SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2202.04218

Managers versus Machines: Do Algorithms Replicate Human Intuition in Credit Ratings?

Abstract

We use machine learning techniques to investigate whether it is possible to replicate the behavior of bank managers who assess the risk of commercial loans made by a large commercial US bank. Even though a typical bank already relies on an algorithmic scorecard process to evaluate risk, bank managers are given significant latitude in adjusting the risk score in order to account for other holistic factors based on their intuition and experience. We show that it is possible to find machine learning algorithms that can replicate the behavior of the bank managers. The input to the algorithms consists of a combination of standard financials and soft information available to bank managers as part of the typical loan review process. We also document the presence of significant heterogeneity in the adjustment process that can be traced to differences across managers and industries. Our results highlight the effectiveness of machine learning based analytic approaches to banking and the potential challenges to high-skill jobs in the financial sector.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Matthew Harding, Gabriel F. R. Vasconcelos. 2022-02-09. Managers versus Machines: Do Algorithms Replicate Human Intuition in Credit Ratings?. https://arxiv.org/abs/2202.04218

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Identification in Linear Quantile Panel Models

This paper studies identification in linear quantile panel models with unrestricted individual heterogeneity when the number of time periods is fixed and small. We impose strict exogeneity, whereby the conditional quantile restriction holds given the individual's complete regressor history and latent individual effect, but otherwise allow the disturbances to be arbitrarily dependent over time.

econ.EM

Experimental Design for Policy Choice

We show how to optimally design experiments when the resulting data will be used to choose a welfare-maximizing policy subject to constraints. A decision maker seeks to maximize Bayes expected welfare by choosing a policy whose effects depend on an unknown finite-dimensional parameter. The decision maker has access to a first wave of experimental data with a fixed design but may choose the design of a second wave that will be collected before choosing the policy. The resulting experimental design--policy choice problem is a very high-dimensional dynamic program that is generally intractable in finite samples. We propose a tractable approximation based on the limit experiment and show it is asymptotically optimal using a new asymptotic representation theorem for adaptive experiments with continuous treatments. We apply the method to a conditional cash transfer experiment and demonstrate the potential for large gains from tailoring the experiment to the policy choice.

econ.EM

Designing Spatial Treatments

Spatial treatments are interventions assigned to locations potentially distinct from those of the responding units. We study their optimal design under a general model in which a unit's response diminishes with distance to a treated site. Our estimand of interest is an ``uncontaminated'' effect equal to the average impact of a single intervention site over all hypothetical sites. We propose a novel design based on a Mat\'{e}rn point process which separates treatments by a distance of at least $r$. A larger choice of $r$ reduces bias by separating interventions but increases variance by reducing their numerosity. We choose $r$ to maximize the rate of convergence of a Horvitz-Thompson estimator and prove that this is minimax rate-optimal. We provide weak conditions under which the estimator is asymptotically normal and propose a variance estimator.

econ.EM