pith. sign in

arxiv: 2512.20753 · v2 · pith:LXMPJR2Jnew · submitted 2025-12-23 · 📊 stat.AP

Algorithmic Bias in Lending: Evidence from a Fintech Audit

classification 📊 stat.AP
keywords lendingunderwritingalgorithmicblackborrowersloansalgorithmsaudit
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Algorithmic lending has transformed the consumer credit landscape, with machine learning models commonly facilitating underwriting decisions. To comply with fair lending laws, these algorithms exclude legally protected characteristics, such as race and gender. Yet algorithmic underwriting can still inadvertently favor certain groups, prompting concerns about whether lending algorithms exhibit discriminatory behavior. Using proprietary loan-level data from a major U.S. fintech platform, we audit lending decisions across approximately 80,000 personal loans. We find that loans made to men and Black borrowers yielded lower profits than loans to other groups, suggesting that men and Black borrowers benefited from relatively favorable pricing. We trace these disparities to miscalibration in the platform's underwriting model, which overestimates risk for women and underestimates risk for Black borrowers. We then show that one could correct this miscalibration -- and the corresponding disparities -- by including race and gender in underwriting models, illustrating a tension between competing notions of fairness.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.