The impact of IFRS 9, liquidity Risk, Credit Risk and

Capital on Banks Performance: (Evidence from the

Jordanian Banking Sector)

By
Sajedah Mohammed Abdallah Eyalsalman

Supervisor
Khaled Mohammed Alzubi
Professor

Co-supervisor
Zyad Mohammed Marashdeh
Associate Professor

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the requirements for

the degree of Master in Accounting and Finance

Faculty of Graduate Studies at the

Hashemite University

Zarqa – Jordan

5, January, 2023
2
3
 4

Dedication

To the one who encouraged me to persevere and made me live these moments, to this
one who always stood by me tirelessly
My loving father -
You will still to be my role model and you will continue to be my hero by the simplest
things you do

To that woman with whom I saw the way of my life and offered my happiness and my
comfort on her happiness
My tender mother-

To the perfect family and my second family

-My husband's family

To my soul companion and the closest to my heart, my support, and supporter in my

academic career
My dear husband-

To my example of kindness, pride, and sacrifice

-My sisters

To my strength and my pride

-To best brother

To my soul, my pulse, and the secret of my happiness. I hope to be a mother that you
are always proud of
My little son-
 5

Acknowledgement

ُ‫) سورة االعراف‬43( ‫اْلَح ْم ُد ِهّلِل اَّلِذ ي َهَداَنا ِلَهـَذ ا َو َم ا ُكَّنا ِلَنْه َتِدَي َلْو ال َأْن َهَداَنا هّللا‬

I would like to thank Allah Almighty for all of the blessings existing in my life, and

then I would like to thank the supervision team, Prof. Khaled Al-Zubi and Dr. Zyad

Marashdeh, for their ongoing efforts and support in achieving and completing this

thesis.

I would also like to thank Prof. Walid Siam, Dr. Ibrahim Khatatbeh, and Dr. Mohammad
Khataybeh of the committee for their discussions, comments, and support in better
accomplishing this thesis.
 6

List of Symbols and Abbreviations

Abbreviation Description

ARBK Arab Bank

ABCO Arab Banking Corporation
BOJX Bank of Jordan
CABK Cairo Amman Bank
CAPL Capital Bank of Jordan
JCBK Jordan Commercial Bank
JOKB Jordan Kuwait Bank
AHLI Jordan Ahli Bank
THBK Housing Bank
AJIB Arab Jordan Investment Bank
INVB Investment Bank
SGBJ Société Générale Bank Jordan
UBSI Al Etihad Bank
ROA Return on assets
ROE Return on equity
IFRS 9 International Financial Reporting
Standard 9
LR Liquidity risk
CR Credit risk
B-Cap Bank Capital
Size Bank size
Growth Loan growth
NIX Non-interest Expense
 7

Table of Content

Discussion Members Committee

Authorization………………………………………………………………………….III

Dedication.......................................................................................................................

IV

Acknowledgement............................................................................................................

List of Symbols and Abbreviations…………..……………………..

…........................VI

List of

Contents……………………………………………………………………….VI

List of

Tables………………………………………………………..............................I

Abstract………………………...

……………………………………………………….X

Chapter one: Introduction…………………………………………….........................1

1.1 Research Problem...............................................................................................2

1.2 Research Importance..........................................................................................3

1.3 Research Aims and Questions...........................................................................3

1.4 Research

Methodology…………………………………………………….........3

1.5 Thesis Outline......................................................................................................3

Chapter Two: Literature Review………......................................................................4

 8

2.2.1 Literature Review IFRS-9.....................................................................................5

2.2.2 Literature Review Liquidity risk..........................................................................6

2.2.3 Literature Review Credit risk...............................................................................8

2.2.4 Literature Review Banks Capital.........................................................................9

chapter three: Research

Methodology..........................................................................12

3.1 Introduction…………...

…………………………………………………………...13

3.2 Methodology…………………………………………………………....................13

3.3 Framework of study…………………………………………………....................13

3.4 The Study Sample ………………………………………………………………...14

3.5 Study Hypotheses........................16

3.6 Operational Definitions......................16

3.7 Research Variable18

3.8 Study Empirical Model…………………………………………………………...19

chapter 4: Data Analysis and Hypotheses

Testing…………………………………....20

4.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………………….21

4.2 Descriptive Analysis22

4.3 Correlation Matrix Test……………………………………………...25

4.4 Model Specification Tests……………26

4.5 Hausman Test...................27

4.6 Regression analysis……………………………………………………………….28

Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations…………………………………….35

5.1 Conclusions……………………………………………………………………..…36
 9

5.2 Recommendations and Future Research……………………………………….37

5.3 Limitations………………………………………………………………………..38

References39

Appendices.........................44

Abstract in Arabic

List of Tables

Table Name Table Page

Table 1 The Sample Data 15

Table 2 all study variables 18

Table 3 Descriptive Analysis 22

Table 4 Correlations Matrix 25

Table 5 Test Breusch-Pagan-Godfrey of ROA 26

Table 6 Test Breusch-Pagan-Godfrey of ROE 27

Table 7 Hausman Test 28

Table 8 Regression analysis for ROA 29

 10

Table 9 Regression analysis for ROE 32

List Figure

Figure Name Figure Page

Figure 3.1 Theoretical Framework 14

Abstract

The impact of IFRS 9, liquidity Risk, Credit Risk and

Capital on Banks Performance: (Evidence from the
Jordanian Banking Sector)

By
Sajedah Mohammed Abdallah Eyalsalman

Supervisor
Khaled Mohammed Alzubi
Professor

Co-supervisor
Zyad Mohammed Marashdeh
Associate Professor

This study aims to identify the impact of IFRS 9, liquidity Risk, Credit Risk and
Capital on Banks Performance Jordanian, The data was collected manually for a sample
bank, and 13 banks were listed as commercial banks, Three Islamic banks were
excluded because their sources of income and investment are different and because
Islamic banks do not manage credit facilities, unlike commercial banks. Also eight
foreign banks were excluded because they provided a percentage of 6.8 credit facilities.
 11

The Study period was 10 years from 2012-2021. Study methodology analytical
quantitative research approach, Performance is measured by profitability Return on
assets and return on equity.

Findings of this study indicate that there is a statistically significant effect of the
application of IFRS-9, a statistically significant effect of liquidity risk, As for credit
risk, any increase in that risk negatively affects (ROA and ROE) , and there is a positive
relationship between bank capital and ROA and a negative relationship between bank
capital and ROE.

The study concluded with a set of recommendations Work to improve the procedures
for the application of IFRS-9 further, Banks should hold liquid assets capital in banking
do use equity and focus on adopting effective credit risk management policies.

Keywords: IFRS-9, Liquidity risk, Credit risk, Bank capital, Bank Performance
Chapter One: Introduction

1.1 Research Problem

1.2 Research Importance

1.3 Research Aims and Questions

1.4 Research Methodology

1.5 Thesis Outline

Chapter one: Introduction

Financial systems are the backbone of economic growth as Jordanian banks have been
able to positively influence the Jordanian economy through the various activities they
offer. The process of granting loans is the main replenishment of the bank's income
through the process of attracting new customers and imposing banking interest. Making
the right decision helps in achieving a better profit return, such as maintaining capital
ratios above the minimum required for banks, maintaining deposits, and the process of
granting bank loans.

The application of IFRS enhances financial stability, as it forces banks to build up loss
reserves if they fall below the required level (Engelmann, 2021). Liquidity risks
threaten the activities of the bank, any shortage in the level of liquidity affects the
sustainability of the bank since liquidity risks are associated with the flow of deposits
(Rokhim & Min, 2020). Risk is closely related so banks must adopt risk management
practices with high efficiency to protect investors and maintain banks' sustainability
(Harb et al., 2022). Credit risk is one of the most exposed risks to banks and is defined
as the failure of the debtor to repay the obligation, which leads to an increase in non-
performing loans, which leads to a financial crisis for the bank (Ahmed et al., 2022).
Capital is the main factor for increasing and decreasing the profitability of banks so that
banks with high levels of capital can practice various business activities and achieve
high profits (Abbas et al., 2019).

The impact of the global financial crisis in 2008 had implications for liquidity risk,
credit risks, and the recent financial crisis revealed the collapses of most commercial
banks due to the imbalance between credit and liquidity risks (Harb et al., 2022;
Reitgruber, 2016). Liquidity risk plays an important role in the bank because it means
the bank's ability to meet obligations and its ability to finance loans, liquidity risks may
result in a loss of the bank's ability to finance banking transactions and thus affect the
bank's profitability (Ibe, 2013). addition Liquidity risk occurs when depositors suddenly
withdraw their money, affecting the bank's sustainability and financial crisis and
affecting its performance by reducing loans, forcibly selling some of the assets and the
negatives it may bring, and pooling deposits at the central bank (Rokhim & Min, 2020).
 5

The application of IFRS 9 implemented in January were in 2018 which a broad impact
on banking operations and bank performance as it increases the confidence of bank
depositors. This is because it provides greater protection by early recognition of
expected credit losses rather than the previous practice of providing allocations only
when losses are incurred (Reitgruber, 2016). The International Financial Reporting
Standard has been issued as an alternative to international standard 39, which includes
previous requirements and additional adjustments, which aims to address the problems
highlighted by the global financial crisis this caused the collapse of the banking sector
and the collapse of many banks from mid-2007 until the end of 2008. (Marzuki et al.,
2021; Stander, 2021).

Credit risk is more important in the financial sector because it is a major cause of
serious banking problems resulting from customer inaction, (Madugu et al., 2020).
Credit risks cause banks to fail and thus lead to economic stagnation, and
misunderstanding the use of credit risk and risk management poses a threat to the
progress of commercial banks (Rehman et al., 2019). Credit risks are affected during
economic fluctuations, credit standards fall during the recession and tighten during the
boom, causing credit problems due to soft loans in a recession (Kesraoui et al., 2022).

1.1 Research Problem

The risks discussed in this thesis are among the most important risks that cause concern
to banks, There must be a balance between liquidity and risk and the bank's capital to
make a profit in the future, and the international standard for preparing financial reports
is seen as improving the profitability of banks from the perspective of recognized losses
(Elena et al., 2020). The problem, therefore, is how to balance banks to avoid liquidity
and credit risks, maintain capital ratios that protect the bank from bankruptcy risk, and
introduce IFRS 9 to see how these challenges affect bank performance.
 6

1.2 Research Importance

1- Assists banks in reaching new results on the impact of the application of IFRS 9
on the performance of banks.
2- Helps banks know the impact of liquidity risks, credit risks and bank capital on
the performance of Jordanian banks.
3- It helps regulators to know the performance of banks and help them overcome
problems and support them.
1.3 Research Aims and Questions
This research aims to examine the impact of the IFRS 9, liquidity Risk, Credit Risk and
Capital on Bank's Performance banks in Jordan to achieve the aims I am going to
answer the following questions:

1- Does the application of IFRS 9 impact banks performance in Jordan?

2-Does liquidity risk impact the banks performance in Jordan?
3-Does credit risk impact the banks performance in Jordan?
4-Does bank capital impact the banks performance in Jordan?

1.4 Research Methodology

Panel data is used to examine the impact of IFRS 9, liquidity risk, credit and capital risk
on the performance of Jordanian banks. The sample data of study banks, Amman stock
Exchange 13 banks out of 24 banks in Jordan during the period (2012-2021) and the
data has been collected manually from annual reports of banks listed on the Amman
Stock Exchange.

1.5 Thesis Outline

The rest of the study contains an overview of the thesis explaining the subject of the
research and then the problem of research and the importance of research and
presenting these research questions and the objective of the study and concludes the
chapter with the methodology of the study in chapter 1, which will provide a
comprehensive review of previous literature on the impact of IFRS 9 and bank risks
such as liquidity risk, credit and capital risks in chapter 2, This chapter discusses
methodology and the method of research, as well as ways of collecting and analyzing
 7

data in chapter 3, empirical findings and discussion in chapter 4 and conclusion and
recommendation in chapter 5.

Chapter Two: Background of Previous Studies

Introduction 2.1

Literature Review 2.2

 8

Chapter two: Introduction

This chapter includes a compilation of information, theories, and previous study
research on the impact IFRS-9, liquidity risk, credit risk, and capital on a bank's
performance. This chapter also discusses theoretical information on bank risks and
clarifies basic concepts related to the impact of IFRS-9, liquidity risk, credit risk, and
Capital on a bank's performance.

2.2 Literature Review

2.2.1 Literature Review IFRS-9
After the global financial crisis, most of the criticism was directed at the reasons for the
collapse of the banking sector, namely the difference between the goals of regulators
and standard-setters, the regulator's goal was to reduce the level of risk to bankers, and
standard-setters were to provide useful information for the ability to make decisions for
investors (Marzuki et al., 2021). To address the shortcomings highlighted by the global
financial crisis, the IASB Board issued IFRS-9, and banks have implemented an
expected credit loss model to estimate loan losses by improving the recognition of loan
losses and showing expected future losses (Abbas et al., 2019; Oberson, 2021b;
Stander, 2021).

Based on IFRS-9, expected credit loss is defined as losses resulting from customer
default (Schutte et al., 2020). The application of IFRS-9 positively affects banks; the
earlier recognition of losses serves to reduce the accumulation of losses, increase
financial stability, and improve the quality of reports by achieving disclosure
requirements (Novotny-Farkas, 2016). IFRS-9 provides better information to investors
and creditors by increasing the transparency of information that enables the investor to
make the best decision (Schaap, 2020). The transition to IFRS-9 negatively affects
banks in terms of a decrease in value and a decrease in the value of bank equity (Groff
& Mörec, 2021). The early recognition of losses increases loan loss provision, low
capital, and lower profits. It is likely that IFRS-9 displays the values of the decline
based on the value of the expected losses (Dong & Oberson, 2021).
 9

IFRS-9 Measurement
IFRS-9 focuses on calculating anticipated credit losses, Losses are recognized when a
deterioration in creditworthiness occurs or a customer defaults. The standard requires
continuous recognition and updating of the value of the loss on the date of each report
to reflect changes in credit risk. The standard provides different ways to measure credit
losses Based on the type of tool and information available, Credit loss is measured by
differences between the present value of accrued contractual cash flows and the present
value of cash flows expected to be received (Du et al., 2022; Gebhardt, 2016).

One of the most commonly used measurement methods ECL = EAD x PD x LGD
Where estimate credit losses (ECL), Exposure at default (EAD) is the estimating default
The value of the risk to which the financial asset is exposed at the time of the date of
payment, the probability of default (PD) Probability of loss value in the event of default
and (LGD) is the estimating the value of the loss resulting from default at a given time
(Chen et al., 2022; Du et al., 2022). The standard IFRS-9 requires recognition of future
credit losses in three stages of the decrease in value The first stage is the expected 12-
month credit losses are recognized as an expense called the monetary value which
includes credit losses resulting from the customer's default (Schutte et al., 2020). Phase
II is a stage of poor performance when credit risk increases are reported at the current
value of losses any deterioration of credit quality, the phase III occurs when the
creditworthiness of the original affects and any depreciation of the asset must be
reported expected credit losses over a lifetime (Gubareva, 2021; Oberson, 2021a).
Another measurement, IFRS-9, is used as a dummy variable: If IFRS 9 is used, an
indicator equal to one is used; otherwise, zero is used (Oberson, 2021b).

2.2.2 Literature Review Liquidity risk

Banks generate liquidity by converting current deposits into loans and monitoring the
quality of loans to reduce the risk of default by borrowers (Mdaghri, 2021). Liquidity
risk arises when banks are unable to cover their short-term obligations or when
customers withdraw large amounts, resulting in a decrease in the bank's liquidity. Banks
 10

face challenges that make them face liquidity risks, namely the difficulty of converting
assets into cash, making them resort to loans from the central bank or other banks to
cover their needs (Fayman et al., 2022). Loans have a significant impact on the bank's
liquidity as high levels of non-performing loans affect the balance sheet and are linked
to the bank's failure (Riahi, 2019).

study examines the risks that affect the performance of banks, The study examined
variables such as operating risk, credit risk, and liquidity risk for a sample of banks
consisting of 15 banks listed on the Amman Stock Exchange, showing that there is an
unimportant positive relationship with ROA between liquidity risk and performance and
a negative relationship between operating risk and credit risk (Altarawneh & Shafie,
2018). Another study argued on the impact of liquidity risk management on the
performance of commercial banks in Pakistan during the period 2006–2009 and
concluded that there is a positive relationship between liquidity and performance and
that any increase in liquidity ratios positively affects the performance of banks (Alim et
al., 2021). Others pointed to a positive correlation between liquidity risk and bank
performance when examining a sample of banks in Bangladesh during the period
(2003–2006), suggesting the need to increase liquidity to increase the bank's
performance (Rahman et al., 2015).

They studied the impact of the risks of liquidity on the performance of banks for the
period 2012-2016 for the sample of six banks, the method which is used in this research
Correlation, Regression analysis. That measure performance by ROA, ROE and
measured liquidity used Loan to deposit ratio, Liquid risky asset to total asset ,and
Capital to total asset ratio, Researchers found that liquidity negatively affects the
performance of banks (Chowdhury & Zaman, 2018).

Also, another study examines the causes of liquidity risks, as liquidity risk is a
determinant of the bank's performance and represents the following reasons: liquid
assets, external financing, regulatory and supervisory factors, and macroeconomic
factors all contribute to low profitability. The researchers discovered that liquidity risks
have a negative impact on bank profitability due to the high cost of financing and
increased net interest margins for the bank (Chen et al., 2018).
 11

Another study argued about the impact of the relationship between credit risk and
liquidity risk on bank profitability from 2004 to 2015.For a sample of 38 conventional
banks in the countries of the Middle East and North Africa, the method unrelated
regression (SUR) was used, and the researchers concluded that increased credit risk
leads to increased liquidity risk and thus emphasizes the negative impact on the
profitability of banks (Abdelaziz et al., 2022).

Liquidity Risk Measurement

Most previous studies have used liquid assets (current assets or short-term assets) to
total assets (Chen et al., 2018; Rudhani & Balaj, 2019). It gives us information about
liquidity shocks. High liquidity ratios mean the bank's ability to absorb and bear losses,
measured as the ratio of total loans to total deposits (Dahir et al., 2018; Pratiwi &
Masdupi, 2021). If the ratio is high, it means that the bank suffers from a lack of
liquidity that affects its financial performance. The variable used to represent the
quality of assets is the ratio of total loans to total assets (Ekinci & Poyraz, 2019;
Rahman et al., 2015).

2.2.3 Literature Review Credit risk

Commercial banks complete their banking activities by obtaining new debt from their
new customers, and all banks rely on this process to achieve their profits in exchange
for the interest they receive from customers. Credit risk is one of the most worrying for
banks, as it is linked to bank loans if borrowers do not pay or default on time (Saleh &
Abu Afifa, 2020). The quality of loans affects credit risk, as non-performing loans are
the result of lower-quality lending, which affects the performance and profitability of
banks (Ozili, 2017).

This study examines the impact of credit risk management on the financial performance
of commercial banks in Uganda for the period 2006-2015 for a sample of banks
consisting of 230 commercial banks. Relying on descriptive statistics, correlation
analysis, and decline, the researcher found that non-performing loans adversely affect
the performance of banks due to their exposure to lack of liquidity and financial crises
(Serwadda, 2018).
 12

In another study, the impact of credit risk on banks' performance for the period (2005–
2017) was examined for a sample of 26 commercial banks in Turkey. The following
variables were used to measure financial performance (ROA and ROE), and credit risk
was measured using non-performing loans (NPLs), and the researchers found a reverse
relationship between credit risk and bank performance (Ekinci & Poyraz, 2019).

Others argued about the impact of credit risk on the performance of global banks in
Ghana during the period (2007–2016). The researchers found a negative correlation
between credit risk and bank performance, i.e., the increase in non-performing loans
negatively affects banks' profits (Gadzo et al., 2019). This study also supports the
results of previous studies with a negative correlation between credit risk and bank
profitability (Sinha & Sharma, 2016).

Despite the majority of the results of previous studies, some studies show that there is a
positive relationship between credit risk and the profitability of banks, such as The
study, which examines the relationship of a sample of six banks in Ghana during the
period (2005–2009), shows in the research result that there is a positive relationship
between credit risk and bank profitability, which shows that banks in Ghana are
positively affected by increasing the risk of default (Boahene et al., 2012). Another
study examined the impact of credit risk on bank profitability for a sample of nine
Tunisian banks during the period 1980–2009 and demonstrated a positive correlation
between credit risk and bank profitability (Abdelaziz et al., 2011).

Credit Risk Measurement

Previous studies used non-performing loans to measure credit risk, such as loan loss
provisions. This low ratio means that there is less credit risk, fewer bad loans, and
increased quality of loans to customers (Ekinci & Poyraz, 2019; Saleh & Abu Afifa,
2020). Another study measured credit risk by total credit or total assets (Abdelaziz et
al., 2011; Hakimi et al., 2012)

2.2.4 Literature Review Banks Capital

 13

Capital limits the risks facing banks, so after the financial crisis, the level of banking
capital was highlighted. What level of capital should banks maintain to protect
themselves from future collapses and risks? To answer the question, Basel III was
proposed after exposing the weaknesses of Basel II, and it aims to enhance the
requirements of banking capital by increasing the minimum capital requirements and
reducing the bank's financial leverage (Obadire et al., 2022).

Capital adequacy enables the ability to measure the quality of assets and is defined as
the amount of capital that protects to banks against insolvency and the risks to which
they are exposed (Noman et al., 2015). the objective of establishing capital adequacy
ratio standards is to establish minimum shareholder equity to protect depositors and
promote financial stability (MENDOZA & Rivera, 2017).

Previous studies show that there are multiple relationships between capital and the
profitability of banks. Some of them indicate the lack of a clear relationship, such as a
study looking at the impact of capital on the profitability of banks during the period
(2003-2011) for a sample of 23 Turkish banks. The techniques of dynamic painting
were used to analyze the data of the plate. The researchers found a positive and negative
relationship between capital and the profitability of banks (Ayaydin & Karakaya, 2014).

Other researchers contend that the impact of bank capital level on profitability was
studied for a sample of 42 banks from various countries from 1999 to 2006. The method
of the random effects panel was used to estimate the profitability of banks. The
researcher concluded that bank-level variables such as capital adequacy have a positive
impact on the profitability of banks (Francis, 2013). Another study supports the In a
previous study, the authors examined the impact of capital on the profitability of
Turkish banks during the 2008–2009 period. before and during the global financial
crisis Using the fixed effects model and the random effects model, the researchers
concluded that there is a positive relationship between capital and the profitability of
banks (Akhmedjonov & Balci Izgi, 2015). The study looks at the impact of credit,
liquidity, and bank capital risks on the bank's profitability during the study period
(2010–2018) for a sample of 13 commercial banks. The study uses GMM econometric
panel data. The researchers found a positive relationship between capital and
profitability. As for the impact of credit risk and liquidity on profitability, there is a
 14

negative correlation (Saleh & Abu Afifa, 2020). This is also confirmed by Djalilov &
Piesse (2016). Banks with the best capital are the most profitable in their respective
countries.

While other studies have reported a negative relationship, such as The study examines
the impact of the relationship between credit, liquidity, and bank capital risk on the
bank's profitability during the period (2007–2016). Research sample: Four banks in
Indonesia. The researchers found a negative relationship between credit, liquidity, and
capital risk. This is justified by the fact that banks seeking a higher profit should reduce
the level of credit required, while to maintain liquidity, credit should be increased to
reduce the default of loans that reduce the bank's liquidity (Rifqah Amaliah & Hassan).
The study looks at the impact of credit risk, liquidity, capital adequacy, and operational
efficiency on the profitability of banks during the period (2009–2013). The study used
multiple linear regression analysis. The researchers found a negative relationship
between credit risk and profitability and that liquidity risk has a positive impact on
profitability, capital adequacy has a negative impact on profitability, and operational
efficiency negatively affects profitability (Prasetyo & Darmayanti, 2015).

Banks Capital Measurement

The bank's capital can be measured using financial ratios such as the capital adequacy
ratio, which is calculated using total equity or risk-weighted assets (RWA) of at least
100% and is a tool to measure a bank's ability to cope with future losses. The high level
of this ratio indicates that the bank has a sufficient amount of capital to deal with risks,
but when this percentage decreases, the bank has the least ability to deal with risks.
(Abbas et al., 2019; Anggreyi et al., 2022; Bitar et al., 2020; Chiaramonte & Casu,
2017). Other previous studies measured the equity to total assets ratio (Lee & Hsieh,
2013; Menicucci & Paolucci, 2016; Ozili, 2015).
Chapter Three: Research Methodology

1. Introduction

2. Methodology

3. Framework of the study

4. Research Data

5. Study Hypotheses

6. Operational Definitions

7. Research Variables

8. Study Empirical Model

 13

Chapter three: Research Methodology

3.1 Introduction

Through this chapter, the methodology used will be clarified according to the nature of
the study. The research methodology enables solving the problem related to research by
collecting and analyzing data. The data in this chapter consist of research data, research
methods, research samples, data sources, study variables, methods of analysis, the
problem related to research by collecting and analyzing data. The data in this chapter
consist of research data, research methods, research samples, data sources, study
variables, methods of analysis.

3.2 Methodology
The study is based on the analytical quantitative research approach to achieve the
objectives of the research; the quantitative approach is one of the most used in
humanities and social studies. Statistical analysis was used through data analysis to
examine the effect of IFRS 9, Liquidity Risk, Credit Risk, and Capital on the bank's
performance.
Statistical analysis will be used in panel data using program E-views, Panel data
provides three models: the fixed effect model, the random effect model, and the Pooled
OLS regression.

3.3 Framework of the study

The theoretical framework aims to focus on risks affecting the bank's performance by
examining the impact of IFRS 9, liquidity risk, credit risk, and capital risk on the bank's
performance.
The following figure shows all the variables of the study and discusses each variable
within the study.
 14

INDEPENDENT VARIABLES DEPENDENT VARIABLE

IFRS 9

Liquidity Risk
BANK
PERFORMANCE
Credit Risk ROA
ROE

Bank capital

CONTROL VARIABLES

Bank size
Loan Growth
Non-interest
Expense

Figure 3.1 Theoretical Framework

3.4 The Study Sample

The sample used to examine hypotheses was collected manually from the annual reports
of banks listed on the Amman Stock Exchange through the Central Bank. In this study,
a sample of 13 commercial banks out of 24 banks is used. The study period covers ten
years during the period (2012–2021). Three Islamic banks were excluded because their
sources of income and investment are different and because Islamic banks do not
manage credit facilities, unlike commercial banks. Also Eight foreign banks were
excluded because they provided a percentage of 6.8 credit facilities (Alrfai et al., 2022).
 15

Establishment
Symbol Bank Name #
Year

1930 ARBK Arab Bank 1

1990 ABCO Arab Banking Corporation (Jordan) 2

1960 BOJX Bank of Jordan 3

1960 CABK Cairo Amman Bank 4

1995 CAPL Capital Bank of Jordan 5

1977 JCBK Jordan Commercial Bank 6

1976 JOKB Jordan Kuwait Bank 7

1955 AHLI Jordan Ahli Bank 8

Housing Bank for Trade and

1973 THBK 9
Finance

1978 AJIB Arab Jordan Investment Bank 10

1982 INVB Invest bank

11

Société Générale de Banque

1965 SGBJ 12
Jordanie

1978 UBSI Bank al Etihad 13

Table (1): The Sample Data

Source: Amman stock exchange website

www.ase.com.jo/ar
 16

3.5 Study Hypotheses

The study indicates a possible relationship between the following variables: IFRS 9,
liquidity, credit risk, and capital banks. In light of this, the proposed hypotheses for this
study were imposed.

H01: There is impact between IFRS 9 and a bank's performance.

H02: There is impact between liquidity risk and a bank's performance.
H03: There is impact between credit risk and a bank's performance.
H04: There is impact between bank capital and the bank's performance.

3.6 Define variables

In this study, the impact of IFRS 9, liquidity risk, credit risk, and capital risk on the
performance of Jordanian banks is examined. This study assumes IFRS 9, liquidity risk,
credit risk, and capital for banks as independent variables and the profitability of banks
as a dependent variable, presenting the schedule of variables and definitions of the
study.

Dependent variables:

a- ROA is the most important measure of profitability because it refers to returns

generated by the company's owned assets (Isayas, 2022). ROA has been defined
as net income divided by total assets (Chhaidar et al., 2022; Zhao & Xu, 2021).

b- ROE is another measure and alternative to measuring profitability; it measures

how the bank uses the shareholder fund to generate income. ROE has been
defined as net income divided by total equity (Menicucci & Paolucci, 2016;
Rangkuti, 2020). in addition (Ayalew, 2021).

Independent variables:

a- IFRS 9: is a dummy variable, to which a value equal to 1 is assigned for the

company year that ends after the date of local mandatory IFRS adoption from
 17

2018 to 2021, and 0 otherwise from 2012 to 2017 (Santos Garcia & Lopes
Lucena, 2022).

b- Liquidity risk (LR): It is an indicator of the efficiency of the bank's management

and the ability of the bank to fulfill its obligations (Al Zaidanin & Al Zaidanin,
2021). Compare deposits to assets and calculate through LR ratio equals
deposits divided by total assets (Das & Rout, 2020).

c- Credit risk (CR): This means that the borrower is unable to pay off debts or
meet obligations and predicts the risk of bad debts, which is measured as Non-
performing loans divided gross loans (Abbas & Masood, 2020; Harb et al.,
2022).

d- Bank Capital (B-Cap): This research is referred to as "Bank Capital

Adequacy," which is measured as Total Equity to Total Assets (Abbas &
Masood, 2020).

Control Variables:

a- Bank size: is measured as the logarithm of the total assets (Al-Tarawneh

et al., 2017; Sinha & Sharma, 2016). Larger banks provide larger
financial services and therefore have a larger number of clients and
assets, which leads to greater profit and reduced risk exposure (Rahaman
& Akhter, 2015).

b- Loan Growth (Growth): The ability to raise new funds if the loan
business expands in comparison to the rest of the balance sheet is
measured as the difference between year-to-year loan growth and the
bank's total loans in the previous year (Saleh & Abu Afifa, 2020).

c- Non-interest Expense: It is considered part of the bank's operating

expenses and is measured through non-interest expenditures divided to
total average assets, including the category of non-interest expenditures
 18

of employee training, rent and workplace expenses, information

technology, the cost of data processing, and other expenses (Sullivan,
2000).
3.7 Research Variable

Table (2): Research Variables

Dependent variables

Sources Measurement Variable name Variables

Chhaidar et al., 2022; Zhao &( Return on assets is Return on ROA

)Xu, 2021 measured as a ratio of net assets
.income to total assets
Net income / total Assets

Ayalew, 2021; Menicucci &( Return on equity is Return on ROE

Paolucci, 2016; Rangkuti, measured as a ratio of net equity
)2020 .income to total equity
Net income / total equity
Independent variables

)Garcia & Lucena, 2022( is a dummy variable, to International IFRS 9

what a value equal to 1 is Financial
assigned for the company Reporting
year that ends after the date Standard 9
of local mandatory IFRS
adoption and 0 otherwise
)Das & Rout, 2020( Deposits / total asset Liquidity risk LR

Abbas & Masood, 2020; Harb( Non-performing loans / Credit risk CR

)et al., 2022 gross loans

)Abbas & Masood, 2020( Equity / Total Assets Bank Capital B-Cap

Control Variables

Al-Tarawneh et al., 2017;( the natural logarithm of Bank size Size

)Sinha & Sharma, 2016
)Saleh & Abu Afifa, 2020(
banks’ total assets
the natural logarithm of
the bank's total assets
Current loan less previous Loan growth Growth
loan to previous loans

)Vithyea, 2014( Non-interest expenditures Non-interest NIX

 19

divided by Expense
total average assets

3.8 Study Empirical Model

It was used in this chapter, Standard estimation techniques using the constant effect
regression model of panel data were used in the analysis to examine the effect of IFRS
9, liquidity risk, credit risk, and capital on the performance of Jordanian banks. The
equation can be explained as follows: Profit is known as "profitability," which is
measured by ROA and ROE).

Profit= α0 + 1 IFRS 9 it + 2 LR it + 3 CR it + 4 B it +5 Size it + +6 growth it +

NIX it + ε it …. (1)
α= is a constant
1-5= the coefficients of the variables
.i= stands for a bank
.t = time
IFRS 9= is a dummy variable, to which a value equal to 1 is assigned for the company
.year that ends after the date of local mandatory IFRS adoption, and 0 otherwise
LR =stands for liquidity Risk
CR =stands for credit risk
B = stands for bank capital
Size = stands for bank size
Growth = stands for loan growth
NIX = Non-interest Expense
.ε = stands for the error term
Chapter four: Data Analysis and Hypotheses Testing

4.1 Introduction

4.2 Descriptive Analysis

4.3 Correlation Matrix Test

4.4 Model Specification Tests

4.5 Hausman Test

4.6 Regression analysis

 21

Chapter Four: Introduction

In this section, analysis of the results of the study will be presented, and the data will be
analyzed through the E-Views program. The data collected from the research process
were used to verify the impact of IFRS 9, liquidity risk, credit risk, and bank capital on
the profitability of Jordanian banks during the period (2012-2021), through a fixed
effects regression model.
This chapter provides analysis and findings related to the risks affecting the
performance of banks. First review a summary of the descriptive statistics of all study
variables. Second, the results of the underlying model that was used to examine the
relationship between bank risk variables and bank performance are presented. Third, the
results of the correlations between the study variables are displayed. After that, analyses
will be performed to choose the appropriate model, where the panel data can be
analyzed through three models: the fixed effect model, the random effect model, and
the pooled model of the underlying model that was used to examine the relationship
between bank risk variables and bank performance are presented. Finally, the results of
the appropriate model will be discussed.
 22

4.2 Descriptive Analysis

In this chapter, the results of the descriptive analysis are presented. Descriptive analyses
are used to examine the relationships between variables through key procedures in
explaining scientific phenomena, and they provide a better understanding of scientific
phenomena (Sloman, 2010).

Table (3): Descriptive Analysis

Variables Mean Std.Dev Median Max Min

ROA
0.011 0.005 0.011 0.020 -0.002

ROE
0.078 0.033 0.083 0.156 -0.010

IFRS 9
0.400 0.492 0.000 1.000 0.000

LR
0.746 0.050 0.748 0.837 0.589

CR
0.074 0.031 0.074 0.200 0.002

B-Cap
0.136 0.027 0.136 0.220 0.075

Size
9.174 0.572 9.305 9.926 7.379

Growth
0.081 0.128 0.056 0.860 -0.092

NIX 0.009 0.007 0.009 0.084 0.005

Note: ROA Return on assets which Measures the profitability of banks (NI/TA), ROE Return on Equity
which Measures profitability by how shareholder money is used to generate income ( NI/TE), IFRS 9
Measures credit loss (dummy variable 0 or 1),LR It is liquidity which measures the efficiency of the
management of the bank ( Deposits/ TA), CR is credit risk measured Bad loan ratio ( NPL/TL),Bank
capital Used to measure the level of capital in a bank ( TE/TA), control variables: Size (Log TA),growth
(Current loan less previous loan to current loans) and Non-interest expenses ( Non-interest expenses /
average total assets )The following table shows the results of the descriptive analysis of the sample data
collected for the period (2012-2021).
 23

The descriptive statistics are exhibited in Table 3: the variables (ROA and ROE) are the
dependent variables; (IFRS 9, LR, CR, and B-Cap) are the independent variables; and
there are three control variables (Size, Growth, and NIX). The results were the
following:

1- ROA: The mean ROA was (0.011), standard deviation (0.005), Statistical
analysis shows that the values of the standard deviation are close to the mean.
The median value was (0.011). The maximum value (0.020) and the minimum
value (-0.002), The differences explain the return on assets in that period as a
result of the Bank of Jordan achieving the highest return years in 2014, As for
the low return on assets Due to the impact of Jordan Kuwait Bank years 2020 in
the covid-19 pandemic.

2- ROE: The mean ROE was (0.078), standard deviation (0.033). The median
value was (0.083). The maximum value (0.156) and the minimum value (-
0.010), The differences explain the return on equity in that period due to the
achievement Capital Bank of Jordan of the highest return years 2021, As for the
low return on equity Due to the impact of Jordan Kuwait Bank years 2020 in
the covid-19 pandemic.

3- IFRS 9: The mean IFRS 9 was (0.400), standard deviation (0.492). The median
value was (0.000). The maximum value (1.000) and the minimum value
(0.000), These numbers explain because the period before the application of the
International Financial Reporting Standard 9 in the years (2012-2017) and the
after application of the standard in the years (2018-2021).

4- Liquidity risk: The mean liquidity risk was (0.746), standard deviation (0.050).
The median value was (0.748). The high values of the statistical analysis
explain the fact that Jordanian banks during the period (2012-2021) suffer from
high liquidity risks. The maximum value (0.837) of the highest Liquidity risk
Arab Jordan Investment Bank year 2017 and the minimum value (0.589) as for
the low value LR of Jordan Ahli Bank years 2013.
 24

5- CR: The mean credit risk was (0.074), standard deviation (0.031). The median
value was (0.074). The valuable reason explains the application of IFRS 9 in
2018 which requires the recognition of expected credit losses faster which
requires banks to grant more accurate credit loans and thus reduce non-
performing loans. Credit risk ranges from (0.200) as the maximum value credit
risk for Societe Generale Bank - Jordan for the year 2012 and the minimum
value (0.002) for Jordan Commercial Bank for the year 2021.

6- B-Cap: The mean B-Cap was (0.136), standard deviation (0.027). The median
value was (0.136). Banks capital ranges from (0.220) as the maximum value
banks capital for Societe Generale Bank - Jordan for the year 2012 and the
minimum value (0.075) for Societe Generale Bank - Jordan for the year 2018.

7- Size: The mean size was (9.174), standard deviation (0.572). The median value
was (9.305). These values indicate the existence of statistically significant
differences in the values of the assets of the bank and is used the natural
logarithm to reduce the difference. Size ranges from (9.926) as the maximum
value size for Housing Bank for Trade for the year 2019 and the minimum value
(7.379) for Arab Bank for the year 2012.

8- Growth: The mean growth was (0.081), standard deviation (0.128). The median
value was (0.056). Growth ranges from (0.860) as the maximum value size for
Arab Jordan Investment Bank for the year 2014 and the minimum value (-0.092)
for Jordan Commercial Bank for the year 2019.

9- NIX: The mean Non-interest expenses was (0.009), standard deviation (0.007).
The median value was (0.009). NIX ranges from (0.084) as the maximum value
size for Bank al Etihad for the year 2019 and the minimum value (0.005) for
Bank al Etihad for the year 2012.
 25

4.3 Correlation Matrix Test

Table 3 shows the correlations between study variables, Pearson's correlation
coefficient is used to examine the correlation of study variables, Pearson's correlation
coefficient testing aims to predict the relationship between variables Pearson correlation
coefficient values range from (1 to -1) (Ly et al., 2018).

When correlation coefficient equals (+1) It turns out that there is a positive relationship
between the variables, when correlation coefficient equals (-1) Turns out to be a
negative relationship between variables and when correlation coefficient equals zero
Shows no correlation between variables.
Table (4): Correlations Matrix

ROA ROE IFRS LR CR B-Cap Size Growth NIX

9

ROA 1

ROE 0.902 1

IFRS 9 -0.404 -0.346 1

LR -0.064 0.144 -0.095 1

CR -0.096 -0.274 -0.141 -0.355 1

B-Cap 0.501 0.121 -0.272 -0.487 0.332 1

Size 0.067 0.192 0.100 0.153 -0.117 -0.185 1

Growth 0.026 0.125 -0.173 0.115 -0.146 -0.109 0.092 1

NIX -0.054 -0.018 0.137 0.085 -0.101 -0.070 0.117 0.032 1

 26

The results of the analysis explain that most of the correlations in the study are weak to
average. Whereas the majority of the link values range from (0.902) for the strongest
positive associations between (ROA and ROE) to (-0.487) for the strongest negative
associations between (LR and B-cap), analysis reveals no alarming linear problems
between the study variables.

4.4 Model Specification Tests

It is important to choose a suitable functional model to examine the hypotheses, Panel
data estimates time cross-sectional data packets using three methods:
1. Pooled OLS regression
2. Fixed effects model
3. Random effects model

In this chapter, the hypotheses of the study are tested based on two tests. The first test is
the (Breusch and Pagan Lagrange Multiplier test), which determines the best model
among pooled OLS regression and random effect models; the second test is the
Hausman test, which determines the best model among fixed effect models and random
effect models
Is the accepted model of pooled OLS regression when P-values are higher than (0.05),
and an alternative is the accepted random effect model when P-values are lower than
(0.05).

Table (5): Test Breusch-Pagan of ROA

Test Breusch-Pagan

Dependent variable ROA

F-Statistic 0.98 Probability 0.45

Obs* R-squared 6.92 Probability 0.44

 27

Table (6): Test Breusch-Pagan of ROE

Test Breusch-Pagan
Dependent ROE
variable

F-Statistic 1.10 Probability 0.37

Obs* R-squared 7.74 Probability 0.36

Notice from the table test (6) and (5) must is accept random effect model and reject
model Pooled OLS Regression.

1- (ARDL)
2- model
4.5 Hausman Test
The Hausman test is one of the most common tests used in panel data
analysis ,Hausman test help the choice of the best model to study by comparing results
between the fixed effect model and the random effect model (Amini et al., 2012). It is
done through Hausman test the acceptance or rejection of the zero hypothesis. Test
focuses on finding out if there is a correlation between unique errors and regression
factors in the model so that the null hypothesis means there is no correlation between
the two.

The null hypothesis is accepted when the P-value is greater than 0.05, and the
appropriate model is the random effect model. When an alternative hypothesis is
accepted and the P-value is less than 0.05, the fixed-effect model is used.
 28

Table (7): Hausman Test

Dependent Chi-square Chi-square D.F Probability

variable Statistic

ROA
22.56 6 0.0010

ROE
20.64 6 0.0021

The table (7) shows the results of a test Hausman that the null hypothesis must be
rejected and the alternative hypothesis accepted because value probability of ROA
(0.0010 <0.05) and value probability of ROE (0.0021<0.05), so the best model of fixed
effect model.

4.6 Regression analysis

Table 8 shows the results of the impact of the application of IFRS 9 on liquidity risk,
credit risk, and the bank's capital on Jordanian banks for the period 2012–2021. The
results of the multiple linear regression test for independent study variables are
presented in Table 8. It is represented by IFRS-9 and measured by the assumption of the
dummy variable, liquidity risk (deposits / total asset), credit risk (non-performing
loans / gross loans), bank capital (equity / total assets), and control variables (size,
growth, nix) on the dependent variable (net income / total assets).

Two tests were applied; the first was the Brooch and Bagan Lagrange multiplier test,
through which the best model was tested between pooled OLS regression and the
random effect model. The second test, which is the Hausman test, was applied, through
which the best model was selected between the fixed effect model and the random
effect model. The best fixed effect model was chosen to explain the study problem.
 29

Table (8): Regression analysis for ROA

Least Squares model (OLS) Random effects model Fixed effects model
Independen Constant

Coefficient

Coefficient

Coefficient
Variables

Std. error

Std. error

Std. error
Prob

Prob

Prob
t-

t-

t-
t

-0.028 0.008 -3.550 0.001 -0.013

0.013 -1.009 0.315 0.103 0.038 2.739 0.007

-0.003 0.001 -5.165 0.000 -0.003 0.001 -4.396 0.000 -0.003 0.001 -4.306 0.000
IFRS-9

0.011 0.006 1.656 0.100 0.007 0.010 0.755 0.452 0.014 0.008 1.785 0.077
LR

-0.042 0.009 -4.605 0.000 -0.041 0.013 -3.042 0.003 -0.032 0.010 -3.258 0.002
CR

0.121 0.013 9.543 0.000 0.084 0.020 4.165 0.000 0.017 0.017 0.960 0.339
B-CAP

0.002 0.001 3.130 0.002 0.001 0.001 1.249 0.214 -0.011 0.004 -2.720 0.008
SIZE

-0.002 0.002 -1.373 0.172 -0.001 0.003 -0.248 0.804 0.000 0.002 0.249 0.804
GROWTH

0.003 0.020 0.175 0.861 -0.027 0.048 -0.568 0.571 0.016 0.025 0.635 0.527
NIX

0.58 0.31 0.81

26.09 9.10 29.34

F-statistic

0.000 0.000 0.000

statistic
(F-
prob
 30

It is noted from the table that the value adjusted R2 of a least squares model (OLS) that
follows GLS cross-section weights is equal to 0.58, the value adjusted R2 of a random
effect model is equal to 0.31, and the value adjusted R2 of an effect fixed model that
follows GLS cross-section weights is equal to 0.81. Where the result of the adjusted R2
fixed effect model turned out to be the best model for the study. Obviously, independent
variables (IFRS-9, LR, CR, and B-CAP) and control variables (size, growth, and NIX)
explained 81% of the variation in return on assets. The results indicate that the value of
the F-statistic is higher for the fixed effect model that followed GLS cross-section
weights, which confirms that the fixed effect model is an important one.

The results of each independent variable on the dependent variable for the models fixed
effect model which followed GLS cross-section weights as follows:

IFRS-9: the value of the Coefficient was (-0.003), and this value indicates a negative
and very weak effect of ROA. t-Statistic (-4.306) , and probability was (0.000) less than
Statistical significance level at (0.05) , which indicates that there is negative effect and
of statistical importance of IFRS-9 on ROA in Jordanian banks commercial during the
period (2012-2021). These results correspond to the results of (Chan & Phua).

LR: the value of the Coefficient was (0.014), and this value indicates a positive and
weak effect of ROA. T-Statistic (1.785), and probability was (0.077) Greater than
Statistical significance level at (0.05), Which indicates that there is a positive effect and
of statistical importance of LR on ROA in Jordanian banks commercial during the
period (2012-2021). The reason explains that an increase in the bank's liquidity will
lead to an increase in banking activity in lending operations and thus increase the return
on assets and profits of the bank. These results correspond to the results of (Pratiwi &
Masdupi, 2021; Warsa & Mustanda, 2016).

CR: the value of the Coefficient was (-0.032), and this value indicates a negative and
weak effect of ROA. T-Statistic (-3.258) , and probability was (0.002) less than
Statistical significance level at (0.05) , indicating that the CR has a negative effect and
statistical significance on ROA in Jordanian banks' commercial operations from 2012 to
2021. Poor credit risk management reduced profits by increasing unsecured assets that
 31

lead a decline ROA. These results correspond to the results of (Ekinci & Poyraz, 2019)
(Buchory, 2015).

B-CAP: the value of the Coefficient was (0.017), and this value indicates a positive and
weak effect of ROA. T-Statistic (0.96), and probability was (0.339) less than Statistical
significance level at (0.05), which indicates that there is no statistically significant
positive of B-CAP on ROA in Jordanian commercial banks from 2012 to 2021. These
results correspond to the results of Saleh and Abu Afifa (2020). The study's findings
support a positive relationship between B-CAP and ROA (Ruziqa, 2013; Saleh & Abu
Afifa, 2020).

Size: The Coefficient value of the size on ROA was (-0.011), where the effect was
negative and very weak, and the t-Statistic was (-2.72) and the probability was (0.008)
less than the level of statistical significance at (0.05). Which indicates that there is
anegative and statistically significant effect of size on ROA in Jordanian banks
commercial during the period (2012-2021). The result explains that larger banks get a
lower return on assets ; This is explained due to asset diversification, or large banks use
accounting methods to reduce the profit related to audits (Golubeva et al., 2019).

Growth: The Coefficient value of the growth on ROA was (0), where the effect was
positive and very strong, and the t-Statistic was (0.249) and the probability was (0.804)
greater than the level of statistical significance at (0.05). Which indicates that there is
positive effect of size on ROA in Jordanian banks commercial during the period (2012-
2021). Which means any increase in growth will lead to an increase ROA.

NIX: The Coefficient value of the NIX on ROA was (0.016), where the effect was
positive and weak, and the t-Statistic was (0.635) and the probability was (0.527)
greater than the level of statistical significance at (0.05). Which indicates that there is
positive and statistically insignificant effect of NIX on ROA in Jordanian banks
commercial during the period (2012-2021).
 32
Table (9): Regression analysis for ROE
Least Squares model (OLS) Random effects model Fixed effects model
Independen Constant

Coefficient

Coefficient

Coefficient
Variables

Std. error

Std. error

Std. error
Prob

Prob

Prob
t-

t-

t-
t

-0.061 0.070 -0.878 0.382 -0.038 0.094 -0.408 0.684 0.883 0.300 2.946 0.004

-0.024 0.006 -4.080 0.000 -0.025 0.006 -4.484 0.000 -0.018 0.005 - 0.000
IFRS-9

3.644

0.037 0.062 0.592 0.555 0.048 0.070 0.682 0.497 0.126 0.061 2.056 0.042
LR

-0.377 0.092 -4.111 0.000 -0.304 0.098 -3.093 0.003 -0.225 0.082 - 0.007
CR

2.754

0.255 0.117 2.178 0.031 0.091 0.148 0.612 0.542 -0.356 0.138 - 0.011
B-CAP

2.578

0.013 0.005 2.778 0.006 0.011 0.007 1.501 0.136 -0.090 0.032 - 0.006
SIZE

2.786

0.003 0.021 0.135 0.893 0.005 0.020 0.257 0.798 0.009 0.012 0.734 0.465
GROWTH

-0.101 0.373 -0.272 0.786 -0.155 0.356 -0.435 0.664 0.149 0.201 0.739 0.461
NIX

0.25 0.20 0.61

7.24 5.61 11.59

statistic
F-

0.000 0.000 0.000

statistic
(F-
prob
 33

It is noted from the table that the value adjusted R2 of a least squares model (OLS)
equals 0.25, the value adjusted R2 of a random effect model equals 0.20, and the value
adjusted R2 of an effect fixed model which followed GLS cross-section weights equals
0.61. Where the result of the adjusted R2 fixed effect model turned out to be the best
model for the study. Obviously, independent variables (IFRS-9, LR, CR, and B-CAP)
and control variables (size, growth, and NIX) explained 61% of the variation in return
on assets. The results indicate that the value of the F-statistic is higher for the models'
fixed effect model, which followed GLS cross-section weights, which confirms that the
fixed effect model is an important model.

The results of each independent variable on the dependent variable for the fixed effect
model, which followed GLS cross-section weights, are as follows:

IFRS-9: The value of the coefficient was -0.018, and this value indicates a negative and
weak effect of ROE. t-statistic (-3.644) and probability were both less than 0.000,
which is less than the statistical significance level of 0.05, which indicates that there is a
negative effect and statistical importance of IFRS-9 on ROE in Jordanian commercial
banks during the 2012–2021 period. These results correspond to the results of (Chan &
Phua).

LR: The value of the coefficient was 0.126, and this value indicates a positive and
strong effect of ROE. T-Statistic (2.056), and probability was (0.042) less than the
statistical significance level of (0.05), which indicates that there is a positive effect and
statistical importance of LR on ROE in Jordanian commercial banks during the period
(2012-2021). These results correspond to the results of (Ahamed, 2021).

CR: the value of the Coefficient was (-0.225), and this value indicates a negative and
strong effect of ROE. t-Statistic (-2.754) , and probability was (0.007) less than
Statistical significance level at (0.05) ,Which indicates that there is a negative effect
strong and of statistical importance of CR on ROE in Jordanian banks commercial
during the period (2012-2021). These results correspond to the results of (Ekinci &
Poyraz, 2019).
 34

B-CAP:The value of the coefficient was -0.356, and this value indicates a negative and
strong effect of ROE. The T-statistic was (-2.578) and the probability was (0.011) less
than the statistical significance level of (0.05), indicating that there is a strong negative
effect and statistically significant of B-CAP on ROE in Jordanian commercial banks
from 2012 to 2021. Any increase in capital leads to a decrease in ROE. The result of the
research supports the positive relationship study between B-CAP and ROE (Ayaydin &
Karakaya, 2014; Nguyen, 2020).

Size: The coefficient value of the size on ROE was (-0.090), where the effect was
negative and weak, and the t-statistic was (-2.786) and the probability was (0.006) less
than the level of statistical significance at (0.05). Which indicates that there is a
negative and statistically significant effect of size on ROE in Jordanian banks'
commercial operations during the period (2012-2021).

Growth: The coefficient value of the growth on ROE was (0.009), where the effect was
positive, and the t-statistic was (0.734) and the probability was (0.465) less than the
level of statistical significance at (0.05). Which indicates that there is a positive no
significant effect of size on ROE in Jordanian banks' commercial operations during the
period (2012–2021).

NIX: The coefficient value of the NIX on ROE was (0.149), where the effect was
positive, the t-statistic was (0.739), and the probability was (0.461), less than the level
of statistical significance of (0.05). Which indicates that there is a positive and
statistically no significant effect of NIX on ROE in Jordanian banks' commercial
operations during the period (2012–2021).
Chapter five: Conclusions and Recommendations

5.1 Conclusions

5.2 Recommendations and Future Research

5.3 Limitations
 36

Chapter Five: Conclusions

Banks face numerous risks that jeopardize their long-term viability and operations (Ekinci & Poyraz, 2019),
so this study sought to investigate the impact of IFRS 9 implementation on liquidity risk, credit risk, and
capital risk on a bank's performance. During the period 2012–2021, to achieve the study's objectives,
analytical quantitative research is used, and the impact of IFRS 9 on liquidity risk, credit risk, and capital on a
bank's performance is examined using statistical analysis.

The results are interpreted as follows:

After conducting the statistical analysis, I find the following results IFRS-9 affect the form of negative for
each of ROA/ ROE, liquidity risk impact of positive for each of ROA/ROE, credit risk impact of negative for
each of ROA/ROE, bank capital positive for ROA and negative for ROE, size impact of negative for each of
ROA/ROE, growth loans impact positive for each of ROA/ROE, and Non-interest Expense impact of positive
for each of ROA/ROE.

1. The results indicate that is a statistically significant impact for impact of the application of IFRS-9 on
Jordanian banks for the period (2012–2021). The results explain that adopting the expected loss
approach will lead to an increase in impairment provisions and that adopting an early recognition
approach to losses increases transparency, reduces bank lending operations, and thus reduces the
return on profits for banks. The result supports the study (Chan & Phua).

2. As for liquidity risks, the results indicate that there is a statistically significant impact of Jordanian
banks, and that these banks during the period (2012-2021) have high liquid assets that reduce their
liquidity risks and reduce the need for external financing, and thus greater economic activity and
greater return on profits.

3. The results indicate that there is a statistically significant impact of credit risk on the performance of
Jordanian banks during the years 2012-2021, which explains the reason due to poor credit risk
management in estimating good credit and a poor economic situation. Increased unemployment helps
with default. Jordanian banks should ideally control credit risk by imposing strict regulations and laws
through which credit risk is controlled to reduce non-performing loans, reduce losses that reduce the
bank's profits, and implement highly efficient credit policies aimed at reducing credit risk.
 37

4. The results indicate that there is a statistically mixed effect a statistically significant effect, And a no
statistically insignificant effect of the bank's capital on the performance of banks during the period
(2012-2021). This is explained by the fact that the capital increase leads to an increase in the
performance of banks and thus an increase in the profitability of banks so that they can face risks and
also have lower financing costs and thus increase the profit return of the bank.

5.2 Recommendations and Future Research

In this section, recommendations are made based on the results of the statistical analysis of the impact of
IFRS 9 and liquidity risk, credit and capital risk on the performance of Jordanian banks, The
recommendations of this research:

1- There is a great need to further work on improving and bringing the standard into line in terms of
efficiency and power so that the positive effects become greater.

2- Inviting managers in Jordanian banks to maintain high liquidity ratios to achieve the best financial
performance and to face any shocks that may expose banks to risks, taking into account the balance between
returns and potential risks in a way that positively affects the financial performance of banks.

3-Banks should check credit risk more efficiently and accurately, develop policies and regulations to reduce
non-performing loans, and conduct high credit studies for bank loans to reduce credit risk.

For future research, suggest research into the details of each risk individually and delving into the bank's
liquidity, credit, and capital risks to provide detailed information to banks to reduce and control these risks,
and recommend increasing the sample period to apply IFRS 9 to reach better results and more in-depth and
accurate.

5.3 Limitations
the research faced many problems, namely:
1- Since the application of IFRS 9 was recently implemented, the sample period is limited to four years for
the adoption period of the application of the standard, which leads to bias in estimation.

2-The difficulty of collecting data from the annual reports for the period (2012-2021), due to the work of
scanning documents for most of the reports in black and white, which makes it difficult to read them.
 38

Reference

Abbas, F., Iqbal, S., & Aziz, B. (2019). The impact of bank capital, bank liquidity and credit risk on
profitability in postcrisis period: A comparative study of US and Asia. Cogent Economics & Finance,
7(1), 1605683.

Abbas, F., & Masood, O. (2020). How do large commercial banks adjust capital ratios: empirical evidence
from the US? Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 33(1), 1849-1866.

Ahamed, F. (2021). Determinants of Liquidity Risk in the Commercial Banks in Bangladesh. European
Journal of Business and Management Research, 6(1), 164-169.

Ahmed, H. M., El-Halaby, S. I., & Soliman, H. A. (2022). The consequence of the credit risk on the financial
performance in light of COVID-19: Evidence from Islamic versus conventional banks across MEA
region. Future Business Journal, 8(1), 1-22.

Al-Tarawneh, A., Abu Khalaf, B., & Al Assaf, G. (2017). Noninterest income and financial performance at
Jordanian Banks. International Journal of financial research, 8(1), 166-171.

Amini, S., Delgado, M. S., Henderson, D. J., & Parmeter, C. F. (2012). Fixed vs random: The Hausman test
four decades later. In Essays in honor of Jerry Hausman (Vol. 29, pp. 479-513). Emerald Group
Publishing Limited.

Ayalew, Z. A. (2021). Capital structure and profitability: Panel data evidence of private banks in Ethiopia.
Cogent Economics & Finance, 9(1), 1953736.

Buchory, H. A. (2015). Banking intermediation, operational efficiency and credit risk in the banking
profitability. Proceeding-Kuala Lumpur International Business, Economics and Law Conference,

Chan, M. F., & Phua, L. K. Impacts of IFRS 9 on Conditional Conservatism and Reported Performance:
Evidence from Malaysian Capital Market.

Chen, Y., Yang, C., & Zhang, C. (2022). Study on the influence of IFRS 9 on the impairment of commercial
bank credit card. Applied Economics Letters, 29(1), 35-40.

Chhaidar, A., Abdelhedi, M., & Abdelkafi, I. (2022). The Effect of Financial Technology Investment Level
on European Banks’ Profitability. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1-23.

Chowdhury, M. M., & Zaman, S. (2018). Effect of liquidity risk on performance of Islamic banks in
Bangladesh. IOSR Journal of Economics and Finance, 9(4), 01-09.
 39

Das, N. M., & Rout, B. S. (2020). Banks’ capital adequacy ratio: a panacea or placebo. Decision, 47(3), 303-
318.

Du, N., Allini, A., & Maffei, M. (2022). How do bank managers forecast the future in the shadow of the past?
An examination of expected credit losses under IFRS 9. Accounting and Business Research, 1-24.

Ekinci, R., & Poyraz, G. (2019). The effect of credit risk on financial performance of deposit banks in
Turkey. Procedia Computer Science, 158, 979-987.

Elena, M., Luminita, A., Madalin, D., & Codrut, T. (2020). IFRS 9 AND THE INTERACTION WITH
BASEL III REGULATION PILLARS. Annals of the University of Oradea, Economic Science Series,
29(2).

Engelmann, B. (2021). Calculating lifetime expected loss for IFRS 9: which formula is measuring what? The
Journal of Risk Finance.

Garcia, I. A. S., & Lucena, W. G. L. (2022). Does the mandatory adoption of IFRS influence the forecast of
growth and profitability? An analysis in emerging countries. Revista Contemporânea de
Contabilidade, 19(50), 95-106.

Gebhardt, G. (2016). Impairments of Greek government bonds under IAS 39 and IFRS 9: A case study.
Accounting in Europe, 13(2), 169-196.

Golubeva, O., Duljic, M., & Keminen, R. (2019). The impact of liquidity risk on bank profitability: some
empirical evidence from the European banks following the introduction of Basel III regulations.
Journal of Accounting and Management Information Systems, 18(4), 455-485.

Gubareva, M. (2021). How to estimate expected credit losses–ECL–for provisioning under IFRS 9. The
Journal of Risk Finance.

Harb, E., El Khoury, R., Mansour, N., & Daou, R. (2022). Risk management and bank performance: evidence
from the MENA region. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting.

Ibe, S. O. (2013). The impact of liquidity management on the profitability of banks in Nigeria. Journal of
Finance and Bank Management, 1(1), 37-48.

Kesraoui, A., Lachaab, M., & Omri, A. (2022). The impact of credit risk and liquidity risk on bank margins
during economic fluctuations: evidence from MENA countries with a dual banking system. Applied
Economics, 54(35), 4113-4130.

Ly, A., Marsman, M., & Wagenmakers, E. J. (2018). Analytic posteriors for Pearson's correlation coefficient.
Statistica Neerlandica, 72(1), 4-13.
 40

Madugu, A. H., Ibrahim, M., & Amoah, J. O. (2020). Differential effects of credit risk and capital adequacy
ratio on profitability of the domestic banking sector in Ghana. Transnational Corporations Review,
12(1), 37-52.

Marzuki, M. M., Rahman, A. R. A., Marzuki, A., Ramli, N. M., & Abdullah, W. A. W. (2021). Issues and
challenges of IFRS 9 in Malaysian Islamic financial institutions: recognition criteria perspective.
Journal of Islamic Accounting and Business Research.

MENDOZA, R. R., & Rivera, J. P. R. (2017). The effect of credit risk and capital adequacy on the
profitability of rural banks in the Philippines. Scientific Annals of Economics and Business, 64(1).

Menicucci, E., & Paolucci, G. (2016). The determinants of bank profitability: empirical evidence from
European banking sector. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting.

Noman, A. H. M., Pervin, S., Chowdhury, M. M., & Banna, H. (2015). The effect of credit risk on the
banking profitability: A case on Bangladesh. Global journal of management and business research.

Obadire, A. M., Moyo, V., & Munzhelele, N. F. (2022). Basel III Capital Regulations and Bank Efficiency:
Evidence from Selected African Countries. International Journal of Financial Studies, 10(3), 57.

Oberson, R. (2021a). The Credit-Risk Relevance of Loan Impairments under IFRS 9 for CDS Pricing: Early
Evidence. European Accounting Review, Forthcoming.

Oberson, R. (2021b). The credit-risk relevance of loan impairments under IFRS 9 for CDS pricing: early
evidence. European Accounting Review, 30(5), 959-987.

Pratiwi, E., & Masdupi, E. (2021). Effect of Credit Risk, Market Risk and Liquidity Risk on Return On
Assets of Conventional Commercial Banks Registered in the Financial Services Authority During the
COVID-19 Pandemic. Financial Management Studies, 1(4), 29-46.

Rangkuti, Z. (2020). The effects of Tier-1 capital to risk management and profitability on performance using
multiple fixed effect panel data model. Measuring Business Excellence.

Rehman, Z. U., Muhammad, N., Sarwar, B., & Raz, M. A. (2019). Impact of risk management strategies on
the credit risk faced by commercial banks of Balochistan. Financial Innovation, 5(1), 1-13.

Reitgruber, W. (2016). Expected loss provisioning under upcoming IFRS 9 Impairment Standards: A new
source of P&L volatility—can we tame it? Journal of Risk Management in Financial Institutions,
9(4), 332-343.

Riahi, Y. M. (2019). How to explain the liquidity risk by the dynamics of discretionary loan loss provisions
and non-performing loans? The impact of the global crisis. Managerial Finance.
 41

Rokhim, R., & Min, I. (2020). Funding liquidity and risk taking behavior in Southeast Asian banks.
Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 56(2), 305-313.

Saleh, I., & Abu Afifa, M. (2020). The effect of credit risk, liquidity risk and bank capital on bank
profitability: Evidence from an emerging market. Cogent Economics & Finance, 8(1), 1814509.

Santos Garcia, I. A., & Lopes Lucena, W. G. (2022). Does the mandatory adoption of IFRS influence the
forecast of growth and profitability? An analysis in emerging countries. Revista Contemporânea de
Contabilidade, 19(50).

Schutte, W. D., Verster, T., Doody, D., Raubenheimer, H., & Coetzee, P. J. (2020). A proposed benchmark
model using a modularised approach to calculate IFRS 9 expected credit loss. Cogent Economics &
Finance, 8(1), 1735681.

Sinha, P., & Sharma, S. (2016). Determinants of bank profits and its persistence in Indian Banks: a study in a
dynamic panel data framework. International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and
Management, 7(1), 35-46.

Stander, Y. S. (2021). Quantifying the sources of volatility in the IFRS 9 impairments. South African Journal
of Accounting Research, 35(3), 191-218.

Sullivan, R. J. (2000). How has the adoption of Internet banking affected performance and risk in banks?
Financial Industry Perspectives, 12(1), 16.

Vithyea, Y. (2014). The linkage between bank net interest margin and non-interest income: The case of the
Cambodian Banking industry. Available at SSRN 2542467.

Warsa, M. I. U. P., & Mustanda, I. K. (2016). Pengaruh CAR, LDR dan NPL terhadap ROA pada sektor
Perbankan di Bursa Efek Indonesia Udayana University].

Zhao, Y., & Xu, Z. (2021). The Impact of Cross-Border Capital Flows on the Chinese Banking System.
SAGE Open, 11(2), 21582440211021410.
 42

Appendix:

ROA
NAME

2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

0.0057 0.0008 0.0161 0.0170 0.0080 0.0088 0.0060 0.0139 0.0141 0.0109 ARBK

0.0078 0.0010 0.0017 0.0085 0.0115 0.0126 0.0152 0.0122 0.0122 0.0133 ABCO

0.0132 0.0131 0.0149 0.0157 0.0178 0.0180 0.0182 0.0205 0.0175 0.0165 BOJX

0.0090 0.0052 0.0088 0.0101 0.0107 0.0139 0.0163 0.0189 0.0184 0.0174 CABK

0.0142 0.0110 0.0132 0.0154 0.0137 0.0080 0.0005 0.0176 0.0196 0.0137 CAPL

0.0048 0.0004 0.0038 0.0037 0.0027 0.0074 0.0106 0.0086 0.0030 0.0024 JCBK
0.0026 -0.0016 0.0109 0.0155 0.0095 0.0110 0.0139 0.0179 0.0186 0.0193
JOKB

0.0048 0.0034 0.0080 0.0076 0.0049 0.0022 0.0092 0.0147 0.0059 0.0090 AHLI

0.0134 0.0051 0.0099 0.0114 0.0154 0.0168 0.0157 0.0163 0.0148 0.0147 THBK

0.0079 0.0052 0.0076 0.0083 0.0093 0.0125 0.0129 0.0139 0.0139 0.0145 AJIB

0.0141 0.0049 0.0137 0.0139 0.0147 0.0164 0.0169 0.0154 0.0153 0.0159 INVB

0.0037 0.0040 0.0059 0.0049 0.0058 0.0084 0.0083 0.0106 0.0109 0.0099 SJBG
 43

0.0066 0.0057 0.0083 0.0106 0.0097 0.0114 0.0121 0.0117 0.0117 0.0084 UBSI

ROE
BANK
NAME

2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

0.0040 0.0057 0.1116 0.1181 0.0549 0.0607 0.0438 0.0890 0.0875 0.0674 ARBK

0.0570 0.0076 0.0123 0.0607 0.0809 0.0895 0.1024 0.0914 0.0876 0.0844 ABCO

0.0747 0.0767 0.0961 0.0988 0.1039 0.1023 0.1092 0.1319 0.1132 0.1141 BOJX

0.0823 0.0466 0.0766 0.0858 0.0863 0.1030 0.1338 0.1526 0.1544 0.1463 CABK

0.1556 0.0852 0.0829 0.0901 0.0782 0.0483 0.0033 0.1053 0.1142 0.0908 CAPL

0.0476 0.0037 0.0382 0.0375 0.0253 0.0640 0.1142 0.0831 0.0281 0.0199 JCBK
0.0165 -0.0099 0.0651 0.0946 0.0575 0.0645 0.0868 0.1070 0.1158 0.1229
JOKB

0.0434 0.0301 0.0722 0.0706 0.0435 0.0207 0.0728 0.1106 0.0563 0.0883 AHLI

0.0905 0.0366 0.0745 0.0875 0.1122 0.1236 0.1200 0.1193 0.1012 0.0998 THBK

0.0793 0.0514 0.0751 0.0781 0.0783 0.1027 0.1046 0.1115 0.1045 0.0967 AJIB

0.0971 0.0330 0.0885 0.0895 0.0882 0.0950 0.0925 0.0845 0.0855 0.0832 INVB

0.0418 0.0375 0.0751 0.0648 0.0582 0.0817 0.0785 0.0757 0.0623 0.0450 SJBG

0.0782 0.0593 0.0793 0.0879 0.0759 0.0942 0.0983 0.0973 0.0893 0.0627 UBSI
 44

IFRS 9
BANK NAME

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

ARBK 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

ABCO 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

BOJX 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

CABK 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

CAPL 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

JCBK 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

JOKB 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

AHLI 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

THBK 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

AJIB 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

INVB 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

SJBG 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

UBSI 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1
 45

Liquidity Risk
BANK
NAME

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

ARBK 0.7188 0.7151 0.7492 0.7538 0.7444 0.7377 0.7420 0.7371 0.7545 0.7672

ABCO 0.6959 0.7679 0.7918 0.7723 0.7473 0.7458 0.7246 0.7343 0.7109 0.7047

BOJX 0.7873 0.7772 0.7775 0.7653 0.7493 0.7449 0.7686 0.7645 0.7300 0.7305

CABK 0.7405 0.7411 0.7835 0.7713 0.7653 0.7863 0.7811 0.7499 0.7338 0.7306

CAPL 0.6489 0.6591 0.6805 0.7003 0.6812 0.6623 0.6579 0.6494 0.6593 0.7311

JCBK 0.7785 0.8106 0.8158 0.8301 0.7976 0.7905 0.7466 0.6664 0.7680 0.7479

0.7409 0.7744 0.7702 0.7793 0.7619 0.7466 0.7380 0.7283 0.7300 0.7002
JOKB

AHLI 0.7536 0.5890 0.7150 0.7267 0.7546 0.7318 0.7221 0.7290 0.7197 0.7332

HBTF 0.7850 0.7868 0.7983 0.8009 0.7852 0.7820 0.7818 0.7744 0.7518 0.7347

AJIB 0.8069 0.7398 0.8023 0.8231 0.8278 0.8368 0.7712 0.8029 0.8065 0.7636

INVB 0.6621 0.7247 0.7181 0.7015 0.6585 0.6395 0.6588 0.6597 0.6511 0.6411

SJBG 0.6856 0.6239 0.7246 0.7815 0.8022 0.8112 0.8311 0.8156 0.7484 0.7420

UBSI 0.7010 0.7066 0.7976 0.8008 0.7735 0.7699 0.7977 0.8136 0.8123 0.8347

Credit Risk BANK

NAME
 46

2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

0.1003 0.0963 0.0787 0.0701 0.0723 0.0765 0.0719 0.0732 0.0755 0.0852 ARBK

0.0859 0.0873 0.0760 0.0481 0.0501 0.0515 0.0504 0.0578 0.0562 0.0583 ABCO

0.0870 0.0852 0.0748 0.0583 0.0498 0.0510 0.0663 0.0808 0.0980 0.1100 BOJX

0.0523 0.0579 0.0546 0.0481 0.0445 0.0419 0.0476 0.0540 0.0583 0.0550 CABK

0.0672 0.0660 0.0876 0.1017 0.1116 0.0943 0.0863 0.0846 0.0974 0.1206 CAPL

0.0022 0.1125 0.1158 0.1190 0.0811 0.0785 0.0943 0.0667 0.1383 0.1731 JCBK
0.0799 0.1104 0.0859 0.0930 0.0552 0.0859 0.0867 0.0783 0.0741 0.0982
JOKB

0.0733 0.0752 0.0628 0.0682 0.0883 0.1135 0.1092 0.1171 0.1258 0.1311 AHLI

0.0762 0.0812 0.0749 0.0626 0.0597 0.0553 0.0690 0.0832 0.1127 0.1103 THBK

0.0138 0.0180 0.0163 0.0246 0.0211 0.0184 0.0213 0.0309 0.0261 0.0772 AJIB

0.0574 0.0559 0.0715 0.0738 0.0707 0.0678 0.0706 0.0936 0.1310 0.1208 INVB

0.0972 0.0801 0.0598 0.0750 0.0419 0.0407 0.0423 0.0578 0.0745 0.2003 SJBG

0.0373 0.0383 0.0424 0.0493 0.0495 0.0681 0.0717 0.0674 0.0791 0.1060 UBSI
 47

Bank Capital
BANK
NAME
2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

0.1382 0.1417 0.1441 0.1437 0.1457 0.1443 0.1361 0.1376 0.1612 0.1621 ARBK

0.1369 0.1351 0.1377 0.1398 0.1421 0.1411 0.1485 0.1336 0.1397 0.1580 ABCO

0.1774 0.1705 0.1551 0.1594 0.1712 0.1763 0.1663 0.1552 0.1548 0.1442 BOJX

0.1071 0.1093 0.1118 0.1146 0.1205 0.1311 0.1215 0.1240 0.1194 0.1192 CABK

0.0910 0.1294 0.1598 0.1714 0.1747 0.1664 0.1633 0.1673 0.1719 0.1511 CAPL

0.1019 0.1032 0.1004 0.0990 0.1082 0.1152 0.0928 0.1033 0.1081 0.1225 JCBK

0.1556 0.1624 0.1667 0.1637 0.1654 0.1698 0.1597 0.1674 0.1604 0.1573
JOKB

0.1110 0.1118 0.1114 0.1082 0.1122 0.1075 0.1257 0.1328 0.1052 0.1019 AHLI

0.1476 0.1399 0.1332 0.1301 0.1370 0.1356 0.1312 0.1367 0.1463 0.1476 THBK

0.0995 0.1021 0.1012 0.1059 0.1193 0.1218 0.1236 0.1249 0.1331 0.1502 AJIB

0.1447 0.1484 0.1544 0.1552 0.1666 0.1731 0.1829 0.1817 0.1791 0.1909 INVB

0.0896 0.1066 0.0782 0.0750 0.0992 0.1024 0.1054 0.1402 0.1753 0.2196 SJBG

0.0845 0.0960 0.1046 0.1208 0.1284 0.1212 0.1228 0.1206 0.1308 0.1343 UBSI
 48

Bank size
BANK
NAME
2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

7.4412 7.4344 7.4204 7.4073 7.3867 7.3848 7.4126 7.4126 7.3898 7.3786 ARBK

9.0899 9.0732 9.0565 9.0591 9.0523 9.0467 9.0124 9.0414 8.9806 8.9177 ABCO

9.4378 9.4334 9.4327 9.4181 9.4091 9.3690 9.3436 9.3405 9.3174 9.3046 BOJX

9.5580 9.5255 9.4955 9.4677 9.4463 9.3964 9.4035 9.3717 9.3450 9.3063 CABK

9.6346 9.4391 9.3397 9.2933 9.3011 9.3026 9.2980 9.3142 9.2757 9.2060 CAPL

9.1598 9.1310 9.1419 9.1315 9.1406 9.1022 9.1725 9.0664 9.0232 8.9265 JCBK

9.4779 9.4487 9.4403 9.4348 9.4521 9.4377 9.4540 9.4166 9.4070 9.3820 JOKB

9.4703 9.4535 9.4414 9.4446 9.4360 9.4496 9.3970 9.3664 9.4318 9.4233 AHLI

9.9162 9.9194 9.9263 9.9191 9.9109 9.8932 9.8989 9.8805 9.8590 9.8507 THBK

9.3619 9.3425 9.3288 9.3082 9.2644 9.2576 9.2536 9.2431 9.0787 9.0141 AJIB

9.1076 9.0879 9.0714 9.0615 9.0307 8.9775 8.9271 8.9059 8.8915 8.8503 INVB

9.2475 9.1981 9.2338 9.2313 9.1310 9.1150 9.0828 8.9378 8.8067 8.6808 SJBG

9.7967 9.7221 9.6608 9.5875 9.5529 9.4082 9.3782 9.3534 9.2851 9.2431 UBSI
 49

Growth
BANK
NAME

2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

0.0032 -0.0027 -0.0137 0.0358 0.0538 0.0021 0.0186 0.0495 0.0498 0.0096 ARBK

0.0719 0.0678 0.0325 0.0389 0.0786 0.0534 0.0383 0.0369 0.0557 0.1699 ABCO

0.0238 0.0575 -0.0277 0.0218 0.1878 0.0621 0.0210 0.0438 0.1154 -0.0867 BOJX

0.9181 0.8881 -0.0255 0.0778 0.1289 0.1782 0.1137 0.0497 -0.0347 0.0605 CABK

0.5696 0.3311 0.0676 -0.0168 -0.0597 0.0747 0.1515 0.1655 0.0916 -0.0674 CAPL

0.0885 0.0827 -0.0915 0.0560 0.1404 0.0475 0.1580 -0.0482 0.1791 0.0665 JCBK

0.0866 0.0159 -0.0289 0.0587 0.0584 0.0671 0.0467 -0.0137 -0.0668 0.1360
JOKB

-0.0033 0.0040 -0.0374 -0.0512 0.0192 0.1893 0.0051 -0.0008 -0.0770 0.0855 AHLI

-0.0191 -0.0165 -0.0101 0.0348 0.0409 0.1418 0.2680 0.0005 0.0123 0.0811 THBK

0.0346 0.0301 0.0795 0.0015 0.0048 0.0242 0.0472 0.8601 -0.0822 0.1823 AJIB

0.0745 0.0898 -0.0251 0.0792 0.2043 0.1716 -0.0251 0.0611 0.0514 0.1537 INVB

0.0205 -0.0911 0.0388 0.2783 0.1462 0.3108 0.3284 0.4496 0.1044 0.2365 SJBG

0.1365 0.1231 0.1544 0.0962 0.4888 0.0760 0.0347 0.2098 0.1878 0.1658 UBSI
 50

NIX
BANK
NAME

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

ARBK 0.0065 0.0063 0.0066 0.0166 0.0082 0.0059 0.0121 0.0066 0.0068 0.0066

ABCO 0.0087 0.0079 0.0078 0.0083 0.0084 0.0089 0.0087 0.0078 0.0081 0.0077

BOJX 0.0086 0.0088 0.0091 0.0098 0.0098 0.0108 0.0126 0.0111 0.0121 0.0127

CABK 0.0099 0.0098 0.0097 0.0105 0.0117 0.0122 0.0118 0.0127 0.0129 0.0120

CAPL 0.0066 0.0071 0.0076 0.0095 0.0096 0.0103 0.0099 0.0101 0.0091 0.0100

JCBK 0.0094 0.0095 0.0108 0.0093 0.0117 0.0132 0.0119 0.0087 0.0087 0.0086

0.0049 0.0058 0.0095 0.0079 0.0096 0.0122 0.0146 0.0093 0.0102 0.0124
JOKB

AHLI 0.0083 0.0088 0.0095 0.0102 0.0104 0.0104 0.0087 0.0083 0.0080 0.0078

THBK 0.0059 0.0065 0.0077 0.0066 0.0071 0.0070 0.0071 0.0070 0.0074 0.0072

AJIB 0.0072 0.0075 0.0078 0.0092 0.0083 0.0085 0.0084 0.0080 0.0080 0.0077

INVB 0.0068 0.0080 0.0087 0.0100 0.0106 0.0107 0.0111 0.0096 0.0084 0.0096

SJBG 0.0083 0.0078 0.0068 0.0057 0.0056 0.0060 0.0055 0.0055 0.0062 0.0056

UBSI 0.0048 0.0061 0.0062 0.0077 0.0090 0.0107 0.0108 0.0837 0.0099 0.0082
 ‫‪51‬‬

‫تأثير المعيار الدولي العداد التقارير المالية رقم ‪ 9‬ومخاطر السيولة ومخاطر االئتمان و‬
‫رأس المال على أداء البنوك‪( :‬أدلة من‬
‫القطاع المصرفي األردني)‬
‫اعداد‬
‫ساجدة محمد عبداهلل عيال سلمان‬
‫المشرف الرئيسي‬
‫خالد محمد بشير الزعبي‬
‫أستاذ دكتور‬
‫المشرف المشارك‬
‫زياد محمد سعد مراشدة‬
‫أستاذ مشارك‬
‫تهدف هذه الدراسة إلى تحديد تأثير المعيار الدولي إلعداد التقارير المالية رقم ‪ ، 9‬ومخاطر السيولة ‪ ،‬ومخاطر‬
‫االئتم ان ورأس الم ال على أداء البن وك األردني ‪ ،‬تم جم ع البيان ات ي دوًيا لعين ة من البن وك ‪ ،‬وتم إدراج ‪13‬‬
‫مص رًفا كمص ارف تجاري ة ‪ ،‬وتم اس تبعاد ثالث ة بن وك إس المية الختالف مص ادر دخله ا واس تثماراتها ‪ ،‬وألن‬
‫البنوك اإلسالمية ال تدير التسهيالت االئتمانية على عكس بنوك تجارية‪ .‬كما تم استبعاد ثمانية بنوك أجنبية ألنها‬
‫قدمت نسبة ‪ 6.8‬من التسهيالت االئتمانية‪.‬‬

‫ك انت فترة الدراس ة ‪ 10‬س نوات من ‪ .2021-2012‬منهجي ة الدراس ة التحليلي ة منهج البحث الكمي ‪ ،‬يق اس‬
‫األداء بالربحية العائد على األصول والعائد على حقوق الملكية‪.‬‬
‫تشير نتائج هذه الدراسة إلى وجود تأثير ذي داللة إحصائية لتطبيق المعيار الدولي إلعداد التقارير المالية رقم ‪9‬‬
‫‪ ،‬وهو تأثير ذو داللة إحصائية لمخاطر السيولة ‪ ،‬أما بالنسبة لمخاطر االئتمان ‪ ،‬فإن أي زيادة في تلك المخاطر‬
‫ت ؤثر س لًبا على (‪ ROA‬و ‪ ، )ROE‬وهن اك عالق ة إيجابي ة بين رأس م ال البن ك والعائ د على األص ول وعالق ة‬
‫سلبية بين رأس مال البنك والعائد على حقوق الملكية‪.‬‬

‫واختتمت الدراسة بمجموعة من التوصيات العمل على تحسين إجراءات تطبيق المعيار الدولي إلعداد التقارير‬
‫المالي ة رقم ‪ 9‬ك ذلك ‪ ،‬يجب على البن وك االحتف اظ ب رأس م ال األص ول الس ائلة في البن وك ال تي تس تخدم حق وق‬
‫الملكية والتركيز على تبني سياسات فعالة إلدارة مخاطر االئتمان‪.‬‬
 ‫‪52‬‬

‫الكلمات المفتاحية‪ :‬المعيار الدولي للتقارير المالية ‪ ، 9‬مخاطر السيولة ‪ ،‬مخاطر االئتمان ‪ ،‬رأس مال البنك‪ ,‬أداء‬
‫البنك‪.‬‬