4.7 Article

Wide and deep learning for peer-to-peer lending

Journal

EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS
Volume 134, Issue -, Pages 209-224

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2019.05.042

Keywords

Wide and deep learning; Peer-to-peer lending; Credit scoring; Profit scoring

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper proposes a two-stage scoring approach to help lenders decide their fund allocations in peerto-peer (P2P) lending market. The existing scoring approaches focus on only either probability of default (PD) prediction, known as credit scoring, or profitability prediction, known as profit scoring, to identify the best loans for investment. Credit scoring fails to deliver the main need of lenders on how much profit they may obtain through their investment. On the other hand, profit scoring can satisfy that need by predicting the investment profitability. However, profit scoring is not free from the imbalance problem where most of the past loans are non-default. Consequently, ignorance of the imbalance problem significantly affects the accuracy of profitability prediction. Our proposed two-stage scoring approach is an integration of credit scoring and profit scoring to address the above challenges. More specifically, stage 1 is designed to identify non-default loans while the imbalanced nature of loan status is considered in PD prediction. The loans identified as non-default are then moved to stage 2 for prediction of profitability, measured by internal rate of return. Wide and deep learning is used to build the predictive models in both stages to achieve both memorization and generalization. Extensive numerical studies are conducted based on real-world data to verify the effectiveness of the proposed approach. The numerical studies indicate our two-stage scoring approach outperforms the existing credit scoring and profit scoring approaches. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available