Risk and Reward: A Data-Driven Approach to Managing Credit Risk in Modern Banking

Imagine you’re a risk manager at a major financial institution. Each day, you’re tasked with evaluating loan applications, identifying potential risks, and ensuring the bank is meeting regulatory capital requirements. Your decisions not only affect the financial health of the institution but also the lives of customers, many of whom depend on these loans for homes, businesses, or personal needs.

This report takes you on a journey through the financial data of 499 loan applicants. We’ll uncover trends, spot risks, and ultimately provide strategic recommendations for managing credit risk, while balancing profitability with regulatory compliance.

The Players: Understanding the Loan Applicants

Before diving into numbers, let’s understand who our customers are. Our data reveals that a majority of applicants are female (61%), and they tend to apply for cash loans (88%) rather than revolving loans. These loans are sizable, with an average amount of $596,256, indicating significant financial commitments.

One key insight here: the majority of customers have a strong financial profile in terms of income and assets. However, a closer look reveals nuances that could affect their ability to repay these loans.

The Financial Landscape: Income, Credit, and Collateral

When we look at the income and credit profiles of the applicants, the diversity becomes clear. Income levels range from $31,500 to $765,000, with an average of $171,586. Similarly, credit amounts vary widely, with some applicants requesting over $2.2 million.

But it’s not just about income and credit. For many applicants, collateral (like cars and real estate) plays a critical role. Interestingly, the data shows that most customers either own real estate or a car — but rarely both. This insight may raise questions about the security of the loans, especially for high-value credit requests.

The Hidden Story: Outliers and Credit Risk

The heart of credit analysis lies in identifying outliers — those applicants who may pose a higher risk. Using statistical techniques like interquartile ranges (IQR), I detected outliers in critical features such as income, credit amounts, and credit bureau requests.

• For example, 31 applicants have significantly higher-than-average incomes, and 10 applicants requested extremely large loan amounts compared to the typical range.
• Notably, 85 applicants had an unusually high number of credit inquiries (AMT_REQ_CREDIT_BUREAU_QRT), which could signal a heightened risk of default.

This hidden risk, if not managed well, could potentially lead to higher default rates and impact the bank’s financial stability.

Assessing Risk: Loan-to-Value (LTV) and Exposure at Default (EAD)

To quantify risk, I calculated two important metrics: Loan-to-Value (LTV) ratios and Exposure at Default (EAD). These metrics help us gauge how secure the loans are.

• LTV Ratio: The LTV ratio indicates how much of the loan is covered by collateral. Most applicants have LTV ratios around 1.0, meaning the loan amount is nearly equal to the value of the collateral. However, some applicants have ratios exceeding 1.39, indicating that the loan is greater than the value of the collateral. These high LTVs present a clear risk for the bank.

• EAD: The EAD values range from $135,000 to $1.2 million, representing the bank’s exposure if a customer defaults. Understanding this exposure helps in setting aside the right amount of capital to cover potential losses.

The Plot Twist: Capital Requirements and Regulatory Compliance

Now, let’s address the regulatory aspect. To ensure the bank is resilient to financial shocks, regulatory bodies require institutions to hold a certain amount of capital. I calculated the Risk-Weighted Assets (RWA) and the Capital Requirements under both the Standardized Approach and the Internal Ratings-Based (IRB) Approach.

• Standardized Approach: Under this method, the total RWA is calculated at $288.97 million, which leads to a capital requirement of $23.1 million.
• IRB Approach: The IRB approach, which uses a more customized risk model, results in a lower RWA of $205.4 million and a capital requirement of $16.4 million.

The difference is significant. By using the IRB approach, the bank can free up over $6.6 million in capital — funds that could be reinvested or used to mitigate risk elsewhere. This is a critical insight for both financial stability and regulatory compliance.

Key Insights and Recommendations: The Road Ahead

Through this analysis, several key insights have emerged:

1. Diverse Risk Profiles: While the majority of applicants have stable financial profiles, outliers in income, credit amounts, and credit bureau inquiries present higher risks. These should be monitored closely.
2. Collateral Gaps: Many applicants lack substantial collateral, especially those with high loan-to-value ratios. The bank should consider tightening credit approval criteria for applicants with LTV ratios above 1.0.
3. Regulatory Efficiency: The IRB approach offers a clear advantage in terms of reducing capital requirements. Transitioning to this method could improve capital efficiency and allow the bank to better manage its portfolio.
4. Proactive Risk Management: Applicants with high credit bureau inquiries and unusual financial patterns should be flagged for additional review to mitigate potential defaults.

Conclusion: A Balanced Approach to Risk and Reward

As I wrap up my analysis, the key message is clear: credit risk management is about balance. The bank must continue to serve its customers by offering substantial loans, but it must do so without exposing itself to unnecessary risk. By focusing on high-risk outliers, improving collateral requirements, and optimizing capital using the IRB approach, the bank can continue to grow while maintaining financial stability.

In this ever-evolving financial landscape, risk management isn’t just about avoiding losses — it’s about ensuring long-term sustainability and profitability. And with these insights in hand, the bank is better positioned to achieve both.

Check the notebook