Why Conditional Default Probabilities May Decline as Debt Matures
Summary
The document contrasts two possible paths for conditional default probabilities derived from cumulative default probabilities: a declining sequence and a rising sequence. It explains the declining pattern with a structural corporate finance intuition. A firm with long-term debt may become less leveraged as existing obligations mature, reducing its chance of default in later periods even while cumulative default probability continues to increase.
The proposed rationale comes from a shareholder-value-maximizing firm model in which investment, debt issuance, production, and default interact. The answer points to a structural model and a figure showing deleveraging alongside lower default probability as supporting illustration. It also cautions that this pattern is difficult to isolate empirically because firms often repay loans while taking out new ones. No empirical study isolating time to maturity is identified, so the explanation is theoretical and not a universal rule for observed loan portfolios.
Key ideas
- Conditional default probability can fall over time even as cumulative default probability rises.
- A structural explanation is that debt repayment reduces leverage and therefore the firm’s risk of default.
- New borrowing can obscure this relationship in empirical loan data.
- The document offers theoretical intuition and an illustration, but no isolated empirical test.
Tags
Full text
# conditional probability of default
# conditional probability of default
I would like to ask the following question.
I would appreciate if someone could help me out.
On what argument is based that states that conditional default rates ( loans of corporate borrowers) tend to decrease as time passes. are there any statistical research done on given issue.
$Variant 1 \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \quad Y1 \qquad Y2 \qquad Y3 \qquad Y4 \qquad Y5 \\ Cumulative \quad PDs \quad \quad \qquad 20 \% \qquad 30\% \qquad 38\% \quad 42\% \qquad 44\% \\ Conditional \quad PDs \qquad \qquad 20\% \qquad 13\% \qquad 9\% \qquad 4\% \qquad 2\% \quad \\ Formula=\frac{CumPD_{i}-CumPD_{i-1}}{1-CumPD_{i-1}}$
$Variant 2 \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \quad Y1 \qquad Y2 \qquad Y3 \qquad Y4 \qquad Y5 \\ Cumulative \quad PDs \quad \quad \qquad 20 \% \qquad 30\% \qquad 42\% \quad 55\% \qquad 70\% \\ Conditional \quad PDs \qquad \qquad 20\% \qquad 13\% \qquad 14\% \quad 15\% \qquad 18\% \quad \\ Formula=\frac{CumPD_{i}-CumPD_{i-1}}{1-CumPD_{i-1}}$
I presented two variants. The first one is with decreasing conditional probabilities. The second one is with increasing conditional probabilities. So the question was why the the first variant is in compliance with properties of conditional default rates where the second is not.
## Answer by phdstudent (score 0, accepted)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/38857
Let's assume a firm that maximizes returns for its shareholders. The firm can distribute dividends $D_t$, invest $I_t$, and borrow long term debt $B_{t}$.
Let's assume its production function depends on how much capital $k_t$ and labor $l_t$ and on the current productivity level $A_t$. Further let $w_t$ be the wage bill.
This firm solves the following problem:
\begin{equation} Max_{k_{t+1}, l_t, B_{t+1}} \sum^\infty_{t=0} F(A_t, K_t, L_t) - (K_{t+1}-(1-\delta)K_t) - w_t l_t - M_t(B_t) + B_{t+1} \end{equation}
Where $M_t(B_t)$ is the payment due on the current outstanding long-term debt $B_t$ and $B_{t+1}$ is new issued debt. Also assume that equity issuances are prohibitively costly and that the firm defaults if $D_t < 0$.
This is an extremely complex problem to solve, but intuitively if you solve the problem you will have conditional probabilities of default that decrease with the level of leverage $B_t$. The reason is straighforward, as debt matures, leverage is lower for the firm and less likely it is to default (the cummulative PD is still increasing trivially).
There are a few papers with similar models. One that comes to my mind, is Gomes, Jermann and Schmid (2016). Take a look at figure 2 of that paper.
In Panel H you see that as time goes by the firm is deleveraging. In Panel G you see that default probability decreases as the firm deleverages. The cumulative PD is still increasing.
Empirically this is a pattern that is hard to see, because in practice as time goes by firms are decreasing some of their corporate loans but taking new loans at the same time. I do not know of any empirical paper that isolates the effect of time to maturity and default. The reason for this is probably that no one questions that the decreasing pattern of defaults is true as time goes by. Any structural model with long-term debt such as the one I outlined above will deliver that result.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.