Heterogeneous Impact of Fintech on the Profitability of Commercial Banks: Competition and Spillover Effects
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI appreciate the documentation made by the authors of this article proposal in order to highlight the foray into the current state of knowledge, although I think they could expand a bit the area of scientific knowledge not only from a geographical perspective.
I also appreciate the application part of the article proposal, namely the empirical testing and validation through the empirical results obtained, including the discussions resulting from the testing and the conclusions drawn.
Therefore, considering the above, I recommend the publication of this article proposal.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors,
Thank you for the opportunity to review your manuscript. You have presented a current issue. topic. The results may be popular with the readers. I consider it a really original manuscript.
I have several recommendations for you:
1.Depersonalize your research completely. Do not use "we, our" at all.
2. You did not follow the recommended structure of the manuscript and its content. Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusion. Add chapter Conclusion, put there implications from Discussion, add limitations and future research.
3. Introduction: The structure of the manuscript is missing.
4. Literature Review: It is necessary to extend this part in the introduction (at least 30 references). I suggest using these references to enrich your manuscript.
Morales, L., Gray, G., and Rajmil, D. (2022). “Emerging Risks in the FinTech Industry – Insights from Data Science and Financial Econometrics Analysis,” Economics, Management, and Financial Markets 17(2): 9–36. doi: 10.22381/emfm17220221.
Adamek, J., & Solarz, M. (2023). Adoption factors in digital lending services offered by FinTech lenders. Oeconomia Copernicana, 14(1), 169–212. https://doi.org/10.24136/oc.2023.005
Vasenska, I., Dimitrov, P., Koyundzhiyska-Davidkova, B., Krastev, V., Durana, P., & Poulaki, I. (2021). Financial transactions using fintech during the COVID-19 crisis in Bulgaria. Risks, 9(3), 48. https://doi.org/10.3390/risks9030048
Popova, Y. (2021). Economic Basis of Digital Banking Services Produced by FinTech Company in Smart City. Journal of Tourism and Services, 12(23), 86–104. https://doi.org/10.29036/jots.v12i23.275
5. Results: Explain the values of R-squared.
6. The discussion part is a crucial part of the paper. The typical one is missing in your manuscript. Compare your study to similar studies in a separate chapter.
I hope my comments will be useful for your future work.
Good luck in your future work.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsReview of the Manuscript jrfm – 2636801-„The Heterogeneous Impact of Fintech on the Profitability of Commercial Banks: Competition and Spillover Effects” for the Journal of Risk and Financial Management.
General Comments
From my point of view, it is a very interesting topic and simultaneously it seems that to the best of my knowledge is the first empirical research which study the role of the The Heterogeneous Impact of Fintech on the Profitability of Commercial Banks: Competition and Spillover Effects. The paper consists of the following sections: Introduction and Literature Review, Mechanism and Research Hypotheses, Research Design, Empirical Results and Discussion.
However, I find some recommendations:
1. It would be very useful to add in the "Introduction" section the purpose, objectives and hypothesis of the research.
2. Conclusions should be well defined in the Discussion sub-chapter.
3. I recommend the authors to make a complete descriptive analysis and to include a series of indicators and tests such as standard deviation, Jarque-Berra, Kurtosis, probabilities, etc., and the number of observations taken in the sample.
4. It is very important that the authors present the correlation matrix and the ovariance matrix and explain the results obtained.
5. I think that the authors should present the VIF test to verify heteroskedasticity and also to verify endogeneity.
6. Descriptive statistics cannot be missing from the paper with the Kurtosis, Skewness, Jarque Bera tests and the probability attached to this test to highlight the normal distribution of the variables.
7. In the same time, in the Empirical Results section the authors have to apply an econometric method like regression or panel with fixed effect estimation or the random effect estimation (see for instance, Baltagi (2008), Hsiao (2014) and Andre B et al. (2015)). Besides, the corresponding tests to determine which is the best method of estimation is needed (see the Hausman test, the Breusch and Pagan (1980)´s Lagrange multiplier, the F test for fixed effects to test whether all unobservable individual effects are zero).
8. 5.The authors talk about the relationship between these variables, however they do not support the empirical evidence providing panel cointegration tests that are crucial (see for instance Kao (1999) panel data cointegration test, the Pedroni (1999, 2004) panel data cointegration test or the Westerlund (2005) panel data cointegration test, among others).
9. At the same time, the authors must explain why they chose cross-section with fixed effects and not with random effects. That is why the authors must do the Hausman test.
10. Also, we consider the literature is not enough and that is why, we recommend the authors to refer to other recent works indexed in Web of Science, Scopus, Emerald, Cambrige, and of course MDPI Journals. We suggest that the authors cite papers published in MDPI journals and Web of Science Journals, such as:
- Batrancea L.M., Pop MC, Rathnaswamy, M.M., Batrancea I., Rus M-I, (2021), An Empirical Investigationon the Transition Process toward a Green Economy, Sustainability, 13(23):13151. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313151.
2. Batrancea, L., Rathnaswamy, M.M., MI Rus, Tulai H., (2022), Determinants of Economic Growth for the Last Half Century: A Panel Data Analysis on 50 Countries, Journal of the Knowledge Economy. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-022-009944-9.
- Aivaz K. A., Munteanu I. F., Stan M.-I., Chiriac A., (2022), A Multivariate Analysis on the Links Between Transport Noncompliance and Financial Uncertainty in Times of COVID-19 Pandemics and War, Sustainability, 14, (16), eISSN: 2071-1050, https://doi.org/10.3390/su141610040
4. Balcı, M.A.; Batrancea, L.M.; Akgüller, Ö.; Gaban, L.; Rus, M.-I.; Tulai, H., (2022), Fractality of Borsa Istanbul during the COVID-19 Pandemic, Mathematics, 10, 2503. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10142503
All in all, I consider that the paper must be improved. As a result, the article can be published in the prestigious Journal of Risk and Financial Management after major revisions.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe problem which is investigated in this submission has important applications in several areas of sciences and engineering and thus the result of this manuscript is useful for the interested reader of the current journal. Also the paper is well represented and contains material worthy of publication after considering the following points. Applying the following comments and suggestions improves the current version and makes it ready for publication.
1. The original contributions need to be much better presented in the last paragraph of section ''INTRODUCTION".
2. The English style must be revised because there are some typos must be corrected.
3. All acronyms should be defined before.
4. What is the main objective of the study?
5. What methodology was used to analyze the data?
6. What were the main findings of the study regarding the competition and technology spillover effects of fintech on the profitability of commercial banks?
7. How does the influence of fintech on the profitability of commercial banks differ between large and small- and medium-sized commercial banks in the short run?
8. What practical guidance does the study provide for commercial banks to respond to the fintech wave and achieve sustainable development?
9. Are there any limitations or areas for future research identified in the study?
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageMinor editing of English language required
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors,
Thank you for your effort and for following my recommendations. My major recommendations have been met, and I am satisfied with the correction. I still have one minor recommendation to mention.
1. Follow the reference formatting guidelines outlined in the journal JRFM template in detail.
After this correction, I am recommending publishing the article.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI agree new version's article.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
