IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ5/7736716.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determination of weights for an optimal credit rating model based on default and nondefault distance maximization

Author

Listed:
  • Guotai Chi
  • Kunpeng Yuan
  • Ying Zhou
  • Lingling Gong

Abstract

The reasonableness of indicator weights is a key determinant of the reliability of a credit rating system. An unreliable credit rating system can lead to incorrect decisions on security investments, loan approvals and other relevant issues. Several combinations of weights are possible in such systems. Thus, it may be straightforward to determine a reasonable weight for a single indicator, but difficult to determine those for a group of indicators, and especially difficult to determine the optimal weights for such a group in a credit rating system. This study proposes a credit rating model that accurately identifies default and nondefault companies by maximizing intergroup credit score deviations and minimizing intragroup deviations. Further, this study establishes a model for determining the optimal weights for a set of indicators in a credit rating system. The empirical results show that the proposed optimal weight-based model outperforms four other weighting models (entropy weighting model, average variance weighting model, coefficient of variation weighting model and deviation weighting model). Lastly, the results show that nonfinancial indicators have a greater effect on the credit status of Chinese small and medium-sized enterprises than financial indicators do.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ5:7736716
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://www.risk.net/system/files/digital_asset/2021-02/Determination_of_weights_for_an_optimal_credit_rating_model_final.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:journ5:7736716. 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.