IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bkr/journl/v80y2021i2p76-95.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Relationship Between the Financial Performance of Banks and the Quality of Credit Scoring Models

Author

Listed:
  • Roman Tikhonov

    (Sberbank)

  • Aleksey Masyutin

    (Sberbank)

  • Vadim Anpilogov

    (Sberbank)

Abstract

Model risk in credit scoring can be understood as the bank's losses associated with a model quality deterioration. Deterioration in model quality entails an incorrect assessment of the creditworthiness of borrowers and leads to an increase in potentially defaulting applications in the loan portfolio, as the bank relies on the model performance when making lending decisions. The relationship between model quality and financial performance is embedded in the confusion matrix, where the value of a type I error indicates the bank's lost profit, and the value of a type II error is equivalent to losses in the event of a default. We propose estimating model risk based on the scenario forecast of model quality or the ranking ability of the Gini model over a given time interval. The result of the analysis is the assessment of the bank's net present value for the current and modified models, depending on the approval level. The proposed approach allows us to solve the problem of the optimal choice of a Gini model and answer the question of how model quality affects financial performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Roman Tikhonov & Aleksey Masyutin & Vadim Anpilogov, 2021. "The Relationship Between the Financial Performance of Banks and the Quality of Credit Scoring Models," Russian Journal of Money and Finance, Bank of Russia, vol. 80(2), pages 76-95, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bkr:journl:v:80:y:2021:i:2:p:76-95
    DOI: 10.31477/rjmf.202102.76
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://rjmf.econs.online/upload/iblock/4da/Quality_of_Credit_Scoring_Models.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31477/rjmf.202102.76?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Valeriane Jokhadze & Wolfgang M. Schmidt, 2020. "Measuring Model Risk In Financial Risk Management And Pricing," International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance (IJTAF), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(02), pages 1-37, April.
    2. Fortunato Pesarin & Luigi Salmaso, 2010. "The permutation testing approach: a review," Statistica, Department of Statistics, University of Bologna, vol. 70(4), pages 481-509.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Henry Penikas, 2023. "Unaccounted model risk for Basel IRB models deemed acceptable by conventional validation criteria," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 25(4), pages 1-25, December.
    2. Henry Penikas, 2022. "Model Risk for Acceptable, but Imperfect, Discrimination and Calibration in Basel PD and LGD Models," Bank of Russia Working Paper Series wps92, Bank of Russia.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Demuynck, Thomas & Salman, Umutcan, 2022. "On the revealed preference analysis of stable aggregate matchings," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 17(4), November.
    2. Mohammed Berkhouch & Fernanda Maria Müller & Ghizlane Lakhnati & Marcelo Brutti Righi, 2022. "Deviation-Based Model Risk Measures," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 59(2), pages 527-547, February.
    3. Antonio D’Ambrosio & Sonia Amodio & Carmela Iorio & Giuseppe Pandolfo & Roberta Siciliano, 2021. "Adjusted Concordance Index: an Extensionl of the Adjusted Rand Index to Fuzzy Partitions," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 38(1), pages 112-128, April.
    4. Laurens Cherchye & Dieter Saelens & Reha Tuncer, 2024. "From unobserved to observed preference heterogeneity: a revealed preference methodology," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 91(363), pages 996-1022, July.
    5. Berthine Nyunga Mpinda & Jules Sadefo-Kamdem & Salomey Osei & Jeremiah Fadugba, 2021. "Accuracies of Model Risks in Finance using Machine Learning," Working Papers hal-03191437, HAL.
    6. Laurens Cherchye & Thomas Demuynck & Bram De Rock & Joshua Lanier, 2020. "Are Consumers Rational ?Shifting the Burden of Proof," Working Papers ECARES 2020-19, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    7. Virginie Rozée & Sayeed Unisa & Elise de La Rochebrochard, 2019. "Sociodemographic characteristics of 96 Indian surrogates: Are they disadvantaged compared with the general population?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-9, March.
    8. Chenyuan Hu & Shuoyan Zhang & Tianyu Gu & Zhuangzhi Yan & Jiehui Jiang, 2022. "Multi-Task Joint Learning Model for Chinese Word Segmentation and Syndrome Differentiation in Traditional Chinese Medicine," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-13, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    model risk; quantitative estimation; bank risk management; credit scoring; machine learning; model; model quality;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C52 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Evaluation, Validation, and Selection
    • C53 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Forecasting and Prediction Models; Simulation Methods
    • C58 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Financial Econometrics
    • G21 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Banks; Other Depository Institutions; Micro Finance Institutions; Mortgages

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bkr:journl:v:80:y:2021:i:2:p:76-95. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Olga Kuvshinova (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cbrgvru.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.