Liquidity Risk Modeling with Machine Learning: Big Data Approaches for Intraday Liquidity Prediction
Main Article Content
Abstract
Liquidity risk has emerged as a critical concern for financial institutions due to increasing market volatility, regulatory scrutiny, and the growing complexity of global financial systems. Traditional liquidity risk management approaches, which rely on static assumptions and low-frequency data, are often inadequate for capturing rapid intraday fluctuations in cash flows and funding requirements. This paper explores the application of machine learning techniques combined with big data architectures to enhance intraday liquidity prediction and risk modeling. The study presents a data-driven framework that leverages high-frequency transactional data, market indicators, and behavioral patterns to forecast liquidity positions in near real time. Advanced machine learning models, including ensemble methods and deep learning architecture such as Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) networks are evaluated for their ability to capture nonlinear dependencies and temporal dynamics inherent in liquidity flows. The proposed approach integrates scalable big data technologies to support real-time ingestion, processing, and predictive analytics. Results demonstrate that machine learning-based models significantly outperform traditional methods in forecasting accuracy and responsiveness to market stress conditions. The paper also discusses practical implementation considerations, including model interpretability, regulatory compliance, and integration with enterprise treasury systems. By enabling proactive liquidity management and early detection of stress scenarios, the proposed framework offers substantial improvements in financial resilience and operational efficiency for modern banking institutions.
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
[1] M. Drehmann and K. Nikolaou, “Funding liquidity risk: Definition and measurement,” J. Bank. Financ., vol. 37, no. 7, pp. 2173–2182, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2012.01.002.
[2] L. Allen and T. G. Bali, “Cyclicality in catastrophic and operational risk measurements,” J. Bank. Financ., vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 1191–1235, 2007, doi: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2006.10.007.
[3] B. C. on B. Supervision, “Basel III: The Liquidity Coverage Ratio and liquidity risk monitoring tools,” Bank for International Settlements, 2013. [Online]. Available: https://www.bis.org/publ/bcbs238.pdf
[4] B. C. on B. Supervision, “Monitoring tools for intraday liquidity management,” Bank for International Settlements, 2013. [Online]. Available: https://www.bis.org/publ/bcbs248.pdf
[5] M. & Company, “The next frontier in risk efficiency,” McKinsey & Company, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/risk-and-resilience/our-insights/the-next-frontier-in-risk-efficiency
[6] T. Chen, “XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System,” Cornell Univ., 2016.
[7] Y. LeCun, Y. Bengio, and G. Hinton, “Deep learning,” Nature, vol. 521, no. 7553, pp. 436–444, 2015.
[8] S. Hochreiter and J. Schmidhuber, “Long Short-Term Memory,” Neural Comput., vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 1735–1780, 1997, doi: 10.1162/neco.1997.9.8.1735.
[9] Deloitte, “AI and risk management.” Deloitte. [Online]. Available: https://www.deloitte.com/global/en/industries/financial-services/perspectives/gx-ai-and-risk-management.html
[10] I. Goodfellow, Y. Bengio, and A. Courville, Deep learning. MIT Press, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.deeplearningbook.org/
[11] M. Azure, “Big Data Architecture Style.” Microsoft Learn. [Online]. Available: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/architecture/guide/architecture-styles/big-data
[12] A. Vaswani et al., “Attention is all you need,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2017, vol. 30. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1706.03762.