IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-03322462.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A comparison of random forest and logistic regression model in credit scoring of rural households

Author

Listed:
  • Hong Nhung Do

    (NEU - National Economics University [Hanoï, Vietnam])

  • Michel Simioni

    (UMR MoISA - Montpellier Interdisciplinary center on Sustainable Agri-food systems (Social and nutritional sciences) - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement - IRD - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - CIHEAM-IAMM - Centre International de Hautes Etudes Agronomiques Méditerranéennes - Institut Agronomique Méditerranéen de Montpellier - CIHEAM - Centre International de Hautes Études Agronomiques Méditerranéennes - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro - Montpellier SupAgro - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement)

Abstract

Many banks currently use the logistic regression model to do credit scoring to give loans to customers. This paper compares the random forest and logistic regression methods to support the financial analysis functions of the predictive tool for credit scoring. We use the data provided by the Vietnam Access Resource to Household Survey (VARHS), which contains 3,530 households in the year 2014 in 12 provinces of Vietnam. Results show that random forest proved to be a better accurate predictive tool than the logistic regression method. This suggests banks use the random forest to predict potential lenders based on the existing client dataset resulting in saving time and cost to find potential clients.

Suggested Citation

  • Hong Nhung Do & Michel Simioni, 2021. "A comparison of random forest and logistic regression model in credit scoring of rural households," Post-Print hal-03322462, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03322462
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    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:hal:journl:hal-03322462. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.