Have pure-play internet banks caught up with traditional and hybrid banks over the past decade?
by Yu Zhang; Charles E. Teague; Randall Hucks; KaylaRose Robison
International Journal of Electronic Finance (IJEF), Vol. 10, No. 1/2, 2020

Abstract: This paper investigates the performance of pure-play internet (PPI) banks compared to their traditional and hybrid counterparts over the past 18 years. All 11 surviving PPI banks were hand screened and matched with 110 control banks randomly selected based on total assets from the FDIC website. Our pooled OLS regressions with robust errors show that PPI banks have lower profitability and are less cost efficient than their counterparts. This may be because PPI banks still need time to accumulate experience and scale effects. PPI banks also do not attract more deposits or invest more in securities than traditional and hybrid banks. However, they do have less risk in terms of bad loans than traditional and hybrid comparables.

Online publication date: Tue, 13-Oct-2020

The full text of this article is only available to individual subscribers or to users at subscribing institutions.

 
Existing subscribers:
Go to Inderscience Online Journals to access the Full Text of this article.

Pay per view:
If you are not a subscriber and you just want to read the full contents of this article, buy online access here.

Complimentary Subscribers, Editors or Members of the Editorial Board of the International Journal of Electronic Finance (IJEF):
Login with your Inderscience username and password:

    Username:        Password:         

Forgotten your password?


Want to subscribe?
A subscription gives you complete access to all articles in the current issue, as well as to all articles in the previous three years (where applicable). See our Orders page to subscribe.

If you still need assistance, please email subs@inderscience.com