Countries differ in the extent to which their financial systems are bank-based or market-based. The financial systems of Germany and Japan, for example, are considered bank-based because banks play a leading role in mobilizing savings, allocating capital, overseeing investment decisions of corporate managers, and providing risk management vehicles. The systems of the United States, and the United Kingdom are considered more market-based. Using bank-level data for a large number of industrial and developing countries, the authors present evidence about the impact of financial development, and structure on bank performance. They measure the relative importance of bank or market finance by the relative size of stock aggregates, by relative trading or transaction volumes, and by indicators of relative efficiency. They show that in developing countries, both banks and stock markets are less developed, but financial systems tend to be more bank-based. The richer the country, the more active are all financial intermediaries. The greater the development of a country's banks, the tougher is the competition, the greater is the efficiency, and the lower are the bank margins, and profits. The more under-developed the stock market, the greater are the bank profits. But financial structure per se does not have a significant, independent influence on bank margins, and profits.

For countries with underdeveloped financial systems, a move toward a more developed financial system reduces bank margins and profitability. Controlling for both bank and market development, financial structure per se - the development of banks relative to that of markets-appears to have no independent effect on bank performance.Countries differ in the extent to which their financial systems are bank-based or market-based. The financial systems of Germany and Japan, for example, are considered bank-based because banks play a leading role in mobilizing savings, allocating capital, overseeing investment decisions of corporate managers, and providing risk management vehicles. The systems of the United States and the United Kingdom are considered more market-based.Using bank-level data for a large number of industrial and developing countries, Demirguc-Kunt and Huizinga present evidence about the impact of financial development and structure on bank performance. They measure the relative importance of bank or market finance by the relative size of stock aggregates, by relative trading or transaction volumes, and by indicators of relative efficiency.They show that in developing countries both banks and stock markets are less developed, but financial systems tend to be more bank-based. The richer the country, the more active are all financial intermediaries.The greater the development of a country's banks, the tougher is the competition, the greater is the efficiency, and the lower are the bank margins and profits.The more underdeveloped the stock market, the greater are the bank profits. But financial structure per se does not have a significant, independent influence on bank margins and profits.This paper - a product of Finance, Development Research Group - is part of a larger effort in the group to study financial structure and development. The study was funded by the Bank's Research Support Budget under the research project Financial Structure and Economic Development (RPO 682-41). The authors may be contacted at [email protected] or [email protected].

We analyze how bank profitability impacts financial stability from both theoretical and empirical perspectives. We first develop a theoretical model of the relationship between bank profitability and financial stability by exploring the role of non-interest income and retail-oriented business models. We then conduct panel regression analysis to examine the empirical determinants of bank risks and profitability, and how the level and the source of bank profitability affect risks for 431 publicly traded banks (U.S., advanced Europe, and GSIBs) from 2004 to 2017. Results reveal that profitability is negatively associated with both a bank’s contribution to systemic risk and its idiosyncratic risk, and an over-reliance on non-interest income, wholesale funding and leverage is associated with higher risks. Low competition is associated with low idiosyncratic risk but a high contribution to systemic risk. Lastly, the problem loans ratio and the cost-to-income ratio are found to be key factors that influence bank profitability. The paper’s findings suggest that policy makers should strive to better understand the source of bank profitability, especially where there is an over-reliance on market-based non-interest income, leverage, and wholesale funding.

March 1998 Differences in interest margins reflect differences in bank characteristics, macroeconomic conditions, existing financial structure and taxation, regulation, and other institutional factors. Using bank data for 80 countries for 1988-95, Demirgüç-Kunt and Huizinga show that differences in interest margins and bank profitability reflect various determinants: * Bank characteristics. * Macroeconomic conditions. * Explicit and implicit bank taxes. * Regulation of deposit insurance. * General financial structure. * Several underlying legal and institutional indicators. Controlling for differences in bank activity, leverage, and the macroeconomic environment, they find (among other things) that: * Banks in countries with a more competitive banking sector-where banking assets constitute a larger share of GDP-have smaller margins and are less profitable. The bank concentration ratio also affects bank profitability; larger banks tend to have higher margins. * Well-capitalized banks have higher net interest margins and are more profitable. This is consistent with the fact that banks with higher capital ratios have a lower cost of funding because of lower prospective bankruptcy costs. * Differences in a bank's activity mix affect spread and profitability. Banks with relatively high noninterest-earning assets are less profitable. Also, banks that rely largely on deposits for their funding are less profitable, as deposits require more branching and other expenses. Similarly, variations in overhead and other operating costs are reflected in variations in bank interest margins, as banks pass their operating costs (including the corporate tax burden) on to their depositors and lenders. * In developing countries foreign banks have greater margins and profits than domestic banks. In industrial countries, the opposite is true. * Macroeconomic factors also explain variation in interest margins. Inflation is associated with higher realized interest margins and greater profitability. Inflation brings higher costs-more transactions and generally more extensive branch networks-and also more income from bank float. Bank income increases more with inflation than bank costs do. * There is evidence that the corporate tax burden is fully passed on to bank customers in poor and rich countries alike. * Legal and institutional differences matter. Indicators of better contract enforcement, efficiency in the legal system, and lack of corruption are associated with lower realized interest margins and lower profitability. This paper-a product of the Development Research Group-is part of a larger effort in the group to study bank efficiency.

Traditional theory suggests that more profitable banks should have lower risk-taking incentives. Then why did many profitable banks choose to invest in untested financial instruments before the crisis, realizing significant losses? We attempt to reconcile theory and evidence. In our setup, banks are endowed with a fixed core business. They take risk by levering up to engage in risky ‘side activities’(such as market-based investments) alongside the core business. A more profitable core business allows a bank to borrow more and take side risks on a larger scale, offsetting lower incentives to take risk of given size. Consequently, more profitable banks may have higher risk-taking incentives. The framework is consistent with cross-sectional patterns of bank risk-taking in the run up to the recent financial crisis.