Satisfaction among Gen Y patients: A case study of students at the International Islamic University Malaysia
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to compare the criteria used among Islamic Indices, specifically between the Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange Shari'ah Index (KLSESI) and the Dow Jones Islamic Market Index (DJIM) in screening a permissible company for investment purposes. The two controversial criteria examined are: level of debt and level of liquidity of company. Design/methodology/approach – The paper investigates the 642 companies listed on the Bursa Malaysia in 2006 as approved Shariah's compliant companies by the Shari'ah Advisory Council of the KLSE. Findings – Overall, the results reveal that the KLSESI does not use both the criteria set by the DJIM as its measures during the screening process. As for the level of debt criterion, the results show that 44.07 percent of the companies listed under the KLSESI are highly geared. These companies depend heavily on debt to finance their capital. However, the results for the level of liquidity criterion are not as extreme as the level of debt where it shows only 17 percent of the companies listed under the KLSESI are highly liquid. The results also indicate that if both criteria are compared concurrently, only 198 out of 565 companies listed under the KLSESI conform to the criteria set up by the DJIM. Research limitations/implications – The main reasons why the differences exist among Islamic Indices are due to micro-factor as faced by Malaysian companies such as the limited amount of capital resources. The Shari'ah supervisory board of the respective indices represents the sole body that determines the rules or criteria to be used by each index. This explains why the indices differ from one country to another and efforts should be done by regulators in the respective countries to harmonize the differing criteria used. Originality/value – The paper represents the first study that compares the criteria used by two different indices regarding Islamic capital investment in a developing country.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 3 (2010)
Issue (Month): 3 (August)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.emeraldinsight.com|
|Order Information:|| Postal: Emerald Group Publishing, Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, BD16 1WA, UK|
Web: http://emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/journals/journals.htm?id=imefm Email:
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:imefpp:v:3:y:2010:i:3:p:253-266. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Louise Lister)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.