banks have a lower intermediation level compared to Islamic banks that
have a better intermediation activity system. Fee-based service activity of Islamic banks
must be varied but not be of conventional mirroring. The disadvantages of Islamic
banking financial engineering include minimum creativity of financial product which is
originally Shariah, and not conventional modification. Islamic banking should renew
the quality of their operational systems to conduct business more efficiently. Investment
on competent human resources in Islamic banking will bring good efficiency and
improve profitability performance.
References
Abd Karim, M.Z., Chan, S.G. and Hasan, S. (2010), Bank efficiency and non-performing loans:
evidence from Malaysia and Singapore, Prague Economic Papers.
Abdul-Majid, M., Saal, S.D. and Battisti, G. (2009), Efficiency in Islamic and conventional
banking: an international comparison, Journal of Production Analysis, Vol. 34 No. 1,
pp. 25-43.
Bank Indonesia (2012), Statistik Perbankan Indonesia, Jakarta.
Bank Indonesia (2013a), Peraturan Bank Indonesia Nomer 15/7/PBI Tentang Perubahan Kedua
Atas Peraturan Bank Indonesia Nomor 12/19/2010 Tentang Giro Wajib Minimum Bank
Umum Pada Bank Indonesia Dalam Rupiah dan Valuta Asing, Bank Indonesia, Jakarta.
Bank Indonesia (2013b), Statistik Perbankan Indonesia, Vol. 11 No. 11, p. 62.
Battese, G. and Coelli, T. (1995), A model for technical inefficiency effects in a stochastic frontier
production function for panel data, Empirical Economic, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 325-332.
Beck, T., Demirguc-Kunt, A. and Merrouche, O. (2013), Islamic vs Conventional bank: business
model, efficiency, and stability, Journal of Banking and Finance, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 433-447.
Islamic
bank vs
conventional
bank
309
IMEFM
9,2
310
Berger, A. and DeYoung, R. (1997), Problem loans and cost efficiency in commercial Banks,
Journal of Banking and Finance, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 849-870.
Bonfin, D. and Kim, M. (2011), Liguidity Risk in Banking: Is There Herding?, Banco de Portugal,
Lisbon.
Chortareas, G.E., Garza-Garca, J.G. and Girardonec, C. (2012), Competition, efficiency and
interest rate margins in Latin American banking, International Review of Financial
Analysis, Vol. 24, pp. 93-103.
Farrell, M.J. (1957), The measurement of productive efficiency, Journal of Royal Statistical
Society, Vol. 120 No. 3, pp. 253-290.
Faye, I., Triki, T. and Kangoye, T. (2013), The Islamic finance promises: evidence from Africa,
Review of Development Finance, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 136-151.
Gujarati, D. (2009), Basic Econometrics, 5th ed., McGraw-Hill Book, New York, NY.
Hasniawati, N.A. (2012), Analisis Panel Data Terhadap Aktivitas Fee Based Income Bank-Bank
Syariah di Indonesia, Skripsi Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Indonesia, Yogyakarta.
Johnes, J., Izzeldin, M. and Pappas, V. (2013), A comparison of performance of Islamic and
Conventional Banks 2004-2009, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Vol. 103,
pp. 93-107.
Liadaki, A. and Ganganis, C. (2009), Efficiency and stock performance Of EU banks: is there a
relationship?, Omega, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 254-259.
Mishkin, F.S. (2010), The Economics of Money, Banking and Financial Markets, 9th ed., Pearson,
London.
Nugroho, W. (2013), Analisis perbandingan kinerja keuangan bank syariah dan bank
konvensional, Jurnal Ilmiah Universitas Bakrie, Vol. 3 No. 4.
Rindawati, E. (2007), Analisis Perbandingan Kinerja Keuangan Perbankan Syariah Dengan
Perbankan Konvensional, Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Islam Indonesia, Yogyakarta.
Rogers, F. and Jr, S. (1999), An analysis of nontraditional activities at US commercial banks,
Review of Financial Economics, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 25-39.
Saragih, A.F. (2013), Analisis Perbandingan Kinerja Keuangan Antara Bank Syariah Dengan
Bank Konvensional, Universitas Sumatra Utara, Sumatra Utara.
Saunders, A. and Cornett, M.M. (2010), Financial Markets and Institutions: A Modern Perspective,
McGraw-Hill Irwin, New York, NY.
Shahimi, S., Ismail, A.B. and Ahmad, S.B. (2006), A panel data analysis of fee income activities in
Islamic bank, Journal KAI: Islamic Economic, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 25-53.
Siamat, D. (2005), Manajemen Lembaga Keuangan: Kebijakan Moneter dan Perbankan, 5th ed.,
Lembaga Penerbit Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta.
Sutan, R.S. (2010), Perbankan Syariah: Produk-Produk dan Aspek-Aspek Hukumnya, PT.
Jayakarta Agung Offset, Jakarta.
Wahyudi, I., Dewi, M.K., Prasetyo, M.B., Rosmanita, F., Putri, N.S. and Haidir, B.M. (2013),
Manajemen Risiko Bank Islam, Penerbit Salemba Empat, Jakarta.
Further reading
Alamsyah, H. (2012), Perkembangan dan prospek perbankan syariah: tantangan dalam
menyongsong MEA 2015, Milad ke-8 Ikatan Ahli Ekonomi Islam (IAEI), pp. 1-2.
Al-Khasawneh, J.A., Bassedat, K., Akten, B. and Pun Thapa, T.P. (2012), Efficiency of Islamic
banks: case of North African Arab countries, Qualitative Research in Financial Markets,
Vol. 4 Nos 2/3, pp. 228-239.
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Islamic
bank vs
conventional
bank
311