An Empirical Study on the Financial Health
of Private Sector Banks in India through the Eagles Approach
Samir B. Mhapuskar*
M. Com, LLB, MBA, Research Scholar, IES Management college and Research Centre,
Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
samirmhapuskar1@gmail.com
Abstract
Purpose:
This paper has assessed the
financial position of the chosen Indian private sector banks on the EAGLES
framework that had estimated the performance on major aspects of key
performance indicators, such as Earnings, Asset quality, Growth,
Liquidity, Equity and Strategic success. The study will
also seek to determine comparative financial
strengths, operational stability,
and strategic performance, as well
as dissimilarities among top selected private sector banks.
Methodology:
The researchers use a mixed-method
research design, which involves analytical review and quantitative methods. The
secondary data were gathered through annual reports (2019-2023) of three big
private sector banks, HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank and IndusInd Bank.
One-way ANOVA with a level of significance of 5% was used to evaluate the
financial performance differences so that statistically significant differences
in EAGLES parameters could be determined.
Findings:
The
findings indicate that there are massive differences in the financial
performance of the sampled banks. ICICI
Bank performed better in Earnings, Asset Quality, Equity, and Strategic
Performance (II/IC), which implies high levels of profitability, proper
management of credit risks, and adequacy of capital. IndusInd Bank performed very well in Growth, Liquidity, and
NII/NIC, which displays efficient growth strategies and liquidity management.
The performance of HDFC Bank was
balanced with equal results, showing stability in operations and a continued
financial state.
Contributions:
The author uses the EAGLES model to
examine the bank performance systematically, which is helpful to investors,
policymakers, and banking professionals. It determines the various levels of
strategic capabilities in the private sector banks and ensures that they are
financially stable in general, to guide their informed investment and their
decisions concerning policies.
Keywords: EAGLES Model, Financial Performance, Private Sector
Banks, ANOVA, Asset Quality
INTRODUCTION
One of the most important parts of India's economic
structure is the banking sector, which helps with things like capital
allocation, business development, and keeping the economy stable. Thanks to new
regulations, fiercer competition, and lightning-fast digitization, the
operating environment for banks has changed drastically in the last several
years (Indian Brand Equity Foundation [IBEF], 2024). To be competitive in a
dynamic climate, private sector banks in India have responded by enhancing
their profitability frameworks, improving asset-quality monitoring, and being
more agile strategically.
Traditionally, frameworks like the “CAMELS”
model have been employed to assess the overall health of banks. On the other
hand, the "EAGLES" model has been widely used in Indian
banking research to provide a more comprehensive view of performance (Daida,
2024). This model encompasses Earnings, Asset Quality, Growth, Liquidity,
Equity (capital sufficiency), & Strategy/structural response. In India, for
example, private banks outperformed their public-sector counterparts on
measures of profitability, asset quality, and sustainability, according to
research by Daida (2024) using the EAGLES model.
This paper uses this context to empirically analyse a
subset of large Indian private banks from 2019 to 2023. The analysis examines
variations across each of the six EAGLES aspects using statistical tools such
as one-way ANOVA and annual report data. This analysis aims to investigate
these financial institutions, draw conclusions about their strengths and areas
for improvement, add to the existing body of literature on performance
evaluation in the Indian banking industry, and ultimately help with strategic
decision-making and regulatory supervision.
LITERATURE
REVIEW
The evaluation of banking performance has been a
significant area of research in financial studies, particularly in emerging
economies such as India. Researchers have developed several frameworks to
assess the financial health, operational efficiency, and risk management
capabilities of banks. Among these, models such as CAMELS and EAGLES have been
widely adopted to examine multidimensional aspects of banking performance.
Mathew et al. (2025) Most of the
small finance and payment banks that just joined the Indian banking system have
been around for over five years. Despite the fact that both institutions fall
under the umbrella term "small bank" or "niche bank," the
primary goal of this piece is to shed light on a hitherto uncharted territory
by analysing their financial performance employing quantitative models. In
order to measure success, this investigation used the EAGLES model, which
stands for Earnings, Assets Quality, Growth, Liquidity, Equity, and Strategy.
Seven years of data are utilized for the Small Finance Banks analysis, and six
years of data are utilized for the Payments Banks analysis. The 19 ratios used
in this study will help disseminate knowledge in a more comprehensive way. They
used One-way ANOVA to see whether the EAGLES were statistically significant.
According to the results, the Payments Banks are outperforming the Small
Finance Banks. Due to the negative SRQ scores of all small banks, the analysis
implies that both institutions made significant improvements in the areas of
loans, advances, and investments; this could need changes in regulatory policy.
The poor Returns on Equity, Asset Quality, and Earnings all made this clear.
The research clearly shows that the small finance banks aren't making the most
of their depositor’s and borrowers’ money when it comes to investments, loans,
and advances. Both banking firms maintain solid growth and liquidity positions.
Some have speculated that new, smaller banks are just entering their growth
phase, and that this is because they are anticipating the introduction of
novel, low-cost financial products, which should lead to an acceleration of
their expansion.
Dipak Kundu et al. (2025). Organizational
effectiveness, especially in public sector agencies, can be measured using the
EAGLES framework, which places emphasis on five interrelated factors:
accountability, engagement, leadership, and governance. In this study, we
examine a few of India's public sector banks using the EAGLES model. In order
to put a number on the connections between these factors and the banks' bottom
lines, econometric models back up the study. Public sector banks in India can
boost their bottom lines by cutting costs and enhancing efficiency, according
to an econometric model that has been defined, solved, and presented here.
Mrs. Rajni Dayma et al. (2025).
This study explores the financial performance of Punjab National Bank after its
merger with Oriental Bank of Commerce and United Bank of India. The research
utilizes the EAGLES model, a tool designed to assess financial health by
focusing on key performance indicators (KPIs) across several dimensions,
including profitability, liquidity, efficiency, and solvency. They analyse
PNBʼs financial metrics before and after the merger, aiming to determine
the impact of the merger on the bank’s operational efficiency, profitability,
and financial stability.
G. Rajesh et al. (2024). A
turning point in India's banking history came with the nationalization of
banks. Competition in the banking business is heating up as the sector grows
swiftly to fulfil the demands of the country's development. When thinking about
India's economy, it's impossible to ignore the banking industry. There is a
vast array of banking institutions in India. The ranks and places of banks
change every year due to their performance, which has been altering over time.
With the use of the EAGLES model, this research set out to assess the health of
a selection of India's private banks. They used the ANOVA test to examine the
banks' financial data after classifying them using the EAGLES model. This
allowed us to discover how diverse they were. The polled financial institutions
were HDFC, DCB, RBL, and ICICI. HDFC Bank outperformed the competition, ranking
first in assets and earnings, second in equity, third in growth and liquidity,
and fourth in liquidity indicators, behind only ICICI. DCB Bank ranked dead
last due to poor performance in profitability, expansion, and liquidity. At the
end of the day, HDFC Bank came out on top. RBL and ICICI following closely
after. There is a statistically significant difference in all samples, and the
null hypothesis is rejected since the values of the investigation's variables
in the table are less than the significant value of 0.05 at the 95% confidence level.
Mr. Kiran et al. (2024).
This study uses the EAGLES model, which is a comprehensive framework for analysing
bank stability, growth, and profitability, to evaluate the financial
performance of banks in both the public and private sectors. Financial analysis
can help investors estimate the risk of a firm's bankruptcy or failure, which
is important for them because they focus on the firm's earnings and prospects.
To that end, the EAGLES model examines important financial statistics, shedding
light on the operational efficiency and robustness of a bank. It detects
possible dangers before they become serious, allowing for prompt actions,
acting as an early warning system. In order to compare and contrast the growth
and efficiency of five different banks, both public and private, this study
looks at their financial statements from 2018–2019 to 2022–23. Important
lessons for future strategy, resource allocation, and performance enhancement
can be gleaned from the results.
Dr. Sreeram Daida et al. (2024)
use the EAGLES model to compare public and private sector banks in India on
Efficiency, Asset quality, Growth, Liquidity, Earnings, and Sustainability.
Over the course of five years, the study examines SBI, CANARA, HDFC, and ICICI,
two public sector banks, and two private sector banks. In order to determine
whether there are statistically significant differences between different
financial variables, this exploratory study used one-way ANOVA testing. In
terms of profitability, growth, and asset quality, private sector banks
typically surpass their public sector counterparts, according to the data. But
when it comes to economic stability and financial inclusion, public sector
banks are still indispensable. Additionally, private banks show more efficiency
and sustainability when it comes to liquidity management and strategic
responsiveness, according to the research. This study adds to what is already
known about the state of Indian banks' finances, which can help with
policymaking and changes to the banking industry. The study highlights the
significance of using strong evaluation models such as EAGLES to guarantee a
more precise and comprehensive evaluation of the performance of banks.
The purpose of the study by Rashesh Vaidya et al.
(2023) was to assess the effectiveness of Nepalese commercial banks by
applying the EAGLE rating model, which was originally developed by Vong
(1994) and comprised of the following acronyms: earning ability ratio,
assets quality ratio, growth rate, liquidity, and equity. Subsequently, Vong
and Song (2015) renamed the model EAGLES by adding the letter 'S'. The
strategy response quotient (S) measures the effectiveness of a bank's
management in determining interest rates for deposits and loans and in managing
the interest burden, which is defined as non-interest income minus overhead
expenditures. From 2018–2019 to 2020–21, the study analysed the financial data
of every commercial bank in Nepal. Based on the EAGLES ranking, the most
successful banks in Nepal are those that have recently entered the market and
are actively expanding their customer base. While determining the ranking of
the commercial banks, the study also discovered that there is a substantial
association between ranking for return on equity (E), ranking for
non-performing loan ratio (A), and ranking for capital adequacy ratio (E).
Similarly, among government-owned commercial banks, the paper ranked the best
bank according to EAGLES for all components; among joint venture banks, the
best bank was ranked according to loan growth, liquidity position, and capital
structure.
Vijayalakshmi
Srinivas et al. (2022). The soundness and productivity of
the financial system are critical to economic expansion. Any economy that wants
to thrive and stay stable in this competitive global business climate needs a
strong banking system. The banking industry in India is one of the most
promising worldwide due to a confluence of demographic, technical, and
macroeconomic trends. Dragged down performance and jeopardizing future growth
are challenges, including high-stressed asset levels and fragmented sector
structure. Non-Performing Assets (NPAs) are the greatest measure of a country's
banking sector's health. The profitability of banks is directly affected by
non-performing assets. The Indian banking sector has recently been quite
worried about non-performing assets (NPAs). Strategies for managing
non-performing accounts (NPAs) in the Indian banking system are discussed in
this paper, along with the idea of NPAs, their magnitude, and the main reasons
why an account becomes an NPA.
According to Dr. Alka B. Kshatriya et al. (2021),
the banking sector maintains the economy's stability. The research will look at
how well both domestic and international banks in India are doing financially.
The characteristics of the EAGLES Model are used to measure financial
performance. When comparing the financial performance of different banks and
other financial institutions, the EAGLES model is employed. Dr. John Vong
founded it following the crisis in Asia. Earnings Capability, Asset Quality,
Growth, Liquidity, Equity, and Strategy make up the EAGLES Model. This research
paper uses data gathered from banks' annual reports over seven years (2013–2014
to 2019–2020). The financial performance is analysed using t-tests, ANOVA, rank
analysis, and ratio analysis. Among the chosen public and foreign banks,
research places Citibank at the top, while Bank of India is at the very bottom.
In terms of the growth and quality of their assets, public and foreign banks
are not much different. Earnings Capacity, Liquidity, Equity, and Strategy are
four areas where public banks and foreign banks differ significantly. It found
that foreign banks' financial performance outperformed that of India's public
sector banks.
According to Mr. Jay Sathavara et al. (2021), a
country's overall economic health is enhanced when its currency and banking
system are stable. Because of the savings and loans, they facilitate, scheduled
commercial banks play a vital role in this industry. The purpose of applying
the EAGLE model to a subset of India's private sector banks was to assess their
financial health. PSBs were selected according to their market capitalization,
which included HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, and IndusInd Bank. We achieved this by
extracting representative sample financial data from the annual reports of
participating banks covering the years 2009–10 through 2018–19. We used the
EAGLE model to assign rankings to the banks, and the ANOVA test to examine how
the various financial parameters varied across the institutions. The results
showed that HDFC Bank had the most earnings, assets, liquidity, and equity,
while ICICI Bank had the highest earnings, growth, and equity. In terms of
expansion, IndusInd Bank was likewise at the top. Last place went to ICICI Bank
in terms of total growth, assets, and profitability. The chosen private sector
banks have all kept their capital adequacy ratio in line with what is required
by the RBI. Based on the study's variables, we may reject the null hypothesis
and conclude that there is a statistically significant difference in all
samples because the computed values are lower than the significance value of
0.05 at the 95% confidence level.
G. SURESH et al. (2020)
All parties involved—depositors, stockholders, staff, and the economy at
large—stand to benefit from a bank's sound financial health. Time and again,
various policies and procedures have been put in place to assess the financial
health of each bank and ensure its proper management. New banking policies and
technology developments have placed banks in more difficult and risky
situations. Even though it has been proven to be outmoded, the CAMEL model is
still commonly used to measure banks' efficiency and performance. Since the
EAGLES model bases its evaluations of banks on their output ratios, it provides
a more definitive, objective, and consistent way to gauge their financial
health and performance. By examining six critical indicators that are important
for every bank today. The purpose of this research was to get a feel for how
well selected Indian commercial banks were doing financially.
Santhoshi Kumari et al. (2017). When
a country's banking system is strong, it helps the economy grow. The EAGLES
approach can compare and measure the performance of Indian banks in a more
consistent, objective, and definitive way. EAGLES methodology ranks
institutions solely based on their output ratios; there is no space for
subjective evaluation. Ten public and private banks' worth of data over a
decade forms the basis of this investigation. Among the three measures of
financial health, Yes Bank stands head and shoulders above the competition. So,
Yes Bank has the best profit potential of the four we considered. Comparison of
ICICI Bank to public sector banks, PSB perform better in terms of the
CAR and investment-to-deposit ratios. Among India's public sector banks,
SBI ranks high for both deposit and loan services. According to the
findings, there is a significant performance gap between certain public and
private banks.
RESEARCH
GAPS
1.
Most previous studies
have focused on comparisons between public and private sector banks, while
limited research specifically examines the financial performance of major
private sector banks in India.
2.
Many studies rely on
traditional evaluation models such as CAMELS, whereas the EAGLES model has been
less frequently applied for comprehensive banking performance analysis.
3.
Earlier research mainly analyses
historical banking performance, with fewer studies focusing on the recent
period marked by digital transformation, regulatory reforms, and post-pandemic
changes in the banking sector.
4.
Several studies use basic
ratio analysis, while limited research applies statistical tools such as ANOVA
to examine significant differences in bank performance.
5.
There is limited
comparative analysis of leading private sector banks such as HDFC Bank, ICICI
Bank, and IndusInd Bank using recent financial data, creating a need for
updated empirical research.
OBJECTIVES
The study aims to assess the overall performance,
stability, and operational efficiency of the selected banks through multiple
financial dimensions, namely Earnings, Asset Quality, Growth, Liquidity,
Equity, and Strategic Performance.
METHODOLOGY
Research
Design
The study adopts an analytical and empirical research
design to evaluate the financial health of selected private sector banks in
India. A mixed-method approach is applied, combining conceptual analysis of the
EAGLES model with quantitative statistical examination of financial data.
The conceptual component involves reviewing existing
literature on banking performance evaluation models, particularly the EAGLES
framework, to understand its theoretical foundation and relevance for analysing
bank performance. The empirical component focuses on analysing financial
indicators derived from the annual reports of the selected banks.
Second, we used the EAGLES criteria (Earnings, Asset
Quality, Growth, Liquidity, Equity, and Strategic Performance) to gather
empirical data from the chosen banks' annual reports and financial statements.
We then used these indicators to quantify the banks' performance.
Nature and Sources of Data
The study is based entirely on secondary data
collected from credible and publicly available sources. These include:
·
Annual reports and
financial statements of HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, and IndusInd Bank
·
Financial databases such
as Money Control and Statista
·
Publications and
statistical data from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI)
·
Academic journals,
research papers, and financial publications related to banking performance
The use of secondary data ensures accuracy,
reliability, and comparability across the selected banks.
Analytical
Framework: EAGLES Model
The financial performance of the selected banks is
evaluated using the EAGLES model, which assesses banking efficiency through six
major dimensions:
|
EAGLES Parameter |
Representative Ratio |
Description |
|
Earnings |
Return on Equity (RoE) |
Measures profitability and shareholder return |
|
Asset Quality |
Net NPA (%) |
Indicates the level of NPA |
|
Growth |
Growth in Loans (%) |
Assesses the expansion in lending activity |
|
Liquidity |
Loans to Deposits Ratio (%) |
Evaluates liquidity and credit deployment |
|
Equity |
Capital Adequacy Ratio (CAR) (%) |
Reflects capital strength and solvency |
|
Strategic Performance |
II/IC and NII/NIC Ratios |
Measures interest and non-interest income efficiency |
These indicators collectively provide a comprehensive
evaluation of profitability, risk management, operational growth, liquidity
stability, capital adequacy, and strategic efficiency of banks.
Statistical Technique
To examine whether differences in performance among
the selected banks are statistically significant, the study employs One-Way
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA).
ANOVA is used because it allows comparison of mean
values of financial indicators across multiple groups (banks) simultaneously.
The test evaluates whether observed variations in financial ratios are
statistically significant or occur merely due to random fluctuations.
The significance level for hypothesis testing is set
at 5 percent (p < 0.05). If the calculated p-value is less than the
significance level, the null hypothesis is rejected, indicating a statistically
significant difference among the banks.
Period of Study
The study covers the period 2019 to 2023, which
captures both pre-pandemic and post-pandemic financial conditions. This
timeframe is particularly relevant as it reflects how banks adapted to major
economic disruptions, digital banking expansion, and regulatory changes in the
Indian banking sector.
Selection of Banks
Three of India's most prominent private sector banks HDFC,
ICICI, & IndusInd Bank were chosen from among twenty-one institutions
according to their market value in 2023:
·
HDFC Bank –
₹3,82,622 crore
·
ICICI Bank –
₹2,82,452 crore
·
IndusInd Bank –
₹97,799 crore
This sample of private banks
was selected to provide a good cross-section of size and performance across the
industry. The sample includes both large and medium-sized banks as well as some
smaller ones.
Justification for Selection of Banks
The present study focuses on three leading private
sector banks in India—HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, and IndusInd Bank—to examine their
financial performance using the EAGLES framework. The selection of these banks
is based on several academic and practical considerations.
First, these banks represent some of the most
significant private sector financial institutions in India in terms of market
capitalization, asset size, and operational scale. As of 2023, HDFC Bank and
ICICI Bank ranked among the top private banks by market value and total assets,
while IndusInd Bank represents a fast-growing mid-sized private sector bank.
Including banks of different sizes allows the study to capture variations in
financial strategies, operational efficiency, and risk management practices across
the private banking segment.
Second, these banks maintain extensive nationwide
operations and diversified banking services, including retail banking,
corporate lending, digital banking, and investment services. Their wide market
presence makes them suitable representatives of the private sector banking
ecosystem in India, allowing the findings to reflect broader industry trends.
Third, the selected banks have consistently published
detailed and reliable financial reports, which ensures the availability of
standardized and comparable data for empirical analysis. Since the study relies
on ratio analysis and statistical testing under the EAGLES model, the
availability of consistent financial disclosures is essential for maintaining
data reliability.
Fourth, previous research has frequently examined
these banks when analysing financial performance within the Indian banking
sector. However, most earlier studies either compare public versus private
sector banks or employ traditional frameworks such as CAMELS. Therefore,
analysing these three banks using the EAGLES model with recent post-pandemic
data (2019–2023) provides updated insights into the financial health,
operational growth, and strategic efficiency of major private sector banks.
Finally, the inclusion of both large and medium-sized
banks enhances the comparative strength of the analysis. While HDFC Bank and
ICICI Bank represent established large-scale institutions with strong capital
structures, IndusInd Bank reflects the performance dynamics of relatively
smaller but rapidly expanding private banks. This combination provides a
balanced and representative sample for comparative financial evaluation.
HYPOTHESES
H₀: There is no substantial distinction in the
financial performance of the selected banks under the specified parameter.
H₀₁: Earnings (Return on Equity)
H₀₂: Asset Quality (Net NPA %)
H₀₃: Growth (Growth of Loans and Advances)
H₀₄: Liquidity (Loans to Deposits Ratio)
H₀₅: Equity (Capital Adequacy Ratio)
H₀₆. ₁: Strategic Performance
(Interest Income to Interest Cost Ratio – II/IC)
H₀₆. ₂: Strategic Performance (NII/NIC)
DATA
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
Earnings
Bank earnings indicate profitability and shareholder
returns. Maintaining a healthy profit margin lowers the probability of
bankruptcy, increases financial stability, and fortifies capital. Return on
Equity (RoE) is the metric utilized to estimate this parameter within
the EAGLES framework. Return on Equity is a metric that banks use to evaluate
how well they turn their shareholders' equity into profits. A lower Return on
Equity (RoE) shows inefficient use of equity capital, whereas a greater RoE
indicates stronger earning power and superior managerial performance.
Table 1: Comparative Analysis of Return on
Equity (%) for Selected Private Sector Banks
|
Year |
HDFC Bank |
ICICI
Bank |
IndusInd Bank |
|
2019 |
0.46 |
12.55 |
16.50 |
|
2020 |
7.19 |
12.18 |
13.25 |
|
2021 |
2.15 |
13.08 |
14.71 |
|
2022 |
7.06 |
12.47 |
7.39 |
|
2023 |
12.03 |
12.68 |
10.20 |
|
Mean |
5.78 |
12.59 |
12.41 |
|
Rank |
3 |
1 |
2 |
The main objective of each
bank is to exploit shareholder wealth; therefore, ROE serves as a key indicator
to assess the earning capacity of the selected Private Sector Banks. A higher
RoE denotes superior profitability and greater returns to equity shareholders,
while a lower RoE reflects comparatively weaker performance. During the study
period from 2019 to 2023, ICICI Bank achieved the highest mean RoE of 12.59%,
followed closely by IndusInd Bank with 12.41%, whereas HDFC Bank reported a
relatively lower mean RoE of 5.78%.
Figure 1:
Comparative Analysis of Return on Equity (ROE) of Selected Private Sector Banks
(2019–2023)
Consequently, ICICI Bank
ranked first, IndusInd Bank second, and HDFC Bank third under the Earnings
parameter of the EAGLES model. To examine whether the differences in mean RoE
values among these banks were statistically significant, the researcher applied
a one-way ANOVA test. Table 2 displays the outcomes of this analysis.
Table 2:
Summary of ANOVA Findings for the Relationship Between Earnings and RoE
|
F |
Sig. |
Outcomes |
|
7.571 |
0.001 |
Discard the
Null Hypothesis H01 |
H01 is rejected from the research because the
calculated F-value is 7.571 and the p-value is less than 0.05.
Asset Quality
The capacity of a bank to control its exposure to risk
and keep its loan portfolio in good shape is reflected in the quality of its
assets. High levels of NPAs weaken profitability and reduce competitiveness, as
funds remain locked in non-recoverable loans. Effective credit appraisal and
recovery mechanisms help minimize NPAs, thereby improving financial stability
and operational efficiency. The asset quality of the selected Private Sector
Banks that were chosen for this study is evaluated using Net Nonperforming
Assets (%) as the primary indicator.
Table 3: Comparative Analysis of Asset
Quality (Net NPA %) for Selected Private Sector Banks
|
Year |
HDFC Bank |
ICICI
Bank |
IndusInd Bank |
|
2019 |
2.06 |
0.75 |
1.39 |
|
2020 |
1.56 |
0.71 |
1.54 |
|
2021 |
1.05 |
1.21 |
1.03 |
|
2022 |
0.73 |
0.64 |
1.28 |
|
2023 |
0.39 |
0.37 |
1.81 |
|
Mean |
1.16 |
0.74 |
1.41 |
|
Rank |
2 |
1 |
3 |
Key to understanding a bank's asset quality is the NPA
percentage., reflecting its efficiency in managing credit risk. A lower Net NPA
ratio signifies stronger asset quality and effective loan recovery mechanisms,
indicating that a smaller portion of the bank’s assets is tied up in
non-performing loans. Accordingly, banks with lower Net NPA values receive
higher rankings under this parameter.
Figure 2: Comparative Analysis of Net
Non-Performing Assets (Net NPA %) of Selected Private Sector Banks (2019–2023)
During the study period, ICICI Bank demonstrated
superior asset quality with the lowest mean Net NPA of 0.74%, compared to HDFC
Bank (1.16%) and IndusInd Bank (1.41%), highlighting its stronger credit risk
management practices.
Table 4: Summary of ANOVA Findings for the
Net NPA (%)
|
F |
Sig. |
Outcomes |
|
4.723 |
0.008 |
Discard the
Null Hypothesis H02 |
In Table 4, we can see that there is a statistically
significant difference in the mean Net NPA ratios amongst HDFC Bank, ICICI
Bank, and IndusInd Bank. This variation is maintained by a computed F-value of
4.723 & p-value less than 0.05. This shows that according to the EAGLES
model, there is a large difference in the asset quality of the chosen banks.
Growth
The EAGLES model isn't complete without growth, which
shows how well a bank can grow its operations and stand out in the market. One
way to measure a bank's market aggressiveness is by looking at its core deposit
and loan growth rates. If the loan growth rate is higher, it usually means that
lending activity is better, revenue is higher, and market competitiveness is
stronger.
Table 5: Comparative Analysis of Growth in
Loans (%) for Selected Private Sector Banks
|
Year |
HDFC Bank |
ICICI
Bank |
IndusInd Bank |
|
2019 |
12.54 |
21.20 |
28.59 |
|
2020 |
15.49 |
6.83 |
10.94 |
|
2021 |
9.15 |
1.79 |
2.81 |
|
2022 |
13.46 |
21.26 |
12.44 |
|
2023 |
19.44 |
17.92 |
21.28 |
|
Mean |
14.02 |
13.80 |
15.21 |
|
Rank |
2 |
3 |
1 |
The analysis reveals that the growth in loans has
varied notably among the selected private sector banks during the study period.
The most dynamic lending behaviour was seen by IndusInd Bank, whose loan growth
ranged from 2.81% in 2021 to 28.59% in 2019, with the highest swing in the
industry. HDFC Bank recorded loan growth
between 9.15% (2021) and 19.44% (2023), indicating steady but moderate
expansion. In contrast, ICICI Bank showed relatively lower growth variability,
ranging from 1.79% (2021) to 21.26% (2022).
Figure 3: Comparative Analysis of Growth
in Loans (%) of Selected Private Sector Banks (2019–2023)
Based on the mean loan growth rates, IndusInd Bank
achieved the top rank, followed by HDFC Bank in second place and ICICI Bank in
third. To assess whether these differences were statistically significant, the
researcher applied a one-way ANOVA test to examine the modification in loan
growth rates (%) amongst the selected banks.
Table 6: Summary of ANOVA Findings for the
Growth in Loans (%)
|
F |
Sig. |
Outcomes |
|
0.612 |
0.659 |
Accepted the Null
Hypothesis H03 |
The outcomes of the loan growth one-way ANOVA study
are displayed in Table 6. The null hypothesis (H₀₃) is believed due
to the computed F-value of 0.612 and a p-value greater than 0.05. The results
show that HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, and IndusInd Bank all had similar average loan
growth rates throughout the research period.
Liquidity
The treasury division of banks is responsible for
maintaining adequate liquid assets to meet short-term financial obligations and
customer demands. As a measure of how much a bank uses its deposits for
lending, the Loans to Deposit Ratio (LDR) is an important metric for liquidity
management. While a moderate LDR signifies efficient resource utilization, an
excessively high ratio may indicate liquidity vulnerability, reducing the
bank’s ability to meet unexpected withdrawal demands. Consequently, banks with
higher LDRs tend to adopt a more cautious and selective lending approach. To
guarantee adequate liquidity reserves & financial stability, commercial
banks are required by regulation to sustain a SLR of 25% during 2019 to
2023
Table 7: Comparative Analysis of Liquidity
– Loans to Deposit Ratio (LDR in %) for Selected Private Sector Banks
|
Year |
HDFC Bank |
ICICI
Bank |
IndusInd Bank |
|
2019 |
90.21 |
91.06 |
95.65 |
|
2020 |
89.27 |
83.61 |
102.35 |
|
2021 |
88.18 |
79.86 |
82.98 |
|
2022 |
86.12 |
87.03 |
81.40 |
|
2023 |
89.27 |
88.09 |
86.17 |
|
Mean |
88.61 |
85.93 |
89.71 |
|
Rank |
2 |
1 |
3 |
Table 7 presents the loan-to-deposit ratio (LDR) of
the selected private sector banks, highlighting their liquidity positions
during the study period. HDFC Bank demonstrated a strong liquidity profile with
an average LDR of 88.61%, securing the second rank under this parameter. ICICI Bank
exhibited an LDR ranging from 79.86% in 2021 to 91.06% in 2019, with an overall
average of 85.93%, placing it First rank in terms of liquidity
performance.
Figure 4: Comparative Analysis of
Liquidity – Loan to Deposit Ratio (LDR %) of Selected Private Sector Banks
(2019–2023)
In contrast, IndusInd Bank achieved the lowest
liquidity ranking, with a mean LDR of 89.71%, varying between 81.40% (2022) and
102.35% (2020). This indicates that IndusInd Bank maintained a comparatively Higher
LDR, which weakens its ability to meet short-term obligations.
Table 8: Summary of ANOVA Findings for the
Liquidity (LDR)
|
F |
Sig. |
Outcomes |
|
1.063 |
0.401 |
Accepted the Null
Hypothesis H04 |
The selected banks' LDRs were compared using one-way
ANOVA. The computed F-value is 1.063 & p-value is larger than 0.05, as
shown in Table 8, which means that the null hypothesis (H₀₄) is
accepted. This recommends that HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, & IndusInd Bank's
liquidity positions did not change much throughout the research period.
Equity
One indicator of a bank's resilience to economic
shocks is the CRAR, which compares the capital strength of the institution to
its risk-weighted assets. Greater stability and reduced insolvency risk are
reflected in a higher CRAR. A CRAR of 8% is required by Basel standards,
whereas commercial banks are required to maintain 9% and public sector banks
are required to maintain 12% by the RBI. In order to keep the banking system
stable and resilient over the long run, it is crucial to keep the CRAR strong.
Table 9: Comparison of Private Sector
Banks' Equity: CRAR (%)
|
Year |
HDFC Bank |
ICICI
Bank |
IndusInd Bank |
|
2019 |
17.23 |
17.45 |
13.83 |
|
2020 |
17.53 |
17.89 |
12.09 |
|
2021 |
15.40 |
22.26 |
15.50 |
|
2022 |
18.54 |
22.69 |
15.31 |
|
2023 |
17.64 |
21.80 |
15.03 |
|
Mean |
17.27 |
20.42 |
14.35 |
|
Rank |
2 |
1 |
3 |
A high Capital Adequacy Ratio (CRAR) indicates that a
bank maintains sufficient capital reserves and has not overextended its lending
capacity, enabling it to meet financial obligations as they arise. With a Highest
mean CRAR value of 20.42%, ICICI Bank ranked first among the selected PSB. HDFC
Bank with 17.27% ranked second and ICICI Bank with 14.35% ranked third.
Figure 5: Comparative Analysis of CRAR of
HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, and IndusInd Bank (2019–2023)
To determine whether these differences were
statistically significant, the researcher applied a one-way ANOVA test under
the assumption that no significant variation exists among the banks’ mean CAR
values. The results of this analysis are presented below.
Table 10: Summary of ANOVA Findings for
the Equity (CRAR)
|
F-value |
Sig. |
Outcomes |
|
9.886 |
0.000 |
Rejected the
Null Hypothesis H05 |
The intended F-value of 9.886 and a p-value lower than
0.05 show that there is a statistically significant difference in the mean CRAR
among the private sector banks that were chosen. The result indicates that the
EAGLES framework finds a substantial difference in the capital strength of
HDFC, ICICI, and IndusInd Bank, and the null hypothesis (H₀₅) is
discarded.
Strategic Performance
Strategic performance reflects a bank’s effectiveness
in expanding income and managing operations through interest and non-interest
activities. Its deposit mobilization, fee-based income generation, and cost
control capabilities are evaluated by the SRQ. A higher SRQ indicates stronger
operational efficiency and sound risk management.
·
Interest Income/Interest
Cost
A bank's ability to efficiently generate interest
revenue in relation to the cost of interest-bearing liabilities is measured by
the Interest Income to Interest Cost ratio (II/IC ratio). A higher ratio
indicates that the bank’s interest earnings have grown faster than its interest
expenses, reflecting effective asset-liability management. A bank can grow its
loan portfolio size to generate more interest income, decrease its cost of
deposits, or boost the yield on advances compared to borrowing costs in order
to improve this ratio.
Table 11: Comparative Analysis of II/IC
Ratio for Selected Private Sector Banks
|
Year |
HDFC Bank |
ICICI
Bank |
IndusInd Bank |
|
2019 |
1.65 |
2.70 |
1.66 |
|
2020 |
1.67 |
2.65 |
1.72 |
|
2021 |
1.85 |
2.33 |
1.87 |
|
2022 |
1.97 |
2.01 |
1.95 |
|
2023 |
2.02 |
1.89 |
1.94 |
|
Mean |
1.83 |
2.32 |
1.83 |
|
Rank |
2 |
1 |
2 |
Throughout the research period, the average
II/IC ratio for the PSB that were chosen varied between 1.83 and
2.32. A ratio of 2.32 was recorded by ICICI Bank, with HDFC and IndusInd Bank
following at 1.83 each. To determine whether these differences were
statistically significant, the researcher applied a one-way ANOVA test to
examine the variation in mean interest income relative to interest cost across
the selected banks.
Figure 6: Comparative analysis of II/IC Ratio
among Selected Private Banks
Table 12: Summary of ANOVA Findings for
the Interest Income to Interest cost
|
F |
Sig. |
Outcomes |
|
1.754 |
0.178 |
Accepted the Null Hypothesis H06.1 |
Table 12 shows the results of the ANOVA, which reveal
that the computed F-value is 1.754 & p-value is greater than 0.05. This
proves that the chosen PSBs do not differ significantly in their
II/IC ratio, and hence supports the acceptance of the null hypothesis
(H₀₆.₁).
·
Non-Interest
Income/Non-Interest Cost:
The NII/NIC ratio reflects a bank’s ability to
generate fee-based and other non-interest income relative to its operating
costs. Ideally, this ratio should exceed one, indicating that the bank earns
more non-interest income than it spends on related expenses. However, in this
study, the NII/NIC ratios of the selected PSB were found to be below one,
suggesting that operational expenses have increased while growth in other
income sources has slowed.
Table 13: Comparative Analysis of NII /
NIC Ratio for Selected Private Sector Banks
|
Year |
HDFC Bank |
ICICI
Bank |
IndusInd Bank |
|
2019 |
0.83 |
0.53 |
0.88 |
|
2020 |
0.90 |
0.57 |
0.84 |
|
2021 |
0.81 |
0.64 |
0.78 |
|
2022 |
0.64 |
0.61 |
0.77 |
|
2023 |
0.60 |
0.61 |
0.72 |
|
Mean |
0.76 |
0.59 |
0.80 |
|
Rank |
2 |
3 |
1 |
Table 13 presents the NII/NIC ratios of the selected PSB.
Among them, IndusInd Bank recorded the highest mean ratio of 0.80, securing the
top rank, while ICICI Bank reported the lowest mean of 0.59, placing it third.
Specifically, ICICI Bank and HDFC Bank registered NII/NIC ratios of 0.53 (2019)
and 0.90 (2020), respectively. To determine whether the differences in mean
NII/NIC ratios among the banks were statistically significant, the researcher
applied a one-way ANOVA test.
Figure 7: Comparative Analysis of NII
/ NIC Ratio of HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, and IndusInd
Bank (2019–2023)
Table 14: Summary of ANOVA Findings for
the Non-Interest Income to Non-Income Cost
|
F |
Sig. |
Outcomes |
|
4.074 |
0.014 |
Rejected the Null
Hypothesis H06.2 |
The null hypothesis (H₀₆.₂) is
rejected due to a statistically important distinction in the NII/NIC ratios
across the selected banks, as indicated by the computed F-value of 4.074 with a
p-value less than 0.05.
Table 15: Summary of Bank Performance
Ranks Based on the EAGLES Framework
|
Parameters |
HDFC Bank |
ICICI
Bank |
IndusInd Bank |
|
Earnings (%) |
3 |
1 |
2 |
|
Asset Quality (%) |
2 |
1 |
3 |
|
Growth in
Loans (%) |
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
Liquidity (%) |
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
Equity (%) |
2 |
1 |
3 |
|
Strategic Performance II/IC |
2 |
1 |
2 |
|
NII/NIC |
2 |
3 |
1 |
Figure 8: Comparative Ranking of Selected
Private Sector Banks Based on EAGLES Performance
The figure presents a comparative ranking of three
private sector banks—HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, and IndusInd Bank—across different EAGLES
performance indicators such as Earnings, Asset Quality, Growth in Loans,
Liquidity, Equity, Strategic Performance (II/IC), and NII/NIC. HDFC Bank
demonstrates strong performance in the earnings category with the highest
ranking, indicating better profitability among the selected banks. ICICI Bank
shows relatively better performance in growth in loans, liquidity, and NII/NIC
indicators, suggesting stronger expansion and income generation capability.
IndusInd Bank performs well in asset quality and equity indicators, reflecting
stability in asset management and capital position. Overall, the chart
highlights variations in strengths across different financial parameters,
indicating that each bank has competitive advantages in specific operational
areas.
RESULTS
AND DISCUSSIONS
Overall Performance of Selected Private Sector Banks
The Indian banking sector has undergone significant
transformation in recent years due to regulatory reforms, technological
advancements, and consolidation within the industry. In particular, mergers and
acquisitions among public sector banks have strengthened their capital base,
operational efficiency, and market share. As a result, private sector banks
face increasing competitive pressure to enhance profitability, maintain asset
quality, and improve strategic performance. In this context, the present study
evaluated the financial performance of three major private sector banks—HDFC
Bank, ICICI Bank, and IndusInd Bank—using the EAGLES model, which examines six
critical dimensions: Earnings, Asset Quality, Growth, Liquidity, Equity, and
Strategic Performance.
The analysis was conducted using financial data from
2019 to 2023 and statistical testing through one-way ANOVA to determine whether
significant differences exist among the selected banks. The findings reveal
that while all three banks maintained sound financial positions during the
study period, notable variations were observed in their operational strategies
and financial performance across the EAGLES parameters.
Earnings and Profitability Performance
Under the earnings parameter measured through Return
on Equity (ROE), ICICI Bank demonstrated the strongest profitability among the
selected banks. With the highest mean ROE of 12.59 percent, the bank ranked
first in terms of earnings performance, indicating efficient utilization of
shareholders’ equity and effective profit generation. IndusInd Bank followed
closely with a mean ROE of 12.41 percent, reflecting strong earning capacity
despite fluctuations in certain years. In contrast, HDFC Bank recorded a
comparatively lower mean ROE of 5.78 percent, resulting in the third position
in the earnings category.
The ANOVA results indicated a statistically
significant difference in the ROE values among the banks (p < 0.05),
suggesting that variations in profitability are influenced by differences in
managerial efficiency, operational strategies, and cost structures.
Asset Quality and Risk Management
Asset quality is a critical indicator of a bank’s
ability to manage credit risk and maintain financial stability. The analysis
based on Net Non-Performing Assets (Net NPA %) shows that ICICI Bank achieved
the best asset quality performance with the lowest mean NPA ratio of 0.74
percent. This indicates strong credit appraisal systems and effective loan
recovery mechanisms.
HDFC Bank secured the second rank with a mean NPA of
1.16 percent, reflecting stable but relatively higher exposure to
non-performing assets compared to ICICI Bank. IndusInd Bank recorded the
highest mean NPA of 1.41 percent, suggesting comparatively weaker credit risk
management. The ANOVA test confirmed a statistically significant difference
among the banks’ asset quality levels, reinforcing the importance of efficient
risk management strategies in sustaining banking stability.
Growth Performance
Growth in loans and advances represents the expansion
capability and market competitiveness of banks. The results indicate that
IndusInd Bank recorded the highest mean loan growth rate of 15.21 percent,
demonstrating aggressive lending strategies and strong business expansion. HDFC
Bank followed with a mean growth rate of 14.02 percent, reflecting consistent
but moderate expansion in lending activities. ICICI Bank recorded the lowest
mean growth rate of 13.80 percent during the study period.
However, the ANOVA test revealed that these
differences were not statistically significant (p > 0.05), indicating that
the overall lending growth of the selected banks remained relatively similar
during the period of study.
Liquidity Management
Liquidity management was assessed using the
Loan-to-Deposit Ratio (LDR), which reflects the extent to which banks utilize
deposits for lending purposes. ICICI Bank ranked first in liquidity performance
with an average LDR of 85.93 percent, suggesting a balanced approach between
lending and maintaining liquidity reserves.
HDFC Bank recorded an average LDR of 88.61 percent,
placing it second, while IndusInd Bank exhibited the highest LDR of 89.71
percent, indicating relatively greater deployment of deposits in lending
activities. Despite these variations, the ANOVA results showed no statistically
significant difference among the banks in terms of liquidity management.
Capital Strength and Equity Position
Capital adequacy plays a crucial role in maintaining
banking stability and protecting institutions against financial shocks. The
Capital Adequacy Ratio (CRAR) analysis revealed that ICICI Bank maintained the
strongest capital position with a mean CRAR of 20.42 percent, significantly
higher than the regulatory requirement. HDFC Bank followed with a mean CRAR of
17.27 percent, while IndusInd Bank recorded the lowest capital adequacy ratio
of 14.35 percent.
The ANOVA test confirmed that the differences in
capital adequacy among the banks were statistically significant (p < 0.05),
indicating varying levels of capital strength and financial resilience.
Strategic Performance
Strategic performance was evaluated using two
indicators: the Interest Income to Interest Cost (II/IC) ratio and the
Non-Interest Income to Non-Interest Cost (NII/NIC) ratio. ICICI Bank achieved
the highest mean II/IC ratio of 2.32, reflecting efficient interest income
generation relative to borrowing costs. HDFC Bank and IndusInd Bank recorded
similar mean values of 1.83.
However, the ANOVA results showed that these
differences were not statistically significant, indicating similar interest
income efficiency across the banks.
In terms of non-interest income efficiency, IndusInd
Bank recorded the highest NII/NIC ratio (0.80), followed by HDFC Bank (0.76),
while ICICI Bank reported the lowest ratio (0.59). The ANOVA results revealed a
statistically significant difference among the banks for this parameter,
suggesting variations in fee-based income generation and cost management
strategies.
Comparative Performance under the EAGLES Framework
Based on the overall ranking of the EAGLES parameters,
ICICI Bank emerged as the best-performing bank among the selected institutions,
demonstrating strong profitability, asset quality, capital adequacy, and
strategic interest income management. IndusInd Bank showed superior performance
in growth and non-interest income efficiency, highlighting its
expansion-oriented strategy and diversified income structure. HDFC Bank,
although ranking second overall, exhibited consistent and stable performance
across most parameters, indicating a balanced and risk-controlled operational
approach.
Overall, the findings highlight that while ICICI Bank
emphasizes profitability and capital strength, IndusInd Bank focuses more on
growth and income diversification, whereas HDFC Bank maintains operational
stability across financial dimensions. These differences illustrate the
distinct strategic orientations of private sector banks in India’s competitive
banking environment.
LIMITATIONS
OF THE STUDY
This study has certain limitations that should be
acknowledged. First, the analysis is limited to only three private sector
banks—HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, and IndusInd Bank—which may restrict the
generalization of the findings to the entire banking sector. Second, the study
relies solely on secondary data obtained from annual reports and financial
databases, which may not capture qualitative factors such as managerial
efficiency or customer satisfaction. Third, the study covers a limited period
from 2019 to 2023. Finally, the analysis is based only on the EAGLES framework
and ANOVA, which may not fully account for macroeconomic and regulatory
influences on banking performance.
FUTURE
IMPLICATIONS AND SCOPE FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
The findings of this study provide useful insights for
investors, banking professionals, and policymakers in understanding the
financial performance of private sector banks. Future research can expand the
scope by including a larger sample of banks, such as public sector, foreign,
and small finance banks, to enable broader comparative analysis. Researchers
may also extend the study period to analyse long-term trends in the banking
sector. Additionally, future studies can apply advanced statistical techniques
and incorporate qualitative factors such as digital banking adoption, corporate
governance, and technological innovation to obtain a more comprehensive
assessment of banking performance.
CONCLUSION
The present study evaluated the financial performance
of selected private sector banks—HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, and IndusInd Bank—using
the EAGLES framework, which examines growth, earnings, asset quality,
liquidity, equity, and strategic performance. The findings indicate noticeable
variations in performance among the selected banks. ICICI Bank emerged as the
overall best-performing bank, demonstrating strong profitability, better asset
quality, robust capital adequacy, and effective strategic income management.
IndusInd Bank showed superior performance in loan growth, liquidity
utilization, and non-interest income efficiency, reflecting its
expansion-oriented strategy. HDFC Bank maintained stable and balanced
performance across most financial indicators, though its earnings capacity was
comparatively lower during the study period. Overall, the results highlight
that private sector banks in India adopt distinct strategic approaches to
maintain competitiveness in a rapidly evolving banking environment. The EAGLES
model proves to be an effective tool for assessing multidimensional banking
performance and identifying key areas of operational strength and improvement.
References
1.
Ahmed, M. A., &
Shareef, M. S. Financial performance of select public sector banks in India: A
Review of Selected Studies.
2.
Daida, S. (2024, December
16). A comparative financial performance of public and private sector banks
using EAGLES model. Journal of International Economic Research. Retrieved from https://jier.org/index.php/journal/article/view/1853
3.
Das, S., & Khan, D.
Analysis of Financial Performance: A study on selected public and private
Indian banks.
4.
Indian Brand Equity
Foundation. (2024). Banking Sector in India: Growth, trends, and opportunities.
Retrieved from https://www.ibef.org/industry/banking-india
5.
Kundu, D., &
Chatterjee, N. (2023). EAGLE Analysis of Selected Public Sector Banks in
India. International Journal of Humanities and Information
Technology, 5(01), 1-8.
6.
Mathew, K. J., &
Kumar, V. R. (2025). Financial Performance Assessment of Small Banks using
EAGLES Model. SDMIMD Journal of Management, 16.
7.
Rao, B. S. (2024).
Financial Performance Analysis Of Private Sector Banks In India: An Eagle Model
Approach. Educational Administration: Theory And Practice, 30 (5)
14005-14018, Doi, 10.
8.
Santhoshi Kumari, G.,
& Prasad, M. S. V. (2017). Evaluating the Financial Performance of Select
Indian Banks Using Eagles Model. IUP Journal of Accounting Research &
Audit Practices, 16(2).
9.
Sathavara, J. A., &
Sathavara, R. C. (2021). Financial performance analysis of private sector banks
in India: An EAGLE model approach. International Journal of Commerce and
Management Studies, 6(3), 1-11.
10.
Suresh, G., &
Krishnan, A. P. (2020). Evaluating the performance of Indian banks: Eagles
model approach. Finance India, 34(3), 999-1024.
11.
Thanigaivalen, P., &
Vidya, M. (2025). A study on financial performance analysis of selected private
sector banks in India. Journal of Management and Science, 15(1),
132-135.
12.
Vaidya, R. (2023).
Evaluating Nepalese Commercial Banks’ Performance from the Eyes of EAGLES
Rating. Khwopa Journal (KJour), 5(1), 37-45. https://doi.org/10.3126/kjour.v5i1.53319
13.
Srinivas, V., Thorve, H.,
Chennamsetti, S., Patni, K., Dadas, A., & Gadiya, B. (2022). A Comparative
Analysis of Growing NPAs between Public Sector Banks and Private Sector
Banks. PARIDNYA-The MIBM Research Journal, 52-61. https://mibmparidnya.in/index.php/PARIDNYA/article/view/173202
14.
Kshatriya, d. a. b.
(2021) financial performance evaluation of selected public sector banks and
foreign sector banks in india through eagles model Ankitaben Vinodbhai Mistri.
The International journal of analytical and experimental modal analysis Volume
XIII, Issue VI, June/ 2021 1 ISSN NO:0886-9367Volume XIII, Issue VI
15.
Mr. Kiran S, Mr. Chandan
L and Sharath H R. (2024) A Comparative Financial Performance Analysis of
Selected Public and Private Sector Banks using Eagles Model. International
Journal of Advanced Research in Science, Communication and Technology (IJARSCT)
Volume 4, Issue 3, ISSN (Online) 2581-9429 DOI: 10.48175/IJARSCT-22900
16.
Mrs. Rajni Dayma (2025)
EPRA International Journal of Environmental Economics, Commerce and Educational
Management Journal DOI: 10.36713/epra0414 |ISI I.F Value: 0.815|SJIF Impact
Factor (2025): 8.57 ISSN: 2348 – 814X Volume: 12 | Issue:6