IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/jorsoc/v61y2010i3d10.1057_jors.2009.66.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of missing data in credit risk scoring. A comparative analysis of methods to achieve robustness in the absence of sufficient data

Author

Listed:
  • R Florez-Lopez

    (University of Leon)

Abstract

The 2004 Basel II Accord has pointed out the benefits of credit risk management through internal models using internal data to estimate risk components: probability of default (PD), loss given default, exposure at default and maturity. Internal data are the primary data source for PD estimates; banks are permitted to use statistical default prediction models to estimate the borrowers’ PD, subject to some requirements concerning accuracy, completeness and appropriateness of data. However, in practice, internal records are usually incomplete or do not contain adequate history to estimate the PD. Current missing data are critical with regard to low default portfolios, characterised by inadequate default records, making it difficult to design statistically significant prediction models. Several methods might be used to deal with missing data such as list-wise deletion, application-specific list-wise deletion, substitution techniques or imputation models (simple and multiple variants). List-wise deletion is an easy-to-use method widely applied by social scientists, but it loses substantial data and reduces the diversity of information resulting in a bias in the model's parameters, results and inferences. The choice of the best method to solve the missing data problem largely depends on the nature of missing values (MCAR, MAR and MNAR processes) but there is a lack of empirical analysis about their effect on credit risk that limits the validity of resulting models. In this paper, we analyse the nature and effects of missing data in credit risk modelling (MCAR, MAR and NMAR processes) and take into account current scarce data set on consumer borrowers, which include different percents and distributions of missing data. The findings are used to analyse the performance of several methods for dealing with missing data such as likewise deletion, simple imputation methods, MLE models and advanced multiple imputation (MI) alternatives based on MarkovChain-MonteCarlo and re-sampling methods. Results are evaluated and discussed between models in terms of robustness, accuracy and complexity. In particular, MI models are found to provide very valuable solutions with regard to credit risk missing data.

Suggested Citation

  • R Florez-Lopez, 2010. "Effects of missing data in credit risk scoring. A comparative analysis of methods to achieve robustness in the absence of sufficient data," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(3), pages 486-501, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:jorsoc:v:61:y:2010:i:3:d:10.1057_jors.2009.66
    DOI: 10.1057/jors.2009.66
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/jors.2009.66
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/jors.2009.66?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Horton, Nicholas J. & Kleinman, Ken P., 2007. "Much Ado About Nothing: A Comparison of Missing Data Methods and Software to Fit Incomplete Data Regression Models," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 61, pages 79-90, February.
    2. Katja Pluto & Dirk Tasche, 2006. "Estimating Probabilities of Default for Low Default Portfolios," Springer Books, in: Bernd Engelmann & Robert Rauhmeier (ed.), The Basel II Risk Parameters, chapter 0, pages 79-103, Springer.
    3. Little, Roderick J A, 1988. "Missing-Data Adjustments in Large Surveys: Reply," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 6(3), pages 300-301, July.
    4. Carey, Mark & Hrycay, Mark, 2001. "Parameterizing credit risk models with rating data," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 197-270, January.
    5. Kasper Roszbach, 2004. "Bank Lending Policy, Credit Scoring, and the Survival of Loans," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(4), pages 946-958, November.
    6. King, Gary & Honaker, James & Joseph, Anne & Scheve, Kenneth, 2001. "Analyzing Incomplete Political Science Data: An Alternative Algorithm for Multiple Imputation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(1), pages 49-69, March.
    7. Horton N.J. & Lipsitz S.R. & Parzen M., 2003. "A Potential for Bias When Rounding in Multiple Imputation," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 57, pages 229-232, November.
    8. James R. Carpenter & Michael G. Kenward & Stijn Vansteelandt, 2006. "A comparison of multiple imputation and doubly robust estimation for analyses with missing data," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 169(3), pages 571-584, July.
    9. Joseph G. Ibrahim & Ming-Hui Chen & Stuart R. Lipsitz & Amy H. Herring, 2005. "Missing-Data Methods for Generalized Linear Models: A Comparative Review," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 100, pages 332-346, March.
    10. Jacobson, Tor & Roszbach, Kasper, 2003. "Bank lending policy, credit scoring and value-at-risk," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 615-633, April.
    11. Little, Roderick J A, 1988. "Missing-Data Adjustments in Large Surveys," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 6(3), pages 287-296, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Andreeva, Galina & Calabrese, Raffaella & Osmetti, Silvia Angela, 2016. "A comparative analysis of the UK and Italian small businesses using Generalised Extreme Value models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(2), pages 506-516.
    2. Gabrel, Virginie & Murat, Cécile & Thiele, Aurélie, 2014. "Recent advances in robust optimization: An overview," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(3), pages 471-483.
    3. Yu, Lean & Huang, Xiaowen & Yin, Hang, 2020. "Can machine learning paradigm improve attribute noise problem in credit risk classification?," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 440-455.
    4. Perko, Igor, 2017. "Behaviour-based short-term invoice probability of default evaluation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(3), pages 1045-1054.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jared S. Murray & Jerome P. Reiter, 2016. "Multiple Imputation of Missing Categorical and Continuous Values via Bayesian Mixture Models With Local Dependence," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 111(516), pages 1466-1479, October.
    2. Chenyang Gu & Roee Gutman, 2017. "Combining item response theory with multiple imputation to equate health assessment questionnaires," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 73(3), pages 990-998, September.
    3. Gabriele Beissel Durrant, 2009. "Imputation Methods for Handling Item-Nonresponse in the Social Sciences: A Methodological Review," Working Papers id:2007, eSocialSciences.
    4. Joost Ginkel & Pieter Kroonenberg, 2014. "Using Generalized Procrustes Analysis for Multiple Imputation in Principal Component Analysis," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 31(2), pages 242-269, July.
    5. Verbeek, M.J.C.M. & Nijman, T.E., 1992. "Incomplete panels and selection bias : A survey," Discussion Paper 1992-7, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    6. Gerko Vink & Laurence E. Frank & Jeroen Pannekoek & Stef Buuren, 2014. "Predictive mean matching imputation of semicontinuous variables," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 68(1), pages 61-90, February.
    7. Roman Bohdan & Elizabeth Tipton & Dean Kiefer & Arsen Djatej, 2014. "The Case of Minority Small Business Owners: Empirical Evidence of Problems in Loan Financing," International Journal of Finance & Banking Studies, Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 3(3), pages 01-13, July.
    8. Dang, Hai-Anh & Carletto, Calogero, 2022. "Recall Bias Revisited: Measure Farm Labor Using Mixed-Mode Surveys and Multiple Imputation," IZA Discussion Papers 14997, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Daniel Schunk, 2007. "A Markov Chain Monte Carlo Multiple Imputation Procedure for Dealing with Item Nonresponse in the German SAVE Survey," MEA discussion paper series 07121, Munich Center for the Economics of Aging (MEA) at the Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy.
    10. Zachary H. Seeskin, 2016. "Evaluating the Use of Commercial Data to Improve Survey Estimates of Property Taxes," CARRA Working Papers 2016-06, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    11. F. Di Lascio & Simone Giannerini & Alessandra Reale, 2015. "Exploring copulas for the imputation of complex dependent data," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 24(1), pages 159-175, March.
    12. Ankita Patnaik & Jeffrey Hemmeter & Arif Mamun, "undated". "Promoting Readiness of Minors with Autism Spectrum Disorder: Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial," Mathematica Policy Research Reports a74c93d9bdce40709ad81cdbc, Mathematica Policy Research.
    13. McDonough, Ian K. & Millimet, Daniel L., 2017. "Missing data, imputation, and endogeneity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 199(2), pages 141-155.
    14. Westermeier, Christian & Grabka, Markus M., 2016. "Longitudinal Wealth Data and Multiple Imputation: An Evaluation Study," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 10(3), pages 237-252.
    15. Youngjoo Cho & Debashis Ghosh, 2021. "Quantile-Based Subgroup Identification for Randomized Clinical Trials," Statistics in Biosciences, Springer;International Chinese Statistical Association, vol. 13(1), pages 90-128, April.
    16. Lkhagvadorj Munkhdalai & Tsendsuren Munkhdalai & Oyun-Erdene Namsrai & Jong Yun Lee & Keun Ho Ryu, 2019. "An Empirical Comparison of Machine-Learning Methods on Bank Client Credit Assessments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-23, January.
    17. Zhong, Hua & Hu, Wuyang, 2015. "Farmers’ Willingness to Engage in Best Management Practices: an Application of Multiple Imputation," 2015 Annual Meeting, January 31-February 3, 2015, Atlanta, Georgia 196962, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    18. Yanqing Sun & Li Qi & Fei Heng & Peter B. Gilbert, 2020. "A hybrid approach for the stratified mark‐specific proportional hazards model with missing covariates and missing marks, with application to vaccine efficacy trials," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 69(4), pages 791-814, August.
    19. Galema, Rients, 2020. "Credit rationing in P2P lending to SMEs: Do lender-borrower relationships matter?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    20. Giorgio Di Pietro & Andrea Cutillo, 2006. "Does Attending a Catholic School Make a Difference? Evidence From Italy," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(3), pages 193-234, July.

    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:pal:jorsoc:v:61:y:2010:i:3:d:10.1057_jors.2009.66. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/ .

    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.