Communications for Statistical Applications and Methods

The Korean Statistical Society (한국통계학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Some Issues on Criterion for Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test in Credit Rating Model Validation

신용평가모형에서 콜모고로프-스미르노프 검정기준의 문제점

  • Park, Yong-Seok (Research Institute of Applied Statistics, Sungkyunkwan University) ;
  • Hong, Chong-Sun (Department of Statistics, Sungkyunkwan University)
  • 박용석 (성균관대학교 응용통계연구소) ;
  • 홍종선 (성균관대학교선 통계학과)
  • Published : 2008.11.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Kolmogorov-Smirnov(K-S) statistic has been widely used for the model validation of credit rating models. Validation criteria for the K-S statistic is empirically used at the levels of 0.3 or 0.4 which are much larger than the critical values of K-S test statistic. We examine whether these criteria are reasonable and appropriate through the simulations according to various sample sizes, type II error rates, and the ratio of bads among data. The simulation results say that the currently used validation criteria are too lower than values of K-S statistics obtained from any credit rating models in Korea, so that any credit rating models have good discriminatory power. In this work, alternative criteria of K-S statistic are proposed as critical levels under realistic situations of credit rating models.

신용평가모형의 판별력에 대한 적합성 검정방법으로 콜모고로프-스미르노프(K-S) 통계량이 널리 사용되고 있다. K-S 통계량을 통한 모형의 판별력 판단기준으로는 표본수에 의존하는 K-S 검정통계량의 임계값보다 매우 큰 기준인 $0.3{\sim}0.4$의 수준이 일반적으로 적용된다. 본 논문에서는 모의실험을 통해 일반적 판단기준의 타당성을 살펴보았다. 모의실험 결과 국내에서 개발된 대부분의 신용평가모형의 결과를 바탕으로 구한 K-S 통계량은 현재 적용하고 있는 판단기준보다 큰 값을 갖는다는 것을 발견하였다. 따라서 어떠한 신용평가모형 이라도 좋은 판별력을 갖는다고 해석할 수 있다. 본 연구에서는 표본크기와 불량률 그리고 제II종 오류율에 따른 대안적인 임계값을 제안한다.

Keywords

References

  1. 송문섭, 박창순, 이정진 (2003). , 자유아카데미
  2. 홍종선, 이창혁, 김지훈 (2008). 범주형 재무자료에 대한 신용평가모형 검증 비교, <한국통계학회논문집>, 15, 615-631 https://doi.org/10.5351/CKSS.2008.15.4.615
  3. Daniel, W. W. (1990). Applied Nonparametric Statistics, 2nd ed, PWS-Kent, Boston
  4. Engelmann, B., Hayden, E. and Tasche, D. (2003a). Measuring the discriminative power of rating systems, Discussion paper, Series 2: Banking and Financial Supervision
  5. Engelmann, B., Hayden, E. and Tasche, D. (2003b). Testing rating accuracy, Risk, 16, 82-86
  6. Fernandes, J. E. (2005). Corporate credit risk modeling: Quantitative rating system and probability of default estimation. Available from : http://pwp.netcabo.pt/jedfernandes/JEF CorporateCreditRisk.pdf
  7. Hand, D. J. (1994). Assessing classification rules, Journal of applied statistics, 21, 3-16 https://doi.org/10.1080/757583645
  8. Joseph, M. P. (2005). A PD validation framework for Basel II internal ratings-based systems, Credit Scoring and Credit Control IV
  9. Koh, H. C. (1992). The sensitivity of optimal cutoff points to misclassification costs of Type I and Type II errors in the going concern prediction context, Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 19, 187-197 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5957.1992.tb00618.x
  10. Tasche, D. (2006). Validation of internal rating systems and PD estimates, eprint arXiv:physics/0606071
  11. Thomas, L. C., Edelman, D. B. and Crook, J. B. (2002). Credit Scoring and Its Applications, Society for Industrial Mathematics, Philadelphia
  12. Wilkie, A. D. (1992). Measures for comparing scoring systems, Credit Scoring and Credit Control, Eds. Thomas, L. C., Crook, J. N and Edelman, D. B. Oxford: Carendon, 123-138
  13. Wilkie, A. D. (2004). Measures for comparing scoring systems, In Readings in Credit Scoring-recent developments, advances, and aims, Eds. Thomas, L. C., Crook, J. N, and Edelman, D. B. Oxford finance