BIS published a working paper that examines how machine learning and non-traditional data affect credit scoring. The paper compares the predictive power of credit scoring models based on machine learning techniques, as used by fintech companies, with that of traditional loss and default models typically used by banks. The results show that the model based on machine learning and non-traditional data used by the fintech company is better able to predict losses and defaults than traditional models in the presence of a negative shock to the aggregate credit supply.
Using proprietary transaction-level data from a leading fintech company in China for the period between May and September 2017, the authors tested the performance of different models to predict losses and defaults, both in normal times and when the economy is subject to a shock. They analyzed the case of an (exogenous) change in regulation policy on shadow banking in China that caused lending to decline and credit conditions to deteriorate. The main conclusions of the paper can be summarized as follows:
- The machine learning-based credit scoring models outperform traditional empirical models (using both traditional and non-traditional information) in predicting borrowers’ losses and defaults.
- Non-traditional information improves the predictive power of the model.
- While the models perform similarly well in normal times, the model based on machine learning is better able to predict losses and defaults following a negative shock to the aggregate credit supply. One possible reason for this is that machine learning can better mine the non-linear relationship between variables in the event of a shock.
- The predictive power of all the models improves when the length of the relationship between bank and customer increases. However, the comparative advantage of the model that uses the fintech credit scoring technique based on machine learning tends to decline when the length of the relationship increases.
Keywords: International, China, Banking, Machine Learning, Credit Scoring, Fintech, Credit Risk, Big Data, BIS
The Bank of England (BoE) published a consultation paper on approach to setting minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL), an operational guide on executing bail-in, and a statement from the Deputy Governor Dave Ramsden.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) is seeking preliminary input on standardization of the proportionality assessment methodology for credit institutions and investment firms.
Certain regulatory authorities in the US are extending period for completion of the review of certain residential mortgage provisions and for publication of notice disclosing the determination of this review until December 20, 2021.
The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) published the policy statement PS18/21, which introduces an amendment in the definition of "higher paid material risk taker" in the Remuneration Part of the PRA Rulebook.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) published its annual report on asset encumbrance in banking sector.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) published a methodological guide to mystery shopping.
The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) released a letter to authorized deposit-taking institutions to provide an update on key policy settings for the capital framework reforms, which will come into effect from January 01, 2023.
The Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures (CPMI) and the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) published a report that assesses the business continuity planning activities of financial market infrastructures or FMIs.
The Bank of England (BoE) published questions and answers (Q&A) on OSCA to BEEDS migration for statistical reporting as well a presentation from the project overview session held with statistical reporters.
The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) is consulting on a technical amendment to the Basel Framework to reflect a new process reviewing the global systemically important bank (G-SIB) assessment methodology.