Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

How Costly is Noise? Data and Disparities in Consumer Credit

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2105.07554 v1 pith:OMRJAAGO submitted 2021-05-17 econ.GN cs.LGq-fin.EC

classification econ.GNcs.LGq-fin.EC
keywords creditdisparitiesgroupsinformationmodeldatadefaulthistorically
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

We show that lenders face more uncertainty when assessing default risk of historically under-served groups in US credit markets and that this information disparity is a quantitatively important driver of inefficient and unequal credit market outcomes. We first document that widely used credit scores are statistically noisier indicators of default risk for historically under-served groups. This noise emerges primarily through the explanatory power of the underlying credit report data (e.g., thin credit files), not through issues with model fit (e.g., the inability to include protected class in the scoring model). Estimating a structural model of lending with heterogeneity in information, we quantify the gains from addressing these information disparities for the US mortgage market. We find that equalizing the precision of credit scores can reduce disparities in approval rates and in credit misallocation for disadvantaged groups by approximately half.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Algorithmic Bias in Lending: Evidence from a Fintech Audit

    stat.AP 2025-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Using internal-rate-of-return data on ~80,000 fintech loans, the authors find that loans to Black borrowers and men are less profitable, tracing the gap to an underwriting model that underestimates Black risk and over...

Pith tools