BEAM065 Bank Management
Coursework 2 (60% of the mark for this module) Submission
deadline: 5 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., bank
capital, 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 sample selection), 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 pass mark 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 pass mark.
• 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%