No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 October 2009
In this study, an attempt is made to determine whether the profitability of a commercial bank is related to the bank's ownership-control status. Affiliated and unaffiliated commercial banks in the sample are found to be equiprofitable. Affiliation with a mutual savings bank does not generate differences in profits, total current operating revenues, or total current operating expenses between the two groups of commercial banks. Furthermore, the marginal net earnings or returns on the individual deposit types are the same for the two groups of banks.
The two groups of banks have extreme differences in their holdings of time and savings deposits and real estate loans. These differences between equiprofitable banks require further analysis. The affiliated commercial banks have significantly larger percentages of their total assets in nonearning assets and lower proportions in loans. The affiliated banks also have larger proportions of their deposits in the less costly demand deposits than do the unaffiliated banks. These results indicate that affiliated banks would have both lower revenues and expenses than do unaffiliated commercial banks, ceteris paribus. However, affiliated banks have larger proportions of their portfolios in the greater income-producing consumer and commercial loans.
In conclusion, profitability of the commercial banks in the sample is not affected by the banks' control status. The commercial banks controlled by mutual savings banks are as profitable as banks controlled by management or “independent” owners. However, the control status does effect significant differences in the balance sheet and income statement accounts. While many of these distinctions may result from differences in the banks' deposit structures, these differences themselves are consequences of affiliation.