Japan vs Malaysia: Bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans
Bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans over time
- Japan
- Malaysia
How they compare
Malaysia currently reports 1.4% against 1.2% in Japan, a difference of 0.2%.
That makes Malaysia's figure about 1.1 times Japan's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 13 shared years of data; in 2010 it was Malaysia ahead.
Japan ranks 134th and Malaysia ranks 131st of 151 countries.
Malaysia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Japan | Malaysia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 1.8% | 1.9% | 0.2% | Malaysia |
| 2020s | 1.2% | 1.7% | 0.5% | Malaysia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans, Japan or Malaysia?
- Malaysia, at 1.4% against 1.2% in Japan as of 2025.
- What is the difference in bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans between Japan and Malaysia?
- 0.2%, with Malaysia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Japan and Malaysia?
- 13 years are reported by both, from 2010 to 2022.
- How do Japan and Malaysia rank globally for bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans?
- Japan ranks 134th and Malaysia ranks 131st of 151 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Financial Soundness Indicators, International Monetary Fund (IMF), published as Bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans (%). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The indicator measures the proportion of a deposit taker’s loan portfolio that is impaired or at risk of default. It is calculated as the ratio of non-performing loans (NPLs) to total gross loans, where NPLs are defined as loans that are past due by 90 days or more or are otherwise considered unlikely to be repaid in full without the realization of collateral. Both non-performing loans and total gross loans should be reported at their gross book value, without deducting for loan-loss provisions or collateral. This indicator provides a key measure of asset quality and potential credit risk in the banking system.