外文翻譯---商業(yè)銀行的信用評分步驟

英文原文： A credit scoring approach for the commercial banking sector Ahmet Burak Emel, Arnold Reisman and Reha Yolalan Yapi Kredi Bank, Levent, 80620, Istanbul, Turkey. The Graduate School of Management, Sabanci University, Istanbul, Turkey Available online 15 March 2007 The economic and, therefore, the social well-being of developing countries with fairly privatized economies is highly dependent on the behavior of a countrys commercial banking sector. Banks provide credit to sustain anufacturing, agricultural, commercial and service enterprises. These, in turn, provide jobs thus enhancing purchasing power, consumption, and savings. Bank failures, especially in such settings, send shockwaves affecting the social fabric of the country as a whole and, as experienced recently, (Latin America and Asia) have the potential of a quick global impact. Thus, it is imperative that lending/credit decisions are made as prudently as possible while keeping the decision making process both efficient and effective. Commercial banks provide financial products and services to clients while managing a set of multi-dimensional risks associated with liquidity, capital adequacy, credit, interest and foreign exchange rates, operating and sovereign risks, etc. In this sense, banks may be considered to be “risk machines”. They take risks, and transform or embed such risks to provide products and services. Banks are also “profit-seeking” organizations basically formed to make money for shareholders. In their typical decision-making processes (i.e. pricing, lending, funding, hedging, etc.), they try to optimize their “risk-return” trade-off. Management of risk and of profitability are very closely related. Risk taking is the basic requirement for future profitability. In other words, todays risks may turn up as tomorrows realities. Therefore, banks may not live without managing these risks. Among the different banking risks, credit risk has a potential “social” impact because of the number and diversity of stakeholders affected. Business failures affect shareholders, managers, lenders (banks), suppliers, clients, the financial community, government, competitors, and regulatory bodies, among others. In the age of telecommunications, the ripple effect of a bank failure is virtually instantaneous and such ripples hold the potential of global impact. In order to effectively manage the credit risk exposure of a modern bank, there is thus a strong need for sophisticated decision support systems backed by analytical tools to measure, monitor, manage, and control, financial and operational risks and inefficiencies. Conscious risk-taking decisions call for quantitative risk-management systems, which, in turn, provide the bank early warnings for predicting potential business failures. Thus, an effective risk-monitoring unit supports managers judgments and, hence, the profitability of the bank. A potential clients credit risk level is often evaluated by the banks internal credit scoring models. Such models offer banks a means for evaluating the risk of their credit portfolio, in a timely manner, by centralizing global-exposures data and by analyzing marginal as well as absolute contributions to risk components. These models can offer useful insight and do provide an important body of information to help a bank formulate its risk management strategies. Models that are conceptually sound, empirically validated, backed by good historical data, understood and implemented by management, augment the business success of credit quality. Over the past decade, several financial crises observed in some emerging markets enjoying a recent financial liberalization experience, showed that debt financing built on capital inflow may result in large and sudden capital outflows, thereby causing a domestic “credit crunch”. Experience with these recent crises forced banking authorities, i.e. the Bank of International Settlements (BIS), the World Bank, the IMF, as well as the Federal Reserve. to draw a number of lessons. Hence, they all encourage commercial banks to develop internal models to better quantify financial risks. The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, English and Nelson, the Federal Reserve System Task Force on Internal Credit Risk Models.Lopez and Saidenberg and Treacy and Carey represent some recent documents addressing these issues. Credit scoring has both financial and non-financial aspects. The scope of the current paper, however, is limited to the evaluation of a bank clients financial performance. Studies attempting to measure firm performance on the basis of qualitative data are exemplified by Bertels et al. Formal or mathematical modeling of finance theory began in the late 1950s. The work of Markowitz represents a major milestone. The practice reached its “take-off” stage as a sub-discipline of Finance during the early 1960s. Some of the early efforts were directed at evaluating a firm for purposes of mergers and acquisitions; some dealt with using investment portfolios to manage risk; others dealt with improvement/optimization of a firms financing mix. They were all directed at enhancing extant finance theory toward the goal of guiding decision-makers. One of the fields in which formal or mathematical modeling of finance theory has found widespread application is risk measurement. A firms financial information plays a vital role in decision making of risk-taking activities by different parties in the economy. An extensive literature dedicated to the prediction of business failure as well as credit scoring concepts has emerged in recent years. Financial ratios are the simplest tools for evaluating and predicting the financial performance of firms. They have been used in the literature for many decades. The benefits and limitations of financial ratio analysis are addressed in a widely used text on managerial finance. Financial statements report both on a firms position at a point in time and on its operations over some past period. However, there are still some limitations in using ratio analysis: (i) many large firms operate in a number of different industries. In such cases it is difficult to develop a meaningful set of industry averages for comparative purposes; (ii) inflation badly distorts a firms balance sheet. Moreover, recorded values are often substantially different from their “true” values; (iii) seasonal factors can distort a ratio analysis; (iv) firms can employ “window dressing techniques” to make their financial statements look stronger; (v) it is difficult to generalize about whether a particular ratio is “good” or “bad”; and (vi) a firm may have some ratios looking “good” and others looking “bad” making it difficult to tell whether the firm is, on balance, strong or weak. Across different countries, sectors and/or periods of time, financial ratios that have been found useful in predicting failure differ from study to study. To deal with the above shortcomings of unidimensional financial ratio analysis, a variety of methods have appeared in the literature for modeling the business failure prediction process. An excellent comprehensive literature survey can be found in Dimitras et al. In the late 1960s, discriminant analysis (DA) was introduced to create a composite empirical indicator of financial ratios. Using financial ratios, Beaver developed an indicator that best differentiated between failed and non-failed firms using univariate analysis techniques. Altman established that ratios found not to be very significant by univariate models, could prove somewhat useful in a discriminant function which considers the relationships among variables. Hence, he considered several variables simultaneously using multiple discriminant analysis (MDA). He argued that MDA had the advantage of considering an entire profile of interrelated characteristics common to the relevant firms. That study also aimed to predict future failure on the basis of financial ratios. He concluded that his bankruptcy prediction model was an accurate forecaster of failure for up to 2 years prior to bankruptcy and that the models accuracy diminishes substantially as the lead-time increases. In spite of widespread use of MDA, Altman, confesses to the following weakness of discriminant analysis: Up to this point the sample firms were chosen either by their bankruptcy status (Group 1) or by their similarity to Group 1 in all aspects except their economic well being. But what of the many firms which suffer temporary profitability difficulties, but in actuality do not become bankrupt. During the years that followed, many researchers attempted to increase the success of MDA in predicting business failure. Among these are Eisenbeis; Peel et al.; and Falbo. Such work also involved Turkish firms. Examples are Unal, and Ganamukkala and Karan. Linear probability and multivariate conditional probability models (Logit and Probit) were introduced to the business failure prediction literature in late 1970s. The contribution of these methods was in estimating the probability of a firms failure. The linear probability model is a special case of ordinary least-squares regression with a dichotomous dependent variable. In the 1980s, studies utilizing the recursive partitioning algorithm (RPA) based on a binary classification tree rationale were applied to this problem by Frydman et al. and Srinivasan and Kim. In the 1980s and 1990s, the use of several mathematical programming techniques enriched the literature. The basic goals of these methods were to escape the assumptions and restrictions of previous techniques and to improve classification accuracy. In the early 1990s, decision support systems (DSS) in conjunction with the paradigm of multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM), were introduced to financial classification problems. Zopounidis, Mareschal and Brans Zopounidis et al. Diakoulaki et al., Siskos et al. and Zopounidis and Doumpos were among the studies that measured firm performance aiming at predicting business failure by making use of DSS and MCDM. The ELECTRE method of Roy and the Rough Sets Method of Dimitras et al. represent studies addressing these issues. Development and application of artificial intelligence resulted in the use of expert systems. Neural Network methods were applied to the bankruptcy problem as well. In the late 1990s, data envelopment analysis (DEA) was introduced to the analysis of credit scoring as in Troutt et al., Simak, and Cielen and Vanhoof. As opposed to the broadly known MDA approach for business failure prediction (which requires extra a priori information, i.e. good/bad classification), DEA requires solely ex-post information, i.e. the observed set of inputs and outputs, to calculate the credit scores. Thus, it opened new horizons for credit scoring. DEA, widely known as a non-parametric approach, is basically a mathematical programming technique developed by Charnes, Cooper and Rhodes (CCR) to evaluate the relative efficiency of “decision making units” (DMUs). DEA converts a multiplicity of input and output measures into a unit-free single performance index formed as a ratio of aggregated output to aggregated input. A productivity maximization rationale is elegantly embedded in its original fractional formulation. The capability of dealing with multi-input/multi-output settings provides DEA an edge over other analytical tools. Conceptually, DEA compares the DMUs observed outputs and inputs in order to identify the relative “best practices” for a chosen observation set. Based on these best observations, an efficient frontier is established and the degree of efficiency of other units with respect to the efficient frontier is then measured. Based on its input-oriented DEA formulation, the resulting performance index value (the credibility score, in our context) provides a numerical value E. E lies between zero and one. If E is less than one, the DMU is considered “inefficient” as compared to the efficient frontier derived from best practices. If E is equal to one, the DMU is located on the efficient frontier. Therefore, it can be said that E measures the relative credit riskiness of firms within the bank portfolio. A number of studies have attempted to use statistical methods (such as discriminant, Logit and Probit analyses) with financial ratios to generate early warning signals for distressed banking institutions The idea is to develop meaningful “peer group analysis”, that is, to develop specific financial characteristics that distinguish between two or more groups, for example, failed and non-failed banks, or problem and non-problem banks, with relatively “good” or “bad” financial conditions. However, except when a priori groups are available to provide certain financial profiles for comparison, identifying appropriate peer group analysis is a difficult task. Data envelopment analysis (DEA), which computes a firms efficiency by transforming inputs into outputs relative to its peers, may provide a fine mechanism for deriving appropriate categories for this purpose. An advantage of DEA is that, it uses actual sample data to derive the efficiency frontier against which each unit in the sample is evaluated with no a priori information regarding which inputs and outputs are most important in the evaluation procedure. Instead, the efficient frontier is generated, when a mathematical algorithm is used to calculate the DEA efficiency score for each unit. Although DEA was introduced in the early 1980s, its applications are acquiring more widespread recognition in the financial literature as time passes. 中文翻譯： 商業(yè)銀行的信用評分步驟 在經(jīng)濟(jì)相當(dāng)被私有化的發(fā)展中國家，經(jīng)濟(jì)福利和社會福利與國家的商業(yè)銀行業(yè)的行為有相當(dāng)高的依賴性。銀行給制造業(yè) 、 農(nóng)業(yè) 、 商業(yè)服務(wù)和服務(wù)企業(yè)提供信貸。這些能提供工作、提高購買力、影響消費(fèi)和儲蓄。特別是在此背景下 ， 銀行倒閉其沖擊波會影響到該國的整個社會結(jié)構(gòu)。因此 ， 這是當(dāng)務(wù)之急 ， 貸款 /信貸決定都是一樣謹(jǐn)慎 ， 盡量保持決策過程的效率性和有效性。 商業(yè)銀行對客戶提供金融產(chǎn)品和服務(wù)的同時，還要管理一套聯(lián)系了流動資產(chǎn)、資本充足、信用、利率及匯率方面、操作和主權(quán)風(fēng)險等多維風(fēng)險，從這個意義上講 ， 銀行可能會被認(rèn)為是 “ 風(fēng)險機(jī)器 ” 。他們在提供產(chǎn)品和服務(wù)時，必須承擔(dān)風(fēng)險 ， 嵌入或改造這種風(fēng)險。 銀行也是 “ 追求利潤 ” 組織 ， 其股東基本是以賺錢為主要目的。在典型的決策過程（即價格 ， 貸款 ， 資金 ， 套期保值等） ， 他們試圖優(yōu)化其 “ 風(fēng)險 -收益 ”權(quán)衡。 風(fēng)險管理和贏利的關(guān)系非常密切。風(fēng)險追求是未來盈利能力的基本要求，換句話說，今天的風(fēng)險也許作為明天的現(xiàn)實(shí)出現(xiàn)。所以，商業(yè)銀行部管理好風(fēng) 險就無法生存。 在不同的銀行業(yè)務(wù)風(fēng)險之中 ， 由于賭金保管人數(shù)量和變化影響，信用危險有潛在的 “ 社會 ” 沖擊。在電訊日趨成熟的現(xiàn)代社會 ， 銀行倒閉的波動行為幾乎是在瞬間產(chǎn)生全球性沖擊。為了有效管理現(xiàn)代銀行的信用風(fēng)險，輔助決策支持系統(tǒng)就需要精密的分析工具來衡量，監(jiān)測和管理，和控制財務(wù)與業(yè)務(wù)風(fēng)險和低效率。 意識到冒險的決定 ， 呼吁定量風(fēng)險管理系統(tǒng)提供銀行預(yù)警來預(yù)測潛在的企業(yè)倒閉。因此 ， 盈利的銀行必須使有效的風(fēng)險監(jiān)控單位支持經(jīng)理人的判斷。一個潛在客戶的信用風(fēng)險水平常常用來評價銀行的內(nèi)部信用評分模型。這些目標(biāo) ， 以確定申請人 是否有能力償還的評估信用風(fēng)險貸款，這通常是利用歷史數(shù)據(jù)和統(tǒng)計方法。這些模型能給銀行提供一種手段，以及時評估它們的風(fēng)險信用組合，集中了全球風(fēng)險數(shù)據(jù)并對此進(jìn)行了邊際分析。這些模型還可以提供有用的見解 ， 并提供了一個重要的信息 ， 以幫助銀行制定風(fēng)險管理戰(zhàn)略。實(shí)驗(yàn)驗(yàn)證，數(shù)學(xué)模型是在概念上健全，輔以良好的歷史數(shù)據(jù)，并且對此執(zhí)行管理和理解，以充實(shí)業(yè)務(wù)成功的授信品質(zhì)。 過去十年，對幾個金融危機(jī)的觀測說明，在一些新興市場金融自由化的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，表明債務(wù)融資興建的資本流入可能導(dǎo)致大資金突然外流，從而造成國內(nèi)的 “ 信貸緊縮 ” ?？v觀這些金融 危機(jī)的起因表明 ， 信貸擴(kuò)張的資金主要來自資本流入導(dǎo)致投資過 高 ， 使得銀行和公司部門易受沖擊。最近這些危機(jī)迫使銀行業(yè)監(jiān)管當(dāng)局 ，即國際清算銀行、世界銀行、國際貨幣基金組織以及美國聯(lián)邦儲備委員會 ， 吸取一些教訓(xùn)。因此，他們鼓勵各商業(yè)銀行發(fā)展的內(nèi)部模式，以更好地量化金融風(fēng)險。巴塞爾銀行監(jiān)督委員會， English 和 Nelson、聯(lián)邦儲備系統(tǒng)專責(zé)小組內(nèi)部信用風(fēng)險模型， Lopez、 Saidenberg、 Treacy 與 Carey 用最近的一些觀點(diǎn)和文獻(xiàn)來解決這些問題。 信用計分有財政和非財務(wù)兩個方面。然而，當(dāng)前文件的范圍被限制對銀行客戶的財政表現(xiàn)的評估， Bertels 試圖研究以衡量公司業(yè)績的基礎(chǔ)上的定性數(shù)據(jù)。 數(shù)學(xué)建模金融理論始于 50 年代末， Markowitz 的工作是一個重大的里程碑。財政部在 60 年代初，將其作為一個分學(xué)科，使其從實(shí)踐中達(dá)到了 “ 起飛 ” 階段。早期一些嘗試 ， 是針對評價一個公司用于兼并和收購；一些處理利用投資組合風(fēng)險管理；一些人處理改進(jìn) /優(yōu)化企業(yè)的融資結(jié)構(gòu)。他們都是針對增強(qiáng)現(xiàn)有金融理論的指導(dǎo)決策者。 其中 1948 年的數(shù)學(xué)建模的金融理論已廣泛應(yīng)用 ， 稱作為風(fēng)險度量 。在決策中形成不同黨派經(jīng)濟(jì)活動的風(fēng)險 ， 一家公司的財務(wù)信息方面發(fā)揮了重要作用。廣泛的文獻(xiàn)致力企業(yè)倒閉的預(yù)言，并且近年來涌現(xiàn)了信用計分的概念。財務(wù)比率是為評估和預(yù)言企業(yè)財政表現(xiàn)的最簡單的工具，財政比率分析的好處和局限演講廣泛應(yīng)用在管理財務(wù)的文獻(xiàn)。財政決算報告堅(jiān)定了公司的立場和關(guān)于過去某一期間的業(yè)務(wù)。但是，仍然有