[ { "id": "chapter_1-q1", "number": 1, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What does the IMF's October 2025 World Economic Outlook project for global output growth in 2025 and 2026?", "answer": "3.2 percent in 2025 and 3.1 percent in 2026", "evidence": "Para 1.01: \"the growth in global output is expected to reach 3.2 percent in 2025 and 3.1 percent in 2026, from 3.3 percent in 2024 (Table 1.01).\" Table 1.01, World Output row, Projections columns: 2025 = 3.2, 2026 = 3.1.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "1" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q2", "number": 2, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What is the IMF projecting for growth in world trade volume of goods and services in 2025?", "answer": "3.6 percent.", "evidence": "Para 1.01: \"global trade growth ... was projected to be 3.6 percent in 2025.\" Table 1.01, World Trade Volume (goods and services) row: Projections 2025 = 3.6.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "1" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q3", "number": 3, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What was the actual world output growth in 2024, and how does the 2025 projection compare to it?", "answer": "Actual 2024 growth was 3.3 percent; the 2025 projection of 3.2 percent is 0.1 percentage point lower.", "evidence": "Table 1.01, World Output row: 2024 Actual = 3.3, 2025 Projection = 3.2.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "1" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q4", "number": 4, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "How does the Euro area's projected 2025 GDP growth compare with its actual 2024 growth?", "answer": "The Euro area is projected to grow 1.2 percent in 2025, up from 0.9 percent in 2024.", "evidence": "Para 1.02: \"growth in the euro area is projected to rise to 1.2 percent in 2025 from 0.9 percent in 2024.\" Table 1.01, Euro area row: 2024 Actual = 0.9, Projections 2025 = 1.2.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "1-2" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q5", "number": 5, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What was China's actual GDP growth in 2024, and what is it projected to grow in 2025?", "answer": "China's actual growth was 5.0 percent in 2024, projected to moderate to 4.8 percent in 2025.", "evidence": "Para 1.03: \"China's output is projected to grow moderately by 4.8 percent in 2025 from the actual growth of 5.0 percent in 2024.\" Table 1.01, China row: 2024 Actual = 5.0, Projections 2025 = 4.8.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "2" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q6", "number": 6, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What was India's actual GDP growth in 2024, and what is it projected to grow in 2025?", "answer": "India's actual growth was 6.5 percent in 2024, projected to increase to 6.6 percent in 2025.", "evidence": "Para 1.03: \"India's output growth is projected to increase by 0.1 percentage points to 6.6 percent in 2025 from the actual growth recorded of 6.5 percent in 2024.\" Table 1.01, India row: 2024 Actual = 6.5, Projections 2025 = 6.6.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "2" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q7", "number": 7, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "Compare the projected 2025 GDP growth rates of the United States, the Euro area, China, and India.", "answer": "United States: 2.0%; Euro area: 1.2%; China: 4.8%; India: 6.6%.", "evidence": "Table 1.01, Projections 2025 column: United States = 2.0, Euro area = 1.2, China = 4.8, India = 6.6.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "1" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q8", "number": 8, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "How does the projected 2025 import growth of advanced economies compare with that of emerging market and developing economies?", "answer": "Advanced economies' import growth is projected at 3.1 percent in 2025, while emerging market and developing economies' import growth is projected at 4.3 percent — 1.2 percentage points higher.", "evidence": "Para 1.05: \"it may increase to 3.1 percent in 2025 ... import growth increased to 5.6 percent in 2024 ... but is projected to decrease to 4.3 percent in 2025.\" Table 1.01, World Trade Volume > Imports > Advanced Economies row: Projections 2025 = 3.1; Imports > Emerging Market and Developing Economies row: Projections 2025 = 4.3.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "2" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q9", "number": 9, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "How does the actual 2024 export growth of advanced economies compare with that of emerging market and developing economies?", "answer": "Advanced economies' export growth was 1.8 percent in 2024, while emerging market and developing economies' export growth was 6.5 percent — 4.7 percentage points higher.", "evidence": "Para 1.05: \"Export growth in the advanced economies was 1.8 percent in 2024 up from 1.0 percent in 2023 ... Export growth in emerging markets and developing economies experienced a sharp increase of 6.5 percent in 2024, higher from 1.1 percent in 2023.\" Table 1.01, World Trade Volume > Exports > Advanced Economies row: 2024 Actual = 1.8; Exports > Emerging Market and Developing Economies row: 2024 Actual = 6.5.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "2" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q10", "number": 10, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What's the projected consumer price inflation rate for advanced economies in 2025?", "answer": "2.5 percent.", "evidence": "Para 1.04: \"The inflation for advanced economies is projected to decrease to 2.5 percent in 2025.\" Table 1.01, Consumer Prices > Advanced Economies row: Projections 2025 = 2.5.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "2" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q11", "number": 11, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What's the projected 2025 consumer price inflation rate for emerging market and developing economies?", "answer": "5.3 percent.", "evidence": "Para 1.04: \"inflation in emerging and developing economies decreased considerably to 7.9 percent in 2024 ... It is projected to decrease gradually to 5.3 percent in 2025.\" Table 1.01, Consumer Prices > Emerging Market and Developing Economies row: Projections 2025 = 5.3.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "2" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q12", "number": 12, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "How did import growth for advanced economies change from 2024 into the 2025 projection?", "answer": "Import growth for advanced economies increased to 2.1 percent in 2024 and is projected to rise further to 3.1 percent in 2025.", "evidence": "Para 1.05: \"Import growth for advanced economies increased sharply to 2.1 percent in 2024 from a negative 0.6 percent in 2023. In this region it may increase to 3.1 percent in 2025.\" Table 1.01, Imports > Advanced Economies row: 2024 Actual = 2.1, Projections 2025 = 3.1.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "2" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q13", "number": 13, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "How is export growth for emerging market and developing economies projected to change from 2024 to 2025?", "answer": "Export growth for emerging market and developing economies is projected to ease from 6.5 percent in 2024 to 5.9 percent in 2025.", "evidence": "Para 1.05: \"Export growth in emerging markets and developing economies experienced a sharp increase of 6.5 percent in 2024 ... but is anticipated to decrease a bit to 5.9 percent in 2025.\" Table 1.01, Exports > Emerging Market and Developing Economies row: 2024 Actual = 6.5, Projections 2025 = 5.9.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "2" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q14", "number": 14, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "By how many percentage points is global inflation projected to decline from 2024 to 2025?", "answer": "Inflation is projected to decline from 5.8 percent in 2024 to 4.2 percent in 2025, a decrease of 1.6 percentage points.", "evidence": "Table 1.01, Consumer Prices row: 2024 = 5.8, 2025 Projection = 4.2. Para 1.04: \"headline inflation has also been projected to decline to 4.2 percent in 2025.\"", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "1" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q15", "number": 15, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What factors are behind the historically slow pace of global output expansion?", "answer": "Trade tensions, particularly the resurgence of U.S. tariffs and protectionist measures, disrupted global trade flows, increased uncertainty, and dampened investment.", "evidence": "Para 1.01 (quoted exactly as printed, including the source document's own punctuation): \"the slow pace of global output expansion can be attributed to trade tensions, particularly. The resurgence of US tariffs and protectionist measures, which disrupted global trade flows, increased uncertainty, and dampened investment.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "1" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q16", "number": 16, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "How did Bangladesh's real GDP growth change from FY24 to FY25 according to BBS estimates?", "answer": "Bangladesh's real GDP growth declined from 4.22 percent in FY24 to 3.97 percent in FY25.", "evidence": "Para 1.10: \"real GDP growth rate for FY25 is estimated to be 3.97 percent, down from 4.22 percent in FY24.\" Table 1.02, GDP (at constant market price) row: FY24 = 4.22, FY25 = 3.97.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "3-4" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q17", "number": 17, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What was the contribution of the agriculture, industry, and services sectors to GDP in FY25?", "answer": "Agriculture: 10.94%; Industry: 37.44%; Services: 51.62%.", "evidence": "Para 1.11: \"The contribution of agriculture to GDP was 10.94 percent in FY25.\" Para 1.12: \"The industrial sector contributed 37.44 percent to GDP in FY25.\" Para 1.13: \"This sector [the services sector] contributed 51.62 percent of GDP in FY25.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "4" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q18", "number": 18, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "How did total investment as a percentage of GDP change from FY24 to FY25, and what were the respective changes in public and private investment ratios?", "answer": "Total investment declined from 30.70 percent to 29.38 percent of GDP. Public investment increased from 6.74 percent to 6.90 percent, while private investment declined from 23.96 percent to 22.48 percent.", "evidence": "Para 1.15: \"total investment as a percentage of GDP decreased slightly to 29.38 percent in FY25, which was 30.70 percent in FY24. However, the ratio of public investment to GDP increased to 6.90 percent from 6.74 percent, while private investment to GDP decreased slightly to 22.48 percent from 23.96 percent over the same period.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "5" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q19", "number": 19, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What was the twelve-month average CPI inflation rate at the end of FY25, and by how many percentage points did it exceed the targeted ceiling?", "answer": "The twelve-month average CPI inflation was 10.03 percent, exceeding the 6.50 percent target by 3.53 percentage points.", "evidence": "Para 1.17: \"twelve-month average CPI inflation ... reached 10.03 percent at the end of FY25 (base: 2021-22=100). Inflation was 3.53 percentage points higher than the targeted ceiling of 6.50 percent in FY25 (Chart 1.02).\"", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "5-6" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q20", "number": 20, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "Describe the trend in food inflation versus non-food inflation during FY25.", "answer": "Food inflation increased slightly from 10.66 percent in June 2024 to 10.70 percent in June 2025, while non-food inflation rose from 8.86 percent to 9.47 percent.", "evidence": "Para 1.17: \"Food inflation increased to 10.70 percent in June 2025, up from 10.66 percent in June 2024. On the contrary, non-food inflation increased to 9.47 percent in June 2025, up from 8.86 percent in June 2024.\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "6" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q21", "number": 21, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "By how many basis points did Bangladesh Bank increase the policy rate in FY25, and what were the corresponding SDF and SLF rates set in the second half of the year?", "answer": "Bangladesh Bank increased the policy rate by 150 basis points to 10.00 percent. The SDF rate was set at 8.50 percent and the SLF rate at 11.50 percent.", "evidence": "Para 1.18: \"the policy rate increased by 150 basis points, up from 8.50 percent, but remained unchanged at 10.00 percent in the second half of FY25, fixing the standing deposits facility (SDF) at 8.50 percent and the standing lending facility (SLF) at 11.50 percent.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "6-7" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q22", "number": 22, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "Why are emerging-market and developing economies projected to remain more resilient than advanced economies in 2025-26?", "answer": "Advanced economies are projected to grow by 1.6 percent in both 2025 and 2026 due to demographic challenges, trade uncertainty, inflation, weak private demand, and geopolitical tensions. Emerging-market and developing economies are projected to grow by 4.2 percent in 2025 and 4.0 percent in 2026, supported by stronger domestic demand, supportive fiscal and monetary policies, favorable demographics, recovering global trade, and improved financial conditions.", "evidence": "Table 1.01, Advanced Economies row: 2025 = 1.6, 2026 = 1.6; Emerging Market and Developing Economies row: 2025 = 4.2, 2026 = 4.0. Para 1.01-1.02: advanced economies slowed by \"demographic challenges, trade uncertainties, high inflation, depressed private demand, and geopolitical tensions\"; para 1.01: emerging and developing economies remain resilient, \"driven primarily by strong domestic demand, supportive fiscal and monetary policies, and favourable demographic trends.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "1-2" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q23", "number": 23, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What were the main contributors to, and drags on, Bangladesh's 3.97 percent GDP growth in FY25, looking at both the sectoral breakdown and the demand side?", "answer": "Industry grew by 4.34 percent and services by 4.51 percent, while agriculture slowed to 1.79 percent due to negative crops and horticulture growth (-0.39%). On the demand side, consumption contributed 3.34 percentage points despite slowing, investment contributed 0.56 percentage points, and net exports weakened because import growth outpaced export growth.", "evidence": "Table 1.02: Industry FY25 = 4.34, Services FY25 = 4.51, Agriculture FY25 = 1.79, Crops and horticulture FY25 = -0.39. Para 1.14: \"total consumption spending decreased by 4.63 percent, which contributed 3.34 percentage points to GDP growth. Total investment decreased by 1.76 percent and contributed 0.56 percentage points to GDP growth. The contribution of net exports to GDP declined due to the decrease in export growth and increase in import growth.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "4-5" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q24", "number": 24, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What risks to Bangladesh's external sector performance in FY26 stand out, even as remittance and investment inflows are expected to support resilience?", "answer": "Global trade tensions, geopolitical uncertainties, and potential tariff shocks are identified as risks that could pose challenges to Bangladesh's external sector performance in FY26, even as sustained remittance inflow, increased foreign investment, and prudent management of a flexible exchange rate are expected to bolster external sector resilience.", "evidence": "Para 1.39: \"sustained remittance inflow, increased foreign investment, and prudent management of a flexible exchange rate are expected to alleviate pressures on balance of payments and bolster external sector resilience. Nevertheless, global trade tensions, geopolitical uncertainties, and potential tariff shocks could pose challenges to external sector performance in FY26.\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "11" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q25", "number": 25, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "How did gross national savings as a percentage of GDP change from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "Gross national savings as a percentage of GDP increased to 29.01 percent in FY25 from 28.42 percent in FY24.", "evidence": "Para 1.16: \"Gross national savings as a percentage of GDP increased to 29.01 percent in FY25 from 28.42 percent in FY24.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "5" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q26", "number": 26, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "By how many percentage points did the domestic savings-investment gap as a percentage of GDP narrow between FY24 and FY25?", "answer": "The domestic savings-investment gap as a percentage of GDP narrowed from -6.74 percent in FY24 to -6.13 percent in FY25, a change of 0.61 percentage points.", "evidence": "Para 1.16: \"the domestic savings-investment gap as a percentage of GDP decreased to -6.13 percent in FY25 from -6.74 percent in FY24 due to lower growth in investment (Chart 1.01).\"", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "5" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q27", "number": 27, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "How did the weighted average interest rates on bank advances and bank deposits change from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "The weighted average interest rate on bank advances increased to 12.08 percent in FY25 from 11.52 percent in FY24, while the weighted average interest rate on bank deposits increased to 6.26 percent from 5.49 percent.", "evidence": "Para 1.26: \"the weighted average interest rate on bank advances increased to 12.08 percent, up from 11.52 percent in FY24. The weighted average interest rate on bank deposits increased to 6.26 percent, up from 5.49 percent in FY24.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "7" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q28", "number": 28, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What was the revised overall budget deficit target for FY25, and how did it compare with the FY24 deficit?", "answer": "The revised overall budget deficit, including grants, for FY25 was set at 4.00 percent of GDP, compared with 3.90 percent of GDP in FY24.", "evidence": "Para 1.27: \"the revised budget for FY25, overall deficit (including grants) was set at 4.00 percent of GDP, which was 3.90 percent in FY24.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "7" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q29", "number": 29, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "How did the total revenue-GDP ratio change from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "The total revenue-GDP ratio increased to 9.33 percent in FY25, up from 8.19 percent in FY24.", "evidence": "Para 1.28: \"the total revenue-GDP ratio increased to 9.33 percent in FY25, higher than 8.19 percent in FY24.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "7" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q30", "number": 30, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "Describe how exports, imports, and the trade deficit changed in FY25 compared with FY24.", "answer": "Exports (f.o.b.) increased by 7.7 percent to USD 43,965 million and imports (f.o.b.) rose by 1.8 percent to USD 64,364 million in FY25, narrowing the trade deficit to USD 20,399 million from USD 22,433 million in FY24.", "evidence": "Para 1.30: \"exports (f.o.b) increased by 7.7 percent while imports (f.o.b) rose by 1.8 percent in FY25. Total exports (f.o.b) in FY25 stood at USD 43965 million, which was USD 40807 million in FY24. On the other hand, total imports (f.o.b) increased to USD 64364 million in FY25, up from USD 63240 million in FY24. As a result, the trade deficit narrowed and stood at USD 20399 million in FY25, which was USD 22433 million in FY24.\" (Chart 1.08).", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "8" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q31", "number": 31, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "How did the nominal effective exchange rate (NEER) and real effective exchange rate (REER) indices move during FY25, and what does this indicate?", "answer": "The nominal effective exchange rate (NEER) index decreased by 6.43 percent in FY25, and the real effective exchange rate (REER) index decreased by 0.45 percent, indicating depreciating pressure on the BDT against the currencies of Bangladesh's trading partners.", "evidence": "Para 1.33: \"The nominal effective exchange rate (NEER) index, as calculated with a trade-weighted 18-currency basket (base: FY16 = 100), decreased by 6.43 percent in FY25. Similarly, the real effective exchange rate (REER) index decreased by 0.45 percent in the period under report (Charts 1.09 and 1.10), indicating depreciating pressure on BDT against the basket of currencies of Bangladesh's trade partners' countries.\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "9" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q32", "number": 32, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What does the FY26 monetary programme project for broad money and credit growth, and why is credit to the public and private sectors expected to move differently?", "answer": "The FY26 monetary programme projects broad money (M2) growth of 8.5 percent, with credit to the public sector growing 18.1 percent and credit to the private sector growing 8.0 percent. Higher public sector credit is intended to finance infrastructure and priority development projects, while restrained private sector credit growth is intended to help keep inflation under control.", "evidence": "Para 1.37: \"Monetary programme for FY26 projected that the broad money (M2) growth will be 8.5 percent, with credit to the public sector growth at 18.1 percent and credit to the private sector at 8.0 percent, reflecting a continued cautiously tight monetary policy stance ... Higher public sector credit is expected to finance infrastructure and priority development projects, while sluggish private sector credit growth will help keep inflation under control.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "10" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q33", "number": 33, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What is the IMF projecting for Bangladesh's real GDP growth in 2025 and 2026?", "answer": "3.8 percent in 2025 and 4.9 percent in 2026.", "evidence": "Table 1.01, South Asia section, Bangladesh row, Projections columns: 2025 = 3.8, 2026 = 4.9.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "1" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q34", "number": 34, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What are the IMF's projected 2025 GDP growth rates for Germany, France, Italy, and Spain?", "answer": "Germany 0.2 percent, France 0.7 percent, Italy 0.5 percent, Spain 2.9 percent.", "evidence": "Table 1.01, Advanced Economies section, Projections 2025 column: Germany = 0.2, France = 0.7, Italy = 0.5, Spain = 2.9.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "1" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q35", "number": 35, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "How do the projected 2025 GDP growth rates of Japan, the United Kingdom, and Canada compare?", "answer": "Japan 1.1 percent, United Kingdom 1.3 percent, Canada 1.2 percent.", "evidence": "Table 1.01, Advanced Economies section, Projections 2025 column: Japan = 1.1, United Kingdom = 1.3, Canada = 1.2.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "1" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q36", "number": 36, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "How do the IMF's projected 2025 consumer price inflation rates for Bangladesh and Pakistan compare, and which South Asian country has no 2025/2026 inflation projection available?", "answer": "Bangladesh's projected 2025 CPI inflation is 10.0 percent and Pakistan's is 4.5 percent; Sri Lanka has no 2025 or 2026 projection listed (shown as \"-\").", "evidence": "Table 1.01, Consumer Prices, South Asia section: Bangladesh Projections 2025 = 10.0; Pakistan Projections 2025 = 4.5; Sri Lanka Projections 2025 = \"-\", 2026 = \"-\".", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "1" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q37", "number": 37, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "By how many percentage points does the oil price projection shift from the 2024 actual figure to the 2025 projection?", "answer": "Oil prices moved from -1.8 percent (2024 actual) to -12.9 percent (2025 projection), a further decline of 11.1 percentage points.", "evidence": "Table 1.01, Commodity Prices (U.S. dollars), Oil row: 2024 Actual = -1.8, Projections 2025 = -12.9.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "1" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q38", "number": 38, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What's the difference between the FY25 growth rates of the mining and quarrying subsector and the water transport subsector?", "answer": "Mining and quarrying grew by 1.03 percent while water transport contracted by -0.43 percent in FY25 — a difference of 1.46 percentage points.", "evidence": "Table 1.02, Industry > a) Mining and quarrying row: FY25 = 1.03; Services > b) Transport and storage > ii) Water transport row: FY25 = -0.43.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "4" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q39", "number": 39, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What time period and base year is used for the national CPI inflation trend data?", "answer": "It presents 12-month average CPI inflation on base FY06=100, switching to base FY22=100 for April 2024 to June 2025, covering fiscal years FY20 through FY25 (provisional).", "evidence": "Chart 1.02, \"Trends in National CPI Inflation (12 month average: base FY06=100, base FY22=100 for April24-June25)\"; x-axis: FY20, FY21, FY22, FY23, FY24, FY25*.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "6" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q40", "number": 40, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "How does the time granularity of the NEER index trend data compare with that of the REER index trend data?", "answer": "Chart 1.09 presents annual data from FY21 to FY25, while Chart 1.10 presents monthly data from July 2024 to June 2025.", "evidence": "Chart 1.09 x-axis: FY21, FY22, FY23, FY24, FY25. Chart 1.10 x-axis: Jul24, Aug24, Sept24, Oct24, Nov24, Dec24, Jan25, Feb25, Mar25, Apr25, May25, Jun25.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "9" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q41", "number": 41, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "How do the variables tracked in the monetary aggregates growth trends compare with those tracked in the sources of broad money trends?", "answer": "Chart 1.03 plots Net domestic assets, Net foreign assets, and Broad money (M2). Chart 1.04 plots Other assets (net), Credit to private sector, Net credit to public sector, Net foreign assets, and M2.", "evidence": "Chart 1.03 legend: \"Net domestic assets, Net foreign assets, Broad money (M2)\". Chart 1.04 legend: \"Other assets (net), Credit to private sector, Net credit to public sector, Net foreign assets, M2\".", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "6-7" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q42", "number": 42, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What components show up in the revenue, expenditure, and overall budget deficit trend data versus the deficit financing trend data?", "answer": "Chart 1.05 shows Revenue and grants, Expenditure, and Overall deficit. Chart 1.06 shows Net foreign financing, Bank borrowings, Non-bank borrowings, and Total financing.", "evidence": "Chart 1.05 legend: \"Revenue and grants, Expenditure, Overall deficit\". Chart 1.06 legend: \"Net foreign financing, Bank borrowings, Non-bank borrowings, Total financing\".", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "7" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q43", "number": 43, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "How did Bangladesh's overall balance of payments outcome change between FY24 and FY25?", "answer": "The overall balance improved from a deficit of USD 4,300 million in FY24 to a surplus of USD 3,393 million in FY25.", "evidence": "Para 1.30: \"the overall balance improved significantly and registered a surplus of USD 3393 million in FY25, in contrast to the deficit of USD 4300 million in FY24. (Chart 1.07, Appendix-3: Table-XVI).\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "8" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q44", "number": 44, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "How did export growth compare with import growth in FY25?", "answer": "Exports (f.o.b) grew 7.7 percent while imports (f.o.b) grew 1.8 percent in FY25.", "evidence": "Para 1.30: \"exports (f.o.b) increased by 7.7 percent while imports (f.o.b) rose by 1.8 percent in FY25 ... (Chart 1.07, Appendix-3: Table-XVI).\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "8" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q45", "number": 45, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "By how much did Bangladesh's current account deficit narrow from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "It narrowed from a deficit of USD 6,602 million in FY24 to a deficit of USD 139 million in FY25 — a narrowing of USD 6,463 million.", "evidence": "Para 1.30: \"current account balance deficit narrowed to USD 139 million in FY25, against the deficit of USD 6602 million in FY24 ... (Chart 1.07, Appendix-3: Table-XVI).\"", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "8" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q46", "number": 46, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "How did Bangladesh's balance of payments position improve in FY25 relative to FY24, looking at trade, remittances, and the financial account together?", "answer": "The trade deficit narrowed to USD 20,399 million (from USD 22,433 million), workers' remittances grew 26.83 percent to USD 30,329 million, and the financial account posted a surplus of USD 3,539 million — together driving the overall balance from a USD 4,300 million deficit in FY24 to a USD 3,393 million surplus in FY25.", "evidence": "Para 1.30: \"the trade deficit narrowed and stood at USD 20399 million in FY25, which was USD 22433 million in FY24. Workers' remittance inflows grew slightly by 26.83 percent and stood at USD 30329 million in FY25 ... Financial account remained surplus and stood at USD 3539 million in FY25 ... the overall balance improved significantly and registered a surplus of USD 3393 million in FY25, in contrast to the deficit of USD 4300 million in FY24. (Chart 1.07, Appendix-3: Table-XVI).\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "8" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q47", "number": 47, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What was Bangladesh's financial account balance in FY25?", "answer": "A surplus of USD 3,539 million.", "evidence": "Para 1.30: \"Financial account remained surplus and stood at USD 3539 million in FY25, supported by inflows of FDI, other investment as well as medium and long-term loans, etc. ... (Chart 1.07, Appendix-3: Table-XVI).\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "8" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q48", "number": 48, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What was the FY25 growth rate of the professional, scientific and technical activities subsector?", "answer": "6.23 percent.", "evidence": "Table 1.02, Services > g) Professional, scientific and technical activities row: FY25 = 6.23.", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "4" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q49", "number": 49, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "Among public administration and defence, education, and human health and social work activities, which subsector recorded the largest FY25 growth, and by how much did it beat the smallest of the three?", "answer": "Education recorded the largest growth at 7.53 percent, exceeding Human Health and Social Work Activities (6.38 percent, the smallest of the three) by 1.15 percentage points.", "evidence": "Table 1.02, Services > i) Public administration and defence, compulsory social security row: FY25 = 6.60; j) Education row: FY25 = 7.53; k) Human health and social work activities row: FY25 = 6.38.", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "4" }, { "id": "chapter_1-q50", "number": 50, "chapter": "Chapter 1", "chapter_title": "Macroeconomic Performance and Prospect", "question": "What three categories of monetary aggregates growth are being tracked, and where does that data come from?", "answer": "Net domestic assets, Net foreign assets, and Broad money (M2) growth; sourced from the Statistics Department, Bangladesh Bank.", "evidence": "Chart 1.03 legend: \"Net domestic assets, Net foreign assets, Broad money (M2)\"; \"Source: Statistics Department, Bangladesh Bank.\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "6" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q1", "number": 1, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "How did Bangladesh's real GDP growth rate change from FY24 to FY25, and how does the FY25 figure compare with the IMF's projection?", "answer": "Real GDP grew by 3.97 percent in FY25, down from 4.22 percent in FY24, but higher than the IMF's World Economic Outlook projected growth of 3.8 percent for FY25.", "evidence": "Para 2.01: \"According to provisional estimates of the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS), real GDP (base: FY16 = 100) grew by 3.97 percent in FY25, down from 4.22 percent in FY24, but higher than the IMF's World Economic Outlook projected growth of 3.8 percent for FY25 (Table 2.01).\" Table 2.01, GDP (at constant market price) row: FY24 = 4.22, FY25 = 3.97.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "12" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q2", "number": 2, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "Why are 2025 GDP growth figures unavailable for Afghanistan and Sri Lanka?", "answer": "Afghanistan's data are omitted by the IMF because of a high degree of uncertainty; Sri Lanka's 2025 projection is excluded from publication owing to ongoing discussions on sovereign debt restructuring.", "evidence": "Chart 2.01 footnotes: \"** Data are omitted by IMF because of high degree of uncertainty.\" \"# Projection for 2025 is excluded from publication owing to ongoing discussions on sovereign debt restructuring.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "12" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q3", "number": 3, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "Where does the data on GDP growth movements across South Asian countries in 2024 and 2025 come from?", "answer": "World Economic Outlook, October 2025, IMF (Projection for 2025).", "evidence": "Chart 2.01 source line: \"Source: World Economic Outlook, October 2025, IMF (Projection for 2025).\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "12" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q4", "number": 4, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What GDP growth rate is Sri Lanka expected to achieve in FY25, and what factors support this growth?", "answer": "3.5 percent, supported by continued improvements in tourism, remittance inflows, and easing inflationary pressures.", "evidence": "Para 2.02: \"The economy of Sri Lanka is expected to grow by 3.5 percent in FY25 (South Asia Development Update, April 2025), supported by continued improvements in tourism, remittance inflows, and easing inflationary pressures.\" (Chart 2.01).", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "12" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q5", "number": 5, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What is Bhutan's projected FY25 GDP growth, and what is cited as the main driver of this growth?", "answer": "6.8 percent, the highest among South Asian nations, largely supported by strong construction activity.", "evidence": "Para 2.02: \"Bhutan's economy is expected to grow by 6.8 percent in FY25, the highest among the nations of South Asia. This growth is largely supported by strong construction activity.\" (Chart 2.01).", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "12" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q6", "number": 6, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What was the FY25 growth rate for each of Bangladesh's agriculture, industry, and services sectors?", "answer": "Agriculture 1.79 percent, Industry 4.34 percent, and Services 4.51 percent.", "evidence": "Para 2.03: \"Sector-wise, agriculture grew by 1.79 percent, industry by 4.34 percent, and services by 4.51 percent (Chart 2.02).\" Table 2.01, Agriculture / Industry / Service total rows: FY25 = 1.79, 4.34, 4.51 respectively.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "12-13" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q7", "number": 7, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "How did the overall pace of Bangladesh's economic growth in FY25 compare with the previous fiscal year, and what factors contributed to this?", "answer": "The economy grew at a lower rate in FY25 than the previous fiscal year due to a confrontation of both domestic and international challenges, including international trade tension, the lingering effect of earlier shocks from political unrest, supply-chain disruptions, and slow private investment growth, which hampered external and domestic demand.", "evidence": "Para 2.01: \"After the political regime change the Bangladesh's economy grew at a lower rate in FY25 than the previous fiscal year due to confrontation of both domestic as well as international challenges. International trade tension, along with the lingering effect of earlier shocks emanated from political unrest, supply-chain disruptions, and slow private investment growth, hampered external demand as well as domestic economic activities.\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "12" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q8", "number": 8, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What trend was seen in the sectoral drivers of growth during FY25?", "answer": "The gradual acceleration of economic growth was led by the services sector, followed by the industry sector and the agriculture sector in FY25.", "evidence": "Para 2.04: \"The growth matrix indicates that the gradual acceleration of economic growth drive was led by the services sector, followed by the industry sector and the agriculture sector in FY25.\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "12" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q9", "number": 9, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "How did agriculture sector growth change from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "Agriculture sector growth decreased to 1.79 percent in FY25 from 3.30 percent in FY24.", "evidence": "Para 2.05: \"Agriculture sector growth decreased to 1.79 percent in FY25 from 3.30 percent in FY24.\" Table 2.01, Agriculture row: FY24 = 3.30, FY25 = 1.79.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "12-13" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q10", "number": 10, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "Can you compare the FY25 growth rates of the crops and horticulture subsector with the animal farming subsector?", "answer": "Crops and horticulture contracted by -0.39 percent while animal farming grew by 3.19 percent in FY25.", "evidence": "Table 2.01, Agriculture > a) Crops and horticulture row: FY25 = -0.39; b) Animal farming row: FY25 = 3.19.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "13" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q11", "number": 11, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "By how many percentage points did the crops and horticulture subsector's growth decline from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "It declined from 4.00 percent in FY24 to -0.39 percent in FY25, a decrease of 4.39 percentage points.", "evidence": "Para 2.06: \"growth in crops and horticulture subsector fell to -0.39 percent in FY25, down from 4.00 percent in FY24.\" Table 2.01, Crops and horticulture row: FY24 = 4.00, FY25 = -0.39.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "13" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q12", "number": 12, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "By how many percentage points did the fishing subsector's growth increase from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "It increased from 0.79 percent in FY24 to 3.24 percent in FY25, a rise of 2.45 percentage points.", "evidence": "Para 2.06: \"The fishing subsector grew by 3.24 percent in FY25, significantly higher than the 0.79 percent growth in FY24.\" Table 2.01, Fishing row: FY24 = 0.79, FY25 = 3.24.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "13" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q13", "number": 13, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "Which agriculture subsector recorded the highest FY25 growth, and how does this compare with its FY24 growth?", "answer": "The forest and other related subsector recorded the highest growth at 5.04 percent in FY25, compared to 4.99 percent in FY24.", "evidence": "Para 2.06: \"the forest and other related subsectors experienced the highest growth, of 5.04 percent in FY25, compared to 4.99 percent in FY24.\" Table 2.01, Forest and related services row: FY24 = 4.99, FY25 = 5.04.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "13" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q14", "number": 14, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "How did the industrial sector's growth rate change from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "The industrial sector grew by 4.34 percent in FY25, up from 3.51 percent in FY24.", "evidence": "Para 2.07: \"the industrial sector grew by 4.34 percent in FY25, up from 3.51 percent in FY24.\" Table 2.01, Industry row: FY24 = 3.51, FY25 = 4.34.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "13" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q15", "number": 15, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What was the FY25 growth rate of the manufacturing sub-sector, and what share of total value addition does it constitute?", "answer": "The manufacturing sub-sector grew by 5.68 percent in FY25, constituting more than 24 percent of total value addition.", "evidence": "Para 2.08: \"the manufacturing sub-sector is the major contributor to industrial growth and grew by 5.68 percent in FY25, constituting more than 24 percent of total value addition.\" Table 2.01, Manufacturing row: FY25 = 5.68; Table 2.02, Manufacturing row: FY25 = 24.99.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "13-14" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q16", "number": 16, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "How do the FY25 growth rates of large industry and small, medium and micro industry compare?", "answer": "Large industry grew by 6.17 percent while small, medium and micro industry grew by 4.92 percent in FY25.", "evidence": "Table 2.01, Industry > b) Manufacturing > i) Large industry row: FY25 = 6.17; ii) Small, medium and micro industry row: FY25 = 4.92.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "13" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q17", "number": 17, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What's the difference between the FY25 growth rates of large industry and cottage industry?", "answer": "Large industry grew 6.17 percent while cottage industry grew 5.62 percent in FY25 — a difference of 0.55 percentage points.", "evidence": "Table 2.01, Industry > b) Manufacturing > i) Large industry row: FY25 = 6.17; iii) Cottage industry row: FY25 = 5.62.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "13" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q18", "number": 18, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "Compare how large industry and cottage industry growth trajectories changed from FY24 to FY25.", "answer": "Large industry growth rose sharply from 1.02 percent in FY24 to 6.17 percent in FY25, while cottage industry growth declined from 6.92 percent in FY24 to 5.62 percent in FY25.", "evidence": "Para 2.08: \"the large industry growth increased the most to 6.17 percent in FY25, up from 1.02 percent in FY24. Cottage industry registered a lower growth of 5.62 percent in FY25, down from 6.92 percent in FY24.\" Table 2.01, Large industry row: FY24 = 1.02, FY25 = 6.17; Cottage industry row: FY24 = 6.92, FY25 = 5.62.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "13-14" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q19", "number": 19, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What was the FY25 growth rate of the water supply, sewerage, waste management and remediation activities subsector?", "answer": "6.01 percent.", "evidence": "Table 2.01, Industry > d) Water supply, sewerage, waste management and remediation activities row: FY25 = 6.01.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "13" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q20", "number": 20, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "How did the services sector's growth rate change from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "The services sector's growth slightly decreased to 4.51 percent in FY25, down from 5.09 percent in FY24.", "evidence": "Para 2.09: \"its growth slightly decreased to 4.51 percent in FY25, down from 5.09 percent in FY24, reflecting slower expansion in the several sub sectors.\" Table 2.01, Service row: FY24 = 5.09, FY25 = 4.51.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "14" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q21", "number": 21, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What was the services sector's share of GDP in FY25, and how does this compare with FY24?", "answer": "The services sector share in GDP stood at 51.62 percent in FY25, compared with 51.44 percent in the preceding year.", "evidence": "Para 2.12: \"The services sector share in GDP stood at 51.62 percent in FY25, compared to 51.44 percent in the preceding year.\" Table 2.02, Service row: FY24 = 51.44, FY25 = 51.62.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "14" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q22", "number": 22, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What was the FY25 growth rate of real estate activities?", "answer": "3.49 percent.", "evidence": "Table 2.01, Service > f) Real estate activities row: FY25 = 3.49.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "13" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q23", "number": 23, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "How does the FY25 GDP share of public administration and defence, compulsory social security compare with the combined FY25 GDP share of education and human health and social work activities?", "answer": "Public administration and defence accounted for 3.60 percent of GDP, while Education (2.82%) and Human health and social work activities (3.67%) together accounted for 6.49 percent — 2.89 percentage points higher than Public administration and defence alone.", "evidence": "Table 2.02, Service > i) Public administration and defense, compulsory social security row: FY25 = 3.60; j) Education row: FY25 = 2.82; k) Human health and social work activities row: FY25 = 3.67.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "14" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q24", "number": 24, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "How did the industry sector's contribution to GDP change from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "The contribution of the industry sector to GDP increased to 37.44 percent in FY25, up from 37.37 percent in FY24.", "evidence": "Para 2.13: \"The contribution of the industry sector to GDP increased to 37.44 percent in FY25, up from 37.37 percent in FY24.\" Table 2.02, Industry row: FY24 = 37.37, FY25 = 37.44.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "14" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q25", "number": 25, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "How did agriculture's share of GDP change from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "The share of agriculture decreased to 10.94 percent in FY25, down from 11.19 percent in FY24.", "evidence": "Para 2.14: \"The share of agriculture decreased to 10.94 percent in FY25, down from 11.19 percent in FY24.\" Table 2.02, Agriculture row: FY24 = 11.19, FY25 = 10.94.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "14" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q26", "number": 26, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What was the mining and quarrying subsector's share of GDP in FY25?", "answer": "1.72 percent.", "evidence": "Table 2.02, Industry > a) Mining and quarrying row: FY25 = 1.72.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "14" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q27", "number": 27, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What was the financial and insurance activities subsector's share of GDP in FY25?", "answer": "2.91 percent.", "evidence": "Table 2.02, Service > e) Financial and insurance activities row: FY25 = 2.91.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "14" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q28", "number": 28, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "Can you explain the relationship between GDP, GDE, and the statistical discrepancy in FY25, and how it compares with FY24?", "answer": "Table 2.03 shows GDP (BDT 55,527.53 billion) was actually BDT 454.64 billion lower than GDE (BDT 55,982.16 billion) in FY25 — i.e., the statistical discrepancy was BDT -454.64 billion, reported as arising mainly from differences in BBS's data compilation technique. This compares with a discrepancy of BDT -444.04 billion in FY24: both years show a discrepancy of the same (negative) sign, with the gap widening slightly from FY24 to FY25.", "evidence": "Para 2.15: \"gross domestic product (GDP) surpassed gross domestic expenditure (GDE) by BDT 454.64 billion in FY25. This is reported as the statistical discrepancy which arises mainly due to the differences in the data compilation technique of BBS. In FY24, the amount of statistical discrepancy was BDT -444.04 billion (Table 2.03).\" Table 2.03, Statistical discrepancy row: FY24 = -444.04, FY25 = -454.64; Gross domestic product row: FY25 = 55527.53; Gross domestic expenditure row: FY25 = 55982.16. (Note: Para 2.15's wording says GDP \"surpassed\" GDE, but the table's own figures show GDP is BDT 454.64 billion lower than GDE, matching the negative discrepancy sign — the discrepancy is GDE-minus-GDP, not the other way round.)", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "15" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q29", "number": 29, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What was Bangladesh's resource balance (net exports) at current market prices in FY25?", "answer": "BDT (-) 2,950.86 billion.", "evidence": "Para 2.16: \"The resource balance (net exports) was estimated at BDT (-) 2,950.86 billion in FY25 (Table 2.03).\" Table 2.03, Resource balance (3)-(4) row: FY25 = -2950.86.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "15" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q30", "number": 30, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "By how much did the resource balance (net exports) change from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "It widened from BDT -2,929.40 billion in FY24 to BDT -2,950.86 billion in FY25 — a change of BDT 21.46 billion.", "evidence": "Table 2.03, Resource balance (3)-(4) row: FY24 = -2929.40, FY25 = -2950.86.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "15" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q31", "number": 31, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What was the total private investment amount at current market prices in FY25?", "answer": "BDT 11,483.66 billion.", "evidence": "Table 2.03, Investment (2) > Private row: FY25 = 11483.66.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "15" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q32", "number": 32, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "How did private investment as a percentage of GDP change in FY25, and what reasons are cited?", "answer": "Private investment declined from 23.96 percent of GDP in FY24 to 22.48 percent in FY25, mainly due to weakened investor confidence caused by social and political unrest and the transition to the interim administration.", "evidence": "Para 2.19: \"Private investment to GDP ratio further declined to 22.48 percent in FY25 from 23.96 percent in FY24, due mainly to lack of confidence among the investors because of social and political unrest, and the interim administration.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "16" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q33", "number": 33, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What percentage of GDP did total consumption and net exports account for in FY25?", "answer": "Total consumption accounted for 76.75 percent of GDP and net exports accounted for (-) 2.62 percent of GDP in FY25.", "evidence": "Para 2.17: \"Total consumption and net exports accounted for 76.75 percent and (-) 2.62 percent of GDP, respectively, in FY25.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "15-16" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q34", "number": 34, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What was Bangladesh's per capita nominal GDP in FY25, and how does it compare with FY24?", "answer": "Per capita nominal GDP was estimated at BDT 339.21 thousand (USD 2,820) in FY25, compared with BDT 304.10 thousand (USD 2,738) in FY24.", "evidence": "Para 2.03: \"In FY25, per capita nominal GDP was estimated at BDT 339.21 thousand (USD 2820), compared with BDT 304.10 thousand (USD 2738) in FY24.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "12" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q35", "number": 35, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "How did public and private investment ratios to GDP move differently from FY24 to FY25, and why?", "answer": "Investment as a percent of GDP decreased to 29.38 percent in FY25 from 30.70 percent in FY24. Private investment to GDP declined further to 22.48 percent (from 23.96 percent) mainly due to lack of confidence among investors because of social and political unrest and the interim administration, while public investment to GDP rose slightly to 6.90 percent (from 6.74 percent).", "evidence": "Para 2.19: \"Investment as a percent of GDP decreased to 29.38 in FY25, down from 30.70 in FY24. Private investment to GDP ratio further declined to 22.48 percent in FY25 from 23.96 percent in FY24, due mainly to lack of confidence among the investors because of social and political unrest, and the interim administration. However, the public investment to GDP ratio increased slightly to 6.90 percent in FY25, up from 6.74 percent in FY24.\" Table 2.04, Investment row: FY24 = 30.70, FY25 = 29.38; Private row: FY24 = 23.96, FY25 = 22.48; Public row: FY24 = 6.74, FY25 = 6.90.", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "16" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q36", "number": 36, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "How did the domestic savings-investment gap as a percentage of GDP change from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "It narrowed from (-) 6.74 percent of GDP in FY24 to (-) 6.13 percent in FY25, even though both the investment-to-GDP ratio and the domestic savings-to-GDP ratio decreased slightly during the same period.", "evidence": "Para 2.20: \"Domestic savings-investment gap as percent of GDP decreased to (-) 6.13 percent in FY25 from (-) 6.74 percent in FY24, although both the ratio of investment to GDP and the ratio of domestic savings to GDP decreased slightly during the same period (Chart 2.04).\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "16" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q37", "number": 37, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "By how much did gross domestic savings (GDS) and gross national savings (GNS) grow in nominal terms in FY25 compared to FY24?", "answer": "Gross domestic savings (GDS) grew by 7.70 percent and gross national savings (GNS) grew by 13.31 percent in FY25 compared to FY24.", "evidence": "Para 2.20: \"Gross domestic savings (GDS) and gross national savings (GNS) at current market prices increased by 7.70 and 13.31 percent, respectively, in FY25, as compared to FY24.\"", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "16" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q38", "number": 38, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "By how many percentage points did the domestic savings-investment gap narrow from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "Using Investment (FY24 = 30.70%, FY25 = 29.38%) and Domestic Savings (FY24 = 23.96%, FY25 = 23.25%), the gap moved from 23.96 - 30.70 = -6.74 percent of GDP in FY24 to 23.25 - 29.38 = -6.13 percent in FY25 — a narrowing of 0.61 percentage points, as also stated in the text and depicted in Chart 2.04.", "evidence": "Table 2.04, Investment row: FY24 = 30.70, FY25 = 29.38; Domestic Savings row: FY24 = 23.96, FY25 = 23.25. Para 2.20: \"Domestic savings-investment gap as percent of GDP decreased to (-) 6.13 percent in FY25 from (-) 6.74 percent in FY24 ... (Chart 2.04).\"", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "16" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q39", "number": 39, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "Describe the FY21-FY25 trend in investment as a percentage of GDP.", "answer": "Investment as a percentage of GDP declined slightly to 29.38 percent in FY25, down from 30.70 percent in FY24, continuing a gradual downward trend visible in Chart 2.04 after its earlier peak.", "evidence": "Para 2.19: \"Investment as a percent of GDP decreased to 29.38 in FY25, down from 30.70 in FY24.\" Chart 2.04, \"Trends in Savings and Investment\", Investment line, x-axis: FY21, FY22, FY23, FY24, FY25*.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "16" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q40", "number": 40, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "Which four variables were tracked for sectoral growth trends, and over what fiscal years?", "answer": "Agriculture, Industry, Services, and GDP growth, tracked from FY21 to FY25 (provisional).", "evidence": "Chart 2.03 legend: \"Agriculture\", \"Industry\", \"Services\", \"GDP\"; x-axis: FY21, FY22, FY23, FY24, FY25*.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "13" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q41", "number": 41, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What two indicators were tracked for Bangladesh's real GDP growth trend, and over what period?", "answer": "GDP growth (bars) and Per Capita Real GDP Growth (line), from FY21 to FY25 (provisional).", "evidence": "Chart 2.02 legend: \"GDP growth\", \"Per Capita Real GDP Growth\"; x-axis: FY21, FY22, FY23, FY24, FY25*.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "13" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q42", "number": 42, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "How do the variables tracked in the real GDP growth trend compare with those tracked in the sectoral growth trend?", "answer": "Chart 2.02 plots GDP growth and Per Capita Real GDP Growth. Chart 2.03 plots Agriculture, Industry, Services, and GDP growth.", "evidence": "Chart 2.02 legend: \"GDP growth\", \"Per Capita Real GDP Growth\". Chart 2.03 legend: \"Agriculture\", \"Industry\", \"Services\", \"GDP\".", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "13" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q43", "number": 43, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "How does Bangladesh's overall GDP growth trend compare with its per capita real GDP growth trend from FY23 to FY25?", "answer": "Per Table 2.01, GDP growth declined from 5.78 percent (FY23) to 4.22 percent (FY24) to 3.97 percent (FY25); Chart 2.02 shows the per capita real GDP growth line following a similarly declining trajectory over the same period.", "evidence": "Table 2.01, GDP (at constant market price) row: FY23 = 5.78, FY24 = 4.22, FY25 = 3.97. Chart 2.02, \"Trends in Bangladesh Real GDP Growth\", legend includes \"Per Capita Real GDP Growth\" line, x-axis: FY21-FY25*.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "13" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q44", "number": 44, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What combination of domestic policy actions and external conditions is necessary for Bangladesh's FY26 growth outlook to be realized?", "answer": "The outlook requires more private-sector investment, stability in the foreign exchange market, good governance and political stability, banking-sector restructuring, and an improved business environment, alongside a resilient external sector supported by strong remittance inflows and solid export earnings; risks include persistently higher inflation, higher interest rates, tight monetary conditions, and slower global growth, though government spending in transportation, communication, power, and energy could help boost investment.", "evidence": "Para 2.21: \"This growth outlook requires more investment in the private sector, stability in the foreign exchange market, good governance and political stability, etc. A resilient external sector supported by strong remittance inflows and solid export earnings will bolster both domestic and external demand ... the downside risks are as follows: persistently higher inflation, higher interest rate and comparatively tight monetary conditions, etc., which could negatively affect investment in the private sector. External demand may be lower as slower global economic growth is forecasted. However, government spending in transportation, communication, power, and energy sectors could boost investment, leading to economic growth.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "16-17" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q45", "number": 45, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "How did Bangladesh's FY25 growth compare to regional peers, and what domestic factors help explain this?", "answer": "Bangladesh's BBS-estimated FY25 growth of 3.97 percent was higher than the IMF's 3.8 percent projection for Bangladesh, but below regional peers such as Bhutan (6.8%), India (6.6%), and the Maldives (4.8%); this reflects the confrontation of domestic and international challenges — including trade tension, lingering effects of political unrest, supply-chain disruptions, and slow private investment growth — that hampered external and domestic demand in FY25.", "evidence": "Para 2.01: \"real GDP ... grew by 3.97 percent in FY25 ... higher than the IMF's World Economic Outlook projected growth of 3.8 percent for FY25 (Table 2.01).\" \"International trade tension, along with the lingering effect of earlier shocks emanated from political unrest, supply-chain disruptions, and slow private investment growth, hampered external demand as well as domestic economic activities.\" Para 2.02: Bhutan 6.8%, India 6.6%, Maldives 4.8% (Chart 2.01, \"World Economic Outlook, October 2025, IMF\").", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "12" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q46", "number": 46, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "Which sector contributed most to FY25 GDP growth in absolute terms despite not having the highest growth rate, and why?", "answer": "The services sector contributed most in absolute terms because it accounts for the largest share of GDP (51.62 percent in FY25); even though its 4.51 percent growth rate is close to industry's 4.34 percent, its much larger GDP share means its growth translates into a bigger absolute contribution than industry (37.44 percent share) or agriculture (10.94 percent share, growing at only 1.79 percent).", "evidence": "Table 2.01: Service FY25 growth = 4.51, Industry FY25 growth = 4.34, Agriculture FY25 growth = 1.79. Table 2.02: Service FY25 share = 51.62, Industry FY25 share = 37.44, Agriculture FY25 share = 10.94. Chart 2.03 (\"Trends in Sectoral Growth\") depicts Agriculture, Industry, Services, and GDP growth trends for the same fiscal years.", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "13-14" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q47", "number": 47, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What downside risks to Bangladesh's FY26 growth outlook are related to monetary conditions?", "answer": "Persistently higher inflation, higher interest rate, and comparatively tight monetary conditions, which could negatively affect investment in the private sector.", "evidence": "Para 2.21: \"the downside risks are as follows: persistently higher inflation, higher interest rate and comparatively tight monetary conditions, etc., which could negatively affect investment in the private sector.\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "16-17" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q48", "number": 48, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What factors are cited as requirements for Bangladesh's FY26 growth target to be achieved?", "answer": "More investment in the private sector, stability in the foreign exchange market, good governance, and political stability, among others.", "evidence": "Para 2.21: \"This growth outlook requires more investment in the private sector, stability in the foreign exchange market, good governance and political stability, etc.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "16" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q49", "number": 49, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What was Bangladesh's real GDP growth rate in FY25, according to the sectoral growth data?", "answer": "3.97 percent.", "evidence": "Table 2.01, GDP (at constant market price) row: FY25 = 3.97. Chart 2.02, \"Trends in Bangladesh Real GDP Growth\", depicts the same FY25 GDP growth figure as its final bar.", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "13" }, { "id": "chapter_2-q50", "number": 50, "chapter": "Chapter 2", "chapter_title": "Trends of the Real Sectors of Bangladesh Economy", "question": "What was Bangladesh Bank's monetary policy stance in the second half of FY25, and what was its aim?", "answer": "Bangladesh Bank pursued a tight monetary policy stance in the second half of FY25, aiming to restrain inflationary pressure.", "evidence": "Para 2.22: \"BB pursued a tight monetary policy stance in the second half of FY25, aiming to restrain inflationary pressure.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "17" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q1", "number": 1, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What is global headline inflation projected to be in 2024, 2025, and 2026?", "answer": "5.8 percent in 2024, declining to 4.2 percent in 2025 and 3.7 percent in 2026.", "evidence": "Para 3.01: \"global headline inflation is expected to decline from 5.8 percent in 2024 to 4.2 percent in 2025 and to 3.7 percent in 2026, with more muted pressures in emerging and developing Asia (World Economic Outlook, October 2025).\" Table 3.07, World row: 2024 = 5.8, 2025P = 4.2, 2026P = 3.7.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "18" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q2", "number": 2, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "Among SAARC countries, which country is projected to have the highest inflation rate in 2025 and what is that rate?", "answer": "Bangladesh is projected to have the highest inflation rate among SAARC countries at 10.0 percent.", "evidence": "Table 3.01 (Inflation in SAARC and Other Asian Countries), 2025P column for the SAARC members (rows 1-8): Bangladesh = 10.0, Bhutan = 2.4, India = 2.8, Maldives = 3.9, Nepal = 4.1, Pakistan = 4.5, Afghanistan = n/a, Sri Lanka = n/a — Bangladesh is the highest.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "19" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q3", "number": 3, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "Where does the data on international commodity price indices come from?", "answer": "Commodity Market Outlook, The World Bank, October 2025.", "evidence": "Chart 3.01 source line: \"Source: Commodity Market Outlook, The World Bank, October 2025.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "18" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q4", "number": 4, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What was the 12-month average national food inflation rate in June 2025?", "answer": "10.70 percent.", "evidence": "Para 3.06: \"The 12-month food inflation stood at 10.70 percent in June 2025, but was 10.66 percent in June 2024.\" Table 3.03, National level, Food row: FY25 = 133.16 (10.70).", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "20" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q5", "number": 5, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What was total food grain production in FY25, and how does it compare with FY24?", "answer": "Total food grain production (rice and wheat) increased to 43.0 million metric tons in FY25, up from 41.9 million metric tons in FY24.", "evidence": "Para 3.11: \"Total food grain production (rice and wheat) increased to 43.0 million metric tons in FY25, up from 41.9 million metric tons in FY24.\" Table 3.05, Actual Production row: FY24 = 41.9, FY25 = 43.0.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "21" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q6", "number": 6, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What was the growth rate of the general wage rate index in FY25, and how does it compare with FY24?", "answer": "The general wage rate index grew by 8.10 percent in FY25, up from 7.74 percent in FY24.", "evidence": "Para 3.12: \"The growth of the general wage rate index stood at 8.10 percent in FY25, which was 7.74 percent in FY24 ... (Table 3.06 and Chart 3.08).\" Table 3.06, General row: FY24 = 7.74, FY25 = 8.10.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "22" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q7", "number": 7, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What is the projected path of inflation in advanced economies from 2024 to 2026?", "answer": "Inflation in advanced economies is projected to decline from 2.6 percent in 2024 to 2.5 percent in 2025 and 2.2 percent in 2026.", "evidence": "Para 3.13: \"Inflation is projected to reach target levels in advanced economies from 2.6 percent in 2024 to 2.5 percent in 2025 and 2.2 percent in 2026 (Table 3.07).\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "22" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q8", "number": 8, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What was the total government procurement of food grain in FY25?", "answer": "2.3 million metric tons, up from 2.2 million metric tons in FY24.", "evidence": "Para 3.11: \"Total government procurement of food grain increased by 0.1 million metric ton to 2.3 million metric tons in FY25, up from 2.2 million metric tons in FY24.\" Table 3.05, Procurement row: FY24 = 2.2, FY25 = 2.3.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "21" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q9", "number": 9, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What was the closing stock of government food grain at the end of FY25?", "answer": "1.8 million metric tons, up from 1.5 million metric tons at the end of FY24.", "evidence": "Para 3.11 (continued on page 21): \"closing stock of government food grains at the end of FY25 increased to 1.8 million metric tons, up from 1.5 million metric tons at the end of FY24 (Table 3.05).\" Table 3.05, Closing Stock row: FY24 = 1.5, FY25 = 1.8.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "21" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q10", "number": 10, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What was the weight assigned to \"Food and Nonalcoholic Beverages\" in the national CPI consumption basket?", "answer": "44.86.", "evidence": "Table 3.04, Group/sub-group \"1. Food and Nonalcoholic Beverages\" row: Weight = 44.86.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "21" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q11", "number": 11, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What was the weight assigned to the \"Transport\" sub-group in the national CPI consumption basket?", "answer": "9.37.", "evidence": "Table 3.04, sub-group \"vi) Transport\" row: Weight = 9.37.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "21" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q12", "number": 12, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What was the FY25 percentage change for the \"Health\" sub-group in the CPI consumption basket?", "answer": "7.65 percent.", "evidence": "Table 3.04, sub-group \"v) Health\" row: % Change FY25 = 7.65.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "21" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q13", "number": 13, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What was Myanmar's projected 2025 inflation rate among the other Asian countries?", "answer": "31.0 percent, the highest among the other Asian countries listed.", "evidence": "Para 3.03: \"Among other Asian countries, Myanmar is projected to have the highest inflation rate of 31.0 percent.\" Table 3.01, Myanmar row: 2025P = 31.0.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "19" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q14", "number": 14, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What was Thailand's projected 2025 inflation rate among the other Asian countries?", "answer": "0.2 percent, the lowest among the other Asian countries listed.", "evidence": "Para 3.03: \"while Thailand may experience the lowest, 0.2 percent inflation in 2025.\" Table 3.01, Thailand row: 2025P = 0.2.", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "19" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q15", "number": 15, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What were Bangladesh Bank's repo, SLF, and SDF rates during MPS July-December 2025?", "answer": "The policy (repo) rate remained unchanged at 10.0 percent, the standing lending facility (SLF) rate remained at 11.5 percent, while the standing deposit facility (SDF) rate decreased to 8.0 percent from 8.5 percent.", "evidence": "Para 3.15: \"The policy (repo) rate remained unchanged at 10.0 percent; while the standing lending facility (SLF) rate remained at 11.5 percent, but the standing deposit facility (SDF) rate decreased to 8.0 percent from 8.5 percent in MPS July-December 2025.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "23-24" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q16", "number": 16, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "How did the price of crude oil change from June 2024 to June 2025?", "answer": "The price of crude oil decreased to USD 69.15 per barrel in June 2025, from USD 81.21 per barrel recorded in June 2024.", "evidence": "Para 3.02: \"the price of crude oil decreased to USD 69.15 per barrel in June 2025 from USD 81.21 per barrel recorded in June 2024 (Commodity Price Data, October 2025, The World Bank).\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "18" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q17", "number": 17, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "According to the FAO's June 2025 biannual report, what is global cereals production forecast to reach in 2025/26, and by how much would this represent an increase over 2024/25?", "answer": "2,911.4 million tons in 2025/26, a 2.1 percent rise from 2,852.7 million tons in 2024/25.", "evidence": "Para 3.14: \"This increase is supported by record forecasts for cereals at 2911.4 million tons in 2025/26, representing a 2.1 percent rise from 2852.7 million tons in 2024/25.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "23" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q18", "number": 18, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "Can you compare Pakistan's and India's projected 2025 inflation rates?", "answer": "Pakistan's projected 2025 inflation is 4.5 percent, while India's is 2.8 percent.", "evidence": "Table 3.01, Pakistan row: 2025P = 4.5; India row: 2025P = 2.8.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "19" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q19", "number": 19, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "Can you compare Korea's and Malaysia's projected 2025 inflation rates?", "answer": "Korea's projected 2025 inflation is 2.0 percent, while Malaysia's is 1.6 percent.", "evidence": "Table 3.01, Korea row: 2025P = 2.0; Malaysia row: 2025P = 1.6.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "19" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q20", "number": 20, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "How does the CPI basket weight of \"Housing, Water, Electricity, Gas, and Other Fuels\" compare with that of \"Transport\"?", "answer": "Housing, Water, Electricity, Gas, and Other Fuels has a weight of 15.24, compared with 9.37 for Transport.", "evidence": "Table 3.04, sub-group \"iii) Housing, Water, Electricity, Gas, and Other Fuels\" row: Weight = 15.24; \"vi) Transport\" row: Weight = 9.37.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "21" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q21", "number": 21, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "How does Bangladesh's projected 2025 inflation rate compare with Pakistan's and Nepal's?", "answer": "Bangladesh's 2025 projected inflation is 10.0 percent, compared with 4.5 percent for Pakistan and 4.1 percent for Nepal — both considerably lower.", "evidence": "Para 3.03: \"Bangladesh is anticipated to experience the highest inflation rate of 10.0 percent in 2025, followed by Pakistan (4.5 percent), Nepal (4.1 percent).\" Table 3.01, Bangladesh row: 2025P = 10.0; Pakistan row: 2025P = 4.5; Nepal row: 2025P = 4.1.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "19" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q22", "number": 22, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "How do the 2025 projected inflation rates of emerging market and developing economies (EMDE) compare with emerging and developing Asia?", "answer": "EMDE inflation is projected at 5.3 percent in 2025, compared with a much lower 1.3 percent for emerging and developing Asia.", "evidence": "Para 3.13: \"Inflation in emerging market and developing economies is projected to ease gradually, reaching around 5.3 percent in 2025 ... In 2025 inflation is expected to downward to 1.3 percent from 1.9 in 2024 due to weak demand and subdued price growth in China (Table 3.07).\" Table 3.07, Emerging Market and Developing Economies row: 2025P = 5.3; Emerging and Developing Asia row: 2025P = 1.3.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "22" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q23", "number": 23, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "How does the FY25 wage rate index growth of the agriculture sub-sector compare with that of industry?", "answer": "Agriculture wage rate index growth was 8.35 percent in FY25, compared with 7.74 percent for industry.", "evidence": "Para 3.12: \"The growths of wage rate indices of three sub sectors, namely agriculture, industry, and service sectors increased to 8.35, 7.74 and 8.38 percent respectively, in FY25 ... (Table 3.06 and Chart 3.08).\" Table 3.06, Agriculture row: FY25 = 8.35; Industry row: FY25 = 7.74.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "22" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q24", "number": 24, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "How does the FY25 wage rate index growth of production compare with construction within the industry sub-sector?", "answer": "The growth of the wage rate index of production was 7.94 percent, higher than that of construction at 7.71 percent.", "evidence": "Para 3.12: \"Within the industry sub sector, the growth of wage rate index of production (7.94 percent) was higher than that of construction (7.71 percent) (Table 3.06 and Chart 3.08).\" Table 3.06, Production row: FY25 = 7.94; Construction row: FY25 = 7.71.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "22" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q25", "number": 25, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "Do the monthly 12-month-average inflation series and the point-to-point inflation series for FY25 use the same time granularity and base year, and if so what are they?", "answer": "Both charts use monthly data from Jul-24 to Jun-25 on base FY22=100, but Chart 3.03 measures 12-month average inflation while Chart 3.04 measures point-to-point inflation.", "evidence": "Chart 3.03 title: \"Monthly Trends of Inflation in FY25 (12-month average: FY22=100)\". Chart 3.04 title: \"Monthly Trends of Inflation in FY25 (Point-to-point: FY22=100)\". Both x-axes: Jul-24 through Jun-25.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "20" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q26", "number": 26, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What variables are tracked for rural inflation compared with those tracked for urban inflation?", "answer": "Both charts plot the same two variables — General and Food inflation (12-month average, base FY22=100) — but Chart 3.06 covers rural areas and Chart 3.07 covers urban areas.", "evidence": "Chart 3.06 legend: \"General\", \"Food\"; title \"Rural Inflation (12-month average: FY22=100)\". Chart 3.07 legend: \"General\", \"Food\"; title \"Urban Inflation (12-month average: FY22=100)\".", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "21-22" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q27", "number": 27, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What three commodity price indices are tracked for international commodity prices, and over what period?", "answer": "Energy, Non-energy, and Agriculture price indices, tracked from December 2023 to June 2025 on a base of 2010=100.", "evidence": "Chart 3.01 legend: \"Energy\", \"Non-energy\", \"Agriculture\"; title \"International Commodity Price Indices (Base: 2010=100)\"; x-axis: Dec-23 through Jun-25.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "18" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q28", "number": 28, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "How does point-to-point core inflation compare with 12-month average core inflation in June 2025?", "answer": "Point-to-point core inflation was 8.95 percent in June 2025, slightly higher than the 12-month average core inflation of 8.77 percent.", "evidence": "Para 3.08: \"The 12-month average core inflation (non-food, non-fuel) increased by 1.41 percentage points to 8.77 percent in June 2025 ... point-to-point core inflation increased by 0.85 percentage points to 8.95 percent in June 2025 (Chart 3.05).\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "20" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q29", "number": 29, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "Compare Bangladesh's FY25 national CPI-based inflation trajectory with the overall pattern shown for SAARC countries.", "answer": "Bangladesh recorded the highest 2025 projected inflation among SAARC countries (10.0 percent), well above the region's other members such as Bhutan (2.4%), India (2.8%), Nepal (4.1%), Maldives (3.9%), and Pakistan (4.5%), a divergence visually evident in Chart 3.02.", "evidence": "Table 3.01, 2025P column: Bangladesh = 10.0, Bhutan = 2.4, India = 2.8, Nepal = 4.1, Maldives = 3.9, Pakistan = 4.5. Chart 3.02, \"Inflation Situation in SAARC Countries\", plots Bangladesh's line distinctly above other SAARC members from 2023 onward.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "19" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q30", "number": 30, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "How does the initial FY25 inflation target compare with the revised target and the actual outturn?", "answer": "The initial budget target for FY25 inflation was 6.5 percent; this was revised upward to 9.0 percent, and the actual outturn was 10.03 percent — 1.03 percentage points above even the revised target.", "evidence": "Para 3.04: \"This average inflation rate was 1.03 percentage points higher than the revised target of 9.0 percent for FY25, while the initial budget target was 6.5 percent.\" Table 3.03 (Annual Average CPI Based Inflation, base: FY22=100), National level, General Index row: FY25 = 131.62 (10.03) — the actual FY25 annual average outturn of 10.03 percent.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "19-20" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q31", "number": 31, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "Compare the FY25 general wage rate index growth rates of the industry and services sub-sectors.", "answer": "The industry sub-sector's wage rate index grew by 7.74 percent in FY25, while the services sub-sector grew by 8.38 percent.", "evidence": "Para 3.12: \"The growths of wage rate indices of three sub sectors, namely agriculture, industry, and service sectors increased to 8.35, 7.74 and 8.38 percent respectively, in FY25.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "22" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q32", "number": 32, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "How did the 12-month average non-food inflation trend during FY25, and how does June 2025 compare with June 2024?", "answer": "The 12-month average non-food inflation trended upward throughout FY25, reaching 9.47 percent in June 2025, up from 8.86 percent in June 2024.", "evidence": "Para 3.06: \"The 12-month average non-food inflation experienced an upward trend throughout FY25 and reached 9.47 percent in June 2025, up from 8.86 percent in June 2024.\" Table 3.03, National level, Non-food row: FY24 = 119.08 (8.86), FY25 = 130.37 (9.47).", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "20" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q33", "number": 33, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "How did the point-to-point rural inflation rate change from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "It increased to 10.20 percent in FY25, which was 0.43 percentage point higher than the 9.77 percent recorded in FY24.", "evidence": "Para 3.09: \"The point-to-point rural inflation rate increased to 10.20 percent in FY25 which was 0.43 percentage point higher than the 9.77 percent recorded in FY24.\" Table 3.03, Rural, General Index row: FY24 = 119.73 (9.77), FY25 = 131.94 (10.20).", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "20-21" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q34", "number": 34, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What six wage-index series are tracked for wage growth, and over what fiscal years?", "answer": "General, Agricultural, Industry, Services, Construction, and Fish, tracked from FY22 to FY25 on base FY22=100.", "evidence": "Chart 3.08 legend: \"General\", \"Agricultural\", \"Industry\", \"Services\", \"Construction\", \"Fish\"; title \"Growth rate of Wage Index (base:FY22=100)\"; x-axis: FY22, FY23, FY24, FY25.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "22" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q35", "number": 35, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What broad disinflationary trend does the October 2025 World Economic Outlook report project for near-term global inflation?", "answer": "It projects a gradual disinflationary trend underpinned by the dissipation of earlier supply-side shocks, persistent subdued demand in key economies, and the tightening of global financial conditions, with global activity expected to weaken and headline inflation projected to decrease from 5.8 percent (2024) to 4.2 percent (2025) and 3.7 percent (2026).", "evidence": "Para 3.13: \"The projections from the October 2025 World Economic Outlook report indicate that the recent trajectory of global inflation reflects a gradual disinflationary trend, underpinned by the dissipation of earlier supply-side shocks, the persistence of subdued demand in key economies, and the tightening of global financial conditions. Global activity is expected to weaken, while headline inflation is projected to decrease from an annual average of 5.8 percent in 2024 to 4.2 percent in 2025 and further to 3.7 percent in 2026 (Table 3.07).\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "22" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q36", "number": 36, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "Describe the path of point-to-point headline inflation in Bangladesh during FY25.", "answer": "Point-to-point headline inflation started at a high level, peaked near the beginning of FY25, and then gradually declined to 8.48 percent in June 2025, compared with 9.72 percent in June 2024.", "evidence": "Para 3.04: \"The first half of the fiscal year was marked by upward pressure, while the second half experienced a gradual easing.\" Para 3.05: \"The point-to-point headline inflation rate was about to 8.48 percent in June 2025 with fluctuations throughout FY25, which was 9.72 percent in June 2024 (Chart 3.04).\" Chart 3.04 (Monthly Trends of Inflation in FY25, Point-to-point: FY22=100): the General (headline) line begins near 11.8 percent in Jul-24, holds elevated through a Nov-24 bump, then declines steadily to about 8.5 percent by Jun-25.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "19-20" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q37", "number": 37, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "By how many percentage points did FY25's actual average inflation exceed the revised inflation target?", "answer": "By 1.03 percentage points (10.03 percent actual versus a 9.0 percent revised target).", "evidence": "Para 3.04: \"This average inflation rate was 1.03 percentage points higher than the revised target of 9.0 percent for FY25.\" Table 3.03, National level, General Index row: FY25 = 131.62 (10.03).", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "19" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q38", "number": 38, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "By how many percentage points did point-to-point rural food inflation fall from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "It fell from 10.68 percent in FY24 to 10.56 percent in FY25, a decrease of 0.12 percentage points.", "evidence": "Para 3.09: \"Point-to-point rural food inflation decreased to 10.56 percent in FY25, down from 10.68 percent in FY24.\" Table 3.03, Rural, Food row: FY24 = 120.41 (10.68), FY25 = 133.12 (10.56).", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "20-21" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q39", "number": 39, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "By how many percentage points does Bangladesh's projected 2025 inflation exceed Pakistan's?", "answer": "10.0 percent versus 4.5 percent — a difference of 5.5 percentage points.", "evidence": "Table 3.01, Bangladesh row: 2025P = 10.0; Pakistan row: 2025P = 4.5.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "19" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q40", "number": 40, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "By how many percentage points does Myanmar's projected 2025 inflation exceed Thailand's?", "answer": "31.0 percent versus 0.2 percent — a difference of 30.8 percentage points.", "evidence": "Table 3.01, Myanmar row: 2025P = 31.0; Thailand row: 2025P = 0.2.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "19" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q41", "number": 41, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "By how much did the price of crude oil decline from June 2024 to June 2025, in USD per barrel?", "answer": "It declined from USD 81.21 per barrel to USD 69.15 per barrel, a decrease of USD 12.06 per barrel.", "evidence": "Para 3.02: \"the price of crude oil decreased to USD 69.15 per barrel in June 2025 from USD 81.21 per barrel recorded in June 2024.\"", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "18" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q42", "number": 42, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "By how many percentage points did the services sub-sector's FY25 wage rate index growth exceed that of agriculture?", "answer": "Services grew 8.38 percent and agriculture grew 8.35 percent in FY25 — a difference of 0.03 percentage points, both figures also depicted in Chart 3.08.", "evidence": "Table 3.06, Services row: FY25 = 8.38; Agriculture row: FY25 = 8.35. Chart 3.08 (\"Growth rate of Wage Index\") plots both series for the same fiscal years.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "22" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q43", "number": 43, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "Combining the commodity-price outlook with Bangladesh's inflation-containment strategy, explain how the global commodity price decline is expected to support Bangladesh's FY26 inflation goals.", "answer": "Global commodity prices are projected to drop sharply — 7.0 percent in 2025 and a further 7.0 percent in 2026 — driven mainly by falling oil prices and weakening global demand; combined with Bangladesh Bank's continued tight monetary policy and gradual exchange-rate stabilisation, easing global commodity prices are expected to help CPI inflation in Bangladesh moderate gradually over FY26.", "evidence": "Para 3.02: \"overall commodity prices are expected to drop sharply in 2025 by 7.0 percent, driven by weaker global economic growth and reduced demand. In 2026, prices are projected to fall further by 7.0 percent.\" Para 3.15: \"CPI inflation in Bangladesh is expected to gradually moderate over FY26, supported by the gradual stabilisation of the exchange rate, easing global commodity prices, and the continued effects of tight monetary policy.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "18-24" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q44", "number": 44, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "Synthesizing the WEO's disinflation drivers with the FAO's food production outlook, what combined picture emerges for near-term global inflation?", "answer": "The WEO projects a gradual global disinflation driven by fading supply-side shocks, subdued demand, and tight financial conditions, while the FAO's June 2025 report is cautiously optimistic that most major food commodities (except sugar) will see increased production in 2025/26 — together suggesting easing price pressures from both the macro and food-supply sides, though risks remain from tariffs, weather variability, and trade policy uncertainty.", "evidence": "Para 3.13: \"the recent trajectory of global inflation reflects a gradual disinflationary trend, underpinned by the dissipation of earlier supply-side shocks, the persistence of subdued demand in key economies, and the tightening of global financial conditions.\" Para 3.14: \"FAO ... presents a cautiously optimistic assessment of global food commodity markets. Production of most major commodities, except sugar, is anticipated to increase ... markets remain exposed to significant risks stemming from weather variability, geopolitical tensions, evolving trade policies, and broader economic uncertainties.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "22-23" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q45", "number": 45, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What combination of Bangladesh Bank policy measures and external stabilizing factors is expected to bring inflation down over FY26?", "answer": "BB's continued tight monetary policy stance in the first half of FY26 to contain inflation and anchor expectations, alongside gradual stabilisation of the exchange rate and easing global commodity prices, are expected to help CPI inflation moderate gradually over FY26, even as food and energy cost pressures may pose short-term challenges.", "evidence": "Para 3.15: \"Maintaining its interest rate-based monetary policy framework, BB might continue its tight monetary policy stance in the first half of FY26 to contain inflation and anchor inflation expectations ... Looking ahead, CPI inflation in Bangladesh is expected to gradually moderate over FY26, supported by the gradual stabilisation of the exchange rate, easing global commodity prices, and the continued effects of tight monetary policy. While supply-side pressures, including food and energy costs, may still pose short-term challenges, overall inflation is projected to decline compared to the peak levels of the previous fiscal year.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "24" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q46", "number": 46, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "Why might point-to-point core inflation and 12-month average core inflation show different readings for the same month of June 2025?", "answer": "Because point-to-point inflation compares prices directly against the same month one year earlier and reacts faster to recent price swings (8.95 percent in June 2025, up 0.85 percentage points), while the 12-month average smooths inflation over a rolling year and reacts more gradually (8.77 percent, up 1.41 percentage points) — so the two measures can diverge even while describing the same underlying price trend, as depicted in Chart 3.05.", "evidence": "Para 3.08: \"The 12-month average core inflation (non-food, non-fuel) increased by 1.41 percentage points to 8.77 percent in June 2025, up from 7.36 percent in June 2024. In the same manner, point-to-point core inflation increased by 0.85 percentage points to 8.95 percent in June 2025, up from 8.10 percent in June 2024 (Chart 3.05).\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "20" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q47", "number": 47, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "Why does Bangladesh's inflation trajectory diverge from most of its SAARC peers in FY25?", "answer": "While most SAARC peers such as Bhutan, India, Nepal, Maldives, and Pakistan show projected 2025 inflation in the low single digits (2.4% to 4.5%), Bangladesh's 10.0 percent is far higher, reflecting domestic supply constraints, rising food prices, and the depreciation of the BDT raising import costs — factors specific to Bangladesh's economy rather than the broader regional trend of easing inflation shown in Chart 3.02.", "evidence": "Table 3.01, 2025P column: Bangladesh = 10.0, Bhutan = 2.4, India = 2.8, Nepal = 4.1, Maldives = 3.9, Pakistan = 4.5. Para 3.04: \"The inflation drive was attributed to domestic supply constraints, and rising food prices, mostly coming from the depreciation of BDT, resulting in higher import costs.\" Chart 3.02, \"Inflation Situation in SAARC Countries\", shows Bangladesh's line diverging above most other SAARC members.", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "19" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q48", "number": 48, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What is the major factor behind the broad-based decline in commodity prices in 2025?", "answer": "Oil prices, as slowing global consumption combines with expanding supply to weigh heavily on the overall commodity index.", "evidence": "Para 3.02: \"A major factor behind this downturn will be oil prices, as slowing global consumption combines with expanding supply to weigh heavily on the overall commodity index.\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "18" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q49", "number": 49, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What was the 12-month average core inflation rate in June 2025?", "answer": "8.77 percent, up 1.41 percentage points from 7.36 percent in June 2024.", "evidence": "Para 3.08: \"The 12-month average core inflation (non-food, non-fuel) increased by 1.41 percentage points to 8.77 percent in June 2025, up from 7.36 percent in June 2024 (Chart 3.05).\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "20" }, { "id": "chapter_3-q50", "number": 50, "chapter": "Chapter 3", "chapter_title": "Price and Inflation", "question": "What was the point-to-point non-food inflation rate in June 2025?", "answer": "9.37 percent, up from 9.15 percent in June 2024.", "evidence": "Para 3.07: \"The point-to-point non-food inflation increased from 9.15 percent in June 2024 to 9.37 percent in June 2025 with fluctuations throughout FY25 ... point-to-point non-food inflation remained above 9.0 percent during FY25 (Chart 3.04).\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "20" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q1", "number": 1, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "At what level has the repo policy rate been fixed since 27 October 2024, and what is the interest rate corridor around it?", "answer": "10.00 percent, with a ±150 basis points symmetric interest rate corridor (IRC) of standing lending facility (SLF) and standing deposit facility (SDF).", "evidence": "Para 4.04: \"Since 27 October 2024 the repo policy rate has been fixed at 10.00 percent, with a ±150 basis points symmetric interest rate corridor (IRC) of standing lending facilities (SLF) and standing deposit facilities (SDF).\" Table 4.01, 27 October 2024 row: Policy Rate = 10.00.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "26" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q2", "number": 2, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "What were the overall weighted average interest rates (WAIR) on advances and deposits in June 2025?", "answer": "12.08 percent on advances and 6.26 percent on deposits.", "evidence": "Para 4.06: \"The overall weighted average interest rates (WAIR) on advances and deposits rose to 12.08 percent and 6.26 percent, respectively, in June 2025.\" Table 4.02, Overall row: WAIR on Advances FY25 = 12.08; WAIR on Deposits FY25 = 6.26.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "26" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q3", "number": 3, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "What was the actual net foreign assets figure at end June 2025, and how did it compare with the projection?", "answer": "Net foreign assets stood at BDT 3,042.56 billion (actual) at end June 2025, below the projected BDT 3,136.67 billion.", "evidence": "Para 4.09: \"Net foreign assets (NFA) and net domestic assets (NDA) of the banking system, the two components of M2, had slower growth than projected in the fiscal year (Table 4.03).\" Table 4.03, Net foreign assets row: End June 2025 Projection = 3136.67, Actual = 3042.56.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "28" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q4", "number": 4, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "What was domestic credit growth in FY25, and how did it compare with the projected rate?", "answer": "Domestic credit growth was 8.04 percent, slower than the projected rate of 12.01 percent.", "evidence": "Para 4.09: \"Domestic credit growth was also slow at 8.04 percent, though the projection was 12.01 percent.\" Table 4.03, Domestic Credit row: growth figures in parentheses — Projection = (12.01), Actual = (8.04).", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "28" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q5", "number": 5, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "What was the actual reserve money (RM) figure at end June 2025?", "answer": "BDT 4,125.74 billion.", "evidence": "Table 4.04, Reserve money row: End June 2025 Actual = 4125.74.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "29" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q6", "number": 6, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "How did the money multiplier (MM) change from June 2024 to June 2025?", "answer": "The money multiplier increased to 5.27 in June 2025, from 4.92 in June 2024.", "evidence": "Para 4.12: \"In June 2025, money multiplier increased to 5.27 from 4.92 in June 2024.\" Table 4.04, Money multiplier row: End June 2024 Actual = 4.92, End June 2025 Actual = 5.27.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "29" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q7", "number": 7, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "At what level was the standing lending facility (SLF) rate set effective 27 October 2024?", "answer": "11.50 percent.", "evidence": "Table 4.01, 27 October 2024 row: SLF = 11.50.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "26" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q8", "number": 8, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "What was the total excess liquid assets of all bank groups at end June 2025?", "answer": "BDT 2,927.45 billion.", "evidence": "Table 4.05, 30-Jun-25 row: Total = 2927.45.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "30" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q9", "number": 9, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "What was the value of scheduled banks' advances at 30 June 2025, and how did this compare with FY24?", "answer": "Advances edged up by 7.06 percent to BDT 17,355.82 billion in FY25, against a rise of 10.07 percent to BDT 16,211.82 billion in FY24.", "evidence": "Para 4.23: \"Advances (bank credit less bills) edged up by 7.06 percent to BDT 17355.82 billion in FY25 against the rise of 10.07 percent to BDT 16211.82 billion in FY24.\" Table 4.06, Advances row: 30 Jun 25 = 17355.82.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "31-32" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q10", "number": 10, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "What were total bank deposits at 30 June 2025, and how did this compare with FY24?", "answer": "Total bank deposits increased by 7.27 percent to BDT 19,978.17 billion during FY25, against an increase of 9.68 percent to BDT 18,623.72 billion in FY24.", "evidence": "Para 4.24: \"Total bank deposits (excluding inter-bank items) increased by 7.27 percent to BDT 19978.17 billion during FY25, against the increase of 9.68 percent to BDT 18623.72 billion in FY24.\" Table 4.07, Total deposits row: 30 Jun 25 = 19978.17.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "32" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q11", "number": 11, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "What was the actual value of claims on deposit money banks (a component of reserve money) at end June 2025?", "answer": "BDT 843.01 billion.", "evidence": "Table 4.04, Claims on deposit money banks row: End June 2025 Actual = 843.01.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "29" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q12", "number": 12, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "What change did Bangladesh Bank make to the daily cash reserve requirement (CRR), and when did it take effect?", "answer": "BB reduced the daily cash reserve requirement (CRR) to 3.00 percent, effective 05 March 2025, while keeping the biweekly average requirement unchanged at 4.00 percent.", "evidence": "Para 4.19: \"BB reduced the daily cash reserve requirement (CRR) to 3.00 percent, with effect from 05 March 2025, while keeping the biweekly average requirement unchanged at 4.00 percent.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "31" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q13", "number": 13, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "What three series track the weighted average interest rates on deposits and advances of scheduled banks along with the spread between them, and over what period do they run?", "answer": "Spread, Deposit rate, and Lending rate, from June 2021 to June 2025.", "evidence": "Chart 4.03 legend: \"Spread\", \"Deposit rate\", \"Lending rate\"; x-axis: Jun-21, Jun-22, Jun-23, Jun-24, Jun-25.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "27" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q14", "number": 14, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "By how much did scheduled banks' borrowings from Bangladesh Bank rise in FY25, and to what level?", "answer": "They rose by 14.16 percent to BDT 1,972.61 billion in FY25.", "evidence": "Para 4.11: \"This raised scheduled banks' borrowings from BB by 14.16 percent to BDT 1972.61 billion in FY25 against a corresponding 64.38 percent increase to BDT 1727.88 billion in FY24.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "29" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q15", "number": 15, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "What is the maximum advance deposit ratio (ADR) banks are instructed to maintain?", "answer": "A maximum of 87.00 percent for conventional banks and 92.00 percent for Islamic Shariah-based banks.", "evidence": "Para 4.18: \"Banks were instructed in 15 April 2020 to maintain their ADR within maximum 87.00 percent for conventional banks and 92.00 percent for Islamic Shariah-based banks respectively.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "30" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q16", "number": 16, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "Can you compare the weighted average interest rate on advances for agriculture and SME in June 2025?", "answer": "Agriculture advances carried a WAIR of 11.72 percent, compared with 12.44 percent for SME.", "evidence": "Table 4.02, WAIR on Advances > Agriculture row: FY25 = 11.72; SME row: FY25 = 12.44.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "26" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q17", "number": 17, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "How do the actual net foreign assets and net domestic assets of reserve money compare at end June 2025?", "answer": "Net foreign assets stood at BDT 2,580.07 billion, considerably higher than net domestic assets at BDT 1,545.66 billion.", "evidence": "Table 4.04, Net foreign assets row: End June 2025 Actual = 2580.07; Net domestic assets row: End June 2025 Actual = 1545.66.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "29" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q18", "number": 18, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "How did the excess liquid assets of state-owned banks compare with private banks at end June 2025?", "answer": "State-owned banks held BDT 1,041.13 billion in excess liquid assets, compared with BDT 1,500.69 billion for private banks (other than Islamic).", "evidence": "Table 4.05, 30-Jun-25 row: State-owned Banks = 1041.13; Private Banks (Other than Islamic) = 1500.69.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "30" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q19", "number": 19, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "How did the repo policy rate change across the three rate revisions during H1FY25?", "answer": "The repo policy rate was tightened three times: to 9.00 percent effective 27 August 2024, to 9.50 percent effective 25 September 2024, and to 10.00 percent effective 27 October 2024, where it has remained fixed since.", "evidence": "Para 4.04: \"BB maintained a cautiously tight monetary policy stance and changed repo policy rates thrice during the first half of FY25 (H1FY25), fixing it at 10.00 percent for the rest of the fiscal year.\" Table 4.01: 27 August 2024 Policy Rate = 9.00; 25 September 2024 Policy Rate = 9.50; 27 October 2024 Policy Rate = 10.00.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "26" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q20", "number": 20, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "How did the spread between WAIR on advances and deposits change from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "The spread declined slightly from 6.03 percentage points in FY24 to 5.82 percentage points in FY25, indicating increasing efficiency in banking practices.", "evidence": "Para 4.06: \"the spread between WAIR on advances and deposits also adjusted after an initial high in June 2024. It declined to 5.82 percent in June 2025, indicating increasing efficiency in banking practices.\" Table 4.02, Spread* row: FY24 = 6.03, FY25 = 5.82.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "26" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q21", "number": 21, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "How did the actual growth of net domestic assets (NDA) of reserve money compare with its projected growth in FY25?", "answer": "Net domestic assets (NDA) decreased significantly by 14.90 percent during FY25, a much steeper decline than the projected 5.52 percent decrease.", "evidence": "Para 4.10: \"Net domestic assets (NDA) of BB, on the other hand, decreased significantly by 14.90 percent during the fiscal year.\" Table 4.04, Net domestic assets row: growth in parentheses — Projection = (-5.52), Actual = (-14.90).", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "29" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q22", "number": 22, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "How did the actual growth of net foreign assets (NFA) of reserve money compare with its projected growth in FY25?", "answer": "Net foreign assets (NFA) of BB grew by 11.48 percent in FY25, well above the projected growth of 6.12 percent.", "evidence": "Para 4.10: \"net foreign assets (NFA) of BB experienced a significant growth of 11.48 percent in FY25, although the projection was of 6.12 percent growth.\" Table 4.04, Net foreign assets row: growth in parentheses — Projection = (6.12), Actual = (11.48).", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "29" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q23", "number": 23, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "How do the variables tracked for the money multiplier compare with those tracked for the income velocity of money?", "answer": "Chart 4.05 plots the Money Multiplier (MM) alongside the currency-deposit ratio (CD) and reserve-deposit ratio (RD) on a secondary axis. Chart 4.06 plots only the Income Velocity of Money.", "evidence": "Chart 4.05 legend: \"MM\", \"CD (RHS)\", \"RD (RHS)\". Chart 4.06 shows a single series, \"Income Velocity of Money\", with no legend of additional variables.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "29" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q24", "number": 24, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "How does the time granularity used for tracking the weighted average call money rate under the interest rate corridor compare with that used for the income velocity of money?", "answer": "Chart 4.02 uses monthly data from Jul-24 to Jun-25, while Chart 4.06 uses annual data from FY21 to FY25.", "evidence": "Chart 4.02 x-axis: Jul-24, Aug-24, ..., Jun-25. Chart 4.06 x-axis: FY21, FY22, FY23, FY24, FY25.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "26,29" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q25", "number": 25, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "How do the components tracked under the movement in broad money compare with those tracked under the net effect on liquidity?", "answer": "Chart 4.04 shows Currency outside banks, Demand Deposits, Time Deposits, and M2. Chart 4.07 shows SDF and BB Bills, Repo/AR/CM Repo/ALS and SLF, Net Effect, and FX Sale/Purchase.", "evidence": "Chart 4.04 legend: \"Currency outside banks\", \"Demand Deposits\", \"Time Deposits\", \"M2\". Chart 4.07 legend: \"SDF and BB Bills\", \"Repo, AR, CM Repo, ALS and SLF\", \"Net Effect\", \"FX Sale/Purchase\".", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "28,31" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q26", "number": 26, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "How did the trend in nominal GDP growth compare with the 12-month average inflation trend from FY21 to FY25?", "answer": "Nominal GDP growth remained relatively elevated and stable through the period (reaching 11.00 percent in FY25), while 12-month average inflation trended upward from a lower base in FY21-FY22 and converged closer to nominal GDP growth by FY25.", "evidence": "Para 4.03: \"An 11.00 percent nominal GDP growth (3.97 percent real) (provisional) was achieved in the fiscal year. Movement of the nominal GDP growth rate and twelve month average headline inflation is shown in Chart 4.01.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "25" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q27", "number": 27, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "How did the movement of the weighted average call money rate compare with the policy (repo) rate during FY25?", "answer": "The weighted average call money rate closely tracked the policy (repo) rate throughout FY25, hovering near 10.00 percent after the rate reached that level on 27 October 2024, staying contained within the ±150 basis points interest rate corridor.", "evidence": "Para 4.05: \"The anchor variables under this monetary policy regime and the call money rates of the interbank market, had been hovering closely around the repo policy rate, contained within the interest rate corridor during the fiscal year.\" Table 4.01, 27 October 2024 row: Policy Rate = 10.00. Chart 4.02 plots \"Policy Rate (Repo)\" alongside \"Weighted Average Call Money Rate\".", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "26" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q28", "number": 28, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "Compare Bangladesh Bank's net liquidity support with its credit guarantee scheme provided to banks during FY25.", "answer": "BB provided net liquidity support of BDT 6.28 billion during the fiscal year, alongside a credit guarantee scheme for interbank transactions worth BDT 111.00 billion.", "evidence": "Para 4.16: \"BB provided a net liquidity support of BDT 6.28 billion during the fiscal year; alongside it provided a credit guarantee scheme for interbank transactions worth BDT 111.00 billion.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "30" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q29", "number": 29, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "How did the highest headline inflation rate recorded over a decade move over the course of FY25?", "answer": "It stood at 11.66 percent (point-to-point) in July 2024, and declined steadily to 8.48 percent by June 2025.", "evidence": "Para 4.03: \"The highest headline inflation rate over a decade was 11.66 percent (point-to-point). This was recorded in July 2024, but it declined steadily to 8.48 percent by June 2025.\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "25" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q30", "number": 30, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "What near-term challenges lie ahead for Bangladesh's monetary policy stance heading into FY26?", "answer": "Reducing inflation, stabilising the exchange rate, rebuilding foreign reserves, and restoring trust in the banking sector.", "evidence": "Para 4.26: \"In the near-term, key challenges remain: reducing inflation, stabilising the exchange rate, rebuilding foreign reserves, and restoring trust in the banking sector.\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "32" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q31", "number": 31, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "What two indicators — nominal GDP growth and average inflation — were tracked together, and over what period?", "answer": "Nominal GDP Growth and Twelve Month Average Inflation, tracked from FY21 to FY25.", "evidence": "Chart 4.01 legend: \"Nominal GDP Growth\", \"Twelve Month Average Inflation\"; x-axis: FY21, FY22, FY23, FY24, FY25.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "25" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q32", "number": 32, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "Describe the trend in the income velocity of money from FY24 to FY25, and what it indicates.", "answer": "The income velocity of money reached 2.55 in FY25, up from 2.46 in FY24, indicating a higher nominal increase in GDP compared to the increase in Broad Money (M2), reflecting the elevated price levels during FY25.", "evidence": "Para 4.13: \"The income velocity of money reached 2.55 in FY25, up from 2.46 in FY24, indicating a higher nominal increase in GDP compared to the increase of Broad Money (M2); reflecting the elevated price levels during FY25.\" Chart 4.06 depicts this series rising from 2.26 (FY21) to 2.55 (FY25).", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "29" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q33", "number": 33, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "Describe the trend in the credit-deposit ratio of scheduled banks from FY20 to FY25.", "answer": "The credit-deposit ratio rose from FY20 through FY23, then decreased slightly to 0.88 at end June 2025 from 0.89 at end June 2024, reflecting that deposits increased more than credit.", "evidence": "Para 4.25: \"The credit-deposit ratio of scheduled banks decreased slightly to 0.88 at end June 2025 as compared to 0.89 at end June 2024 ... Chart 4.08 shows the credit-deposit ratio of scheduled banks from FY20-FY25.\" Table 4.06 (Advances/Bills) and Table 4.07 (Total deposits) provide the underlying quarterly credit and deposit figures.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "32" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q34", "number": 34, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "By how many percentage points did the spread between WAIR on advances and deposits narrow from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "It narrowed from 6.03 percentage points in FY24 to 5.82 percentage points in FY25, a decrease of 0.21 percentage points.", "evidence": "Table 4.02, Spread* row: FY24 = 6.03, FY25 = 5.82. Para 4.06: \"It declined to 5.82 percent in June 2025.\"", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "26" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q35", "number": 35, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "By how much did the actual net foreign assets of reserve money exceed the projected figure at end June 2025?", "answer": "Actual net foreign assets were BDT 2,580.07 billion versus a projection of BDT 2,456.01 billion — a difference of BDT 124.06 billion.", "evidence": "Table 4.04, Net foreign assets row: End June 2025 Projection = 2456.01, Actual = 2580.07.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "29" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q36", "number": 36, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "By how many percentage points did the overall WAIR on advances rise from FY23 to FY25?", "answer": "It rose from 7.31 percent in FY23 to 12.08 percent in FY25, an increase of 4.77 percentage points.", "evidence": "Table 4.02, WAIR on Advances > Overall row: FY23 = 7.31, FY25 = 12.08.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "26" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q37", "number": 37, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "By how much did total scheduled bank credit increase between 30 June 2024 and 30 June 2025?", "answer": "It increased from BDT 16,603.13 billion to BDT 17,641.13 billion — a rise of about BDT 1,038 billion, reflecting 6.25 percent growth.", "evidence": "Para 4.23: \"Outstanding total bank credit (excluding inter-bank) in FY25 rose by 6.25 percent to BDT 17641.13 billion against the increase of 9.80 percent to BDT 16603.13 billion in FY24.\" Table 4.06, Total row: 30 Jun 24 = 16603.13, 30 Jun 25 = 17641.14.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "31-32" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q38", "number": 38, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "By how many percentage points did the growth rate of scheduled banks' borrowings from Bangladesh Bank slow from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "The growth rate slowed from 64.38 percent in FY24 to 14.16 percent in FY25, a deceleration of 50.22 percentage points.", "evidence": "Para 4.11: \"This raised scheduled banks' borrowings from BB by 14.16 percent to BDT 1972.61 billion in FY25 against a corresponding 64.38 percent increase to BDT 1727.88 billion in FY24.\"", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "29" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q39", "number": 39, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "By how much did total bank deposits increase from 30 June 2024 to 30 June 2025, a movement also reflected in the credit-deposit ratio?", "answer": "Total deposits rose from BDT 18,623.72 billion to BDT 19,978.17 billion — an increase of BDT 1,354.45 billion.", "evidence": "Table 4.07, Total deposits row: 30 Jun 24 = 18623.72, 30 Jun 25 = 19978.17. Chart 4.08 (\"Credit-Deposits Ratio\") reflects this deposit growth outpacing credit growth over the same period.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "31-32" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q40", "number": 40, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "Looking at the net foreign assets and net domestic assets data together, why did broad money (M2) growth fall short of its FY25 projection despite improved foreign exchange reserves?", "answer": "Although net foreign assets (NFA) grew strongly by 11.48 percent (well above the 6.12 percent projection, mirroring rising foreign exchange reserves), net domestic assets (NDA) fell sharply by 14.90 percent as BB halted lending to government under its tight monetary policy stance; this NDA contraction offset the NFA gain, leaving M2 growth bound at 6.95 percent — below the 8.43 percent projected rate.", "evidence": "Para 4.09: \"Broad money (M2) growth ... was projected at 8.43 percent in FY25 ... At the end of June 2025 this growth was bounded within the projected growth rate at 6.95 percent (y-o-y).\" Para 4.10: \"net foreign assets (NFA) of BB experienced a significant growth of 11.48 percent in FY25, although the projection was of 6.12 percent growth ... Net domestic assets (NDA) of BB ... decreased significantly by 14.90 percent during the fiscal year as the central bank put a halt on lending to the government following the tight monetary policy stance.\" Table 4.03, Broad Money row: Actual = 21740.17.", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "28-29" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q41", "number": 41, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "How did the July 2024 student-mass uprising connect to Bangladesh Bank's monetary policy reform agenda during FY25?", "answer": "The essence of the July 2024 student-mass uprising translated into policy actions emphasising good governance and institutional integrity; BB gained new momentum in advancing its reform agenda, which included modernising the monetary policy framework, promoting exchange rate flexibility, and reinstating ethical banking practices, alongside streamlining money market and foreign exchange market transactions and strengthening the Monetary Policy Committee's response to economic catalysts.", "evidence": "Para 4.01: \"As the essence of the July 2024 student-mass uprising translated into policy actions emphasising good governance and institutional integrity, BB gained new momentum in advancing its reform agenda, modernising the monetary policy framework, promoting exchange rate flexibility, and reinstating ethical banking practices.\" Para 4.02: \"During FY25, BB continued to fine tune monetary variables through streamlining money market and foreign exchange market transactions. The Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) also streamlined and strengthened the monetary policy response to the economic catalysts to the monetary sector.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "25" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q42", "number": 42, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "What combination of institutional reforms and near-term challenges defines Bangladesh Bank's monetary stance heading into FY26?", "answer": "The interim government and BB initiated major institutional and policy reforms addressing structural bottlenecks, strengthening macroeconomic stability, and enhancing resilience; though these measures will take time to fully materialise, strong political commitment is expected to sustain the recovery, even as near-term challenges remain — reducing inflation, stabilising the exchange rate, rebuilding foreign reserves, and restoring trust in the banking sector.", "evidence": "Para 4.26: \"the interim government and BB initiated several major and necessary reforms at institutional and policy levels: addressing structural bottlenecks, strengthening macroeconomic stability, and enhancing resilience. Though these measures will take time to fully materialise, strong political commitment is expected to sustain the recovery and drive long-term growth. In the near-term, key challenges remain: reducing inflation, stabilising the exchange rate, rebuilding foreign reserves, and restoring trust in the banking sector.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "32" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q43", "number": 43, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "How are the rise in the money multiplier and the decline in the currency-deposit (CD) ratio related?", "answer": "As inflation rates started on a downward trajectory since November 2024, the tendency to hold cash decreased, resulting in a lower currency-deposit (CD) ratio in June 2025; both the reserve-deposit (RD) and currency-deposit (CD) ratios edged down in June 2025, and this decline in the two ratios contributed to the incremental rise in the money multiplier (MM) to 5.27.", "evidence": "Para 4.12: \"Both reserve-deposit ratio (RD) and currency-deposit ratio (CD) edged down in June 2025, contributing to this incremental rise in the MM. As inflation rates started on a downward trajectory since November 2024, tendency to hold cash has decreased, resulting in the lower CD ratio in June 2025. Chart 4.05 shows the MM.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "29" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q44", "number": 44, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "How do the divergent movements of net foreign assets and net domestic assets together reflect Bangladesh Bank's tight monetary policy stance in FY25?", "answer": "Net foreign assets rose strongly to BDT 2,580.07 billion (up from BDT 2,314.41 billion in FY24), mirroring improved foreign exchange reserves, while net domestic assets fell to BDT 1,545.66 billion (from BDT 1,816.33 billion) as BB halted government lending under its tight policy stance — together these offsetting movements kept reserve money broadly stable at BDT 4,125.74 billion, close to its FY24 level of BDT 4,130.74 billion, consistent with the goal of maintaining price stability.", "evidence": "Table 4.04: Net foreign assets row: End June 2024 Actual = 2314.41, End June 2025 Actual = 2580.07; Net domestic assets row: End June 2024 Actual = 1816.33, End June 2025 Actual = 1545.66; Reserve money row: End June 2024 Actual = 4130.74, End June 2025 Actual = 4125.74.", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "29" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q45", "number": 45, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "What was the highest headline inflation rate recorded over the past decade, and when was it recorded?", "answer": "11.66 percent (point-to-point), recorded in July 2024.", "evidence": "Para 4.03: \"The highest headline inflation rate over a decade was 11.66 percent (point-to-point). This was recorded in July 2024.\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "25" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q46", "number": 46, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "What does the movement of the weighted average call money rate indicate about monetary policy transmission?", "answer": "The call money rate closely tracking the repo policy rate, contained within the interest rate corridor, indicates strong transmission of monetary policy through the interest rate channel.", "evidence": "Para 4.05: \"The secured transactions market rate and the interbank repo rate also followed the repo policy rate closely. Both rates indicated the strong transmission of monetary policy through the interest rate channel. The movement of weighted average call money rate and policy rates are shown in Chart 4.02.\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "26" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q47", "number": 47, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "How do Bangladesh Bank's liquidity operations break down across standing facilities, repo-type instruments, and foreign exchange sale/purchase interventions?", "answer": "It shows the net effects of liquidity from BB's operations, including standing facilities (SDF and BB Bills), repo-type instruments (Repo, AR, CM Repo, ALS and SLF), and foreign exchange sale/purchase interventions.", "evidence": "Para 4.17: \"Table 4.05 shows the excess liquid assets of various bank groups while Chart 4.07 shows the net effects of liquidity.\" Chart 4.07 legend: \"SDF and BB Bills\", \"Repo, AR, CM Repo, ALS and SLF\", \"Net Effect\", \"FX Sale/Purchase\".", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "30-31" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q48", "number": 48, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "What was the credit-deposit ratio of scheduled banks at end June 2025?", "answer": "0.88.", "evidence": "Para 4.25: \"The credit-deposit ratio of scheduled banks decreased slightly to 0.88 at end June 2025 as compared to 0.89 at end June 2024.\" Table 4.06 (Total bank credit = 17641.14) and Table 4.07 (Total deposits = 19978.17) at 30 Jun 25 together underlie this ratio, which Chart 4.08 also depicts as 0.88 for FY25.", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "32" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q49", "number": 49, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "What was the actual growth rate of net domestic assets (NDA) of reserve money in FY25?", "answer": "-14.90 percent (a significant decrease).", "evidence": "Para 4.10: \"Net domestic assets (NDA) of BB, on the other hand, decreased significantly by 14.90 percent during the fiscal year.\" Table 4.04, Net domestic assets row: End June 2025 Actual growth (in parentheses) = (-14.90).", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "29" }, { "id": "chapter_4-q50", "number": 50, "chapter": "Chapter 4", "chapter_title": "Monetary Management", "question": "What was the SDF rate set effective 27 October 2024?", "answer": "8.50 percent.", "evidence": "Table 4.01, 27 October 2024 row: SDF = 8.50.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "26" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q1", "number": 1, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Which legal provisions empower Bangladesh Bank to regulate and supervise banks and to conduct on-site and off-site supervision?", "answer": "The Bangladesh Bank Order 1972, Article 7A(f), makes regulating and supervising banking companies and financial institutions a major function of the Bank, and under the Bank Company (Amended up to 2023) Act, 1991 (Sections 44 and 68), Bangladesh Bank is empowered to conduct both on-site and off-site supervision.", "evidence": "Para 5.01: \"As per the Bangladesh Bank Order 1972, Article 7A (f), one of the major functions of the Bank is “to regulate and supervise banking companies and financial institutions.” In addition, under the Bank Company (Amended up to 2023) Act, 1991 (Sections 44 and 68), Bangladesh Bank (BB) is empowered to conduct both on-site and off-site supervision.\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "33" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q2", "number": 2, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "What are the four categories of scheduled banks in Bangladesh based on ownership structure?", "answer": "State-owned commercial banks (SCBs), specialised banks (SBs), private commercial banks (PCBs), and foreign commercial banks (FCBs).", "evidence": "Para 5.02: \"Depending on their ownership structure, there are four categories of scheduled banks in Bangladesh: state-owned commercial banks (SCBs), specialised banks (SBs), private commercial banks (PCBs), and foreign commercial banks (FCBs).\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "34" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q3", "number": 3, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "How many scheduled banks and bank branches operated in 2023 and in 2024?", "answer": "61 banks with 11,154 branches in 2023, and 61 banks with 11,260 branches in 2024.", "evidence": "Table 5.01 (Banking System Structure, Assets and Deposits), Total row: 2023 No. of Banks = 61, No. of Branches = 11,154; 2024 No. of Banks = 61, No. of Branches = 11,260.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "33" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q4", "number": 4, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "What was the total asset size of the banking sector at end December 2024, and how did it compare with the previous year?", "answer": "Total assets stood at BDT 26,297.8 billion at end December 2024, which was 9.65 percent higher than the previous year.", "evidence": "Para 5.03: \"At end December 2024, total assets of the banking sector stood at BDT 26,297.8 billion, which was 9.65 percent higher than the previous year (Table 5.01).\" Table 5.01, Total row, Total Assets: 2023 = 23,984.0, 2024 = 26,297.8.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "33" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q5", "number": 5, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Compare the total assets of SCBs and PCBs in 2024.", "answer": "In 2024 SCBs held BDT 5,985.6 billion in total assets while PCBs held BDT 18,350.1 billion — PCBs' total assets were about BDT 12,364.5 billion higher.", "evidence": "Table 5.01, 2024 columns, Total Assets: SCBs = 5,985.6, SBs = 612.1, PCBs = 18,350.1, FCBs = 1,349.1, Total = 26,297.8.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "33" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q6", "number": 6, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "What share of total banking-sector assets did PCBs and FCBs hold in December 2024?", "answer": "PCBs held a 69.77 percent share and FCBs held a 5.13 percent share of total assets in December 2024.", "evidence": "Para 5.03: \"PCBs' share of total assets was 69.77 percent in December 2024, compared to 68.65 percent in December 2023. The FCBs held a 5.13 percent share of total assets in December 2024, down from 5.66 percent in December 2023.\" Table 5.01, 2024, Share in Industry Assets (in Percent): PCBs = 69.77, FCBs = 5.13.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "34" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q7", "number": 7, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Compare the share of total banking-sector assets held by SCBs and PCBs in December 2024, and how each changed from December 2023.", "answer": "SCBs' share fell to 22.77 percent in December 2024 from 23.37 percent in December 2023, while PCBs' share rose to 69.77 percent from 68.65 percent over the same period.", "evidence": "Para 5.03: \"In December 2024, the SCBs held a 22.77 percent share of total assets, which was 23.37 percent in December 2023. PCBs' share of total assets was 69.77 percent in December 2024, compared to 68.65 percent in December 2023.\" Table 5.01, Share in Industry Assets (in Percent): SCBs 2023 = 23.37, 2024 = 22.77; PCBs 2023 = 68.65, 2024 = 69.77.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "34" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q8", "number": 8, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "What were the banking sector's total deposits in December 2024, and how did that compare with December 2023?", "answer": "Total deposits stood at BDT 18,975.8 billion in December 2024, compared to BDT 17,641.1 billion in December 2023, an increase of 7.57 percent.", "evidence": "Para 5.04: \"Total deposits of the banking sector stood at BDT 18,975.8 billion in December 2024, compared to BDT 17,641.1 billion in December 2023, showing an increase of 7.57 percent.\" Table 5.01, Total row, Total Deposits: 2023 = 17,641.1, 2024 = 18,975.8.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "34" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q9", "number": 9, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "How did SCBs' and PCBs' shares of total banking-sector deposits change between December 2023 and December 2024?", "answer": "SCBs' deposit share decreased from 24.68 percent to 23.71 percent, while PCBs' deposit share increased from 67.63 percent to 68.98 percent.", "evidence": "Para 5.04: \"SCBs' share decreased from 24.68 percent to 23.71 percent; PCBs' share increased from 67.63 percent to 68.98 percent; FCBs' share decreased from 4.91 percent to 4.49 percent; and SBs' share increased slightly from 2.78 percent to 2.82 percent between December 2023 and December 2024. (Table 5.01).\" Table 5.01, Share in Industry Deposits (in Percent): SCBs 2023 = 24.68, 2024 = 23.71; PCBs 2023 = 67.63, 2024 = 68.98.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "34" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q10", "number": 10, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "What components make up aggregate industry assets, and where does that breakdown come from?", "answer": "Aggregate industry assets are split into Loans & Advances, Government bills & bond, Deposit with BB, Cash in tills, and Other Assets; the source is the Department of Off-site Supervision, Bangladesh Bank.", "evidence": "Chart 5.01 (Aggregate Industry Assets, in billion BDT): segments labelled \"Loans & Advances\", \"Govt. bills & bond\", \"Deposit with BB\", \"Cash in tills\", and \"Other Assets\" for June 2024 and March 2025; \"Source: Department of Off-site Supervision, Bangladesh Bank.\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "34" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q11", "number": 11, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Compare the composition of aggregate industry assets between June 2024 and March 2025 in terms of the loans and advances share and the government bills and bonds share.", "answer": "The loans and advances share was essentially unchanged — 63.6 percent (BDT 17,112.67 billion) in June 2024 versus 63.5 percent (BDT 17,114.88 billion, or 63.51 percent per paragraph 5.06) in March 2025 — and the government bills and bonds share held at 17.7 percent (BDT 4,749.23 billion in June 2024 and BDT 4,763.46 billion in March 2025).", "evidence": "Para 5.06: \"The aggregate banking sector assets consisted of BDT 17,114.88 billion in loans and advances (63.51 percent of total assets) ... BDT 4,763.46 billion as investments in government bills and bonds (treasury securities) ... (Chart 5.01).\" Chart 5.01: June 2024 — Loans & Advances 17112.67 (63.6%), Govt. bills & bond 4749.23 (17.7%); March 2025 — Loans & Advances 17114.88 (63.5%), Govt. bills & bond 4763.46 (17.7%).", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "33-34" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q12", "number": 12, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "What was the total shareholders' equity of the banks at the end of March 2025, and how did it compare with June 2024?", "answer": "Total shareholders' equity stood at BDT 1,227.24 billion at the end of March 2025, up from BDT 1,222 billion in June 2024.", "evidence": "Para 5.07: \"Total shareholders' equity of the banks stood at BDT 1,227.24 billion at the end of March 2025, up from BDT 1,222 billion in June 2024.\" Chart 5.02 (Aggregate Industry Liabilities, in billion BDT): Share holder's equity = 1222.00 (4.5%) in June 2024 and 1227.24 (4.6%) in March 2025.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "34" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q13", "number": 13, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "How have the banking industry's capital and risk-weighted assets (RWA) trended, and how has the Capital/RWA ratio moved, from 2012 through March 2025?", "answer": "The bars show Capital and Risk Weighted Assets (RWA) in billion BDT on the left axis, and the line shows Capital/RWA in percent on the right-hand-side axis, covering 2012, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and March 2025.", "evidence": "Chart 5.03 (Aggregate Capital Adequacy Position): left axis \"In billion BDT\" with bars for \"Capital\" and \"RWA\"; right axis \"in percent\" with line \"Capital/RWA (RHS)\"; x-axis 2012, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025 (March).", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "35" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q14", "number": 14, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Under Basel-III, what minimum capital requirement (MCR) must banks in Bangladesh maintain?", "answer": "A minimum capital requirement of 10.0 percent of risk weighted assets (RWA) or BDT 5.0 billion as capital, whichever is higher.", "evidence": "Para 5.08: \"Under Basel-III, banks in Bangladesh are instructed to maintain a minimum capital requirement (MCR) at 10.0 percent of the risk weighted assets (RWA) or BDT 5.0 billion as capital, whichever is higher.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "35" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q15", "number": 15, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "What was the Capital to Risk Weighted Assets Ratio (CRAR) of the banking industry as a whole at the end of March 2025?", "answer": "6.74 percent.", "evidence": "Table 5.02 (Capital to Risk Weighted Assets Ratio by Types of Banks, in percent), Total row, End of March 2025 column = 6.74.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "35" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q16", "number": 16, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Compare the banking industry's actual capital adequacy at end March 2025 with the Basel-III minimum capital requirement.", "answer": "The Basel-III minimum capital requirement is 10.0 percent of RWA, but the CRAR of the banking industry as a whole was only 6.74 percent at end March 2025 — about 3.26 percentage points below the required minimum.", "evidence": "Para 5.08: \"banks in Bangladesh are instructed to maintain a minimum capital requirement (MCR) at 10.0 percent of the risk weighted assets (RWA) or BDT 5.0 billion as capital, whichever is higher.\" Para 5.09: \"The CRAR of the banking industry as a whole was 6.74 percent at end March, 2025 (Chart 5.03).\" Chart 5.03 shows the Capital/RWA (RHS) line falling to below 7 percent by 2025 (March).", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "35-36" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q17", "number": 17, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "By how many percentage points did the banking industry's overall CRAR fall from 2023 to the end of March 2025?", "answer": "It fell by 4.70 percentage points, from 11.44 percent in 2023 to 6.74 percent at end March 2025.", "evidence": "Table 5.02 (Capital to Risk Weighted Assets Ratio by Types of Banks, in percent), Total row: 2023 = 11.44, End of March 2025 = 6.74. Calculation: 11.44 - 6.74 = 4.70.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "35" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q18", "number": 18, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "What was the banking industry's Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) ratio at end March 2025, and how many scheduled banks fell short of the CET1 and minimum capital requirements?", "answer": "CET1 was 3.99 percent at end March 2025, which was below Basel III requirements; 19 out of 61 scheduled banks fell short of the CET1 requirement and 20 banks failed to meet the minimum capital requirement.", "evidence": "Para 5.29: \"the capital to risk weighted asset ratio (CRAR) of the banking industry stood at 6.74 percent at end March, 2025 while CET1 was 3.99 percent, which was below Basel III capital adequacy requirements. At the individual bank level, 19 out of 61 scheduled banks fell short of the CET1 requirement, while 20 banks failed to meet the minimum capital requirement.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "40" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q19", "number": 19, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Explain the ways in which the banking industry fell short of Basel III standards at end March 2025.", "answer": "At end March 2025 the industry breached every key Basel III capital metric: CRAR was 6.74 percent against the 10.0 percent minimum, CET1 was 3.99 percent against the 4.50 percent minimum, the capital conservation buffer (CCB) stood at 0.00 percent against the 2.50 percent requirement, and the leverage ratio was 2.99 percent against the 3.75 percent minimum. At the bank level, 19 of 61 banks were short of CET1, 20 failed the minimum capital requirement, only 35 met the CCB requirement, and only 43 met the leverage-ratio requirement.", "evidence": "Table 5.02, Total row, End of March 2025 = 6.74. Para 5.28: minimum total capital ratio 10.0 percent, CET1 \"at least 4.50 percent of total risk-weighted assets (RWA)\". Para 5.29: \"CRAR of the banking industry stood at 6.74 percent at end March, 2025 while CET1 was 3.99 percent ... 19 out of 61 scheduled banks fell short of the CET1 requirement, while 20 banks failed to meet the minimum capital requirement.\" Para 5.30: \"CCB of the banking industry stood at 0.00 percent at end March 2025 ... 35 banks have already fulfilled CCB requirements.\" Para 5.31: \"the minimum requirement of leverage ratio as 3.75 percent. This ratio of the banking industry stood at 2.99 percent at end March 2025, where at the individual level, 43 banks have already fulfilled the minimum requirements set.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "35-41" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q20", "number": 20, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "What was the gross NPL ratio of the banking sector at end March 2025?", "answer": "24.13 percent.", "evidence": "Para 5.10: \"At end March 2025, the gross NPL ratio of the banking sector stood at 24.13 percent.\" Table 5.03(a) (Ratio of Gross NPLs to Total Loans by Types of Banks), Total row, End of March 2025 column = 24.13.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "36" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q21", "number": 21, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Which bank category had the highest and which had the lowest gross NPL ratio at end March 2025, and what were those ratios?", "answer": "SCBs had the highest gross NPL ratio at 45.79 percent and FCBs had the lowest at 4.83 percent.", "evidence": "Table 5.03(a), End of March 2025 column: SCBs = 45.79, SBs = 14.47, PCBs = 20.16, FCBs = 4.83.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "36" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q22", "number": 22, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "How did the gross NPL ratios of SCBs and PCBs move from 2024 to end March 2025?", "answer": "SCBs' gross NPL ratio rose from 42.83 percent in 2024 to 45.79 percent at end March 2025, and PCBs' rose from 15.60 percent to 20.16 percent over the same period.", "evidence": "Table 5.03(a): SCBs 2024 = 42.83, End of March 2025 = 45.79; PCBs 2024 = 15.60, End of March 2025 = 20.16.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "36" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q23", "number": 23, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Compare the CRAR of SCBs, PCBs and FCBs as of 31 March 2025.", "answer": "As of 31 March 2025 the CRAR of SCBs was 2.90 percent, PCBs 7.45 percent, and FCBs 41.32 percent.", "evidence": "Para 5.09: \"CRAR of SCBs, PCBs and FCBs were 2.90, 7.45 and 41.32 percent respectively, as of 31 March 2025.\" Table 5.02, End of March 2025 column: SCBs = 2.90, PCBs = 7.45, FCBs = 41.32.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "36" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q24", "number": 24, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Describe the trend in the banking sector's overall gross NPL ratio from 2015 to end March 2025.", "answer": "The overall ratio was 8.8 percent in 2015, drifted up to 9.2 percent (2016), 9.3 percent (2017) and 10.3 percent (2018), eased to 9.32 percent (2019) and 7.66 percent (2020), then rose again to 7.93 percent (2021), 8.16 percent (2022) and 9.00 percent (2023), before surging to 20.20 percent in 2024 and 24.13 percent at end March 2025.", "evidence": "Table 5.03(a), Total row: 2015 = 8.8, 2016 = 9.2, 2017 = 9.3, 2018 = 10.3, 2019 = 9.32, 2020 = 7.66, 2021 = 7.93, 2022 = 8.16, 2023 = 9.00, 2024 = 20.20, End of March 2025 = 24.13.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "36" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q25", "number": 25, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "How have total loans, NPLs, and the NPL ratio trended from 2018 through March 2025?", "answer": "Chart 5.04 (Aggregate Position of NPLs to Total Loans) plots Total Loans and NPLs as bars in billion BDT and the NPL Ratio as a line on the right-hand-side axis in percentage, for 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and March 2025 (data up to March 2025).", "evidence": "Chart 5.04 (Aggregate Position of NPLs to Total Loans): bars \"Total Loans\" and \"NPLs\" (left axis \"In billion BDT\"), line \"NPL Ratio (RHS)\" (right axis \"In percentage\"); x-axis 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025 (March); note \"* Up to March 2025\"; \"Source: Department of Off site Supervision, Bangladesh Bank.\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "36" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q26", "number": 26, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "By how many percentage points did the banking sector's overall gross NPL ratio increase from 2023 to 2024?", "answer": "It increased by 11.20 percentage points, from 9.00 percent in December 2023 to 20.20 percent in 2024.", "evidence": "Table 5.03(a), Total row: 2023 = 9.00, 2024 = 20.20 (also shown as the NPL Ratio line in Chart 5.04). Para 5.11: \"the NPL ratio climbed to 9.00 percent in December 2023. The situation deteriorated sharply in 2024, when the ratio surged to 20.20 percent\". Calculation: 20.20 - 9.00 = 11.20.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "36-38" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q27", "number": 27, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "By how many percentage points did the banking sector's gross NPL ratio rise between December 2023 and end March 2025?", "answer": "It rose by 15.13 percentage points, from 9.00 percent in December 2023 to 24.13 percent at end March 2025.", "evidence": "Para 5.11: \"the NPL ratio climbed to 9.00 percent in December 2023 ... By March 2025 ... the NPL ratio increased further to 24.13 percent\". Table 5.03(a), Total row: 2023 = 9.00, End of March 2025 = 24.13. Calculation: 24.13 - 9.00 = 15.13.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "36-37" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q28", "number": 28, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Why did the banking sector's NPL ratio fall in 2019 and 2020 but rise sharply in 2024?", "answer": "The ratio fell to 9.3 percent in 2019 because of the amendment to the term loan's definition of 'past due/overdue' and the special loan rescheduling and one-time exit facility, and fell further to 7.66 percent in 2020 after a debt moratorium on all loans during the COVID-19 pandemic. It surged to 20.20 percent in 2024 largely due to the lack of good governance in the banking sector and the more stringent loan classification guidelines implemented in two phases in September 2024 and March 2025.", "evidence": "Para 5.11: \"the NPL ratio reduced to 9.3 percent in 2019 due to the amendment to the term loan's definition of 'past due/overdue' and the special loan rescheduling and one-time exit facility offered. Later, NPLs in the banking sector stood at a noticeably lower 7.66 percent in 2020, after a debt moratorium provided for all loans in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. ... The situation deteriorated sharply in 2024, when the ratio surged to 20.20 percent, largely due to the lack of good governance in the banking sector ... more stringent loan classification guidelines were implemented in two phases—September 2024 and March 2025—substantially contributing to the sharp rise in reported NPLs.\" Table 5.03(a), Total row.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "37" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q29", "number": 29, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Why was the deterioration in asset quality by March 2025 concentrated in SCBs and PCBs?", "answer": "By March 2025 the sector's gross NPL ratio reached 24.13 percent with the burden concentrated in SCBs and PCBs, whose ratios climbed to 45.79 percent and 20.16 percent. The chapter attributes this to poor loan assessment and inadequate follow-up and supervision of loans, which produced low asset quality specifically at SCBs and PCBs, compounded by weak governance in the banking sector and the two-phase tightening of loan classification rules (September 2024 and March 2025) that forced previously under-reported bad loans onto the books.", "evidence": "Para 5.11: \"the NPL ratio increased further to 24.13 percent, with the burden concentrated in SCBs and PCBs.\" Para 5.12: \"Poor assessment, along with inadequate follow-up and supervision of loans, eventually resulted in the current situation of low asset quality of SCBs and PCBs.\" Table 5.03(a), End of March 2025: SCBs = 45.79, PCBs = 20.16, versus 42.83 and 15.60 in 2024.", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "37" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q30", "number": 30, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "What was the net NPL ratio of the overall banking sector at end December 2024 and at end March 2025?", "answer": "The net NPL ratio was 10.57 percent at end December 2024 and 15.00 percent at end March 2025.", "evidence": "Para 5.13: \"the ratio of net NPLs (net of provisions and interest suspense) to net total loans (net of provisions and interest suspense) of the banking sector was 10.57 percent at end December 2024. ... At end March, 2025 the net NPL ratio of the overall banking sector stood at 15.00 percent.\" Table 5.03(b) (Ratio of Net NPL to Net Total Loans by Types of Banks), Total row, End June 2025 column = 15.00.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "37" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q31", "number": 31, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Compare the banking sector's net NPL ratio at end December 2024 with its level at end March 2025.", "answer": "The net NPL ratio rose from 10.57 percent at end December 2024 to 15.00 percent at end March 2025, an increase of 4.43 percentage points.", "evidence": "Para 5.13: \"the ratio of net NPLs ... of the banking sector was 10.57 percent at end December 2024. ... At end March, 2025 the net NPL ratio of the overall banking sector stood at 15.00 percent.\" Table 5.03(b), Total row: 2024 = 10.5, End June 2025 = 15.00.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "37" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q32", "number": 32, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "How have total expenses and total income in the banking industry trended from 2017 through March 2025?", "answer": "Chart 5.05 (Trends in Aggregate Position of Income and Expenditure in the Banking Industry) shows Total Expenses and Total Income as bars in billion BDT, together with a line indicator in percent, for 2017 through 2024 and March 2025 (data up to March).", "evidence": "Chart 5.05 (Trends in Aggregate Position of Income and Expenditure in the Banking Industry): bars \"Total Expenses\" and \"Total Income\" (left axis \"In billion BDT\"), right axis \"In percent\"; x-axis 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025 (March); note \"*Up to March\"; \"Source: Department of Off site Supervision, Bangladesh Bank.\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "37" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q33", "number": 33, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "By how much did the amount of NPLs of SCBs increase between 2015 and end March 2025?", "answer": "SCBs' NPLs increased by BDT 1,191.27 billion, from BDT 272.8 billion in 2015 to BDT 1,464.07 billion at end March 2025.", "evidence": "Table 5.04 (Amount of NPLs by Types of Banks, in billion BDT), SCBs row: 2015 = 272.8, End March 2025 = 1464.07. Calculation: 1464.07 - 272.8 = 1191.27.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "38" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q34", "number": 34, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Which two bank categories drove the increase in total banking-sector NPLs from 2023 to end March 2025, and by how much did each rise?", "answer": "SCBs and PCBs drove almost the entire increase. Total sector NPLs rose from BDT 1,456.33 billion in 2023 to BDT 4,203.35 billion at end March 2025 (up BDT 2,747.02 billion); of this, SCBs' NPLs rose by BDT 806.26 billion (657.81 to 1,464.07) and PCBs' by BDT 1,932.13 billion (709.82 to 2,641.95), together accounting for about BDT 2,738.39 billion of the total increase.", "evidence": "Table 5.04: SCBs 2023 = 657.81, End March 2025 = 1464.07; PCBs 2023 = 709.82, End March 2025 = 2641.95; Total 2023 = 1456.33, End March 2025 = 4203.35. Chart 5.07 (Comparative position of NPLs by Type of Banks) shows the SCBs and PCBs lines rising steeply after 2023 while the FCBs line stays flat. Calculations: 1464.07 - 657.81 = 806.26; 2641.95 - 709.82 = 1932.13; 4203.35 - 1456.33 = 2747.02.", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "38-41" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q35", "number": 35, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "How do the NPL trajectories of SCBs and PCBs compare with those of DFIs and FCBs from 2018 to March 2025?", "answer": "The SCBs and PCBs lines rise sharply, especially after 2023, with PCBs climbing above BDT 2,500 billion and SCBs above BDT 1,400 billion by March 2025, whereas the DFIs and FCBs lines stay low and almost flat near the bottom of the chart throughout the period.", "evidence": "Chart 5.07 (Comparative position of NPLs by Type of Banks, in billion BDT): legend \"SCBs\", \"PCBs\", \"DFIs\", \"FCBs\"; x-axis 2018 to 2025 (March); the PCBs and SCBs series turn steeply upward after 2023 while DFIs and FCBs remain near the axis. \"Source: Department of Off-site Supervision, Bangladesh Bank.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "41" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q36", "number": 36, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "What share of total banking-sector NPLs did PCBs account for at end March 2025?", "answer": "About 62.85 percent — PCBs' NPLs of BDT 2,641.95 billion out of the sector total of BDT 4,203.35 billion.", "evidence": "Table 5.04, End March 2025 column: PCBs = 2641.95, Total = 4203.35. Chart 5.07 shows PCBs as the largest NPL holder by March 2025. Calculation: 2641.95 / 4203.35 = 0.6285 = 62.85 percent.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "38-41" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q37", "number": 37, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "What was the shortfall between required provision and provision maintained by all banks at end June 2025?", "answer": "A shortfall of BDT 1,706.55 billion — required provision was BDT 2,751.03 billion while provision maintained was BDT 1,044.48 billion.", "evidence": "Table 5.05 (Required Provision and Provision Maintained by all Banks, in billion BDT), End June 2025 column: Required Provision = 2751.03, Provision maintained = 1044.48, Excess(+)/shortfall(-) = -1706.55. Calculation: 2751.03 - 1044.48 = 1706.55.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "38" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q38", "number": 38, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "By how many percentage points did the provision maintenance ratio of all banks fall from 2022 to end June 2025?", "answer": "It fell by 48.95 percentage points, from 86.92 percent in 2022 to 37.97 percent at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 5.05, Provision maintenance ratio (%) row: 2022 = 86.92, End June 2025 = 37.97. Calculation: 86.92 - 37.97 = 48.95.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "38" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q39", "number": 39, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "What was the provision maintenance ratio of all banks in 2021, 2022 and at end December 2024?", "answer": "Banks maintained 82.63 percent of required provisions in 2021, 86.92 percent in 2022, and 50.75 percent at end December 2024.", "evidence": "Para 5.15: \"Banks maintained 82.63 percent of required provisions in 2021, which increased slightly to 86.92 percent in 2022. However, the ratio decreased slightly to 50.75 percent at end December, 2024.\" Table 5.05, Provision maintenance ratio (%) row: 2021 = 82.63, 2022 = 86.92, 2024 = 50.75; Chart 5.08 plots the Provision maintenance ratio (RHS).", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "38-41" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q40", "number": 40, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Describe the trend in the provision maintenance ratio and the provision shortfall of all banks between 2020 and end June 2025.", "answer": "The provision maintenance ratio fell steadily from 99.81 percent in 2020 to 82.63 percent (2021), 86.92 percent (2022), 80.53 percent (2023), 50.75 percent (2024) and 37.97 percent at end June 2025, while the provision shortfall widened dramatically from BDT 1.24 billion in 2020 to BDT 140.07 billion (2021), BDT 110.09 billion (2022), BDT 192.61 billion (2023), BDT 1,061.31 billion (2024) and BDT 1,706.55 billion at end June 2025. Chart 5.08 shows the maintenance-ratio line falling while the NPL bars rise far faster than the provision-maintained bars.", "evidence": "Table 5.05: Provision maintenance ratio (%) 2020 = 99.81, 2021 = 82.63, 2022 = 86.92, 2023 = 80.53, 2024 = 50.75, End June 2025 = 37.97; Excess(+)/shortfall(-) 2020 = -1.24, 2021 = -140.07, 2022 = -110.09, 2023 = -192.61, 2024 = -1061.31, End June 2025 = -1706.55. Chart 5.08 (Provision Adequacy Position of all Banks): bars \"Amount of NPLs\" and \"Provision maintained\", line \"Provision maintenance ratio (RHS)\".", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "38-41" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q41", "number": 41, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Compare the provision maintenance ratio of SCBs and PCBs with that of SBs and FCBs at end March 2025.", "answer": "At end March 2025 SCBs and PCBs were heavily under-provisioned, with provision maintenance ratios of 31.47 percent and 39.20 percent respectively, whereas SBs and FCBs were over-provisioned at 108.73 percent and 118.65 percent. Chart 5.08 shows the overall (all-banks) provision maintenance ratio dropping to its lowest point as aggregate NPLs outran provisions.", "evidence": "Table 5.06 (Comparative Position of Provision Adequacy, in billion BDT), End March 2025 rows — Provision maintenance ratio (%): SCBs = 31.47, SBs = 108.73, PCBs = 39.20, FCBs = 118.65 (Required provision: SCBs 933.83, SBs 28.42, PCBs 1765.56, FCBs 23.22; Provision maintained: SCBs 293.86, SBs 30.90, PCBs 692.16, FCBs 27.55). Chart 5.08 (Provision Adequacy Position of all Banks) shows the Provision maintenance ratio (RHS) line falling to about 37 percent by 2025 (March).", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "38-41" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q42", "number": 42, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Why did the banking sector's aggregate provision shortfall widen even though some bank types over-provisioned?", "answer": "The aggregate provision maintenance ratio fell from about 82–87 percent in 2021–2022 to 50.75 percent at end December 2024 and lower still afterwards because SCBs and PCBs — which hold the bulk of NPLs — could not maintain the required provision at end March 2025, while SBs and FCBs (which over-provisioned in 2022–2024) are too small to offset that gap. Chart 5.08 shows NPLs rising far faster than provision maintained, pulling the all-banks maintenance ratio down.", "evidence": "Para 5.15: \"banks failed to maintain the required level of provision against their NPLs from 2015 to June 2025. Banks maintained 82.63 percent of required provisions in 2021, which increased slightly to 86.92 percent in 2022. However, the ratio decreased slightly to 50.75 percent at end December, 2024.\" Para 5.16: \"SBs and FCBs except SCBs and PCBs, were able to maintain the required provision against loans in 2022, 2023 and 2024. However, at end March 2025, while SBs and FCBs maintained the required provision, SCBs and PCBs could not do so.\" Chart 5.08 (Provision Adequacy Position of all Banks): the \"Amount of NPLs\" bars rise well above the \"Provision maintained\" bars and the \"Provision maintenance ratio (RHS)\" line declines.", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "37-41" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q43", "number": 43, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "How does the movement in the banking industry's expenditure-to-income (EI) ratio relate to its income and expenditure trend, and what effect has that had on profits?", "answer": "Chart 5.05 shows total expenses of the industry rising broadly in line with, and by March 2025 catching up to, total income, and paragraph 5.18 reports that the EI ratio rose for every bank category compared with the previous year (reaching 89.74 percent for the banking sector at end March 2025). Because expenditure grew as fast as income — particularly operating expenses as a share of total expenses — the rising EI ratio squeezed and had a negative impact on the net profits of banks.", "evidence": "Para 5.18: \"the expenditure-to-total income (EI) ratio of the banking sector was 89.74 percent at end March 2025 ... EI ratios of all bank categories showed increasing trends compared to the previous year. The upward trends in the EI ratio, particularly, in operating expenses to total expenses, has had negative impact on the net profits of banks.\" Chart 5.05 (Trends in Aggregate Position of Income and Expenditure in the Banking Industry) plots \"Total Expenses\" and \"Total Income\" bars from 2017 to March 2025.", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "37-39" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q44", "number": 44, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Describe the trend in the banking sector's expenditure-to-income (EI) ratio.", "answer": "The EI ratio of every bank category showed an increasing trend compared with the previous year, and the banking sector's EI ratio reached 89.74 percent at end March 2025. The rising trend, especially in operating expenses to total expenses, has had a negative impact on banks' net profits.", "evidence": "Para 5.18: \"EI ratios of all bank categories showed increasing trends compared to the previous year. The upward trends in the EI ratio, particularly, in operating expenses to total expenses, has had negative impact on the net profits of banks.\" Chart 5.05 (Trends in Aggregate Position of Income and Expenditure in the Banking Industry).", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "37-39" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q45", "number": 45, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Which bank category had the highest expenditure-to-income (EI) ratio in 2024, and what was its value?", "answer": "Specialised banks (SBs) had the highest EI ratio in 2024, at 131.12 percent.", "evidence": "Table 5.07 (Expenditure-Income (EI) Ratio by Types of Banks, in percent), 2024 column: SCBs = 85.30, SBs = 131.12, PCBs = 80.60, FCBs = 32.2, Total = 78.98.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "39" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q46", "number": 46, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Compare the expenditure-to-income (EI) ratios of SCBs, PCBs and FCBs in March 2025.", "answer": "In March 2025 the EI ratio was 89.74 percent for SCBs, 88.76 percent for PCBs, and 33.12 percent for FCBs — FCBs were far more cost-efficient than SCBs and PCBs.", "evidence": "Para 5.18: \"The EI ratios of SCBs, PCBs, and FCBs were 89.74, 88.76, and 33.12 percent, respectively, in March 2025.\" Table 5.07, End March 2025 column: SCBs = 89.74, PCBs = 88.76, FCBs = 33.12.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "39" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q47", "number": 47, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Compare the return on assets (ROA) of SCBs and PCBs at end March 2025 with their 2024 levels.", "answer": "SCBs' ROA declined to negative 0.51 percent in March 2025 from negative 0.37 percent in 2024, while PCBs' ROA fell to negative 0.30 percent in March 2025 from a positive 0.51 percent in 2024 — turning negative for the first time.", "evidence": "Para 5.20: \"The ROA of SCBs declined to negative 0.51 percent in March 2025, compared to negative 0.37 percent in 2024. On the other hand, the ROA of PCBs has been declining gradually since 2022.\" Table 5.08 (Profitability Ratio by Types of Banks, in percent), ROA: SCBs 2024 = -0.37, End March 2025 = -0.51; PCBs 2024 = 0.51, End March 2025 = -0.30.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "38-40" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q48", "number": 48, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Compare the return on equity (ROE) of PCBs and FCBs at end March 2025 with their 2024 levels.", "answer": "PCBs' ROE fell to negative 6.11 percent in March 2025 from a positive 9.43 percent in 2024, whereas FCBs' ROE only edged down to 18.02 percent in March 2025 from 19.09 percent in 2024, remaining strongly positive.", "evidence": "Para 5.21: \"the ROE of PCBs declined to a negative 6.11 percent in March 2025, down from 9.43 percent in 2024. The ROE of FCBs decreased to 18.02 percent in March 2025, down from 19.09 percent in 2024.\" Table 5.08, ROE: PCBs 2024 = 9.43, End March 2025 = -6.11; FCBs 2024 = 19.09, End March 2025 = 18.02.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "39-40" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q49", "number": 49, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "What was the Net Interest Margin (NIM) of the banking industry in March 2025, and what was it in 2024?", "answer": "The NIM of the banking industry was 2.30 percent in March 2025, down from 2.90 percent in 2024.", "evidence": "Para 5.22: \"the Net Interest Margin (NIM) of the banking industry stood at 2.30 percent in March 2025, which was 2.90 percent in 2024.\" Table 5.09 (Net Interest Margin (NIM) by Types of Banks, in percent), Total row: 2024 = 2.90, March 2025 = 2.30.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "39-40" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q50", "number": 50, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "What was the trend in NIM for the overall banking sector?", "answer": "NIM for the overall banking sector exhibited a downward trend from 2014 to 2022, despite slight increases in 2018, 2023 and 2024.", "evidence": "Para 5.22: \"NIM for the overall banking sector exhibited a downward trend from 2014 to 2022 despite slight increases in 2018, 2023 and 2024.\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "39" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q51", "number": 51, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "How have interest income, interest expense, and the net interest spread of the industry trended from 2014 through March 2025?", "answer": "Chart 5.09 (Aggregate NII of the industry, billion BDT) plots Interest income and Interest Expense as bars and Net interest spread as a line on the right-hand-side axis, for 2014, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and March 2025.", "evidence": "Chart 5.09 (Aggregate NII of the industry, billion BDT): bars \"Interest income\" and \"Interest Expense\" (left axis \"Interest income & expense\"), line \"Net interest spread (RHS)\" (right axis \"Net interest income\"); x-axis 2014, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025 (March). \"Source: Department of Off-site Supervision, Bangladesh Bank.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "41" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q52", "number": 52, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "What were the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR) and net stable funding ratio (NSFR) of the banking sector as of June 2025, and what are the minimum requirements?", "answer": "As of 30 June 2025 the LCR of the banking sector was 171.49 percent and the NSFR was 104.95 percent, both against a minimum requirement of 100 percent.", "evidence": "Para 5.27: \"As of 30 June 2025, the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR) of the banking sector was 171.49 percent (against a minimum requirement of 100 percent) ... the net stable funding ratio (NSFR) of the banking sector was 104.95 percent (against the minimum requirement of 100 percent) in June 2025\".", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "40" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q53", "number": 53, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Compare the prudential limit of the advance-deposit ratio (ADR) for conventional banks with the investment-deposit ratio (IDR) limit for Islamic Shariah-based banks.", "answer": "The prudential limit of ADR for conventional banks is 87 percent, while the IDR limit for Islamic Shariah-based banks is 92 percent. The banking sector's overall ADR/IDR stood at 81.55 percent in December 2024.", "evidence": "Para 5.24: \"In December 2024, the banking sector's overall advance/investment deposit ratio (ADR/IDR) stood at 81.55 percent. The prudential limits of ADR for conventional and IDR for Islamic Shariah-based banks were 87 percent and 92 percent respectively.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "39" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q54", "number": 54, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Compare the current statutory liquidity ratio (SLR) requirement for conventional banks with that for Islamic Shariah-based banks.", "answer": "The current SLR for conventional banks is 13.00 percent of ATDTL, while for Islamic Shariah-based banks it is 5.50 percent of their ATDTL of the second preceding month.", "evidence": "Para 5.25: \"The current rate of statutory liquidity ratio (SLR) for conventional banks is 13.00 percent of ATDTL, but in the case of Islamic Shariah-based banks, the rate of SLR is 5.50 percent of their ATDTL of the second preceding month.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "39" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q55", "number": 55, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Which banking inspection department conducted the most inspections in FY25, and how many of its inspections were comprehensive (head offices plus branches)?", "answer": "DBI-2 conducted the most inspections, with 582 total inspections in FY25, of which 569 were comprehensive inspections (7 at head offices and 562 at branches).", "evidence": "Table 5.10 (A Summary of On-site Banking Inspections in FY25), DBI-2 row: Comprehensive Inspections Head Offices = 7, Branches = 562, Special Inspections = 2, Core Risk Inspections = 8, SREUP and AML Inspections = -, Quick Summary Inspections = 03, Total Inspections = 582. Calculation: 7 + 562 = 569. (Other departments' totals: DBI-1 = 89, DBI-3 = 453, DBI-4 = 437, DBI-5 = 306, DBI-6 = 96, DBI-7 = 119, DBI-8 = 99, DBI-9 = 181; Total = 2362.)", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "42" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q56", "number": 56, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "What is the three-stage timeline for the full adoption of the Expected Credit Loss (ECL) framework under IFRS 9 by 2027?", "answer": "Stage 1 (Preparatory) runs from March 2025 to December 2025, when banks set up IFRS 9 implementation teams and build borrower-level databases going back to 2022. Stage 2 (Development and Pilot) begins in January 2026, with banks finalising automated ECL models by mid-2026 and applying the framework to at least 25 percent of their loan portfolios from September 2026, expanding to 50 percent by December 2026 with parallel reporting under both systems. Stage 3 (Final) takes place in 2027, expanding coverage to at least 75 percent of total loans by June and achieving full implementation across all loans by December.", "evidence": "Box 5.01 (Adoption of Expected Credit Loss (ECL) Framework Under IFRS 9): \"Bangladesh Bank has decided to adopt an Expected Credit Loss (ECL) methodology-based provisioning system under IFRS 9, to be fully implemented by 2027. ... 1. Preparatory Stage: The preparatory phase will run from March 2025 to December 2025. ... 2. Development and Pilot Stage: The development and pilot phase will commence in January 2026 ... Banks will implement the ECL framework in phases, starting with at least 25 percent of their loan portfolios from September 2026, expanding to 50 percent by December 2026, with parallel reporting under both IFRS 9 and the existing incurred-loss system. 3. Final Stage: The final phase in 2027 will focus on full-scale adoption of the ECL framework, expanding coverage to at least 75 percent of total loans by June and achieving full implementation across all loans by December\".", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "43" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q57", "number": 57, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "What were the total fund and total investment of the Deposit Insurance Trust Fund (DITF) as of 31 December 2024, and what share of depositors were fully insured?", "answer": "As of 31 December 2024 the DITF total fund was BDT 1,168.71 billion, total investment was BDT 168.3 billion, and approximately 91.21 percent of depositors were fully insured.", "evidence": "Table 5.11 (The recent position of DITF), Unaudited Figure (as of 31 December 2024) column: Total Fund = 1168.71 billion BDT, Total Investment = 168.3 billion BDT, Fully Insured Depositors = 91.21% (Approximately); Premium Rate: Sound Bank Categories = 0.08%, Early Warning Bank Categories = 0.09%, Problem Bank Categories = 0.10%; Coverage Amount \"Limited up to BDT 1Lac (considering per depositor per bank)\".", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "50" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q58", "number": 58, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "When was the Credit Information Bureau (CIB) established in Bangladesh Bank, and when did it introduce online services?", "answer": "The CIB was established in Bangladesh Bank on 18 August 1992 and introduced online services on 19 July 2011.", "evidence": "Para 5.52: \"The Credit Information Bureau (CIB) was established in Bangladesh Bank on 18 August 1992 with the mandate to minimise the incidence of default loans and to strengthen overall credit discipline in the financial sector. To modernise operations and accelerate report generation, the Bureau introduced online services on 19 July 2011 in alignment with the Digital Bangladesh initiative.\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "50" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q59", "number": 59, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "Compare the growth in the total number of bank borrowers with the growth in classified borrowers between June 2024 and June 2025.", "answer": "The total number of bank borrowers rose only marginally, by 0.16 percent, from 75,93,820 in June 2024 to 76,05,923 in June 2025, whereas the number of classified borrowers rose sharply, by around 39 percent, from 10,12,721 to 14,09,548 over the same period.", "evidence": "Para 5.54: \"The total number of bank borrowers stood at 76,05,923 at end June 2025, compared with 75,93,820 in June 2024, showing only a marginal increase of 0.16 percent. In contrast, the number of classified borrowers rose sharply to 14,09,548 in June 2025, up from 10,12,721 in June 2024, representing an increase of around 39 percent year-on-year.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "50" }, { "id": "chapter_5-q60", "number": 60, "chapter": "Chapter 5", "chapter_title": "Banking Sector Performance, Regulation and Bank Supervision", "question": "By how many did the total number of bank borrowers increase between June 2024 and June 2025?", "answer": "By 12,103 borrowers — from 75,93,820 in June 2024 to 76,05,923 in June 2025 (a 0.16 percent increase).", "evidence": "Para 5.54: \"The total number of bank borrowers stood at 76,05,923 at end June 2025, compared with 75,93,820 in June 2024, showing only a marginal increase of 0.16 percent.\" Calculation: 76,05,923 - 75,93,820 = 12,103.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "50" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q1", "number": 1, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "When did Islamic banking start in Bangladesh, and what has driven its expansion over the past four decades?", "answer": "Islamic banking started in Bangladesh in 1983 and has continued expanding over the past four decades, driven by higher demand from the Muslim population for Shariah-compliant banking services and regulatory support from the government and Bangladesh Bank.", "evidence": "Para 6.01: \"In Bangladesh Islamic banking started in 1983, and has grown significantly as a crucial component of the financial sector. Over the past four decades, Islamic banking has continued expanding, motivated by higher demand of the Muslim population for Shariah-compliant banking services, as well as regulatory support from the government and Bangladesh Bank (BB).\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "53" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q2", "number": 2, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "How many full-fledged Islamic banks operate in Bangladesh, how many branches do they have, and how many Islamic banking branches and windows do conventional commercial banks provide?", "answer": "There are 10 full-fledged Islamic banks with 1,699 branches (out of 11,372 branches of the entire banking sector), plus 41 Islamic banking branches of 17 conventional commercial banks and 905 Islamic banking windows of 21 conventional commercial banks.", "evidence": "Para 6.02: \"The Islamic banking sector in Bangladesh is composed of 10 full-fledged Islamic banks and consists of 1699 branches out of the 11372 branches of the entire banking sector. In addition, 41 Islamic banking branches of 17 conventional commercial banks and 905 Islamic banking windows of 21 conventional commercial banks also provide Islamic financial services in Bangladesh (Table 6.01).\" Table 6.01, Total row: Full-fledged Islamic Banks = 10, No. of Branches = 1699; Conventional Banks having Islamic Branches = 17, No. of Branches = 41; Conventional Banks having Islamic Windows = 21, No. of Windows = 905.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "53" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q3", "number": 3, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "Which full-fledged Islamic bank has the largest branch network, and how many branches does it have?", "answer": "Islami Bank Bangladesh PLC has the largest network, with 400 branches.", "evidence": "Table 6.01 (Number of Islamic Banks, Branches and Windows), Full-fledged Islamic Banks / No. of Branches: Islami Bank Bangladesh PLC = 400, Al-Arafah Islami Bank PLC = 226, First Security Islami Bank PLC = 206, Social Islami Bank PLC = 181, EXIM Bank PLC = 155, Shahjalal Islami Bank PLC = 141, Standard Bank PLC = 138, Union Bank PLC = 114, Global Islami Bank PLC = 105, ICB Islamic Bank Limited = 33.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "53" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q4", "number": 4, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "How do Islami Bank Bangladesh PLC's assets, deposits and investment compare with those of the other full-fledged Islamic banks at end June 2025?", "answer": "Islami Bank Bangladesh PLC's assets, deposits and investment bars are far larger than those of any other full-fledged Islamic bank, exceeding BDT 2,000 billion in assets, while the next largest banks (Al-Arafah Islami Bank PLC and First Security Islami Bank PLC) are well below BDT 1,000 billion and ICB Islamic Bank Limited is negligible.", "evidence": "Chart 6.01 (Bankwise Assets, Deposits and Investment of Islamic Banks in end June 2025, in billion BDT): the Islami Bank Bangladesh PLC group of bars (assets, Deposits, Investment) rises to roughly 2,000-2,500 while all other banks' bars are a fraction of that, tapering to near zero for ICB Islamic Bank Limited. \"Source: Respective Islamic banks.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "53" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q5", "number": 5, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What was the total asset size of the Islamic banking system (IBS) at end June 2025 and at end December 2024?", "answer": "Total assets of IBS stood at BDT 6,606.68 billion at end June 2025 (an increase of 3.04 percent from December 2024) and BDT 6,411.62 billion at end December 2024 (an increase of 9.63 percent from December 2023).", "evidence": "Para 6.04: \"At end June 2025, total assets of the Islamic banking system (IBS) of Bangladesh stood at BDT 6606.68 billion, registering an increase of 3.04 percent from December 2024. Total assets of IBS stood at BDT 6411.62 billion at end December 2024, showing an increase of BDT 563.44 billion or 9.63 percent as compared to December 2023.\" Table 6.02, Assets row, Islamic Banks: 2024 = 6411.62 (9.63), 2025* = 6606.68 (3.04).", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "54" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q6", "number": 6, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What were the total deposits of the Islamic banking system (IBS) at end June 2025 and at end December 2024?", "answer": "Total deposits of IBS stood at BDT 4,709.88 billion at end June 2025 (up 2.89 percent from end December 2024) and BDT 4,577.41 billion at end December 2024 (up 3.84 percent, or BDT 169.44 billion, from December 2023).", "evidence": "Para 6.05: \"At end June 2025, total deposits of IBS stood at BDT 4709.88 billion, registering an increase of 2.89 percent from end December 2024. Total deposits of IBS stood at BDT 4577.41 billion at end December 2024, showing an increase of BDT 169.44 billion or 3.84 percent compared to December 2023.\" Table 6.02, Deposits row, Islamic Banks: 2024 = 4577.41 (3.84), 2025* = 4709.88 (2.89).", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "54" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q7", "number": 7, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What share of the overall banking industry's assets, deposits and investment did the Islamic banking system account for in 2024?", "answer": "In 2024 the Islamic banking system held 24.38 percent of overall banking industry assets, 24.30 percent of deposits, and 29.80 percent of investment.", "evidence": "Table 6.02 (Industry Progress and Market Share of Islamic Banking System), Share in Overall Banking Industry (in percent), 2024 column: Assets = 24.38, Deposits = 24.30, Investment = 29.80.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "54" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q8", "number": 8, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "Compare the share of the Islamic banking system in overall banking industry assets with its share of overall deposits in December 2024.", "answer": "In December 2024 the Islamic banking system's share of overall banking industry assets was 24.38 percent, slightly higher than its 24.30 percent share of overall deposits.", "evidence": "Para 6.04: \"The share of IBS accounted for 24.38 percent of the total assets of the whole banking industry in December 2024.\" Para 6.05: \"The share of IBS was recorded at 24.30 percent of the total deposits of the entire banking industry in December 2024.\" Table 6.02, Share in Overall Banking Industry, 2024: Assets = 24.38, Deposits = 24.30.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "54" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q9", "number": 9, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "How do the total assets of all banks compare with the total assets of Islamic banks in 2024?", "answer": "All banks held BDT 26,297.80 billion in total assets in 2024, while Islamic banks held BDT 6,411.62 billion — Islamic banks accounted for roughly a quarter of the industry total.", "evidence": "Table 6.02, Assets row: All Banks 2024 = 26,297.80; Islamic Banks 2024 = 6411.62 (9.63); Share in Overall Banking Industry 2024 = 24.38.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "54" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q10", "number": 10, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "How did the Islamic banking system's share of overall banking industry deposits trend from 2023 to end June 2025?", "answer": "The Islamic banking system's share of overall banking industry deposits declined steadily, from 25.20 percent in 2023 to 24.30 percent in 2024 and 23.59 percent at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 6.02, Deposits row, Share in Overall Banking Industry (in percent): 2023 = 25.20, 2024 = 24.30, 2025* = 23.59. Note: * End June 2025.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "54" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q11", "number": 11, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What were the main components of the Islamic banking system's total assets in 2024, by share?", "answer": "Investment secured the highest position at 73.66 percent (BDT 4,722.54 billion), followed by other assets at 14.99 percent (BDT 960.95 billion), sukuk and BGIIB at 4.63 percent (BDT 296.64 billion), deposits with BB at 3.90 percent (BDT 250.09 billion), EDF at 1.57 percent (BDT 100.66 billion), cash in tills at 0.92 percent (BDT 59.07 billion) and refinance at 0.34 percent (BDT 21.66 billion).", "evidence": "Para 6.04: \"Among the total assets, investment secured the highest position at 73.66 percent, followed by other assets 14.99 percent, sukuk and BGIIB 4.63 percent, deposits with BB 3.90 percent, Export Development Fund (EDF) 1.57 percent, cash in tills 0.92 percent and refinance 0.34 percent.\" Chart 6.02(a) (Total Assets of Islamic Banks in 2024, in billion BDT): Total Investment 4722.54 (73.66%), Other assets 960.95 (14.99%), Sukuk and BGIIB 296.64 (4.63%), Deposit with BB 250.09 (3.90%), EDF 100.66 (1.57%), Cash in tills 59.07 (0.92%), Refinance 21.66 (0.34%).", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "54" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q12", "number": 12, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What components make up the total assets of Islamic banks in 2024, and where does this data come from?", "answer": "Total Investment, Other assets, Sukuk and BGIIB, Deposit with BB, EDF, Cash in tills, and Refinance; the source is the respective Islamic banks.", "evidence": "Chart 6.02(a) (Total Assets of Islamic Banks in 2024, in billion BDT): labelled segments \"Total Investment, 4722.54, 73.66%\", \"Other assets, 960.95, 14.99%\", \"Sukuk and BGIIB, 296.64, 4.63%\", \"Deposit with BB, 250.09, 3.90%\", \"EDF, 100.66, 1.57%\", \"Cash in tills, 59.07, 0.92%\", \"Refinance, 21.66, 0.34%\"; \"Source: Respective Islamic banks.\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "54" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q13", "number": 13, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What were the components of Islamic banks' total liabilities in 2024?", "answer": "Time deposit 61.20 percent (BDT 3,923.60 billion), other liabilities 24.39 percent (BDT 1,563.58 billion), demand deposit 10.49 percent (BDT 672.25 billion), shareholders' equity 2.57 percent (BDT 165.05 billion), EDF 1.03 percent (BDT 65.87 billion) and refinance 0.33 percent (BDT 21.14 billion); deposits (time plus demand) made up 71.69 percent of total liabilities.", "evidence": "Para 6.05: \"In 2024, deposits (time + demand) remained the main source of the funding of Islamic banks (71.69 percent of total liabilities). Among the total liabilities, other liabilities were 24.39 percent, shareholders' equity was 2.57 percent, EDF was 1.03 percent and refinance was 0.33 percent.\" Chart 6.02(b) (Total Liabilities of Islamic Banks in 2024, in billion BDT): Time deposit 3923.60 (61.20%), Other liabilities 1563.58 (24.39%), Demand deposit 672.25 (10.49%), Share holders equity 165.05 (2.57%), EDF 65.87 (1.03%), Refinance 21.14 (0.33%).", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "54" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q14", "number": 14, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "How does the share of time deposits compare with the share of demand deposits in Islamic banks' total liabilities in 2024?", "answer": "Time deposits made up 61.20 percent of total liabilities while demand deposits made up 10.49 percent — time deposits were roughly six times the demand-deposit share, and together the two accounted for 71.69 percent of total liabilities.", "evidence": "Chart 6.02(b): Time deposit 3923.60 (61.20%), Demand deposit 672.25 (10.49%). Para 6.05: \"deposits (time + demand) remained the main source of the funding of Islamic banks (71.69 percent of total liabilities).\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "54" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q15", "number": 15, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "How does the single largest component of Islamic banks' total assets compare with the single largest component of their total liabilities in 2024?", "answer": "The largest asset component was Total Investment at BDT 4,722.54 billion (73.66 percent of total assets), while the largest liability component was Time deposit at BDT 3,923.60 billion (61.20 percent of total liabilities).", "evidence": "Chart 6.02(a): \"Total Investment, 4722.54, 73.66%\" (largest asset segment). Chart 6.02(b): \"Time deposit, 3923.60, 61.20%\" (largest liability segment).", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "54" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q16", "number": 16, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "By how much did the total assets of the Islamic banking system increase between December 2023 and December 2024?", "answer": "By BDT 563.44 billion (an increase of 9.63 percent), reaching BDT 6,411.62 billion at end December 2024.", "evidence": "Para 6.04: \"Total assets of IBS stood at BDT 6411.62 billion at end December 2024, showing an increase of BDT 563.44 billion or 9.63 percent as compared to December 2023.\"", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "54" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q17", "number": 17, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What was the combined value of time and demand deposits held by Islamic banks in 2024, and what share of total liabilities did this represent?", "answer": "The combined value was BDT 4,595.85 billion (BDT 3,923.60 billion in time deposits plus BDT 672.25 billion in demand deposits), representing 71.69 percent of total liabilities.", "evidence": "Chart 6.02(b): Time deposit = 3923.60 (61.20%), Demand deposit = 672.25 (10.49%). Para 6.05: \"deposits (time + demand) remained the main source of the funding of Islamic banks (71.69 percent of total liabilities).\" Calculations: 3923.60 + 672.25 = 4595.85; 61.20 + 10.49 = 71.69.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "54" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q18", "number": 18, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "How did the Islamic banking system maintain roughly a one-quarter market share of the banking industry even as its asset quality collapsed?", "answer": "Between 2023 and end June 2025 the Islamic banking system held its industry share of assets at about 24.4-24.5 percent (24.38 percent in 2023 and 2024, 24.52 percent at end June 2025) and its investment share near 30 percent, because its assets and deposits kept growing in absolute terms (assets up 9.63 percent in 2024, deposits up 3.84 percent). At the same time its share of industry gross NPLs jumped from 17.06 percent in 2023 to 62.44 percent in 2024 and 62.55 percent at end June 2025 — so the sector's balance-sheet size held up while its bad-loan concentration multiplied.", "evidence": "Table 6.02, Share in Overall Banking Industry (in percent): Assets 2023 = 24.38, 2024 = 24.38, 2025* = 24.52; Investment 2023 = 30.41, 2024 = 29.80, 2025* = 30.11; Gross NPLs 2023 = 17.06, 2024 = 62.44, 2025* = 62.55. Para 6.04: assets \"increase of BDT 563.44 billion or 9.63 percent\". Para 6.05: deposits \"increase of BDT 169.44 billion or 3.84 percent\".", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "54" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q19", "number": 19, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What were the total investments (loans and advances) of the Islamic banking system at end June 2025 and at end December 2024?", "answer": "Total investments stood at BDT 5,222.04 billion at end June 2025 (an increase of 4.12 percent) and BDT 5,015.49 billion at end December 2024 (up BDT 336.67 billion, or 7.20 percent, from December 2023).", "evidence": "Para 6.06: \"Total Investments (loans and advances) of IBS increased to BDT 5222.04 billion or 4.12 percent at end June 2025. It stood at BDT 5015.49 billion in December 2024 which had gone up by BDT 336.67 billion or 7.20 percent from December 2023.\" Table 6.04, Total investment row: 2024 = 5015.49, 2025* = 5222.04.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "55" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q20", "number": 20, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What was the capital to risk weighted assets ratio (CRAR) of full-fledged Islamic banks in 2024 and at end June 2025?", "answer": "The CRAR of full-fledged Islamic banks was 3.91 percent in 2024 and fell to negative 0.95 percent at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 6.03 (Capital to Risk Weighted Assets of IBS), Capital to risk weighted assets (ratio in percent) row: 2024 = 3.91, 2025* = -0.95. Note: * As per Provisional data of end June 2025; the capital adequacy figure reflected only for full-fledged Islamic banks.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "55" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q21", "number": 21, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What was the aggregate regulatory capital of full-fledged Islamic banks on 31 December 2024, and how did it change by end June 2025?", "answer": "It was BDT 171.85 billion on 31 December 2024 and had decreased to BDT -50.88 billion (negative) at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Para 6.07: \"the aggregate amount of regulatory capital of full-fledged Islamic banks stood at BDT 171.85 billion as on 31 December 2024, but had decreased to BDT -50.88 billion at end June 2025.\" Table 6.03, Total capital row: 2024 = 171.85, 2025* = -50.88.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "55" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q22", "number": 22, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What was the ratio of gross NPIs to total investments of Islamic banks in 2024 and at end June 2025?", "answer": "The ratio was 43.05 percent in 2024 and rose to 50.35 percent at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 6.04 (Ratio of Gross NPIs to Total Investments of Islamic Banks), Ratio of gross NPIs to total investments (in percent) row: 2024 = 43.05, 2025* = 50.35. Note: * End June 2025.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "55" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q23", "number": 23, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What was the amount of gross NPIs of the Islamic banking system as on June 2025, and how was it distributed across full-fledged Islamic banks, Islamic branches and Islamic windows of conventional banks?", "answer": "Gross NPIs of the Islamic banking system were BDT 2,629.09 billion as on June 2025, of which full-fledged Islamic banks accounted for BDT 2,594.30 billion, Islamic branches of conventional banks BDT 22.91 billion, and Islamic windows of conventional banks BDT 11.89 billion.", "evidence": "Para 6.08: \"As on June 2025, the amount of gross NPIs of the Islamic banking system was BDT 2629.09 billion, of which full-fledged Islamic banks, branches and windows of conventional banks were BDT 2594.30 billion, BDT 22.91 billion and BDT 11.89 billion respectively (Table 6.04).\" Table 6.04, Gross NPI by types of Islamic banks, 2025* column: Full-fledged = 2594.30, Branches = 22.91, Windows = 11.89.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "55" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q24", "number": 24, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "How did the ratio of gross NPIs to total investments of Islamic banks trend from 2020 to end June 2025?", "answer": "The ratio was broadly flat and low from 2020 to 2022 (4.06 percent, 4.03 percent, 3.95 percent), edged up to 5.31 percent in 2023, then exploded to 43.05 percent in 2024 and 50.35 percent at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 6.04, Ratio of gross NPIs to total investments (in percent) row: 2020 = 4.06, 2021 = 4.03, 2022 = 3.95, 2023 = 5.31, 2024 = 43.05, 2025* = 50.35.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "55" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q25", "number": 25, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What was the amount of net NPIs of the Islamic banking system as on June 2025, and how was it split across full-fledged Islamic banks, Islamic branches and Islamic windows?", "answer": "Net NPIs of the Islamic banking system were BDT 1,621.60 billion as on June 2025, comprising BDT 1,592.48 billion for full-fledged Islamic banks, BDT 20.03 billion for Islamic branches of conventional banks, and BDT 9.09 billion for Islamic windows of conventional banks.", "evidence": "Para 6.09: \"As on June 2025, the amount of net NPIs of Islamic banking system was BDT 1621.60 billion, of which full-fledged Islamic banks, branches and windows of conventional banks were BDT 1592.48 billion, BDT 20.03 billion and BDT 9.09 billion, respectively.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "55" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q26", "number": 26, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "Compare the ratio of gross NPIs to total investments of Islamic banks at end December 2024 with its level at end June 2025.", "answer": "The ratio rose from 43.05 percent at end December 2024 to 50.35 percent at end June 2025, an increase of 7.30 percentage points.", "evidence": "Para 6.08: \"The gross NPI of Islamic banks increased by 50.35 percent at end June 2025 which was 43.05 percent at end December 2024.\" Table 6.04, Ratio of gross NPIs to total investments (in percent): 2024 = 43.05, 2025* = 50.35.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "55" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q27", "number": 27, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "Compare the ratio of net NPIs to net total investments of the Islamic banking system at end December 2023 with that at end December 2024.", "answer": "The ratio jumped from 2.70 percent at end December 2023 to 29.80 percent at end December 2024.", "evidence": "Para 6.09: \"The ratio of net NPIs (net of provisions and profit suspense) to net total investment (net of provisions and profit suspense) of IBS increased to 29.80 percent at end December 2024, up from 2.70 percent of end December 2023 (Table 6.05).\" Table 6.05, Ratio of net NPIs to total net investments (%): 2023 = 2.70, 2024 = 29.80.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "55" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q28", "number": 28, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "Compare the three largest components of Islamic banks' total liabilities in 2024.", "answer": "Time deposit was the largest at 61.20 percent (BDT 3,923.60 billion), followed by other liabilities at 24.39 percent (BDT 1,563.58 billion) and demand deposit at 10.49 percent (BDT 672.25 billion) — time deposit alone was larger than the other two combined.", "evidence": "Chart 6.02(b) (Total Liabilities of Islamic Banks in 2024, in billion BDT): Time deposit 3923.60 (61.20%), Other liabilities 1563.58 (24.39%), Demand deposit 672.25 (10.49%), Share holders equity 165.05 (2.57%), EDF 65.87 (1.03%), Refinance 21.14 (0.33%).", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "54" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q29", "number": 29, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "Compare the CRAR of full-fledged Islamic banks in 2023, 2024 and end June 2025.", "answer": "The CRAR fell from 12.68 percent in 2023 to 3.91 percent in 2024 and then to negative 0.95 percent at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 6.03, Capital to risk weighted assets (ratio in percent) row: 2023 = 12.68, 2024 = 3.91, 2025* = -0.95. Para 6.07: \"CRAR of full-fledged Islamic banks had reduced to -0.95 percent. It also decreased to 3.91 percent as of December 2024, down from 12.68 percent of 31 December 2023.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "55" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q30", "number": 30, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "How did the CRAR of full-fledged Islamic banks trend from 2020 to end June 2025?", "answer": "The CRAR held around 12.5-12.8 percent from 2020 to 2023 (12.77, 12.81, 12.51, 12.68 percent), then collapsed to 3.91 percent in 2024 and to negative 0.95 percent at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 6.03, Capital to risk weighted assets (ratio in percent) row: 2020 = 12.77, 2021 = 12.81, 2022 = 12.51, 2023 = 12.68, 2024 = 3.91, 2025* = -0.95. Para 6.07 gives the same 2023, 2024 and end June 2025 figures.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "55" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q31", "number": 31, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "How did the ROA of Islamic banks trend from 2020 to end June 2025?", "answer": "ROA was positive and fairly stable at about 0.53-0.56 percent from 2020 to 2022 (0.56, 0.53, 0.54 percent), fell to 0.16 percent in 2023, then turned negative at -0.39 percent in 2024 and -0.64 percent at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 6.09 (Profitability ratio (ROA) of Islamic banks), ROA row: 2020 = 0.56, 2021 = 0.53, 2022 = 0.54, 2023 = 0.16, 2024 = -0.39, 2025* = -0.64. Para 6.11: \"At end June 2025, the ROA of IBS declined to -0.64 percent. It also decreased in December 2024 (-0.39 percent) as compared to December 2023 (0.16 percent).\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "55-57" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q32", "number": 32, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "By how much did the gross NPIs of Islamic banks increase between 2023 and end June 2025?", "answer": "By BDT 2,380.64 billion — from BDT 248.45 billion in 2023 to BDT 2,629.09 billion at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 6.04, Gross NPIs row: 2023 = 248.45, 2025* = 2629.09. Calculation: 2629.09 - 248.45 = 2380.64.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "55" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q33", "number": 33, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "By how much did the net NPIs of Islamic banks increase between 2023 and end June 2025?", "answer": "By BDT 1,499.24 billion — from BDT 122.36 billion in 2023 to BDT 1,621.60 billion at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 6.05 (Ratio of Net NPIs to Total Net Investments of Islamic Banks), Net NPIs row: 2023 = 122.36, 2025* = 1621.60. Calculation: 1621.60 - 122.36 = 1499.24.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "55" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q34", "number": 34, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "By how many percentage points did the CRAR of full-fledged Islamic banks fall between 31 December 2023 and 31 December 2024?", "answer": "By 8.77 percentage points — from 12.68 percent on 31 December 2023 to 3.91 percent in December 2024.", "evidence": "Para 6.07: \"CRAR of full-fledged Islamic banks ... decreased to 3.91 percent as of December 2024, down from 12.68 percent of 31 December 2023.\" Table 6.03, Capital to risk weighted assets (ratio in percent): 2023 = 12.68, 2024 = 3.91. Calculation: 12.68 - 3.91 = 8.77.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "55" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q35", "number": 35, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What share of the entire banking industry's gross NPLs did Islamic banks account for at end June 2025?", "answer": "About 62.55 percent — Islamic banks' gross NPLs of BDT 2,629.09 billion out of the all-banks total of BDT 4,203.35 billion.", "evidence": "Table 6.02, Gross NPLs row: All Banks 2025* = 4203.35, Islamic Banks 2025* = 2629.09, Share in Overall Banking Industry 2025* = 62.55. Calculation: 2629.09 / 4203.35 = 0.6255 = 62.55 percent.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "54-55" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q36", "number": 36, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "How did the capital position of full-fledged Islamic banks turn negative by mid-2025?", "answer": "Full-fledged Islamic banks' total capital fell from BDT 370.57 billion in 2023 to BDT 171.85 billion in 2024 and then to BDT -50.88 billion at end June 2025, while their risk-weighted assets kept rising (BDT 2,922.60 billion in 2023 to BDT 4,393.63 billion in 2024 and BDT 5,371.79 billion at end June 2025). With capital being wiped out — largely by the surge in provisioning against non-performing investments — while the RWA base expanded, the CRAR fell from 12.68 percent to 3.91 percent and then to negative 0.95 percent.", "evidence": "Table 6.03: Total capital 2023 = 370.57, 2024 = 171.85, 2025* = -50.88; Risk weighted assets 2023 = 2922.60, 2024 = 4393.63, 2025* = 5371.79; Capital to risk weighted assets (ratio in percent) 2023 = 12.68, 2024 = 3.91, 2025* = -0.95. Para 6.07: \"the aggregate amount of regulatory capital of full-fledged Islamic banks stood at BDT 171.85 billion as on 31 December 2024, but had decreased to BDT -50.88 billion at end June 2025.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "55" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q37", "number": 37, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "How did the roughly 769 percent jump in Islamic banks' gross NPLs in 2024 propagate into their provisioning and capital positions?", "answer": "Islamic banks' gross NPLs rose about 769 percent in 2024 (to BDT 2,159.06 billion) and rose further to BDT 2,629.09 billion by end June 2025. The required provision jumped accordingly to BDT 1,925.15 billion in 2024 and BDT 2,154.04 billion by mid-2025, but provision maintained barely moved (BDT 210.68 billion, then BDT 223.89 billion), so the provision maintained-to-required ratio crashed from about 99 percent to roughly 10 percent and a shortfall of nearly BDT 1,930 billion opened up. That unfunded provisioning gap ate through capital, driving the full-fledged banks' total capital to BDT -50.88 billion and CRAR to negative 0.95 percent.", "evidence": "Table 6.02, Gross NPLs row, Islamic Banks: 2024 = 2159.06 (769.00), 2025* = 2629.09 (21.77). Table 6.06 (Required Provision and Provision Maintained by Islamic Banks): Required Provision 2024 = 1925.15, 2025* = 2154.04; Provision maintained 2024 = 210.68, 2025* = 223.89; Ratio of provision maintained to required provision 2023 = 99.19, 2024 = 10.94, 2025* = 10.39; Excess(+)/Shortfall(-) 2025* = -1930.15. Table 6.03: Total capital 2025* = -50.88, Capital to risk weighted assets (ratio in percent) 2025* = -0.95.", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "54-56" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q38", "number": 38, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What was the required provision and the provision maintained by Islamic banks at end June 2025?", "answer": "At end June 2025 the required provision was BDT 2,154.04 billion while the provision maintained was only BDT 223.89 billion.", "evidence": "Table 6.06 (Required Provision and Provision Maintained by Islamic Banks, in billion BDT), 2025* column: Amount of Gross NPI = 2629.09, Required Provision = 2154.04, Provision maintained = 223.89, Ratio of provision maintained to required provision = 10.39, Excess(+)/Shortfall(-) = -1930.15. Note: * End June 2025.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "56" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q39", "number": 39, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What metrics track Islamic banks' gross NPLs, provisioning and provision-coverage ratio over time, and what period do they span?", "answer": "Chart 6.03 (Gross NPI, Provision and Ratio of Provision Maintained to Required Provision) shows the amount of Gross NPLs and Provision as bars in billion BDT and the ratio of required provision to provision maintained as a line in percent, for 2020 through 2024 and end June 2025.", "evidence": "Chart 6.03 (Gross NPI, Provision and Ratio of Provision Maintained to Required Provision): bars \"Gross NPLs\" and \"Provision\" (left axis \"In billion BDT\"), line \"Ratio of Required Provision to Provision maintained(%)\" (right axis \"Percent\"); x-axis 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025*; note \"* End June 2025\"; \"Source: Data of respective banks.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "56" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q40", "number": 40, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "How did Islamic banks' gross NPLs and their ratio of provision maintained to required provision move between 2023 and 2024?", "answer": "Between 2023 and 2024 the Gross NPLs bar jumped from a low level (around BDT 250 billion) to well above BDT 2,000 billion, while the ratio line, which had stayed near the top of its range (about 99 percent) through 2023, plunged to roughly 10 percent.", "evidence": "Chart 6.03: the \"Gross NPLs\" bar rises steeply from 2023 to 2024 (to well above 2,000 on the \"In billion BDT\" axis) while the \"Ratio of Required Provision to Provision maintained(%)\" line drops sharply from near its peak to the bottom of the \"Percent\" axis between 2023 and 2024. Supporting values (Table 6.06): Amount of Gross NPI 2023 = 248.45, 2024 = 2159.06; Ratio 2023 = 99.19, 2024 = 10.94.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "56" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q41", "number": 41, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What was the provision shortfall of Islamic banks at end June 2025, and how had the ratio of provision maintained to required provision changed since 2023?", "answer": "At end June 2025 the provision shortfall was BDT 1,930.15 billion, and the ratio of provision maintained to required provision had fallen from 99.19 percent in 2023 to 10.94 percent in 2024 and 10.39 percent at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 6.06, 2025* column: Excess(+)/Shortfall(-) = -1930.15; Ratio of provision maintained to required provision: 2023 = 99.19, 2024 = 10.94, 2025* = 10.39. Chart 6.03 shows the ratio line collapsing after 2023 while the Gross NPLs bars surge.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "56" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q42", "number": 42, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "Compare the provision maintained by Islamic banks with the required provision in 2023 and at end June 2025.", "answer": "In 2023 provision maintained (BDT 194.11 billion) was almost equal to the required provision (BDT 195.70 billion), a ratio of 99.19 percent. By end June 2025 provision maintained had crept up only to BDT 223.89 billion while the required provision had ballooned to BDT 2,154.04 billion, a ratio of just 10.39 percent — a shortfall of BDT 1,930.15 billion.", "evidence": "Table 6.06: Required Provision 2023 = 195.70, 2025* = 2154.04; Provision maintained 2023 = 194.11, 2025* = 223.89; Ratio of provision maintained to required provision 2023 = 99.19, 2025* = 10.39; Excess(+)/Shortfall(-) 2023 = -1.59, 2025* = -1930.15. Chart 6.03 shows the \"Provision\" bars staying low while the \"Gross NPLs\" bars surge after 2023.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "56" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q43", "number": 43, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "How did the ratio of provision maintained to required provision for Islamic banks trend from 2020 to end June 2025, and how did the provision shortfall move over that period?", "answer": "The ratio of provision maintained to required provision held close to 98-99 percent from 2020 to 2023 (98.02, 97.88, 97.63, 99.19 percent), then collapsed to 10.94 percent in 2024 and 10.39 percent at end June 2025. Over the same period the provision shortfall widened from a few billion taka (BDT 2.23 billion in 2020) to BDT 1,714.47 billion in 2024 and BDT 1,930.15 billion at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 6.06: Ratio of provision maintained to required provision 2020 = 98.02, 2021 = 97.88, 2022 = 97.63, 2023 = 99.19, 2024 = 10.94, 2025* = 10.39; Excess(+)/Shortfall(-) 2020 = -2.23, 2021 = -2.82, 2022 = -3.52, 2023 = -1.59, 2024 = -1714.47, 2025* = -1930.15. Chart 6.03 plots the ratio line and the Gross NPLs / Provision bars over 2020-2025*.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "56" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q44", "number": 44, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "How did the amount of gross NPI of Islamic banks trend from 2020 to end June 2025?", "answer": "Gross NPI rose gradually from BDT 123.09 billion in 2020 to BDT 147.81 billion (2021), BDT 168.40 billion (2022) and BDT 248.45 billion (2023), then surged to BDT 2,159.06 billion in 2024 and BDT 2,629.09 billion at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 6.04, Gross NPIs row: 2020 = 123.09, 2021 = 147.81, 2022 = 168.40, 2023 = 248.45, 2024 = 2159.06, 2025* = 2629.09. Chart 6.03 shows the \"Gross NPLs\" bars low and flat through 2023 then spiking in 2024 and 2025*.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "55-56" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q45", "number": 45, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "Why did the deterioration in investment quality hit Islamic banks' balance sheets particularly hard?", "answer": "Investment was by far the dominant asset class for Islamic banks in 2024, making up 73.66 percent of total assets (BDT 4,722.54 billion). So when the ratio of gross NPIs to total investments jumped from 43.05 percent at end December 2024 to 50.35 percent at end June 2025, roughly half of the single largest asset category had become non-performing, directly impairing the bulk of the sector's assets.", "evidence": "Chart 6.02(a): \"Total Investment, 4722.54, 73.66%\" — the largest slice of Islamic banks' 2024 total assets. Para 6.08: \"The gross NPI of Islamic banks increased by 50.35 percent at end June 2025 which was 43.05 percent at end December 2024.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "54-55" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q46", "number": 46, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "How did the rise in non-performing investments translate into the Islamic banking system's profitability by end June 2025?", "answer": "Chart 6.03 shows gross NPIs surging while provisioning lagged. Servicing that bad book pushed the expenditure-to-income ratio of the Islamic banking system to 111.37 percent at end June 2025 (up from 92.01 percent in December 2024), so the sector was spending more than it earned. As a result ROA fell to -0.64 percent, the ROE of full-fledged Islamic banks fell to -41.81 percent, and net profit margin fell to -0.55 percent.", "evidence": "Chart 6.03 (Gross NPI, Provision and Ratio of Provision Maintained to Required Provision) shows Gross NPLs spiking in 2024-2025*. Para 6.10: \"The expenditure to total income (EI) ratio of IBS increased to 111.37 percent at end June 2025. It increased slightly to 92.01 percent at end December 2024, up from 78.39 percent from end December 2023.\" Para 6.11: \"At end June 2025, the ROA of IBS declined to -0.64 percent. ... At end June 2025, ROE of full fledged Islamic banks stood at -41.81 percent. ... Net profit margins of IBS stood at -0.55 at end June 2025\".", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "56-57" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q47", "number": 47, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "Why did the ratio of provision maintained to required provision for Islamic banks collapse from about 99 percent in 2020-2023 to roughly 10 percent in 2024-2025?", "answer": "The collapse happened because the required provision exploded while the provision actually maintained barely moved. Required provision jumped from BDT 195.70 billion in 2023 to BDT 1,925.15 billion in 2024 and BDT 2,154.04 billion at end June 2025 (tracking the surge in gross NPI), but provision maintained rose only from BDT 194.11 billion to BDT 210.68 billion and then BDT 223.89 billion. Chart 6.03 shows the Provision bars staying flat while the Gross NPLs bars spike, so the ratio fell from 99.19 percent to 10.94 percent and 10.39 percent and a near-BDT 1,930 billion shortfall opened up.", "evidence": "Table 6.06: Required Provision 2023 = 195.70, 2024 = 1925.15, 2025* = 2154.04; Provision maintained 2023 = 194.11, 2024 = 210.68, 2025* = 223.89; Ratio of provision maintained to required provision 2023 = 99.19, 2024 = 10.94, 2025* = 10.39; Excess(+)/Shortfall(-) 2024 = -1714.47, 2025* = -1930.15. Chart 6.03 shows \"Provision\" bars roughly flat while \"Gross NPLs\" bars surge in 2024-2025*.", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "56" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q48", "number": 48, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What were the amount of gross NPI and the provision excess or shortfall of Islamic banks at end June 2025?", "answer": "At end June 2025 the amount of gross NPI was BDT 2,629.09 billion and the provision shortfall was BDT 1,930.15 billion.", "evidence": "Table 6.06, 2025* column: Amount of Gross NPI = 2629.09, Excess(+)/Shortfall(-) = -1930.15. Chart 6.03 plots the Gross NPLs and Provision bars for 2025* (end June 2025).", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "56" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q49", "number": 49, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What was the expenditure-to-total-income (EI) ratio of the Islamic banking system at end June 2025, end December 2024 and end December 2023?", "answer": "The EI ratio of the Islamic banking system was 111.37 percent at end June 2025, 92.01 percent at end December 2024, and 78.39 percent at end December 2023.", "evidence": "Para 6.10: \"The expenditure to total income (EI) ratio of IBS increased to 111.37 percent at end June 2025. It increased slightly to 92.01 percent at end December 2024, up from 78.39 percent from end December 2023.\" Table 6.08, Ratio of expenditure to income (%) row: 2023 = 78.39, 2024 = 92.01, 2025* = 111.37.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "57" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q50", "number": 50, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What was the return on assets (ROA) of the Islamic banking system at end June 2025, end December 2024 and end December 2023?", "answer": "The ROA of the Islamic banking system was negative 0.64 percent at end June 2025, negative 0.39 percent at end December 2024, and a positive 0.16 percent at end December 2023.", "evidence": "Para 6.11: \"At end June 2025, the ROA of IBS declined to -0.64 percent. It also decreased in December 2024 (-0.39 percent) as compared to December 2023 (0.16 percent).\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "57" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q51", "number": 51, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "Compare the ROA of the Islamic windows of conventional banks, the Islamic branches of conventional banks, and the full-fledged Islamic banks in December 2024.", "answer": "In December 2024 the Islamic windows of conventional banks had the highest ROA at 1.73 percent, followed by the Islamic branches at 1.13 percent, while the full-fledged Islamic banks had a negative ROA of -0.56 percent.", "evidence": "Para 6.11: \"Among IBS, ROA of the Islamic windows of conventional banks was the highest (1.73 percent), followed by the Islamic branches (1.13 percent) and the full-fledged (-0.56 percent) Islamic banks in December 2024 (Table 6.09).\" Table 6.09, ROA by types of Islamic banks, 2024 column: Full-fledged = -0.56, Branches = 1.13, Windows = 1.73.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "57" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q52", "number": 52, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "Compare the expenditure-to-income (EI) ratio of the full-fledged Islamic banks with those of the Islamic branches and Islamic windows of conventional banks at end December 2024.", "answer": "At end December 2024 the full-fledged Islamic banks had the highest EI ratio at 94.47 percent, compared with 66.55 percent for the Islamic branches and 61.18 percent for the Islamic windows of conventional banks.", "evidence": "Para 6.10: \"The EI ratio of the full-fledged Islamic banks was 94.47 percent, the highest among IBS in December 2024. The EI ratios of the Islamic branches and windows of conventional banks were 66.55 and 61.18 percent, respectively, at end December 2024 (Table 6.08).\" Table 6.08, Ratio of expenditure to income by types of Islamic banks, 2024 column: Full-fledged = 94.47, Branches = 66.55, Windows = 61.18.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "57" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q53", "number": 53, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "How did the net income of Islamic banks trend from 2020 to end June 2025?", "answer": "Net income rose from BDT 21.67 billion in 2020 to BDT 25.39 billion (2021) and BDT 28.36 billion (2022), then fell sharply to BDT 9.17 billion in 2023 before turning to losses of BDT -24.97 billion in 2024 and BDT -42.13 billion at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 6.09 (Profitability ratio (ROA) of Islamic banks), Net income row: 2020 = 21.67, 2021 = 25.39, 2022 = 28.36, 2023 = 9.17, 2024 = -24.97, 2025* = -42.13. Note: * End June 2025.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "57" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q54", "number": 54, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What were the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR) and net stable funding ratio (NSFR) of Islamic banks as on 30 June 2025, and what are the minimum requirements?", "answer": "As on 30 June 2025 the LCR of Islamic banks was 47.36 percent and the NSFR was 93.51 percent, both against a minimum requirement of 100.00 percent — meaning Islamic banks fell short on both liquidity ratios.", "evidence": "Para 6.12: \"As on 30 June 2025, the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR) of Islamic banks was 47.36 percent (against minimum requirement of 100.00 percent) ... The net stable funding ratio (NSFR) of Islamic banks was 93.51 percent in 30 June 2025, indicating that they did not have enough stable funding to fully cover their required long-term funding needs.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "57" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q55", "number": 55, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "As of 30 June 2025, how did Islamic banks' maintenance of the cash reserve ratio (CRR) and the statutory liquidity ratio (SLR) compare with the required rates?", "answer": "As of 30 June 2025 Islamic banks were not able to maintain the CRR against the required rate, whereas they maintained the SLR higher than the required rate.", "evidence": "Para 6.12: \"As of 30 June 2025, Islamic banks were not able to maintain CRR against the required rate whereas they maintained SLR higher than the required rate (Table 6.13).\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "57" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q56", "number": 56, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "When was the Bangladesh Government Islamic Investment Bond (BGIIB) introduced, and what type of instrument is it?", "answer": "The BGIIB is a Mudaraba bond introduced by the Bangladesh Government in October 2004; the 6-month BGIIB was introduced in FY04 and the 3-month BGIIB in January 2015.", "evidence": "Para 6.18: \"Bangladesh Government has introduced a Mudaraba Bond named \"Bangladesh Government Islamic Investment Bond\" in October 2004 with a view to mitigating the long-felt need for a Shariah-based monetary instrument ... The operation of 6-month BGIIB was introduced in FY04 and 3-month BGIIB in January 2015.\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "59" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q57", "number": 57, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "What was the net balance against BGIIB at end June FY24 and at end June FY25?", "answer": "The net balance against BGIIB was BDT 0.82 billion at end June FY24 (total sales BDT 126.72 billion against financing of BDT 125.89 billion) and BDT 33.76 billion at end June FY25 (total sales BDT 174.18 billion against financing of BDT 140.42 billion). Calculation: 174.18 - 140.42 = 33.76.", "evidence": "Para 6.18: \"At end June 2024, the total sales of BGIIB stood at BDT 126.72 billion whereas the total amount of financing against this bond came to BDT 125.89 billion. The net balance against BGIIB stood at BDT 0.82 billion. At the end June FY25, the total sales of BGIIB stood at BDT 174.18 billion whereas the total amount of financing against this bond came to BDT 140.42 billion and the net balance against BGIIB stood at BDT 33.76 billion.\" Table 6.18: Sale of BGIIB FY25 = 174.18, Financing against BGIIB FY25 = 140.42, Net balance FY25 = 33.76.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "59" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q58", "number": 58, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "Compare the two Bangladesh Government Investment Sukuk (BGIS) auctions held in June FY25 in terms of bids received and bids accepted.", "answer": "In the first June FY25 auction, 72 bids worth BDT 109.25 billion were received and BDT 30 billion was accepted; in the second auction, 171 bids worth BDT 83.48 billion were received and BDT 20.00 billion was accepted.", "evidence": "Para 6.19: \"In the first auction, 72 bids for BDT109.25 billion were received, of which all bids worth of BDT30 billion were accepted; In the second auction, in all 171 bids for BDT83.48 billion were received, of which all bids worth BDT20.00 billion were accepted.\" Table 6.19, 12 March 2025 and 19 May 2025 columns: No of bid received = 72 and 171; Face value of bid received = 109.25 and 83.48; Face value of bid accepted = 30.00 and 20.00.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "60" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q59", "number": 59, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "When was the Islamic Interbank Fund Market (IIFM) introduced, and for what purpose?", "answer": "The Islamic Interbank Fund Market (IIFM) was introduced on 27 December 2011 for the integration of liquidity management of the Islamic banking sector.", "evidence": "Para 6.20: \"An Islamic Interbank Fund Market (IIFM) was introduced on 27 December 2011 for integration of liquidity management of the Islamic banking sector.\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "60" }, { "id": "chapter_6-q60", "number": 60, "chapter": "Chapter 6", "chapter_title": "Performance of Islamic Banking System (IBS) in Bangladesh", "question": "Compare the Islamic Banks Liquidity Facility (IBLF) and the Mudarabah Liquidity Support (MLS) in terms of auction activity during FY25.", "answer": "During FY25 there were 175 IBLF auctions in which 424 bids for BDT 1,365.08 billion were received and all were accepted, versus only 2 MLS auctions in which 2 bids for BDT 4.80 billion were received and accepted — IBLF was by far the more heavily used facility.", "evidence": "Para 6.21: \"A total of 175 IBLF auctions were held during FY25. In FY25, in all 424 bids for BDT1365.08 billion were received, of which all bids worth of BDT1365.08 billion were accepted.\" Para 6.22: \"A total of 02 MLS auctions were held during FY25. In FY25, in all 02 bids for BDT4.80 billion were received, of which all bids worth of the entire offered amount was accepted.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "61" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q1", "number": 1, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "When did Bangladesh Bank pioneer the Guidelines on Green Banking, introduce the Sustainable Finance Policy, and revise that policy?", "answer": "Bangladesh Bank pioneered the Guidelines on Green Banking in 2011, introduced the Sustainable Finance Policy in 2020 (with a list of 68 green products), and revised the policy in 2023, enhancing the list of green finance products to 94 under 14 sectors and adding a focus on gender inclusiveness.", "evidence": "Para 7.02: \"In 2011, BB pioneered the Guidelines on Green Banking for scheduled banks and FCs ... BB introduced the Sustainable Finance Policy in 2020, which clearly defines green and sustainable finance and identifies a list of 68 green products, projects, and initiatives under green finance. However, in 2023, the Sustainable Finance Policy was revised and is now focusing on gender inclusiveness and on enhancing the list of green finance products to 94 under 14 sectors.\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "64-65" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q2", "number": 2, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "How much additional financing does Bangladesh require annually until 2030 to achieve its SDG targets?", "answer": "An additional USD 132.59 billion annually until 2030.", "evidence": "Para 7.01: \"To achieve SDG targets, Bangladesh requires an additional USD 132.59 billion annually until 2030.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "64" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q3", "number": 3, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "For the successful implementation of the 113 interventions of the National Adaptation Plan (NAP 2023-2050), how much will the country need by 2050, and what is the annual financing requirement?", "answer": "The country will need USD 230 billion by 2050, with an annual financing requirement of approximately USD 8.5 billion.", "evidence": "Para 7.01: \"for the successful implementation of 113 interventions (90 high-priorities and 23 moderate-priorities) of the National Adaptation Plan (NAP 2023-2050), the country will need USD 230 billion by 2050, with an annual financing requirement of approximately USD 8.5 billion.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "64" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q4", "number": 4, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "What green and sustainable finance allocation targets has Bangladesh Bank set for banks and FCs?", "answer": "Banks and FCs must allocate at least 5.00 percent of their net loans or investments to green finance and 40.00 percent to sustainable finance. Separately, they must allocate 25.00 percent of green finance to the green CMSME sector and 20.00 percent of green finance to the women entrepreneur sector, and within the green CMSME allocation, 15.00 percent must go to the women entrepreneur sector.", "evidence": "Para 7.02: \"BB ... now requires banks and FCs to allocate at least 5.00 percent of their net loans or investments to green finance and 40.00 percent to sustainable finance. ... Banks and FCs have been instructed to allocate 25.00 percent of green finance in the green CMSME sector and 20.00 percent of green finance in the women entrepreneur sector. Within the green CMSME sector allocation, 15.00 percent will be provided to women entrepreneur sector.\" Table 7.01 (Summary of Sustainable Finance FY25) reports actual sustainable finance and green finance by bank/FC type against these targets.", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "64-65" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q5", "number": 5, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "What was the percentage of green finance outstanding against total loans outstanding in FY25, and how did it compare with the previous fiscal year?", "answer": "Green finance outstanding was 4.60 percent of total loans outstanding in FY25, which was 0.33 percentage points higher than the previous fiscal year.", "evidence": "Para 7.04: \"Percentage of green finance outstanding against total loans outstanding was 4.60 percent which was 0.33 percent higher than that of the previous fiscal year.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "64" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q6", "number": 6, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Can you explain the bridging role Bangladesh Bank plays in closing the country's sustainable-finance gap?", "answer": "Bangladesh faces a large financing gap — an additional USD 132.59 billion a year until 2030 for the SDGs and about USD 8.5 billion a year for the National Adaptation Plan — that the public sector alone cannot meet, so private sector engagement is essential. Bangladesh Bank bridges this gap by directing banks and FCs, through the Green Banking Guidelines and Sustainable Finance Policy, to allocate at least 5.00 percent of net loans/investments to green finance and 40.00 percent to sustainable finance, plus green CMSME and women entrepreneur sub-targets. Table 7.01 shows the resulting FY25 disbursement: BDT 5,449,322.20 million of sustainable finance (of which BDT 320,552.20 million was green finance) across all bank and FC types.", "evidence": "Para 7.01: \"Bangladesh requires an additional USD 132.59 billion annually until 2030 ... an annual financing requirement of approximately USD 8.5 billion. ... Since the public sector alone cannot meet these financing requirements, private sector engagement is imperative. In this context, BB is playing a bridging role to mitigate financing gaps by encouraging banks and FCs to increase their involvement in sustainable, green and climate financing.\" Para 7.02: allocation targets of \"5.00 percent ... to green finance and 40.00 percent to sustainable finance\". Table 7.01, Grand Total row: Sustainable Finance = 5,449,322.20, Green Finance = 320,552.20 (in million BDT).", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "64-65" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q7", "number": 7, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "What was the total amount disbursed as green finance by banks and FCs during FY25, and how did it compare with FY24?", "answer": "Green finance disbursement was BDT 320.55 billion in FY25, which was 18.85 percent higher than in FY24.", "evidence": "Para 7.04: \"The total amount disbursed as green finance during FY25 was BDT 320.55 billion by banks and FCs, which was 18.85 percent higher than that of FY24.\" Table 7.01, Grand Total row, Green Finance column = 320,552.20 (in million BDT).", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "64-65" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q8", "number": 8, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Compare the total green finance disbursed with the total sustainable finance disbursed by banks and FCs in FY25.", "answer": "Green finance disbursement was BDT 320.55 billion (BDT 320,552.20 million) in FY25, a small fraction of the total sustainable finance of BDT 5,449,322.20 million (about 5,449 billion) — green finance was roughly 6 percent of total sustainable finance.", "evidence": "Para 7.04: \"The total amount disbursed as green finance during FY25 was BDT 320.55 billion.\" Table 7.01, Grand Total row: Green Finance = 320,552.20, Sustainable Finance = 5,449,322.20 (in million BDT).", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "64" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q9", "number": 9, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "If green finance disbursement of BDT 320.55 billion in FY25 was 18.85 percent higher than in FY24, approximately what was the green finance disbursement in FY24?", "answer": "Approximately BDT 269.7 billion (320.55 / 1.1885 ≈ 269.71).", "evidence": "Para 7.04: \"The total amount disbursed as green finance during FY25 was BDT 320.55 billion by banks and FCs, which was 18.85 percent higher than that of FY24.\" Calculation: 320.55 / 1.1885 = 269.71 billion.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "64" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q10", "number": 10, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "What was the grand total of sustainable finance and the grand total of total sustainable-linked finance (SLF) in FY25?", "answer": "The grand total of sustainable finance was BDT 5,449,322.20 million and the grand total of Total SLF was BDT 5,128,770.00 million.", "evidence": "Table 7.01 (Summary of Sustainable Finance FY25, in million BDT), Grand Total row: Total SLF = 5,128,770.00, Green Finance = 320,552.20, Sustainable Finance = 5,449,322.20.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "64" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q11", "number": 11, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "How much sustainable finance did PCBs disburse in FY25, and how did that compare with the banks' total?", "answer": "PCBs disbursed BDT 4,112,520.17 million of sustainable finance in FY25, out of a banks' total of BDT 5,344,800.56 million — PCBs alone accounted for about 77 percent of all bank sustainable finance.", "evidence": "Table 7.01, Sustainable Finance column: PCBs = 4,112,520.17, Total (banks) = 5,344,800.56 (in million BDT).", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "64" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q12", "number": 12, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Compare the sustainable finance disbursed by PCBs with that disbursed by SOCBs in FY25.", "answer": "PCBs disbursed BDT 4,112,520.17 million of sustainable finance in FY25, roughly 79 times the BDT 51,978.50 million disbursed by SOCBs.", "evidence": "Table 7.01, Sustainable Finance column: SOCBs = 51,978.50, SCBs = 110,816.24, PCBs = 4,112,520.17, FCBs = 254,947.17, ISBs = 814,538.48 (in million BDT).", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "64" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q13", "number": 13, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Which sector received the largest amount of green finance in FY25, and how much was it?", "answer": "Energy and Resource Efficiency received the largest amount of green finance in FY25, with a grand total of BDT 118,315.63 million (BDT 106,410.45 million from banks and BDT 11,905.18 million from FCs).", "evidence": "Table 7.02 (Summary Sheet of Green Finance in FY25, in million BDT), Grand Total row: Renewable Energy = 14,371.89, Energy and Resource Efficiency = 118,315.63, Green Socially Responsible Financing = 88,579.91, Green/Environment Friendly Establishments = 42,121.27, Circular Economy and Eco-Projects Financing = 14,118.94 (Energy and Resource Efficiency is the largest).", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "65" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q14", "number": 14, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "What was the grand total green finance disbursed to the Green CMSME sector and to Blue Economy Financing in FY25?", "answer": "Green CMSME received BDT 10,523.96 million and Blue Economy Financing received BDT 4,231.35 million of green finance in FY25.", "evidence": "Table 7.02, Grand Total row: Green CMSME = 10,523.96, Blue Economy Financing = 4,231.35 (in million BDT). (Bank's Total: Green CMSME = 10,177.91, Blue Economy Financing = 4,007.35.)", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "65" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q15", "number": 15, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Can you verify that the sector-wise green finance figures add up to the reported FY25 total of BDT 320.55 billion?", "answer": "Summing the 14 sector grand totals in Table 7.02 (14,371.89 + 118,315.63 + 363.04 + 6,890.77 + 29.65 + 14,118.94 + 2,484.51 + 42,121.27 + 6,678.71 + 10,523.96 + 88,579.91 + 4,231.35 + 5,529.42 + 6,313.15) gives BDT 320,552.20 million, i.e. BDT 320.55 billion, which matches paragraph 7.04 exactly.", "evidence": "Table 7.02, Grand Total row (in million BDT): Renewable Energy 14,371.89; Energy and Resource Efficiency 118,315.63; Alternative Energy 363.04; Liquid Waste Management 6,890.77; Solid Waste Management 29.65; Circular Economy and Eco-Projects Financing 14,118.94; Environment Friendly Brick Production 2,484.51; Green/Environment Friendly Establishments 42,121.27; Green Agriculture 6,678.71; Green CMSME 10,523.96; Green Socially Responsible Financing 88,579.91; Blue Economy Financing 4,231.35; Information and Communication Technology 5,529.42; Miscellaneous 6,313.15. Sum = 320,552.20. Para 7.04: \"The total amount disbursed as green finance during FY25 was BDT 320.55 billion.\"", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "64-65" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q16", "number": 16, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "What is the percentage breakdown of green finance disbursement across the different categories in FY25?", "answer": "Chart 7.01 (Share of Category-wise Green Finance in FY25) is a pie chart showing the percentage share of each of the 14 green finance categories — Renewable Energy, Energy & Resource Efficiency, Alternative Energy, Liquid Waste Management, Solid Waste Management, Circular Economy & Eco-Projects Financing, Environment Friendly Brick Production, Green/Environment Friendly Establishments, Green Agriculture, Green CMSME, Green Socially Responsible Financing, Blue Economy Financing, Information and Communication Technology, and Miscellaneous.", "evidence": "Chart 7.01 (Share of Category-wise Green Finance in FY25): pie chart with legend listing Renewable Energy, Energy & Resource Efficiency, Alternative Energy, Liquid Waste Management, Solid Waste Management, Circular Economy & Eco-Projects Financing, Environment Friendly Brick Production, Green/Environment Friendly Establishments, Green Agriculture, Green CMSME, Green Socially Responsible Financing, Blue Economy Financing, Information and Communication Technology, Miscellaneous; \"Source: Sustainable Finance Department, Bangladesh Bank.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "66" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q17", "number": 17, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Compare the shares of the two largest categories of green finance in FY25.", "answer": "The largest category held about a 37 percent share and the second largest about 28 percent, together accounting for roughly two-thirds of all green finance in FY25.", "evidence": "Chart 7.01 (Share of Category-wise Green Finance in FY25): the two largest pie segments are labelled 37% and 28%, followed by 13%, 5%, 4%, 3%, 2%, 2%, 2%, 1%, 1%, 0%, 0%, 0%.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "66" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q18", "number": 18, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "What was the green finance disbursed to the Green Socially Responsible Financing sector in FY25, and what was its approximate share of the total?", "answer": "The Green Socially Responsible Financing sector received a grand total of BDT 88,579.91 million in FY25 (BDT 85,080.66 million from banks and BDT 3,499.25 million from FCs), representing roughly a 28 percent share of total green finance.", "evidence": "Table 7.02, Green Socially Responsible Financing column: Bank's Total = 85,080.66, FCs = 3,499.25, Grand Total = 88,579.91 (in million BDT). Chart 7.01 shows this as one of the two largest slices, at about 28 percent.", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "65-66" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q19", "number": 19, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Which green finance sectors received the smallest amounts in FY25?", "answer": "Solid Waste Management received the least, with a grand total of just BDT 29.65 million (all from PCBs), followed by Alternative Energy at BDT 363.04 million; Chart 7.01 shows several categories rounding to a 0 percent share.", "evidence": "Table 7.02, Grand Total row: Solid Waste Management = 29.65, Alternative Energy = 363.04, Environment Friendly Brick Production = 2,484.51 (in million BDT). Chart 7.01 shows multiple small slices labelled 0% and 1%.", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "65-66" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q20", "number": 20, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Which two green finance categories dominated FY25 disbursement, both by amount and by share of the total?", "answer": "Energy and Resource Efficiency dominated with a grand total of BDT 118,315.63 million (about a 37 percent share), followed by Green Socially Responsible Financing at BDT 88,579.91 million (about 28 percent) — together roughly 65 percent of all green finance.", "evidence": "Table 7.02, Grand Total row: Energy and Resource Efficiency = 118,315.63, Green Socially Responsible Financing = 88,579.91 (next highest is Green/Environment Friendly Establishments at 42,121.27). Chart 7.01 shows the two largest slices at 37% and 28%.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "65-66" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q21", "number": 21, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Compare bank green finance directed to Green Socially Responsible Financing with that directed to Green/Environment Friendly Establishments in FY25.", "answer": "Banks disbursed BDT 85,080.66 million to Green Socially Responsible Financing versus BDT 38,385.37 million to Green/Environment Friendly Establishments — more than double. In Chart 7.01 this corresponds to the ~28 percent slice versus a ~13 percent slice.", "evidence": "Table 7.02, Bank's Total row: Green Socially Responsible Financing = 85,080.66, Green/Environment Friendly Establishments = 38,385.37 (in million BDT). Chart 7.01 shows the corresponding pie segments at about 28% and 13%.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "65-66" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q22", "number": 22, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "What does the distribution of FY25 green finance across sectors imply about the concentration of green lending?", "answer": "Green finance is highly concentrated: Energy and Resource Efficiency (BDT 118,315.63 million, ~37 percent) and Green Socially Responsible Financing (BDT 88,579.91 million, ~28 percent) together take about two-thirds of the BDT 320,552.20 million total, while sectors such as Solid Waste Management (BDT 29.65 million), Alternative Energy (BDT 363.04 million) and Environment Friendly Brick Production (BDT 2,484.51 million) receive almost nothing. This shows green lending is driven by a few large, established product categories rather than spread evenly across the taxonomy.", "evidence": "Table 7.02, Grand Total row (in million BDT): Energy and Resource Efficiency 118,315.63; Green Socially Responsible Financing 88,579.91; Green/Environment Friendly Establishments 42,121.27; Renewable Energy 14,371.89; Circular Economy and Eco-Projects Financing 14,118.94; Green CMSME 10,523.96; Solid Waste Management 29.65; Alternative Energy 363.04. Chart 7.01 shows two dominant slices (37% and 28%) and a long tail of 0-2% slices.", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "65-66" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q23", "number": 23, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "How did total sustainable finance trend from FY21 to FY25?", "answer": "Total sustainable finance rose steadily over the period, from roughly BDT 400 billion in FY21 (January-June) to about BDT 1,000 billion in FY22, around BDT 1,500 billion in FY23, roughly BDT 3,300 billion in FY24, and about BDT 5,400 billion in FY25.", "evidence": "Chart 7.02 (Trend in Total Sustainable Finance): y-axis \"in billion BDT\" from 0 to 6000; x-axis FY21(Jan-June), FY22, FY23, FY24, FY25; the line rises continuously and steepens toward FY24-FY25, ending above 5000. \"Source: Sustainable Finance Department, Bangladesh Bank.\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "66" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q24", "number": 24, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Compare the growth trajectory of total sustainable finance with that of total green finance from FY21 to FY25.", "answer": "Both series trend upward over FY21-FY25, but at very different scales and shapes. Total sustainable finance (Chart 7.02) climbs almost continuously from roughly BDT 400 billion to about BDT 5,400 billion. Total green finance (Chart 7.03) is far smaller — it dips slightly from about BDT 100 billion in FY21 to around BDT 85 billion in FY22 before rising to roughly BDT 150 billion (FY23), BDT 270 billion (FY24) and about BDT 320 billion (FY25). So green finance is only a small fraction (roughly 6 percent in FY25) of total sustainable finance and had a less smooth path.", "evidence": "Chart 7.02 (Trend in Total Sustainable Finance): line rising from ~400 to ~5,400 billion BDT across FY21(Jan-June)-FY25. Chart 7.03 (Trend in Total Green Finance): y-axis \"In billion BDT\" 0-300+; line at ~100 (FY21), dipping to ~85 (FY22), then rising to ~150 (FY23), ~270 (FY24), ~320 (FY25). Para 7.04: green finance FY25 = BDT 320.55 billion.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "64-67" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q25", "number": 25, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "How would you characterise the trend in banks' and FCs' investment in sustainable finance?", "answer": "Investments in sustainable finance by banks and FCs have shown a steady upward trend over the period, and Chart 7.02 confirms this — total sustainable finance rises every year from about BDT 400 billion in FY21 (January-June) to roughly BDT 5,400 billion in FY25, with the steepest gains in FY24 and FY25.", "evidence": "Para 7.03: \"investments in sustainable finance by banks and FCs have shown a steady upward trend over the period.\" Chart 7.02 (Trend in Total Sustainable Finance): monotonically rising line from ~400 to ~5,400 billion BDT over FY21(Jan-June)-FY25.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "64-66" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q26", "number": 26, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "How did total green finance trend from FY21 to FY25?", "answer": "Total green finance dipped slightly from about BDT 100 billion in FY21 to roughly BDT 85 billion in FY22, then rose each year to about BDT 150 billion in FY23, roughly BDT 270 billion in FY24, and around BDT 320 billion in FY25.", "evidence": "Chart 7.03 (Trend in Total Green Finance): y-axis \"In billion BDT\" 0-300+; x-axis FY21, FY22, FY23, FY24, FY25; line value near 100 at FY21, lower near 85 at FY22, then rising to roughly 150, 270 and 320 at FY23, FY24 and FY25. \"Source: Sustainable Finance Department, Bangladesh Bank.\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "67" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q27", "number": 27, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "How many projects were rated in the ESDD checklist during FY25, and how much was disbursed in rated projects?", "answer": "687,647 projects were rated in the ESDD checklist during FY25, and a total of BDT 5,724.35 billion was disbursed in 558,261 rated projects, which were assumed to be environmentally and socially sustainable.", "evidence": "Para 7.05: \"The number of projects rated in the ESDD checklist during FY25 was 687,647. Total amount of BDT 5,724.35 billion disbursed in 558,261 rated projects in FY25, which were assumed to be environmentally and socially sustainable.\" Chart 7.04 (Trend in ESRR by Banks and Finance Companies) plots the Number of Projects Rated and the Number of Rated Projects Financed from FY19 to FY25.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "65-68" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q28", "number": 28, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "How did the number of projects rated and the number of rated projects financed under ESRR trend from FY19 to FY25?", "answer": "Both series rose over the period, staying low and close together from FY19 to FY21, then climbing steeply from FY22 onward. By FY25 the number of projects rated reached roughly 690,000 while the number of rated projects financed reached about 550,000, with the rated line staying above the financed line throughout.", "evidence": "Chart 7.04 (Trend in ESRR by Banks and Finance Companies): x-axis FY19-FY25; two lines, \"Number of Projects Rated\" and \"Number of Rated Projects Financed\", both rising sharply after FY22, the rated line ending near 690,000 and the financed line near 550,000. \"Source: Sustainable Finance Department, Bangladesh Bank\".", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "68" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q29", "number": 29, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "How does the environmental and social risk screening framework relate to the green finance taxonomy?", "answer": "The 2023 revision of the Sustainable Finance Policy expanded the green finance list to 94 products under 14 sectors, and Table 7.02 reports FY25 green finance disbursement across exactly those 14 sectors. Underpinning this, Environmental and Social Risk Rating (ESRR) is obligatory under the ESRM guidelines: in FY25, 687,647 projects were screened in the ESDD checklist and BDT 5,724.35 billion was disbursed in 558,261 rated projects assumed to be environmentally and socially sustainable. So the taxonomy defines what counts as green while the ESRR screening determines which specific projects are eligible to receive that financing.", "evidence": "Para 7.02: \"the Sustainable Finance Policy was revised ... enhancing the list of green finance products to 94 under 14 sectors.\" Para 7.05: \"Environmental and Social Risk Rating (ESRR) is obligatory in line with guidelines on ESRM for banks and FCs. The number of projects rated in the ESDD checklist during FY25 was 687,647. Total amount of BDT 5,724.35 billion disbursed in 558,261 rated projects in FY25\". Table 7.02 lists FY25 green finance across 14 sectors (Renewable Energy through Miscellaneous).", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "65-68" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q30", "number": 30, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "How does actual green CMSME financing in FY25 compare with Bangladesh Bank's target allocation for that sector?", "answer": "Bangladesh Bank requires banks and FCs to direct 25.00 percent of their green finance to the green CMSME sector (with 15.00 percent of that green CMSME allocation going to women entrepreneurs). In FY25, however, green CMSME disbursement was only BDT 10,523.96 million out of total green finance of BDT 320,552.20 million — about 3.3 percent — far below the 25 percent target.", "evidence": "Para 7.02: \"Banks and FCs have been instructed to allocate 25.00 percent of green finance in the green CMSME sector and 20.00 percent of green finance in the women entrepreneur sector. Within the green CMSME sector allocation, 15.00 percent will be provided to women entrepreneur sector.\" Table 7.02, Grand Total row: Green CMSME = 10,523.96; total across all sectors = 320,552.20 (in million BDT). Calculation: 10,523.96 / 320,552.20 = 3.3 percent.", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "65" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q31", "number": 31, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "How well does banks' CSR spending align with climate priorities in FY25?", "answer": "Bangladesh Bank requires banks to allocate 10.00 percent of their CSR budget to the Climate Risk Fund. Yet in FY25, banks' total CSR expenditure was BDT 4,573.4 million and only 4.18 percent of it went to the environment and climate change mitigation and adaptation sector, as Chart 7.06 also shows (a 4.18 percent slice). The bulk went to Others (54.34 percent), Health (22.86 percent) and Education (18.63 percent), so climate-focused CSR fell well short of the 10 percent expectation.", "evidence": "Para 7.06: \"BB has further instructed that all banks and FCs must allocate 10.00 percent of their CSR budget to CRF\". Para 7.14: \"the share of CSR expenditure on environment and climate change mitigation and adaptation sector was only 4.18 percent\" and the total was \"BDT 4573.4 million in FY25\". Chart 7.06 (Share of Sector-wise CSR Expenditure of Banks in FY25): Others 54.34%, Health 22.86%, Education 18.63%, Environment & Climate Change Mitigation & Adaptation 4.18%.", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "66-70" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q32", "number": 32, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "What was the total disbursement under Bangladesh Bank's refinance scheme for green products/initiatives in FY23 and in FY25?", "answer": "Total disbursement was BDT 2,622.56 million in FY23 and BDT 6,726.80 million in FY25.", "evidence": "Table 7.03 (Disbursement Trend of BB Refinance Scheme for Green Products/Initiatives, in million BDT), Total row: FY20 = 994.81, FY21 = 792.58, FY22 = 1,121.99, FY23 = 2,622.56, FY25 = 6,726.80.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "69" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q33", "number": 33, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "How did total disbursement under Bangladesh Bank's refinance scheme for green products/initiatives trend from FY20 to FY25?", "answer": "Total disbursement fell from BDT 994.81 million in FY20 to BDT 792.58 million in FY21, then rose steadily to BDT 1,121.99 million in FY22, BDT 2,622.56 million in FY23 and BDT 6,726.80 million in FY25.", "evidence": "Table 7.03, Total row: FY20 = 994.81, FY21 = 792.58, FY22 = 1,121.99, FY23 = 2,622.56, FY25 = 6,726.80 (in million BDT).", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "69" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q34", "number": 34, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "How has the number of eligible green products/initiatives under the BB refinance scheme changed over time?", "answer": "The number of eligible green products/initiatives rose from 6 initially to 55 in FY20, from 55 to 68 in FY22, and from 68 to 70 in FY23.", "evidence": "Para 7.08: \"BB enhanced the eligible green products/initiatives for refinance under the scheme from 6 to 55 in FY20, from 55 to 68 products in FY22 and from 68 to 70 products in FY23.\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "67" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q35", "number": 35, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Which products drove the sharp rise in Bangladesh Bank's green refinance disbursement in FY25?", "answer": "The FY25 jump to BDT 6,726.80 million was driven mainly by Energy Efficient Machineries (BDT 3,523.34 million, up from BDT 1,163.77 million in FY23), Green Building (BDT 1,634.05 million) and Solar Mini Grid (BDT 916.60 million).", "evidence": "Table 7.03, FY25 column: Energy Efficient Machineries = 3,523.34 (FY23 = 1,163.77), Green Building = 1,634.05, Solar Mini Grid = 916.60, Environment Friendly Brick Production = 103.70, Safe working Environment = 249.58, Led Bulb/Tube Manufacturing/Assembly Plant = 189.00; Total = 6,726.80 (in million BDT).", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "69" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q36", "number": 36, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "By how much did total disbursement under Bangladesh Bank's green refinance scheme increase from FY20 to FY25?", "answer": "By BDT 5,731.99 million — from BDT 994.81 million in FY20 to BDT 6,726.80 million in FY25.", "evidence": "Table 7.03, Total row: FY20 = 994.81, FY25 = 6,726.80 (in million BDT). Calculation: 6,726.80 - 994.81 = 5,731.99.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "69" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q37", "number": 37, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Where is Bangladesh Bank's green refinance concentrated in FY25?", "answer": "Green refinance is heavily concentrated in Energy Efficient Machineries: Table 7.03 shows it received BDT 3,523.34 million of the BDT 6,726.80 million FY25 total, and Chart 7.05 shows it as a 52.38 percent slice of product-wise refinance disbursement. The next largest is Green Establishment (24.29 percent in Chart 7.05; Green Building BDT 1,634.05 million in Table 7.03), followed by Solar Power (14.70 percent) and Bio Gas (11.40 percent).", "evidence": "Table 7.03, FY25 column: Energy Efficient Machineries = 3,523.34, Green Building = 1,634.05, Solar Mini Grid = 916.60, Bio Gas = 7.69; Total = 6,726.80 (in million BDT). Chart 7.05 (Product-wise Refinance Disbursement in FY25): Energy Efficient Machineries 52.38%, Green Establishment 24.29%, Solar Power 14.70%, Bio Gas 11.40%, Safe Working Environment 3.71%, Manufacturing Recyclable Goods 2.81%, Environment Friendly Brick Production 1.54%.", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "68-69" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q38", "number": 38, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Compare the two largest categories of product-wise refinance disbursement in FY25.", "answer": "Energy Efficient Machineries was the largest at 52.38 percent, more than double the second largest, Green Establishment, at 24.29 percent.", "evidence": "Chart 7.05 (Product-wise Refinance Disbursement in FY25): Energy Efficient Machineries 52.38%, Green Establishment 24.29%, Solar Power 14.70%, Bio Gas 11.40%, Safe Working Environment 3.71%, Manufacturing Recyclable Goods 2.81%, Environment Friendly Brick Production 1.54%, Effluent Treatment Plant 0.28%.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "68" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q39", "number": 39, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Compare the disbursement to Solar Mini Grid under Bangladesh Bank's green refinance scheme in FY23 and FY25.", "answer": "Disbursement to Solar Mini Grid rose sharply from BDT 90.64 million in FY23 to BDT 916.60 million in FY25 under the scheme (whose fund grew from BDT 2.00 billion at its 2009 establishment to BDT 10.00 billion).", "evidence": "Para 7.08: \"A revolving refinance scheme of BDT 2.00 billion was established in 2009 with a view to broadening finance for green products or initiatives at lower costs which increased to 10.00 billion subsequently.\" Table 7.03 (Disbursement Trend of BB Refinance Scheme for Green Products/Initiatives, in million BDT), Solar Mini Grid row: FY20 = 27.50, FY21 = 0.00, FY22 = 0.00, FY23 = 90.64, FY25 = 916.60.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "67-69" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q40", "number": 40, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "What was the total CSR expenditure by banks in FY25, and which sectors received the largest shares?", "answer": "Total bank CSR expenditure was BDT 4,573.4 million in FY25. The largest shares went to other sectors (54.34 percent), health (22.86 percent) and education (18.63 percent), while environment and climate change mitigation and adaptation received only 4.18 percent.", "evidence": "Para 7.14: \"The total amount of CSR expenditure by banks was BDT 4573.4 million in FY25 ... Banks contributed major shares in other sectors, health, and education to 54.34 percent, 22.86 percent, and 18.63 percent, respectively ... the share of CSR expenditure on environment and climate change mitigation and adaptation sector was only 4.18 percent.\" Table 7.04 (CSR Expenditure of Banks in FY25), Total column / Percentage column: Education 787.20 / 18.63, Health 1,111.10 / 22.86, Environment and Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation 202.30 / 4.18, Others 2,472.80 / 54.34, Total 4,573.40 / 100.00.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "70-71" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q41", "number": 41, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Compare banks' CSR expenditure on education in July-December 2024 with January-June 2025.", "answer": "Banks spent BDT 444.70 million on education in July-December 2024 (14.50 percent of that half's CSR) and BDT 342.50 million in January-June 2025 (22.75 percent of that half's CSR) — a lower amount but a larger share.", "evidence": "Table 7.04, Education row: Amount (July-December 24) = 444.70, Sectoral Share (percent) = 14.50; Amount (January-June 25) = 342.50, Sectoral Share (percent) = 22.75; Total = 787.20 (in million BDT).", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "71" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q42", "number": 42, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Compare the total CSR expenditure of banks with that of finance companies in FY25.", "answer": "Banks spent BDT 4,573.4 million on CSR in FY25, roughly 65 times the BDT 69.90 million spent by finance companies.", "evidence": "Para 7.14: \"The total amount of CSR expenditure by banks was BDT 4573.4 million in FY25.\" Para 7.15: \"FCs reported CSR expenditure of BDT 69.90 million in FY25.\" Table 7.04 Total = 4,573.40; Table 7.05 Total = 69.90 (in million BDT).", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "70-72" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q43", "number": 43, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Compare the share of CSR expenditure directed to environment and climate change mitigation and adaptation by banks versus by finance companies in FY25.", "answer": "Finance companies directed a larger share of their CSR to environment and climate change mitigation and adaptation — 11.71 percent — than banks did, at only 4.18 percent.", "evidence": "Para 7.14: \"the share of CSR expenditure on environment and climate change mitigation and adaptation sector was only 4.18 percent\" (banks). Para 7.15: \"The major shares of CSR expenditure by FCs went to education (33.30 percent), health (29.55 percent), and environment and climate-change mitigation and adaptation (11.71 percent).\" Table 7.04, Environment and Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation, Percentage = 4.18.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "70-71" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q44", "number": 44, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Compare the FY25 CSR expenditure of banks on the 'Others' sector, health and education.", "answer": "In FY25 banks spent BDT 2,472.80 million on Others (54.34 percent of total CSR), BDT 1,111.10 million on health (22.86 percent) and BDT 787.20 million on education (18.63 percent).", "evidence": "Table 7.04, Total column / Percentage column: Others (income generating activities, disaster management, infrastructure development, sports and culture, other) = 2,472.80 / 54.34, Health = 1,111.10 / 22.86, Education = 787.20 / 18.63, Environment and Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation = 202.30 / 4.18, Total = 4,573.40 / 100.00 (in million BDT).", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "71" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q45", "number": 45, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "By how much did banks' CSR expenditure on education change from July-December 2024 to January-June 2025?", "answer": "It decreased by BDT 102.20 million, from BDT 444.70 million in July-December 2024 to BDT 342.50 million in January-June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 7.04, Education row: Amount (July-December 24) = 444.70, Amount (January-June 25) = 342.50 (in million BDT). Calculation: 342.50 - 444.70 = -102.20.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "71" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q46", "number": 46, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "What was the CSR expenditure of finance companies in FY25, and how was it distributed across sectors?", "answer": "Finance companies reported CSR expenditure of BDT 69.90 million in FY25, with the major shares going to education (33.30 percent), health (29.55 percent), environment and climate-change mitigation and adaptation (11.71 percent) and other sectors (25.46 percent).", "evidence": "Para 7.15: \"FCs reported CSR expenditure of BDT 69.90 million in FY25 ... The major shares of CSR expenditure by FCs went to education (33.30 percent), health (29.55 percent), and environment and climate-change mitigation and adaptation (11.71 percent). However, in other sectors, they spent 25.46 percent during the period.\" Table 7.05 (CSR Expenditure of Finance Companies in FY25), Total row = 69.90 (in million BDT), with sector rows for Education, Health, Environment and Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation, and Others.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "70-72" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q47", "number": 47, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "As of June 2025, how many banks were engaged in agent banking, and how many agents and outlets were there in FY25?", "answer": "As of June 2025, 30 banks were engaged in agent banking, with a total of 15,373 agents deployed and 20,557 outlets in FY25.", "evidence": "Para 7.18: \"As of June 2025, 30 banks were engaged in agent banking. A total of 15,373 agents were deployed with 20,557 outlets in FY25, which were 3.86 percent and 4.27 percent lower than 15991 agents and 21473 outlets listed, respectively in FY24.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "70" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q48", "number": 48, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "How many no-frill accounts (NFAs) had been opened as of June 2025, and what was the total amount of deposits in them?", "answer": "As of June 2025, 28,706,799 NFAs had been opened (up 3.34 percent from 27,777,448 in June 2024), with total deposits of BDT 50,367.84 million (up 6.67 percent from BDT 47,216.08 million in June 2024).", "evidence": "Para 7.20: \"As of June 2025, 28,706,799 NFAs were opened under the financial inclusion programme. The number was 27,777,448 in June 2024, indicating an increase of 3.34 percent. The total amount of deposits in NFAs reached BDT 50,367.84 million in June 2025, compared to BDT 47,216.08 million in June 2024, indicating an increase of 6.67 percent.\" Chart 7.09 (Trends in No-Frill Accounts) plots the number of accounts and the amount of deposits from June 2019 to June 2025.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "72" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q49", "number": 49, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "How much sustainable finance did specialised banks (SCBs) disburse in FY25, and what did it consist of?", "answer": "SCBs disbursed BDT 110,816.24 million of sustainable finance in FY25, almost all of it (BDT 110,749.42 million) in Sustainable Agriculture, with just BDT 66.82 million of green finance and nothing in the other sustainable-linked categories.", "evidence": "Para 7.02: \"BB ... now requires banks and FCs to allocate at least 5.00 percent of their net loans or investments to green finance and 40.00 percent to sustainable finance.\" Table 7.01 (Summary of Sustainable Finance FY25, in million BDT), SCBs row: Sustainable Agriculture = 110,749.42, Sustainable CMSME = 0.00, Sustainable Liked Socially Responsible Financing = 0.00, Other Sustainable Linked Finance = 0.00, Total SLF = 110,749.42, Green Finance = 66.82, Sustainable Finance = 110,816.24.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "64-65" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q50", "number": 50, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Compare the green finance disbursed to Renewable Energy by banks versus by finance companies in FY25.", "answer": "Banks and finance companies disbursed almost identical amounts to Renewable Energy in FY25 — BDT 7,248.84 million from banks and BDT 7,123.05 million from FCs — for a grand total of BDT 14,371.89 million.", "evidence": "Para 7.04: \"The total amount disbursed as green finance during FY25 was BDT 320.55 billion by banks and FCs, which was 18.85 percent higher than that of FY24.\" Table 7.02 (Summary Sheet of Green Finance in FY25, in million BDT), Renewable Energy column: Bank's Total = 7,248.84, FCs = 7,123.05, Grand Total = 14,371.89.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "64-65" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q51", "number": 51, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Compare the green finance disbursed by PCBs and by Islamic banks (ISBs) in FY25.", "answer": "PCBs disbursed BDT 236,166.05 million of green finance in FY25, roughly five and a half times the BDT 43,049.58 million disbursed by ISBs.", "evidence": "Para 7.02: \"BB ... now requires banks and FCs to allocate at least 5.00 percent of their net loans or investments to green finance\". Table 7.01 (Summary of Sustainable Finance FY25, in million BDT), Green Finance column: SOCBs = 6,297.99, SCBs = 66.82, PCBs = 236,166.05, FCBs = 6,448.80, ISBs = 43,049.58, Total (banks) = 292,029.24.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "64-65" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q52", "number": 52, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "By how much did total deposits in no-frill accounts increase between June 2024 and June 2025?", "answer": "By BDT 3,151.76 million — from BDT 47,216.08 million in June 2024 to BDT 50,367.84 million in June 2025.", "evidence": "Para 7.20: \"The total amount of deposits in NFAs reached BDT 50,367.84 million in June 2025, compared to BDT 47,216.08 million in June 2024, indicating an increase of 6.67 percent.\" Calculation: 50,367.84 - 47,216.08 = 3,151.76.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "72" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q53", "number": 53, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "By how much did disbursement to Energy Efficient Machineries under Bangladesh Bank's green refinance scheme increase from FY23 to FY25?", "answer": "By BDT 2,359.57 million — from BDT 1,163.77 million in FY23 to BDT 3,523.34 million in FY25.", "evidence": "Para 7.08: \"A revolving refinance scheme of BDT 2.00 billion was established in 2009 ... which increased to 10.00 billion subsequently.\" Table 7.03 (Disbursement Trend of BB Refinance Scheme for Green Products/Initiatives, in million BDT), Energy Efficient Machineries row: FY23 = 1,163.77, FY25 = 3,523.34. Calculation: 3,523.34 - 1,163.77 = 2,359.57.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "67-69" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q54", "number": 54, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "What percentage of total bank green finance in FY25 was disbursed by PCBs?", "answer": "About 80.9 percent — PCBs disbursed BDT 236,166.05 million of the banks' total green finance of BDT 292,029.24 million.", "evidence": "Para 7.04: \"The total amount disbursed as green finance during FY25 was BDT 320.55 billion by banks and FCs.\" Table 7.01 (Summary of Sustainable Finance FY25, in million BDT), Green Finance column: PCBs = 236,166.05, Total (banks) = 292,029.24, Grand Total = 320,552.20. Calculation: 236,166.05 / 292,029.24 = 0.809 = 80.9 percent.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "64-65" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q55", "number": 55, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "How did agent banking activity change from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "The number of agents fell 3.86 percent (to 15,373) and outlets fell 4.27 percent (to 20,557) from FY24 to FY25, so the physical footprint contracted slightly. But Chart 7.08 shows the underlying business still growing over June 2020-June 2025: the number of accounts, deposits, lending and inward remittance lines all continued rising, with accounts reaching about 24.4 million and the balance BDT 456.05 billion by June 2025.", "evidence": "Para 7.18: \"A total of 15,373 agents were deployed with 20,557 outlets in FY25, which were 3.86 percent and 4.27 percent lower than 15991 agents and 21473 outlets listed, respectively in FY24. The total number of accounts up to June 2025 was 24,406,236 and the total balance of these accounts was BDT 456.05 billion.\" Chart 7.08 (Trends in Agent Banking Activities): x-axis June 2020-June 2025; lines for Agent Outlets, Number of Accounts, Amount of Deposits, Amount of Lending, Inward Remittance, all rising.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "70-71" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q56", "number": 56, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Under the BDT 30.00 billion refinance scheme for COVID-19 affected marginal people, compare the maximum end-user interest rate when the loan is disbursed by MFIs with the rate when disbursed by scheduled banks.", "answer": "The maximum end-user interest rate was 9.00 percent when disbursed by MFIs and 7.00 percent when disbursed by scheduled banks.", "evidence": "Para 7.27: \"the interest rate of loans at the end-user level was a maximum of 9.00 percent and 7.00 percent in case of disbursal by MFIs and scheduled banks, respectively.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "74" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q57", "number": 57, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "Compare the interest rate structure of the BDT 7.50 billion refinance scheme for BDT 10/50/100 account holders with that of the Digital Nano Loan refinance scheme.", "answer": "Both schemes charge banks 1.00 percent interest from Bangladesh Bank. At the borrower level, the BDT 7.50 billion scheme charges 7.00 percent, while the Digital Nano Loan scheme allows end users to be charged a maximum of 9.00 percent.", "evidence": "Para 7.25: \"The most significant part of the scheme lies in the interest rates which is 7.00 percent at the borrower level (from bank to end users) and 1.00 percent at the bank level (from BB to PFIs).\" Para 7.28: \"It is enabling end users of the facility to borrow at a maximum of 9.00 percent interest rate from banks. In contrast, BB charges 1.00 percent interest to the banks.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "73-75" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q58", "number": 58, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "How did the revolving refinance scheme for BDT 10/50/100 account holders change following the circular of 29 September 2024?", "answer": "The refinance fund was enhanced from BDT 5.00 billion to BDT 7.50 billion, and it became mandatory for banks to allocate at least 25 percent of total loans under the scheme to women borrowers.", "evidence": "Para 7.25: \"In continuation of the refinance scheme ... BB issued a circular on 29 September 2024, to enhance the refinance fund from BDT 5.00 billion to BDT 7.50 billion. In addition, it has been made mandatory for banks to allocate at least 25 percent of total loans under this scheme to women borrowers.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "73" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q59", "number": 59, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "What was the cumulative amount refinanced under Bangladesh Bank's green refinance scheme up to June 2025, and what was the disbursement in FY25?", "answer": "The cumulative amount refinanced under the scheme up to June 2025 stood at BDT 16,945.81 million, and paragraph 7.08 states the FY25 disbursement as BDT 2,622.56 million.", "evidence": "Para 7.08: \"The cumulative amount refinanced under the scheme up to June 2025 stood at BDT 16,945.81 million. In FY25, total disbursement under the BB's refinance was BDT 2,622.56 million.\" (Note: Table 7.03 reports the FY25 Total as 6,726.80 million.)", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "67" }, { "id": "chapter_7-q60", "number": 60, "chapter": "Chapter 7", "chapter_title": "Sustainable and Inclusive Banking", "question": "What award did Bangladesh Bank win in 2024, and where was it presented?", "answer": "Bangladesh Bank won 'The Global Youth Financial Inclusion Award' at the AFI Global Policy Forum (GPF) in El Salvador on September 4, 2024, for its progress in increasing inclusion of young people in the formal financial system.", "evidence": "Box 7.01: \"Bangladesh Bank (BB) received the 'The Global Youth Financial Inclusion Award' at the AFI Global Policy Forum (GPF) in El Salvador on September 4, 2024. The award recognised BB's significant initiatives to boost financial inclusion among the youth.\" Para 7.37: \"In 2024, BB was the winner of the Global Youth Financial Inclusion Award for the notable progress it had made in increasing inclusion of young people in the formal financial system.\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "75" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q1", "number": 1, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How many finance companies (FCs) operate in Bangladesh, and under which law are they regulated?", "answer": "Currently 35 FCs operate in Bangladesh, and they are regulated by Bangladesh Bank under the Finance Company Act, 2023.", "evidence": "Para 8.01: \"Currently, 35 FCs operate in Bangladesh. These FCs are regulated by Bangladesh Bank (BB) under the Finance Company Act, 2023. In the aftermath of recent setbacks in the industry, the new act was promulgated to regulate FCs vigorously and restore stakeholders' confidence.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "79" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q2", "number": 2, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What are finance companies not entitled to do under sections 22 and 24(1) of the Finance Company Act, 2023?", "answer": "FCs are not entitled to (i) issue cheques, pay-orders or demand drafts; (ii) receive demand deposits; and (iii) transact gold or foreign currencies.", "evidence": "Para 8.02: \"According to sections 22 and 24(1) of the Finance Company Act, 2023 FCs are not entitled to: i. Issue cheques, pay-orders or demand drafts; ii. Receive demand deposits; and iii. Transact gold or foreign currencies.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "79" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q3", "number": 3, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "Which two core departments of Bangladesh Bank regulate and supervise finance companies, and what does each do?", "answer": "The Department of Financial Institutions and Markets (DFIM), which formulates policies, regulations and guidelines and conducts off-site supervision; and the Financial Institutions Inspection Department (FIID), which conducts comprehensive and special inspection programmes.", "evidence": "Para 8.02: \"The FCs are regulated and supervised by two core departments of BB: (i) The Department of Financial Institutions and Markets (DFIM), and (ii) Financial Institutions Inspection Department (FIID). DFIM formulates policies, regulations and guidelines to regulate FCs. It also conducts off-site supervision. FIID conducts comprehensive and special inspection programmes.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "79" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q4", "number": 4, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What minimum paid-up capital must a finance company maintain, and which circular set this requirement?", "answer": "A finance company is required to maintain a minimum paid-up capital of BDT 1.00 billion, set by DFIM Circular No.5, dated 24 July 2011.", "evidence": "Para 8.03: \"A FC is required to maintain a minimum paid-up capital of BDT 1.00 billion (DFIM Circular No.5, dated 24 July 2011). However paid-up capital and reserves must not fall below the minimum ratio of risk weighted-assets set by BB, which is currently 10.00 percent.\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "79" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q5", "number": 5, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "Compare the minimum paid-up capital requirement for a finance company with the minimum capital-to-risk-weighted-assets ratio requirement.", "answer": "A finance company must maintain a minimum paid-up capital of BDT 1.00 billion, and separately its paid-up capital and reserves must not fall below a minimum ratio of risk-weighted assets of 10.00 percent.", "evidence": "Para 8.03: \"A FC is required to maintain a minimum paid-up capital of BDT 1.00 billion (DFIM Circular No.5, dated 24 July 2011). However paid-up capital and reserves must not fall below the minimum ratio of risk weighted-assets set by BB, which is currently 10.00 percent (according to the prudential guidelines issued by BB on 'Capital Adequacy and Market Discipline for Finance Companies').\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "79" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q6", "number": 6, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How many finance companies and total branches were there as of 30 June 2025, and what was the ownership breakdown across government-owned, joint-venture and private FCs?", "answer": "As on 30 June 2025 there were 35 FCs with 274 total branches; of the 35 FCs, 3 were government-owned, 13 were joint ventures and 19 were private.", "evidence": "Table 8.01 (Trends in Structure of FCs), 2025* column: No. of FCs = 35, Government-owned = 3, Joint-venture = 13, Private = 19, New branches = 0, Total branches = 274. Note: * As on 30 June 2025.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q7", "number": 7, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How did the finance company branch network change in FY25?", "answer": "Two branches were closed in FY25 and no new branches were opened, leaving the total number of FC branches at 274 as of 30 June 2025. Of these, 76 are in Dhaka district and 198 are spread across 35 other districts.", "evidence": "Para 8.04: \"As of June 30, 2025, the total number of branches of FCs was 274. Two (02) branches were closed in FY25. Among the branches, 76 are set up in the district of Dhaka and the remaining 198 are located in 35 districts across the country.\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "79" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q8", "number": 8, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What were the total assets and total deposits of finance companies as of 30 June 2025?", "answer": "Total assets were BDT 1,045.51 billion and total deposits were BDT 522.89 billion as on 30 June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 8.02 (Trends in Assets, Liabilities and Deposits of FCs), 2025* column: Total assets = 1045.51, Total liabilities = 1189.09, Liabilities-assets ratio (%) = 113.73, Total deposit = 522.89, Deposit as % of total liabilities = 43.97. Note: * As on 30 June.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q9", "number": 9, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What were the total assets of FCs at end June 2025, and how did they compare with end June 2024?", "answer": "Total assets of FCs stood at BDT 1,045.51 billion at end June 2025, higher than BDT 1,007.17 billion at end June 2024.", "evidence": "Para 8.05: \"The total assets of FCs at end June 2025 stood at BDT 1045.51 billion, higher than BDT 1007.17 billion at end June 2024. (Table 8.02).\" Table 8.02, Total assets row: 2024 = 1007.17, 2025* = 1045.51.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "79-80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q10", "number": 10, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "Compare the total assets of FCs at end June 2025 with those at end June 2024.", "answer": "Total assets rose to BDT 1,045.51 billion at end June 2025 from BDT 1,007.17 billion at end June 2024 — an increase of BDT 38.34 billion.", "evidence": "Para 8.05: \"The total assets of FCs at end June 2025 stood at BDT 1045.51 billion, higher than BDT 1007.17 billion at end June 2024.\" Table 8.02, Total assets row: 2024 = 1007.17, 2025* = 1045.51.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "79-80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q11", "number": 11, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "By how much did the total assets of FCs increase between end June 2024 and end June 2025?", "answer": "By BDT 38.34 billion — from BDT 1,007.17 billion to BDT 1,045.51 billion.", "evidence": "Para 8.05: \"The total assets of FCs at end June 2025 stood at BDT 1045.51 billion, higher than BDT 1007.17 billion at end June 2024.\" Table 8.02, Total assets row: 2024 = 1007.17, 2025* = 1045.51. Calculation: 1045.51 - 1007.17 = 38.34.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "79-80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q12", "number": 12, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What were the total deposits of FCs at end June 2025, and how did they compare with end June 2024?", "answer": "Total deposits of FCs stood at BDT 522.89 billion at end June 2025, higher than BDT 475.14 billion at end June 2024.", "evidence": "Para 8.08: \"Total deposits of FCs at end June 2025 stood at BDT 522.89 billion, higher than BDT 475.14 billion at end June 2024. Table 8.02.\" Table 8.02, Total deposit row: 2024 = 475.14, 2025* = 522.89.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q13", "number": 13, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "By how much did the total deposits of FCs increase between end June 2024 and end June 2025?", "answer": "By BDT 47.75 billion — from BDT 475.14 billion to BDT 522.89 billion.", "evidence": "Para 8.08: \"Total deposits of FCs at end June 2025 stood at BDT 522.89 billion, higher than BDT 475.14 billion at end June 2024.\" Table 8.02, Total deposit row: 2024 = 475.14, 2025* = 522.89. Calculation: 522.89 - 475.14 = 47.75.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q14", "number": 14, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How have total deposits of finance companies trended from 2019 through mid-2025?", "answer": "Total deposits were roughly flat to slightly declining from BDT 451.93 billion in 2019 through BDT 443.55 billion in 2022, then recovered to BDT 477.22 billion in 2023, dipped slightly to BDT 475.14 billion in 2024, and rose to BDT 522.89 billion as on 30 June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 8.02, Total deposit row: 2019 = 451.93, 2020 = 453.20, 2021 = 444.20, 2022 = 443.55, 2023 = 477.22, 2024 = 475.14, 2025* = 522.89 (in billion BDT).", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q15", "number": 15, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What were the total liabilities of FCs at end June 2025, and how did they compare with end June 2024?", "answer": "Total liabilities of FCs increased to BDT 1,189.09 billion at end June 2025, up from BDT 1,054.38 billion at end June 2024.", "evidence": "Para 8.09: \"At end June 2025, the total liabilities of the FCs increased to BDT 1189.09 billion, up from BDT 1054.38 billion at end June 2024. Table 8.02.\" Table 8.02, Total liabilities row: 2024 = 1054.38, 2025* = 1189.09.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q16", "number": 16, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "Compare the change in total assets of FCs with the change in total liabilities between end June 2024 and end June 2025.", "answer": "Total assets rose by only BDT 38.34 billion (from BDT 1,007.17 billion to BDT 1,045.51 billion), while total liabilities rose far more — by BDT 134.71 billion (from BDT 1,054.38 billion to BDT 1,189.09 billion) — so liabilities grew about three and a half times faster than assets.", "evidence": "Para 8.05: total assets \"BDT 1045.51 billion ... higher than BDT 1007.17 billion at end June 2024\". Para 8.09: \"the total liabilities of the FCs increased to BDT 1189.09 billion, up from BDT 1054.38 billion at end June 2024.\" Table 8.02: Total assets 2024 = 1007.17, 2025* = 1045.51; Total liabilities 2024 = 1054.38, 2025* = 1189.09.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "79-80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q17", "number": 17, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "By how much did total liabilities of finance companies increase from 2024 to mid-2025?", "answer": "By BDT 134.71 billion — from BDT 1,054.38 billion in 2024 to BDT 1,189.09 billion as on 30 June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 8.02, Total liabilities row: 2024 = 1054.38, 2025* = 1189.09 (in billion BDT). Calculation: 1189.09 - 1054.38 = 134.71.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q18", "number": 18, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How do finance companies' total assets compare with their total liabilities as of 30 June 2025?", "answer": "As on 30 June 2025, FCs' total liabilities of BDT 1,189.09 billion exceeded their total assets of BDT 1,045.51 billion by about BDT 143.58 billion, giving a liabilities-assets ratio of 113.73 percent.", "evidence": "Table 8.02, 2025* column: Total assets = 1045.51, Total liabilities = 1189.09, Liabilities-assets ratio (%) = 113.73 (in billion BDT).", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q19", "number": 19, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How has deposits as a percentage of total liabilities for finance companies changed between 2019 and mid-2025?", "answer": "Deposits fell sharply as a share of total liabilities, from 60.0 percent in 2019 to 43.97 percent as on 30 June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 8.02, Deposit as % of total liabilities row: 2019 = 60.0, 2020 = 55.55, 2021 = 53.91, 2022 = 51.62, 2023 = 48.53, 2024 = 45.06, 2025* = 43.97.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q20", "number": 20, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How have finance companies' total assets trended from 2019 through mid-2025?", "answer": "Total assets grew broadly over the period, from BDT 871.5 billion in 2019 to BDT 902.16 billion (2020), slipping to BDT 896.56 billion (2021), then rising to BDT 920.01 billion (2022), BDT 996.85 billion (2023), BDT 1,007.17 billion (2024) and BDT 1,045.51 billion as on 30 June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 8.02, Total assets row: 2019 = 871.5, 2020 = 902.16, 2021 = 896.56, 2022 = 920.01, 2023 = 996.85, 2024 = 1007.17, 2025* = 1045.51 (in billion BDT).", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q21", "number": 21, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How has the liabilities-to-assets ratio of finance companies trended from 2019 through mid-2025?", "answer": "The liabilities-assets ratio rose steadily from 86.42 percent in 2019 to 90.43 percent (2020), 91.90 percent (2021), 93.39 percent (2022), 98.63 percent (2023), and then crossed 100 percent to 104.69 percent in 2024 and 113.73 percent as on 30 June 2025 — meaning FCs' total liabilities came to exceed their total assets.", "evidence": "Para 8.09: \"At end June 2025, the total liabilities of the FCs increased to BDT 1189.09 billion, up from BDT 1054.38 billion at end June 2024.\" Table 8.02, Liabilities-assets ratio (%) row: 2019 = 86.42, 2020 = 90.43, 2021 = 91.90, 2022 = 93.39, 2023 = 98.63, 2024 = 104.69, 2025* = 113.73.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q22", "number": 22, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What does finance companies' liabilities-to-assets position as of 30 June 2025 imply about the sector's net worth?", "answer": "As on 30 June 2025 FCs' total liabilities (BDT 1,189.09 billion) exceeded their total assets (BDT 1,045.51 billion), a liabilities-assets ratio of 113.73 percent. Since liabilities are larger than assets, the FC sector as a whole had negative net worth (aggregate equity of roughly negative BDT 143.58 billion), and the ratio has been deteriorating every year since 2019.", "evidence": "Para 8.09: \"At end June 2025, the total liabilities of the FCs increased to BDT 1189.09 billion, up from BDT 1054.38 billion at end June 2024.\" Table 8.02, 2025* column: Total assets = 1045.51, Total liabilities = 1189.09, Liabilities-assets ratio (%) = 113.73; the ratio rises every year from 86.42 in 2019.", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q23", "number": 23, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What was the sector-wise breakdown of finance companies' investment at end June 2025?", "answer": "Industry 48.25 percent; housing 16.68 percent; trade and commerce 15.04 percent; financial corporations 7.07 percent; service 6.09 percent; consumer finance 3.29 percent; agriculture 2.04 percent; others 1.48 percent; and mining and quarrying 0.07 percent.", "evidence": "Para 8.06: \"Sector-wise composition of FCs' investment at end June 2025 was as follows: trade and commerce 15.04 percent; industry 48.25 percent; agriculture 2.04 percent; housing 16.68 percent; financial corporations 7.07 percent; service 6.09 percent; consumer finance 3.29 percent; and others 1.48 percent (Chart 8.01).\" Chart 8.01 (Investment Patterns of FCs): Trade and Commerce 15.04%, Industry 48.25%, Agriculture 2.04%, Mining & Quarrying 0.07%, Housing 16.68%, Financial Corporation 7.07%, Service 6.09%, Consumer Finance 3.29%, Others 1.48%.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q24", "number": 24, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "Which sector had the largest share of finance companies' investment at end June 2025, and what was that share?", "answer": "Industry had the largest share, at 48.25 percent of FCs' investment.", "evidence": "Chart 8.01 (Investment Patterns of FCs): Industry: 48.25%, Housing 16.68%, Trade and Commerce 15.04%, Financial Corporation 7.07%, Service 6.09%, Consumer Finance 3.29%, Agriculture 2.04%, Others 1.48%, Mining & Quarrying 0.07%. \"* As on 30 June 2025. Source: Department of Financial Institutions and Markets, Bangladesh Bank\".", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q25", "number": 25, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What were the second and third largest sectors in finance companies' investment at end June 2025?", "answer": "Housing was the second largest at 16.68 percent and trade and commerce was the third largest at 15.04 percent.", "evidence": "Chart 8.01 (Investment Patterns of FCs): Industry 48.25%, Housing 16.68%, Trade and Commerce 15.04%, Financial Corporation 7.07%, Service 6.09%.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q26", "number": 26, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How does the share of finance company investment going to industry compare with the share going to housing at end June 2025?", "answer": "Industry accounted for 48.25 percent of FC investment, about 2.9 times the 16.68 percent share going to Housing.", "evidence": "Chart 8.01 (Investment Patterns of FCs): Industry: 48.25%, Housing 16.68%.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q27", "number": 27, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How do the three smallest sectors compare in finance companies' investment at end June 2025?", "answer": "The three smallest were mining and quarrying at 0.07 percent, others at 1.48 percent and agriculture at 2.04 percent.", "evidence": "Chart 8.01 (Investment Patterns of FCs): Mining & Quarrying 0.07%, Others 1.48%, Agriculture 2.04%, Consumer Finance 3.29%.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q28", "number": 28, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What shares of finance companies' investment went to agriculture and to consumer finance at end June 2025?", "answer": "Agriculture received 2.04 percent and consumer finance received 3.29 percent of FCs' investment at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Para 8.06: \"agriculture 2.04 percent ... consumer finance 3.29 percent\". Chart 8.01: Agriculture 2.04%, Consumer Finance 3.29%.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q29", "number": 29, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What shares of finance companies' investment went to financial corporations and to the service sector at end June 2025?", "answer": "Financial corporations received 7.07 percent and the service sector received 6.09 percent of FCs' investment at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Para 8.06: \"financial corporations 7.07 percent; service 6.09 percent\". Chart 8.01: Financial Corporation 7.07%, Service 6.09%.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q30", "number": 30, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How do the shares of finance company investment going to housing, financial corporations and consumer finance compare at end June 2025?", "answer": "Housing received the largest of the three at 16.68 percent, more than double the 7.07 percent going to financial corporations and about five times the 3.29 percent going to consumer finance.", "evidence": "Para 8.06: \"housing 16.68 percent; financial corporations 7.07 percent ... consumer finance 3.29 percent\". Chart 8.01: Housing 16.68%, Financial Corporation 7.07%, Consumer Finance 3.29%.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q31", "number": 31, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What was the sector-wise breakdown of finance companies' investment as of 30 June 2025, and where does that breakdown come from?", "answer": "Chart 8.01 (Investment Patterns of FCs) is a doughnut chart showing the sector-wise composition of FCs' investment across nine sectors — Trade and Commerce, Industry, Agriculture, Mining & Quarrying, Housing, Financial Corporation, Service, Consumer Finance and Others. The source is the Department of Financial Institutions and Markets, Bangladesh Bank, as on 30 June 2025.", "evidence": "Chart 8.01 (Investment Patterns of FCs): legend lists Trade and Commerce (15.04%), Industry (48.25%), Agriculture (2.04%), Mining & Quarrying (0.07%), Housing (16.68%), Financial Corporation (7.07%), Service (6.09%), Consumer Finance (3.29%), Others (1.48%); \"* As on 30 June 2025. Source: Department of Financial Institutions and Markets , Bangladesh Bank\".", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q32", "number": 32, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What sector does the narrative description of finance companies' investment mix leave out compared to the fuller sector-wise breakdown reported for it?", "answer": "Paragraph 8.06 lists eight sectors (trade and commerce, industry, agriculture, housing, financial corporations, service, consumer finance and others), while Chart 8.01 shows nine — it additionally breaks out 'Mining & Quarrying' at 0.07 percent, which the paragraph does not mention separately.", "evidence": "Para 8.06: \"trade and commerce 15.04 percent; industry 48.25 percent; agriculture 2.04 percent; housing 16.68 percent; financial corporations 7.07 percent; service 6.09 percent; consumer finance 3.29 percent; and others 1.48 percent (Chart 8.01).\" Chart 8.01 legend: Trade and Commerce (15.04%), Industry (48.25%), Agriculture (2.04%), Mining & Quarrying (0.07%), Housing (16.68%), Financial Corporation (7.07%), Service (6.09%), Consumer Finance (3.29%), Others (1.48%).", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q33", "number": 33, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What does the sector distribution of finance companies' investment imply about concentration risk?", "answer": "FC investment is highly concentrated: industry alone accounts for 48.25 percent, and the top three sectors (industry, housing and trade and commerce) together make up about 79.97 percent. This means FCs' loan books are heavily exposed to the fortunes of a few sectors — especially industry — so a downturn there would hit the sector disproportionately, while agriculture (2.04 percent) and mining and quarrying (0.07 percent) get almost nothing.", "evidence": "Chart 8.01 (Investment Patterns of FCs): Industry 48.25%, Housing 16.68%, Trade and Commerce 15.04%, Financial Corporation 7.07%, Service 6.09%, Consumer Finance 3.29%, Agriculture 2.04%, Others 1.48%, Mining & Quarrying 0.07%. Industry + Housing + Trade and Commerce = 79.97%.", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q34", "number": 34, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How exposed are finance companies' balance sheets to industrial lending?", "answer": "Loans and leases made up 73.74 percent of FCs' total assets as of end June 2025, and within that investment portfolio industry was by far the largest sector at 48.25 percent. So roughly a third of all FC assets (about 0.7374 x 0.4825) are industrial loans and leases, making the sector's health highly dependent on industrial borrowers — the same period in which the overall NPL ratio reached 35.72 percent.", "evidence": "Chart 8.01: Industry = 48.25% of FCs' investment. Para 8.06: \"their investments are mostly concentrated in the industrial sector.\" Para 8.12: \"In the total asset composition of all FCs, the share of loans/leases was 73.74 percent as of end June 2025 ... At end June 2025, the NPL for FCs was 35.72 percent.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "80-81" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q35", "number": 35, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "If industrial exposure is 48.25 percent of finance companies' loan/lease portfolio, approximately how much of the end-June-2025 loan/lease book of BDT 770.92 billion was industrial?", "answer": "Approximately BDT 371.97 billion (48.25 percent of BDT 770.92 billion), assuming the sector-wise investment shares in Chart 8.01 apply to the loan/lease portfolio.", "evidence": "Chart 8.01: Industry = 48.25% of FCs' investment. Table 8.03 (Trends in Total loan/lease and Classified Loan/Lease, in billion BDT), Loan/lease row, 2025* = 770.92. Calculation: 770.92 x 0.4825 = 371.97.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "80-81" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q36", "number": 36, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What was the largest sector in finance companies' investment at end June 2025, and what were the sector's total assets at that date?", "answer": "Industry was the largest sector at 48.25 percent of FCs' investment, and the FC sector's total assets as on 30 June 2025 were BDT 1,045.51 billion.", "evidence": "Chart 8.01 (Investment Patterns of FCs): Industry: 48.25%. Table 8.02, 2025* column: Total assets = 1045.51 (in billion BDT).", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q37", "number": 37, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How does the share of finance company investment going to industry compare with the share of deposits in their total liabilities as of 30 June 2025?", "answer": "Industry accounted for 48.25 percent of FCs' investment, while deposits made up only 43.97 percent of FCs' total liabilities — so FCs' single largest asset-side exposure is larger than their reliance on deposit funding.", "evidence": "Chart 8.01: Industry = 48.25% of FCs' investment. Table 8.02, 2025* column: Deposit as % of total liabilities = 43.97.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "80" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q38", "number": 38, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How does the concentration of finance companies' investment in industry compare with the share of their loan/lease book that is classified as of end June 2025?", "answer": "Industry made up 48.25 percent of FCs' investment while classified loans/leases made up 35.72 percent of the total loan/lease book (BDT 275.41 billion of BDT 770.92 billion) as of end June 2025 — a heavy single-sector concentration alongside a very high non-performing ratio.", "evidence": "Chart 8.01: Industry = 48.25% of FCs' investment. Table 8.03, 2025* column: Loan/lease = 770.92, Classified loan/lease = 275.41, Classified loan/lease as % of total loan/lease = 35.72.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "80-81" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q39", "number": 39, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "Assuming the sector-wise investment mix applies, what would the industrial share of finance companies' classified loans/leases be at end June 2025?", "answer": "If industry's 48.25 percent share of the investment mix applied to the BDT 275.41 billion of classified loans/leases, industrial classified loans would be roughly BDT 132.88 billion (48.25 percent of BDT 275.41 billion).", "evidence": "Chart 8.01: Industry = 48.25% of FCs' investment. Table 8.03, 2025* column: Classified loan/lease = 275.41 (in billion BDT). Calculation: 275.41 x 0.4825 = 132.88.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "80-81" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q40", "number": 40, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How does sectoral concentration in finance companies' investment relate to the sector's asset quality and profitability?", "answer": "FCs concentrate their investment in industry (48.25 percent, with the top three sectors near 80 percent), so the sector is highly exposed to a narrow set of borrowers. Over 2019-2025 the classified loan/lease ratio climbed from 9.53 percent to 35.72 percent (with classified loans rising from BDT 63.99 billion to BDT 275.41 billion), and profitability collapsed — ROA fell to negative 3.03 percent as on 30 June 2025 while ROE (calculated on only the 17 FCs with positive equity) was just 2.07 percent. The concentrated, deteriorating book is the direct driver of the sector-wide losses.", "evidence": "Chart 8.01: Industry 48.25%, top three sectors (Industry + Housing + Trade and Commerce) = 79.97%. Table 8.03, Classified loan/lease as % of total loan/lease: 2019 = 9.53, 2025* = 35.72; Classified loan/lease: 2019 = 63.99, 2025* = 275.41. Table 8.04, 2025* column: ROE = 2.07, ROA = -3.03. Para 8.13: \"ROE has been calculated considering 17 FCs having positive equity.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "80-81" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q41", "number": 41, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What provisioning rates must finance companies keep against each of the five asset classification categories?", "answer": "1.00 percent for standard assets (0.25 percent for the CMSME sector), 5.00 percent for special mention accounts, 20.00 percent for sub-standard, 50.00 percent for doubtful, and 100.00 percent for bad/losses.", "evidence": "Para 8.20: \"Assets are classified as standard, special mention accounts, sub-standard, doubtful and bad/losses, requiring FCs to keep provisions by 1.00 percent (0.25 percent for CMSME sector), 5.00 percent, 20.00 percent, 50.00 percent and 100.00 percent, respectively.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "82" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q42", "number": 42, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What were the total loan/lease, classified loan/lease, and classified ratio for finance companies as of 30 June 2025?", "answer": "Total loan/lease was BDT 770.92 billion, classified loan/lease was BDT 275.41 billion, and classified loan/lease as a percentage of total loan/lease was 35.72 percent.", "evidence": "Table 8.03 (Trends in Total loan/lease and Classified Loan/Lease, in billion BDT), 2025* column: Loan/lease = 770.92, Classified loan/lease = 275.41, Classified loan/lease as % of total loan/lease = 35.72. Note: * As on 30 June 2025.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "81" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q43", "number": 43, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What was the NPL ratio for FCs at end June 2025, and what were the corresponding loan/lease and NPL amounts?", "answer": "The NPL ratio for FCs was 35.72 percent at end June 2025, with total outstanding loan/lease of BDT 770.92 billion and NPL of BDT 275.41 billion.", "evidence": "Para 8.12: \"At end June 2025, the NPL for FCs was 35.72 percent.\" Para 8.20: \"At end June 2025, the total outstanding loan/lease was BDT 770.92 billion, of which NPL was BDT 275.41 billion (35.72 percent of total loan/lease, Table 8.03).\" Table 8.03, 2025* column: Loan/lease = 770.92, Classified loan/lease = 275.41, ratio = 35.72.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "81-82" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q44", "number": 44, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "Compare the classified loan/lease ratio of FCs in 2019 with that as on 30 June 2025, and the corresponding growth in the classified loan/lease amount.", "answer": "The classified loan/lease ratio rose from 9.53 percent in 2019 to 35.72 percent as on 30 June 2025, while the classified loan/lease amount rose more than four-fold, from BDT 63.99 billion to BDT 275.41 billion.", "evidence": "Para 8.12: \"At end June 2025, the NPL for FCs was 35.72 percent.\" Table 8.03: Classified loan/lease as % of total loan/lease 2019 = 9.53, 2025* = 35.72; Classified loan/lease 2019 = 63.99, 2025* = 275.41 (in billion BDT).", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "81" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q45", "number": 45, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How has the classified loan/lease ratio of finance companies trended from 2019 through mid-2025?", "answer": "The classified loan/lease ratio rose every year, from 9.53 percent in 2019 to 15.03 percent (2020), 19.33 percent (2021), 23.88 percent (2022), 27.65 percent (2023), 33.15 percent (2024) and 35.72 percent as on 30 June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 8.03, Classified loan/lease as % of total loan/lease row: 2019 = 9.53, 2020 = 15.03, 2021 = 19.33, 2022 = 23.88, 2023 = 27.65, 2024 = 33.15, 2025* = 35.72.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "81" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q46", "number": 46, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How has the classified loan/lease amount of finance companies trended from 2019 through mid-2025?", "answer": "The classified loan/lease amount rose continuously, from BDT 63.99 billion in 2019 to BDT 100.59 billion (2020), BDT 130.17 billion (2021), BDT 168.21 billion (2022), BDT 199.51 billion (2023), BDT 247.11 billion (2024) and BDT 275.41 billion as on 30 June 2025 — while total loan/lease grew only modestly from BDT 671.77 billion to BDT 770.92 billion.", "evidence": "Para 8.12: \"The trends of the ratio of gross NPLs/leases to total loans/leases are shown in Table 8.03.\" Table 8.03: Classified loan/lease row: 2019 = 63.99, 2020 = 100.59, 2021 = 130.17, 2022 = 168.21, 2023 = 199.51, 2024 = 247.11, 2025* = 275.41; Loan/lease row: 2019 = 671.77, 2025* = 770.92 (in billion BDT).", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "81" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q47", "number": 47, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "By how much did classified loan/lease of finance companies increase between 2019 and mid-2025?", "answer": "By BDT 211.42 billion — from BDT 63.99 billion in 2019 to BDT 275.41 billion as on 30 June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 8.03, Classified loan/lease row: 2019 = 63.99, 2025* = 275.41 (in billion BDT). Calculation: 275.41 - 63.99 = 211.42.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "81" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q48", "number": 48, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What's the state of finance companies' asset quality and profitability as of 30 June 2025?", "answer": "Asset quality is severely impaired: classified loans/leases reached BDT 275.41 billion, or 35.72 percent of the BDT 770.92 billion loan/lease book, after rising every year since 2019. Profitability is negative and worsening at the asset level — ROA fell to negative 3.03 percent as on 30 June 2025 (from negative 2.46 percent in 2024) — while headline ROE of 2.07 percent is misleading because it is computed on only the 17 of 35 FCs that still have positive equity.", "evidence": "Table 8.03, 2025* column: Loan/lease = 770.92, Classified loan/lease = 275.41, Classified loan/lease as % of total loan/lease = 35.72. Table 8.04, ROA row: 2024 = -2.46, 2025* = -3.03; ROE row: 2024 = 1.98, 2025* = 2.07. Para 8.13: \"Industry ROA and ROE at end June, 2025 were -3.03 and 2.07, respectively ... ROE has been calculated considering 17 FCs having positive equity.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "81" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q49", "number": 49, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What were the return on equity (ROE) and return on assets (ROA) of finance companies as of 30 June 2025?", "answer": "ROE was 2.07 percent and ROA was negative 3.03 percent as on 30 June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 8.04 (Trends in Profitability of FCs, in percent), 2025* column: Return on equity (ROE) = 2.07, Return on asset (ROA) = -3.03. Note: * As on 30 June 2025.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "81" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q50", "number": 50, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How do the ROE and ROA of finance companies compare as of 30 June 2025, and what does the divergence between them reflect?", "answer": "ROE was a positive 2.07 percent while ROA was a negative 3.03 percent as on 30 June 2025. The two diverge because ROE is calculated on only the 17 FCs that have positive equity, whereas ROA covers the whole sector — so ROE understates the sector-wide losses.", "evidence": "Table 8.04, 2025* column: Return on equity (ROE) = 2.07, Return on asset (ROA) = -3.03. Para 8.13: \"Industry ROA and ROE at end June, 2025 were -3.03 and 2.07, respectively Table 8.04. ROE has been calculated considering 17 FCs having positive equity.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "81" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q51", "number": 51, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "Compare the return on equity (ROE) of FCs in 2023, 2024 and as on 30 June 2025.", "answer": "ROE was deeply negative at negative 52.30 percent in 2023, then turned positive to 1.98 percent in 2024 and 2.07 percent as on 30 June 2025 — though the recent positive figures reflect only the 17 FCs with positive equity.", "evidence": "Para 8.13: \"Industry ROA and ROE at end June, 2025 were -3.03 and 2.07, respectively ... ROE has been calculated considering 17 FCs having positive equity.\" Table 8.04, Return on equity (ROE) row: 2023 = -52.30, 2024 = 1.98, 2025* = 2.07.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "81" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q52", "number": 52, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How has the return on equity (ROE) of finance companies trended from 2019 through mid-2025?", "answer": "ROE was negative 25.2 percent in 2019, improved to around negative 2 to negative 3 percent in 2020-2021, deteriorated sharply to negative 19.26 percent in 2022 and negative 52.30 percent in 2023, then turned positive at 1.98 percent in 2024 and 2.07 percent as on 30 June 2025.", "evidence": "Table 8.04, Return on equity (ROE) row: 2019 = -25.2, 2020 = -1.99, 2021 = -2.79, 2022 = -19.26, 2023 = -52.30, 2024 = 1.98, 2025* = 2.07 (in percent).", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "81" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q53", "number": 53, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How have finance companies' asset quality and asset-level profitability trended together from 2019 through mid-2025?", "answer": "The two deteriorated together. The classified loan/lease ratio climbed every year, from 9.53 percent (2019) to 35.72 percent (30 June 2025). Over the same span ROA stayed negative throughout — negative 2.56 percent (2019), briefly near zero in 2020-2021, then negative 1.27 percent (2022), negative 0.72 percent (2023), negative 2.46 percent (2024) and negative 3.03 percent (30 June 2025) — with the worst ROA reading coming alongside the worst classified ratio.", "evidence": "Table 8.03, Classified loan/lease as % of total loan/lease row: 2019 = 9.53, 2020 = 15.03, 2021 = 19.33, 2022 = 23.88, 2023 = 27.65, 2024 = 33.15, 2025* = 35.72. Table 8.04, Return on asset (ROA) row: 2019 = -2.56, 2020 = -0.19, 2021 = -0.23, 2022 = -1.27, 2023 = -0.72, 2024 = -2.46, 2025* = -3.03.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "81" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q54", "number": 54, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "What share of the finance company sector was in weak condition around end-2024 to mid-2025?", "answer": "At end December 2024, of the 35 FCs the composite CAMELS rating put 9 at '4 or Marginal' and 10 at '5 or Unsatisfactory' — 19 FCs, more than half, in the two weakest categories (with 3 more still under process). Consistently, by end June 2025 only 17 of the 35 FCs had positive equity.", "evidence": "Para 8.16: \"At end December 2024, out of 35 FCs, the composite CAMELS rating of 9 were '2 or Satisfactory', 4 were '3 or Fair', 9 were '4 or Marginal', 10 were '5 or Unsatisfactory', while 3 are still under process.\" Para 8.13: \"ROE has been calculated considering 17 FCs having positive equity.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "81" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q55", "number": 55, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "Compare the statutory liquidity ratio (SLR) requirement for FCs that take term deposits with that for FCs operating without term deposits.", "answer": "FCs with term liabilities must maintain an SLR of 5.00 percent (inclusive of an average 1.50 percent CRR, with at least 1.00 percent each day, maintained bi-weekly), while FCs operating without taking term deposits must maintain an SLR of 2.50 percent.", "evidence": "Para 8.14: \"Term liabilities are subject to a SLR of 5.00 percent, inclusive of an average of 1.50 percent (at least 1.00 percent each day) CRR bi-weekly. The SLR for FCs operating without taking term deposits is 2.50 percent.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "81" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q56", "number": 56, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "Since when have all FCs carried out stress testing on a quarterly basis?", "answer": "All FCs have carried out stress testing on a quarterly basis since 30 June 2012, using the methodology and perspectives provided by Bangladesh Bank.", "evidence": "Para 8.23: \"All FCs have been carried out stress testing on a quarterly basis since 30 June 2012 using the stress testing methodology and perspectives provided by BB.\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "83" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q57", "number": 57, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How many inspections of each type did Bangladesh Bank's Financial Institutions Inspection Department (FIID) conduct on finance companies in FY25?", "answer": "In FY25 FIID conducted 25 head office comprehensive inspections of FCs, 1 branch comprehensive inspection, 17 core risk inspections, 38 FICL inspections (Quick Summary Report) and 20 special inspections.", "evidence": "Para 8.24: \"During FY25, BB's Financial Institutions Inspection Department (FIID) has conducted a total of 25 comprehensive inspections on head offices of FCs. Details of the inspection conducted by the department are shown in Table 8.05.\" Table 8.05 (Inspections Conducted by FIID in FY25): Head office comprehensive inspection of FCs = 25, Branch comprehensive inspection = 01, Core risk inspection = 17, FICL inspection (Quick Summary Report) = 38, Special Inspection = 20.", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "83" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q58", "number": 58, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "How did the cost of funds of FCs change between June 2024 and June 2025?", "answer": "The cost of funds of FCs rose from 8.54 percent in June 2024 to 9.06 percent in June 2025.", "evidence": "Para 8.26: \"The cost of funds of FCs in June 2024 was 8.54 percent, although it increased to 9.06 percent in June 2025.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "84" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q59", "number": 59, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "By how many percentage points did the cost of funds of FCs increase between June 2024 and June 2025?", "answer": "By 0.52 percentage points — from 8.54 percent to 9.06 percent.", "evidence": "Para 8.26: \"The cost of funds of FCs in June 2024 was 8.54 percent, although it increased to 9.06 percent in June 2025.\" Calculation: 9.06 - 8.54 = 0.52.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "84" }, { "id": "chapter_8-q60", "number": 60, "chapter": "Chapter 8", "chapter_title": "Performance, Regulation and Supervision of Finance Companies (FCs)", "question": "Finance companies' total capital market investment of BDT 52.59 billion is reported to have accounted for 5.03 percent of their total assets as of 30 June 2025 — does that check out against the total assets figure reported for that date?", "answer": "Dividing BDT 52.59 billion by 0.0503 implies total FC assets of about BDT 1,045.5 billion, which matches the BDT 1,045.51 billion total assets reported for 2025 in Table 8.02.", "evidence": "Para 8.07: \"As of 30 June 2025, total investment of FCs in the capital market stood at BDT 52.59 billion, which accounted for 5.03 percent of the total assets of all FCs.\" Table 8.02 (Trends in Assets, Liabilities and Deposits of FCs), Total assets row, 2025* = 1045.51 (in billion BDT). Calculation: 52.59 / 0.0503 = 1,045.5.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "80-82" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q1", "number": 1, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "During FY25, how many times was the policy (repo) rate raised, by how much in total, and where did it settle?", "answer": "The policy (repo) rate was raised three times in FY25, by a total of 150 basis points, and settled at 10.00 percent; the interest rate corridor (IRC) was also narrowed to plus or minus 150 bps.", "evidence": "Market Highlights, FY25: \"To curb higher inflation, the policy rate (repo rate) was raised thrice with a total of 150 basis points (bps). Besides, IRC was narrowed down to ± 150 bps.\" Para 9.04: \"The repo rate was changed thrice with an increase of 150 bps, and settled at 10.00 percent during FY25.\" Table 9.02 (Repo Auctions in FY25) shows accepted-bid interest rates of 8.50-11.50 percent across tenors.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "85-86" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q2", "number": 2, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "What were the average volume of trade and the average weighted average interest rate in the call money market in FY24 and FY25?", "answer": "The average volume of trade was BDT 900.3 billion in FY24 and BDT 767.1 billion in FY25; the average weighted average interest rate was 7.7 percent in FY24 and 9.8 percent in FY25.", "evidence": "Table 9.01 (Volume of Trade and Weighted Average Interest Rates in Call Money Market), Average row: FY24 Volume = 900.3, FY24 WAIR = 7.7; FY25 Volume = 767.1, FY25 WAIR = 9.8.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "85" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q3", "number": 3, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "What was the range of the weighted average call money interest rate in FY25?", "answer": "The weighted average call money interest rate ranged from 8.8 percent to 10.14 percent in FY25.", "evidence": "Para 9.03: \"Weighted average call money interest rate exhibited a significant rise in this financial year, ranging from 8. 8 percent to 10.14 percent in FY25.\" Table 9.01, FY25 Weighted average interest rates (%) column: 8.8 (July) rising to 10.1 by year-end, Average = 9.8.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "86" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q4", "number": 4, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "How many repo auctions were held in FY25, how much was accepted, and at what interest rates?", "answer": "A total of 233 repo auctions were held in FY25, in which 19,739 bids for BDT 21,687.0 billion were accepted, at interest rates on accepted bids ranging from 8.50 to 11.50 percent per annum.", "evidence": "Para 9.04: \"In FY25, a total of 233 repo auctions were held, while 19739 bids for BDT 21687.0 billion were accepted (Table 9.02). The interest rate of accepted bids ranged from 8.50 to11.50 percent per annum in FY25.\" Table 9.02 (Repo Auctions in FY25), Total row: Bids accepted Number = 19739, Face value = 21687.0, Interest rate = 8.50-11.50*.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "86" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q5", "number": 5, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "How many Standing Deposit Facility (SDF) auctions were held in FY25, how much was accepted, and at what interest rates?", "answer": "221 SDF auctions were held in FY25, in which 930 bids for BDT 41,246.3 billion were accepted, at interest rates of 7.00 to 8.50 percent.", "evidence": "Table 9.03 (Standing Deposit Facility (SDF) Auctions in FY25): Total auctions held during the year = 221, Tenure = 1-Day, Bids accepted Number = 930, Face value = 41246.3, Interest rate of the accepted bids (%) = 7.00-8.50.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "86" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q6", "number": 6, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "What was the total face value of government treasury bill bids accepted in FY25, and the total outstanding bills as of end June 2025?", "answer": "The total face value of treasury bill bids accepted was BDT 4,016.7 billion, and total outstanding bills as of end June 2025 were BDT 2,576.8 billion.", "evidence": "Table 9.04 (Auctions of Government Treasury Bills in FY25), Total row: Bids accepted Number = 25087, Face value = 4016.7; Outstanding bills as of end June 2025 = 2576.8 (in billion BDT).", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "87" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q7", "number": 7, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "What was the total face value of Bangladesh Government Treasury Bond bids accepted in FY25, the outstanding bonds as of end June 2025, and the range of weighted average annual yield?", "answer": "The total face value of BGTB bids accepted was BDT 1,652.6 billion, outstanding bonds as of end June 2025 were BDT 5,185.9 billion, and the range of annual weighted average yield was 10.2334 to 12.7393 percent.", "evidence": "Table 9.05 (Auctions of Bangladesh Government Treasury Bonds, FY25), Total row: Bids accepted Number = 14203, Face value = 1652.6; Outstanding bonds as of end June 2025 = 5185.9; The range of annual weighted average yield (%) = 10.2334-12.7393*.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "88" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q8", "number": 8, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "In FY25, how many BGTB bids were received and accepted, and by how much did outstanding treasury bonds increase?", "answer": "A total of 19,665 bids for BDT 4,914.7 billion were received, of which 14,203 bids for BDT 1,652.6 billion were accepted; outstanding bonds increased by BDT 1,107.6 billion and stood at BDT 5,185.9 billion at end FY25.", "evidence": "Para 9.13: \"In FY25, a total of 19665 bids for BDT 4914.7 billion were received, of which 14203 bids for BDT 1652.6 billion were accepted from banks and non-banks ... Outstanding bonds increased by BDT 1107.6 billion and stood at BDT 5185.9 billion at end FY25.\" Table 9.05, Total row: Bids offered Number = 19665, Face value = 4914.7; Bids accepted Number = 14203, Face value = 1652.6; Outstanding bonds = 5185.9.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "88" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q9", "number": 9, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "How did the sale of, and financing against, the Bangladesh Government Islamic Investment Bond (BGIIB) change from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "The amount of BGIIB sold rose to BDT 174.2 billion in FY25 from BDT 126.7 billion in FY24, and financing against the BGIIB fund rose to BDT 140.4 billion at end FY25 from BDT 125.9 billion in FY24.", "evidence": "Para 9.15: \"The amount sold stood at BDT 174.2 billion in FY25, from BDT 126.7 billion in FY24. Financing against BGIIB fund also went up notably to BDT 140.4 billion at end FY25, compared to BDT 125.9 billion in FY24, implying higher demand for funds by the Islamic banks.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "89" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q10", "number": 10, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "What was the net balance against the BGIIB as of end June 2025, and how did it compare with end June 2024?", "answer": "The net balance against BGIIB increased to BDT 33.8 billion as of end June 2025, from BDT 0.8 billion at end June 2024, because of both higher sales and higher financing of the fund.", "evidence": "Para 9.15: \"As of end June 2025, net balance against BGIIB increased to BDT 33.8 billion from BDT 0.8 billion at end June 2024, because of both higher sales and financing of the fund.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "89" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q11", "number": 11, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "When was the Bangladesh Government Investment Sukuk (BGIS) bond introduced, and what was the outstanding amount of Sukuk at the end of June 2025?", "answer": "The BGIS bond was introduced in FY21; so far six Sukuk bonds under Ijarah and Istisna'a mode have been issued, and after a new BDT 50.0 billion BGIS auction in FY25, the outstanding amount of Sukuk rose to BDT 240.0 billion at the end of June 2025.", "evidence": "Para 9.16: \"the Bangladesh Government Investment Sukuk (BGIS) bond was introduced in FY21. So far, six Sukuk (BGIS) bonds under Ijarah and Istisna'a mode have been issued ... With a new auction of BDT 50.0 billion BGIS held in FY25, the outstanding amount of Sukuk raised to BDT 240.0 billion at the end of June 2025.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "89-90" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q12", "number": 12, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "What were the market capitalisation, turnover in value and DSE Broad Index (DSEX) of the Dhaka Stock Exchange at end June FY25?", "answer": "Market capitalisation was BDT 6,622.7 billion, turnover in value was BDT 1,110.4 billion, and the DSEX stood at 4,838.4 at end June FY25.", "evidence": "Table 9.07 (Activities of Dhaka Stock Exchange (DSE)), FY25 (End June) column: Market capitalisation (Billion BDT) = 6622.7, Turnover in value (Billion BDT) = 1110.4, Turnover in volume (no. in Billion) = 40.7, DSE Broad Index (DSEX) = 4838.4.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "92" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q13", "number": 13, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "By how much did the DSEX and the CSE all-share price index (CASPI) fall in FY25?", "answer": "The DSEX fell by 9.2 percent to 4,838.4 and the CASPI showed a 10.8 percent decline to 13,438.4 in FY25.", "evidence": "Para 9.21: \"DSEX experienced a fall by 9.2 percent to 4838.4, and in CSE the all-share price index (CASPI) showed a 10.8 percent decline to 13438.4 in FY25.\" Table 9.07, DSE Broad Index (DSEX): FY24 = 5328.4, FY25 = 4838.4. Table 9.08, All-share Price Index (CASPI): FY24 = 15066.8, FY25 = 13438.4.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "91-92" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q14", "number": 14, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "Which sector had the largest share of total advances in FY25?", "answer": "Trade and Commerce had the largest share at 33.9 percent.", "evidence": "Chart 9.03 (Sector-wise Shares of Total Advances in FY25): Trade & Commerce 33.9%, Industry 22.3%, Working Capital Financing 20.0%, Others 11.7%, Construction 7.2%, Agriculture Fishing and Foresty 4.3%, Transport 0.6%. \"Source: Statistics Department, Bangladesh Bank.\"", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "93" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q15", "number": 15, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "What were the sector-wise shares of total credit (advances) in FY25?", "answer": "Trade and commerce 33.9 percent, industry 22.3 percent, working capital 20.0 percent, other sectors 11.7 percent, construction 7.2 percent, agriculture, fishing and forestry 4.3 percent, and transport 0.6 percent.", "evidence": "Para 9.27: \"the trade and commerce sector contributed the most (33.9 percent) (Chart 9.03) ... followed by industry (22.3 percent), working capital (20.0 percent), other sectors (11.7 percent), construction (7.2 percent), agriculture, fishing and forestry (4.3 percent), and transport (0.6 percent).\" Chart 9.03 shows the corresponding pie segments.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "93" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q16", "number": 16, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "How did disbursement, recovery and outstanding of industrial term loans by banks and finance companies change in FY25?", "answer": "Disbursement increased by 7.3 percent to BDT 1,057.6 billion, recoveries increased by 11.2 percent to BDT 1,181.5 billion, and outstanding industrial term loans increased by 11.8 percent to BDT 4,174.8 billion; overdue loans rose 32.0 percent and reached 21.7 percent of outstanding at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Para 9.28: \"Disbursement of industrial term loans by banks and finance companies (FCs) increased by 7.3 percent to BDT 1057.6 billion in FY25 ... recoveries increased by 11.2 percent to BDT 1181.5 billion in FY25 ... outstanding industrial term loans increased by 11.8 percent and stood at BDT 4174.8 billion in FY25. Overdue loans also increased by 32.0 percent in FY25 and stood at 21.7 percent of outstanding industrial term loans at end June 2025 (Table 9.10).\" Table 9.10 (Industrial Term Loans of Banks and Financial Institutions), Total row: Disbursement FY25 = 1057.6, Recovery FY25 = 1181.5, Outstanding FY25 = 4174.8, Overdue FY25 = 906.8, Overdue as % of outstanding FY25 = 21.7%.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "93-94" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q17", "number": 17, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "What happened to the BDT-USD exchange rate and foreign exchange reserves in FY25?", "answer": "The exchange rate depreciated by 3.9 percent in FY25 and stood at BDT 122.8 per USD at end June 2025, and foreign exchange reserves increased to USD 31.8 billion (equivalent to 5.2 months of imports of goods and services) at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Para 9.39: \"the exchange rate depreciated by 3.9 percent in FY25 and stood at BDT 122.8 at end June 2025 (Chart 9.05).\" Para 9.40: \"foreign exchange reserves increased markedly to USD 31.8 billion (equivalent to 5.2 months of imports of goods and services) at end June 2025.\" Chart 9.05 (BDT-USD Exchange Rates Movement (End Month) in FY25): line rising from about 118 in Jul-24 to about 122.8 in Jun-25.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "95-96" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q18", "number": 18, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "What role did PCBs play in industrial term loans at end June 2025?", "answer": "PCBs dominated: they held a 72.2 percent share of outstanding industrial term loans (BDT 3,014.0 billion of the BDT 4,174.8 billion total) and disbursed the largest amount (BDT 852.3 billion) in FY25. Chart 9.04 shows the PCB bars for disbursement, recovery and outstanding towering over those of SCBs, FCBs, SBs and FIs.", "evidence": "Para 9.29: \"Private commercial banks (PCBs) had a major share (72.2 percent) in outstanding industrial term loans at end June 2025 (Table 9.10 and Chart 9.04) ... As per disbursing credit, PCBs occupied the largest portion (BDT 852.3 billion) in FY25.\" Table 9.10, PCBs row: Disbursement FY25 = 852.3, Recovery FY25 = 962.7, Outstanding FY25 = 3014.0; Total Outstanding FY25 = 4174.8. Chart 9.04 (Industrial Term Loans of Banks and Financial Companies in FY25): PCBs bars are far higher than SCBs, FCBs, SBs and FIs.", "query_type": "Fact Extraction", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "93-94" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q19", "number": 19, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "Compare the average volume of trade in the call money market in FY24 and FY25.", "answer": "The average volume of trade fell from BDT 900.3 billion in FY24 to BDT 767.1 billion in FY25.", "evidence": "Table 9.01, Average row: FY24 Volume of trade = 900.3, FY25 Volume of trade = 767.1 (in billion BDT).", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "85" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q20", "number": 20, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "Compare the weighted average call money interest rate in FY24 with that in FY25.", "answer": "The weighted average call money rate rose significantly in FY25, ranging from 8.8 percent to 10.14 percent over the year. Chart 9.01 shows the FY25 line sitting well above the FY24 line for every month — FY24 ran from about 6.3 percent in July to a peak of about 9.4 percent in January, easing slightly to around 9.1 percent by June, whereas FY25 started near 8.8 percent and rose to about 10.1 percent.", "evidence": "Para 9.03: \"Weighted average call money interest rate exhibited a significant rise in this financial year, ranging from 8. 8 percent to 10.14 percent in FY25.\" Table 9.01 (Volume of Trade and Weighted Average Interest Rates in Call Money Market), FY24 column: Jul=6.3, peaks at Jan=9.4, then Feb=9.3, Mar=8.7, Apr=8.8, May=9.1, Jun=9.1. Chart 9.01 (Movements of Call Money Rate): two lines labelled \"FY 24\" and \"FY 25\", x-axis Jul to Jun; the FY 25 line runs consistently above the FY 24 line, rising from about 8.8 to about 10.1, while FY 24 rises from about 6.3 to a January peak of about 9.4 before easing to about 9.1 by June.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "85-86" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q21", "number": 21, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "By how much did the average volume of interbank trade in call money change in FY25 compared with FY24?", "answer": "It reduced by BDT 133.2 billion, or 14.8 percent, in FY25 compared with FY24.", "evidence": "Para 9.03: \"The average volume of interbank trade in call money reduced by BDT 133.2 billion in FY25 (14.8 percent lower than FY24).\" Table 9.01, Average Volume of trade: FY24 = 900.3, FY25 = 767.1.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "86" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q22", "number": 22, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "Compare the weighted average annual yield range of 91-day treasury bills in FY24 with FY25.", "answer": "The weighted average annual yield range of 91-day treasury bills rose from 7.06-11.65 percent in FY24 to 10.21-11.99 percent in FY25.", "evidence": "Table 9.04, 91-Day row, Weighted average annual yield (WAR) range (%): FY24 = 7.06-11.65, FY25 = 10.21-11.99.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "87" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q23", "number": 23, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "How did the weighted average annual yields of treasury bills in FY25 compare with FY24?", "answer": "Weighted average annual yields of treasury bills increased significantly in FY25 compared with FY24, implying a liquidity shortage in the money market; in FY25 the weighted average yield-to-maturity ranged from 10.0 to 12.1 percent, against FY24 ranges that started as low as 7.06 percent.", "evidence": "Para 9.11: \"Weighted average annual yields of the treasury bill increased significantly in FY25 compared to FY24 (Table-9.04), implying liquidity shortage in the money-market ... The weighted average yield-to-maturity ranged from 10.0 to 12.1 percent during the period being discussed here.\" Table 9.04, Total row, WAR range: FY24 = 7.06-12.00, FY25 = 10.03-12.09*.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "88" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q24", "number": 24, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "Compare the total face value of BGTB bids offered with the total face value accepted in FY25.", "answer": "Bids offered totalled BDT 4,914.7 billion while only BDT 1,652.6 billion was accepted — about a third of the amount offered.", "evidence": "Table 9.05, Total row: Bids offered Face value = 4914.7, Bids accepted Face value = 1652.6 (in billion BDT).", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "88" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q25", "number": 25, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "Compare the overdue industrial term loans (as a percentage of outstanding) across bank categories at end June 2025.", "answer": "At end June 2025 the overdue ratio was 89.3 percent for specialised banks (BKB, RAKUB), 28.7 percent for SCBs, 24.3 percent for finance companies, 20.0 percent for PCBs and just 6.4 percent for foreign banks.", "evidence": "Para 9.30: \"Foreign banks had much lower overdue loans (6.4 percent of outstanding) at end June 2025 ... PCBs had also lower overdue loans (20.0 percent) compared to SCBs (28.7 percent), FCs (24.3 percent) and SBs (89.3 percent) at end June, 2025.\" Table 9.10, Overdue as % of outstanding, FY25 column: SCBs = 28.7%, PCBs = 20.0%, Foreign banks = 6.4%, Specialised banks (BKB, RAKUB) = 89.3%, Finance companies = 24.3%, Total = 21.7%.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "94" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q26", "number": 26, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "Compare the shares of Trade and Commerce, Industry and Working Capital Financing in total advances in FY25.", "answer": "Trade and Commerce had the largest share at 33.9 percent, followed by Industry at 22.3 percent and Working Capital Financing at 20.0 percent.", "evidence": "Chart 9.03 (Sector-wise Shares of Total Advances in FY25): Trade & Commerce 33.9%, Industry 22.3%, Working Capital Financing 20.0%, Others 11.7%, Construction 7.2%, Agriculture Fishing and Foresty 4.3%, Transport 0.6%.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "93" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q27", "number": 27, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "By loan size, which band accounted for the largest share of loans at end FY25, and which the smallest?", "answer": "The largest band was loans of BDT 500 million and above at 30 percent, and the smallest was loans up to BDT 10 million at 23 percent; loans of BDT 100 million to BDT 500 million accounted for 25 percent and BDT 10 million to BDT 100 million for 22 percent.", "evidence": "Box 9.03, \"Loan Classification: Size of Loans\" pie: Up to BDT 10 million 23%, BDT 10 million to BDT 100 million 22%, BDT 100 million to BDT 500 million 25%, BDT 500 million and above 30%. Accompanying text: \"the largest share (30 percent) was held by large loan accounts valued at BDT 500 million and above ... The remaining 23 percent consists of loans up to BDT 10 million.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "97" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q28", "number": 28, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "Compare the market capitalisation and all-share price index (CASPI) of the Chittagong Stock Exchange in FY23 and FY25.", "answer": "CSE market capitalisation fell from BDT 7,577.9 billion in FY23 to BDT 6,911.9 billion in FY25, and CASPI fell from 18,702.2 to 13,438.4 over the same period.", "evidence": "Table 9.08 (Activities of Chittagong Stock Exchange (CSE)): Market capitalisation (Billion BDT) FY23 = 7577.9, FY25 = 6911.9; All-share Price Index (CASPI) FY23 = 18702.2, FY25 = 13438.4.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "92" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q29", "number": 29, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "Compare the FY25 decline in secondary-market turnover at the DSE with that at the CSE.", "answer": "In FY25 turnover in the secondary market decreased by 25.9 percent at the DSE and by 45.0 percent at the CSE — a much steeper fall at the CSE.", "evidence": "Para 9.21: \"In FY25, the amount of turnover in the secondary market both at DSE and CSE, decreased by 25.9 percent and 45.0 percent respectively.\" Table 9.07, Turnover in value (Billion BDT): FY24 = 1498.6, FY25 = 1110.4. Table 9.08, Turnover in value (Billion BDT): FY24 = 72.8, FY25 = 40.1.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "91-92" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q30", "number": 30, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "Compare the DSEX and DSE market capitalisation at end December 2024 with their levels at end June 2025.", "answer": "At end December 2024 the DSEX stood at 5,216.4 and market capitalisation at BDT 6,626.2 billion; by end June 2025 (Table 9.07, FY25) the DSEX had declined to 4,838.4 while market capitalisation was almost unchanged at BDT 6,622.7 billion. Chart 9.02 shows the DSEX line drifting down through the second half of FY25 while the market-capitalisation bars stay broadly flat.", "evidence": "Chart 9.02 (Trends in Market Behaviour of DSE) plots monthly Market Capitalisation and Turnover bars with the DSEX(RHS) line from Jul-24 to Jun-25; the DSEX line falls after December. Para 9.19 states the end-December-2024 readings of 5216.4 (DSEX) and BDT 6626.2 billion (market capitalisation). Table 9.07 (Activities of Dhaka Stock Exchange (DSE)), FY25 (End June) column: Market capitalisation (Billion BDT) = 6622.7, DSE Broad Index (DSEX) = 4838.4.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "90-92" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q31", "number": 31, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "Compare the overdue-loan burden of SCBs, PCBs and specialised banks in industrial term lending at end June 2025.", "answer": "Specialised banks (BKB, RAKUB) had by far the worst overdue ratio at 89.3 percent of outstanding (BDT 5.0 billion overdue on BDT 5.6 billion outstanding), versus 28.7 percent for SCBs and 20.0 percent for PCBs. In absolute terms, though, PCBs carried the largest overdue amount (BDT 601.7 billion), reflecting their dominant book size shown in Chart 9.04.", "evidence": "Table 9.10, FY25 columns: SCBs Outstanding = 751.9, Overdue = 216.0, Overdue % = 28.7%; PCBs Outstanding = 3014.0, Overdue = 601.7, Overdue % = 20.0%; Specialised banks (BKB, RAKUB) Outstanding = 5.6, Overdue = 5.0, Overdue % = 89.3%. Chart 9.04 shows PCBs' Disbursement/Recovery/Outstanding bars dwarfing the other lenders'.", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "93-94" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q32", "number": 32, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "Compare the gross non-resident portfolio investment inflow through NITA in FY24 and FY25, and the corresponding gross outflow.", "answer": "Gross inflow increased to BDT 25.0 billion in FY25 from BDT 19.1 billion in FY24, while gross outflow (sale proceeds and dividends) decreased to BDT 24.2 billion in FY25 from BDT 40.6 billion in FY24 — turning the flow roughly balanced.", "evidence": "Para 9.22: \"Gross investment inflow in shares and securities listed on the stock exchanges by non-residents through Non-Resident Investor's Taka Account (NITA) increased to BDT 25.0 billion in FY25 from BDT 19.1 billion in FY24. Similarly, gross outflow as sale proceeds and dividends decreased to BDT 24.2 billion in FY25 from BDT 40.6 billion in FY24.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "92" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q33", "number": 33, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "In FY25, compare the gross inflow of non-resident portfolio investment through NITA with the gross outflow.", "answer": "In FY25 the gross inflow was BDT 25.0 billion and the gross outflow (sale proceeds and dividends) was BDT 24.2 billion, so inflow slightly exceeded outflow by about BDT 0.8 billion.", "evidence": "Para 9.22: \"Gross investment inflow ... increased to BDT 25.0 billion in FY25 ... gross outflow as sale proceeds and dividends decreased to BDT 24.2 billion in FY25\".", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "92" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q34", "number": 34, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "Under the Grihayan Tahobil, compare the interest rate at which the fund lends to NGOs with the rate at which NGOs on-lend to the rural poor.", "answer": "The fund lends to NGOs at a 1.5 percent simple interest rate, while NGOs disburse credit to the rural poor at a 5.5 percent simple interest rate — a 4.0 percentage point spread.", "evidence": "Para 9.36: \"This fund provides loan facilities to NGOs at 1.5 percent simple interest rate for disbursing credit to the rural poor at 5.5 percent simple interest rate with a recovery period of maximum 7 years.\"", "query_type": "Comparison", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "95" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q35", "number": 35, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "How did the call money rate move over FY25 relative to FY24?", "answer": "The FY25 weighted average call money rate started around 8.8 percent in July, climbed to about 10.0 percent by November-December and then held around 10.0-10.1 percent for the rest of the year, staying above the FY24 line in every month (FY24 ran from about 6.3 percent in July to a peak of about 9.4 percent in January, then eased to around 9.1 percent by June).", "evidence": "Chart 9.01 (Movements of Call Money Rate): two lines, \"FY 24\" and \"FY 25\", x-axis Jul to Jun; the FY 25 line rises from about 8.8 to about 10.1 and stays above the FY 24 line throughout, while the FY 24 line rises from about 6.3, peaks at about 9.4 in January, and eases to about 9.1 by June. \"Source: Monetary Policy Department, Bangladesh Bank.\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "85" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q36", "number": 36, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "How did the BDT-USD exchange rate trend through FY25?", "answer": "The BDT-USD end-month exchange rate rose from about 118 in July 2024 to roughly 120 from August through December 2024, stepped up to about 122 from January to April 2025, peaked near 123 in May 2025, and eased slightly to about 122.8 in June 2025.", "evidence": "Chart 9.05 (BDT-USD Exchange Rates Movement (End Month) in FY25): y-axis \"BDT per USD\" 117-123; x-axis Jul-24 to Jun-25; the line is near 118 (Jul-24), about 120 (Aug-24 to Dec-24), about 122 (Jan-25 to Apr-25), near 123 (May-25) and about 122.8 (Jun-25). \"Source: Monetary Policy Department, Bangladesh Bank.\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "96" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q37", "number": 37, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "How did the monthly weighted average call money interest rate trend through FY25?", "answer": "The monthly weighted average rate rose from 8.8 percent in July and August, to 9.1 percent (September), 9.7 percent (October), 10.0 percent (November), and around 10.0-10.1 percent from December through June, easing only slightly to 9.9 percent in April.", "evidence": "Table 9.01, FY25 Weighted average interest rates (%) column: July = 8.8, August = 8.8, September = 9.1, October = 9.7, November = 10.0, December = 10.1, January = 10.1, February = 10.0, March = 10.0, April = 9.9, May = 10.1, June = 10.1; Average = 9.8.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "85" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q38", "number": 38, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "How did treasury bill yields move from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "Treasury bill weighted average annual yields increased significantly across all tenors. For 91-day bills the range rose from 7.06-11.65 percent (FY24) to 10.21-11.99 percent (FY25); for 182-day bills from 7.13-11.80 to 10.03-12.04 percent; and for 364-day bills from 7.85-12.00 to 10.13-12.09 percent — a clear upward shift that paragraph 9.11 attributes to a liquidity shortage in the money market.", "evidence": "Para 9.11: \"Weighted average annual yields of the treasury bill increased significantly in FY25 compared to FY24 (Table-9.04), implying liquidity shortage in the money-market.\" Table 9.04, WAR range (%): 91-Day FY24 = 7.06-11.65, FY25 = 10.21-11.99; 182-Day FY24 = 7.13-11.80, FY25 = 10.03-12.04; 364-Day FY24 = 7.85-12.00, FY25 = 10.13-12.09.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "87-88" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q39", "number": 39, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "How did the DSE market trend during FY25?", "answer": "In the first half of FY25 the DSE market capitalisation and the DSEX both moved up and down, with variability continuing into the latter half. At end December 2024 the DSEX and market capitalisation stood at 5,216.4 and BDT 6,626.2 billion, and they then declined to 4,838.4 and BDT 6,622.7 billion by end June 2025 — so the index fell noticeably while market capitalisation was little changed.", "evidence": "Para 9.19: \"In the first half of FY25, there were ups and downs in market capitalisation, while the DSE broad index (DSEX) showed a similar pattern. DSEX and market capitalisation also implied variability in the latter half of FY25. Accordingly, at end December 2024, DSEX and market capitalisation stood at 5216.4 and BDT 6626.2 billion respectively, and then declined to 4838.4 and BDT 6622.7 billion at end June 2025 (Chart 9.02).\" Chart 9.02 plots monthly Market Capitalisation and Turnover bars with the DSEX(RHS) line.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "90" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q40", "number": 40, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "How did scheduled banks' advances by economic purpose trend in FY25?", "answer": "Advances of scheduled banks for economic purpose exhibited an upward trend: total advances rose 8.9 percent to BDT 17,390.8 billion at end June 2025 (from BDT 15,971.0 billion in FY24). Industry (+12.8 percent) and trade and commerce (+10.6 percent) grew fastest, while agriculture, fishing and forestry (+2.5 percent) and construction (+0.9 percent) grew slowly.", "evidence": "Para 9.26: \"Advances of scheduled banks for economic purpose exhibited upward trend in FY25 (Table 9.09). At end June 2025, total advance was BDT 17390.8 billion, which was 8.9 percent higher than that in FY24. Major growth is seen in industry (12.8 percent), trade and commerce (10.6 percent) ... the agriculture, fishing and forestry sector and construction sector registered lower growth of 2.5 percent and 0.9 percent, respectively.\" Table 9.09 (Advances of Scheduled Banks by Economic Purposes), Grand Total: FY24 = 15971.03, FY25(P) = 17390.84, % change = 8.9.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "93" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q41", "number": 41, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "How did DSE market capitalisation, turnover in value and the DSEX trend from FY23 to FY25?", "answer": "All three weakened over FY23-FY25. Market capitalisation fell from BDT 7,720.8 billion (FY23) to BDT 6,621.6 billion (FY24) and was flat at BDT 6,622.7 billion (FY25). Turnover in value fell steadily, from BDT 1,910.9 billion to BDT 1,498.6 billion to BDT 1,110.4 billion. The DSEX declined each year, from 6,344.1 to 5,328.4 to 4,838.4. Chart 9.02 shows the same softening within FY25, with the DSEX line drifting down in the second half.", "evidence": "Table 9.07: Market capitalisation (Billion BDT) FY23 = 7720.8, FY24 = 6621.6, FY25 = 6622.7; Turnover in value (Billion BDT) FY23 = 1910.9, FY24 = 1498.6, FY25 = 1110.4; DSE Broad Index (DSEX) FY23 = 6344.1, FY24 = 5328.4, FY25 = 4838.4. Chart 9.02 (Trends in Market Behaviour of DSE) plots monthly Market Capitalisation and Turnover bars and the DSEX(RHS) line over Jul-24 to Jun-25.", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "90-92" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q42", "number": 42, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "What did the rising call money rate in FY25 reflect?", "answer": "It reflected persistent liquidity stress in the banking sector, alongside the tighter policy stance adopted by Bangladesh Bank.", "evidence": "Market Highlights, FY25: \"The call money interest rates experienced a sharp increase in FY25. The rising call money rate reflected persistent liquidity stress in the banking sector, alongside the tighter policy stance adopted by BB.\" Para 9.03: \"The rising call money rate reflected persistent liquidity stress in the banking sector, alongside the tighter policy stance adopted by BB.\"", "query_type": "Trend Analysis", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "85-86" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q43", "number": 43, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "By how much did the average volume of trade in the call money market change from FY24 to FY25?", "answer": "It fell by BDT 133.2 billion — from BDT 900.3 billion in FY24 to BDT 767.1 billion in FY25.", "evidence": "Table 9.01, Average Volume of trade row: FY24 = 900.3, FY25 = 767.1 (in billion BDT). Calculation: 900.3 - 767.1 = 133.2.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "85" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q44", "number": 44, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "If outstanding treasury bonds increased by BDT 1,107.6 billion in FY25 to reach BDT 5,185.9 billion, what was the outstanding amount at the start of FY25?", "answer": "About BDT 4,078.3 billion (5,185.9 - 1,107.6).", "evidence": "Para 9.13: \"Outstanding bonds increased by BDT 1107.6 billion and stood at BDT 5185.9 billion at end FY25.\" Table 9.05, Total row, Outstanding bonds as of end June 2025 = 5185.9. Calculation: 5185.9 - 1107.6 = 4078.3.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "88" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q45", "number": 45, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "By how much did the total advances of scheduled banks by economic purpose grow between FY24 and FY25?", "answer": "By BDT 1,419.81 billion — from BDT 15,971.03 billion in FY24 to BDT 17,390.84 billion in FY25, a rise of 8.9 percent.", "evidence": "Table 9.09 (Advances of Scheduled Banks by Economic Purposes, in billion BDT), Grand Total row: FY24 = 15971.03, FY25(P) = 17390.84, % change = 8.9. Calculation: 17390.84 - 15971.03 = 1419.81.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "93" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q46", "number": 46, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "In FY25, by how much did recoveries of industrial term loans exceed disbursements?", "answer": "By BDT 123.9 billion — recoveries were BDT 1,181.5 billion against disbursements of BDT 1,057.6 billion.", "evidence": "Para 9.28: \"Disbursement of industrial term loans by banks and finance companies (FCs) increased by 7.3 percent to BDT 1057.6 billion in FY25 ... recoveries increased by 11.2 percent to BDT 1181.5 billion in FY25.\" Table 9.10, Total row: Disbursement FY25 = 1057.6, Recovery FY25 = 1181.5. Calculation: 1181.5 - 1057.6 = 123.9.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "94" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q47", "number": 47, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "By how much did the DSE turnover in value fall from FY24 to FY25, and what percentage decline does that represent?", "answer": "It fell by BDT 388.2 billion, from BDT 1,498.6 billion in FY24 to BDT 1,110.4 billion in FY25 — a decline of about 25.9 percent, matching the figure in paragraph 9.21.", "evidence": "Table 9.07, Turnover in value (Billion BDT): FY24 = 1498.6, FY25 = 1110.4. Para 9.21: \"the amount of turnover in the secondary market both at DSE and CSE, decreased by 25.9 percent and 45.0 percent respectively.\" Calculation: 1498.6 - 1110.4 = 388.2; 388.2 / 1498.6 = 25.9 percent.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "91-92" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q48", "number": 48, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "What share of total outstanding industrial term loans did PCBs hold at end June 2025?", "answer": "About 72.2 percent — PCBs' outstanding of BDT 3,014.0 billion out of the industry total of BDT 4,174.8 billion.", "evidence": "Table 9.10, Outstanding FY25: PCBs = 3014.0, Total = 4174.8 (in billion BDT). Para 9.29: \"Private commercial banks (PCBs) had a major share (72.2 percent) in outstanding industrial term loans at end June 2025.\" Chart 9.04 shows the PCBs Outstanding bar far above those of other lenders. Calculation: 3014.0 / 4174.8 = 0.722 = 72.2 percent.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "93-94" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q49", "number": 49, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "Under the Grihayan Tahobil, what is the interest rate spread between the rate charged to NGOs and the rate NGOs charge the rural poor?", "answer": "4.0 percentage points — the fund lends to NGOs at 1.5 percent and NGOs on-lend to the rural poor at 5.5 percent.", "evidence": "Para 9.36: \"This fund provides loan facilities to NGOs at 1.5 percent simple interest rate for disbursing credit to the rural poor at 5.5 percent simple interest rate\". Calculation: 5.5 - 1.5 = 4.0.", "query_type": "Numerical Calculation", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "95" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q50", "number": 50, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "How would you characterise money-market conditions in FY25?", "answer": "Money-market conditions tightened sharply on persistent liquidity stress. The weighted average call money rate rose from an average of 7.7 percent (FY24) to 9.8 percent (FY25), ranging up to 10.14 percent, while the average traded volume fell 14.8 percent (BDT 133.2 billion). Treasury bill yields rose in step — 91-day bill yields moved from a 7.06-11.65 percent range to 10.21-11.99 percent — which the chapter reads as evidence of a liquidity shortage.", "evidence": "Table 9.01, Average: FY24 WAIR = 7.7, FY25 WAIR = 9.8; FY24 Volume = 900.3, FY25 Volume = 767.1. Para 9.03: \"Weighted average call money interest rate ... ranging from 8. 8 percent to 10.14 percent in FY25 ... The average volume of interbank trade in call money reduced by BDT 133.2 billion in FY25 (14.8 percent lower than FY24).\" Table 9.04, WAR range 91-Day: FY24 = 7.06-11.65, FY25 = 10.21-11.99. Para 9.11: yields \"increased significantly in FY25 compared to FY24 ... implying liquidity shortage in the money-market.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "85-88" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q51", "number": 51, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "Where was scheduled banks' credit growth concentrated in FY25?", "answer": "Growth was concentrated in industry and trade. Industry advances grew 12.8 percent (to BDT 3,871.5 billion) and trade and commerce 10.6 percent (to BDT 5,892.6 billion), together far outpacing agriculture (2.5 percent) and construction (0.9 percent). By share of the FY25 credit stock, trade and commerce is the largest at 33.9 percent, then industry at 22.3 percent and working capital at 20.0 percent, so the fastest-growing sectors are also among the largest.", "evidence": "Table 9.09, % change column: Industry = 12.8, Trade and Commerce = 10.6, Working Capital Financing = 7.1, Others = 8.6, Agriculture, Fishing and Forestry = 2.5, Construction = 0.9, Transport = -4.2; FY25 amounts: Industry = 3871.5, Trade and Commerce = 5892.6, Grand Total = 17390.84. Para 9.27: \"the trade and commerce sector contributed the most (33.9 percent) ... followed by industry (22.3 percent), working capital (20.0 percent)\".", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Table", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "93" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q52", "number": 52, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "Can you summarise the state of Bangladesh's capital market in FY25?", "answer": "The capital market was weak throughout FY25. Chart 9.02 and paragraph 9.19 show the DSEX drifting down through the year, and paragraph 9.21 records the DSEX falling 9.2 percent to 4,838.4, the CASPI falling 10.8 percent to 13,438.4, and secondary-market turnover dropping 25.9 percent at the DSE and 45.0 percent at the CSE. Paragraph 9.41 attributes this to low turnover, weak retail participation, periodic liquidity crunches, volatile sentiment and low confidence following governance and transparency concerns.", "evidence": "Chart 9.02 (Trends in Market Behaviour of DSE): DSEX(RHS) line declines in the latter part of FY25. Para 9.21: \"DSEX experienced a fall by 9.2 percent to 4838.4, and in CSE the all-share price index (CASPI) showed a 10.8 percent decline to 13438.4 in FY25 ... turnover in the secondary market both at DSE and CSE, decreased by 25.9 percent and 45.0 percent respectively.\" Para 9.41: \"the capital market suffers from low turnover and weak retail participation, periodic liquidity crunches, volatile investor sentiments and low confidence following governance and transparency concerns.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "90-96" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q53", "number": 53, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "Which lenders drove the rise in overdue industrial term loans in FY25?", "answer": "Total overdue industrial term loans rose about 32.0 percent, from BDT 687.2 billion to BDT 906.8 billion. PCBs drove almost all of that increase: their overdue jumped from BDT 384.4 billion to BDT 601.7 billion (overdue ratio up from 14.4 percent to 20.0 percent). SCBs' overdue was roughly flat (BDT 213.6 billion to BDT 216.0 billion) and finance companies' fell slightly. Chart 9.04 shows PCBs hold by far the largest outstanding book, so the deterioration in their portfolio dominates the sector total.", "evidence": "Table 9.10, Overdue: PCBs FY24 = 384.4, FY25 = 601.7; SCBs FY24 = 213.6, FY25 = 216.0; Finance companies FY24 = 81.7, FY25 = 79.2; Total FY24 = 687.2, FY25 = 906.8; Overdue as % of outstanding, PCBs FY24 = 14.4%, FY25 = 20.0%. Para 9.28: \"Overdue loans also increased by 32.0 percent in FY25\". Chart 9.04 shows PCBs' Outstanding bar far above the other lenders'.", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Table + Chart", "difficulty": "Hard", "source_page": "93-94" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q54", "number": 54, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "How did the foreign exchange market stabilise in FY25?", "answer": "Continued tight monetary policy and a favourable balance of payments restored stability in the second half of FY25. The crawling peg exchange rate arrangement gave flexibility while higher remittance inflows and positive export growth supported reserve accumulation, so the BDT depreciated only mildly — 3.9 percent over the year, to BDT 122.8 per USD at end June 2025 — and foreign exchange reserves rose to USD 31.8 billion, about 5.2 months of import cover.", "evidence": "Market Highlights, FY25: \"In FY25, BDT-USD exchange rate showed a mild depreciating track due to higher remittance inflows, positive export growth and stability in the exchange rate. Hence, foreign exchange reserves accelerated to USD 31.8 billion.\" Para 9.39: \"Continued tight monetary policy and favourable development in BoP helped restore stability in the foreign exchange market in the second half of FY25 ... the introduction of a crawling peg exchange rate and improved remittance inflows supported reserve accumulation ... the exchange rate depreciated by 3.9 percent in FY25 and stood at BDT 122.8 at end June 2025.\" Para 9.40: \"foreign exchange reserves increased markedly to USD 31.8 billion (equivalent to 5.2 months of imports of goods and services) at end June 2025.\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "85-96" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q55", "number": 55, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "What problems does the FY25 outlook identify for Bangladesh's financial market, and how has Bangladesh Bank responded?", "answer": "The outlook identifies very high NPLs, concentrated and related-party lending, weak governance and risk management, and political interference that have eroded depositor and investor confidence, depressed private-sector credit growth and strained bank balance sheets, alongside a capital market suffering low turnover and weak retail participation. In response, Bangladesh Bank has launched asset-quality reviews, engaged external audit firms to scrutinise troubled banks, formed joint investigation teams through the Financial Intelligence Unit to trace siphoned funds, placed some senior executives on leave, updated loan-classification and rescheduling circulars, tightened monetary policy, and is moving toward bank resolution tools including merger/resolution frameworks.", "evidence": "Para 9.41: \"Bangladesh's financial market in FY25 continues to struggle with very high NPLs, concentrated and related-party lending, weak governance and risk management practices, as well as political interference that have eroded depositor and investor confidence.\" Para 9.42: \"Regulators launched asset-quality reviews and engaged external audit firms to scrutinise troubled banks as well as formed joint investigation teams through the Financial Intelligence Unit to trace allegedly siphoned funds ... Bangladesh Bank issued and updated circulars on loan classifications, rescheduling and restructuring ... there are moves toward bank resolution tools (including merger/resolution frameworks).\"", "query_type": "Multi-hop Reasoning", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "96-98" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q56", "number": 56, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "Which regulators control the operational activities of the different segments of Bangladesh's financial market?", "answer": "Bangladesh Bank regulates the money market and the foreign exchange market; the Bangladesh Securities and Exchange Commission (BSEC) regulates the capital market; the Insurance Development and Regulatory Authority (IDRA) regulates insurance companies; and the Microcredit Regulatory Authority (MRA) regulates microcredit institutions.", "evidence": "Para 9.02: \"Operational activities of these markets are controlled by different regulators: BB (for money market and foreign exchange market), Bangladesh Securities and Exchange Commission (BSEC) (for capital market), Insurance Development and Regulatory Authority (IDRA) (for insurance companies), and Microcredit Regulatory Authority (MRA) (for microcredit institutions).\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "86" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q57", "number": 57, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "Who chairs the Financial Stability Committee (FSC), how often does it meet, and when was its inaugural meeting?", "answer": "The Governor of Bangladesh Bank chairs the FSC, it meets quarterly (with provision for extraordinary sessions), and its inaugural meeting was convened on 9 July 2025.", "evidence": "Box 9.01: \"The Governor chairs a Committee, which also includes all Deputy Governors, the Chief Economist, the Executive Director in charge of the Financial Stability Department (FSD), and the Directors of nine relevant departments as its members ... Meetings are held quarterly, with provisions for extraordinary sessions if and when needed. The inaugural meeting was convened on 9 July 2025.\"", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text Only", "difficulty": "Easy", "source_page": "89" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q58", "number": 58, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "What was the range of annual weighted average yield for 2-year and 20-year Bangladesh Government Treasury Bonds in FY25?", "answer": "The range of annual weighted average yield was 10.9312 to 12.3000 percent for 2-year bonds and 11.1824 to 12.7393 percent for 20-year bonds.", "evidence": "Table 9.05 (Auctions of Bangladesh Government Treasury Bonds, FY25), The range of annual weighted average yield (%): 2-Year = 10.9312-12.3000, 3-Year = 12.3004-13.1879, 5-Year = 10.3927-12.3963, 10-Year = 10.2334-12.5639, 15-Year = 10.4917-12.6785, 20-Year = 11.1824-12.7393.", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Table Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "88" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q59", "number": 59, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "By major economic purpose, what shares of total loans went to industry, trade and commerce, and consumer finance at end FY25?", "answer": "Industry (term loan and working capital) received 42 percent, trade and commerce 33 percent, and consumer finance 10 percent of total loans; construction, agriculture and others were smaller (7 percent, 4 percent and 4 percent).", "evidence": "Box 9.03, \"Loan Classification: Major Economic Purposes\" pie: Industry (Term Loan & Working Capital) 42%, Trade & Commerce 33%, Consumer Finance 10%, Construction 7%, Agriculture, Fishing & Forestry 4%, Others 4%. Accompanying text: \"the industrial sector receives the highest allocation, accounting for 42 percent of total loans ... Trade and commerce occupies 33 percent of total loans ... Consumer finance represents 10 percent of total loans\".", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Chart Only", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "97" }, { "id": "chapter_9-q60", "number": 60, "chapter": "Chapter 9", "chapter_title": "Financial Market", "question": "By how much did the BDT depreciate against the USD in FY25, and where did the rate stand at end June 2025?", "answer": "The exchange rate depreciated by 3.9 percent in FY25 and stood at BDT 122.8 per USD at end June 2025.", "evidence": "Para 9.39: \"the exchange rate depreciated by 3.9 percent in FY25 and stood at BDT 122.8 at end June 2025 (Chart 9.05).\" Chart 9.05 (BDT-USD Exchange Rates Movement (End Month) in FY25): the end-month line ends near 122.8 in Jun-25, up from about 118 in Jul-24.", "query_type": "Evidence Retrieval", "presentation_format": "Text + Chart", "difficulty": "Medium", "source_page": "95-96" } ]