Skip to content
All library documents

Default Probability Curves from Credit Spreads and Proxies

Article Quant Q&A · Author: Good Guy Mike

Summary

The document asks how to estimate term structures of default probabilities when market data is unavailable, including for non-listed firms. It notes that migration-based Markov chains can turn historical rating transitions into rating-specific default curves, while market approaches commonly infer credit information from bonds or credit default swaps. The question also raises portfolio default correlation as a modeling concern.

The answer reframes expected credit loss as involving both default probability and recovery, and argues that credit spreads can reflect both components. It suggests using spreads from related index products or companies as proxies when direct observations are missing. It distinguishes broad portfolios, for which the answer says correlation is not needed in a basic index valuation, from tranche valuation, where dependence among names matters. This is a brief exchange rather than a complete model specification: it provides no estimation procedure, migration data, or empirical comparison, and its claims about spread proxies and correlation are not developed in detail.

Key ideas

  • Historical rating migrations can be modeled with Markov chains to derive rating-level default term structures.
  • Expected credit loss depends on both default likelihood and recovery.
  • Credit spreads from related instruments or companies can serve as proxies when direct data is missing.
  • The answer distinguishes basic portfolio index valuation from tranche valuation when discussing default correlation.
  • The exchange does not give a full calibration method or empirical validation.

Tags

Full text
# Term structure of default probabilities without market data


# Term structure of default probabilities without market data












With the forthcoming new regulations, IFRS9, financial institutions will be required to model life time expected credit losses. Consequently, it is necessary to model the term structure of default probabilities for different products/counter-parties. How can one successfully implement such a model?

In current literature one finds a variety of approaches to model the term structure of default probabilities. Most often, these approaches utilize market data to extract implied default probabilities over a certain horizon, for instance using bonds or credit default swaps. However, these methods are only applicable when such data is available. The term structure of default probabilities for non-listed enterprises (for instance) will be much more cumbersome to determine. Also, many models does not rigorously incorporate default correlations which is necessary for the application of a portfolio. Presumably one will only be able to use historical data of credit migrations.

In accordance with Bluhm and Overbeck (2007) one find the model credit migrations using Markov chains, and from there find each rating grades term structure.

Have anyone come across other interesting literature which allows one to model term structures of default probabilities only using historical credit migration data?

## Answer by user3264325 (score 4)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/16340

Firstly it's good to straighten out our goal.

You correctly say, that IFRS9 requires analysis of expected losses.

There are two components of expected losses.

1) Expected probability of a default event 2) Expected recovery rate

So, not only do we need the probability but also the recovery rate.

Luckily, both are approximated by the credit spread, which as you say is readily available from CDS or Bonds.

As for market data, note that CDS are available for many more names than you would usually find in the listed equity markets. A function of the the fixed income market being magnitudes larger.

In the event that you cannot find the data the industry practice is to proxy with a spread from a related CDX or company. Some funds also use several proxy schemes, to flesh out different scenarios.

Correlations are not necessary. You see this when you price a CDX for example. You do need correlations when you price CDX tranches - because the interplay between names then becomes important, but no for vanilla CDX (which are a portfolio of names essentially).

I'll happily look around for some literature, if you want something specific - suspect you can Google around easy enough for extra information though.

Shown in full with attribution under the source's licence. Licence: CC BY-SA 4.0 (Stack Exchange)

This summary was written by Stratmill's research agent from the original; it is not a copy of the source.