Bank Net Interest Margin Forecasting and Capital Adequacy Stress Testing by Machine Learning Techniques

R. Brummelhuis, Zhongmin Luo
{"title":"Bank Net Interest Margin Forecasting and Capital Adequacy Stress Testing by Machine Learning Techniques","authors":"R. Brummelhuis, Zhongmin Luo","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3282408","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The 2007-09 financial crisis revealed that the investors in the financial market were more concerned about the future as opposed to the current capital adequacy for banks. Stress testing promises to complement the regulatory capital adequacy regimes, which assess a bank's current capital adequacy, with the ability to assess its future capital adequacy based on the projected asset-losses and incomes from the forecasting models from regulators and banks. The effectiveness of stress-test rests on its ability to inform the financial market, which depends on whether or not the market has confidence in the model-projected asset-losses and incomes for banks. Post-crisis studies found that the stress-test results are uninformative and receive insignificant market reactions; others question its validity on the grounds of the poor forecast accuracy using linear regression models which forecast the banking-industry incomes measured by Aggregate Net Interest Margin. Instead, our study focuses on NIM forecasting at an individual bank's level and employs both linear regression and non-linear Machine Learning techniques. First, we present both the linear and non-linear Machine Learning regression techniques used in our study. Then, based on out-of-sample tests and literature-recommended forecasting techniques, we compare the NIM forecast accuracy by 162 models based on 11 different regression techniques, finding that some Machine Learning techniques as well as some linear ones can achieve significantly higher accuracy than the random-walk benchmark, which invalidates the grounds used by the literature to challenge the validity of stress-test. Last, our results from forecast accuracy comparisons are either consistent with or complement those from existing forecasting literature. We believe that the paper is the first systematic study on forecasting bank-specific NIM by Machine Learning Techniques; also, it is a first systematic study on forecast accuracy comparison including both linear and non-linear Machine Learning techniques using financial data for a critical real-world problem; it is a multi-step forecasting example involving iterative forecasting, rolling-origins, recalibration with forecast accuracy measure being scale-independent; robust regression proved to be beneficial for forecasting in presence of outliers. It concludes with policy suggestions and future research directions.","PeriodicalId":376562,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Central Banks - Impacts (Topic)","volume":"92 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Central Banks - Impacts (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3282408","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

The 2007-09 financial crisis revealed that the investors in the financial market were more concerned about the future as opposed to the current capital adequacy for banks. Stress testing promises to complement the regulatory capital adequacy regimes, which assess a bank's current capital adequacy, with the ability to assess its future capital adequacy based on the projected asset-losses and incomes from the forecasting models from regulators and banks. The effectiveness of stress-test rests on its ability to inform the financial market, which depends on whether or not the market has confidence in the model-projected asset-losses and incomes for banks. Post-crisis studies found that the stress-test results are uninformative and receive insignificant market reactions; others question its validity on the grounds of the poor forecast accuracy using linear regression models which forecast the banking-industry incomes measured by Aggregate Net Interest Margin. Instead, our study focuses on NIM forecasting at an individual bank's level and employs both linear regression and non-linear Machine Learning techniques. First, we present both the linear and non-linear Machine Learning regression techniques used in our study. Then, based on out-of-sample tests and literature-recommended forecasting techniques, we compare the NIM forecast accuracy by 162 models based on 11 different regression techniques, finding that some Machine Learning techniques as well as some linear ones can achieve significantly higher accuracy than the random-walk benchmark, which invalidates the grounds used by the literature to challenge the validity of stress-test. Last, our results from forecast accuracy comparisons are either consistent with or complement those from existing forecasting literature. We believe that the paper is the first systematic study on forecasting bank-specific NIM by Machine Learning Techniques; also, it is a first systematic study on forecast accuracy comparison including both linear and non-linear Machine Learning techniques using financial data for a critical real-world problem; it is a multi-step forecasting example involving iterative forecasting, rolling-origins, recalibration with forecast accuracy measure being scale-independent; robust regression proved to be beneficial for forecasting in presence of outliers. It concludes with policy suggestions and future research directions.
基于机器学习技术的银行净息差预测和资本充足率压力测试
2007-09年的金融危机表明,金融市场上的投资者更关心的是未来,而不是银行当前的资本充足率。压力测试有望补充监管资本充足率制度,该制度评估银行当前的资本充足率,并能够根据监管机构和银行预测模型的预计资产损失和收入评估其未来的资本充足率。压力测试的有效性取决于它向金融市场提供信息的能力,而这又取决于市场对模型预测的银行资产损失和收入是否有信心。危机后的研究发现,压力测试结果缺乏信息,市场反应也微不足道;另一些人则质疑其有效性,理由是使用线性回归模型预测银行业收入(以总净息差衡量)的预测准确性较差。相反,我们的研究侧重于单个银行层面的NIM预测,并采用线性回归和非线性机器学习技术。首先,我们介绍了在我们的研究中使用的线性和非线性机器学习回归技术。然后,基于样本外测试和文献推荐的预测技术,我们比较了基于11种不同回归技术的162个模型的NIM预测精度,发现一些机器学习技术以及一些线性技术可以实现比随机漫步基准更高的精度,这使得文献所使用的质疑压力测试有效性的理由无效。最后,我们的预测精度比较结果与现有预测文献的结果一致或互补。我们认为这篇论文是第一个用机器学习技术预测银行特定NIM的系统研究;此外,这是对预测准确性比较的第一个系统研究,包括使用金融数据的线性和非线性机器学习技术来解决关键的现实问题;它是一个涉及迭代预测、滚动原点、再校准的多步预测实例,预测精度测量与尺度无关;鲁棒回归对存在异常值的预测是有益的。最后提出了政策建议和未来的研究方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信