Using machine learning for detecting liquidity risk in banks

Rweyemamu Ignatius Barongo , Jimmy Tibangayuka Mbelwa
{"title":"Using machine learning for detecting liquidity risk in banks","authors":"Rweyemamu Ignatius Barongo ,&nbsp;Jimmy Tibangayuka Mbelwa","doi":"10.1016/j.mlwa.2023.100511","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The accurate classification of banks’ Liquidity Risk (LR) for regulatory supervision is hindered by limitations in the measures, such as Minimum Liquid Assets (MLA), Net-Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR), and Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR). This study addressed two limitations on data integrity vulnerabilities and the narrow composition of LR factors excluding practical LR determinants such as credit portfolio quality, market conditions, strategies of assets and funding. Theoretical gaps included the eight new LR factors in this study, benchmarking study results with measures to interpret the studies’ contributions and the selection of suitable prediction methods for non-linear, imbalanced, scaling, and near real-time data. We used data from 38 Tanzanian banks (2010-2021) from the Bank of Tanzania (BOT). Extensive factors experimentation using Random Forest (RF) and Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) models identified ten features for Machine Learning (ML) analysis and LR rating as output. A hybrid RF-MLP model with a 199-tree RF and 10-512-250-120-80-60-6 MLP was developed. It increased LR sensitivity and reduced RF and MLP model limitations through generalisation, and demonstrated statistical and practical performance. It minimised classification errors with Type I and II errors, and Negative Likelihood of 0.8%, 9.1%, and 1%; Discriminant Power of 2.61; and 90% to 96% Accuracy, Balanced Accuracy, Precision, Recall, F1 Score, G-mean, Cohen’s Kappa, Youden Index, and Area Under the Curve. Past LR scenarios confirmed RF-MLP performance improvement over MLA. The unavailability of LCR and NSFR data hindered a comprehensive evaluation. This study extended LR factors and proposed a model to complement LR classification.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":74093,"journal":{"name":"Machine learning with applications","volume":"15 ","pages":"Article 100511"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666827023000646/pdfft?md5=1a2b1e48bca56948123e7558d5a1060e&pid=1-s2.0-S2666827023000646-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Machine learning with applications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666827023000646","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The accurate classification of banks’ Liquidity Risk (LR) for regulatory supervision is hindered by limitations in the measures, such as Minimum Liquid Assets (MLA), Net-Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR), and Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR). This study addressed two limitations on data integrity vulnerabilities and the narrow composition of LR factors excluding practical LR determinants such as credit portfolio quality, market conditions, strategies of assets and funding. Theoretical gaps included the eight new LR factors in this study, benchmarking study results with measures to interpret the studies’ contributions and the selection of suitable prediction methods for non-linear, imbalanced, scaling, and near real-time data. We used data from 38 Tanzanian banks (2010-2021) from the Bank of Tanzania (BOT). Extensive factors experimentation using Random Forest (RF) and Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) models identified ten features for Machine Learning (ML) analysis and LR rating as output. A hybrid RF-MLP model with a 199-tree RF and 10-512-250-120-80-60-6 MLP was developed. It increased LR sensitivity and reduced RF and MLP model limitations through generalisation, and demonstrated statistical and practical performance. It minimised classification errors with Type I and II errors, and Negative Likelihood of 0.8%, 9.1%, and 1%; Discriminant Power of 2.61; and 90% to 96% Accuracy, Balanced Accuracy, Precision, Recall, F1 Score, G-mean, Cohen’s Kappa, Youden Index, and Area Under the Curve. Past LR scenarios confirmed RF-MLP performance improvement over MLA. The unavailability of LCR and NSFR data hindered a comprehensive evaluation. This study extended LR factors and proposed a model to complement LR classification.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用机器学习检测银行流动性风险
最小流动资产(MLA)、净稳定资金比率(NSFR)和流动性覆盖率(LCR)等指标的局限性,阻碍了对银行流动性风险(LR)进行准确分类以进行监管。本研究解决了数据完整性漏洞的两个限制,以及LR因素的狭窄组成,排除了实际的LR决定因素,如信贷组合质量、市场条件、资产和融资策略。理论差距包括本研究中的8个新的LR因素,对研究结果进行基准测试,以解释研究的贡献,以及对非线性、不平衡、缩放和近实时数据选择合适的预测方法。我们使用了坦桑尼亚银行(BOT)的38家坦桑尼亚银行(2010-2021年)的数据。使用随机森林(RF)和多层感知器(MLP)模型进行广泛的因素实验,确定了机器学习(ML)分析和LR评级的十个特征作为输出。建立了具有199树RF和10-512-250-120-80-60-6 MLP的混合RF-MLP模型。它通过泛化提高了LR灵敏度,减少了RF和MLP模型的限制,并证明了统计和实际性能。它最大限度地减少了I型和II型错误的分类错误,负似然为0.8%、9.1%和1%;判别幂为2.61;90%到96%的准确率、平衡准确率、精密度、召回率、F1分数、G-mean、Cohen’s Kappa、Youden指数和曲线下面积。过去的LR场景证实RF-MLP性能优于MLA。LCR和NSFR数据的缺乏阻碍了综合评价。本研究扩展了LR因素,并提出了一个模型来补充LR分类。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Machine learning with applications
Machine learning with applications Management Science and Operations Research, Artificial Intelligence, Computer Science Applications
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
98 days
期刊最新文献
Document Layout Error Rate (DLER) metric to evaluate image segmentation methods Supervised machine learning for microbiomics: Bridging the gap between current and best practices Playing with words: Comparing the vocabulary and lexical diversity of ChatGPT and humans A survey on knowledge distillation: Recent advancements Texas rural land market integration: A causal analysis using machine learning applications
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1