BEAM065 Bank Management
Coursework 2 (60% of the mark for this module) Submission
Deadline: 1st May. Word limit: 3,000.
This assignment consists of two options. Both options are worth 100 marks.
YOU NEED TO CHOOSE EITHER OPTION 1 OR OPTION 2.
Option 1
Using data from Compustat for a large sample of banks (at least 50) and over a period of at least 5 years, examine the determinants of bank dividend payouts:
- Fama and French (2001) hypothesis
- Risk-shifting theory
- Signalling theory
- Life-cycle theory
As proxies for dividend payouts, you can use any (or all) of the following variables:
- Dividend-to-asset ratio
- Dividend-to-equity ratio
- Dividend payout ratio
Or you can use dividend payout dummy variables as follows:
- Dividend pay dummy
- Dividend increase dummy
- Dividend decrease dummy
- Dividend omission dummy
In your analysis, you can consider different dimensions/variables, e.g., bankcapital, bank size, deposits, and any other, following the relevant literature.
Moreover, you can use a variety of specifications (as many as you want, e.g., large banks and small banks or different periods). You should also discuss your results by comparing them with those in the relevant literature. Finally, you should discuss the potential pitfalls of the methodology used (if any).
(100 marks)
(no more than 3,000 words)
IMPORTANT: For your analysis you MUST use STATA. The reference list, tables (including notes and titles of the tables) and figures (including notes and titles of the tables) do NOT count towards the word limit. You do NOT need an introduction or conclusion in your report, but you can divide your report into three different sections, one to describe briefly your methodology, one for your dataset (e.g, database used and sampleselection), and one for the discussion of the results.
Suggested structure for the report:
1.1 Methodology
1.2 Data
1.3 Discussion of the results
Option 2
Download the annual reports of two banks, “Bank X” and “Bank Y”, for the last 5 years. These two banks must be headquartered in the same country and must be competitors in at least one line of business (e.g., they engage in “retail banking” activities). Then, compare the two banks in terms of:
a) Overall performance and its main drivers
b) Risk profile
c) Corporate governance structure
d) Dividend payout policy (if any)
e) International activities (if any)
f) Funding strategies
g) Hedging strategies (if any)
(100 marks)
(no more than 3,000 words)
IMPORTANT: The reference list does NOT count towards the word limit. You do NOT need an introduction or conclusion in your essay.
Further guidelines
This assignment requires you to focus on the concepts and theories developed in weeks 1 to 10, and is related to the ILOs 1-2, 4- 10. You are expected to read all of the relevant core academic material on ELE. Evidence of reading optional articles will be rewarded if it improves the quality of your answers. The marking criteria are stated in Appendix A below.
IMPORTANT: Academic misconduct
The material you submit must be your own work and written in your own words. Where you have used quoted material, you must make full reference to it.
You might be asked to send the data used in your analysis to the Module Leader (Dr. Thaer Alhalabi), along with any other file that you might have used for your data analysis (e.g., Excel file, STATA do-file or log file). Dr. Thaer Alhalabi might also ask you to explain how you ran the regressions, either via email or during an online meeting on Teams. Further investigation of potential academic misconduct might ensue, according to University regulations.
More information on referencing style
https://vle.exeter.ac.uk/course/view.php?id=6748§ion=2
Late Submission of Assignments
You must submit your assignment by the deadline specified. If you fail to submit on time, the following penalties apply:
• Work submitted up to 1 hour after the deadline, which has reached the standard of the
module passmark or above, will be subject to a penalty of 5% of the total available mark for the coursework, down to a minimum score of the module passmark.
• The penalty for assessed work submitted up to two weeks and without an agreed extension is a capped mark of 50%.
• Assessed work submitted more than two weeks beyond a submission date will receive a mark of zero.
Mitigation
• https://www.exeter.ac.uk/students/infopoints/yourinfopointservices/mitigation/
BART Submission
Online Submission Student Summary Sheet v19
Online Submission Student Handbook v19
Academic Honesty Advice for Students prior to Submission v2
Appendix A: Marking Rubric
|
Mark
|
(Fail/Condon able Fail)
|
Pass
|
Merit
|
Distinction
|
Weighting
|
|
Marking
Criteria
|
<50
|
50-59
|
60-69
|
>70
|
% of total mark
|
|
Knowledge and Understanding of the Subject
|
Gaps in
knowledge
and only
superficial
understanding of the well-
established principles of area(s) of
study.
|
Broad
knowledge and
understanding of material, of well- established
principles of
area(s) of study, and of the way in which those
principles have been developed.
|
Very good
knowledge and understanding of material, of
well- established principles of
area(s) of study, and of the way in which those principles have been developed.
|
Very good,
detailed
knowledge and
understanding of material, main
concepts/theories at this level.
Awareness of the limitation of their knowledge, and how this
influences any
analyses and
interpretations
based on that
knowledge.
|
40%
|
|
Analysis and Interpretation
Demonstration of logical
analysis and
critical
interpretation.
|
Little or no
analysis of
findings,
concepts or
theoretical
ideas;
descriptive,
simplistic and
anecdotal
and/or
incorrect.
|
Satisfactory
application and analysis of
findings/concepts, perhaps with
some deviation from theoretical premises.
|
Good application and analysis of
findings/concepts carried out in
line with
methodological and theoretical premises.
|
Application and analysis of
findings/concepts
carried out
accurately and
with high degree of competence in line with
methodological and theoretical premises.
|
45%
|
|
Style and
Structure
1) Clear
structure, and
attention to
grammar and
spelling.
2) Use of
recommended
and other
reading
materials.
3) Correct
academic
referencing.
|
Poor structure and grammar which is hard to follow or
understand;
incorrectly
formatted,
with no
references or poorly chosen ones.
|
Overall structure and organisation is satisfactory.
Internal
coherence of the
whole is
satisfactory.
Make
consistently
sound use of
appropriate
academic
conventions and
academic
honesty.
|
Good structure and grammar,
which is easy to follow and
understand.
Make
consistently good
use of
appropriate
academic
conventions and
academic
honesty.
|
Clearly structured and lucidly
expressed. Make consistently
excellent use of appropriate
academic
conventions and academic honesty Evidence of
further research. Excellent range and quality of
references to
support analysis.
|
15%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
100%
|