The hardware and bandwidth for this mirror is donated by METANET, the Webhosting and Full Service-Cloud Provider.
If you wish to report a bug, or if you are interested in having us mirror your free-software or open-source project, please feel free to contact us at mirror[@]metanet.ch.

OptimalBinningWoE

Optimal binning and Weight of Evidence transformation for credit scoring and risk modelling, with 37 C++ binning algorithms behind one R interface.

The package covers the whole path from a raw feature store to a deployed scorecard: fit the binning, screen the variables against IV strength and bin ordering, transform the data, and export the same transformation as SQL so the scoring runs where the data lives.

37 algorithms	21 numerical, 16 categorical — entropy, \(\chi^2\), exact optimisation, shape-constrained and streaming methods
C++ engine	Rcpp/RcppEigen throughout; 500 variables over 20,000 rows bin and screen in about two seconds
Automated screening	`obwoe_select()` returns a verdict and a reason for every candidate, never dropping a row
In-database scoring	`obwoe_sql()` emits exact `CASE` expressions for 14 SQL dialects
Regulatory fit	monotonic binning, auditable bin-level evidence, reason codes
tidymodels ready	`step_obwoe()` is a first-class, tunable `recipes` step

Installation

install.packages("OptimalBinningWoE")

# development version
# install.packages("pak")
pak::pak("evandeilton/OptimalBinningWoE")

Quick start

The Statlog (German Credit) benchmark ships with the package, so the example below runs as-is.

library(OptimalBinningWoE)

german <- read.csv(
  gzfile(system.file("extdata", "germancredit.csv.gz",
                     package = "OptimalBinningWoE")),
  stringsAsFactors = FALSE
)
german$default <- 1L - german$credit_risk
german$credit_risk <- NULL

model <- obwoe(german, target = "default", min_bins = 2, max_bins = 6)
summary(model)

The four steps

1. Fit. One call bins every column, routing numerical and categorical variables to the right algorithm.

model <- obwoe(german, target = "default", max_bins = 6)

2. Screen. obwoe_select() applies the two criteria that govern variable admission — Information Value strength and guaranteed rank ordering — and returns one row per candidate with the decision and the reason behind it.

sel <- obwoe_select(model)
sel[, c("feature", "total_iv", "iv_class", "ks", "monotonic", "selected", "reason")]
#>            feature total_iv     iv_class      ks monotonic selected        reason
#> 1:  credit_history   0.2932       Medium  0.1805      TRUE     TRUE            OK
#> 2:        duration   0.2727       Medium  0.1900      TRUE     TRUE            OK
#> ...
#> 14:         status   0.6660   Suspicious  0.3671      TRUE    FALSE IV_SUSPICIOUS
#> 15: number_credits   0.0101 Unpredictive  0.0481      TRUE    FALSE  IV_BELOW_MIN

status is the strongest variable in the file and is rejected for it: an IV above 0.50 is far more often leakage than signal. Nothing is silently dropped — 500 candidates return 500 rows, so the automatic verdict can be reviewed.

3. Transform. Apply the fitted binning to any frame, in R or inside a recipes pipeline.

scored <- obwoe_apply(new_data, model)

rec <- recipes::recipe(default ~ ., data = german) |>
  step_obwoe(recipes::all_predictors(), outcome = "default", max_bins = 6)

4. Deploy. Export the same transformation as SQL.

obwoe_sql(model, table = "risk.applications",
          features = sel$feature[sel$selected], dialect = "postgres")

CASE
    WHEN duration IS NULL THEN 0
    WHEN duration <= 7 THEN -1.3121863889661687
    WHEN duration > 7 AND duration <= 10 THEN -0.45198512374305744
    WHEN duration > 10 AND duration <= 16 THEN -0.3028722379457563
    WHEN duration > 16 AND duration <= 33 THEN 0.10461674470498177
    WHEN duration > 33 AND duration <= 39 THEN 0.5728610146854435
    WHEN duration > 39 THEN 0.993901334579079
    ELSE 0
END AS duration_woe

Intervals are half-open on the right, (a, b], reproducing obwoe_apply() exactly; cut points are written at full round-trip precision; and every expression opens with an explicit IS NULL branch, because NULL <= 5 is NULL in SQL, not FALSE.

The whole pipeline in one call

obwoe_scorecard() runs the four steps above end to end — split, bin, screen by IV and correlation, fit, scale to points — and writes the result as an .xlsx model document.

card <- obwoe_scorecard(
  german,
  target = "default",
  split  = 0.7,
  engine = "glm",
  file   = "scorecard.xlsx"
)

card
head(card$points[, c("variable", "bin", "woe", "points")])
predict(card, german, type = "score")

The workbook holds thirteen sheets: the model summary, the scorecard points table, the coefficients with standard errors, the bin statistics of the variables that entered, the screening funnel with a reason per rejected variable, the correlation matrix before and after pruning, score gains, PSI stability between samples, a cut-off strategy table, the deployment SQL in both WoE and points form, and a reproducibility record.

Three properties are enforced rather than assumed. The binning is fitted on the training rows only, so the hold-out numbers are not inflated by supervised leakage. A variable whose WoE coefficient comes out negative — the WoE already carries the direction, so a negative slope means the model is reversing it — is dropped and the model refitted. And the generated points SQL reproduces the R card score exactly, unseen categories included.

Vignettes

Two long-form articles carry the detailed documentation and worked cases.

Optimal Binning and Weight of Evidence: A Practical Guide — the working reference. What WoE and IV measure and why monotonicity of the event rate and of the WoE are the same statement; reading a bin table and a gains table; screening a whole base with obwoe_select(); how the algorithm families differ and how to pick one; applying the transformation to new data; exporting to SQL; preprocessing missing values and outliers. Uses the bundled German Credit benchmark throughout.

An Industrial Scorecard Pipeline — an origination scorecard built the way a risk department builds one. A wide synthetic base carrying the pathologies that matter (missing bureau data, rare dealer codes, near-duplicate vendor fields, pure noise, and a leaky post-booking field), screening at scale, redundancy pruning with obcorr() in the WoE space, a recipes pipeline around step_obwoe(), logistic regression with the coefficient sign check, scorecard points and PDO scaling, out-of-time validation with gains and PSI, deployment to SQL, tuning with tidymodels, and the governance checklist that closes a model document.

Choosing an algorithm

Three questions settle it in practice.

flowchart TD
    A[What is the variable?] --> B[Numerical]
    A --> C[Categorical]

    B --> D{Must the WoE be<br/>monotone?}
    D -->|"Yes — regulatory"| E["<b>ir</b> · <b>mrblp</b> · <b>mblp</b><br/><b>mob</b> · oslp"]
    D -->|No| F{Millions of rows<br/>or streaming?}
    F -->|Yes| G["<b>sketch</b> · ewb · kmb"]
    F -->|No| H{Need the global<br/>optimum?}
    H -->|Yes| I["<b>dp</b> · milp · bb · sblp"]
    H -->|No| J["<b>jedi</b> · <b>mdlp</b><br/>fast_mdlp · dmiv · cm"]

    C --> K{High cardinality<br/>with rare levels?}
    K -->|Yes| L["<b>sketch</b> · mba · swb"]
    K -->|No| M{Must the WoE be<br/>monotone?}
    M -->|Yes| N["<b>gmb</b> · <b>mob</b> · udt"]
    M -->|No| O["<b>jedi</b> · <b>cm</b><br/>ivb · dmiv · fetb · dp"]

    E --> P([obwoe algorithm = ...])
    G --> P
    I --> P
    J --> P
    L --> P
    N --> P
    O --> P

Bold entries are the defaults worth trying first. algorithm = "auto" picks jedi, a good general-purpose choice for both types.

Family	Algorithms	Optimises
Information-theoretic	`mdlp`, `fast_mdlp`, `dmiv`, `ivb`, `jedi`	entropy or IV gain per split, with an MDL stopping rule
Statistical merging	`cm`, `fetb`, `mob`	merges neighbours whose difference fails a \(\chi^2\) or Fisher test
Shape-constrained	`ir`, `mrblp`, `mblp`, `oslp`, `gmb`	best fit subject to a monotonicity constraint
Exact optimisation	`dp`, `milp`, `sblp`, `bb`	global optimum of IV under bin-count and size constraints
Metaheuristic	`sab`, `mba`, `swb`, `udt`	simulated annealing, agglomerative or tree-based search
Unsupervised	`ewb`, `kmb`, `ubsd`, `sketch`	equal width, k-means, standard deviation, streaming quantiles

obwoe_algorithms() lists all 37 with the feature types each supports; every one is also callable directly as ob_numerical_*() or ob_categorical_*().

Key functions

Function	Purpose
`obwoe()`	Fit optimal binning and WoE across a data frame
`obwoe_select()`	Screen variables by IV strength and bin ordering
`obwoe_apply()`	Apply a fitted binning to new data
`obwoe_gains()`	Gains table with KS, Gini, lift and capture rates
`obwoe_sql()`	Generate the equivalent SQL `CASE` expressions
`obwoe_scorecard()`	Run the full pipeline and write the `.xlsx` model document
`obwoe_report()`	Write the workbook for an existing scorecard
`obwoe_scale()` / `obwoe_score()`	PDO scaling of log-odds to points
`obwoe_prune()`	Drop redundant variables by correlation in the WoE space
`obwoe_psi()`	Population Stability Index between two samples
`step_obwoe()`	tidymodels recipe step, tunable
`obcorr()`	Fast pairwise correlations for redundancy pruning
`ob_preprocess()`	Missing-value and outlier handling before binning
`obwoe_algorithms()`	List the available algorithms
`control.obwoe()`	Algorithm control parameters

Interpreting Information Value

The package grades IV with the bands from Siddiqi (2006), and obwoe_select() acts on them.

IV	Band	Reading
\(< 0.02\)	Unpredictive	drop
\([0.02,\ 0.10)\)	Weak	keep only if it adds diversity
\([0.10,\ 0.30)\)	Medium	the workhorses of a scorecard
\([0.30,\ 0.50)\)	Strong	strong, verify it is not a proxy
\(\ge 0.50\)	Suspicious	almost always leakage

Documentation

Contributing

Contributions are welcome. See the Contributing Guidelines and the Code of Conduct.

Citation

@software{optimalbinningwoe,
  author = {José Evandeilton Lopes},
  title  = {OptimalBinningWoE: Optimal Binning and Weight of Evidence Framework for Modeling},
  year   = {2026},
  url    = {https://github.com/evandeilton/OptimalBinningWoE}
}

References

Siddiqi, N. (2006). Credit Risk Scorecards: Developing and Implementing Intelligent Credit Scoring. John Wiley & Sons.
Thomas, L. C., Edelman, D. B., & Crook, J. N. (2002). Credit Scoring and Its Applications. SIAM.
Navas-Palencia, G. (2020). Optimal Binning: Mathematical Programming Formulation. arXiv:2001.08025.
Fayyad, U. M., & Irani, K. B. (1993). Multi-interval discretization of continuous-valued attributes for classification learning. IJCAI.
Anderson, R. (2007). The Credit Scoring Toolkit: Theory and Practice for Retail Credit Risk Management. Oxford University Press.

License

These binaries (installable software) and packages are in development.
They may not be fully stable and should be used with caution. We make no claims about them.