Oluwaseyi Olalere

This study contributes to the current debate on the downsides and benefits of revenue diversification. Diversification may affect banks when they invest in riskier activities with lower returns, while they benefit from diversified activities that are less risky but have higher returns. The study offers extended implications in the empirical literature using a different measure of revenue diversification from an emerging market perspective. The study uses recent financial data from 26 Malaysian and Nigerian banks for the period 2009–2017, totaling 234 observations. The GMM estimation technique is employed to test the relationship. The results show that revenue diversification – non-interest income/gross revenue ratio (NII), fee and commission income/revenue ratio (NII1), and non-interest income/total assets ratio (NIITA) – significantly affect the firm value and stability of Nigerian banks. Liquidity, administrative expenses, net interest margin (NIM), non-performing loans (NPL), size, GDP growth rate and inflation also affect the firm value and stability of a bank. For Malaysian banks, diversification variables do not significantly affect firm value of a bank, while liquidity, administrative expenses, NIM and size significantly affect firm value. Diversification (NII and NIITA), liquidity, administrative expenses, NIM, NPL, size, GDP growth and inflation rate has a significant impact on the stability of Malaysian banks. The study concludes that revenue diversification affects both the firm value and stability of banks, and to achieve sound financial stability, banks that focus on interest-generating activities may diversify into non-interest-generating activities.

The paper aims to explore the impact of financial risks on the firm value of banks in ASEAN-5 countries. The study used the panel data regression model to analyze the available data for 63 commercial banks in ASEAN-5 countries from 2009 to 2017, totaling 567 observations. GMM dynamic estimation was also used for robustness and comparison purposes. The financial risk was measured using the non-performing loans ratio (NPL), the loan to deposit ratio (LD), the liquid asset ratio (LATA), the cost to income ratio (CIR), and the net interest margin (NIM), while firm value was measured using the enterprise value. The study used controlled variables proxied by size, GDP growth and the inflation rate, while the correlation between credit risk and interest rate risk (CR•IR) was also determined. Given the results of the study, credit risk proxy by non-performing loans ratio has a significant positive effect on the firm value, the liquidity risk (LD) has a significant positive impact on the firm value of ASEAN banks, while LATA has a significant negative effect on the firm value. Operational risk (CIR) and interest rate risk (NIM) have a significant negative impact on the firm value of ASEAN-5 banks. Bank size and inflation rate significantly and negatively affect the firm value, while GDP growth is found to have a significant positive impact on the firm value of ASEAN-5 banks. An insignificant interaction is found between credit risk and interest rate risk (CR•IR). The GMM estimation also supported these findings. The results obtained will be an important signal for policy makers, which is useful for the effective mobilization and allocation of credits to productive areas and helps manage inherent risks. The study provides implications for all countries regarding the financial risks associated with the value of the firm. Therefore, this study offers new insights into this relationship by providing useful information to the academics, policy makers, governments, and other stakeholders and serves as a benchmark for further study in this area.