Predicting Default Probabilities for Stress Tests: A Comparison of Models
压力测试中的违约概率预测:模型比较AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
本页为预印本版本;arXiv 收录、作者填写的期刊信息以及作者既有发表经历,都不单独证明本篇已接收。作者发表记录按 OpenAlex 身份与完整姓名、本站覆盖期刊 ISSN 及正式卷期核对,只展示已核实例,档案仍可能误合并。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要明确围绕金融机构压力测试中的信用风险和违约概率预测展开,直接对应金融风险,而非证券收益预测。
压力测试中的违约概率预测:模型比较AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Since the Great Financial Crisis (GFC), the use of stress tests as a tool for assessing the resilience of financial institutions to adverse financial and economic developments has increased significantly. One key part in such exercises is the translation of macroeconomic variables into default probabilities for credit risk by using macrofinancial linkage models. A key requirement for such models is that they should be able to properly detect signals from a wide array of macroeconomic variables in combination with a mostly short data sample. The aim of this paper is to compare a great number of different regression models to find the best performing credit risk model. We set up an estimation framework that allows us to systematically estimate and evaluate a large set of models within the same environment. Our results indicate that there are indeed better performing models than the current state-of-the-art model. Moreover, our comparison sheds light on other potential credit risk models, specifically highlighting the advantages of machine learning models and forecast combinations.