From: Adverse selection, loan access and default behavior in the Chilean consumer debt market
Control variables | 1 = Bank | 2 = Bank + Retail | 3 = Retail Store | 4 = Union Debt | 5 = Other Debt | 6 = No Access |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Age | − 0.107*** (0.0161) | − 0.109*** (0.0161) | − 0.102*** (0.0160) | − 0.0766*** (0.0159) | − 0.123*** (0.0163) | − 0.00340* (0.00183) |
OECD equivalent household size | 2.253*** (0.346) | 2.508*** (0.347) | 2.608*** (0.348) | 2.643*** (0.350) | 2.534*** (0.349) | 0.340*** (0.0460) |
Income: \(\ln (\bar{P}_{i,t-4})\) | 1.094*** (0.183) | 0.806*** (0.182) | − 0.0273 (0.178) | − 0.0636 (0.184) | 0.958*** (0.186) | − 0.757*** (0.0591) |
Unemployment \(\bar{u}_{i,t-4}\) | 15.93*** (2.214) | 16.29*** (2.186) | 18.13*** (2.144) | 17.25*** (2.286) | 20.33*** (2.264) | 1.873*** (0.694) |
Wage volatility \(\bar{\sigma }_{i,t-4}\) | − 3.636*** (0.577) | − 3.788*** (0.577) | − 3.484*** (0.573) | − 3.796*** (0.581) | − 3.523*** (0.576) | 0.252*** (0.0810) |
Education (years) | 0.123*** (0.0389) | 0.0935** (0.0387) | − 0.00713 (0.0386) | 0.0591 (0.0402) | 0.110*** (0.0400) | − 0.0763*** (0.0118) |
Santiago capital region | 0.206 (0.217) | 0.214 (0.215) | 0.174 (0.213) | 0.205 (0.221) | 0.279 (0.221) | 0.0467 (0.0601) |
2008/2009 | − 0.662* (0.384) | − 1.039*** (0.380) | − 0.830** (0.377) | − 0.805** (0.401) | − 1.121*** (0.397) | 0.191* (0.106) |
2010/2011 | − 0.656** (0.302) | − 1.092*** (0.299) | − 0.475 (0.296) | 0.246 (0.312) | − 0.636** (0.306) | 0.530*** (0.0908) |
2014 | 0.433 (0.353) | 0.453 (0.351) | 1.221*** (0.353) | 1.796*** (0.371) | 0.551 (0.359) | 0.810*** (0.112) |
2017 | 1.011*** (0.324) | 0.281 (0.321) | − 0.122 (0.322) | 1.029*** (0.338) | 1.334*** (0.331) | − 0.505*** (0.100) |
Constant | − 8.319*** (0.515) | − 3.676 (0) | 7.217*** (1.899) | 3.556* (1.981) | − 8.251*** (1.989) | 9.179*** (0.655) |
Observations: 21,319 households. McFadden’s Pseudo R-squared: 0.071 |