IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ5/4992916.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Goodness-of-fit for discrete-choice models of borrower default

Author

Listed:
  • Arden Hall

Abstract

Discrete choice models of the probability of default (PD) have several applications in finance. In some applications, such as credit scoring, their value is in ranking applicants or customers by PD. Other applications, such as estimating losses as part of determining capital requirements under Basel, require accuracy for the estimated PD. There is a well-developed set of tests to assess models’ ability to rank-order, and these are sometimes relied upon to assess the accuracy of models’ probability estimates. This paper demonstrates that the rank-order tests are unreliable for assessing models to be used to predict probabilities. This is true even when estimated probabilities will only be used to assign observations to segments. There are other tests, such as the Hosmer–Lemeshow test, which assess magnitude as well as order. While there are some practical difficulties in applying these alternative tests to the data sets typically used for default model estimation, they can provide a better assessment of how well a model fits the data.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ5:4992916
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://www.risk.net/system/files/digital_asset/2017-06/Goodness_of_fit_for_discrete_choice_models_of_borrower_default.pdf
Download Restriction: no
---><---

More about this item

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:rsk:journ5:4992916. 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.

We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Thomas Paine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.risk.net/journal-of-risk-model-validation .

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.