Using a Bayesian model for bankruptcy prediction : a comparative approach

The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of the choice of cut-off points, sampling procedures, and the business cycle on the accuracy of bankruptcy prediction models. Misclassification can result in erroneous predictions leading to prohibitive costs to firms, investors and the economy. To test the impact of the choice of cut-off points and sampling procedures, three bankruptcy prediction models are assessed- Bayesian, Hazard and Mixed Logit. A salient feature of the study is that the analysis includes both parametric and nonparametric bankruptcy prediction models. A sample of firms from Lynn M. LoPucki Bankruptcy Research Database in the U. S. was used to evaluate the relative performance of the three models. The choice of a cut-off point and sampling procedures were found to affect the rankings of the various models. In general, the results indicate that the empirical cut-off point estimated from the training sample resulted in the lowest misclassification costs for all three models. Although the Hazard and Mixed Logit models resulted in lower costs of misclassification in the randomly selected samples, the Mixed Logit model did not perform as well across varying business-cycles. In general, the Hazard model has the highest predictive power. However, the higher predictive power of the Bayesian model, when the ratio of the cost of Type I errors to the cost of Type II errors is high, is relatively consistent across all sampling methods. Such an advantage of the Bayesian model may make it more attractive in the current economic environment. This study extends recent research comparing the performance of bankruptcy prediction models by identifying under what conditions a model performs better. It also allays a range of user groups, including auditors, shareholders, employees, suppliers, rating agencies, and creditors' concerns with respect to assessing failure risk.

Macroeconomic News and Exchange Rates: Evidence of Unstable Effect

Although the link between macroeconomic news announcements and exchange rates is well documented in recent literature, this connection may be unstable. By using a broad set of macroeconomic news announcements and high frequency forex data for the Euro/Dollar, Pound/Dollar and Yen/Dollar from Nov 1, 2004 to Mar 31, 2014, we obtain two major findings with regards to this instability. First, many macroeconomic news announcements exhibit unstable effects with certain patterns in foreign exchange rates. These news effects may change in magnitude and even in their sign over time, over business cycles and crises within distinctive contexts. This finding is robust because the results are obtained by applying a Two-Regime Smooth Transition Regression Model, a Breakpoints Regression Model, and an Efficient Test of Parameter Instability which are all consistent with each other. Second, when we explore the source of this instability, we find that global risks and the reaction by central bank monetary policy to these risks to be possible factors causing this instability.

Macroeconomic News Effects and Foreign Exchange Jumps

This thesis investigates how macroeconomic news announcements affect jumps and cojumps in foreign exchange markets, especially under different business cycles. We use 5-min interval from high frequency data on Euro/Dollar, Pound/Dollar and Yen/Dollar from Nov. 1, 2004 to Feb. 28, 2015. The jump detection method was proposed by Andersen et al. (2007c), Lee & Mykland (2008) and then modified by Boudt et al. (2011a) for robustness. Then we apply the two-regime smooth transition regression model of Teräsvirta (1994) to explore news effects under different business cycles. We find that scheduled news related to employment, real activity, forward expectations, monetary policy, current account, price and consumption influences forex jumps, but only FOMC Rate Decisions has consistent effects on cojumps. Speeches given by major central bank officials near a crisis also significantly affect jumps and cojumps. However, the impacts of some macroeconomic news are not the same under different economic states.