Comparing debt characteristics and LGD models for different collections policies

L.C. Thomas, A. Matuszyk and A. Moore

International Journal of Forecasting, 2012, vol. 28, issue 1, 196-203

Abstract: This paper discusses the similarities and differences in the collection process between in-house and 3rd party collection. The objective is to show that, although the same type of modelling approach to estimating the Loss Given Default (LGD) can be used in both cases, the details will be significantly different. In particular, the form of the LGD distribution suggests that one needs to split the distribution in different ways in the two cases, as well as using different variables. The comparisons are made using two data sets of the collection outcomes from two sets of unsecured consumer defaulters.

Keywords: Credit risk; Collection process; LGD modelling (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2012
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (7)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169207011000203
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:intfor:v:28:y:2012:i:1:p:196-203

DOI: 10.1016/j.ijforecast.2010.11.004

Access Statistics for this article

International Journal of Forecasting is currently edited by R. J. Hyndman

More articles in International Journal of Forecasting from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().