FinObservatory

Bangladesh, banking supervision

Bangladesh banking sector, system view

A system-level view of Bangladesh’s banking sector, built from Bangladesh Bank published data. This page reports the sector only in aggregate: one system-wide row and four bank categories (state-owned commercial, private commercial, foreign, specialized). It does not name any bank, and by design it attaches no weakness, distress signal, ranking, or score to any named institution. That is a settled editorial policy, not a technical limit: the underlying figures describe real, operating banks, so the finest grain this module ever shows is the bank category.

57
Scheduled banks
Bangladesh Bank-licensed
18.96%
System NPL ratio
IMF FSI, 2024
5.59%
System capital ratio
IMF FSI, 2024
Jul 5, 2026
Register snapshot
57-bank tracker verification

System trend, IMF Financial Soundness Indicators

The authoritative complete-population figures the Bangladesh Bank reports to the IMF, annual through 2024. Both series jump in 2024: system NPL rises to 18.96% and the regulatory capital ratio falls to 5.59%, reflecting the post-August-2024 “honest accounting” reclassification that forced recognition and provisioning of previously understated bad loans.

Nonperforming loans to total gross loans

20112024, percent, annual

Hover for values

Regulatory capital to risk-weighted assets

20112024, percent, annual

Hover for values

Source: IMF Financial Soundness Indicators (FSI), Bangladesh. License: IMF FSI, attribution required. Annual observations; the latest published year for Bangladesh at build time. Methodology

Where the sector splits: the category cross-section

The register is a single cross-sectional snapshot (one most-recently-disclosed period per bank), not a historical panel, so there is no category-level time series to plot as a trend. What it does show is the gap between ownership groups. Each bar carries its own disclosure coverage; no figure is zero-filled where a bank does not report.

Weighted NPL ratio by category

loan-weighted, percent. State-owned banks carry the sector’s distressed loans.

0.015.030.045.060.0State-owned commercial banks6 of 7 banks54.1%Specialized banks3 of 3 banks18.9%Private commercial banks26 of 38 banks18.6%Foreign commercial banks3 of 9 banks2.3%

Weighted capital ratio by category

asset-weighted, percent; dashed line is Bangladesh Bank’s 12.5% Basel III minimum.

0.010.020.030.040.0State-owned commercial banks1 of 7 banks0.2%Specialized banks0 of 3 banksno disclosurePrivate commercial banks9 of 38 banks14.3%Foreign commercial banks3 of 9 banks38.7%12.5% min
Bank categoryBanksTotal assetsWeighted NPLWeighted CARBelow 12.5%Modal vintage
State-owned commercial banks7৳2.15 tn(3)54.1%(6)0.2%(1)1 of 12024-12-31
Specialized banks (agri/expat/development)3৳435.85 bn(2)18.9%(3)no disclosure0 of 02023-06-30
Private commercial banks (conventional + Islamic)38৳15.47 tn(32)18.6%(26)14.3%(9)1 of 112024-12-31
Foreign commercial banks9৳1.01 tn(4)2.3%(3)38.7%(3)0 of 32024-12-31

Parenthetical counts are the number of banks disclosing that field (the coverage denominator). Total assets are in full BDT (৳ tn = trillion). “Below 12.5%” counts banks under the regulatory minimum against those that disclose a capital ratio at all, and never identifies them.

Source: Bangladesh Bank publications, via the BDPolicyLab 57-bank tracker. License: Bank public disclosures and Bangladesh Bank circulars; category aggregates derived by FinObservatory. Single cross-sectional snapshot; underlying vintages span FY2022-23 to Q4 2025. Methodology

Banks below the regulatory capital minimum

2of 15 banks that disclose a capital ratio are below the 12.5% Basel III minimum.

This is a count, never a list of names, and it is a point-in-time figure: the register is a single snapshot, not a period-by-period panel, so there is no history behind this count to chart as a trend. The denominator is the 15 banks that disclose a capital ratio at all, out of 57; capital adequacy is one of the least-disclosed fields in the sector, so read this against the complete-population IMF FSI capital ratio of 5.59% (2024) above.

Source: Bangladesh Bank publications, via the BDPolicyLab 57-bank tracker Count of banks below the Basel III minimum among those disclosing a capital ratio; no institution identified. Methodology

Register versus IMF FSI: the perimeter difference

The register aggregates and the IMF FSI figures measure the same sector on different perimeters. The IMF FSI series is the authoritative complete-population figure; the register’s weighted aggregates cover only the banks that disclose each field, a disclosure-limited and skewed subset. Both are shown; the gap is not reconciled away.

IndicatorIMF FSI (whole system)Register (weighted, partial coverage)
NPL to gross loans18.96% (2024)29.09% (38 of 57 banks)
Regulatory capital to RWA5.59% (2024)16.56% (13 of 57 banks)

Why they differ: the register’s NPL figure exists mostly for large, distress-skewed banks, so it runs above the complete-population IMF figure; its capital ratio, by contrast, is disclosed mainly by strongly capitalised private and foreign banks and under-represents the state-owned and specialised banks that pull the true system figure down, so it runs above the IMF figure too. Treat the IMF FSI series as the system-wide truth and the register’s weighted figures only with their coverage denominators.

Source: IMF Financial Soundness Indicators (FSI), Bangladesh | Bangladesh Bank publications, via the BDPolicyLab 57-bank tracker Perimeter and disclosure-coverage difference; see the methodology for the full reconciliation. Methodology

Reading this dashboard

  • Everything here is a system or bank-category aggregate. No individual bank is named, ranked, or scored, by design.
  • The IMF FSI series is the authoritative complete-population figure; the register snapshot adds the current category breakdown but covers only disclosing banks, always shown with its denominator.
  • This is reference information about the banking system, not investment, compliance, or supervisory advice, and not a rating of any institution. See the methodology for source lineage, definitions, the aggregates-only decision, the FSI perimeter comparison, and staleness.