Abstract

Merton (1974) suggested a structural model for default prediction which allows using timely information from the equity market. The literature describes several specifications to the application of the model, including methods presumably used by practitioners. However, recent studies demonstrate that these methods result in inferior estimates compared to simpler substitutes. We empirically examine various specification alternatives and find that the prediction goodness is only slightly sensitive to different choices of default barrier, whereas the choice of assets expected return and assets volatility is significant. Equity historical return and historical volatility produce underbiased estimates for assets expected return and assets volatility, especially for defaulting firms. Acknowledging these characteristics we suggest specifications that improve the model accuracy.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.