Beyond Balance Sheets: Predicting Credit Risk with Climate and Narrative Data

by

Author: Denis Avetisyan

New research demonstrates that incorporating non-traditional data sources-like climate risks and textual reports-can significantly enhance the accuracy of credit default predictions.

This study integrates climate and text data with traditional financial metrics to improve credit risk modelling, particularly for agricultural micro and small enterprises using SHAP explainability.

Traditional credit risk assessment often struggles with limited data, particularly for micro and small enterprises. This is addressed in ‘Multimodal Insights into Credit Risk Modelling: Integrating Climate and Text Data for Default Prediction’, which proposes a novel framework integrating structured financial data with climate risk exposure and textual narratives. Our results demonstrate that combining these diverse data sources significantly improves the accuracy of default prediction, revealing a crucial role for previously untapped environmental and qualitative insights. Could this multimodal approach unlock more robust and equitable credit access for vulnerable businesses facing increasing climate-related challenges?

The Erosion of Conventional Risk Metrics

Conventional credit scoring models traditionally prioritize quantifiable financial data – income, debt, credit history – creating a profile often lacking a complete picture of an applicant’s circumstances. This reliance on structured data can inadvertently overlook critical contextual factors such as temporary job loss, medical expenses, or regional economic downturns that significantly impact repayment ability. Consequently, individuals with thin credit files, or those experiencing short-term financial hardship despite a generally positive history, may be unfairly penalized or denied credit. This approach fails to recognize that financial health is rarely solely reflected in numerical data, and a more nuanced evaluation considering the ‘whole person’ is crucial for accurate risk assessment and fostering financial inclusion.

Loan officers routinely document detailed justifications for credit decisions – these ‘Textual Narratives’ represent a rich source of predictive information often overlooked by traditional risk models. While quantitative data captures what a borrower has done, these narratives reveal why, offering insights into mitigating circumstances, character assessments, and future potential not reflected in credit scores. However, integrating this qualitative data presents significant challenges; natural language is inherently unstructured, requiring sophisticated techniques like natural language processing and machine learning to extract meaningful signals. Recent studies demonstrate that models incorporating insights gleaned from these narratives consistently outperform those relying solely on structured data, suggesting a pathway to more accurate and nuanced credit risk assessment – and potentially, greater financial inclusion.

Predicting credit default with accuracy demands a shift beyond conventional methods that prioritize solely structured financial data. Current models often fail to capture the complete risk profile of a borrower, overlooking critical contextual details embedded within loan officer narratives – the qualitative assessments detailing circumstances not reflected in numbers. Research indicates that these ‘textual narratives’ contain predictive signals capable of significantly improving default predictions when integrated with traditional data. A holistic approach, therefore, leverages the strengths of both quantitative and qualitative information, creating a more nuanced and reliable assessment of creditworthiness. This integration isn’t merely about adding data points; it’s about constructing a more complete picture of a borrower’s ability and willingness to repay, ultimately leading to more informed lending decisions and reduced financial risk.

The Convergence of Data Streams

Multimodal learning leverages the complementary strengths of diverse data sources – structured credit data, climate panel data, and textual narratives – to enhance predictive accuracy. Structured credit data provides quantifiable financial history, while climate panel data introduces geographically-specific environmental risk factors. Textual narratives, derived from sources like news reports and company filings, offer qualitative insights into borrower behavior and external pressures. By integrating these distinct data types, the model can identify patterns and correlations not discernible through single-source analysis, resulting in a more holistic and precise risk assessment.

Traditional predictive models often rely on a single data source, such as credit history or financial ratios. Multimodal learning, conversely, actively seeks to leverage the distinct and often non-redundant information contained within multiple data types – structured credit data, climate panel data, and textual narratives – to improve prediction accuracy. This is achieved by identifying correlations and dependencies between these datasets; for example, climate risk factors indicated in panel data may contextualize anomalies observed in a borrower’s credit history, or textual narratives can provide explanatory context for quantitative data points. The principle rests on the premise that combining these complementary data streams yields a more complete and nuanced understanding than any single source could provide independently.

Synergistically combining structured credit data, climate panel data, and textual narratives facilitates a more robust borrower risk assessment by leveraging the complementary strengths of each data type. Structured credit data provides quantifiable financial history; climate panel data introduces forward-looking environmental risk factors impacting repayment capacity; and textual narratives, derived from sources like news articles or loan applications, offer nuanced contextual information often missing from quantitative datasets. This integration allows for the identification of risk factors that may be obscured when analyzing data sources in isolation, leading to improved model accuracy and a more comprehensive understanding of borrower vulnerability. The resulting assessment incorporates both historical performance and anticipated future risks, ultimately enhancing the reliability of credit predictions.

Evidence of Climatic Influence on Creditworthiness

For credit default prediction, three distinct recurrent neural network architectures – LSTM, GRU, and Transformer models – were evaluated using multimodal datasets. Training these models with combined data sources resulted in a consistent Area Under the Curve (AUC) of 0.740, indicating strong discriminatory power in identifying potential defaults. This performance level suggests that incorporating diverse data types, beyond traditional financial metrics, improves the accuracy of credit risk assessment. The models were implemented to predict the probability of default based on the input features, with the AUC serving as the primary metric for evaluating predictive capability.

Analysis of climate panel data indicates a significant relationship between climate-related risks and borrower repayment capacity. Specifically, exposure to risks such as water-logging, high temperatures, drought, and cryogenic freezing demonstrably affects a borrower’s ability to meet financial obligations. This suggests that climate risk is a non-negligible factor in credit risk assessment and should be considered alongside traditional financial indicators. The inclusion of these climate variables provides insights beyond those available from structured data alone, potentially improving the accuracy of credit default predictions.

Analysis indicates a correlation of 0.426 between water-logging risk and model output, suggesting that climate data provides predictive information not captured by standard borrower datasets. This is further supported by the model’s performance metrics: a Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) statistic of 0.464 demonstrates strong discriminatory power, and an H-measure of 0.306 confirms the stability and reliability of the observed separation between good and bad credit risks when incorporating climate panel data. These metrics collectively validate the added value of including climate risk factors in credit default prediction models.

Interpreting Risk: Beyond Prediction to Understanding

The predictive power of machine learning models in credit risk assessment is significantly enhanced by the application of SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) values, a method rooted in game theory. These values don’t simply indicate that a model predicts default, but rather quantify the precise contribution of each individual feature – including increasingly important climate risk factors – to that specific prediction. By decomposing the prediction into the contributions of each feature, SHAP values offer a granular, interpretable understanding of the model’s reasoning; a lender can pinpoint, for example, how much a borrower’s flood risk exposure influenced their assessed probability of default. This level of detail moves beyond ‘black box’ predictions, enabling stakeholders to validate model behavior, identify potential biases, and ultimately, build trust in the automated decision-making process.

The ability to discern the rationale behind a credit risk assessment is paramount for fostering confidence in automated lending systems. Machine learning models, while powerful, often operate as “black boxes,” leaving stakeholders uncertain about the factors driving specific decisions. However, when a model clearly articulates why a borrower receives a particular risk score, it shifts from being an opaque predictor to a transparent analytical tool. This transparency allows lenders to move beyond simply identifying high-risk applicants and instead understand the specific vulnerabilities contributing to that assessment – perhaps exposure to increasing flood risk, declining agricultural yields, or shifting energy costs. Consequently, lenders gain the capacity to validate model outputs, identify potential biases, and ultimately build a more robust and trustworthy financial ecosystem.

Lenders are increasingly positioned to move beyond simply assessing climate risk as a factor in creditworthiness and towards actively building financial resilience through targeted interventions. By explicitly identifying specific climate vulnerabilities – such as flood exposure, drought susceptibility, or reliance on climate-sensitive industries – institutions can proactively offer tailored support to borrowers. This may include providing access to disaster preparedness resources, offering preferential loan terms for climate adaptation investments like flood defenses or drought-resistant crops, or structuring repayment plans that account for potential climate-related income disruptions. This shift from reactive risk assessment to proactive resilience-building not only strengthens the financial stability of borrowers but also fosters a more sustainable and equitable lending ecosystem, mitigating the potential for climate change to exacerbate existing financial inequalities.

The study illuminates how predictive models, even those meticulously constructed, are inherently susceptible to shifts in underlying conditions. Integrating climate and textual data isn’t simply about adding more variables; it’s acknowledging the dynamic nature of risk itself. This aligns with Feyerabend’s assertion: “Anything goes.” The research demonstrates that rigidly adhering to traditional financial metrics can be limiting, and embracing diverse data sources, however unconventional, can refine risk assessment. The improvement in default prediction, particularly for vulnerable agricultural enterprises, suggests that a proliferation of methods-a willingness to consider anything-can yield a more robust understanding of systemic vulnerabilities and promote graceful decay rather than abrupt failure.

What Lies Ahead?

This work, like every commit in the annals of credit risk modelling, records a specific state. The demonstrated improvements through multimodal integration – climate data, textual narratives – are not endpoints, but rather chapters marking a shift in perspective. The immediate gain in predictive power for agricultural micro and small enterprises is encouraging, yet masks a deeper, inevitable decay. Traditional financial metrics, while possessing a certain inertia, are demonstrably incomplete. Delaying the incorporation of systemic risks – climate change, evolving business narratives – is a tax on ambition, a compounding of uncertainty.

Future iterations must address the inherent limitations of present proxies. Climate risk, as currently represented, is often coarse-grained, failing to capture localized vulnerabilities crucial for granular credit assessments. Textual analysis, while potent, remains susceptible to manipulation, the subtle art of narrative shaping. The field needs to move beyond feature engineering towards genuinely integrated models-architectures where climate and textual inputs aren’t simply appended, but fundamentally alter the representation of risk itself.

The true challenge isn’t maximizing accuracy, but building resilience. Every model, regardless of sophistication, will eventually fail. The question becomes not whether default can be predicted, but whether systems can gracefully absorb the inevitable shocks, and adapt-a quality not easily captured in a loss function. This research offers a valuable snapshot, but the long game demands a reckoning with the fundamental impermanence of all predictive landscapes.

Original article: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2601.00478.pdf

Contact the author: https://www.linkedin.com/in/avetisyan/

See also:

2026-01-05 12:24