IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ5/7800771.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research on listed companies’ credit ratings, considering classification performance and interpretability

Author

Listed:
  • Zhe Li
  • Guotai Chi
  • Ying Zhou
  • Wenxuan Liu

Abstract

Any credit evaluation system must be able not only to identify defaults, but also to be interpretable and provide reasons for defaults. Therefore, this study uses the correlation coefficient and F-test to select the initial features of a credit evaluation system, and then a validity index for a second selection to ensure that the feature system has the optimum ability to discriminate in determining default status. We omit one feature in each iteration by replacing each feature, calculating the changes in validity index values after deleting this feature and, finally, calculating the ratio of the change value to the sum of all change values. This ratio is then used as the feature’s weight. This study also introduces a data gravity model in predicting defaults, as predicting a validation set’s default status derives the classification threshold to maximize classification accuracy. An empirical analysis of the listed company samples reveals that the feature system selected from 610 features can distinguish between both defaults and nondefaults. Compared with eight other models, our data gravity model not only exhibits good classification performance, but also has interpretability; further, this model can provide at least five-year-ahead forecasting, and can offer a timely risk warning for banks.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ5:7800771
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://www.risk.net/system/files/digital_asset/2021-02/Research_on_listed_companies%E2%80%99_credit_ratings_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:journ5:7800771. 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.