Machine Learning in Credit Risk: Measuring the Dilemma Between Prediction and Supervisory Cost

A. Alonso, Joselyn Carbo
{"title":"Machine Learning in Credit Risk: Measuring the Dilemma Between Prediction and Supervisory Cost","authors":"A. Alonso, Joselyn Carbo","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3724374","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"New reports show that the fi nancial sector is increasingly adopting machine learning (ML) tools to manage credit risk. In this environment, supervisors face the challenge of allowing credit institutions to benefi t from technological progress and financial innovation, while at the same ensuring compatibility with regulatory requirements and that technological neutrality is observed. We propose a new framework for supervisors to measure the costs and benefi ts of evaluating ML models, aiming to shed more light on this technology’s alignment with the regulation. We follow three steps. First, we identify the benefi ts by reviewing the literature. We observe that ML delivers predictive gains of up to 20 % in default classifi cation compared with traditional statistical models. Second, we use the process for validating internal ratings-based (IRB) systems for regulatory capital to detect ML’s limitations in credit risk mangement. We identify up to 13 factors that might constitute a supervisory cost. Finally, we propose a methodology for evaluating these costs. For illustrative purposes, we compute the benefi ts by estimating the predictive gains of six ML models using a public database on credit default. We then calculate a supervisory cost function through a scorecard in which we assign weights to each factor for each ML model, based on how the model is used by the fi nancial institution and the supervisor’s risk tolerance. From a supervisory standpoint,having a structured methodology for assessing ML models could increase transparency and remove an obstacle to innovation in the financial industry.","PeriodicalId":306152,"journal":{"name":"Risk Management eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"22","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk Management eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3724374","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 22

Abstract

New reports show that the fi nancial sector is increasingly adopting machine learning (ML) tools to manage credit risk. In this environment, supervisors face the challenge of allowing credit institutions to benefi t from technological progress and financial innovation, while at the same ensuring compatibility with regulatory requirements and that technological neutrality is observed. We propose a new framework for supervisors to measure the costs and benefi ts of evaluating ML models, aiming to shed more light on this technology’s alignment with the regulation. We follow three steps. First, we identify the benefi ts by reviewing the literature. We observe that ML delivers predictive gains of up to 20 % in default classifi cation compared with traditional statistical models. Second, we use the process for validating internal ratings-based (IRB) systems for regulatory capital to detect ML’s limitations in credit risk mangement. We identify up to 13 factors that might constitute a supervisory cost. Finally, we propose a methodology for evaluating these costs. For illustrative purposes, we compute the benefi ts by estimating the predictive gains of six ML models using a public database on credit default. We then calculate a supervisory cost function through a scorecard in which we assign weights to each factor for each ML model, based on how the model is used by the fi nancial institution and the supervisor’s risk tolerance. From a supervisory standpoint,having a structured methodology for assessing ML models could increase transparency and remove an obstacle to innovation in the financial industry.
信用风险中的机器学习:衡量预测成本与监督成本之间的困境
新的报告显示,金融部门越来越多地采用机器学习(ML)工具来管理信用风险。在这种环境下,监管机构面临的挑战是允许信贷机构从技术进步和金融创新中受益,同时确保符合监管要求并遵守技术中立性。我们为监管者提出了一个新的框架,以衡量评估ML模型的成本和收益,旨在更多地阐明该技术与监管的一致性。我们遵循三个步骤。首先,我们通过回顾文献来确定其益处。我们观察到,与传统统计模型相比,ML在默认分类中提供了高达20%的预测增益。其次,我们使用这个过程来验证监管资本的内部评级(IRB)系统,以检测ML在信用风险管理方面的局限性。我们确定了多达13个可能构成监管成本的因素。最后,我们提出了一种评估这些成本的方法。为了便于说明,我们通过使用公共信用违约数据库估计六个ML模型的预测收益来计算收益。然后,我们通过记分卡计算监管成本函数,其中我们根据金融机构使用模型的方式和监管者的风险承受能力,为每个ML模型的每个因素分配权重。从监管的角度来看,有一个结构化的方法来评估机器学习模型可以提高透明度,并消除金融行业创新的障碍。
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