|
|
 |
|
Viewing report
|
|
|
|
Bosnia-Herzegovina Commercial Banking Report Q4 2009
Business Monitor International, Aug 2009, Pages: 45
The Bosnia-Herzegovina Commercial Banking Report provides industry professionals and strategists, corporate analysts, banking associations, government departments and regulatory bodies with independent forecasts and competitive intelligence on Bosnia-Herzegovina's commercial banking industry.
We now rate 59 banking systems, and it is little surprise that the developed states dominate the top spots. The US and UK come first and second place, respectively, with scores of 88.7 and 88.0 out of 100. Of crucial importance to both scores are the very high rankings in the crucial 'Risks to realisation of returns Market structure' sub-category, which accounts for 42% of the overall score. The two countries are ranked first and second in this category as well. This sub-category captures the size of the sector, and the potential for assets and loans to grow in US dollar terms. While both systems have been buffeted by the global credit crunch and will not post stellar growth numbers in percentage terms for the foreseeable future, the sheer size of the US and UK's financial systems means that there is massive potential for deposits, assets and client loans to rise. In addition, the generally solid institutional framework which looks set to be augmented with new post-credit crunch regulations - will continue to provide a firm basis for the sector.
A Mixed Bag For The Developed States
Following just behind the US and UK are a clutch of major developed state economies, including France (82.9, 3rd) and Germany (80.5, 4th), Canada (79.9, 5th), as well as Australia and Italy (78.4, joint 6th). All of these sectors have reasonable prospects into the medium term, having a large deposit and loan base, as well as the potential to grow substantially in volume (if not percentage) terms. However, several states are notable by their absence in this cluster. Austria falls somewhat short (72.4, 12th) of the pack, along with Greece (69.4, 16th), but it is the poor performances by Switzerland (62.7, 26th) and Japan (56.3, 34th) which really stand out. Both countries are going to struggle to post increases in asset or loan growth in US dollar terms over the forecast period, to 2013, partially as a result of currency moves to the downside, but also, in the case of Switzerland, because of the relative weakness of the two key banking groups, UBS and Credit Suisse, which had built up large franchises during the good years.
Asia Rising
Significantly, just behind the main pack of European economies, several Asian states have managed to post strong performances in our risk ratings. Malaysia (72.1, 11th) and Singapore (77.1, 8th) come in ahead of Austria. However, Singapore leads the world globally in the 'Risks to realisation of returns Country risk' sub-category, with a score of 84.0, while South Korea has a score of 64.0. Singapore's high score rests on good scores for key elements of the economic, political and business environment risk ratings, which measure the risks to policy continuity. In contrast, the small size of the economy and banking sector is a major factor limiting the potential for expansion, especially in a world of lower liquidity and risk appetite. South Korea, however, has a large domestic economy to provide the deposit base necessary to fund credit growth.
Elsewhere in Asia, we note that China (overall score 75.1) ranks 9th overall. As the world's third biggest economy - and still an emerging one at that it is little surprise that the scope for asset growth in China is huge. This has allowed the country to be ranked fourth in the 'Limits of potential returns' category (74.0), and post the highest 'Limits of potential returns - Market structure' sub-category score with 90.0. What prevents China from rising any higher is its poor performances in the 'Limits of potential returns - Country structure' sub-category, 57.5 (42nd), and the 'Risk to realisation of returns category', 80.0 (9th).
Of particular concern is the potential for a collapse of the local system, because much lending is still state directed and risk management is still embryonic. In addition, despite the size of the whole economy, per capita GDP remains low. We forecast it at US$3,024 for 2009, with significant income inequalities. This severely limits the ability of financial institutions to sell premium products in local markets, and also means that average deposit levels are still very low.
Central And Eastern Europe, Limited Opportunities
The emerging European states are posting surprisingly mediocre ratings outturns. We highlight the potential for a systemic crisis in the region as the major Western European banks remove credit and capital from Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). These risks are exacerbated by the deep recessions we see in the Baltic states, Bulgaria, Russia and Turkey, and the risk of further currency crises that could create even greater economic dislocations, as the massive economic asymmetries that have built up in the region unwind. When taken in tandem with the relatively small size of the local economies and the rapid banking sector expansion seen in recent years, it is little surprise that the highest rated CEE state is regional heavyweight Russia, with 73.8 (10th globally), and that the top 'new' EU member is the Czech Republic, 64.5 (24th). Coming close to the bottom of both the regional and global peers groups are Latvia (39.0, 55th) and Ukraine (43.0, 51st), which have both been forced to tap the IMF and EU for emergency funds.
MENA Below Par
The big story in recent years in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) banking sector has been high oil prices. Hydrocarbon revenues have swollen bank balances across the Gulf region, with significant amounts of capital and liquidity finding its way to North Africa as well. With the days of stellar oil prices gone for now (and not likely to return over the forecast period) the outlook is not so positive for the region, and this is reflected in the fact that the two highest ranked countries are the UAE at 14th and Saudi Arabia at 21st. No other MENA state has broken into the top 25 of our 59-strong ratings universe. Of particular concern is that while some progress has been made on putting the region's financial infrastructure on a more sustainable footing in recent years, it is still far too dependant upon oil revenues, and there are few drivers of economic or commercial banking growth outside the natural resources sector. It is particularly worrying that not one MENA state has broken into the top 10 states in the 'Limits of potential returns - Market structure' sub-category. The best performer is the UAE, in 18th place and even with the growth of Islamic banking products, the boom years are over. We expect much more moderate growth in the financial space over the forecast period.
Opportunities In Africa
While Africa remains one of the most 'under-banked' regions in the world - and hence one of the most insulated from the global credit crunch - the commercial banking business environment ratings still reflect the major problems in operating even in the region's largest economies. South Africa's overall 70.5 rating score put it in 13th place globally, while in the 'Limits of potential returns - Market structure' category it scores 73.3, but it receives poor score for 'Risks to realisation of returns - Country risk' with 56.0. The country's main weaknesses, in common with Kenya and Nigeria, are bureaucracy, external economic risk and financial market risk, all of which deter potential investors from engaging more fully in the local market.
Diverse Latin Performance
Again, in Latin America, the ratings do not tell one particular story, with a diverse regional picture developing. Perhaps the most interesting story is among the worst performers, which include Argentina (43.0, 49th), Colombia (50.3, 43rd) and Venezuela (36.0, 56th). All three economies face difficult times over the coming years, having been fiscally imprudent. The latter two, especially Venezuela, have benefited significantly from the oil boom, which has now come to an end. There is little to be optimistic about in any part of the ratings for these countries, and we anticipate a much weaker performance than in Brazil (66.5, 23rd), Chile (66.6, 22nd) or even Mexico (67.6, 20th). Of particular note is Brazil's crucial 'Limits of potential returns Market structure' sub-category rating of 80.0 (seventh globally) and Chile's reasonably solid 80.0 'Risks to realisation of returns Market structure' rank of 11th.
Commercial Banking Business Environment Rating Methodology
Since Q108, we have described numerically the banking business environment for each of the countries surveyed. We do this through our Commercial Banking Business Environment Rating (CBBER), a measure that ensures we capture the latest quantitative information available. It also ensures consistency across all countries and between the inputs to the CBBER and the Insurance Business Environment Rating, which is likewise now a feature of our insurance reports. Like the Business Environment Ratings calculated for all the other industries on which it reports, the CBBER takes into account the limits of potential returns and the risks to the realisation of those returns. It is weighted 70% to the former and 30% to the latter.
The evaluation of the 'Limits of potential returns' includes market elements that are specific to the banking industry of the country in question and elements that relate to that country in general. Within the 70% of the CBBER that takes into account the 'Limits of potential returns', the market elements have a 60% weighting and the country elements have a 40% weighting. The evaluation of the 'Risks to realisation of returns' also includes banking elements and country elements (specifically, BMI's assessment of long-term country risk). However, within the 30% of the CBBER that take into account the risks, these elements are weighted 40% and 60%, respectively.
Further details on how we calculate the CBBER are provided at the end of this report. In general, though, three aspects need to be borne in mind in interpreting the CBBERs. The first is that the market elements of the 'Limits of potential returns' are by far the most heavily weighted of the four elements. They account for 60% of 70% (or 42%) of the overall CBBER. Second, if the market elements are significantly higher than the country elements of the 'Limits of potential returns', it usually implies that the banking sector is (very) large and/or developed relative to the general wealth, stability and financial infrastructure in the country. Conversely, if the market elements are significantly lower than the country elements, it usually means that the banking sector is small and/or underdeveloped relative to the general wealth, stability and financial infrastructure in the country. Third, within the 'Risks to the realisation of returns' category, the market elements (ie: how regulations affect the development of the sector, how regulations affect competition within it, and Moody's Investor Services ratings for local currency deposits) can be markedly different from the analysts long-term risk rating.
Product samples
A sample for this product is available. Please Login/Register to download this sample.
Customers who bought this item also bought
Bosnia and Herzegovina Commercial Banking Report Q4 2010
Bosnia and Herzegovina Commercial Banking Report Q2 2010
Bosnia and Herzegovina Commercial Banking Report Q2 2011
Bosnia and Herzegovina Commercial Banking Report Q1 2010
Bosnia-Herzegovina Commercial Banking Report Q1 2011
Bosnia and Herzegovina Commercial Banking Report Q3 2009
Slovenia Commercial Banking Report Q2 2011
Slovenia Commercial Banking Report Q4 2011
Slovenia Commercial Banking Report Q1 2012
Slovenia Commercial Banking Report Q3 2010
|
|
|
|
