The Role of Stress Testing in Enhancing Financial Transparency and Credit Risk Management: Evidence from Islamic and Conventional Banking in ASEAN

  • Septa Diana Nabella Universitas Ibnu Sina https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8731-3138
  • Kiki Wulandari Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji
  • Maya Sova Universitas Respati Indonesia
  • Abdul Jalal Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji
  • Dewi Permata Sari Universitas Ibnu Sina
DOI: https://doi.org/10.62159/sembj.v7i1.1926
Keywords: Stress testing, Credit risk, Financial transparency, Islamic and conventional banks, ASEAN

Abstract

Background: Despite the growing importance of stress testing as a supervisory tool, its role in reducing information opacity and improving credit risk management remains underexplored in ASEAN’s dual banking system, where Islamic and conventional banks operate under distinct financial structures.

Method: Using a Panel Vector Autoregression (PVAR) model with Generalized Method of Moments (GMM), this study analyses 72 listed banks across five ASEAN countries over 2012–2022. Credit risk is proxied by NPL/NPF ratios, incorporating key macroeconomic and bank-specific variables.

Results: The findings indicate that credit risk dynamics are highly persistent, with own shocks accounting for more than 97% of forecast error variance in both banking systems. GDP growth and real interest rates emerge as the most influential macroeconomic determinants. Islamic banks display mean-reverting credit risk behaviour, whereas conventional banks exhibit greater persistence. Impulse response analysis reveals that macroeconomic shocks have statistically significant but heterogeneous effects across bank types. In addition, Granger causality results suggest that macroeconomic variables can serve as early warning indicators of credit risk. The COVID-19 period provides additional evidence that stronger capital buffers help mitigate the transmission of macroeconomic shocks to NPL ratios.

Conclusion: These results support the role of stress testing as a tool for improving risk assessment and strengthening supervisory oversight in ASEAN banking systems. This study contributes by providing the first PVAR-based comparative analysis of stress testing in ASEAN’s dual banking system, incorporating the COVID-19 shock as a natural experiment, and offering cross-country evidence on the role of stress testing in improving financial transparency.

References

Abad, P., Robles, M.-D., & Alonso Orts, C. (2023). Stress testing programs and credit risk opacity of banks: USA vs Europe. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 89, Article 101876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2023.101876
Abdeljawad, I., Rashid, M., Abu Alia, M., Qushtom, R., Irshaid, M., & Sahyouni, A. (2024). Cushion hypothesis and credit risk: Islamic versus conventional banks from the MENA region. PLOS ONE, 19(7), Article e0306901. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0306901
Abdymomunov, A., & Gerlach, J. (2014). Stress testing interest rate risk exposure. Journal of Banking & Finance, 49, 287–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2014.08.013
Abid, L., Ouertani, M. N., & Zouari-Ghorbel, S. (2014). Macroeconomic and bank-specific determinants of household's non-performing loans in Tunisia: A dynamic panel data approach. Procedia Economics and Finance, 13, 58–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(14)00430-4
Abrigo, M. R. M., & Love, I. (2016). Estimation of panel vector autoregression in Stata. The Stata Journal, 16(3), 778–804. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X1601600314
Andrews, D. W. K., & Lu, B. (2001). Consistent model and moment selection procedures for GMM estimation with application to dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 101(1), 123–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(00)00077-4
Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. (2009). Principles for sound stress testing practices and supervision (BCBS Working Paper No. 155). Bank for International Settlements. https://www.bis.org/publ/bcbs155.pdf
Blau, B. M., Brough, T. J., & Griffith, T. G. (2017). Bank opacity and the efficiency of stock prices. Journal of Banking & Finance, 76, 32–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2016.11.026
Buston, C. S. (2015). Active risk management and banking stability. Journal of Banking & Finance, 79, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2015.01.016
Castro, V. (2013). Macroeconomic determinants of the credit risk in the banking system: The case of the GIPSI. Economic Modelling, 31, 672–683. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2013.01.027
Chaibi, H., & Ftiti, Z. (2015). Credit risk determinants: Evidence from a cross-country study. Research in International Business and Finance, 33, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2014.06.001
Daoud, Y., & Kammoun, A. (2024). Banking regulation and financial soundness nexus in view of the crisis: An Islamic banking perspective. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 14(2), 113–122. https://doi.org/10.32479/ijefi.15760
De Mendonça, H. F., Galvão, D. J. C., & Loures, R. F. V. (2013). Credit and bank opaqueness: How to avoid financial crises? Economic Modelling, 33, 605–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2013.05.001
Firdaus, N. A., Fakhruddin, I., Riyaldi, R., & Rosman, R. (2024). Liquidity and credit risk: A comparative study of Islamic and conventional banks in Indonesia. FINANSIA: Jurnal Akuntansi dan Perbankan Syariah, 7(1), 103–116. https://doi.org/10.32332/finansia.v7i1.8918
Flannery, M. J., Kwan, S. H., & Nimalendran, M. (2013). The 2007–2009 financial crisis and bank opaqueness. Journal of Financial Intermediation, 22(1), 55–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfi.2012.08.001
Flannery, M., Hirtle, B., & Kovner, A. (2017). Evaluating the information in the federal reserve stress tests. Journal of Financial Intermediation, 29, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfi.2016.08.001
Im, K. S., Pesaran, M. H., & Shin, Y. (2003). Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. Journal of Econometrics, 115(1), 53–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(03)00092-7
Khammassi, I., Boufateh, T., & Naoui, K. (2020). Do stress tests reduce liquidity risk opacity? American Journal of Finance and Accounting, 6(2), 135–158. https://doi.org/10.1504/AJFA.2020.110322
Khammassi, I., Boufateh, T., Naoui, K., Alrawad, M., & Lutfi, A. (2024). The role of stress tests in enhancing bank transparency: A comparative study of Islamic and conventional banks. ECONOMICS – Innovative and Economics Research Journal, 12(1), 71–100. https://doi.org/10.2478/eoik-2024-0003
Khan, M. F., Ali, M. S., Hossain, M. N., & Bairagi, M. (2023). Determinants of non-performing loans in conventional and Islamic banks: Emerging market evidence. Modern Finance, 1(1), 56–69. https://doi.org/10.61351/mf.v1i1.27
Kok, C., Müller, C., Ongena, S., & Pancaro, C. (2023). The disciplining effect of supervisory scrutiny in the EU-wide stress test. Journal of Financial Intermediation, 53, Article 101015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfi.2022.101015
Levin, A., Lin, C. F., & Chu, C. S. J. (2002). Unit root tests in panel data: Asymptotic and finite-sample properties. Journal of Econometrics, 108(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(01)00098-7
Louzis, D. P., Vouldis, A. T., & Metaxas, V. L. (2012). Macroeconomic and bank-specific determinants of non-performing loans in Greece: A comparative study of mortgage, business, and consumer loan portfolios. Journal of Banking & Finance, 36(4), 1012–1027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2011.10.012
Makri, V., Tsagkanos, A., & Bellas, A. (2014). Determinants of non-performing loans: The case of Eurozone. Panoeconomicus, 61(2), 193–206. https://doi.org/10.2298/PAN1402193M
Mishkin, F. S. (1999). Global financial instability: Framework, events, issues. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 13(4), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.13.4.3
Misman, F. N., & Bhatti, M. I. (2020). The determinants of credit risk: An evidence from ASEAN and GCC Islamic banks. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 13(5), Article 89. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm13050089
Myers, S. C., & Majluf, N. S. (1984). Corporate financing and investment decisions when firms have information that investors do not have. Journal of Financial Economics, 13(2), 187–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(84)90023-0
Petrella, G., & Resti, A. (2013). Supervisors as information producers: Do stress tests reduce bank opaqueness? Journal of Banking & Finance, 37(12), 5406–5420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2013.01.005
Rohadi, S. C., Sarumpaet, S., & Syaipudin, U. (2024). Determinants of non-performing loans in ASEAN banking. Owner: Riset dan Jurnal Akuntansi, 8(2), 1917–1929. https://doi.org/10.33395/owner.v8i2.2331
Salas, M. B., Lamothe, P., Delgado, E., Fernández-Miguélez, A. L., & Valcarce, L. (2024). Determinants of nonperforming loans: A global data analysis. Computational Economics, 64(5), 2695–2716. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10614-023-10543-8
Salas, V., & Saurina, J. (2002). Credit risk in two institutional regimes: Spanish commercial and savings banks. Journal of Financial Services Research, 22(3), 203–224. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019781109676
Šeho, M., Bacha, O. I., & Smolo, E. (2024). Bank financing diversification, market structure, and stability in a dual-banking system. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 86, 102461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pacfin.2024.102461
Shank, C. A., & Vianna, A. C. (2016). Are US-dollar-hedged-ETF investors aggressive on exchange rates? A panel VAR approach. Research in International Business and Finance, 38, 430–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2016.05.002
Published
2026-02-13
How to Cite
Nabella, S. D., Wulandari, K., Sova, M., Jalal, A., & Sari, D. P. (2026). The Role of Stress Testing in Enhancing Financial Transparency and Credit Risk Management: Evidence from Islamic and Conventional Banking in ASEAN. Sharia Economic and Management Business Journal (SEMBJ), 7(1), 28-41. https://doi.org/10.62159/sembj.v7i1.1926
Issue
Vol. 7 No. 1 (2026): February
Section
Articles

Copyright (c) 2026 Septa Diana Nabella, Kiki Wulandari, Maya Sova, Abdul Jalal, Dewi Permata Sari

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

The authors who publish in the journal agree to the following terms:

  • The authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  • The authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  • The authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
  • The authors warrant that the article is original, written by stated author(s), has not been published before, contains no unlawful statements, does not infringe the rights of others, is subject to copyright that is vested exclusively in the author and free of any third-party rights, and that any necessary written permissions to quote from other sources have been obtained by the author(s).


Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis Manajemen Syariah (SEMB-J), Yayasan Darussalam Bengkulu is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Based on a work at https://siducat.org/index.php/sembj/.