Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Banking System Of Armenia Among Most Reliable Ones In CIS Area:Standard

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Banking System Of Armenia Among Most Reliable Ones In CIS Area:Standard

    BANKING SYSTEM OF ARMENIA AMONG MOST RELIABLE ONES IN CIS AREA: STANDARD & POOR'S

    YEREVAN, DECEMBER 16. ARMINFO. The Banking system of Armenia is
    considered one of the most reliable ones in the CIS area, say
    specialists of the international agency Standard Poor's.

    According to the rating, as to the total system regulatory capital
    as a % of risk weighted assets (BIS ratio), the banking system of
    Armenia showed 34% in late 2003, yielding only to Tajikistan (44.7%)
    and Kyrghyzstan (34%). Total banking system regulatory capital of the
    baking system of Armenia in late 2003 was $79 mln (20 banks) leaving
    behind Kyrghyzstan ($49 mln - 20 banks) and Tajikistan ($35 mln - 14
    banks). At the end of 2003 Armenia ranked the first as to the capital
    share controlled by foreign capital, including other CIS investors -
    47%, leaving behind Kyrgyzstan - 29% amd Tajikistan 26.6%. As to the
    total banking system assets, the banking system of Armenia showed
    $498 mln, then goes Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, $258 mln and $147 mln,
    respectively.

    The specialists of the agency say that over the past decade, the number
    of banks in most CIS countries has decreased significantly as a result
    of bank failures, mergers, and license withdrawals. Restructuring
    measures, as well as increases in minimum bank capital requirements
    and capital adequacy ratios, have been effective instruments to
    fortify banking systems and encourage consolidation. This process
    is continuing today. For example, Armenia is increasing the minimum
    required capital level to $5 million from the current $2 million,
    effective July 1, 2005. This is largely above a minimum capital level
    of ?1 million required in Russia, but still below a limit of $7 million
    required in Kazakhstan. In Russia, the number of banks dropped from
    2,300 in 1995, to nearly 1,300 banks today. Azerbaijan and Georgia
    have seen a decline to about 50 banks in each country from almost
    250 in each. Since 1994 in Kazakhstan, the number of banks fell to 36
    from more than 180. Despite the growing divergence of policies and in
    the performance of the CIS banking systems, one thing they share is
    exposure to a variety of common risks. In addition to factors already
    mentioned, such as shadowy economies, they include:

    High economic and industry risks;

    Volatility to economic cycles;

    Low population wealth and high income inequalities;

    Underdeveloped regulatory and legal systems;

    Varying accounting practices; and

    Limited confidence in the banking system.

    In addition, the financial profiles of banks are characterized by weak
    capital; lack of core deposits; weak credit culture, vulnerability
    to asset quality risks; and low operating efficiency. Liquidity and
    financial flexibility of CIS banks remain limited.

    The population remains suspicious of banks and unwilling to trust
    them with its savings Responding to the lack of confidence in their
    banking systems, some CIS countries have sought to introduce deposit
    insurance schemes. At the end of 1990s, Kazakhstan and Ukraine set up
    deposit insurance systems, followed more recently by Moldova. In July
    2004, amid the turmoil in the banking sector, the Russian government
    adopted a law guaranteeing retail deposits in banks not admitted to
    the retail-deposit insurance system introduced in December 2003 (whose
    selection process has yet not been completed). Armenia set up a deposit
    insurance system in 2003, which should start operating in 2005. The
    Kyrgyz Republic is only preparing deposit insurance legislation.

    The CIS banking systems mirror many of the high concentration
    problems of their economies, particularly regarding the high
    dependence on commodities in exports: oil for Russia and Kazakhstan,
    gas for Turkmenistan, gold for the Kyrgyz Republic, aluminum for
    Tajikistan, and diamond polishing for Armenia. With limited industry
    diversification and natural-resource dependent and agriculturally
    dominant economies, the CIS economies are fairly correlated in their
    risks and economic cyclicality. Due to growing regional cooperation
    and trade, the growth of many smaller CIS countries depends partly
    on the performance of the large economies in the region--Russia,
    Kazakhstan, and Ukraine.

    Many privately owned CIS banks are closely connected to industrial
    and trade groups. Beneficial owners, often hiding behind numerous
    nominee or operating companies, are not publicly disclosed. This
    raises critical information and corporate governance risks, which could
    lead to understated related-party exposures. There is also a lack of
    certainty about the owners' ability and willingness to inject fresh
    capital into the banks. Ultimate ownership and interrelationships
    between borrowers and industries are difficult to discern. Opaque
    ownership structures favor related party lending, with its attendant
    risks. This results, in part, from the lack of enforcement and
    monitoring of "fit and proper" criteria, and inhibits the emergence
    of a market for corporate control. The lack of such a market is one
    key reason for the lack of market-driven bank reorganizations in the
    CIS countries, including the entry of foreign banks, mergers, and
    acquisitions. The CIS banking systems have combined assets of around
    $240 billion, which is less than half the size of Dresdner Bank AG
    (A/Negative/A-1) or Barclays Bank PLC (AA/Stable/A-1+) and a third
    of the size of ABN AMRO Bank N.V. (AA-/Stable/A-1+).
Working...
X