MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405533422 · doi:10.1093/jrsssa/qnae137

On the convergence of credit risk in current consumer automobile loans

2024· article· en· W4405533422 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jackson P. Lautier, V. A. Pozdnyakov, Jun Yan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A (Statistics in Society) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicBanking stability, regulation, efficiency
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConcordia UniversityBentley UniversityMiddle Tennessee State UniversityUniversity of ConnecticutOhio State UniversityUniversity of Colorado BoulderVanderbilt UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCurrent (fluid)Convergence (economics)BusinessCredit riskEconomicsFinancial systemActuarial scienceMacroeconomicsEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Risk-based pricing within consumer lending is ubiquitous. It considers both prevailing interest rates and the credit profile of a borrower to determine the cost of borrowing. All else equal, higher default risks pay higher borrowing costs. This cost is the annual percentage rate (APR), and it is set at the loan’s origination. A borrower’s credit profile is dynamic, however, and the risk of default gradually declines for current loans. In this article, we derive a novel large-sample statistical hypothesis test suitable for loans sampled from asset-backed securities to populate a credit risk transition matrix between consumer credit risk groups. We find that current loans in all risk groups eventually converge to the top credit tier before scheduled termination, a phenomenon we call credit risk convergence. We then use these convergence estimates for two empirical economic studies. We first estimate that lender conditional risk-adjusted expected profits significantly increase as high-risk, high-APR borrowers stay active and paying. We then estimate current borrowers are entitled to $1,153–2,327 in potential credit-based savings from their improving risk profiles. Because we study consumer auto loans, a large-scale and essential economic good, we opine on the social implications of these results and suggest areas of further study.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A (Statistics in Society)Same topicBanking stability, regulation, efficiencyFrench-language works237,207