A critique of credit risk models with evidence from mid-cap firms

David E. Allen, Robert J. Powell, Abhay K. Singh

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterResearchpeer-review

Abstract

The significant problems experienced by banks during the global financial crisis (GFC) have highlighted the critical importance of measuring and providing for credit risk. This chapter will examine three popular categories of credit risk measurement models and provide an analysis of the relative shortcomings and advantages of each method. The categories include ratings based models, financial statement analysis models, and the Merton / KMV structural model. Each model assesses different criteria, and responds differently to dynamic economic circumstances. As part of our assessment of these models, we provide a US-based empirical analysis, using a mid-cap data set that spans a 10-year time frame, and that includes the pre-GFC, GFC, and post-GFC periods. Outputs for each of the three model categories are benchmarked against actual impaired assets and defaults. We find the key advantages of the ratings and accounting based models to be the wide range of factors included in the initial analysis, but that they are very slow to respond to changing economic conditions. Structural models, on the other hand, while factoring in lesser factors into the initial analysis, are very responsive to dynamic conditions. An understanding of the merits and disadvantages of the various models can assist banks and other credit modelers in choosing between the available credit modeling techniques.
LanguageEnglish
Title of host publicationQuantitative financial risk management
Subtitle of host publicationtheory and practice
EditorsConstantin Zopounidis, Emilios Galariotis
Place of PublicationHoboken, New Jersey
PublisherWiley-Blackwell, Wiley
Chapter11
Pages296-311
Number of pages16
ISBN (Electronic)9781119080305
ISBN (Print)9781118738184
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Credit risk models
Global financial crisis
Credit
Credit risk
Rating
Structural model
Factors
Disadvantage
Financial statement analysis
Assets
Economic conditions
Factoring
Measurement model
Empirical analysis
Modeling
Economic dynamics
Risk measurement

Cite this

Allen, D. E., Powell, R. J., & Singh, A. K. (2015). A critique of credit risk models with evidence from mid-cap firms. In C. Zopounidis, & E. Galariotis (Eds.), Quantitative financial risk management: theory and practice (pp. 296-311). Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell, Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119080305.ch11
Allen, David E. ; Powell, Robert J. ; Singh, Abhay K. / A critique of credit risk models with evidence from mid-cap firms. Quantitative financial risk management: theory and practice. editor / Constantin Zopounidis ; Emilios Galariotis. Hoboken, New Jersey : Wiley-Blackwell, Wiley, 2015. pp. 296-311
@inbook{4819e1a9f6b44b3b941f53297a47687b,
title = "A critique of credit risk models with evidence from mid-cap firms",
abstract = "The significant problems experienced by banks during the global financial crisis (GFC) have highlighted the critical importance of measuring and providing for credit risk. This chapter will examine three popular categories of credit risk measurement models and provide an analysis of the relative shortcomings and advantages of each method. The categories include ratings based models, financial statement analysis models, and the Merton / KMV structural model. Each model assesses different criteria, and responds differently to dynamic economic circumstances. As part of our assessment of these models, we provide a US-based empirical analysis, using a mid-cap data set that spans a 10-year time frame, and that includes the pre-GFC, GFC, and post-GFC periods. Outputs for each of the three model categories are benchmarked against actual impaired assets and defaults. We find the key advantages of the ratings and accounting based models to be the wide range of factors included in the initial analysis, but that they are very slow to respond to changing economic conditions. Structural models, on the other hand, while factoring in lesser factors into the initial analysis, are very responsive to dynamic conditions. An understanding of the merits and disadvantages of the various models can assist banks and other credit modelers in choosing between the available credit modeling techniques.",
author = "Allen, {David E.} and Powell, {Robert J.} and Singh, {Abhay K.}",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1002/9781119080305.ch11",
language = "English",
isbn = "9781118738184",
pages = "296--311",
editor = "Constantin Zopounidis and Emilios Galariotis",
booktitle = "Quantitative financial risk management",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell, Wiley",
address = "United Kingdom",

}

Allen, DE, Powell, RJ & Singh, AK 2015, A critique of credit risk models with evidence from mid-cap firms. in C Zopounidis & E Galariotis (eds), Quantitative financial risk management: theory and practice. Wiley-Blackwell, Wiley, Hoboken, New Jersey, pp. 296-311. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119080305.ch11

A critique of credit risk models with evidence from mid-cap firms. / Allen, David E.; Powell, Robert J.; Singh, Abhay K.

Quantitative financial risk management: theory and practice. ed. / Constantin Zopounidis; Emilios Galariotis. Hoboken, New Jersey : Wiley-Blackwell, Wiley, 2015. p. 296-311.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterResearchpeer-review

TY - CHAP

T1 - A critique of credit risk models with evidence from mid-cap firms

AU - Allen, David E.

AU - Powell, Robert J.

AU - Singh, Abhay K.

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - The significant problems experienced by banks during the global financial crisis (GFC) have highlighted the critical importance of measuring and providing for credit risk. This chapter will examine three popular categories of credit risk measurement models and provide an analysis of the relative shortcomings and advantages of each method. The categories include ratings based models, financial statement analysis models, and the Merton / KMV structural model. Each model assesses different criteria, and responds differently to dynamic economic circumstances. As part of our assessment of these models, we provide a US-based empirical analysis, using a mid-cap data set that spans a 10-year time frame, and that includes the pre-GFC, GFC, and post-GFC periods. Outputs for each of the three model categories are benchmarked against actual impaired assets and defaults. We find the key advantages of the ratings and accounting based models to be the wide range of factors included in the initial analysis, but that they are very slow to respond to changing economic conditions. Structural models, on the other hand, while factoring in lesser factors into the initial analysis, are very responsive to dynamic conditions. An understanding of the merits and disadvantages of the various models can assist banks and other credit modelers in choosing between the available credit modeling techniques.

AB - The significant problems experienced by banks during the global financial crisis (GFC) have highlighted the critical importance of measuring and providing for credit risk. This chapter will examine three popular categories of credit risk measurement models and provide an analysis of the relative shortcomings and advantages of each method. The categories include ratings based models, financial statement analysis models, and the Merton / KMV structural model. Each model assesses different criteria, and responds differently to dynamic economic circumstances. As part of our assessment of these models, we provide a US-based empirical analysis, using a mid-cap data set that spans a 10-year time frame, and that includes the pre-GFC, GFC, and post-GFC periods. Outputs for each of the three model categories are benchmarked against actual impaired assets and defaults. We find the key advantages of the ratings and accounting based models to be the wide range of factors included in the initial analysis, but that they are very slow to respond to changing economic conditions. Structural models, on the other hand, while factoring in lesser factors into the initial analysis, are very responsive to dynamic conditions. An understanding of the merits and disadvantages of the various models can assist banks and other credit modelers in choosing between the available credit modeling techniques.

U2 - 10.1002/9781119080305.ch11

DO - 10.1002/9781119080305.ch11

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9781118738184

SP - 296

EP - 311

BT - Quantitative financial risk management

A2 - Zopounidis, Constantin

A2 - Galariotis, Emilios

PB - Wiley-Blackwell, Wiley

CY - Hoboken, New Jersey

ER -

Allen DE, Powell RJ, Singh AK. A critique of credit risk models with evidence from mid-cap firms. In Zopounidis C, Galariotis E, editors, Quantitative financial risk management: theory and practice. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell, Wiley. 2015. p. 296-311 https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119080305.ch11