Academ ic Voices

A Multidisciplinary Journal
Volume 6, N0. 1, 2016
ISSN 2091-1106

LOAN MANAGEMEN T O F NABIL BANK AND

EVEREST BANK: A CO MPARATIVE STU DY
Sanjay Shrestha
Department of Finance, TU, Thakur Ram Multiple Campus, Birgunj, Nepal
Email:

Abstract
The st udy focuses on loan m anagement of two com mercial banks with reference

report s t he com parative st udy of deposit, loan, ROA, ROE and CV. Descriptive

data from 2011/ 12 t o 2015/ 16. Both of the banks have u lized most of the funds
in the form of credit and advances which is t he major part of ut ilizing deposits
for income generat ing purpose. On t he average, both Nabil and Everest bank
have utilized its t otal deposits constant in consecutive years. Likewise, the mean
ratio of t otal loan to t otal deposit of Nabil and Everest bank are 70.75% and

uniformit y t han Nabil since Everest has less CV of 6.16%. It can be concluded
t hat t he higher mean rat io indicat es the good lending performance.

Ke y words

Intro duction
after collecting them from scattered sources.

economic development of the country. Bank

the formation and mobilization of internal
is a resource for the economic development,

various segment of society and extends credit Commercial banks are the heart of the
to the people. So, commercial banks are those
individuals, government institutions and
activities of trade, industry and agriculture business units. They make funds available
through their lending and investing activities

objectives of commercial banks is to mobilize government institutions. In doing so, they

47
 Sanjay Shrestha

substantial amount of income generating

assets is found to be important determinants
activities of the government. They provide of bank performances. So, credit risk
a large portion of medium of exchange and management capability of a bank remained
they are the media through which monetary

commercial banking system of a nation is very institution depended upon the power
important to the functioning of its economy management of credit risk. The risk focused
(Van Horn, 2000). examination process has been adapted to
credit the inspection process to the more risk
Financial system contains two components areas of both operation and business. Credit
risk is considered as greater risk from all other

bank.

institution whereas Employee Provident Fund, Metho ds

Insurance companies etc. are the examples of
Nabil Bank Ltd. and Everest Bank Ltd. were
economic activities are directly or indirectly selected for the study of loan management. To
channeled through these banks. People keep
their surplus money as deposits in the banks from 2011/12 to 2015/16. To make the study
and hence bank can provide such funds to
were used for analysis, The basic tools used
loans and advances. were ratio analysis.

Management of bank risks is the most Re sults and discussio n

economic growth in the developed economics To t al loa ns a nd a dva nce t o t ot al
depo sit rat io
between risks &returns is important for
Table 1 shows that the total loan & adv. to total
deposit ratio of Nabil are 74.79%, 72.90%,
operation credit risk which is related to 72.55%, 63.01% and 70.49% respectively from

2011/12 41,065 54,905 74.79% 35,910 50,006 71.81%

2012/13 46,369 63,609 72.90% 43,393 57,720 75.18%
2013/14 54,691 75,388 72.55% 47,572 62,108 76.60%
2014/15 65,501 103,957 63.01% 54,482 83,093 65.57%
2015/16 77,730 110,267 70.49% 68,911 93,735 73.52%
Mean 70.75% 72.54%
S.D 0.053 0.045
C.V 7.34% 6.16%

48
 LOA N M AN AGEM EN T OF N ABIL BA NK AN D EVEREST BAN K

year 2015/16. Average ratio of Nabil is 2.64%.

ratios of Everest bank are 71.81%, 75.18%, Likewise, this ratio of Everest is highest 1.96%

2011/12 to 2015/16 respectively. Likewise, the

mean ratio of Nabil and Everest are 70.75% 1.73%. Here, average loan loss provision to
and 72.54% respectively. Higher loan and total loan ratio of Nabil is higher than Everest.
advance to total deposit ratio shows higher This increased ratio indicates the increased
risk and higher turnover. But, Nabil and volume of non-performing loans and vice
Everest have invested their deposit more in
Nabil is less uniformity since it has higher CV
of 10.10% than Everest i.e. 7.68%.
has more uniformity than Nabil since Everest
has less CV of 6.16%.
increasing probability of non-performing
Nabil and Everest have been constant to loan. Increase in loan loss provision decreases
mobilize its total deposit as loan and advances.
But its positive impact is to strengthen the

of view, because there may arise liquidity the credit risk and reduced the risks related
crisis. Both banks have equally aggressive. to deposits. The low ratio indicates the good
But it is true that the banks should aim to quality of assets in total volume of loan
maintain more than 70% of deposits as loan &advances. High ratio indicates more risky
assets in total volume of loan & advances.

Lo an loss p ro vision t o t o t al lo an and No n-performing loans t o t o t al loa n

ad vances rat io and ad vances rat io
Table 2 shows the loan loss provision to total Table 3 shows the non-performing loan to
loan & advance ratio of selected commercial
The ratio of Nabil ranges highest of 2.44%
and the lowest is 1.14% in FY 2011/12 and FY
in 2015/16 respectively. Likewise, the ratio of

Table 2: Lo an loss provisio n to lo an an d advance (Rs in m illio ns)

2011/12 1,262 41,065 3.07% 705 35,910 1.96%

2012/13 1,275 46,369 2.75% 804 43,393 1.85%
2013/14 1,511 54,691 2.76% 878 47,572 1.85%
2014/15 1,659 65,501 2.53% 881 54,482 1.62%
2015/16 1,624 77,730 2.09% 956 68,911 1.39%
Mean 2.64% 1.73%
S.D 0.0029 0.0014
C.V 10.10% 7.68%

49
 Sanjay Shrestha

2011/12 1,000 41,065 2.44% 307 35,910 0.85%

2012/13 1,015 46,369 2.19% 276 43,393 0.64%
2013/14 1,256 54,691 2.30% 470 47,572 0.99%
2014/15 1,220 65,501 1.86% 367 54,482 0.67%
2015/16 889 77,730 1.14% 264 68,911 0.38%
Mean 1.99% 0.71%
S.D 0.0027 0.0024
C.V 12.85% 34.68%

Everest is highest of 0.99% and the lowest of

0.35% respectively in FY 2013/14 and 2010/11. is from the interest payments a bank makes
The mean non-performing loan to total loan
of Nabil and Everest are 1.99% and 0.71% performing if they not serviced for some
respectively. Everest has the lowest non- time. If payments are late for a short time a
performing loan to total loan & advances, thus
Everest is best performer than Nabil. However,
the trend of NPL to total loan of Nabil is performing.

variation, Nabil is more uniformity since it has Increase in the amount of non-performing
CV 12.85% than Everest with CV of 34.68%. assets or loans means mismanagement of loan
and deposit of individuals and households.

non-performing loans. Sample banks are not commercial banks need to reduce non-
far from this above fact. If non-performing performing assets or loan.
loan increases, the overall banking business
Lo an loss p ro vision (LLP) t o
perfo rm ing loa n
Therefore, it is suggested that both the sample
banks to be sincere while granting loan and Table 4presents the loan loss provision to
performing loan ratio of Nabil and Everest
performing loans.
LLP to ratio are 2.3% and 1.73% for Nabil and
The Ratio of NPL to total loan Advance reveals Everest respectively. Loan loss provision to
how much or the loan and advances are non- the performing loan is directly related. As
performing assets. It is calculated as follows. the performing loan increases LLP decreases.
Non-performing assets, also called non-
somewhat near 2%. That means bank is trying
performing loans, are loans on which
to maintain the ratio constant at minimum.
repayments or interest payments are not being
Likewise, Standard deviation for the Nabil
made on time. A loan is an asset for a bank as
and Everest are 0.0041 and 0.0012 respectively.
the interest payments and the repayments of
50
 LOA N M AN AGEM EN T OF N ABIL BA NK AN D EVEREST BAN K

2011/12 1,262 41,867 3.01% 705 36,309 1.94%

2012/13 1,275 46,630 2.18% 804 43,921 1.83%
2013/14 1,511 54,947 2.29% 878 47,979 1.83%
2014/15 1,659 63,473 1.92% 881 53,659 1.64%
2015/16 1,624 76,841 2.11% 956 68,647 1.39%
Mean 2.30% 1.73%
S.D 0.0041 0.0012
C.V 17.43% 6.40%
of the sample banks. The average of this
ratio is 28.21% and 25.63% for Nabil and EBL
of the banks which is 17.43% and 6.40% for respectively. This indicates that the return on

LLP to LLP ratio is highest of Nabil which is Standard deviation for the Nabil and Everest
3.01% than Everest i.e. 1.94%. The analysis can
be easily seen that the LLP to performing loan
measuring the uniformity of the banks which
Everest. is 14.55% and 11.34% for Nabil and Everest

Loan loss provision is the compulsion factor in

lending practices and Non-Performing Loan is higher of Nabil which is 28.21% than of EBL
is the evil factor in banks. If they are high which is 25.63% in average among the two

variation Everest is more uniformity which

measures the portion of provisioned loan with has less CV i.e. 11.34% than Nabil.
non-performing Loan.
ROE can be mathematically expressed as
shown in table 5.

may institution can make which decides

its continuity in the future. For banking resources of owners. It reveals the clear picture
of the capacity of the bank to utilize its owner
fund.
one hand and also make some payment in the
form of dividends to their shareholders. It is Ret urn o n t o t al asset s (ROA)
the excess of income over expenditure. It is the

assets ratio or return on total assets of the

sample banks. The average ratio for return on
assets is 2.47% and 1.91% for Nabil and EBL
Ret urn o n equit y (RO E) respectively. This indicates that the return on
Table 5 presents the result of return on equity assets for the bank is satisfactory. Likewise,
51
 Sanjay Shrestha

Table 5: Return on Equ ity (Rs in m illio ns)

2011/12 1,700 5,459 31.14% 1,091 4,177 26.12%

2012/13 2,219 6,691 33.16% 1,471 4,827 30.47%
2013/14 2,319 7,640 30.35% 1,549 5,456 28.39%
2014/15 2,098 9,518 22.04% 1,574 6,889 22.85%
2015/16 2,821 11,590 24.34% 1,730 8,514 20.32%
Mean 28.21% 25.63%
S.D 0.042 0.031
C.V 14.55% 11.34%

2011/12 1,700 63,257 2.69% 1,091 55,813 1.95%

2012/13 2,219 73,241 3.03% 1,471 64,741 2.27%
2013/14 2,319 87,274 2.66% 1,549 70,445 2.20%
2014/15 2,098 118,695 1.77% 1,574 99,167 1.59%
2015/16 2,821 128,919 2.19% 1,730 113,885 1.52%
Mean 2.47% 1.91%
S.D 0.0048 0.0027
C.V 19.25% 13.33%

Standard deviation for the Nabil and Everest Bank Ltd. for the period of 2010/11 to 2014/15.

measuring the uniformity of the banks which

is 19.25% and 13.33% for Nabil and Everest The degree of the management success in
handling the credits and advances of the bank

is higher of Nabil which is 2.48% than of EBL of relationship of loans and advances among
which is 2.03% among the two sample banks.
assets, total deposits etc. This relationship

has more risky that is higher CV 19.25% than

EBL of 13.33%. of the respective banks. The objective behind
this analysis is to understand and analyze the
impact of the credit provided by the banks to

by dividing NPAT by Total Assets. This ratio degree of relationship between two sets of
provides the foundation necessary for a
company to deliver a good return on equity.
Return on Total Assets ratio of Standard method is applied in the study.
Chartered Bank Nepal Ltd. and Nepal SBI

52
 LOA N M AN AGEM EN T OF N ABIL BA NK AN D EVEREST BAN K

Table 7: Co rre lation between de po sit, lo an an d advance

Nabil 0.9907 0.981 12.73 3.182

Everest 0.97 0.942 7.18 3.182

Correlat io n bet ween d eposit and lo an Correlat io n bet ween loan and lo an
and ad vance lo ss Provision
The relationship between the total loan and The relationship between the total loan and
loan loss provision indicates the volume of loss
indicates the direction taken by total loan with provision raised from the total credit granted.
the changes in the volume of total deposit. A This suggests the volume and chances of loans
bank will be unable to provide large volumes being default or not paid by the clients are of
of loan if it does not receive adequate and

and total nonperforming loans denoted byr.

total credit and total deposits denoted by r,
tcal and ttab refers to calculated value of t-
tcal and ttab refers to calculated value of statistic and tabulated value of t-statistic at
t-statistic and tabulated value of t-statistic at
respectively.
respectively.

Table 7 clearly highlights the relationship between total loan and total loan loss provision
between the total Deposit received and of the Nabil and Everest. As depicted by the
loan and advance provided. The positive Table 8, the correlation between these two
relationship shown by their correlation variables is highly positive of both Nabil and
Everest bank, which means, they are moving
in each variable are taking place in the same in the same direction. Correlation between
direction, i.e., an increase in total loan is these two variables is positive, which means
supported by an increase in the total deposit. they are moving in the same direction. The
positive relationship points out the fact that
an increase in non-performing loans leads to
longer period if any one of these variables do an increase in total volume of loan. However,
not increase or decrease with one another. The if the volume of loans being default decreases
calculated value tcal of both sample banks i.e. with the increase in the volume of loan
Nabil and Everest (12.73 and 7.18) is greater

with 3 degree of freedom for two tailed test performing loans by the credit department.

department have a quick learning curve when

of Nabil and Everest. it comes to handing non-performing loans
and credit.

Table 8: Co rrelation between lo an an d lo an loss provisio n

Nabil 0.99 0.981 3.56 3.182

Everest 0.979 0.9585 8.31 3.182
53
 Sanjay Shrestha

The bank must keep a loan loss provision of & advances of both banks. NPL to total loan
pass loan (performing loan) which makes the of Nabil is decreasing trend over the study
positive relation in the variables. By using period, so this is good sign for the bank. By
t- statistic, the calculated value tcalof both
Nabil and Everest (3.56 and 8.31) is greater

degree of freedom for two tailed test(3.182). It The average ratio for return on assets is 2.47%
and 1.91% for Nabil and Everest respectively.
loan and advances and total nonperforming This indicates that the return on assets for the

probably means that the volume of loan being indicates Nabil has more risky because it has
higher CV than Everest. The average of return
volume of the loan provided only. There may on equity of Nabil bank is higher than Everest.
be several other reasons for the loans being This indicates that this return for Nabil is good
default.

good sign of company growth and it is always

Co nclusion
positive for investment in such company for
Both of the banks have utilized most of the investor.
funds in the form of credit and advances
which is the major part of utilizing deposits for Re fe re nce s
income generating purpose. On the average,
both Nabil and Everest bank have utilized Bhattacharya, H. (1998). Banking Strategy, Credit
its total deposits constant in consecutive Appraisal and Lending Decision: A Risk Return
years. Likewise, the mean ratio of total loan Fram ework. New Delhi: Ashoka Prakashan.
to total deposit of Nabil and Everest bank are
Bhandari, D. R. (2003). Principle and Practices of
variation analysis, Everest bank has more Banking & Insurance. Kathmandu: Asmita
uniformity than Nabil since Everest has less Prakashan
CV of 6.16%. It can be concluded that the
higher mean ratio indicates the good lending Joshi, P. R. (2001). Research Methodology.
performance. Kathmandu: Buddha Academic Publishers and
Distributors Pvt Ltd.
The loan loss provision to loan and advance
ratio of Nabil bank is highest than Everest Kothari, C. R. (1990). Research Methodology:
bank. This increased ratio indicates the Methods and Techniques. 2nd Edition, New
increased volume of non-performing loans Delhi: Wishwa, Prakashan
and vice versa. The mean Non-performing
loan to total loan of Nabil and Everest bank Singh, H. B. (2005). Banking & Insurance with
are 1.99% and 0.71% respectively. It has Guidelines for Project W ork & Report W riting.
constant non-performing loan to total loan New Delhi: Bikash Prakashan

54