Banking Performance Measurement for Indian Banks Using AHP and TOPSIS

Authors

  • Mihir Dash Alliance University, Bangalore, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32890/ijbf2016.12.2.4

Keywords:

multi-criteria decision modelling, AHP, TOPSIS, factor analysis

Abstract

Multi-criteria decision modelling (MCDM) offers a range of procedures for evaluation problems requiring the ranking of a discrete set of alternatives, including the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). These procedures have been widely applied for banking performance evaluation (Önder & Hepşen, 2013).The present study compared the outcomes of AHP and TOPSIS for evaluation of a sample of 35 Indian banks, including 19 public sector banks and 16 private sector banks. The variables used in the analysis pertained to the financial ratios corresponding to the CAMEL parameters. The weights for different parameters in the CAMEL model were obtained by factor analysis. The results of the study indicated an overall consistency between the rankings, resulting from the models. A significant difference was found in the performance between private sector banks and public sector banks. In particular, banks that were found to be consistently ranked high by both models can be taken as the best performers, and banks that were found to be consistently ranked low by both models can be taken as the worst performers. This would enable regulators and policy makers, on the one hand, to benchmark the performance of banks against that of best performers, and on the other hand, to take steps to improve the performance of worst performers. The results of the study also needed to be examined more carefully to identify the critical performance parameters for banks.

 

References

Babic, Z., Belak, V., & Tomic-Plazibat, N. (1999). Ranking of Croatian Banks according to business efficiency. Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium on Operations Research, Preddvor, Slovenia.

Bayyurt, N. (2013). Ownership effect on bank’s performance: Multi-criteria decision making approaches on foreign and domestic Turkish banks. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 99, 919-928.

Dash, M., & Das, A. (2013). Performance appraisal of Indian banks using CAMELS rating. IUP Journal of Bank Management 12(2), 31-42.

Doumpos, M., & Zopounidis, C. (2011). A multicriteria approach to bank rating. In Evaluation and Decision Models with Multiple Criteria: Case Studies. Bisdorf, R., Dias, L.C., Meyer, P., Mousseau, V., and Pirot, M., from International Handbooks on Information Systems, Springer

Ginevičius, R., & Podviezko, A. (2013). The evaluation of financial stability and soundness of Lithuanian banks. Ekonomska Istraživanja-Economic Research, 26(2), 191-208.

Gupta, R. (2014). An analysis of Indian public sector banks using CAMEL approach. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 16(1), 94-102.

Hunjak, T., & Jacovceviv, D. (2001). AHP-based model for bank performance evaluation and rating. Proceedings of the Sixth ISAHP, Berne, Switzerland.

Ioannidis, C., Pasiouras, F., & Zopounidis, C. (2010). Assessing bank soundness with classification techniques. Omega, 38(5), 345-357.

Kosmidou, K., & Zopounidis, C. (2008). Measurement of bank performance in Greece. South-Eastern Europe Journal of Economics, 6(1), 79-95.

Mareschal, B., & Brans, J. (1991). BANKADVISER: An industrial evaluation system. European Journal of Operational Research, 54, 318-324.

Mareschal, B., & Mertens, D. (1992). BANKS: A multicriteria decision support system for financial evaluation in the international banking sector. Journal of Decision Systems, 1(2/3), 175-189. Önder, E., & Hepşen, A. (2013). Combining Time Series Analysis and Multi Criteria Decision Making Techniques for Forecasting Financial Performance of Banks in Turkey. Proceedings of the International Conference on Applied Business and Economics (ICABE-13), New York, USA. http://ijbf.uum.edu.my

Prasad, K. V. N., Ravinder, G., & Reddy, D.M. (2011). A CAMEL Model Analysis of Public and Private Sector Banks in India. Journal of Banking Financial Services & Insurance Research, 1(5), 50-73.

Raveh, A. (2000). The Greek banking system: Reanalysis of performance. European Journal of Operational Research, 120(3), 525-534.

Sahajwala, R., & van der Bergh, P. (2000). Supervisory risk assessment and early warning systems. Basel Committee on Banking Supervision Working Papers, No. 4, Bank of International Settlements.

Seçme, N. Y, Bayrakdaroglu, A., & Kahraman, C. (2009). Fuzzy performance evaluation in Turkish banking sector using analytic hierarchy process and TOPSIS. Expert Systems with Applications (36), 11699-11709.

Spathis, C., Kosmidou, K., & Doumpos, M. (2002). Assessing profitability factors in the Greek banking system: A multicriteria approach. International Transactions in Operational Research, 9, 517-530.

Stankevičienė, J., & Mencaitė, E. (2012). The evaluation of bank performance using a multi-criteria decision making model: A case study on Lithuanian commercial banks. Technological & Economic Development of Economy, 18(1), 189-205.

Wua, H.-Y., Tzeng, G.-H., & Chen, Y.-H. (2009). A fuzzy MCDM approach for evaluating banking performance based on balanced Scorecard. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 10135-10147.

Zopounidis, C., Despotis, D., & Stavropoulou, E. (1995). Multiattribute evaluation of Greek banking performance. Applied Stochastic Models and Data Analysis, 11(1), 97-107.

Downloads

Published

31-08-2016

How to Cite

Dash, M. (2016). Banking Performance Measurement for Indian Banks Using AHP and TOPSIS. International Journal of Banking and Finance, 12(2), 63-76. https://doi.org/10.32890/ijbf2016.12.2.4

Research impact

Harvested 2026-09-07
3 citations, from OpenAlex — the highest of the sources checked

Counts differ between services because each indexes a different body of literature. None of them is the whole picture.

Identifiers DOI 10.32890/ijbf2016.12.2.4 OpenAlex W2896243449