IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ5/7961668.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Enhancing default prediction in alternative lending: leveraging credit bureau data and machine learning

Author

Listed:
  • Zilong Liu
  • Hongyan Liang

Abstract

Alternative lending is a vital source of credit for consumers underserved by traditional banks. This study examines how integrating additional data and advanced machine learning enhances default prediction in this sector. We merge loan records with credit bureau data and compare four variable sets: credit scores alone; loan-specific variables alone; a combination of credit scores and loan variables; and an integration of credit scores, loan variables and more than 300 credit bureau variables selected via least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (Lasso) regression. Our findings show that credit scores alone yield limited accuracy (with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.6), while incorporating loan-specific features significantly improves performance. Further including selected credit bureau variables and tuning hyperparameters boosts predictive power, with a random forest model achieving an AUC of 0.854. Key predictors include credit scores, the loan amount, loan duration, months since the oldest trade, and recent credit inquiries. These results underscore the importance of comprehensive credit bureau data and rigorous model validation in alternative lending, offering practical insights for lenders and policy makers seeking to refine credit risk assessment.

Suggested Citation

  • Zilong Liu & Hongyan Liang, . "Enhancing default prediction in alternative lending: leveraging credit bureau data and machine learning," Journal of Risk Model Validation, Journal of Risk Model Validation.
  • Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ5:7961668
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.risk.net/node/7961668
    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:journ5:7961668. 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-risk-model-validation .

    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.