206 
BANKING STANDARDS 
TABLE 170 
CoMPARATIVE MEASURES OF REGRESSION TO TYPE FOR RATIOS OF TOTAL 
EXPENSE To EARNING ASSETS, MEMBER BANKS, NEW YORK 
FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT, 1923-1925 
(Percentage Differences from Yearly Averages for all Banks. See page 293.) 
PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCES: 
(First Year of Each 
Pair of Years) 
ve f 
Position 
Groups 
Average 
40 and over 
30 and under 40 
20 and under 30 
10 and under 20 
Tnder 10 
Above 
Below 
Under 10 
ro and under 20 
20 and under 30 
30 and under 40 
10 and over 
Average 
Te 
All Pairs 
D1rrERENCES BY PAIRS OF YEARS 
1923 and 1024 
1924 and 192% 
Second 
year 
less than 
First 
year® 
— 2.7 
—15.0 
—20.0 
- 7.1 
— 0.5 
~~ 1.8 
Number 
Second 
years 
'ess than 
First 
yranpa® 
Number 
Second 
year 
les: than 
First 
vear® 
> 
~ 
Tr 
+ 1.4 
+ 1.9 
+ 4.3 
+ 5.0 
%= 0.0 
+ 1.0 
*The signs relate to the prevailing changes in the ratios themselves compared with the averages in the 
first and the second years, minus (—) indicating that the ratios decrease, and plus (+) that they increase, 
the larger the difference between the deviations in the first and 
in the second years. That is, the ratios regress to type, the 
types in each of the years being the average amounts for all 
banks being considered. Conditions essentially duplicating those 
just described for the New York district banks were seen to 
characterize the member banks in the First district.}® Are these 
results due to methods of manipulating the data? They did 
not appear to be in the case of the Boston banks, inasmuch 
as similar results were secured by different methods, and there 
are equally valid reasons for believing that they are not so 
in the case of the New York banks. This conclusion follows 
because of the fact that (1) the same phenomenon appears 
when, as in the case of the Boston banks,!! the deviations in 
the first and in the second of each pair of years are taken from 
the respective city-group and volume-group averages, and (2) 
when the ratios are studied without respect to averages as 
standards of reference.!? 
"10 See Table 168. 11 See Table 160. 12 See Table 170.