另类信用评分的银行业务:审计美国消费贷款的计算基础设施

IF 4.6 1区 社会学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Environment and Planning A-Economy and Space Pub Date : 2023-05-10 DOI:10.1177/0308518x231174026
Michael McCanless
{"title":"另类信用评分的银行业务:审计美国消费贷款的计算基础设施","authors":"Michael McCanless","doi":"10.1177/0308518x231174026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Alternative credit scores have become an increasingly important tool for lenders to assess risk and authorize investment in consumer debt. Using alternative data and processing techniques that leverage machine learning (ML) and Artificial Intelligence (AI), these models are designed to bypass existing barriers to risk-based pricing, which is the idea that financial institutions offer different interest rates to consumers based on their likelihood of default. Through an algorithmic audit of one lender's (Upstart) credit scoring model, I find that alternative data, particularly whether an applicant has a bachelor's degree, strongly impacted loan outcomes. This raises important equity concerns about overhauling lending criteria via opaque models that restructure the logic of risk assessment. In following the logic of risk assessment generated by Upstart's model, I also audit three fintech-bank partnerships and examine the balance sheets of banks providing capital via Upstart's platform. This is done to demonstrate rising capital allocation to these types of loans at banks engaged in fintech-bank partnerships, in one case rising from 0.14% to 15.6% of the banks’ balance sheet over three years. My analysis shows that alternative credit scoring systems function as a key piece of calculative infrastructure, which allows some institutions to bypass barriers to risk-based pricing, and becomes an infrastructural site for tech startups to partner with financial institutions seeking out new sources of revenue.","PeriodicalId":48432,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Planning A-Economy and Space","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Banking on alternative credit scores: Auditing the calculative infrastructure of U.S. consumer lending\",\"authors\":\"Michael McCanless\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0308518x231174026\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Alternative credit scores have become an increasingly important tool for lenders to assess risk and authorize investment in consumer debt. Using alternative data and processing techniques that leverage machine learning (ML) and Artificial Intelligence (AI), these models are designed to bypass existing barriers to risk-based pricing, which is the idea that financial institutions offer different interest rates to consumers based on their likelihood of default. Through an algorithmic audit of one lender's (Upstart) credit scoring model, I find that alternative data, particularly whether an applicant has a bachelor's degree, strongly impacted loan outcomes. This raises important equity concerns about overhauling lending criteria via opaque models that restructure the logic of risk assessment. In following the logic of risk assessment generated by Upstart's model, I also audit three fintech-bank partnerships and examine the balance sheets of banks providing capital via Upstart's platform. This is done to demonstrate rising capital allocation to these types of loans at banks engaged in fintech-bank partnerships, in one case rising from 0.14% to 15.6% of the banks’ balance sheet over three years. My analysis shows that alternative credit scoring systems function as a key piece of calculative infrastructure, which allows some institutions to bypass barriers to risk-based pricing, and becomes an infrastructural site for tech startups to partner with financial institutions seeking out new sources of revenue.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48432,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environment and Planning A-Economy and Space\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environment and Planning A-Economy and Space\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518x231174026\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environment and Planning A-Economy and Space","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518x231174026","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

替代信用评分已成为贷方评估风险和授权消费者债务投资的越来越重要的工具。这些模型利用机器学习(ML)和人工智能(AI)的替代数据和处理技术,旨在绕过基于风险定价的现有障碍,即金融机构根据消费者违约的可能性向其提供不同的利率。通过对一家贷款机构(Upstart)信用评分模型的算法审计,我发现替代数据,特别是申请人是否拥有学士学位,对贷款结果有很大影响。这引发了人们对通过不透明的模型重组风险评估逻辑来改革贷款标准的重大股权担忧。根据Upstart模型产生的风险评估逻辑,我还审计了三家金融科技银行合作伙伴关系,并检查了通过Upstart平台提供资金的银行的资产负债表。这样做是为了证明,在与金融科技银行合作的银行中,这类贷款的资本配置不断增加,在一个案例中,三年内从银行资产负债表的0.14%上升到15.6%。我的分析表明,替代信用评分系统是计算基础设施的关键组成部分,它使一些机构能够绕过基于风险的定价障碍,并成为科技初创公司与寻求新收入来源的金融机构合作的基础设施站点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Banking on alternative credit scores: Auditing the calculative infrastructure of U.S. consumer lending
Alternative credit scores have become an increasingly important tool for lenders to assess risk and authorize investment in consumer debt. Using alternative data and processing techniques that leverage machine learning (ML) and Artificial Intelligence (AI), these models are designed to bypass existing barriers to risk-based pricing, which is the idea that financial institutions offer different interest rates to consumers based on their likelihood of default. Through an algorithmic audit of one lender's (Upstart) credit scoring model, I find that alternative data, particularly whether an applicant has a bachelor's degree, strongly impacted loan outcomes. This raises important equity concerns about overhauling lending criteria via opaque models that restructure the logic of risk assessment. In following the logic of risk assessment generated by Upstart's model, I also audit three fintech-bank partnerships and examine the balance sheets of banks providing capital via Upstart's platform. This is done to demonstrate rising capital allocation to these types of loans at banks engaged in fintech-bank partnerships, in one case rising from 0.14% to 15.6% of the banks’ balance sheet over three years. My analysis shows that alternative credit scoring systems function as a key piece of calculative infrastructure, which allows some institutions to bypass barriers to risk-based pricing, and becomes an infrastructural site for tech startups to partner with financial institutions seeking out new sources of revenue.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
100
期刊介绍: Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space is a pluralist and heterodox journal of economic research, principally concerned with questions of urban and regional restructuring, globalization, inequality, and uneven development. International in outlook and interdisciplinary in spirit, the journal is positioned at the forefront of theoretical and methodological innovation, welcoming substantive and empirical contributions that probe and problematize significant issues of economic, social, and political concern, especially where these advance new approaches. The horizons of Economy and Space are wide, but themes of recurrent concern for the journal include: global production and consumption networks; urban policy and politics; race, gender, and class; economies of technology, information and knowledge; money, banking, and finance; migration and mobility; resource production and distribution; and land, housing, labor, and commodity markets. To these ends, Economy and Space values a diverse array of theories, methods, and approaches, especially where these engage with research traditions, evolving debates, and new directions in urban and regional studies, in human geography, and in allied fields such as socioeconomics and the various traditions of political economy.
期刊最新文献
Any Time, Any Place, Any Way, Any Pace: Markets, EdTech, and the spaces of schooling. Inclusive growth, public transit infrastructure investments and neighbourhood trajectories of inequality in Montreal. Doing economics differently. Applying the global wealth chain typology to property purchases in the Liverpool and Merseyside Area Does urbanization depend on in-migration? Demography, mobility, and India's urban transition
×
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