Main Article Content

Abstract

n 2018, Bank Muamalat was rumored to be bankrupt due to the high ratio of nonperforming financing which had an impact on depleting banking capital. This research aims to


determine the health level of Bank Muamalat in 2018-2022 using the RGEC method. This type


of research uses a quantitative descriptive approach. The data used in this research is secondary


data, namely the annual financial reports for 2018-2022. The research results show that the


health level of Bank Muamalat Indonesia in 2018 was in the quite healthy category with a final


composite score of 62.85% getting a composite rating of 3, in 2019 it was in the quite healthy


category with a final composite score of 62.85% getting a composite rating of 3, in 2020 it was


in the quite healthy category with a final composite score of 62.58% getting a composite rating


of 3, in 2021 it was in the quite healthy category with a final composite score of 68.57% getting


a fairly healthy composite rating, and in 2022 it was in the quite healthy category with The final


composite score was 68.57%, obtaining a composite rating of 3.

Article Details

References

  1. Bank Muamalat. 2016. Profil Bank
  2. Muamalat.https://www.bankmuama
  3. lat.co.id/profil-bank-muamalat.
  4. [Diakses pada 21 Mei 2023].
  5. Bi Rahmani, Nur Ahmadi. (2016).
  6. Metodologi Penelitian Ekonomi,
  7. Medan : FEBI UINSU Press.
  8. Hadiwijaya. T., L. Lahindah., dan I. R.
  9. Pratiwi. 2016. Effect Of Capital
  10. Structure And Corporate
  11. Governance On Firm Value (Study
  12. Of Listed Banking Companies In
  13. Indonesia Stock Exchange). Journal
  14. of Accounting and Business Studies.
  15. 1(1): 39-58
  16. Pandia. (2012). Manajemen Dana dan
  17. Kesehatan Bank. Jakarta: Rineka
  18. Cipta.
  19. Parenrengi, S., dan T. W. Hendratni.
  20. (2018). Pengaruh Dana Pihak
  21. Ketiga, Kecukupan Modal dan
  22. Penyaluran Kredit terhadap
  23. Profitabilitas Bank.
  24. Jurnal
  25. Manajemen Strategi Dan Aplikasi
  26. Bisnis .1(1): 9–18.
  27. Peraturan Bank Indonesia Nomor:
  28. 13/1/PBI/2011. Penilaian Tingkats
  29. Kesehatan Bank Umum. 5 Januari
  30. 2011. Lembaran Negara Republik
  31. Indonesia 2011 Nomor 1 DPNP.
  32. Jakarta.
  33. Peraturan Otoritas Jasa Keuangan Nomor
  34. 4/POJK.03/2016 tentang Penilaian
  35. Tingkat Kesehatan Bank.
  36. Pramana, K. M., dan L. G. S. Artini. (2016).
  37. Analisis Tingkat Kesehatan Bank
  38. (Pendekatan RGEC) pada PT. Bank
  39. Danamon Indonesia Tbk. E-Jurnal
  40. Manajemen Universitas Udayana.
  41. 5(6): 3849–3878.
  42. Sadikin, A., F. R. Dalimunthe., D. M.
  43. Dewi., D., Dahniar., dan A.
  44. Suprianto. (2017). Penggunaan
  45. Metode RBBR dalam Menganalisis
  46. Tingkat Kesehatan Bank. Seminar
  47. Nasional ASBIS 2017. Politeknik
  48. Negeri Banjarmasin: 41– 61.
  49. Sugiyono. (2017). Metode Penelitian
  50. Pendidikan Pendekatan Kuantitatif,
  51. Kualitatif, dan R & D. Bandung:
  52. Alfabeta.
  53. Surat Edaran Bank Indonesia Nomor
  54. 13/24/DPNP Tahun 2011. Penilaian
  55. Tingkat Kesehatan Bank Umum. 25
  56. Oktober 2011. Jakarta.
  57. Surat Edaran Bank Indonesia Nomor
  58. 6/23/DPNP Tahun 2004. Sistem
  59. Penilaian Tingkat Kesehatan Bank
  60. Umum. 31 Mei 2004. Jakarta.
  61. Surat Edaran Bank Indonesia
  62. 15/15/DPNP/2013 Tanggal 29 April
  63. Perihal Pelaksanaan Good
  64. Corporate Governance Bagi Bank
  65. Umum.
  66. Warka, M., dan E. Hariyanto. (2016).
  67. Kedudukan Bank Syariah dalam
  68. Sistem Perbankan di Indonesia.
  69. IQTISHADIA: Jurnal Ekonomi &
  70. Perbanka