IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ1/7961585.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How magic a bullet is machine learning for credit analysis? An exploration with fintech lending data

Author

Listed:
  • J. Christina Wang
  • Charles B. Perkins

Abstract

Fintech lending to consumers has grown rapidly since the 2007–9 Great Recession. This study applies machine learning (ML) methods to loan-level data from the largest fintech lender of personal loans to assess whether these techniques can produce more accurate out-of-sample default predictions than standard regression models, as fintech advocates claim. To explain loan outcomes, the analysis incorporates the economic conditions faced by borrowers after origination—an element typically absent from other ML studies of default. For the given data, ML methods do improve prediction accuracy, especially over shorter horizons within a year. However, having more data—up to a point—enhances their relative accuracy, likely due to data or model drift over time, which can cause more complex models to misfire out of sample. Adding standard credit variables beyond a core set offers only marginal gains, implying that unconventional data must be sufficiently informative to benefit consumers with limited credit history. Finally, the study finds little statistically significant evidence that ML methods yield unequal benefits across borrower subgroups defined by risk, income, or location.

Suggested Citation

  • J. Christina Wang & Charles B. Perkins, . "How magic a bullet is machine learning for credit analysis? An exploration with fintech lending data," Journal of Credit Risk, Journal of Credit Risk.
  • Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ1:7961585
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.risk.net/node/7961585
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:rsk:journ1:7961585. 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: Thomas Paine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.risk.net/journal-of-credit-risk .

    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.