IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Comparison of modeling methods for Loss Given Default

  • Qi, Min
  • Zhao, Xinlei
Registered author(s):

    We compare six modeling methods for Loss Given Default (LGD). We find that non-parametric methods (regression tree and neural network) perform better than parametric methods both in and out of sample when over-fitting is properly controlled. Among the parametric methods, fractional response regression has a slight edge over OLS regression. Performance of the transformation methods (inverse Gaussian and beta transformation) is very sensitive to [epsilon], a small adjustment made to LGDs of 0 or 1 prior to transformation. Model fit is poor when [epsilon] is too small or too large, although the fitted LGDs have strong bi-modal distribution with very small [epsilon]. Therefore, models that produce strong bi-model pattern do not necessarily have good model fit and accurate LGD predictions. Even with an optimal [epsilon], the performance of the transformation methods can only match that of the OLS.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378426611001166
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Banking & Finance.

    Volume (Year): 35 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 11 (November)
    Pages: 2842-2855

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:jbfina:v:35:y:2011:i:11:p:2842-2855
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbf

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Bastos, João A., 2010. "Forecasting bank loans loss-given-default," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 2510-2517, October.
    2. Daniel Covitz & Song Han, 2004. "An empirical analysis of bond recovery rates: exploring a structural view of default," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2005-10, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    3. Qi, Min & Yang, Xiaolong, 2009. "Loss given default of high loan-to-value residential mortgages," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 788-799, May.
    4. Acharya, Viral V. & Bharath, Sreedhar T. & Srinivasan, Anand, 2007. "Does industry-wide distress affect defaulted firms? Evidence from creditor recoveries," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 787-821, September.
    5. Papke, Leslie E & Wooldridge, Jeffrey M, 1996. "Econometric Methods for Fractional Response Variables with an Application to 401(K) Plan Participation Rates," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(6), pages 619-32, Nov.-Dec..
    6. Merton, Robert C., 1973. "On the pricing of corporate debt: the risk structure of interest rates," Working papers 684-73., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    7. Dermine, J. & de Carvalho, C. Neto, 2006. "Bank loan losses-given-default: A case study," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 1219-1243, April.
    8. Edward Altman & Andrea Resti & Andrea Sironi, 2004. "Default Recovery Rates in Credit Risk Modelling: A Review of the Literature and Empirical Evidence," Economic Notes, Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA, vol. 33(2), pages 183-208, 07.
    9. Stefano Caselli & Stefano Gatti & Francesca Querci, 2008. "The Sensitivity of the Loss Given Default Rate to Systematic Risk: New Empirical Evidence on Bank Loans," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 1-34, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jbfina:v:35:y:2011:i:11:p:2842-2855. 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: (Zhang, Lei)

    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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.