Publication activity
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
Research across participating journals · All insights follow your collection filters.
Publication activity alongside incoming citations.
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
OpenAlex · year of the citing work
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Leading affiliations and themes in this collection.
Full distributions & methodology ↓Independent sources. Clear time scales.
Crossref and OpenAlex · separate totals for the same publication cohorts
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
Latest lifetime totals, grouped by the cited article’s year. These are not citations received in that year.
OpenAlex · incoming citation links grouped by citing-work year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Select journals to compare the same collection filters. Source totals stay separate. These measures describe research activity, not journal quality.
Articles by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
By year of the citing work · 2017–2026
2026 is year to date. Crossref and OpenAlex lifetime charts share a citation scale. Unknown observations appear as gaps; known zero stays zero. Annual receipts use available OpenAlex histories and may not sum to lifetime totals. 0 undated publications excluded from publication-year charts.
Crossref citation coverage: 67 / 70 publications (95.7%). Latest observation: 21 Oct 2026, 00:21 UTC. Means and percentages use records with known counts.
DOI-matched OpenAlex observations for the same selected publications. These counts are separate from Crossref and are never added together.
Observation range: 21 Oct 2026 00:21 UTC — 21 Oct 2026 00:22 UTC. Missing matches are not zero citations. Previous observations may remain if a refresh fails or a DOI no longer matches.
OpenAlex affiliations and primary-topic classification. Each publication counts once per institution or country; multi-affiliated publications appear in multiple groups, so percentages can sum above 100%. Countries describe author affiliations, not nationality. Topics use one primary topic per publication.
54 / 70 with data · 16 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 70 selected publications.
54 / 70 with data · 16 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 70 selected publications.
70 / 70 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 70 selected publications.
Citations are the latest recorded totals for articles published in each year, not citations received during that year. Crossref and OpenAlex remain separate and share the same citation scale. 2026 is incomplete; newer articles have had less time to receive citations.
0 undated publications excluded. Unknown citation counts are shown as —, never as zero. Partial coverage can understate totals; expand each table for known / total records.
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Publications | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2014 | All selected publications | 6 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| 2015 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2016 | All selected publications | 13 | 13 | 13/13 | 13/13 |
| 2017 | All selected publications | 6 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 4 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 7 | 7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 9 | 9 | 9/9 | 9/9 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 5 | 5 | 5/5 | 5/5 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 3 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 7 | 7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 4 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 1/2 | 2/2 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 0/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2014 | All selected publications | 20 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| 2015 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2016 | All selected publications | 18 | 13 | 13/13 | 13/13 |
| 2017 | All selected publications | 58 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 13 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 28 | 7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 14 | 9 | 9/9 | 9/9 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 10 | 5 | 5/5 | 5/5 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 1 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 10 | 7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 1 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 1/2 | 2/2 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | — | 2 | 0/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2014 | All selected publications | 46 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| 2015 | All selected publications | 6 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2016 | All selected publications | 62 | 13 | 13/13 | 13/13 |
| 2017 | All selected publications | 131 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 29 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 53 | 7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 22 | 9 | 9/9 | 9/9 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 17 | 5 | 5/5 | 5/5 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 2 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 10 | 7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 3 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 1/2 | 2/2 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 0/2 | 2/2 |
Incoming citations to the selected publications, grouped by the year of the citing work. This is separate from lifetime citation totals grouped by the cited article’s publication year.
The publication filters above define which articles receive the citations. The citation-year range below only controls this chart and the incoming-citation comparison. Removing publication-year filters includes older articles’ incoming citations too.
Annual history available for 70 / 70 selected publications. Supported display window: 2017–2026; 2026 is incomplete. Within a successfully fetched ten-year window, omitted years mean zero. Missing histories and years beyond a saved observation’s window remain unknown (—); partial coverage can understate totals.
Annual-history observations (UTC): 2026-10-21T00:21:59.431718+00:00 — 2026-10-21T00:22:06.169127+00:00. Older observations may be retained after failed or incomplete refreshes.
| Citation year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex · Citations received by year | Publications | Annual history known |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 6 | 70 | 70/70 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 18 | 70 | 70/70 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 18 | 70 | 70/70 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 40 | 70 | 70/70 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 50 | 70 | 70/70 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 64 | 70 | 70/70 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 55 | 70 | 70/70 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 55 | 70 | 70/70 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 42 | 70 | 70/70 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 20 | 70 | 70/70 |
Counts represent citation links, not unique citing papers across a journal: one paper citing two selected articles contributes two links. Older citations outside this window are excluded, so annual sums need not equal lifetime totals. OpenAlex methodology ↗
Publications by publication year. 2026 is an incomplete year.
| Period | Publications |
|---|---|
| 2013 | 1 |
| 2014 | 6 |
| 2015 | 1 |
| 2016 | 13 |
| 2017 | 6 |
| 2018 | 4 |
| 2019 | 7 |
| 2020 | 9 |
| 2021 | 5 |
| 2022 | 3 |
| 2023 | 7 |
| 2024 | 4 |
| 2025 | 2 |
| 2026 | 2 |
Latest Crossref totals for the selected publications; not citations received in the selected years.
Unknown counts are excluded from the mean, median and cited-publication rate.
Same filters, source and counting rules across journals. Descriptive statistics, not a quality ranking.
| Journal / publisher | Publications | Crossref citations | OpenAlex citations | OpenAlex coverage | Crossref mean | Crossref median | Crossref cited %* | Crossref coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| International Journal of Finance & Banking Studies SSBFNET | 70 | 175 | 382 | 70/70 | 2.61 | 1 | 68.7 | 67/70 · 95.7% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
The study examines the bank-specific and macroeconomic determinants of banks profitability in Nigeria analyzing audited financial reports of selected sixteen (16) commercial banks over the period of 2010 to 2015 making up to 96 observations. The study identified that existing studies are sketchy in developing economies even though many studies have emerge in developed economies. The bank profitability is measured by return on assets and return on equity as function of bank-specific and macroeconomic determinants. Using the balanced panel data set, the empirical results of the study shows that capital adequacy and liquidity have a positive and significant effect on bank profitability. However, efficiency ratio have a negative and significant effect on bank profitability. With regards to macroeconomic variable, GDP growth also have a positive and significant impact on banks profitability. The empirical results of the study suggested that banks can improve their profitability through increasing capital and liquidity, decreasing operating cost with conscious effort to maintain transparency in their operations. In addition, a good economic environment for financial institutions foster increase in bank profitability. Hence, the study recommends that further studies can expand the scope while extending to other industries as well.
The aim of the empirical study is to investigate credit risk determinants in banking sectors across three kinds of South Asian economies. An accumulated sample of 105 unbalanced panel data of financial firms over the period of 2000-2015, by applying General Method of Moment (GMM) estimation techniques one-step at the difference in order to identify factors influencing credit risk. This study is inspired by two broad categories of explanatory variables which are bank-specific and macroeconomic. Bank-specific factors influencing unsystematic risk, while macroeconomic factors promoting systematic risk. The study uses a proxy of non-performing loans for credit risk in banking sectors of Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh. The empirical results have been found aligned with theoretical arguments and literature as expected. In comparison, NPLs in Pakistan is greater than India and Bangladesh, while India has the lowest ratio of non-performing loans. The study documents that bank-specific factors (inefficiency, profitability, capital ratio and leverage) have a significant contribution towards credit risk. Further, the study also finds a significant impact of macroeconomic variables on non-performing loans. While, the result in the case of Bangladesh predicts contradictions that have no significant effect on non-performing loans at various levels. The overall results indicate that credit risk is not influenced by only external factors but also affect by internal factors like bad management and skimping etc.
The purpose of this article is to examine the impact of selected internal and external factors on a bank’s profitability. The research investigates the impact of operational size, liquidity, risk appetite, management efficiency, product diversification, concentration, GDP growth and inflation change on the profitability of sample of 4179 European commercial banks for the period between 2011 and 2015. The input data were obtained from the Orbis Focus and the World Bank databases. The determinants were used to construct two models with ROAA and ROAE as a proxies and regression analysis using between groups panel approach was conducted. It has been found that growing economy impacts banks’ profitability positively. It has been robustly confirmed that management efficiency, product diversification, market concentration and inflation result in decreased profitability. The operational size has been found to be negatively linked to changes in net results but was confirmed only with ROAA model. Similarly, statistically significant results with regard to liquidity were found only for ROAA model and the correlation was positive. The strong negative impact of market concentration on profitability is an interesting finding allowing for further exploration of reasons for this unexpected vector of correlation.
This study examines the influence of liquidity on the profitability of Iraqi commercial banks. Five banks based in Iraq namely: North bank, Iraqi Islamic bank, Sumer bank, Dar Es-Salam bank and Babylon bank randomly selected and analyzed for the current study over the period 2005 to 2013. Moreover, annual reports of these banks have studied and the main ratios of profitability and liquidity were calculated. These reports are available at Iraqi Stock Exchange site. The variables that were identified as independent for liquidity were, loan deposit ratio, deposit asset ratio and cash deposit ratio, while return on assets as dependent variable for profitability. The Ordinary Least Square (OLS) model used to examine the impact of liquidity on profitability. The study observes that any increase in liquidity ratios as above mentioned will lead return on asset to increase as well. Depending on this study it could be better for Iraqi banks to keep a balance between liquidity and profitability.
The aim of our research is to investigate the relationship between risk management, corporate governance and performance in lending institutions. Mainly, this research seeks to examine the effect of risk management and some board’s features on financial performance. Empirical analyses are conducted from a sample of 17 Tunisian lending institutions over the period 2002-2011 using an OLS regression. The study shows that board size affect performance significantly. Most importantly, the existence of a risk committee within the institution has a negative and significant effect on performance.
This study examines whether risk asset exposure affects the financial performance of commercial banks in Cameroon, a bank-dominated economy of the Central African Economic and Monetary Community (CEMAC). Risk asset exposure is measured by lending intensity (the loan-to-deposit ratio) and credit expansion (annual loan growth), and performance by return on assets (ROA). The data form a balanced panel of ten commercial banks over 2014–2024, compiled from the prudential reporting system of the Central African Banking Commission (COBAC) as published by Cameroon's National Economic and Financial Committee. Bank fixed-effects regressions with bank-clustered standard errors are complemented by a wild-cluster bootstrap suited to few clusters, Driscoll–Kraay standard errors, lagged regressors, panel Granger non-causality tests and a within–between (Mundlak) decomposition that separates changes in a bank's own exposure from persistent differences between banks. The main findings are that (i) neither lending intensity nor credit expansion is significantly associated with profitability in any specification (bootstrap p = 0.81 and 0.30), and the confidence intervals exclude effects larger than about one percentage point of ROA; (ii) lending intensity is unrelated to profitability both within banks over time and between banks (between-effect bootstrap p = 0.88); and (iii) the COVID-19 years of 2020–2021 were associated with ROA about 0.70 percentage points lower (bootstrap p = 0.009). The results indicate a limited role for lending exposure, while significant bank fixed effects and the COVID-19 coefficient point to persistent bank heterogeneity and common systemic shocks. Because the sample comprises ten banks under a single regulator, the findings should be interpreted with caution.
This paper examines how uninsured deposits influence credit union funding and whether private excess deposit insurance alters the stability, pricing, and lending capacity of uninsured deposits — deposits that exceed the federal deposit insurance limit. Using U.S. credit union Call Report data from 1995–2022, we exploit variation across institution size, insurance regime, and participation in optional private excess deposit insurance. We distinguish between pre-crisis (1995–2007) and post-crisis (2009–2022) periods surrounding the 2008 expansion of federal insurance limits. We document pronounced heterogeneity across the size distribution. For small credit unions, uninsured deposits are limited in scale and are associated with lower loan intensity. In contrast, uninsured deposits play a central funding role for large credit unions, which account for 94% of industry assets and 97% of uninsured deposits. For these institutions, uninsured deposits support lending and command higher funding costs — effects that are significantly moderated by excess deposit insurance, reducing funding costs by approximately 27 basis points during the pre-crisis period. Following 2008, excess insurance participation declines among large institutions but increases modestly among small firms. Overall, excess deposit insurance functions as a partial substitute for federal coverage, stabilizing uninsured funding without increasing delinquency rates — evidence against moral hazard.
This paper focuses on a classic policy trade-off by unraveling the role of financial deregulation in driving financial stability and exploring how the role of regulatory quality can affect this relationship. To this end, this study uses a balanced panel dataset of 73 countries across a period of ten years starting from 2014. The empirical specification utilizes a two-step System GMM approach, accounting for both endogeneity, unobserved heterogeneity issues, and persistence in financial stability. Specifically, financial stability is measured by non-performing loans (NPLs), which represent the level of risk exposure of national banking sectors. The findings reveal that financial freedom leads to higher level of financial instability, proving theoretical predictions of the excessive risk-taking behavior of lending institutions encouraged with financial deregulation. Furthermore, the interaction term between financial freedom and regulatory quality is statistically significant, suggesting that financial deregulation can be compensated by the quality of regulatory environment. The role of the GDP per capita variable used for stabilizing the findings is significant as it represents the resilience of more developed economies. The implications of the results are complex. In a more institutional context, this finding suggests that financial stability is not a direct function of financial freedom but is conditional on institutional capability. Hence, high regulatory quality can mitigate the instability caused by financial freedom, thereby enabling a balanced approach.
This study examines the stock performance of large and small European banks included in the STOXX 600 Banks index in response to three major macroeconomic shocks the COVID-19 pandemic, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank. Employing daily bank stock returns and an event study framework, the analysis measures immediate market reactions through abnormal returns, while subsequent shifts in equity performance are evaluated using volatility, Sharpe ratios, and beta coefficients. The results suggest that large banks tend to exhibit more pronounced short-term losses during shocks compared to smaller banks. In contrast, small banks generally outperform in the medium term following these events, achieving higher risk-adjusted returns despite elevated volatility. Both segments experience increased market correlation and volatility during periods of disruption, indicating heightened systemic risk. Moreover, the type of shock plays a crucial role, with smaller banks often showing greater resilience to localized and geopolitical shocks.
This paper investigates the factors that form bank risks in Bangladeshi state-owned banks. As a representation of bank risk, non-performing loans have been considered the dependent variable for this study. The relevant data have been extracted from six state-owned banks in Bangladesh from 2013 to 2022. The final dataset consists of 60 firm-year observations. The ordinary least square (OLS) regression with robust standard errors model is utilized to find the relationship of bank risks with determinants like asset size, efficiency, liquidity, profitability, leverage ratio, capital adequacy ratio, and loan to asset ratio. The findings say that bank size and loan-to-asset ratio have a highly significant positive relationship with bank risk, whereas profitability, capital adequacy ratio, and bank efficiency have a significant negative association with bank risk. On the other hand, leverage and liquidity are negatively and positively correlated with no statistical significance. To check the study's robustness, another proxy of bank risk, loan loss provision has been used and the results are almost similar. State-owned banks operate in every economy with a different mindset than the general commercial banks. Hence, policymakers should take necessary initiatives based on this study to bring down the high bank risks in state-owned banks in Bangladesh.
Source coverage refers to this result set; a publication may occur in several sources. Sync times refer to contributing journals.
Missing abstracts: 0 · Missing authors: 0 · Missing publication dates: 0 · Dates without day precision: 0
| Source | Most recent successful journal sync | Latest attempt |
|---|---|---|
| crossref | 21 Oct 2026 00:21 UTC · ijfbs | complete · ijfbs · 21 Oct 2026 00:21 UTC |
| ojs-rest | 21 Oct 2026 00:21 UTC · ijfbs | complete · ijfbs · 21 Oct 2026 00:14 UTC |
| oai-pmh | 20 Oct 2026 19:56 UTC · ijfbs | complete · ijfbs · 20 Oct 2026 19:55 UTC |
| openalex-enrichment | 21 Oct 2026 00:22 UTC · ijfbs | complete · ijfbs · 21 Oct 2026 00:21 UTC |