IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ5/7955423.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Forecasting the loss given default of bank loans with a hybrid multilayer LGD model by extending multidimensional signals

Author

Listed:
  • Mengting Fan
  • Zan Mo
  • Qizhi Zhao
  • Hongming Gao
  • Hongwei Liu
  • Hui Zhu

Abstract

According to the Basel II and Basel III accords, loss given default (LGD) is an important component of credit risk assessment. To improve the accuracy of LGD prediction, this paper uses signaling theory and machine learning methods to study the LGD predictions of commercial banks by considering the venture quality and level of uncertainty. First, from the perspective of signal costs, signaling theory is used to analyze the impacts of venture quality and extended level of uncertainty signals on LGD. Then, a new hybrid multilayer LGD model-based hierarchical framework is proposed for studying the LGD predictions of commercial banks in a high-dimensional unbalanced data context. The experimental results demonstrate that the venture quality and level of uncertainty significantly affect LGD. Additionally, the hybrid multilayer LGD model – consisting of logistic classification, random oversampling examples combined with random forest classification and ordinary least squares regression – not only yields high levels of prediction accuracy and interpretability in high-dimensional unbalanced data contexts but is also robust regardless of the selection of the training set and samples used. The results of the study serve as an important reference for decision-making by commercial banks in their assessment of default losses and the risk management of small/startup companies.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ5:7955423
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://www.risk.net/system/files/digital_asset/2022-12/jrmv_fan_online_early.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:journ5:7955423. 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.