Tai Lieu

Influence of Corporate Fundamentals on Equity Returns of Public Sector Banks and Public Sector Financial Institutions in India
R.K.Mishra*, K.Jayaditya Sarma** & Pawan Kumar Avadhanam***

Banks and Financial Institutions in India have been under the clutches of a few individuals and trusts before their nationalization. In 1969, after the post-nationalization and subsequently, in the 1980s after the second phase of nationalization, banks have expanded phenomenally and have ventured into new areas. After the advent of liberalization in the 90s and the entry of private players, banks have experienced a phenomenal change in the levels of competition. However, at the same time, so many banks in the public sector are still doing well and contributing significantly to the exchequer and have maintained immunity against global factors. The present study focuses on the Public Sector Banks and Public Sector Financial Institutions in the era of liberalization, globalization and privatization.
Banks and Financial Institutions in India have been under the clutches of a few individuals and trusts before their nationalization. In 1969, after postnationalization and, subsequently, in the 1980s after the second phase of nationalization, banks have expanded phenomenally and have ventured into new areas. After the advent of liberalization in the 90s and the entry of private players, banks have experienced a phenomenal change in the levels of competition. However, at the same time, so many banks in the public sector are still doing well and contributing significantly to the exchequer and have maintained immunity against global factors. This is because of their strengths like clear balance sheets and accountability and the fact that they are
in the core sectors. In the stock markets too, Public Sector Banks (PSBs) and Public Sector Financial Institutions (PSFIs) have been playing a pervasive role in the post-liberalization scenario. Most of the market players, both indigenous and foreign, have been shifting their portfolio investments to public sector scrips due to the increasing volatility with equity investments of the private sector.
* Dr.R.K.Mishra, Sr.Professor & Director, Institute of Public Enterprise, Osmania University Campus, Hyderabad 500 007.
** K.Jayaditya Sarma, PGDM Student (200810), Institute of Public Enterprise, Osmania University Campus, Hyderabad 500 007. *** Dr.Pawan Kumar Avadhanam, Assistant Professor, Institute of Public Enterprise, Osmania University Campus, Hyderabad 500 007. 59
The Journal of Institute of Public Enterprise, Vol. 34, No. 1&2 2011, Institute of Public Enterprise
The present study focuses on the PSBs and PSFIs in the era of liberalization, globalization and privatization. When a study is taken up on the behaviour of PSBs and PSFIs, it is usually taken for granted that the government decides every activity of the concerned. The point to be understood is that after the 1990s, the PSBs are also exposed to the market conditions and are also governed by the market principle of perform or perish. To improve their performance, PSBs and PSFIs are adopting various methods like mergers so that their size increases and they can compete with multi-nationals. To obtain the leverage benefits, they are going in for more equity sources and to obtain funds in large amounts, they are going for Initial Public Offering (IPO) rather than waiting for government budget allocation. The present study hypothesizes that the corporate fundamentals do influence the equity returns of the Public Sector Enterprises (PSEs). The study assumes that the individual companies will reflect the sectoral performance and the results thus obtained for the sector can be generalized for all the companies operating in the same industry. The study also attempts to confirm whether the results are in common for private enterprises operating in the same sector. In spite of the above, there are many issues being raised by the market and public need to be addressed. They are
60
in regard to the movement in the stock prices during the trading sessions. People are interested to know how, why and when the corporate fundamentals like Profits Earning ratio (P/E ratio), Current Ratio (CR), Quick Ratio (QR), Earning per Share (EpS), Return on Net Worth (RoNW), Return on Capital Employed (RoCE), Dividends per Share (DpS), etc., impact the equity returns of the scrip.
Literature Review
Various researchers to explore the factors affecting the equity returns put in a good amount of effort. Some of the papers and their outcomes have been explained below, which would strengthen our understanding about the statistical significance of various factors affecting the equity returns. Dhameja (1972) examined the statistical significance of various factors influencing the dividend policy in the Indian paper industry. In his study, he observed that dividend determination was influenced by the past years profits. The fluctuations in earnings were not influenced by the past years profit or dividends. The current years earnings influenced fluctuations in dividend determination while change in sales had a positive influence on dividend. Further, it was ascertained from the study that lagged dividend was directly associated with current year dividend.
Krishnan (1984) investigated the influence of selected company specific factors on the average of equity share prices. The study revealed that book value per share and DpS are the most significant determinants of market share prices in the general engineering and cotton textile industries. EpS was also significant in influencing the share prices. In the cotton textile industry alone was the yield a significant variable. Dimitrios et al., (1999) explored the predictability of stock returns in the British equity capital markets investigating the predictive power of fundamentals such as dividend yields, dividend growth rate and macroeconomic variables such as the term structure of interest rates and attempted to explain return predictability using the information hypothesis of dividends. The choice of predictor variables is motivated by the existing evidence for us which, in turn, is also influenced by the practice of fundamental security analysts. Robert et al., (1999) cited the previous research on the relationship between dividend policy and stock returns and use a linear programme and multiindex model to form an investment strategy to see whether dividend yields increase stock returns. They explained the methodology tested on 1965-1989 US data and presented the results, which suggest that the multi-index
model is superior to the single index market model in terms of explanatory power and volatility; but provides conflicting conclusions on the relevance of dividends to stock returns. Martinez (1999) aimed at assessing the usefulness of fundamental and macroeconomic information to the French market. Relationship between abnormal returns and fundamentals was analyzed between 1992 and 1996. The empirical findings showed that the relationship between returns and the first three factors, viz., dividends, size and net profit after tax (used to represent the fundamentals claimed by analysts to be useful) was statistically significant for each of the years from 1992 to 1996. The adjusted R2 varies from 8 per cent to 35 per cent. According to the t-statistics, the factor with the largest loading (in absolute value) for the return on invested capital, the return on assets, the return on equity and the leverage ratio is value-relevant to explain return variability. In order to complete the regression on stock returns, the author added two macroeconomic variables (an inflation indicator and a stateof-the-economy variable). The pooled regression R2 is also strongly affected. This co-efficient varies from 14 per cent to 29 per cent depending upon whether the stock returns are regressed on the three factors only or on the three factors and the two macroeconomic
61
variables. These results clearly showed that financial statements and macroeconomic data do provide information to value security prices. Malhotra and Prakash (2001), considered corporate fundamental factors, analyzed the determinants of A group and B group shares during 1989-99 and found that changes in net sales per share had negative correlation with the change in the price of the equity shares. They concluded that the book value per share, price to earning ratio, market price to book value and EpS turned out to be positively significant in influencing equity share prices. Dimitrios (2003) examined the relationships between macroeconomic factors and stock prices in Cyprus. Estimating a reduced form Vector Auto Regressive model (VAR) he determined Granger causality between stock returns and the predictor variables. The author finds strong evidence of predictability (which implies inefficiency) in stock returns, which is similar to the pattern observed in developed stock markets. In common with prior studies in this area, they cannot be used as evidence of market inefficiency or deficiencies in the asset-pricing model. K. Chandrashekhar Rao and Sunny Jose, in their paper, Relative Influence of Market Volatility, Economic Changes and Company Fundamentals on Equity
62
Returns in India : A Study (1996), identified the priced risk variables in building a risk-return relationship on equities in India on export basis. More specifically, the study was devoted to investigate the association as envisaged in Modern Investment and Portfolio Management studies between equities returns and various risk factors which emanate from market and economic forces as well as company specific fundamentals. Particularly, the study was intended to answer underneath specific queries of risk-return relationships. Considering the identified variables in the above said studies, the present study has examined the relationship between expected rates of return and company fundamentals (financial risk variables), market factors (beta), economic variables (economy betas) through stepwise regression models for the years of 1981 to 1991. The following observations were made from the study. Size of a firm is an important fundamental, which is largely taken into consideration by many shareholders in estimating the value of the scrip. Empirical studies conducted by Banz (1981), Reinganum (1981), Beaver, Kettler and Scholes (1970) Sharma, Rattan K (1989), Joseph Lakonishok (1980), Martin Jay Gruber (1987) observes that size represents the omitted risk variables in a valuation model. The present study observes that size possesses positive sign and it is significant (in a majority of cases).
Dividend policy of a company is considered an important aspect in the eyes of investors. Although there is no unanimity over its impact, a company having a consistent track record of dividend payment is, of course, reckoned by investors. The present study observes that dividend payout to be a statistically significant variable with a negative sign. Negative sign is consistent with the argument that market prefers dividend payment. This observation gains support from the studies of Haskel Banishay (1961), Arditti (1967), Sharma (1989), Zahir (1992), Marc Nerlove (1968), Meghnad Desai (1965 & 1969) and Prasanna Chandra (1977). Leverage Ratio is an indicator of financial risk. Increasing debt in capital structure is supposed to increase the financial and bankruptcy risks of equity holders and hence it should have a positive sign. Such an argument is validated by Martin Jay Gruber (1966), Sharma and Rao (1969) Beaver, Kettler and Scholes (1970) and Babcock Guilford (1967). The present study observes that the financial leverage possesses a positive sign but found its presence felt only in case of two years out of 11 years of study. Productivity can be defined as the value added by manufacturing enterprise. Increasing productivity is expected to result in increased profitability and should reduce the risk of a firm. The
study observes that the productivity measure is found rarely incorporated into the valuation model. The empirical co-efficient seems to possess a negative sign. This may be either due to proven inefficiency of Indian capital market or due to lack of information on the said measure. The feeble influence of productivity measure is consistent with the studies conducted by Bao and Bao (1989) and contradictory to Garai (1989). The empirical works of Marc Nerlove (1968), Sharma (1989), Beaver, Kettler and Scholes (1970), Weston (1963) and others substantiate that growth is a positive indicator of the capacity to generate earnings. The empirical observations support the positive co-efficient in three out of five cases but it is significant only once. The negative sign possibly indicated that the Indian Investors fail to reckon this fundamental, while fighting for survival among the much mighty bull and bear pressures. Liquidity Ratio is considered as a true test on the fund management efficiency of a firm. It is like striking a balance between paucity and superfluity. Beaver, Kettler and Scholes (1970), Marc Nerlove (1968) and others included this variable to ascertain the response of share prices. The results show that this variable has found place only twice in the final models. The presence of negative and positive signs in almost an equal number of times indicate the
63
poor explanatory power of this corporate variable. However, this observation is consistent with the above said studies. Profitability is a very important variable having influence in share returns. This variable measures the overall efficiency of a firm in generating returns to equity holders. This variable highlights the competitive vitality of the firm to survive in the face of business vicissitudes. In the empirical testing it is found that this variable, contrary to expectation, showed a very poor explanation and entered into final model only once during the entire period of analysis. The justification for the triviality of this variable again reminds the inefficiency of Indian stock market to discount accurately the fundamental factors. Accounting beta is a measure of the sensitivity of accounting return of a firm to a broad based index of industry average returns. It is an important variable in the empirical studies conducted by Beaver, Kettler and Scholes (1970), Gonedes (1973) and others. A positive sign is expected to this co-efficient as relatively higher earnings of a firm compared to the industry average will have definitely a positive relationship with share returns. The study identified this variable to be of moderate importance. Out of eleven years of study, in four
64
years this variable has entered into the final model with positive sign. It highlights the reasonable explanatory power of this fundamental variable. Earning growth and earning variability indicators are two important measures of importance. While the former provides a clue on the future earnings trend, the latter presents the earnings instability index. The investigation reveals that these two variables are not seriously considered by investors in Indian conditions. A negative sign to growth variable expresses doubts in the minds of investors on its continuation in future. The negative role to earnings instability index indicates the preponderance of speculative trading where fortune seekers hunt for highly volatile scrips to make abnormal gains. P/E ratio is an important fundamental measure of risk-return relationship. P/E ratio indicates volatility of market prices and high P/E is a measure of high risk. Therefore, a negative sign is expected for its co-efficient. The present study observes that this variable, although much talked at, found to possess a feeble relationship and its presence is marginally felt only twice in the study. It supports the accusation that Indian investor hunts for high P/E securities defying the fundamental rules of investment game.
Andreas stlund and Mikael Hyleen in their paper, The Relationship between Credit Ratings and Beta : A Quantitative Study on the Nordic Market (2009), aimed to investigate the relationship between systematic risk and credit ratings. The systematic risk, frequently measured by beta, is an important consideration for both investors and corporations. Therefore, it is interesting to examine if indications about the systematic risk could be gained by looking at credit ratings, especially on the Nordic market, where credit ratings are seemingly growing in importance. Consequently, the following research hypothesis is posed; they intended to establish a relationship between market risk (Beta) and credit ratings for firms in the Nordic countries. Michael T. Kiley, in his paper, Stock Prices and Fundamentals : A Macroeconomic Perspective (2004), compared the predictions for the market value of firms from the Gordon Growth Model with those from a Dynamic GeneralEquilibrium Model. The predictions for movements in the market value of firms following shifts in preferences, growth prospects and risk are quantitatively and qualitatively different across the models. While previous research illustrated how a drop in the required return or an increase in the growth rate of the economy can explain the run-up in equity values in the 1990s in the
Gordon Growth Model, the GeneralEquilibrium Model suggests that such results are misleading. Abdel Mounaim Lahrech in his paper, The impacts of US and Canadian Fundamentals on Canadian Stock Market, (2009), examined the influence of US and Canadian macroeconomic fundamentals on Canadian stock prices allowing for different associations across the US business cycle. The study used Johansens multi-variate co-integration test and Vector Error Correction Model (VECM) to examine the long and short-run association. Results showed evidence of a long-run association between Canadian stock prices, US stock prices and Canadian as well as US fundamentals. Moreover, the paper finds a strong cross-country effect that depends on the stage of US business cycle. R.Vaidyanathan and Sudheer Chava, have tested for the hypothesis that investment in low P/B stock on an average will give higher returns than investment in higher P/B stocks. The test reveals that the annual returns of portfolios formed on the basis of P/B ratio are not significantly different from each other. This is true for all combinations. Huang and Litzenbeger (1998) empirically examined Chinese stock price reactions to financial announcements for 2002. They found that B share prices react more strongly to negative financial
65
announcements than A shares. The announcements can lead to excess returns. One explanation is that the markets are segmented by the inconvertibility of Chinas currency as well as by the structural change of investors. Meanwhile, China-listed companies need to improve their transparency and disclosure. Amilan (2004) analyzed the influence of corporate fundamentals on equity returns by testing the year-wise consistency of equity returns with the corporate fundamentals in the selected industries. For this purpose, the researcher has considered four industries, textile, chemical, electrical equipment and computer & software. The sample scrips were selected from the listed companies of BSE during the period 1999-00 to 2001-02. In each industry, equity returns of the sample companies were regressed on the values of corporate fundamentals of the companies with one-year lag. Based on the values of the regression co-efficient of independent variables, the consistency of equity returns with the corporate fundamentals was tested. The regression result proved that in general, the equity returns are not consistent with corporate fundamentals in the selected industries in India. Prakash (2004) indicates that application of VARs method yields important elasticity measures that point towards the nature of parameters of the system
66
that is determining the levels of stock prices in the short and long-run. The author used stock market price aggregates in three variable VARs and applied to the cross-section stock market data from the Indian stock market on particular dates. The co-efficients estimated are found to be very systematic and consistent and the equations show high statistical significance and determination. They point towards a very cyclical behaviour of prices. Fundamentals like the P/E ratio and market capitalization rates are found as ineffective explanatory variables for prices and they do not affect the co-efficient estimates when involved.
Objectives
The main objective of the study is to analyze the impact of corporate fundamentals on the equity returns of PSBs and PSFIs quoted at the BSE during the period 1996-97 to 2008-09.
Sample and Data Sources

The sample consists of 15 companies (ten PSBs and five PSFIs) quoted at BSE over the period 1996-97 to 2008-09. The criteria for choosing ten PSBs and five PSFIs from BSE were their consistent quotation over the study period. The data consists of year-end individual stock prices, various corporate fundamentals and financial parameters in the BSE.
This study uses only the secondary data collected from research work on the topic, working papers, NSE and BSE websites and directories, CMIE data base Prowess, Capital Markets data base Capital Line, company balance sheets, public enterprise survey reports and the RBI bulletins. Data thus collected is processed, analyzed, tabulated and presented in an understandable manner.
The following Linear Regression Model is estimated to analyze the relationship between the return from the equity shares and the corporate fundamentals :
RET t = + 1 QR t-1 + 2 P/E t-1 + 3 DPS t-1 + 4 EPS t-1 + 5 CR t-1 + 6 DER t-1 + 7 BPS t-1 + 8 RoNW t-1 + 2 RoCE t-1 + 10 PB t-1 + 11 FV t-1 + e t.,
Tools
To find the impact of the PSB and PSFI scrips on the stock returns during the study period, a simple regression analysis is used taking into account the scrips fundamentals as independent variables and the equity return as dependent. Further ANOVA and Reliability test have been employed. For this purpose, SPSS has been deployed.
Where, RET t = Return from the equity shares at time t. (Dependent Variable)
= Regression constant i.e., Risk free
return.
= Regression co-efficient (slope of the
line) QR t-1 = Quick Ratio at time t-1. P/E t-1 = Price Earning ratio at time t-1. DpS t-1 = Dividend per Share at t-1. EpS t-1 = Earning per Share at time t-1. CR t-1 = Current Ratio at time t-1. DER t-1 = Debt Equity Ratio at time t-1. BpS t-1 = Book value per Share at time t-1. RoNW t-1 = Return on Net Worth at time t-1. RoCE t-1 = Return on Capital Employed at time t-1.
67
Research Methodology
The research methodology includes an analysis of the historical data of the various banks, which are included in the banking index of BSE. SPSS has been deployed to run the regression analysis and interpret the results. Practical trading sessions have been carried out to understand the movement of equity returns. Microsoft Excel and SPSS have been used to analyze the performance of the financial institutions.
PB t-1 = Price to book ratio at time t-1. FV t-1 = Face value of share at time t-1. e t = Error term at time t. For estimating the above equation, the independent variables have been considered with one-year lag. This is because the values of corporate fundamentals for a given year can influence the investors behaviour and, hence, the price changes in the scrips only in the subsequent year. Therefore, while taking the rate of change in the equity share price of the year t as the dependent variable, the selected corporate fundamentals values for the year t-1 have been taken as independent influencing variables. The year-end of the fundamentals have been taken and averaged out on an annual basis. Return from Equity Shares : Annual returns from scrip were calculated for every year of analysis. For this purpose, the year-end prices are used to calculate the return over the study period and averaged up for the period 1996-97 to 2008-09. For instance, the return for the scrip I in the financial year 1994-95 is given as :
Ei = Log P1 Log P0 / Log P0*100
Analysis : After successfully running the software the following results have been obtained. The Regression Equation is : 1.584 (Return) = 113.147 + 1.948 (Current Ratio) + 6.440 (Quick Ratio) 16.134 (Debt Equity Ratio) + 7.888 (Price-Book Ratio) 2.62 (Price-Earning Ratio) + 4.984 (Return on Net Worth) + .275 (Return on Capital Employed) .799 (Dividend per Share) + .024 (Earnings per Share) + 2.390 (Book Value of Share) 113.147 (Face Value of Share). From Table-1, it can be seen that the relationship of equity returns with selected corporate fundamentals viz., QR, P/E ratio, EpS, DpS, CR, DER, BpS and co-efficient of determination (R2) have shown and proved that the relationship is very strong. This indicates that there is a good fit between the corporate fundamentals and equity returns of the PSBs and PSFIs. Further, from Table-1 we can infer that the BpS and DpS are the only independent variables, which significantly impact the equity returns. The reason can be attributed to the p-values of these two independent variables, which are less than 0.05. As far as the other independent variables are concerned, the significance values are more than 0.05. This means that these variables do not influence the equity returns.
here P1 is the year-end scrip price for the year 1995-96 and P0 is the year-end scrip price for the year 1994-95.
68
Table-1 : Regression Results for various Public Sector Banks and Public Sector Financial Institutions
Regression Co-efficient ( ) t-Value 113.147 1.584 1.948 6.440 16.134 7.888 0.262 4.984 0.275 0.799 0.024 2.390 113.147 2.500 0.184 0.188 0.016 0.703 48.231 0.430 3.810 9.747 4.122 3.426 0.568 1.562 1.655 2.070 0.610 1.994 1.497 4.241 1.475 3.401 2.346 3.546 0.447 48.231 2.346 0.101 0.685 0.609 0.216 0.196 0.130 0.585 0.140 0.231 0.024 0.237 0.042 0.101 Standard Error Significance level p-value
Variables
R2 = 0.957
Constant
Return
Current Ratio
Quick Ratio
Debt-Equity Ratio
Price-Book Ratio
Price-Earning Ratio
Return on Net Worth
Return on Capital Employed
Dividend per Share
Earnings per Share
Book value of Share
Face value of Share
69
Interpretation of the ANOVA Table (significance value 0.082) indicates that there exists a significant difference between the dependent and independent variables and they are not in alignment with each other. SPSS indicates a Cronbachs alpha value of 0.349. This means that our model is suffering from unsatisfactory internal consistency reliability. Therefore, it has to be tested a few more times and if possible by increasing the number of scale items, which may yield us a value more than 0.6, the value that is solicited for exceptionally good models.
Researchers, students, analysts and others have tried their best to uncover the factors driving the stock prices. In our attempt we have chosen a select list of banking scrips, which have been quoted consistently in the BSE. The reason for choosing the banking sector is because of the demand that these scrips enjoy in the Indian capital market. The regression output from the SPSS has suggested that the two independent variables, BpS and DpS have a significant impact on the equity returns, whereas the other independent variables like RoNW, RoCE, P/E ratio and EpS etc., do not have any impact.
Findings and Conclusion

Fluctuations in stock prices have always been a matter of concern, as these have a significant impact on the returns.
Table-2 : ANOVA Analyses : ANOVA

Model 1 Regression Residual Total Sum of Squares 2864.540 128.730 2993.270 df 11 3 14 Mean Square 260.413 42.910 F 6.069 Sig. .082 a
a. Predictors : (Constant), Face Value per Share, PB Ratio, Quick Ratio, Dividend per Share, Debt Equity Ratio, Current Ratio, P/E ratio, Return on Capital Employed, Return on Net Worth, Book Value per Share, Earnings per Share. b. Dependent Variable : Return
Table-3 : Reliability Analyses Reliability Statistics

Cronbachs Alpha 0.349
70
No. of Items 12
Since the governments influence on the banks policies has not been taken into account and less number of independent variables and scrips are included the results may have deviated to a good extent. On the whole, one can understand that scrip price movements seem to be random in nature even though there is a temporary influence on their prices periodically.
K. Chandra Sekhara Rao, & Sunny Jose, (1996) Relative Influence of Market Volatility, Economic Changes and Company Fundamentals on Equity Returns in India : A Study, Finance India, Vol. X, No. 1, pp. 27-48. Kalman J. Cohen, Walter L. Ness, Jr., Hitoshi Okuda, Robert A. Schwartz, David K. Whitcomb, (May, 1976) The Determinants of Common Stock Returns Volatility : An International Comparison, The Journal of Finance, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 733-740. Kapadia, M.S. (1985) Public Sectors Poor Financial Returns : Place for Taken Over Units, Financial Express, Vol. 8, pp. 14-25. M.A.Zahir, (1992) Factors affecting Equity Prices in India, The Chartered Accountant, Vol. 30, No. 8 (Feb), pp. 194. Martin Jay Gruber, (1966) Determinants of Common Stock Prices, The Journal of Finance, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 747-748. Martin K. Hess, (2005) Sector Specific impacts of Macroeconomic Fundamentals on the Swiss Stock Market, Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, Vol.17, pp. 234-245. Michael T. Kiley, (Federal Reserve Board) Stock Prices and Fundamentals : A Macroeconomic Perspective. Nicholas Molodovsky, (1959) Valuation of Common Stocks. The Analysts Journal, Vol. 15, pp. 23-27 and 84-99. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, & Dr.Vijay Kumar Sharma, Role of Stock Exchange in the Development of Indian Capital Market : A Study of National Stock Exchange, January 4, 2008.
References
Abdelmounaim Lahrech, (2009) The Impacts of US and Canadian Fundamentals on Canadian Stock Market, Journal of Money, Investment and Banking, issue 7. Balke, Nathan S. & Wohar, Mark, E. (2001) Explaining Stock Price Movements : Is there a Case for Fundamentals? Economic & Financial Review. Claude B. Erb, Campbell R. Harvey, & Tadas E. Viskanta, (1996) Political Risk, Economic Risk and Financial Risk, Financial Analysts Journal, Vol. 52, No. 6, pp. 29-46. Jayen B. Patel, (2008) Calendar Effects in the Indian Stock Market, International Business & Economics Research Journal, Vol. 7, No. 361. John Kraft & Arthur Kraft, (1977) Determinants of Common Stock Prices : A Time Series Analysis, The Journal of Finance, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 417-425.
x x
71
Annexure-1 : List of Public Sector Banks and Public Sector Financial Institutions Public Sector Banks
Allahabad Bank Canara bank Bank of India Bank of Baroda Indian Overseas Bank Punjab National Bank SBI Bikaner and Jaipur State Bank of India State Bank of Mysore State Bank of Travancore
Public Sector Financial Institutions

Can Fin Homes Ltd. GIC Housing Finance Ltd. LIC Housing Finance Corporation Ltd. PND GILTs Ltd. SBI Home Finance
72
Copyright of Journal of Institute of Public Enterprise is the property of Institute of Public Enterprise and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

Tai Lieu

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tai Lieu

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Influence of Corporate Fundamentals on Equity Returns of Public Sector Banks and Public Sector Financial Institutions in India

R.K.Mishra, K.Jayaditya Sarma & Pawan Kumar Avadhanam

Sample and Data Sources

Return on Net Worth

Return on Capital Employed

Dividend per Share

Earnings per Share

Book value of Share

Face value of Share

Findings and Conclusion

Table-2 : ANOVA Analyses : ANOVA

Table-3 : Reliability Analyses Reliability Statistics

Public Sector Financial Institutions

You might also like