Executive Summary

The global banking sector presents a complex and divergent landscape of profitability, risk, and competition. A comprehensive analysis of Return on Assets (ROA) patterns across 26 key global markets reveals that the drivers of banking performance are far more nuanced than traditional metrics suggest. This report dissects the intricate relationships between profitability, market concentration, regulatory frameworks, and technological disruption to provide a sophisticated typology of banking markets and actionable strategic recommendations for global financial institutions.

The primary finding of this analysis is that the conventional wisdom linking higher market concentration to higher profitability is an oversimplification that frequently breaks down under scrutiny. While the Market Concentration Hypothesis (H1) posits that fewer, larger banks should lead to higher average ROA, our analysis finds this holds only under specific conditions. Markets like Germany, with high headline concentration but a unique multi-pillar structure, exhibit intense competition and low profitability. Conversely, highly concentrated Nordic markets display moderate, stable profitability driven by efficiency and technology rather than pricing power alone. The nature of competitors—be they profit-maximizing private entities, policy-driven state-owned banks, or community-focused cooperatives—and the basis of competition are more decisive factors than concentration ratios alone.

The Development Stage Hypothesis (H3), which suggests emerging markets exhibit higher but more volatile ROA, is strongly supported. Nations like Brazil, India, and Indonesia demonstrate superior headline ROA compared to most developed counterparts. However, this higher return is often coupled with greater macroeconomic volatility, reflected in lower Bank Z-scores (a measure of stability). This creates a clear strategic trade-off between high-growth, high-variance markets and stable, low-return developed economies. The key strategic question is not merely “Where is ROA highest?” but “Where is the risk-adjusted return most attractive and sustainable?”

The Regulatory Efficiency Hypothesis (H2), proposing that sophisticated regulatory frameworks foster lower ROA variance, is also largely confirmed. There is a clear positive correlation between the quality of regulation and market stability. Markets like Singapore, Switzerland, and Canada, which score highly on regulatory quality indices, demonstrate more predictable and stable performance. This analysis reveals an “efficient frontier” of regulation, where robust, clear, and predictable rules create the most attractive environments for long-term investment, superior to both under-regulated (high-risk) and overly complex (high-cost) regimes.

Finally, the Innovation Disruption Hypothesis (H4), which examines the impact of fintech, requires significant nuance. The evidence does not support a simple narrative of fintech uniformly depressing incumbent bank profitability. Instead, fintech acts as a catalyst that increases ROA variance, driving a wedge between efficient, adaptive incumbents and their less agile peers. While neobanks excel at low-cost customer acquisition, they have largely failed to achieve sustainable profitability at scale, creating a “profitability paradox.” This presents a strategic opportunity for traditional banks that can pair their core balance sheet strengths—low-cost funding and trust—with a sufficiently enhanced digital customer experience.

Based on these findings, we have developed a market competition typology that classifies global banking markets into four distinct categories:

1. Stable Oligopolies (e.g., Canada, Australia): High barriers to entry, rational competition, and stable, moderate returns.
2. Competitive Disparities / High Growth (e.g., India, Brazil): High ROA potential offset by significant volatility and a complex mix of private, state-owned, and digital players.
3. Commoditized / Hyper-Competitive (e.g., Germany, Japan): Mature, stable markets where intense competition has compressed margins, leading to low and stable ROA.
4. Fragmented & Inefficient (e.g., Russia): Markets with structural impediments, high risk, and poor, volatile returns.

For global financial institutions, these findings yield critical strategic imperatives. Market entry decisions must be based on a sophisticated, multi-factor assessment of risk-adjusted returns, not headline ROA. Competitive strategy must be tailored to the specific market typology—competing on brand and service in oligopolies, on digital access and speed in high-growth markets, and on niche specialization or cost leadership in commoditized environments. Ultimately, the successful global bank of the next decade will be defined by its ability to navigate this diverse landscape, leveraging technology to manage risk and choosing its markets based on a nuanced understanding of the interplay between competition, regulation, and innovation.

---

Section 1: The Global Banking Landscape – A Tale of Divergent Profitability

The global banking sector is not a monolith. It is a mosaic of distinct markets, each with its own economic rhythm, competitive intensity, and profitability profile. An analysis of Return on Assets (ROA), a key metric of how efficiently a bank uses its assets to generate profit, reveals a world of stark contrasts. Understanding these patterns is the first step toward developing a sophisticated global strategy.

1.1. Global ROA Rankings and Distribution

A global ranking of banking sector ROA immediately highlights a fundamental divide between developed and emerging economies. Data from 2021 shows that many of the highest-performing banking systems are located in emerging or frontier markets. For instance, countries like Ghana (4.9%), Kazakhstan (4.37%), and Brazil (1.86%) exhibit robust profitability metrics.¹ In contrast, many of the world’s most advanced economies, particularly in Europe and Japan, anchor the lower end of the rankings. Germany’s banking sector, for example, posted a meager ROA of 0.12% in 2021.²

This divergence is not absolute. The United States, a highly developed market, maintained a healthy ROA of 1.59% in 2021, outperforming many of its developed peers.¹ Similarly, key financial hubs like Singapore (1.01%) and efficient Nordic markets like Sweden (0.95%) occupy a middle ground, demonstrating that development status alone does not determine profitability.³ The average ROA across 136 countries in 2021 was 1.57%, a figure that masks the wide dispersion of performance, from Syria’s high of 8.83% to Greece’s low of -1.82%.¹ This wide distribution underscores the necessity of a market-by-market analysis rather than relying on broad regional generalizations.

1.2. ROA Volatility and Risk-Adjusted Performance

Headline ROA figures can be deceptive if not viewed through the lens of risk and volatility. A high-return market may not be attractive if that return is unpredictable and subject to severe downturns. To create a more nuanced understanding of performance, it is essential to incorporate measures of stability.

The Bank Z-score is a powerful tool for this purpose, as it directly measures the probability of a banking system’s default by comparing its buffers (capital and returns) to the volatility of those returns. The formula is given by (ROA+(equity/assets))/sd(ROA), where sd(ROA) is the standard deviation of the Return on Assets.⁵ A higher Z-score implies greater stability and a lower probability of insolvency.

When analyzing Z-scores across countries, a critical pattern emerges: many of the markets with the highest headline ROA also exhibit higher volatility, which can depress their Z-scores.⁶ This suggests that the high returns in some emerging markets are a compensation for greater underlying risk, be it macroeconomic, political, or regulatory. Conversely, stable, developed markets may offer lower headline ROA but achieve higher Z-scores due to the predictability and low volatility of their earnings.

This concept of risk-adjusted performance can be further enriched by examining other key indicators. Non-Performing Loan (NPL) ratios provide a direct measure of asset quality and credit risk. A market with a high ROA but also a high and rising NPL ratio (as seen in some emerging economies during periods of stress) is fundamentally less healthy than a market with a moderate ROA and a low, stable NPL ratio.⁷ Similarly, the

Cost-to-Income ratio measures operational efficiency. A bank or banking system with a low cost-to-income ratio is more efficient at converting revenue into profit. Markets like Sweden (48.6%) and Singapore (45.4%) demonstrate high efficiency, which supports their profitability even in a competitive environment.³ In contrast, less efficient systems with higher cost-to-income ratios (e.g., Germany at 88.6%) struggle to translate revenues into profits, regardless of market structure.²

By combining ROA with metrics like the Z-score, NPL ratios, and cost-to-income ratios, a more complete picture of market attractiveness emerges. The strategic objective shifts from a simple pursuit of high ROA to a search for markets offering the most attractive and sustainable risk-adjusted returns.

1.3. Temporal Trends in Profitability (2014-2024)

Banking profitability is not static; it evolves in response to economic cycles, regulatory shifts, and competitive pressures. Analyzing ROA trends over the past decade reveals distinct trajectories for different markets.

• United States: The ROA of major US banks like U.S. Bancorp shows a clear cyclical pattern. After peaking pre-pandemic, ROA dipped in 2020, recovered strongly in 2021, and then experienced a steady decline through 2022 and 2023 as interest rates rose and economic conditions tightened.⁹ This trend reflects the sector’s sensitivity to the broader economic and monetary policy environment.
• China: The Chinese banking sector’s ROA has been on a gradual but persistent downward trend since its peak in the mid-2010s. Data from the World Bank and FRED shows a decline from over 1.2% before 2015 to 0.86% in 2021.¹⁰ This reflects a maturing economy, narrowing interest margins, and regulatory pressures to support the real economy, which may temper profitability.
• India: The Indian banking sector, particularly its private banks, presents a story of remarkable recovery. After facing significant asset quality challenges that pushed ROA to a low of 0.51% in 2020, private sector banks have seen a dramatic turnaround. Their ROA climbed to 1.63% in 2023 and reached an all-time high of 1.87% in 2024.¹¹ This V-shaped recovery highlights the dynamism of the Indian market and the successful resolution of past asset quality issues for its private lenders.

These divergent paths underscore that a market’s current ROA is less important than its trajectory and the underlying drivers of that trend.

1.4. The Macroeconomic Context

Bank profitability is inextricably linked to the health of the broader economy. Key macroeconomic variables—GDP growth, inflation, and interest rates—create the operating environment in which banks function.

• GDP Growth: A strong correlation exists between economic growth and banking sector health. Higher GDP growth typically translates into greater loan demand from both businesses and consumers, lower credit losses, and thus higher profitability.¹² The robust growth seen in emerging economies like India (6.5% in 2024-25) ¹³ and China (projected around 5% for 2025) ¹⁴ is a primary driver of their banks’ higher ROA compared to slower-growing developed economies like Germany, which has been flirting with recession.¹⁶
• Interest Rates: The level and trajectory of interest rates have a profound impact on bank profitability, primarily through their effect on Net Interest Margins (NIMs). The global interest rate hiking cycle that began in 2022 provided a significant tailwind for many banking systems. In a rising rate environment, banks can often reprice their assets (loans) faster than their liabilities (deposits), leading to wider NIMs and higher ROA.¹⁷ This effect was clearly visible in Germany, where a significant increase in net interest income in 2023 drove ROA to a 25-year high ¹⁸, and in the UAE, where ROA rose to a strong 2.0%.¹⁹

However, the impact of rising rates is not uniform. It is heavily mediated by the competitive dynamics of the local deposit market. In India, for example, intense competition for deposits between public and private sector banks meant that the cost of funds rose rapidly, putting pressure on NIMs despite the higher policy rates.²⁰ This demonstrates that a bank’s funding structure and the competitive landscape are critical variables that determine how it benefits from macroeconomic trends. A bank with a stable, low-cost deposit base is far better positioned to capitalize on rising interest rates than one that must aggressively compete for funding in the open market.

---

Section 2: The Anatomy of Competition – Linking Market Structure to Performance

A central hypothesis in industrial organization is that market structure dictates firm behavior and performance. In banking, this often translates to the belief that more concentrated markets—those dominated by a few large players—should exhibit higher profitability due to reduced competitive pressure. This section tests this Market Concentration Hypothesis (H1), revealing a far more complex reality where the nature of competition is often more important than its simple measurement.

2.1. Measuring Market Concentration: HHI and Beyond

To empirically assess market structure, this report primarily uses the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI). The HHI is calculated by squaring the market share of each firm in a market and summing the results. It ranges from near zero for a perfectly competitive market to 10,000 for a monopoly.²¹ US antitrust agencies provide a useful framework for interpretation: an HHI below 1,500 suggests a competitive market, 1,500 to 2,500 is moderately concentrated, and above 2,500 is highly concentrated.²²

Where HHI data is unavailable, we supplement our analysis with concentration ratios (CR), such as the CR3 or CR5, which measure the percentage of total market assets held by the top three or five banks, respectively. This is a common metric provided by sources like the World Bank and national central banks.²³ While less nuanced than the HHI, it provides a valuable proxy for market concentration.

2.2. Testing the Concentration-Profitability Hypothesis (H1)

The conventional hypothesis (H1) predicts a positive correlation between market concentration and profitability (ROA). The logic is that in a market with fewer competitors, banks can exercise greater market power, leading to wider net interest margins and higher fees, thus boosting profits.

However, a cross-sectional analysis of our selected markets reveals that this relationship is weak and inconsistent. While some highly concentrated markets like Canada and Australia exhibit strong, stable profitability, there are significant outliers that challenge the hypothesis. This suggests that other structural factors are at play, moderating or even reversing the expected effect of concentration.

2.3. Case Study: The German Anomaly – When Concentration Doesn’t Equal Profit

Germany provides the most compelling counterexample to the simple concentration-profitability hypothesis. Based on the market share of its largest private commercial banks, the German market appears highly concentrated, with a CR3 of 79.4% in 2021.²⁴ Yet, its banking sector’s ROA is among the lowest in the developed world, at just 0.12% in 2021 and a 25-year high of only 0.46% in 2023.²

This anomaly is explained by Germany’s unique “three-pillar” banking system. The market is not a simple oligopoly of private banks. It also includes:

1. Public Savings Banks (Sparkassen): A vast network of municipally owned banks with a public service mandate.
2. Cooperative Banks (Volksbanken und Raiffeisenbanken): Another extensive network of member-owned institutions.

These public and cooperative pillars, which are not primarily profit-maximizing, create intense competition at the local and regional levels for deposits and loans. They prioritize stability and service to their local communities over generating high returns for shareholders. This institutional structure, not captured by a simple CR3 of the largest commercial banks, fundamentally alters the competitive dynamic, suppressing margins and overall profitability across the entire system. The Bundesbank’s detailed statistics by bank category confirm the distinct performance and mandates of these different pillars.²⁶ This case demonstrates that understanding the institutional fabric and the objectives of key market players is more critical than relying on headline concentration metrics.

2.4. Case Study: The Nordic Model – High Concentration, High Efficiency, Moderate Profits

The Nordic markets, particularly Sweden, offer a different model. The Swedish banking market is one of the most concentrated in the world, with a CR3 of 89.6%.²⁵ Unlike Germany, this concentration translates into a true oligopoly dominated by a few large, pan-Nordic banking groups.

However, this has not led to exorbitant profits at the expense of consumers. Instead, the Swedish system is characterized by extreme efficiency and technological advancement. With a low cost-to-income ratio of 48.6% and one of the most digitized payment systems globally, competition appears to have shifted from aggressive price wars to a race for technological superiority, operational efficiency, and enhanced customer service.⁴ This results in a banking sector that is stable and moderately profitable (ROA of 0.95% in 2021) but does not exhibit the super-normal profits that a simple concentration model might predict.⁴ Norway displays a similar pattern of high concentration, strong profitability (ROE of 14.0% in 2023), and high efficiency (cost/income ratio of 39.0%).²⁹ The Nordic model suggests that in a mature oligopoly, competition can evolve in ways that benefit both banks (through efficiency gains) and consumers (through better technology and service) without leading to price gouging.

2.5. Competition in Emerging Markets: The Role of State Ownership

In high-growth emerging markets like China, India, and Brazil, the competitive landscape is uniquely shaped by the significant presence of State-Owned Banks (SOBs). In China, large commercial banks, which are predominantly state-owned, account for 41.7% of total banking assets.³⁰ In India, Public Sector Banks (PSBs) have recently surged to capture a 43% market share in the critical home loan segment, overtaking private lenders.³¹

The presence of these giants creates a “dual-track” competitive environment. SOBs often operate with a dual mandate: to be commercially viable but also to fulfill government policy objectives. This can include lending to specific industries, supporting employment, or enhancing financial inclusion.³² As a result, research indicates that SOBs in developing countries tend to be less profitable than their private sector counterparts.³⁴ This lower profitability of a substantial part of the market naturally pulls down the market-wide average ROA.

However, this dual structure may also enhance systemic stability. During economic downturns or financial crises, SOBs can act as a counter-cyclical buffer, maintaining or even increasing lending when private banks, driven by risk aversion, pull back.³² This dynamic creates a unique risk-return profile for these markets: a potentially lower average ROA than a purely private system might generate, but with greater resilience to systemic shocks. For a foreign private bank entering such a market, this implies that competition is not just about price and service but also about navigating a landscape where major players operate with different objectives and a different cost of capital.

---

Section 3: The Regulatory Compass – Navigating Stability and Profitability

Regulation is the bedrock upon which a financial system is built. It dictates the rules of competition, the boundaries of risk-taking, and the resilience of the entire sector. The quality and stringency of a country’s regulatory framework are critical determinants of its banking market’s performance. This section tests the Regulatory Efficiency Hypothesis (H2), which posits that more sophisticated regulatory regimes foster greater stability, and explores the intricate trade-off between ensuring safety and enabling profitability.

3.1. Quantifying the Regulatory Environment

To analyze the impact of regulation, this report utilizes two key sets of indicators:

1. World Bank Regulatory Quality Index: This is a perception-based metric that captures the ability of a government to formulate and implement sound policies and regulations that permit and promote private sector development. On a scale from -2.5 (weak) to 2.5 (strong), it provides a broad measure of regulatory effectiveness and predictability.³⁶ As of 2023, financial centers like Singapore (2.31), Switzerland (1.73), and the Nordic countries (e.g., Denmark 1.84, Sweden 1.72) consistently rank at the top. In contrast, some emerging markets, despite their growth potential, may have lower scores, indicating higher regulatory risk.³⁶
2. Bank Capital Adequacy Ratios (CAR): This is a hard, quantitative measure of regulatory stringency, reflecting the implementation of Basel Accords. It represents the ratio of a bank’s capital to its risk-weighted assets. Higher CARs signify a larger capital buffer to absorb unexpected losses, a hallmark of a more conservative and stringent regulatory approach.³⁷

3.2. The Impact of Regulatory Quality on ROA Variance (H2)

The Regulatory Efficiency Hypothesis (H2) suggests that markets with higher-quality regulatory frameworks should exhibit lower ROA variance, meaning more stable and predictable profitability. High-quality regulation reduces uncertainty, curbs excessive risk-taking, and ensures a level playing field, all of which contribute to a more stable operating environment.

Our analysis supports this hypothesis. A strong positive correlation exists between a country’s Regulatory Quality Index score and its banking system’s stability, as measured by the Bank Z-score. Markets renowned for their sophisticated, predictable, and robust regulatory oversight—such as Singapore, Hong Kong, Canada, and Switzerland—are also exemplars of financial stability.³⁶ While their regulations may cap the potential for exceptionally high, short-term profits by limiting leverage and risky activities, they are highly effective at mitigating downside risk and preventing the kind of volatility that leads to banking crises. This creates an attractive environment for long-term, stable investment.

3.3. Capital Requirements vs. Profitability: A Necessary Trade-off?

A central debate in banking regulation revolves around the impact of capital requirements on profitability. The argument is that forcing banks to hold more capital (i.e., mandating a higher CAR) is a drag on returns, particularly Return on Equity (ROE), as it reduces leverage. The effect on ROA is more complex.

An examination of our sample markets shows no simple negative correlation between CAR and ROA. Many jurisdictions with very high capital requirements, such as the UK (Total Capital Ratio of 21.1% in 2023) and Sweden (CET1 of 18.4% in 2023), maintain profitable banking sectors.²⁹ This suggests that while capital is a cost, well-managed banks in supportive economic environments can generate sufficient returns to offset it.

The relationship is further complicated by market structure. Some research suggests that regulators may permit less stringent capital rules in more concentrated markets, operating under the assumption that the “quiet life” of an oligopoly leads to lower intrinsic risk.⁴⁰ However, the global trend since the 2008 financial crisis has been a broad-based strengthening of capital requirements across all market types, making CAR a necessary but not sufficient condition for explaining performance differences. It acts as a “blunt instrument” to ensure a baseline of safety, but it does not, by itself, determine the profitability or efficiency of a market.

3.4. The Role of Supervision in Market Efficiency

Beyond the written rules, the quality and focus of day-to-day supervision are paramount. An active and forward-looking supervisory body can significantly enhance market efficiency and stability. For example, the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) conducted a major investigation into retail banking, leading to remedies like Open Banking, designed specifically to increase customer engagement and reduce the incumbency advantages of large banks.⁴¹ This proactive, pro-competitive supervisory stance fosters a more dynamic market than one where supervision is purely focused on compliance with static rules.

Similarly, reports from the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) provide qualitative insights into the effectiveness of national supervisory bodies, their crisis management capabilities, and their approach to emerging risks like cybersecurity and fintech.⁴² These qualitative factors help explain why some markets with similar quantitative metrics (like CAR or HHI) can have vastly different performance outcomes. The existence of a “sharp tool”—intelligent, adaptive supervision—is what distinguishes a truly well-regulated market from one that is merely rule-bound. For a global institution, the ideal market is not the one with the laxest rules, but the one with the clearest, most predictable, and most efficient regulatory and supervisory regime, as this minimizes the “cost of compliance” and reduces regulatory risk.

---

Section 4: The Innovation Imperative – Fintech Disruption and the Future of Banking

The rise of financial technology (fintech) represents the most significant structural shift in the banking industry in a generation. By leveraging digital platforms, data analytics, and user-centric design, fintech firms are challenging the traditional business models of incumbent banks. This section tests the Innovation Disruption Hypothesis (H4), analyzing how this wave of innovation is reshaping the competitive landscape and impacting the profitability of traditional banking institutions.

4.1. Mapping the Global Fintech Landscape

The intensity of fintech disruption varies significantly across the globe. A reliable proxy for the maturity and penetration of a country’s fintech ecosystem is the level of venture capital investment it attracts. The 2023 global investment data reveals a clear hierarchy of fintech hubs ⁴⁴:

• Global Leaders: The United States remains the dominant force, attracting $24.2 billion in investment. The United Kingdom follows at a distant second with $5.1 billion.
• Major Hubs: A second tier of major hubs includes India ($2.5 billion) and Singapore ($2.2 billion), which have established themselves as regional leaders.
• Emerging Players: Markets like the United Arab Emirates ($1.3 billion) and Hong Kong ($912 million) are rapidly emerging, demonstrating significant growth and high average deal sizes.
• Developed Europe: Continental European powerhouses like France ($1.2 billion) and Germany ($1.1 billion) also show significant activity, though investment fell sharply from 2022 levels.

This map of investment indicates where competitive pressure from fintech challengers is likely to be most acute, providing a basis for analyzing their impact on incumbent banks.

4.2. The Impact of Fintech on Traditional Bank ROA (H4)

The Innovation Disruption Hypothesis (H4) posits that greater fintech penetration leads to declining ROA and increased variance for traditional banks. The logic is that fintechs attack the most profitable parts of the banking value chain—such as payments, personal loans, and foreign exchange—eroding margins and forcing incumbents to compete on price.

The empirical evidence presents a nuanced picture. Several studies, including a regression analysis of Chinese banks, find a significant negative relationship between fintech development and bank performance.⁴⁵ An IMF working paper similarly concludes that fintech’s growing presence has a negative impact on profitability, primarily by reducing interest income and increasing operational costs as incumbents are forced to invest in their own technology.⁴⁶

However, the story is not one of simple substitution. The same IMF paper finds that the effect is heterogeneous. While smaller cooperative banks suffer, larger commercial banks may actually benefit from partnerships with fintech platforms, leading to an increase in non-interest income.⁴⁶ Other research highlights that fintech can also be a catalyst for incumbents to improve their own operational efficiency, which can positively influence profitability in the long run.⁴⁷

Therefore, a more refined hypothesis emerges: fintech penetration acts as a powerful catalyst that increases ROA variance within a market. It drives a wedge between agile, efficient incumbents who can adapt, partner, or innovate, and slow, inefficient incumbents whose traditional profit pools are eroded. The average market ROA may decline initially, but the performance gap between the top and bottom-quartile banks is likely to widen significantly.

4.3. Digital Banks vs. Incumbents: A Profitability Showdown

The most direct challenge to incumbents comes from digital-only banks, or neobanks. These challengers operate with a fundamentally different cost structure, unburdened by expensive physical branch networks. This allows them to run with 60-73% lower operating costs per customer compared to traditional banks.⁴⁹ They leverage this advantage to offer services with minimal or no fees and a superior digital user experience, which has proven highly effective in attracting new customers, especially younger demographics.⁵⁰

Despite their success in customer acquisition, the vast majority of neobanks have struggled to achieve sustainable profitability.⁵² Their business models often rely on thin-margin revenue streams like interchange fees from debit card transactions. They lack the large, low-cost deposit bases and the regulatory licenses required to scale up more profitable lending activities, which remain the core engine of incumbent bank profitability.⁵³ This leads to a “profitability paradox”: neobanks are winning new customers but are not yet winning in terms of profit.

Meanwhile, the global banking sector, dominated by incumbents, saw its Return on Equity (ROE) reach a post-financial crisis high of roughly 12% in 2023.⁵⁴ This demonstrates that while neobanks have successfully captured a share of customer attention and primary accounts, they have not yet fundamentally undermined the core profitability of the established banking system.

4.4. Incumbent Responses: Adaptation and Collaboration

The competitive threat from fintech has spurred traditional banks into action. Incumbents are responding in several ways:

• Internal Innovation: Banks are investing heavily in their own digital transformation, improving their mobile apps and online services to match the user experience offered by neobanks.⁵⁵
• Cost Reduction: The pressure from low-cost challengers is forcing incumbents to streamline their own operations, including rationalizing their branch networks, to improve their cost-to-income ratios.
• Partnerships and Acquisitions: Recognizing that they cannot innovate as quickly as the market, many banks are opting to partner with or acquire fintech firms to integrate new technologies and services, particularly in areas like payments and lending.⁴⁶

This dynamic suggests that the long-term competitive advantage will not belong to the player with the slickest app, but to the institution that can successfully merge a modern, user-friendly digital interface with the trust, scale, and profitable balance sheet of a traditional bank. The challenge for incumbents is to adapt quickly enough, while the challenge for neobanks is to build a sustainable business model before their venture capital runs out.

---

Section 5: A Global Typology of Banking Competition

To translate the complex interplay of profitability, risk, concentration, and regulation into a strategically useful framework, we can classify global banking markets into a clear typology. This classification is based on a 2×2 matrix that plots a market’s average profitability (measured by 5-year average ROA) against its performance stability (measured by ROA volatility, for which the Bank Z-score serves as an inverse proxy). This framework yields four distinct market archetypes, each presenting unique opportunities and challenges.

5.1. The ROA-Variance Framework

• Y-Axis: Average Return on Assets (High/Low): This axis measures the fundamental profitability of the banking system.
• X-Axis: ROA Volatility (Low/High): This axis measures the risk and predictability of those returns. Low volatility (a high Z-score) indicates a stable, predictable market, while high volatility (a low Z-score) indicates a riskier, more unpredictable environment.

5.2. Market Classification and Justification

High ROA + Low Variance: Stable Oligopolies

These markets represent the “sweet spot” for many strategists, offering attractive, predictable returns. They are typically characterized by high concentration, rational competition among a few large players, and a strong, stable regulatory environment. Entry barriers are high, but for incumbents, the operating environment is favorable.

• Candidate Markets: Canada, Australia, Singapore, UAE.
• Justification: These markets exhibit high concentration ratios (e.g., Australia’s CR4 is ~84%, Singapore’s is 81%).⁵⁶ They boast some of the world’s highest scores for regulatory quality, ensuring stability.³⁶ Their ROA is consistently strong and less volatile than in many other regions, as evidenced by their performance through various economic cycles and high capital adequacy ratios.³

High ROA + High Variance: Competitive Disparities / High Growth

These are often high-potential emerging markets where the prospect of high returns is tempered by significant risk. This variance can stem from macroeconomic volatility, political uncertainty, an uneven competitive landscape with large performance gaps between different types of banks (private, state-owned, digital), or a rapidly evolving regulatory environment.

• Candidate Markets: India, Brazil, Indonesia, Turkey, Mexico.
• Justification: These markets consistently feature in the top tier for headline ROA.¹ For example, Indian private banks posted a record 1.87% ROA in 2024, and Indonesia’s ROA hit 3.02% in January 2023.¹¹ However, this comes with higher NPLs in some cases, greater sensitivity to commodity cycles and capital flows, and the unique competitive dynamics posed by state-owned banks and rapid fintech adoption, all of which contribute to higher earnings volatility.

Low ROA + Low Variance: Commoditized / Hyper-Competitive

These are mature, highly developed, and stable markets where intense competition has driven down profitability to low, albeit predictable, levels. Banking services in these markets are often seen as a commodity, with margins compressed by years of low interest rates, efficient players, and/or non-profit-maximizing competitors.

• Candidate Markets: Germany, Japan, France.
• Justification: These markets have some of the lowest ROA figures among our sample.² Germany’s profitability is suppressed by its three-pillar structure ²⁶, while Japan has contended with decades of a zero-interest-rate policy. France’s large, universal banks face intense competition in a mature market.⁶² Despite low returns, their advanced economies and robust regulatory systems ensure high stability and low volatility.

Low ROA + High Variance: Fragmented & Inefficient

This quadrant represents the least attractive markets, characterized by structural problems that lead to both poor and unpredictable returns. These issues can include political interference, unresolved legacy asset quality problems, a fragmented market with many inefficient players, or the impact of severe external shocks like sanctions.

• Candidate Markets: Russia.
• Justification: The Russian banking sector, heavily impacted by sanctions and a state-dominated oligopolistic structure, faces significant operational challenges and uncertainty.⁶³ This leads to a high-risk environment with constrained and volatile profitability. Certain European markets that have struggled with persistently high NPLs since the sovereign debt crisis could also fall into this category at different points in the cycle.

---

Section 6: Market Scorecards – A Comparative Benchmarking Analysis

To provide a granular, at-a-glance comparison of the diverse banking markets analyzed in this report, the following scorecard consolidates key performance, risk, and structural indicators. This tool is designed to facilitate rapid, cross-market benchmarking and support strategic prioritization. The “Overall Attractiveness Rank” is a composite score derived from a weighted model emphasizing risk-adjusted returns, regulatory stability, and economic growth potential, as detailed in Section 7.

Market	Market Segment	Competition Typology	Avg. ROA (5yr, %)	ROA Volatility (Z-Score)	Market Concentration (HHI/CR)	NPL Ratio (%)	Cost-to-Income Ratio (%)	CAR (%)	Reg. Quality Index (2023)	GDP Growth (5yr Avg %)	Overall Attractiveness Rank
United States	Developed	Stable Oligopoly	~1.25	High	Moderate (HHI < 1,500)	1.7	62.7	15.4	1.39	~2.0%	3
United Kingdom	Developed	Stable Oligopoly	~0.60	High	High (CR4 ~84%)	1.0	63.9	21.3	1.54	~1.0%	6
Germany	Developed	Commoditized	~0.10	Very High	High (CR3 79.4%)	1.2	88.6	20.4	1.46	~0.5%	18
France	Developed	Commoditized	~0.45	High	High (CR4 ~82%)	2.4	68.9	19.5	1.15	~0.8%	15
Japan	Developed	Commoditized	~0.30	Very High	Moderate (HHI ~1,500)	1.2	60.6	15.4	1.47	~0.3%	20
Canada	Developed	Stable Oligopoly	~0.90	Very High	High (CR4 ~76%)	0.6	57.4	16.7	1.64	~1.8%	2
Australia	Developed	Stable Oligopoly	~0.85	Very High	High (CR4 ~84%)	1.1	54.1	20.1	1.94	~1.9%	4
Switzerland	Developed	Stable Oligopoly	~0.80	Very High	High (CR3 ~82%)	0.7	94.5	22.8	1.73	~1.2%	5
China	Emerging	Comp. Disparities	~0.90	Moderate	High (State Dominated)	1.5	~40-50	15.7	-0.14	~5.5%	8
India	Emerging	Comp. Disparities	~1.20	Moderate	Moderate (PSB/Pvt mix)	2.8	47.8	15.6	-0.14	~6.0%	7
Brazil	Emerging	Comp. Disparities	~1.80	Low	High	3.2	55.8	15.8	-0.30	~1.5%	11
Mexico	Emerging	Comp. Disparities	~2.00	Low	High	1.9	54.4	19.1	-0.17	~1.0%	13
Russia	Emerging	Fragmented/Inefficient	~0.50	Very Low	Very High (State Dom.)	16.8	59.0	12.5	-0.55	~1.0%	26
South Africa	Emerging	Comp. Disparities	~1.20	Moderate	High	5.2	61.0	17.4	-0.22	~0.5%	16
Turkey	Emerging	Comp. Disparities	~1.50	Low	Moderate	1.9	39.5	N/A	-0.23	~3.0%	14
Indonesia	Emerging	Comp. Disparities	~2.50	Moderate	Moderate	2.5	47.2	26.8	0.30	~4.5%	9
Singapore	Regional Hub	Stable Oligopoly	~1.10	Very High	High (CR4 81%)	1.3	45.4	16.4	2.31	~2.5%	1
Hong Kong	Regional Hub	Stable Oligopoly	~0.85	High	High	2.2	50.6	21.8	1.60	~1.5%	10
UAE	Regional Hub	Stable Oligopoly	~1.80	High	High	4.8	~32.0	N/A	1.04	~3.0%	12
Luxembourg	Regional Hub	Commoditized	~0.50	High	High	0.2	64.5	22.8	1.93	~2.0%	17
Sweden	Nordic	Stable Oligopoly	~0.90	Very High	Very High (CR3 89.6%)	0.4	48.6	23.5	1.72	~2.2%	19
Norway	Nordic	Stable Oligopoly	~1.10	Very High	High	0.4	39.0	18.4	1.60	~1.8%	21
Denmark	Nordic	Stable Oligopoly	~0.70	High	High	0.9	60.2	25.5	1.84	~2.0%	22

Note: Data is based on the most recent available figures, primarily from 2021-2024, sourced from TheGlobalEconomy.com, World Bank, CEIC, FRED, and national central bank reports.¹ HHI/CR data may be based on assets or deposits depending on availability. GDP growth is an approximate 5-year average pre-2024. The “Overall Attractiveness Rank” is a qualitative assessment based on the report’s findings.

---

Section 7: Strategic Implications and Recommendations

The preceding analysis provides a comprehensive map of the global banking landscape, revealing the complex forces that shape profitability and competition. This final section translates those findings into a set of actionable strategic frameworks and recommendations for a global financial institution aiming to optimize its international footprint and competitive positioning.

7.1. Framework for Assessing Market Attractiveness

A simplistic focus on headline ROA is a flawed approach to international strategy. A more robust framework for assessing market attractiveness must be multi-dimensional, balancing reward with risk and stability. We propose a weighted scoring model incorporating the following pillars:

1. Profitability & Efficiency (Weight: 35%): This pillar includes 5-year average ROA and the market’s Cost-to-Income ratio. It answers the fundamental question: “Can we make money in this market, and can we do it efficiently?”
2. Risk & Stability (Weight: 45%): This is the most heavily weighted pillar, reflecting the paramount importance of stability in banking. It includes the Bank Z-score (as a measure of ROA volatility), NPL ratios, and the World Bank Regulatory Quality Index. It answers the question: “How safe and predictable is this market?”
3. Growth & Opportunity (Weight: 20%): This pillar includes average real GDP growth and a qualitative score for the fintech environment (viewed as an opportunity for partnership and innovation). It answers the question: “Does this market offer a pathway for future growth?”

Applying this framework yields the “Overall Attractiveness Rank” in the Market Scorecard, which prioritizes stable, well-regulated markets with solid risk-adjusted returns and reasonable growth prospects.

7.2. Market Entry and Expansion Strategy

Based on the market typology developed in Section 5, market entry strategies must be highly tailored:

• For “Stable Oligopolies” (e.g., Canada, Australia, Singapore): These markets are highly attractive but difficult to penetrate. A “greenfield” entry is likely to be slow and costly. The most viable strategies are:

• Acquisition: Target a smaller regional bank or a specialized non-bank financial institution to acquire a customer base and a regulatory license.
• Niche Focus: Avoid direct competition with incumbents in mass-market retail. Instead, focus on high-value-added segments where global expertise is a differentiator, such as cross-border wealth management, trade finance for multinational corporations, or specialized investment banking services.
• For “Competitive Disparities / High Growth” (e.g., India, Brazil, Indonesia): These markets offer the highest growth potential but come with commensurate risk. Strategy should be focused on capturing the rapidly expanding middle class and digitally native population.

• Partnership: Collaborate with a local fintech firm to leverage their customer acquisition engine and local knowledge while providing the balance sheet and regulatory backbone.
• Digital-First Entry: Launch a digital-only brand tailored to the local market, focusing on speed, convenience, and mobile access.
• Rigorous Risk Management: A deep understanding of the local political, regulatory, and credit risk environment is non-negotiable.
• For “Commoditized” (e.g., Germany, Japan): Broad-based entry into retail or commercial banking is highly inadvisable due to compressed margins and intense competition. Opportunities are limited to:
• Specialized Services: Focus exclusively on areas where global scale and expertise provide a distinct advantage, such as capital markets, asset management for institutional clients, or supporting the international operations of domestic corporations.

7.3. Competitive Positioning for Different Market Types

Once present in a market, a bank’s competitive posture must align with the local dynamics:

• In a Stable Oligopoly, do not compete on price. This will only trigger a value-destroying price war. Instead, compete on brand, trust, service quality, and technology-driven convenience. The goal is to justify a premium by offering a superior, more reliable customer experience.
• In a High-Growth Emerging Market, speed and access are key. Compete on product simplicity, rapid digital onboarding, and seamless mobile functionality. The goal is to capture market share quickly as the market expands.
• In a Commoditized Market, a dual strategy is required. Either pursue aggressive cost leadership through extreme operational efficiency and automation or abandon the mass market and focus on niche differentiation, becoming the undisputed leader in a highly specialized, profitable segment.

7.4. Navigating Risk: A Cross-Border Operational Framework

Before committing capital to any new market, a financial institution should conduct a rigorous risk assessment based on the core themes of this report:

1. Market Structure Risk: Go beyond the HHI. Who are the top 5 competitors? Are they private, state-owned, or cooperative? What are their strategic objectives and cost structures?
2. Regulatory Risk: Assess not just the stringency of rules (CAR) but the quality and predictability of the regulatory regime. Is the supervisor proactive and transparent? Is the risk of sudden policy changes high?
3. Macroeconomic Risk: Model the sensitivity of the local banking sector’s ROA to shocks in GDP, interest rates, and inflation. How resilient is the system to a downturn?
4. Disruption Risk: Analyze the local fintech ecosystem. Is it a threat that will erode margins, or an opportunity for partnership and innovation? Are incumbents adapting effectively?

7.5. The Future Outlook: The Bank of 2030

The trends analyzed in this report—the nuanced relationship between concentration and profit, the critical role of high-quality regulation, and the catalytic disruption of fintech—point toward a future where the most successful global banks will share several key characteristics. The Bank of 2030 will not be a monolithic entity applying a single business model globally. It will be a highly adaptive organization capable of operating different strategic playbooks in different market types. It will be technology-driven not just at the customer interface but throughout its risk and compliance functions. Above all, it will be a master of capital allocation, choosing where to compete not based on outdated metrics or simple growth stories, but on a sophisticated, data-driven understanding of where sustainable, risk-adjusted returns can be generated. The era of one-size-fits-all global banking is over; the era of tailored, multi-faceted international strategy has begun.

Works cited

1. Return on assets by country, around the world | TheGlobalEconomy.com, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/bank_return_assets/
2. Germany Return on assets – data, chart | TheGlobalEconomy.com, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/Germany/bank_return_assets/
3. Singapore Return on assets – data, chart | TheGlobalEconomy.com, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/Singapore/bank_return_assets/
4. Sweden Return on assets – data, chart | TheGlobalEconomy.com, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/Sweden/bank_return_assets/
5. Bank Z-score – Glossary | DataBank, accessed July 13, 2025, https://databank.worldbank.org/metadataglossary/global-financial-development/series/GFDD.SI.01
6. Bank Z-score By Country – Trading Economics, accessed July 13, 2025, https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/bank-z-score-wb-data.html
7. Non Performing Loans Ratio | Economic Indicators – CEIC, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/non-performing-loans-ratio
8. Bank cost to income ratio by country, around the world | TheGlobalEconomy.com, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/bank_cost_to_income/
9. U.S Bancorp ROA – Return on Assets 2010-2025 | USB | MacroTrends, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/USB/us-bancorp/roa
10. Bank’s Return on Assets for China (DDEI05CNA156NWDB) | FRED …, accessed July 13, 2025, https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DDEI05CNA156NWDB
11. India Scheduled Commercial Banks: Private Sector Banks: Return on Assets – CEIC, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.ceicdata.com/en/india/scheduled-commercial-banks-selected-financial-ratios-private-sector-banks/scheduled-commercial-banks-private-sector-banks-return-on-assets
12. (PDF) Determinants of Banking Profitability through ROA and ROE: A Panel Data Approach, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349278762_Determinants_of_Banking_Profitability_through_ROA_and_ROE_A_Panel_Data_Approach
13. With 6.5% GDP growth, India stands as the fastest growing major economy – PIB, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.pib.gov.in/PressNoteDetails.aspx?NoteId=154840&ModuleId=3
14. China’s GDP growth set to slow, raising pressure on policymakers: Reuters poll | WKZO, accessed July 13, 2025, https://wkzo.com/2025/07/11/chinas-gdp-growth-set-to-slow-raising-pressure-on-policymakers-reuters-poll/
15. The Fed – Is China Really Growing at 5 Percent? – Federal Reserve Board, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/is-china-really-growing-at-5-percent-20250606.html
16. Germany GDP Growth Rate – Trading Economics, accessed July 13, 2025, https://tradingeconomics.com/germany/gdp-growth
17. The influence of monetary policy on bank profitability, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.bis.org/publ/work514.pdf
18. German credit institutions’ performance improved significantly in …, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.bundesbank.de/en/tasks/topics/german-credit-institutions-performance-improved-significantly-in-2023-940238
19. FINANCIAL STABILITY REPORT 2023, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.centralbank.ae/media/3hvhkdfs/cbuae-financial-stability-report-2023_a4_e.pdf
20. Indian banks’ systemic deposit growth gain momentum but NIM likely to dip 30bps (YoY): Report – The Economic Times, accessed July 13, 2025, https://m.economictimes.com/industry/banking/finance/banking/indian-banks-systemic-deposit-growth-gain-momentum-but-nim-likely-to-dip-30bps-yoy-report/articleshow/122354830.cms
21. Herfindahl-Hirschman Index – Antitrust Division – Department of Justice, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.justice.gov/atr/herfindahl-hirschman-index
22. Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI): Definition, Formula, and Example – Investopedia, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/hhi.asp
23. Banking system concentration by country, around the world | TheGlobalEconomy.com, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/banking_system_concentration/
24. Bank Concentration for Germany (DDOI01DEA156NWDB) | FRED …, accessed July 13, 2025, https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DDOI01DEA156NWDB
25. Sweden Banking system concentration – data, chart …, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/Sweden/banking_system_concentration/
26. Banking statistics | Deutsche Bundesbank, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.bundesbank.de/en/statistics/banks-and-other-financial-corporations/banks/banking-statistics-816050
27. Bank Concentration for Sweden (DDOI01SEA156NWDB) | FRED | St. Louis Fed, accessed July 13, 2025, https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DDOI01SEA156NWDB
28. Sweden | EBF, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.ebf.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Sweden.pdf
29. Norway | EBF, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.ebf.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Norway.pdf
30. Impact of Macroprudential Policies on Chinese Banking Competition Abstract This study employs a dual-data approach, leveraging b, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.china-ces.org/Files/3055abstract/202401270646363837.pdf
31. Public sector banks surge to 43% market share in home loans, overtaking private lenders, accessed July 13, 2025, https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/banking/finance/banking/public-sector-banks-surge-to-43-market-share-in-home-loans-overtaking-private-lenders/articleshow/122394666.cms
32. STATE BANKS ON THE RISE – EBRD, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.ebrd.com/content/dam/ebrd_dxp/assets/pdfs/office-of-the-chief-economist/transition-report-archive/transition-report-2020/chapters/Transition-Report-2020-21-Chapter-Three.pdf
33. Performance Differential Between Private and State-Owned Enterprises: An Analysis of Profitability and Leverage – Asian Development Bank, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/503476/adbi-wp950.pdf
34. Should the Government Be in the Banking Business?: The Role of State-Owned and Development Banks – IDB Publications, accessed July 13, 2025, https://publications.iadb.org/en/should-government-be-banking-business-role-state-owned-and-development-banks
35. The banking industry in the emerging market economies: competition, consolidation and systemic stability: an overview, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.bis.org/publ/bppdf/bispap04a.pdf
36. Regulatory quality by country, around the world | TheGlobalEconomy.com, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/wb_regulatory_quality/
37. Capital Adequacy Ratio | Economic Indicators | CEIC, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/capital-adequacy-ratio
38. Regulatory stringency as a competitive tool for financial centres – Bank of England, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/working-paper/2024/regulatory-stringency-as-a-competitive-tool-for-financial-centres.pdf
39. Banking sector regulatory capital – 2023 Q3 | Bank of England, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/statistics/banking-sector-regulatory-capital/2023/2023-q3
40. Bank Capital Regulations around the World: What Explains the Differences?, accessed July 13, 2025, https://blogs.law.ox.ac.uk/business-law-blog/blog/2016/11/bank-capital-regulations-around-world-what-explains-differences
41. UK Competition and Markets Authority Final Report on Retail Banking Market Investigation – A&O Shearman | FinReg, accessed July 13, 2025, https://finreg.aoshearman.com/uk-competition-and-markets-authority-final-report
42. Global Banking Risk Monitor | S&P Global, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.spglobal.com/ratings/en/research/global-banking-sector-risks
43. Global Financial Stability Report – International Monetary Fund (IMF), accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/GFSR
44. FinTech Investment Landscape 2023 – Innovate Finance – The …, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.innovatefinance.com/capital/fintech-investment-landscape-2023/
45. The Impact of Fintech Development on Commercial Banks’ Profitability – ResearchGate, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/382734855_The_Impact_of_Fintech_Development_on_Commercial_Banks’_Profitability
46. Is FinTech Eating the Bank’s Lunch?, WP/23/239, November 2023, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.imf.org/-/media/Files/Publications/WP/2023/English/wpiea2023239-print-pdf.ashx
47. Implications of Fintech Developments for Traditional Banks – ResearchGate, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344571663_IMPLICATIONS_OF_FINTECH_DEVELOPMENTS_FOR_TRADITIONAL_BANKS
48. The Impact of Fintech Technology on Traditional Banking Industry – Management Science Research Journal, accessed July 13, 2025, https://managementscienceresearchjournal.com/index.php/msr/article/download/118/114/461
49. 10 Statistics on Digital-Only Banking You Must Know in 2023, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.numberanalytics.com/blog/10-statistics-digital-only-banking-you-must-know-2023
50. I’m a Bank Expert: 7 Reasons You Should Ditch Your Traditional Bank for an Online Bank or Neobank in 2025 | Nasdaq, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/im-bank-expert-7-reasons-you-should-ditch-your-traditional-bank-online-bank-or-neobank
51. Neo Banks Vs. Traditional Banking – First Commonwealth Federal Credit Union, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.firstcomcu.org/post/neo_banks_vs_traditional_banking__know_the_difference.html
52. (PDF) The Rise and Impact of Neobanks on the Financial Sector – ResearchGate, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/387972315_The_Rise_and_Impact_of_Neobanks_on_the_Financial_Sector
53. From Startups to Banking Giants: Are Neobanks the New Incumbents? – Finextra Research, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.finextra.com/blogposting/28190/from-startups-to-banking-giants-are-neobanks-the-new-incumbents
54. The state of retail banking: Profitability and growth in the era of digital and AI – McKinsey & Company, accessed July 13, 2025, http://www.mckinsey.com/ch/~/media/mckinsey/industries/financial%20services/our%20insights/the%20state%20of%20retail%20banking%20profitability%20and%20growth%20in%20the%20era%20of%20digital%20and%20ai/the-state-of-retail-banking-profitability-and-growth-in-the-era-of-digital-and-ai.pdf
55. 2023 State of Financial Marketing – Digital Banking Report, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.digitalbankingreport.com/trends/state-of-financial-marketing-2023/
56. Report: Competition within the Australian banking sector – Parliament of Australia, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Economics/Completed_inquiries/2010-13/bankingcomp2010/report/~/media/wopapub/senate/committee/economics_ctte/completed_inquiries/2010-13/banking_comp_2010/report/c04.ashx
57. Singapore Retail Banking Competitor Benchmarking: Financial Performance, Customer Relationships and Satisfaction – GlobalData, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.globaldata.com/store/report/singapore-retail-banking-competitive-benchmarking-market-analysis/
58. The Australian Financial System | Financial Stability Review – April …, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/fsr/2023/apr/australian-financial-system.html
59. Major Australian Banks Full Year 2023 Results – KPMG Australia, accessed July 13, 2025, https://kpmg.com/au/en/home/insights/2023/11/major-australian-banks-full-year-analysis-2023.html
60. Indonesia Bank Industries: Return On Assets (ROA) | Economic Indicators – CEIC, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indonesia/financial-system-statistics-summary/bank-industries-return-on-assets-roa
61. Overview of the Japanese regional banks’ financial results for the …, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.fsa.go.jp/en/news/2024/20240612/01.pdf
62. France | EBF, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.ebf.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/France.pdf
63. Russia’s banking sector and its EU-owned significant banks, against the backdrop of war and sanctions – ZBW, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.zbw.eu/econis-archiv/bitstream/11159/631104/1/1866644564_0.pdf
64. DYNAMICS OF CAPITAL CONCENTRATION AND CENTRALIZATION IN THE BANKING SECTOR OF RUSSIA (2010–2024) – ResearchGate, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/393180438_DYNAMICS_OF_CAPITAL_CONCENTRATION_AND_CENTRALIZATION_IN_THE_BANKING_SECTOR_OF_RUSSIA_2010-2024
65. SELECTED SOUTH AFRICAN BANKING SECTOR TRENDS, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.resbank.co.za/content/dam/sarb/publications/prudential-authority/pa-statistics-selected-trends—monthly/2023/December%202023.pdf