Abstract:There has been intensive research from academics and practitioners regarding models for predicting bankruptcy and default events, for credit risk management. Seminal academic research has evaluated bankruptcy using traditional statistics techniques (e.g. discriminant analysis and logistic regression) and early artificial intelligence models (e.g. artificial neural networks). In this study, we test machine learning models (support vector machines, bagging, boosting, and random forest) to predict bankruptcy one year prior to the event, and compare their performance with results from discriminant analysis, logistic regression, and neural networks. We use data from 1985 to 2013 on North American firms, integrating information from the Salomon Center database and Compustat, analysing more than 10,000 firm-year observations. The key insight of the study is a substantial improvement in prediction accuracy using machine learning techniques especially when, in addition to the original Altman’s Z-score variables, we include six complementary financial indicators. Based on Carton and Hofer (2006), we use new variables, such as the operating margin, change in return-on-equity, change in price-to-book, and growth measures related to assets, sales, and number of employees, as predictive variables. Machine learning models show, on average, approximately 10% more accuracy in relation to traditional models. Comparing the best models, with all predictive variables, the machine learning technique related to random forest led to 87% accuracy, whereas logistic regression and linear discriminant analysis led to 69% and 50% accuracy, respectively, in the testing sample. We find that bagging, boosting, and random forest models outperform the others techniques, and that all prediction accuracy in the testing sample improves when the additional variables are included. Our research adds to the discussion of the continuing debate about superiority of computational methods over statistical techniques such as in Tsai, Hsu, and Yen (2014) and Yeh, Chi, and Lin (2014). In particular, for machine learning mechanisms, we do not find SVM to lead to higher accuracy rates than other models. This result contradicts outcomes from Danenas and Garsva (2015) and Cleofas-Sanchez, Garcia, Marques, and Senchez (2016), but corroborates, for instance, Wang, Ma, and Yang (2014), Liang, Lu, Tsai, and Shih (2016), and Cano et al. (2017). Our study supports the applicability of the expert systems by practitioners as in Heo and Yang (2014), Kim, Kang, and Kim (2015) and Xiao, Xiao, and Wang (2016).

Bankruptcy Litigation and Relationship Banking

Insolvency Resolution and the Missing High Yield Bond Markets

Bankruptcy Risk in Discounted Cash Flow Equity Valuation

Corporate bankruptcy and banking deregulation: The effect of financial leverage

Machine learning models and bankruptcy prediction

An Agency Theory of the Bankruptcy Law

The Economic Consequences of Bankruptcy Reform

Predicting corporate bankruptcy using the framework of Leland-Toft: evidence from U.S.

Do forecasts of bankruptcy cause bankruptcy? A machine learning sensitivity analysis

Bankruptcy risk model and empirical tests

Financial Restructuring and Resolution of Banks

Bankruptcy as an exit mechanism for systems with a variable number of components

Shareholder Litigation and Bank Risk

A comparison of Bayesian, Hazard, and Mixed Logit model of bankruptcy prediction

Bankruptcy judicial reform and corporate trade credit financing

Going Bankrupt in China

Systemic Losses Due to Counter Party Risk in a Stylized Banking System

Bankruptcy judicial system reform and corporate financial litigation risk: A quasi-natural experiment in China

Accounting Conservatism and Bankruptcy Risk

Fairness Vs. Economic Efficiency: Lessons from an Interdisciplinary Analysis of Talmudic Bankruptcy Law

Defining the Relationship Between Municipal Bankruptcy and Modern Federalism Jurisprudence