I.
Introduction:
a) Cambodia
economy overview
According to the NBC 2013 report the Cambodia economy is expected
to growth slightly to 7.6% due to the sustained agricultural growth, increase
in the number of tourism, garment export growth, and gradual recovery of
construction. Cambodia have shifted from the low income country to the
low-middle income country throughout the past two decades due to the high
economic growth which raise Cambodia’s GDP per capita to $1,036 in 2013.
In 2013 the year-to-year inflation increased from 1.8% to
4.6% by the end of the year. During 2013 the exchange rate of Khmer Riel
against the US dollar was relatively stable with the average exchange rate of
4,043 Riel per US dollar. Cambodia has the foreign reserve of $4,104 million
excluding the 12,436.07951 kilograms of gold and SDR 68.37 million. Cambodia
has 49 banks, which consist of 36 commercial banks and 9 specialize banks.
In 2013 the deposit was relatively stable with the average
of 3.4% for US dollar and 5% for Khmer Riel (Figure 1). For the lending rate in
2013 the USD loans decrease slightly to 10.72% while KHR loan remained around
11.4% throughout the year (Figure 2).
b)
ACLEDA overview
ACLEDA bank Plc. is a public limited company. It was found
in 1993, as a national NGO for micro and small enterprises’ development, which
form under the bank and financial institution law of Cambodia. Accordingly in
2000 ACLEDA was licensed as a specialize bank by National Bank of Cambodia and
in 2003 got licensed, as commercial bank. Currently ACLEDA bank Plc. pools of
financial product include E-banking, credit, deposits, cash management, trade
finance, fund transfer, financial lease, life insurance, money exchange and
other banking services. By the end of November 2014 it has 253 branches throughout
Cambodia (Table1).
At the end of the financial year 2013, ACLEDA had the total
assets of $2,297,745,201 and total liabilities of $1,927,560,563. While the
total deposit was $1,451,478,315, the loan and advance of ACLEDA was $1,439,487,576.
The gross income was $252,677,339. ACLEDA net profit after tax was $77,761,428.
However, the earning per share was $0.4293, which is pretty low.
II.
Financial Statement Analysis
This part of the report will discuss and provide
specific detail to items which are considered as the KPI and have noticeably
changes from 2011 to 2013. To begin with, the increase in economic growth rate
and stability in Cambodia, lead people to feel confidence on banking sector.
Depositors start to put their money in safer place, bank. At the same time,
deposit is one of the main factors which cause Balance with Central Bank to
increase steadily in both proportion to total assets and dollar amount. In
Balance with Central Bank consists of reserve requirement, current accounts,
fixed deposits and capital guarantee but reserve requirement covers the largest
proportion, around 40 %. These three years reserve requirement also moved up
speedily due to high deposits (12.5% of customers' deposits).
Another item which had huge change is Investment
in Subsidiaries which increased around 80% due to high investment for bank
operations in Lao and Myanmar. At the same time, Property and equipment also
increased more than 200% as a result of increasing branches which requires more
land and building for their office location.
By increasing in their operations, ACLEDA bank
borrowed massive amount of money to meet the growth of their assets. They need
money to construct new building for branch expansion in both provinces and
cities. The composition of net interest margin fluctuated around 60% due to the
mismatch of growth rate between interest income and interest expense. Despite
the fact that amount of loans to borrowers and interest income speeded up but
the growth rate is quite low.
Due to more entrants in bank sector,
competitions in banking sector are really strong. Borrowers might want to make
rational decision by going to a bank which offered low interest. This issue is
also applied to deposits from customers and interest expense with rate
dropping.
However, growth rate of interest expense tends
to be higher than interest income because of the loans from that they got from
ACLEDA NGO and IFC for expansion. Thus, rate of net interest income dropped
slightly in each year. Due to the declining growth rat of loans and deposits,
the income that the bank got from charging services also declined.
In balance sheet, total equities obviously
changed because of growing in share capital. Normally, share capital covers the
largest proportion and has biggest changes with 137%. ACLEDA injected share
capital by more than USD 100 million which is contributed from stock dividend
of bank and cash from shareholders. Reason for large raise in ACLEDA share
capital is the strong growth in its core domestic and oversea business with
loans and other financial services and total assets. In addition, this build
public trusts by demonstrating that they have strong shareholders who are ready
to support bank and create confidence to protect customers' savings. Despite a
little mismatch of interest growth rate, ACLEDA is able to generate profit.
Each year, net profit margin is growing at least 1%, meaning it has done well
performance. They manage to use their revenue to cover all expenses without
causing any loss.
III. Profitability Ratios
To
better analyze the profitability ratio of ACLEDA, we calculate and compare the
bank’s ratios to the industries average. We take only the top 4 banks in
Cambodia in term of assets to calculate the industrial average. The key
indicators include the following:
·
ACLEDA
Bank had been able to increase its return on assets (ROA) during this last
three years. The ROA for ACLEDA Bank was 3.32% in 2011, 3.34% in 2012, and
3.38% in 2013 (Table 4, line 2), while the ROA for the banking industry was
2.31% in 2011, 2.38% in 2012, and 2.46% in 2013 (Table 5, line 2). ACLEDA Bank
had been able to generate higher ROA than its peer competitors. This reflects
the effectiveness of ACLEDA Bank’s managers in generating net profits out of
the assets controlled by the bank.
·
ACLEDA’s
net interest margin (NIM) was substantially above the industrial average and it
had been fluctuating around 7.72% from 2011 to 2013 (Table 4, line 3). None of
the top banks in Cambodia had been able to generate such a high NIM like ACLEDA
Bank. The high NIM margin indicates the efficiency of ACLEDA Bank’s managers in
raising funds at low cost and making loans at a high rate. NIM is vital for the
bank’s profitability; the larger the NIM, the more profits the bank can
make.
·
The net
non-interest margin of ACELDA Bank was highly negative (Table 4, line 4). This
reflects that the bank’s non-interest income was much lower than the bank’s
non-interest expense. The bank had spent excessively on personal and general
administrative expenses, which made its non-interest expense to be far much
higher than its non-interest income. The non-interest expense of this bank was
3.5 times bigger that its non-interest income in 2013. ACLEDA Bank’s net
non-interest margin had been fluctuating around -3.5% during the last three
years, while the net non-interest margin for industrial average was around
-1.8%. ACLEDA Bank’s management should find ways in order to make its
non-interest expense in line with its non-interest income.
·
The bank’s
earnings per share (EPS) experienced a decline from $0.63 in 2011 to $0.42 in
2013 (Table 4, line 5). The reduction in EPS was due to the huge increase in
share outstanding. ACELDA Bank tried to issue more shares in order to increase
the public confidence and to raise additional capital to meet the growth of its
assets.
·
The
earning spreads of ACLEDA Bank were 8.79% in 2011, 8.67% in 2012, and 8.25% in
2013 (Table 4, line 6), while the earning spreads of the industry average were
5.77% in 2011, 5.65% in 2012, and 5.73% in 2013 (Table 5, line 6). ACLEDA
Bank’s earning spreads had been higher than the industrial average for the last
three years; this reflects the effectiveness of ACLEDA Bank’s management in
borrowing and lending money. However, greater competition tended to squeeze the
earning spread of ACLEDA Bank from time to time.
·
The net
operating margin of ACLEDA Bank was above its peer group of institutions-for
example, rising to 4.25% in 2013(Table 4, line 7) versus 3.10% for peer
institutions for the same year (Table 5, line 7). The bank had been very
efficient in its operations and controlling expenses. In other words, the bank
was able to generate more revenues per dollar of sale than its peer competitors.
·
ACLEDA
Bank’s operating efficiency ratio was higher than the industrial average. The
bank management was not very efficient in controlling the bank’s operating
expenses. For every dollar the bank earned from its operations, the bank spent
back for more than $0.6 (Table 4, line 8).
·
Besides
ACLEDA Bank, none of the banks in Cambodia had been able to generate more than
20% of return on equity (ROE) (Table 4, line 9). ACLEDA Bank had done
exceptionally well in generating returns for its shareholders. However, the
bank’s ROE had declined from time to time. In order understand why the ROE of
ACLEDA Bank had declined from time to time, we need to break down ROE into its
key components.
1)The first most direct ROE relations is:
ROE = ROA x Average assets/Average equity
==> We can calculate ACLEDA Bank’s
ROE as follow:
2011: ROE = 0.0332 x 8.32 = 27.61%
2012: ROE = 0.0334 x 7.56 = 25.22%
2013: ROE = 0.0338 x 6.20 = 21.01%
We
can see ACLEDA Bank’s ROE decreased from time to time due to the drop in
financial leverage. ACLEDA tried to
increase its capital during this last couple of years in order to meet the
growth of its assets and increase the public confidence.
2)The second equation that is also related to ROE is:
ROE = Net profit
margin x Asset utilization x Equity multiplier
We
already did the calculation for this equation in Table 1, from line 9 to line
12. As the results suggest, there are several factors that cause the ROE of
ACLEDA Bank to decrease between 2011 and 2013. First, the bank’s asset
utilization ratio had decreased from 11.56% in 2011 to 11% in 2013. This
illustrates that the yield from assets of this bank had deteriorated somewhat.
Second, the bank had reduced its equity multiplier from 8.32 times in 2011 to
6.21 times in 2013. However, ACLEDA Bank was able to increase its net profit
margin during this last couple of years. This reflects the effectiveness of
ACLEDA Bank’s management in controlling expenses and maximising revenues. The
increase in net profit margin was smaller than the reduction in asset
utilization ratio and equity multiplier together, which made the ROE to
decrease.
3)Another equation that is link to ROE is:
ROE = Tax Management Efficiency x Expense control
efficiency x Asset
management efficiency x Fund management
efficiency
We
also did the calculation for this equation in Table 1, from line 13 to 17.
There are two main factors that caused the bank’s ROE to decrease between 2011
and 2013: a reduction in asset management efficiency and funds management
efficiency. The asset management efficiency of ACLEDA Bank decreased by 0.56%
from 2011 to 2013. The bank had decreased its ability to generate higher return
from its assets overtime. The bank also decreased the use of financial leverage
and as we learnt in our bank management course, the higher the financial
leverage, the potential return the bank can make. Because of the reduction in
financial leverage, the bank also reduced the return to its shareholders.
IV.
Peer
Assessment
So far, we have looked at the performance of ACLEDA Bank in
term of their profitability any trends. However, as the competition in the
banking industry is becoming more and more intense, the profitability analysis
alone may not be enough, the peer assessment is equally crucial for ALCO
committee to understand ACLEDA’s strengths and weaknesses in comparison to its
peers. Therefore, in this section, we will compare the performance of ACLEDA
with the other big 3, namely: ANZ Royal, Cambodia Public Bank and CANADIA Bank.
Our analysis will provide the bigger picture of performance based on 5 big
criteria: Capital adequacy, Asset quality, Management capability, Earning
ability and liquidity position.
1.
Capital
Adequacy
Capital adequacy is one of the prominent indicators of a
bank’s finance health. It is extremely useful for a bank to conserve and
protect stakeholder’s confidence and preventing the bank from being bankrupt.
In addition, it also reflects whether the bank has enough capital to bear
unexpected loss arising in the future and bank leverage.
According to the result, the average ACLED’s debt to equity
ratio and equity to asset ratio is 6.75 times and 13.13% respectively. This
indicates the financial health of ACLEDA to bear any unexpected loss. However,
the financial leverage of ACLEDA keep declining for the last four years,
resulting from additional capital injection.
2.
Assets
Quality
The quality of assets is an important measure to examine the
degree of financial strengths of commercial bank. Because the asset of
commercial bank is mainly comprised of loan, thus in judging the quality of
assets, we use two indicators: Non-performing loan to gross loan and Provision
for loan loss to gross loan.
According to above table, for the last 4 years, ACLEDA has
maintaining its non-performing loan to gross loans and provision for loan loss
to gross loan at the rate of 0.355% and 1.20% of total gross loan respectively.
This figure illustrates the ability of ACLEDA to effectively screen out good
from bad customers. Furthermore, most of the ACLEDA’s loan portfolios are in
good quality. Comparatively speaking, ACLEDA perform better at maintain its
loss arising from default of loan than its peers.
3.
Managerial
Capability
Managerial competency and capability are crucial for
survival and growth of a bank. A good management team can lead the bank to
growth and earn profit while the bad one can potentially harmful to the bank in
the long term. In this setting, we will use four criteria to judge the
managerial capability: Asset and profit growth rate, and loan to deposit ratio.
From 2010 to 2013, based on data available, we can see
ACLEDA’s asset growth on average 26.13% per year, outperformed their peers. In
addition, the profit growth at the rate of 77%, but such figure must be
interpreted carefully, because the economy has just recovered from downturn,
and most of commercial bank made negative profit during 2008 – 2010, therefore,
high average growth should be interpreted as strong recovery. Moreover, average loan to deposit ratio of
ACELDA is 91.43%, higher than its peers and industry average. These figure
reflect ACLEDA’s ability convert its deposit to loan and maximize profits.
4.
Earning
Ability
Because the end goal of a business is to maximize
shareholder’s value, thus earning ability should be considered as one the most
important criteria when judging the performance the bank.
According to table, there is the upward trend in both
ACLEDA’s ROE and ROA which on average ROE is roughly 23.55% and average ROA is
$3, outperform its peer and industry average as a whole. In addition, ACLEDA’S
average EPS is $0.503 and Net interest to total asset is 7.7$ per $100 of
asset. These reflect ACLEDA’s ability to convey the profits to its shareholder
and efficiency use of resource to convert into profit opportunity.
5.
Liquidity
Position
For any business, but specifically for banking industry,
liquidity is like the blood’s vessels, without it, bank can fail instantly due
to bank run, therefore, bank must maintain adequate level of liquid asset to
guard any short term demand.
According to the table, average
liquidity ratio of ACLEDA is 27.28%, lower than its peers as well as industry
average. However, a close look might see that there is an upward trend in this
ratio, reflecting ACLEDA’s determination to boost liquidity. It is also
worthwhile to point out that, although ACLEDA’s liquidity is lower than its
peers but 27% of liquidity is generally speaking more than enough, plus that
with lower liquidity, ACLEDA can boost its profits.
V.
Risk Management
The following categorized the
top 3 risks that could potentially impact the performance of ACLEDA bank as of
the year 2013.
a)
Credit risk:
Credit risk is the risk that counterparty will cause a
financial loss to the bank by failing to discharge an obligation. Credit risk
is the most important risk for the bank’s business. As for the analysis on the
credit risk exposure of ACLEDA, we found that while the average nonperforming
assets to total loan is %2.63 in 2013, the ratio for ACLEDA is only limited to
%0.55. In accordance with Prakas No. B7-09-074, non-performing assets are
income generating assets including loans and advances that are past due for 90
days or more. Thus this relatively low ratio suggested that ACLEDA is more
efficient in managing and collecting loans and advances than its peers. In
addition, over 95% of ACLEDA loans are secured with some sort of securities.
Simply stated, their credit risk exposure is lower than the industry.
Nonetheless, if we look at the trend of ACLEDA
non-performing assets to total loan ratio for the last 3 years, we could see
that this ratio has been increasing rapidly (Table 6). The ratio was at 0.17%
in 2011 then rose to 0.27% in 2012 and finally increases more than double to
0.55% in 2013. This increase in the nonperforming assets means that ACLEDA has
been to some extend liberalized its credit process and make loans to customer
with relatively higher risk profile. This ultimately increases the bank credit
risk exposure.
It is also interesting to see that while the nonperforming
assets of the bank has been increasing significantly, ACLEDA ratio of provision
of loan loss to total loans during the past 3 years have been relatively stable
(Table 7). Thus despite having higher credit risk exposure, the bank does not
seem to be prepared for the potential loan losses at all.
b)
Liquidity Risk:
Liquidity could also
potentially be one of the concerns for ACLEDA as well. By calculating the ratio
of the ACLEDA
total liquid asset (cash on hand + balance with central bank + balance with
other bank) to ACLEDA total assets, we can evaluate the liquidity of the bank.
A low ratio suggests a lower liquidity consideration within the bank. As shown
in the table 8, the ratio has been increasing throughout the 4 years period, which
suggested the increase concern on liquidity by management.
However, comparing to the banking sector in Cambodia, in
2013 the liquidity ratio of ACLEDA is underperforming the industry average of
by approximately 3.5% (Table 8). This conveys a rather active behavior by
ACLEDA as other banks in the industry tend to be more conservative in their
portfolio due to the risk profile of Cambodia.
Further
breaking down of ACLEDA financial liabilities by maturity and the asset held
for managing such liabilities can be seen in table 9. The information provided
suggested that the bank could potentially face with short term liquidity need
as its asset held for managing liquidity is lower than the financial
liabilities of up to 3 month of maturity. Although this may seem to be normal
for a banking operation, borrowing short and lending long, it can be
destructive in the context of Cambodia due to seasonal abnormality. As an
instance, during the 2013 election, it was reported that more than $600 million
was flooded out the banking system due to fears of post-election chaos in which
set off panic and mass withdrawals. This is a part of country risk and although
it can be predictable to certain extend, failure to incorporate this into
liquidity management policy of the bank can be disastrous.
c)
Interest rate risk:
Cash flow interest rate risk is the risk that the future
cash flows of a financial instrument will fluctuate because of changes in
market interest rates. As show in ACLEDA note to the financial statement, the
bank have been facing with a positive interest rate repricing gap for the past
years with $266,069,822
in 2012 increasing to $341,880,466 in the year 2013. Theatrically speaking,
this would mean that the bank is likely to be facing with an increase net in
interest income if the market interest rate were to increase since then the
interest income from earning assets will outstrip the interest expense of the
liabilities.
This
works relatively well if the market interest rate trend in Cambodia is expected
to be moving in an upward trend. Nonetheless breaking down ACLEDA interest rate
repricing gap in the 2013 into different maturity bucket, would yield a rather
different result (Table 10):
Disregarding
the non-interest bearing bucket, it is apparent that the bank is liability
sensitive over the coming month and over the next 12 months, and then become
asset sensitive in the later period (1-5 years and over 5 years maturity).
Logically speaking, the management positioned the bank for falling interest
over the next 12 months and for rising horizon over longer horizon.
What we can infer from this information however
is that the possibility of an increase in interest rate over the next 12 months
could potentially decrease the net interest income of the bank. Suppose the
market interest rate will increase by 2% over the next 1 month. This will
produce a loss for the bank equivalent to (+0.02)x(-104,244,304) or
-2084886.08$. This represents the potential risk that the bank could face due
to the fluctuation in the interest rate.
The issue is even more jeopardizing since the
management of ACLEDA at this stage does not have a policy to set limits on the
level of mismatch of interest rate repricing that may be undertaken, but rather
only monitor the mismatch. In addition, the management does not state a clear
counter measurement that can be used to protect earning in the case of
unexpected change in interest rate. Combine with the fact that the current
Cambodia financial market is underdeveloped thus limit the use of hedging
instrument such as future contract; it is even more burdening for management to
hedge against such risk.
VI. Conclusion and Recommendation:
a. SWOT Analysis
Based
on the above analysis, we summarize the finding into the following SWOT
Strength:
·
Strong and leading position
in the country
·
Large established customer
base
·
Good credit control
·
Have a lot of capital
|
Opportunity:
·
Expansion into ASEAN markets (41 in
Lao and 6 in Myanmar)
·
Number of
Cambodians has a bank account keeps increasing
·
M&A to further
increase market shares
·
E-banking
|
Weakness:
·
Inefficient in controlling operating
expense
·
low financial leverage ratio
·
Weak liquidity position
· no
policy to limit ISGAP
|
Threat:
·
Increase competitions in
the future
·
No parent company
·
Increase credit risk
exposure
·
Regulatory changes
·
Political risk
|
b. Recommendations
ACLEDA Bank had spent
excessively on personal, general and administrative expenses, which made its
net non-interest income to be highly negative and its operating efficiency
ratio higher than other banks. ACLEDA Bank’s managers should try to find ways
such as outsourcing some of its works to other companies and/or hire more part
time employees to cut the bank’s operating expenses. The bank’s ROE had
experienced a decline in recent years due to the reduction of financial
leverage ratio by the bank. In order to maintain or increase its ROE, we would
recommend ACLEDA Bank to increases its financial leverage ratio. The higher the
financial ratio, the higher the potential return the bank can make. Cambodians
now have increased their confidence in the banking sector and the political
system in Cambodia has also been improving, so the bank should not be too
conservative than even before.
With the issue of risk, in
order for the bank to be more prepare for the default of loans, especially
since the bank seem to be liberalizing its loan process, ACLEDA management can
look to increase the yearly subtraction of loan loss provision. This would
decrease the magnitude to which bad loan can affect the bank. In term of
liquidity management, although ACLEDA is underperforming its peers, it is not
by a significant amount. Plus this is rather justified if interest income
increase accordingly. Yet the pressing matter would be liquidity management
during abnormal periods. As for Cambodia, this is highly visible especially
during the election period where lack of public confidence in the banking
industry led to high deposit withdrawal. Although the political condition
within the country is improving, this risk should not be neglected. Since
ACLEDA has no parent company and since domestic bank will be likely to be
squeeze during such an event, management team can develop a system for an
easier international borrowing. We would also recommend that ACLEDA management
team forecast the expected rate of deposit outflow during such event and manage
the needed liquidity accordingly. For the bank interest rate risk exposure, since
the underdeveloped financial market prevents the possibilities of hedging
instrument, we recommend that ACLEDA adopt a rather defensive strategy to
interest rate change by developing policies that limit the mismatch of the
interest sensitive gap, as soon as possible,
Appendix:
Figure
1: Deposit Rate, Cambodia
Figure
2: Lending Rate, Cambodia
Table
1: ACLEDA branch network expansion history
Balance Sheet
|
2013
|
2012
|
2011
|
Assets
|
|||
Cash on hand
|
6.25%
|
7.47%
|
8.02%
|
Balances with the Central Bank
|
23.07%
|
19.99%
|
16.16%
|
Balances with other banks
|
3.22%
|
4.46%
|
5.78%
|
Loans and advances to customers
|
62.65%
|
64.52%
|
66.55%
|
Other assets
|
1.08%
|
1.06%
|
1.01%
|
Investment in subsidiaries
|
0.97%
|
0.66%
|
0.81%
|
Property and equipment
|
2.10%
|
0.96%
|
1.02%
|
Intangible assets
|
0.41%
|
0.53%
|
0.37%
|
Deferred tax assets
|
0.24%
|
0.33%
|
0.28%
|
Other investments
|
0.01%
|
0.01%
|
0.01%
|
Total assets
|
100.00%
|
100.00%
|
100.00%
|
Liabilities
|
|||
Due to other banks
|
8.34%
|
4.10%
|
3.12%
|
Deposits from customers
|
63.17%
|
72.46%
|
74.04%
|
Other liabilities
|
2.03%
|
2.18%
|
1.86%
|
Borrowings
|
4.44%
|
2.49%
|
2.31%
|
Subordinated debts
|
4.72%
|
3.42%
|
4.44%
|
Provision for income tax
|
0.67%
|
0.83%
|
0.84%
|
Employee benefits
|
0.52%
|
1.29%
|
1.35%
|
Total liabilities
|
83.89%
|
86.77%
|
87.97%
|
Equities
|
|||
Share capital
|
8.08%
|
5.93%
|
5.27%
|
General reserve
|
4.65%
|
3.96%
|
3.43%
|
Retain earnings
|
3.38%
|
3.34%
|
3.32%
|
Total equities
|
16.11%
|
13.23%
|
12.03%
|
Total liabilities and equities
|
100.00%
|
100.00%
|
100.00%
|
Table
2: ACLEDA Common Size Balance Sheet 2011-2013
2013
|
2012
|
2011
|
|
Interest income
|
88.51%
|
88.41%
|
84.55%
|
Interest expense
|
-20.28%
|
-18.96%
|
-16.77%
|
Net interest income
|
68.23%
|
69.44%
|
67.78%
|
Provision for loan losses
|
-2.20%
|
-2.22%
|
-2.16%
|
Net interest income after provision for loan losses
|
66.03%
|
67.23%
|
65.62%
|
Fee and commission income
|
9.91%
|
11.13%
|
12.81%
|
Fee and commission expense
|
-0.26%
|
-0.17%
|
-0.26%
|
Net fee and commission income
|
9.65%
|
10.96%
|
12.55%
|
Other income
|
1.58%
|
0.47%
|
2.65%
|
Personnel expenses
|
-24.65%
|
-27.90%
|
-28.23%
|
General and administrative expenses
|
-10.36%
|
-10.93%
|
-12.37%
|
Depreciation charge
|
-2.72%
|
-2.30%
|
-3.51%
|
Amortization charge
|
-0.86%
|
-0.63%
|
-0.74%
|
-37.00%
|
-41.29%
|
-42.20%
|
|
Profit before income tax
|
38.68%
|
36.89%
|
35.97%
|
Income tax expenses
|
-7.90%
|
-7.27%
|
-7.26%
|
Profit for the year
|
30.77%
|
29.62%
|
28.72%
|
Table
3: ACLEDA Common Size Income Statement 2011-2013
Table
4: ACLEDA Profitability Ratio 2011-2013
Table
5: Industries Average Profitability Ratio 2011-2013
2013
|
2012
|
2011
|
|
Non-performing assets
|
$8,065,344
|
$3,347,016
|
$1,703,556
|
Total loan and lease
|
$1,468,091,287
|
$1,253,744,486
|
$1,006,603,896
|
NPA/Total loans
|
0.55%
|
0.27%
|
0.17%
|
growth
|
105.79%
|
57.74%
|
Table
6: ACLEDA NPA to Total loans
2013
|
2012
|
2011
|
|
Provision of loan loss
|
$5,570,677
|
$4,759,364
|
$3,706,112
|
Total loan and lease
|
1,468,091,287
|
1,253,744,486
|
1,006,603,896
|
PLL/Total loans
|
0.38%
|
0.38%
|
0.37%
|
Table
7: ACLEDA PLL to Total loans
2013
|
2012
|
2011
|
2010
|
|
Total liquid assets/Total assets
|
32.54%
|
31.93%
|
29.96%
|
23.70%
|
Industry average
|
36%
|
Table
8: ACLEDA Total liquid assets to Total assets
Up to 1 month
|
1 to 3 month
|
3 to 12 month
|
1 to 5 years
|
Over 5 years
|
total
|
|
Total financial liabilities
|
928,178
|
210,413
|
506,466
|
289,505
|
33,127
|
1,967,689
|
Assets held for managing liquidity
|
658,257
|
202,118
|
562,225
|
863,880
|
292,198
|
2,578,678
|
Table
9: ACLEDA Liquidity Exposure, 2013 (in thousand USD)
Maturity Bucket
|
interest sensitive assets
|
interest sensitive liability
|
size of gap
|
sensitivity
|
cumulative gap
|
Non-interest bearing
|
476,249,239
|
237,797,325
|
238,451,914
|
Asset
|
238,451,914
|
Up to 1 month
|
370,538,559
|
713,234,777
|
-342,696,218
|
Liability
|
-104,244,304
|
1 to 3 months
|
166,906,755
|
201,282,734
|
-34,375,979
|
Liability
|
-138,620,283
|
3 to 12 months
|
443,699,138
|
516,621,445
|
-72,922,307
|
Liability
|
-211,542,590
|
1 to 5 years
|
695,487,592
|
212,898,795
|
482,588,797
|
Asset
|
271,046,207
|
Over 5 years
|
81,234,988
|
10,400,729
|
70,834,259
|
Asset
|
341,880,466
|
Table
10: ACLEDA ISGAP by Maturity Bucket, 2013
Bank
|
Debt-Equity Ratio (times)
|
||||
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
Average
|
|
ACLEDA
|
7.97
|
7.31
|
6.53
|
5.2
|
6.7525
|
ANZ ROYAL
|
7.16
|
7.3
|
7.53
|
7.47
|
7.365
|
CAMBODIA PUBLIC
|
4.16
|
3.6
|
3.8
|
3.52
|
3.77
|
CANADIA
|
6.96
|
7.15
|
6.65
|
6.33
|
6.7725
|
Table
11: Debt Equity Ratio 2011-2013
Bank
|
Equity to Asset Ratio (%)
|
||||
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
Average
|
|
ACLEDA
|
11.15
|
12.03
|
13.23
|
16.11
|
13.13
|
ANZ ROYAL
|
11.84
|
12.03
|
11.71
|
11.79
|
11.8425
|
CAMBODIA PUBLIC
|
18.98
|
21.31
|
20.43
|
21.69
|
20.6025
|
CANADIA
|
12.57
|
12.17
|
13.03
|
13.59
|
12.84
|
Table
12: Equity to Asset Ratio 2011 - 2013
Bank
|
NPL to Total Loan Ratio
(%)
|
||||
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
Average
|
|
ACLEDA
|
0.43
|
0.17
|
0.27
|
0.55
|
0.355
|
ANZ ROYAL
|
4.85
|
3.67
|
4.2
|
3.1
|
3.955
|
CAMBODIA PUBLIC
|
3.37
|
3.04
|
3.04
|
1.82
|
2.8175
|
CANADIA
|
5.92
|
5.3
|
5.6
|
4.99
|
5.4525
|
Table
13: NPL to Gross loans
Bank
|
PLL to total loan (%)
|
||||
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
Average
|
|
ACLEDA
|
1.26
|
1.1
|
1.17
|
1.28
|
1.2025
|
ANZ ROYAL
|
3.27
|
2.38
|
3.29
|
2.42
|
2.84
|
CAMBODIA PUBLIC
|
2.18
|
2.69
|
2.92
|
2.44
|
2.5575
|
CANADIA
|
4.64
|
3.63
|
3.59
|
3.61
|
3.8675
|
Table
14: PLL to Gross loans
Bank
|
Asset Growth rate
|
||||
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
Average
|
|
ACLEDA
|
28.38
|
28.09
|
28.35
|
20.42
|
26.31
|
ANZ ROYAL
|
17.6
|
14.9
|
18.89
|
18.56
|
17.4875
|
CAMBODIA PUBLIC
|
6.3
|
0.16
|
17.88
|
5.63
|
7.4925
|
CANADIA
|
42.59
|
21.57
|
22.21
|
15.84
|
25.5525
|
Table
15: Assets Growth rate
Bank
|
Profit Growth rate
|
||||
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
Average
|
|
ACLEDA
|
172.27
|
86.62
|
28.96
|
22.17
|
77.505
|
ANZ ROYAL
|
276.08
|
46.91
|
3.36
|
47.15
|
93.375
|
CAMBODIA PUBLIC
|
7.72
|
71.67
|
18.03
|
5.26
|
25.67
|
CANADIA
|
-25.6
|
53.43
|
53.03
|
10.07
|
22.7325
|
Table
16: Profit Growth rate
Bank
|
Loan to Deposit ratio (%)
|
||||
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
Average
|
|
ACLEDA
|
83.22
|
90.89
|
90.84
|
100.77
|
91.43
|
ANZ ROYAL
|
58.02
|
57.35
|
52.17
|
51.48
|
54.755
|
CAMBODIA PUBLIC
|
70.93
|
77.17
|
74.37
|
78.57
|
75.26
|
CANADIA
|
59.97
|
68.11
|
65.9
|
75.7
|
67.42
|
Table
17: Loans to Deposits
Bank
|
ROE (%)
|
||||
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
Average
|
|
ACLEDA
|
20.4
|
27.6
|
25.2
|
21
|
23.55
|
ANZ ROYAL
|
10.94
|
14.38
|
12.68
|
15.67
|
13.4175
|
CAMBODIA PUBLIC
|
7.25
|
11.06
|
11.56
|
10.84
|
10.1775
|
CANADIA
|
11.58
|
15.09
|
17.65
|
16.07
|
15.0975
|
Table
18: ROE
Bank
|
ROA ($ per 100$ of asset)
|
||||
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
Average
|
|
ACLEDA
|
2.04
|
3.28
|
3.32
|
3.36
|
3
|
ANZ ROYAL
|
1.34
|
1.73
|
1.54
|
1.91
|
1.63
|
CAMBODIA PUBLIC
|
1.38
|
2.36
|
2.36
|
2.35
|
2.1125
|
CANADIA
|
1.46
|
1.84
|
2.3
|
2.19
|
1.9475
|
Table
19: ROA
Bank
|
EPS
|
||||
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
Average
|
|
ACLEDA
|
0.3754
|
0.6329
|
0.5744
|
0.4293
|
0.503
|
ANZ ROYAL
|
0.1135
|
0.1678
|
0.17
|
0.25
|
0.175325
|
CAMBODIA PUBLIC
|
0.156
|
0.2639
|
0.31
|
0.32
|
0.262475
|
CANADIA
|
0.37
|
0.21
|
0.27
|
0.28
|
0.2825
|
Table
20: EPS
Bank
|
Net Interest / Total
Asset
|
||||
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
Average
|
|
ACLEDA
|
7.64
|
7.83
|
7.81
|
7.5
|
7.695
|
ANZ ROYAL
|
3.67
|
3.59
|
3.11
|
2.98
|
3.3375
|
CAMBODIA PUBLIC
|
4.28
|
4.17
|
3.52
|
3.8
|
3.9425
|
CANADIA
|
2.73
|
2.91
|
2.3
|
3.76
|
2.925
|
Table
21: Net interest to Total Asset
Bank
|
Liquid Asset / total
asset
|
||||
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
Average
|
|
ACLEDA
|
23.7
|
20.92
|
31.96
|
32.54
|
27.28
|
ANZ ROYAL
|
37.81
|
36.3
|
43.59
|
44.46
|
40.54
|
CAMBODIA PUBLIC
|
29.14
|
26.52
|
30.42
|
28.8
|
28.72
|
CANADIA
|
40.24
|
38.12
|
40.82
|
37
|
39.045
|
Table
22: Liquid Asset to Total Asset
No comments:
Post a Comment