Comparison of Binary Logit Model and Multinomial Logit Model in Predicting Corporate Failure
A critical issue in the prediction of corporate failures is, whether to categorize sample firms in a binary fashion into failed firms and non-failed firms or to classify failed firms according to multiple financial difficulties. As most previous studies only employ the binary approach in their forecast, this work compares both the binary logit model and the multinomial logit model to determine whether or not the accuracy of forecasting corporate failures can be improved by further classifying financially-failed firms. The binary logit model recognizes slightly-distressed events and bankruptcy-and-reorganizations events both as corporate failure, while the multinomial logit model distinguishes between levels of corporate failure events as slightly-distressed firms and bankruptcy-and-reorganization firms. The empirical results show that the misclassification errors and error costs of the binary logit model are smaller than those of the multinomial logit model, suggesting that the binary logit model performs superior to the multinomial logit model in predicting corporate failure. The comparison results imply that the slightly-distressed firms and bankruptcy-and-reorganization firms are similar in characteristics. The occurrence of slightly-distressed events is already on the verge of bankruptcy, signifying major financial failure in the company operations. In such case, investors and debtors should be especially alert to withdraw their investments or terminate their loans to prevent loss.
Volume (Year): 2 (2012)
Issue (Month): (November)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 17 Alton Towers Circle, Unit 101 Toronto, ON, M1V3L8, Canada|
Web page: http://www.bapress.ca
|Order Information:|| Postal: 17 Alton Towers Circle, Unit 101 Toronto, ON, M1V3L8, Canada|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bap:journl:120409. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Carlson)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.