• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Estimating Loss Given Default Based on Beta Regression

    2021-12-16 06:41:58JamilJaberNoriszuraIsmailSitiNorafidahMohdRamliBakerAlbadareenandNawafHamadneh
    Computers Materials&Continua 2021年3期

    Jamil J.Jaber,Noriszura Ismail,Siti Norafidah Mohd Ramli,Baker Albadareen and Nawaf N.Hamadneh

    1Department of Risk Management and Insurance,The University of Jordan,Aqaba,77111,Jordan

    2Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia,Department of Mathematical Sciences,Malaysia

    3Department of Basic Sciences,College of Science and Theoretical Studies,Saudi Electronic University,Riyadh,11673,Saudi Arabia

    Abstract: Loss given default (LGD) is a key parameter in credit risk management to calculate the required regulatory minimum capital.The internal ratings-based(IRB)approach under the Basel II allows institutions to determine the loss given default (LGD) on their own.In this study, we have estimated LGD for a credit portfolio data by using beta regression with precision parameter(?)and mean parameter(μ).The credit portfolio data was obtained from a banking institution in Jordan;for the period of January 2010 until December 2014.In the first stage,we have used the“outstandingamount”and“amount of borrowing”to find LGD of each default borrower(494 out of 4393 borrower).In the second stage,we fit univariate parametric distributions to the LGD data to obtain the beta distribution.After that, we have estimated the values of ?based on microeconomic variables (SPP, OE and LR).Moreover, we have estimated the values of μ based on macroeconomic variables (GDP and Inflation rate).Finally, we have compared between six different link functions(Logit,loglog,probit,cloglog,cauchit,and log),which have used with ?and μ.The results show that Beta regression with probit link function has the highest R-squared with accepted measurements for logL,AIC and BIC.

    Keywords: Credit risk; loss given default; parametric distribution;regression model

    1 Introduction

    The Basel Committee gives three approaches to estimate the required regulatory capital in banking institutions; standardized, internal ratings-based (IRB) and progressing IRB.The IRB approach is generally favored compared to the standard approach because it produces higher accuracy estimates and lower capital charges.The IRB approach under the Basel II allows institutions to determine probabilities of default (PD) and loss given default (LGD) on their own, as opposed to the standardized approach under the Basel I which uses estimates of PD and LGD from the Central Bank to calculate the required capital based on a percentage of risk-weighted-assets.Thus,the Basel II leads to a better differentiation of risks and considers diversification of a bank’s portfolio [1,2].

    In Jordan, the banking sector obtains the estimate of LGD from the Central Bank of Jordan under the Basel I.Therefore, the LGD estimate is fixed, and does not varies according to banks.The contributions of this chapter are to estimate the LGD under the Basel II for corporate credit portfolio in the Jordanian banking sector, to fit the LGD data to parametric distributions,and to incorporate internal and external financial variables into the data so that the LGD data can be fitted to regression models.The main advantage of fitting the LGD data with financial variables as covariates is that we can determine which financial variables significantly affect the LGD.Since the LGD is influenced by some key transaction characteristics, several categories of variables such as macroeconomic and industry-specific variables can be used to build a predictive regression model.

    The objective of this chapter is to use several parametric models (beta, Cauchy, gamma,Gompertz, logistic, log-normal, gamma, normal, and Weibull) to estimate LGD.The models are fitted to a sample data obtained from the corporate credit portfolio of a bank in Jordan for the period of January 2010 until December 2014.The LGD data lies between interval [0,1] because it is the proportion of outstanding amount from the borrowing amount.We also consider five financial variables for the regression model to determine the financial variables, which significantly affect the LGD.The financial variables are gross domestic product (GDP), inflation rate (Inf),service pricing policy (SPP), operating efficiency (OE), and liquidity ratio (LR).

    The rest of this paper proceeds as follows.In the next section, we discuss the literature review for important work for LGD, and Section 3 describes the parametric distributions for fitting the LGD data and the regression models for determining the financial variables which significantly affect the LGD.We present the sample data and the empirical results in Section 4, and the final section concludes.

    2 Literature Review

    Most empirical studies on credit risk depended heavily on corporate bond markets to gauge losses in the case of default.The reason behind this is that bank loans are private instruments,and thus, little information on loan losses are freely accessible.Several studies on credit risks and LGD on bond markets have been carried out in the last several decades.An earlier study can be found in [3] who utilized actuarial analysis to investigate mortality rates of U.S.corporate bonds.This was followed by various empirical studies on credit risk in bond markets (see, for example [4,5]).The mortality approach was also used by [6] to measure the percentage of bad and doubtful loans of corporate bond recovered several months after the default date.Recent studies on LGD can be found in [7] who proposed a new model for LGD of bank loans by leveraging time to recovery, and reference [8] who forecasted LGD of bank loans using multi-stage model.In another study, [9] constructed a survival model to predict risks of cardholders and applied the model to a case study in Capital Card Services.

    LGD data from banking industry tends to be skewed and heavy-tailed, and thus,can be fitted by parametric models such as beta, lognormal, gamma, and Pareto.Besides parametric models, non-parametric models were also proposed and used, such as regression tree, neural networks, multivariate adaptive regression spline, and least squares support vector machine [10-17].

    For the case of LGD with covariates, regression models can be utilized and several examples can be found from past studies.Examples of regression models for LGD data are ordinary least squares regression (OLS), ridge regression (RiR), and fractional response regression.In 2005 Moody’s introduced the renowned LossCals Model using a multivariate linear regression model consisting of industry and macroeconomic factors, and reference [18] applied logistic regression with time consideration using transformed LGD as dependent variable and macroeconomic variables as independent variables.Recently, reference [19] used quintiles regression to estimate downturn and unexpected credit losses known as downturn LGD.Finally, reference [9] constructed a model to predict the risk of a cardholder for the lifetime of account and applied survival analysis methodologies to a case study in capital card services.

    Under the Basel II, banking institutions are suggested to consider macroeconomic downturn conditions when estimating recovery rates [20-22].In particular, reference [22] assumes that banking institutions should use gross domestic product (GDP) growth rate and unemployment rate as determinants of recovery rate prediction.It should be noted that recovery rate is equal to one minus LGD rate.Studies from [23,24] showed that GDP growth rate was significantly relevant to the recovery rate of the U.S.bonds.On the other hand, references [12,25] found that GDP growth rate was not significantly relevant.

    Other macroeconomic covariates were also suggested in the literature to predict recovery rate,such as inflation rate [24], interest rate [14,24], growth rate of investment [12,26] and rate of return on stock market [24,25].Studies from [6,27] showed that recovery rate decreases when loan size increases.In another study, reference [8] used Japanese credit portfolio to analyze impacting factors of LGD and to improve multi-stage model for predicting LGD.The variables considered are creditworthiness score, collateral quota (commercial bills), collateral quota (real estate), collateral quota (marketable securities), collateral quota (deposits), credit guarantee quota,and exposure (in hundred million yen).Their results showed that collateral, guarantees, and loan size significantly affect the LGD.

    In this study, we consider macro- and micro-economics factors as explanatory variables, and the factors are obtained from available reports.We use macro-economic factors (GDP and inflation rate) for the mean parameter and micro-economic factors (service pricing policy, operating efficiency, and liquidity ratio) for the dispersion parameter in beta regression model.

    3 Methodology for Estimating LGD

    This section gives a background of the main concepts used in our study.Our model consists of three stages.In the first stage, we use the outstanding amount and amount of borrowing to find LGD of each default borrower.In the second stage, we will use the LGD to find the suitable parametric model.In the third stage, we will use beta regression with different link functions for fitting the LGD data with covariates for two parameters for beta regression.

    3.1 Loss-Given Defaults(LGD)

    A variety of models in which LGD is subject to systematic risk can be found in the literature.Reference [28] proposed a model in which the LGD is normally distributed and influenced by the same systematic factor that drives the probability of default (PD).Reference [10] employs a lognormal distribution for the LGD.Other extensions include [29], choosing a probit transformation.References [30,31] employ a logit transformation.However, reference [6] used mortality approach to measure the percentage of bad and doubtful loan of corporate bonds that are recovered n months after the default date.The actuarial-based mortality approach is appropriate because the population sample is changing over time.The dataset of this study is obtained from micro-data on defaulted bank loans of a private bank in Portugal, Banco Commercial Portugues (BCP).It consists of 10000 short-term loans granted to small and medium-sized companies from June 1995-December 2000 (66 months).They identified the LGD by the following:LGD=SPULBt, where SPULBt=1-SMRRt, and SMRRt=where SPULBtis a sample (weighted) percentage of unpaid loan balance at period t, SMRRtis a sample (weighted) marginal recovery rate at time t, i refers to each of the m loan balances outstanding in the sample, and t is the periods after default.They found that the cumulative average recovery is almost completed after 48 months.Moreover, the distribution of cumulative recovery rates is a bi-model distribution.Reference [32] used unsecured consumer loans or credit cards for one UK lender to compare linear regression and survival analysis models to predict LGD.The datasets were collected on 27000 personal loans from 1989-2004.There are two reasons to use survival analysis.Firstly, debts which are still being repaid cannot be included in the standard linear regression approach.Survival analysis models can treat such repayments as censored and easily include them in the model.Secondly, the recovery rate is not normally distributed and therefore modeling it using a linear regression violates the assumptions of linear regression models.The recovery rate is defined as: RR=where RR is a recovery rate and LGD = 1-RR.The study compared linear regression with survival analysis models(proportional hazard models and accelerated failure time models for Weibull, log-logistic, gamma,and Cox model).The linear regression is better than survival models in single distribution models based on higher R-square, higher Spearman rank, and lower MSE.Reference [6] used LGD ratio as shown before to estimate the percentage of LGD after n-months of corporate bond default.However, reference [32] considered equation as shown before to estimate LGD ratio for personal loans.Our study constructs LGD ratio from previous equations to estimate LGD as shown in Eq.(1).

    The Basel II risk parameters are PD, LGD and exposure at default (EAD).The rate of expected credit loss (ECL) which is also known as the risk-weighted-asset of credit portfolio can be expressed as the product of PD and LGD.Therefore, LGD is one of the two determining factors of credit losses [33].The ECL of credit portfolio can generally be represented as:

    where PDiis the probability of default of theith borrower,i=1,2,...,m,LGDiis the loss given default,EADiis the exposure at default, andmis the total number of borrowers in the portfolio.

    3.2 Parametric Distributions

    Common parametric distributions for modeling the LGD data are considered.Tab.1 provides the density function and survival function for the distributions considered in this study, which are Beta, Cauchy, Gamma, Gompertz, Logistic, Log-normal, Normal, and Weibull.These distributions are suitable for modeling skewed and heavy-tailed data, which are commonly displayed in LGD data.The empirical pdf for the LGD data in our study can be seen in Fig.1 (pdf).The curve of empirical pdf indicates that the LGD data is skewed and heavy-tailed.

    Table 1: Parametric models for LGD

    Figure 1: q-q plot, p-p plot, PDF and CDF.Beta distribution, gamma distribution, normal distribution, logistic distribution, Cauchy distribution, exponential distribution

    Three types of accuracy criteria are used to choose the best model; Akaike information criterion (AIC), Bayesian information criterion (BIC), and Log-likelihood (LogL).BIC is depend on maximum likelihood estimates of the model parameters [34], which penalizes a sample data with larger size and number of parameters.The formula is defined asBIC=-2?+kp, where?refers to the log likelihood of the estimated model,prefers to the number of parameters, andk=logn.AIC is also depend on maximum likelihood estimates of model parameters [35], but penalizes a sample data with larger size.The formula is defined asAIC=-2?+k*p, where?refers to the log likelihood of the estimated model,prefers to the number of parameters,andk*=2.

    3.3 Beta Regression

    In our study we use beta regression for fitting the LGD data with covariates.The reason for fitting beta regression is that the distribution is well common to be adequate for modeling quantities bounded in the interval [0,1].Based on the selection of parameters, the probability density function can be unimodal, J-shaped, U-shaped or uniform.It can be shown in the later section that beta distribution is the best model compared to other parametric distributions for fitting the sample data without covariates for our case study.Therefore, we consider several beta regressions, by using different link functions, for fitting the LGD data with covariates.

    Let random variable Y follows to Beta distribution, B(α,β), where the parameters are α,β>0.The mean and variance of Y are defined as E(Y)= α/(α + β)and Var(Y)=αβ/((α+β)2(α+β+1))respectively.Reference [36] defined a regression structure of beta distribution as the followings.Let μ=α/(α+β)and ?=α+β, so that α=μ? and β=(1-μ)?.The new parameterizations of Beta regression are E(Y)=μ and Var(Y)=V(μ)/(1+?), where V(μ)=μ(1-μ)for Y ~B(μ,?)with 0<μ<1 and ?>0 since α,β>0.Parameter ? is known as precision parameter.Since a larger ? indicates as smaller variance for a fixed μ, 1/? can also be regarded as the dispersion parameter.

    In our study, the precision parameter is modeled in a similar way as the mean parameter.Instead of having a fixed dispersion (fixed variance) we have a varying dispersion (varying variance).Therefore, a varying variance indicate a varying risks and it would be beneficial if significant risk factors (significant covariates) can be determined.It should be noted that variance is commonly used as one of the risk measures in finance area.The risk of loss in finance can be measured using confidence interval, for instance, the 95% confidence interval for loss can be measured as max(μ±2σ), where σ is the standard deviation.

    Lety=(y1,...,yn)Tbe a random samplewhereyi~B(μi,?i),i=1,...,n.The parameters,μiand?i, are assumed to satisfy the following functional relations:

    whereβ=(β1,...,βk)Tandθ=(θ1,...,θh)Tare defined as vectors of unknown regression parameters that are assumed to be functionally independent,β∈Rkandθ∈Rh,k+h <n,η1iandη2iare predictors, andxi1,...,xiq1,zi1,...,ziq2are observations onq1andq2known covariates which need not be exclusive.

    A number of several link functions can be used forg(.), such as logit specification which defined asg(μ)= log(μ/(1 -μ), probit functiong(μ)= Φ-1(μ)where Φ(.)refer to the standard normal distribution function, log functiong(μ)=log(μ), complementary log-log functiong(μ)=-log(-log(μ)), and Cauchy functiong(μ)=tan(π(μ-0.5)).A rich discussion on the link functions can be explained in [37,38], or by referring to Chapter 7 in [39].

    The log-likelihood function of Beta regression models defined as:

    In this study, we consider Beta regression with different link functions for fitting LGD data with covariates.We use R-squared to select the best regression model.

    4 Empirical Results for LGD

    A sample data based on the credit portfolio of a banking institution in Jordan is used in our study.The credit bank portfolio was obtained from January 2010-December 2014.The portfolio capacity is 4393, and the overall number of defaults during the 5-year period is 494.The sample size is the same as the number of default, which is 494, and the LGD data lies between interval[0,1].For the case study, a borrower is declared as default if he is unable to pay cash installment in a period of 3 months.

    The number of defaultsper annumand the summary statistics for the LGD data are presented in Tab.2.The maximum number of LGD is recorded in years 2010 and 2011.It can be observed that the highest mean of LGD is 97.7% with 0.025 standard deviation in 2010.The high frequency of LGD in 2010 and 2011 in as results of Jordanian economy had late response to financial crisis,which occurred in 2008.The Amman stock exchange (ASE) after 2009 starts decreasing steadily until 2012 [41,42].Indicated that performance of Jordanian Banks sector had negative effect after global financial crisis such as, share prices decreasing and non-performing assets increasing.Therefore, for this reason we see the number of default increased as result of financial crisis that effect of ability of borrowers to pay their borrowing money.However, the lowest mean of LGD is 54.1% with 0.251 standard deviation in year 2014.Furthermore, the minimum LGD is 3.2% in year 2013 and the maximum LGD is 99.6% in year 2010.The R-package is used for fitting the sample data to the parametric models [43].

    Tab.3 provides the results of the fitted parametric distributions.Beta distribution is the preferable model because it has the highest LogL and the lowest AIC and BIC.Further comparison can be obtained from the q-q plot, p-p plot, empirical and theoretical PDF, and empirical and theoretical CDF shown in Fig.1.It can be found that beta distribution shows a better fit compared to other parametric distributions.Therefore the mean of Beta distribution can be used as the estimate of LGD for the credit portfolio [44].

    The results from Tab.3 show that beta distribution is the best model for fitting the sample data.Therefore, we consider beta regression with different link functions in order to explore the internal and external financial variables which significantly affect the LGD.

    The descriptive statistics of the explanatory variables are shown in Tab.4.

    Table 3: Parametric models

    Tab.5 provides the parameter estimates and standard errors for Beta regressions, which are fitted using different link functions.All regression parameters are significant, at least at 0.10 level,except for beta regression with Cauchy link function where the estimate of LR is insignificant.

    The estimates of GDP and Inf are highly significant for the mean(μ).GDP refer to a monetary measure of the market value of all final goods and services produced within the country’s border in a specific period of time (typically 1 year).An increasing GDP means that the economy is expanding, and firms are producing and selling more products or services.When GDP declines, the economy is depicted as being in a downturn.During downturn, fewer goods and services are being sold, business profits turn down, unemployment rises and government tax collections fall.

    An increasing inflation rate (Inf) indicates a sustained increment in the prices of goods and services over a specific period of time.Inflation referred to a reduction in the purchasing power per unit of money.In other word, when inflation rate rises, each unit of currency buys fewer goods and services.

    Table 4: Summary statistics for explanatory variables

    Our results show that a decreasing GDP growth rate resulted in an increasing LGD, while an increasing inflation rate resulted in an increasing LGD.The results are expected in an adverse economic conditions, where GDP diminishes and inflation rate increases as the default frequencies increase and the asset prices decrease [44], and consequently, the recovery rates decrease.When an economic prosperity resumes, the situation reverses, indicating that the capital requirements under these conditions would swing wildly.In general, a lower LGD is favored for calculating the expected loss (EL) of a banking institution.The results show that lower LGD is obtained when the GDP is higher and the inflation rate is lower.

    Service pricing policy (SPP) ratio is measured as operating expenses divided by total liability.This ratio measures the funding for operating expenses by the total liability.Higher SPP is resulted when the relative decrease in total liability is more than the decrease in operating expenses.For our case, higher SPP decreases the variance of LGD.It is implied here that larger decreases in total liability resulted in less variations of LGD among the default borrowers.

    Operating efficiency ratio (OE) is measured as total operating expenses divided by total operating revenues.The increase in OE is caused by the larger decrease in total operating revenue relative to the decrease in total operating expenses.Our case shows that higher OE decreases the LGD variance.It can be indicated here that larger reduction in total operating revenue leads to less variations of LGD among the default borrowers.

    Cash ratio (cash and cash equivalents divided by current liability) is generally a more conservative liquidity ratio measure of a company’s ability to repay its short-term obligations, using only the most liquid of assets, such as cash on hand, cash equivalents (sometimes referred to as marketable securities) and demand deposits.This measure tells creditors the company’s ability to pay all current liabilities immediately without having to sell or liquidate other assets.Higher LR is resulted when current liability has larger decrease than the decrease in cash and cash equivalents.Our results show that higher liquidity ratio (LR) indicates higher variance of LGD.It is implied here that a larger decrease in current liability resulted in more variations of LGD among the default cases.In general, lower variance of LGD is favored in terms of risk measures.The results show that lower variance is obtained when we have higher SPP, higher OE, and lower LR.

    Table 5: Beta regression with different link functions

    Table 6: Beta regression with R-squared, AIC and BIC

    Further results can be seen in Tab.6, where the R-squared, log likelihood, AIC and BIC for each model are provided.Since beta regression with probit link function has the highest R-squared, while having accepted measurements for logL, AIC and BIC, this model is chosen as the best regression model for explaining the relationship between LGD and financial variables.

    5 Conclusion

    In the context of credit portfolio, LGD is the percentage of exposure that will be lost if a default occurs.Uncertainty with respect to the actual LGD is an important source of risks of credit portfolio, in addition to default risk.In this study, several parametric distributions were used to estimate LGD based on a sample of credit portfolio collected from a bank in Jordan from the period of 2010-2014.The results show that Beta distribution is the best parametric model for estimating LGD based on the following tests; logL, AIC and BIC.Several financial variables were then incorporated to the sample data to find the macro- and micro-economics determinants of LGD.The results show that Beta regression with probit link function has the highest R-squared with accepted measurements for logL, AIC and BIC.The results from beta regression models show that macroeconomic variables (GDP and Inflation rate) are significant for the mean parameter(μ), while microeconomic variables (SPP, OE and LR) are significant for the precision parameter (?).In particular, a decreasing GDP growth rate resulted in an increasing LGD, while an increasing inflation rate resulted in an increasing LGD.In terms of LGD risks,the variance (risks) of LGD are lower with lower SPP and lower OP, but higher with lower LR.We have proposed successfully the significant microeconomic variables which affect on precision parameter (?) and compared between six different link functions (Logit, loglog, probit, cloglog,cauchit, and log) by Beta regression.

    Funding Statement:This research is supported by the Fundamental Research Grant Scheme/ Ministry of Education Malaysia [Research No.: FRGS/1/2019/STG06/UKM/01/5] and the Research University Grant/Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia [Research No.: GUP-2019-031].Initials of authors who received the grant: N.Ismail.

    Conflicts of Interest:The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest to report regarding the present study.

    99久久人妻综合| 婷婷色麻豆天堂久久| 美女主播在线视频| 国产一区二区亚洲精品在线观看| 国产成人免费观看mmmm| 免费看日本二区| 国产av国产精品国产| 午夜精品在线福利| 三级国产精品片| 狠狠精品人妻久久久久久综合| 午夜久久久久精精品| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 女人久久www免费人成看片| 男女边摸边吃奶| 九九久久精品国产亚洲av麻豆| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 久久人人爽人人爽人人片va| 一级毛片电影观看| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站| 色播亚洲综合网| 日本爱情动作片www.在线观看| 偷拍熟女少妇极品色| 91久久精品国产一区二区成人| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| 国产精品一区www在线观看| 中文乱码字字幕精品一区二区三区 | 国内精品美女久久久久久| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久| 免费大片18禁| 午夜福利成人在线免费观看| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜 | 国产黄片视频在线免费观看| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看| 欧美日韩在线观看h| 非洲黑人性xxxx精品又粗又长| 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 久久国内精品自在自线图片| 免费观看的影片在线观看| 免费观看无遮挡的男女| 免费人成在线观看视频色| 大陆偷拍与自拍| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人| 亚洲精品一二三| 天堂av国产一区二区熟女人妻| 免费观看无遮挡的男女| 亚洲av成人精品一区久久| 一级毛片aaaaaa免费看小| 看黄色毛片网站| 在线播放无遮挡| 国产毛片a区久久久久| 日本熟妇午夜| 国产精品99久久久久久久久| 国产成人精品久久久久久| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃 | 国产伦在线观看视频一区| .国产精品久久| 亚洲国产高清在线一区二区三| 亚洲激情五月婷婷啪啪| 黄片无遮挡物在线观看| 欧美bdsm另类| 国产精品一区二区三区四区久久| 欧美另类一区| 久久6这里有精品| 人妻少妇偷人精品九色| 精品久久久久久久人妻蜜臀av| 纵有疾风起免费观看全集完整版 | 国产一级毛片在线| 亚洲成色77777| 亚洲国产精品专区欧美| 男插女下体视频免费在线播放| 久久久a久久爽久久v久久| 你懂的网址亚洲精品在线观看| 久久99热这里只有精品18| 精品久久久久久久末码| 精品亚洲乱码少妇综合久久| 身体一侧抽搐| 九色成人免费人妻av| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 欧美潮喷喷水| 国产精品无大码| 嫩草影院新地址| 晚上一个人看的免费电影| 熟妇人妻久久中文字幕3abv| 久久久成人免费电影| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3| 高清午夜精品一区二区三区| 又粗又硬又长又爽又黄的视频| 男人爽女人下面视频在线观看| 久久精品熟女亚洲av麻豆精品 | 国产高清有码在线观看视频| 亚洲av电影不卡..在线观看| 亚洲电影在线观看av| 国产一区亚洲一区在线观看| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 久久这里有精品视频免费| 亚洲精品日韩在线中文字幕| 欧美zozozo另类| 亚洲精品国产av蜜桃| 久久久久久久久久久免费av| 黑人高潮一二区| 麻豆成人午夜福利视频| 麻豆成人av视频| av国产免费在线观看| 欧美激情在线99| av线在线观看网站| 精品熟女少妇av免费看| 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 成人二区视频| 熟女电影av网| 国产视频首页在线观看| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片| 国产精品一区二区在线观看99 | 狂野欧美白嫩少妇大欣赏| 91精品一卡2卡3卡4卡| 国产真实伦视频高清在线观看| 久久6这里有精品| 色尼玛亚洲综合影院| 在线天堂最新版资源| 午夜激情久久久久久久| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的 | 亚洲成人av在线免费| 日日啪夜夜撸| 嫩草影院新地址| 亚洲图色成人| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| 色哟哟·www| 三级国产精品片| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区| 久久精品夜夜夜夜夜久久蜜豆| 欧美xxxx黑人xx丫x性爽| 亚洲在线自拍视频| 亚洲成人精品中文字幕电影| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| 成人综合一区亚洲| 97人妻精品一区二区三区麻豆| av卡一久久| 亚洲天堂国产精品一区在线| 神马国产精品三级电影在线观看| 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人| 美女主播在线视频| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| 成人亚洲欧美一区二区av| 美女黄网站色视频| 久久午夜福利片| 日日啪夜夜爽| 大陆偷拍与自拍| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄| 99九九线精品视频在线观看视频| 在现免费观看毛片| 久久久久久久国产电影| 99久久九九国产精品国产免费| 26uuu在线亚洲综合色| 天天躁日日操中文字幕| 伊人久久国产一区二区| 亚洲人成网站在线观看播放| 久久久亚洲精品成人影院| 久久久国产一区二区| 国产人妻一区二区三区在| 久久精品熟女亚洲av麻豆精品 | 亚洲av中文av极速乱| 国产一区二区亚洲精品在线观看| 成人性生交大片免费视频hd| 国产日韩欧美在线精品| 身体一侧抽搐| 九色成人免费人妻av| 成人性生交大片免费视频hd| 国产免费又黄又爽又色| 欧美三级亚洲精品| 国产精品一区二区三区四区久久| 久久久久精品性色| 中文字幕av在线有码专区| 午夜福利高清视频| 2018国产大陆天天弄谢| 久久久久九九精品影院| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 成人亚洲欧美一区二区av| 色哟哟·www| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| 亚洲电影在线观看av| 亚洲最大成人av| 99热这里只有精品一区| 蜜臀久久99精品久久宅男| 亚洲婷婷狠狠爱综合网| 少妇的逼水好多| 成人国产麻豆网| 成人av在线播放网站| 十八禁网站网址无遮挡 | 亚洲丝袜综合中文字幕| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 婷婷色av中文字幕| 在线观看av片永久免费下载| 欧美zozozo另类| 亚洲三级黄色毛片| 99久久精品热视频| 亚洲人与动物交配视频| 免费观看av网站的网址| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 国产探花在线观看一区二区| 在线观看一区二区三区| 国产视频内射| 亚洲精品aⅴ在线观看| 亚洲欧美日韩卡通动漫| 欧美日本视频| 日韩三级伦理在线观看| 免费看日本二区| 亚洲第一区二区三区不卡| 一级毛片久久久久久久久女| 美女被艹到高潮喷水动态| 久久精品国产自在天天线| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 久久鲁丝午夜福利片| 国产欧美另类精品又又久久亚洲欧美| 亚洲久久久久久中文字幕| ponron亚洲| 卡戴珊不雅视频在线播放| 国产激情偷乱视频一区二区| 97超视频在线观看视频| 中文字幕制服av| 欧美精品一区二区大全| 国产成人a∨麻豆精品| 80岁老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 久久99热这里只有精品18| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 国产免费福利视频在线观看| 午夜福利视频精品| 内射极品少妇av片p| 日韩大片免费观看网站| 蜜桃久久精品国产亚洲av| 男女边摸边吃奶| 性插视频无遮挡在线免费观看| 国产在线男女| 亚洲av.av天堂| 日本黄色片子视频| 91午夜精品亚洲一区二区三区| 亚洲婷婷狠狠爱综合网| 麻豆成人av视频| 国产精品一区二区三区四区久久| 高清在线视频一区二区三区| 26uuu在线亚洲综合色| 国产老妇伦熟女老妇高清| 国产成人午夜福利电影在线观看| 三级经典国产精品| 成人欧美大片| 久久久久久九九精品二区国产| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 99热6这里只有精品| 在线a可以看的网站| 国产伦在线观看视频一区| 蜜臀久久99精品久久宅男| 成人特级av手机在线观看| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器| 成人一区二区视频在线观看| 亚洲精品乱码久久久久久按摩| 日韩强制内射视频| 一级av片app| 免费无遮挡裸体视频| av一本久久久久| 中文在线观看免费www的网站| 亚洲自拍偷在线| 亚洲国产色片| 免费观看av网站的网址| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 国产黄片美女视频| 免费观看无遮挡的男女| 一个人看视频在线观看www免费| 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| 精品久久久久久久久久久久久| 日韩欧美精品v在线| 亚洲精品日本国产第一区| 国产免费视频播放在线视频 | 国内揄拍国产精品人妻在线| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 亚洲乱码一区二区免费版| 春色校园在线视频观看| 国产精品一区二区三区四区免费观看| 偷拍熟女少妇极品色| 免费人成在线观看视频色| www.色视频.com| 啦啦啦啦在线视频资源| 国产爱豆传媒在线观看| 久久久久网色| 欧美日韩一区二区视频在线观看视频在线 | 搡女人真爽免费视频火全软件| 国产乱来视频区| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 免费观看的影片在线观看| 亚洲色图av天堂| 青青草视频在线视频观看| 日韩视频在线欧美| 日韩三级伦理在线观看| 丝袜喷水一区| 亚洲成人中文字幕在线播放| 男插女下体视频免费在线播放| 成年女人在线观看亚洲视频 | 亚洲成人精品中文字幕电影| 啦啦啦中文免费视频观看日本| 别揉我奶头 嗯啊视频| 精品一区二区三区人妻视频| 久久久国产一区二区| 国产成人aa在线观看| 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 久久国产乱子免费精品| av卡一久久| 一级爰片在线观看| 国产免费一级a男人的天堂| 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 超碰97精品在线观看| 亚洲无线观看免费| 免费播放大片免费观看视频在线观看| 毛片一级片免费看久久久久| 日本一本二区三区精品| 两个人的视频大全免费| 国产精品三级大全| 婷婷色av中文字幕| 免费av不卡在线播放| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 午夜激情欧美在线| h日本视频在线播放| 美女xxoo啪啪120秒动态图| 成年女人在线观看亚洲视频 | 亚洲精品影视一区二区三区av| 国产探花极品一区二区| 国产黄片视频在线免费观看| 国产精品99久久久久久久久| 日韩成人av中文字幕在线观看| 国产成人午夜福利电影在线观看| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站| 可以在线观看毛片的网站| 国产欧美另类精品又又久久亚洲欧美| 国产一区有黄有色的免费视频 | 久热久热在线精品观看| 精品久久久久久久久亚洲| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| av天堂中文字幕网| 国产精品久久视频播放| 久久久久国产网址| 91在线精品国自产拍蜜月| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看| 美女xxoo啪啪120秒动态图| 久久久精品免费免费高清| 少妇的逼好多水| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看| 丰满人妻一区二区三区视频av| 亚洲国产成人一精品久久久| 最新中文字幕久久久久| 色尼玛亚洲综合影院| 免费播放大片免费观看视频在线观看| 亚洲美女搞黄在线观看| 亚洲伊人久久精品综合| 国产大屁股一区二区在线视频| 精品久久久久久电影网| 午夜久久久久精精品| 色综合亚洲欧美另类图片| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 日韩精品有码人妻一区| 亚洲av在线观看美女高潮| 成人国产麻豆网| 蜜桃久久精品国产亚洲av| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| 亚洲av电影不卡..在线观看| 日本wwww免费看| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 热99在线观看视频| 亚洲图色成人| 免费电影在线观看免费观看| av在线老鸭窝| 亚洲自偷自拍三级| 欧美潮喷喷水| 亚洲最大成人av| kizo精华| 日本av手机在线免费观看| 99re6热这里在线精品视频| 亚洲国产欧美人成| 97超碰精品成人国产| 色综合亚洲欧美另类图片| 伊人久久国产一区二区| 黑人高潮一二区| 黄色欧美视频在线观看| 夫妻午夜视频| 亚洲av中文字字幕乱码综合| 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 欧美日本视频| 91在线精品国自产拍蜜月| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频 | 精品一区二区免费观看| 又黄又爽又刺激的免费视频.| 国产精品一及| 大又大粗又爽又黄少妇毛片口| 国产国拍精品亚洲av在线观看| 国产淫语在线视频| 国产成人福利小说| 亚洲欧美成人精品一区二区| 国产精品一区二区三区四区久久| 中文字幕制服av| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜爱| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| 少妇熟女欧美另类| 在线天堂最新版资源| 99九九线精品视频在线观看视频| 国产伦精品一区二区三区四那| www.色视频.com| 精品一区二区三区视频在线| 中文资源天堂在线| 美女国产视频在线观看| 午夜激情欧美在线| 色网站视频免费| 深爱激情五月婷婷| 亚洲人成网站高清观看| 亚洲精品成人久久久久久| 水蜜桃什么品种好| av天堂中文字幕网| 久久综合国产亚洲精品| 中文字幕久久专区| 男女下面进入的视频免费午夜| 三级毛片av免费| 色网站视频免费| 一个人免费在线观看电影| 成年女人在线观看亚洲视频 | 我的女老师完整版在线观看| 免费看日本二区| 午夜福利在线在线| 国内精品宾馆在线| 成人亚洲欧美一区二区av| 国精品久久久久久国模美| 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| 亚洲va在线va天堂va国产| 国内精品美女久久久久久| 国产成人aa在线观看| 国产三级在线视频| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 美女黄网站色视频| 午夜视频国产福利| 最近中文字幕高清免费大全6| 成年版毛片免费区| 亚洲av免费高清在线观看| 国产乱人视频| 亚洲成人av在线免费| 激情五月婷婷亚洲| 成人美女网站在线观看视频| 国产精品一及| 免费少妇av软件| 精品久久国产蜜桃| 久久久久久久久久成人| 18禁在线无遮挡免费观看视频| 九九在线视频观看精品| 亚洲成人久久爱视频| 国产黄频视频在线观看| 亚洲av电影不卡..在线观看| 黑人高潮一二区| 午夜视频国产福利| 国产av国产精品国产| 99视频精品全部免费 在线| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| 午夜福利在线在线| 免费黄网站久久成人精品| 婷婷六月久久综合丁香| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人| 超碰av人人做人人爽久久| 岛国毛片在线播放| 亚洲最大成人av| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影| 亚洲最大成人手机在线| 蜜臀久久99精品久久宅男| 亚洲av不卡在线观看| 一级毛片 在线播放| 久久这里有精品视频免费| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站| 亚洲av二区三区四区| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看| 久久久亚洲精品成人影院| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| www.色视频.com| 成人一区二区视频在线观看| 97在线视频观看| 日本熟妇午夜| 99久久精品国产国产毛片| 亚洲av中文av极速乱| 亚洲av不卡在线观看| 日韩欧美三级三区| 国产亚洲精品av在线| 毛片一级片免费看久久久久| 亚洲精品aⅴ在线观看| 啦啦啦啦在线视频资源| 高清日韩中文字幕在线| 国产成人午夜福利电影在线观看| 91久久精品国产一区二区成人| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| 国产乱来视频区| 久久这里只有精品中国| 精品一区二区三卡| 欧美日韩视频高清一区二区三区二| 国产男女超爽视频在线观看| 51国产日韩欧美| 亚洲真实伦在线观看| 国产久久久一区二区三区| 亚洲内射少妇av| 国产伦一二天堂av在线观看| 插阴视频在线观看视频| 国产乱人视频| 内地一区二区视频在线| 有码 亚洲区| 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 大香蕉97超碰在线| 久久99精品国语久久久| 中文字幕人妻熟人妻熟丝袜美| 日韩三级伦理在线观看| 欧美人与善性xxx| 插阴视频在线观看视频| 蜜臀久久99精品久久宅男| 别揉我奶头 嗯啊视频| 黑人高潮一二区| 麻豆成人av视频| 久久久久九九精品影院| 自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇| 天堂影院成人在线观看| 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 亚洲成人久久爱视频| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂 | 日日干狠狠操夜夜爽| 国产成人一区二区在线| 夫妻午夜视频| 欧美高清成人免费视频www| 国产成人精品婷婷| 免费观看精品视频网站| 亚洲精品色激情综合| 久久久a久久爽久久v久久| 免费不卡的大黄色大毛片视频在线观看 | 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 久久97久久精品| 一个人看的www免费观看视频| 亚洲婷婷狠狠爱综合网| av天堂中文字幕网| 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 永久网站在线| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 国内少妇人妻偷人精品xxx网站| 在线免费十八禁| 两个人的视频大全免费| 国产麻豆成人av免费视频| 汤姆久久久久久久影院中文字幕 | 中文字幕av在线有码专区| 搡老乐熟女国产| 国产精品99久久久久久久久| 国产av国产精品国产| 国产精品一区二区在线观看99 | 亚洲在线观看片| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 国产免费一级a男人的天堂| 中文字幕亚洲精品专区| 又粗又硬又长又爽又黄的视频| 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 久久久久精品久久久久真实原创| 亚洲在线观看片| 日日干狠狠操夜夜爽| 欧美精品一区二区大全| 久久精品国产亚洲av天美| 亚洲最大成人av| 全区人妻精品视频| 国产一级毛片在线| 2018国产大陆天天弄谢| 三级经典国产精品| 久久精品国产亚洲网站| 亚州av有码| 搞女人的毛片| 久久久久精品性色| 亚洲国产av新网站| 亚洲无线观看免费| 91精品伊人久久大香线蕉| freevideosex欧美| 男女那种视频在线观看| 最近中文字幕高清免费大全6| 91久久精品电影网| av线在线观看网站| 一级二级三级毛片免费看| 在线天堂最新版资源| 亚洲精品456在线播放app| 床上黄色一级片| 欧美最新免费一区二区三区| 成年免费大片在线观看| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出| 亚洲在久久综合| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| 热99在线观看视频| 中文资源天堂在线| 五月天丁香电影| 草草在线视频免费看| 中文资源天堂在线| 老司机影院成人| 国产不卡一卡二| 国产精品人妻久久久久久| 国产亚洲av嫩草精品影院| 日韩中字成人| 免费看不卡的av| 成人无遮挡网站| 免费高清在线观看视频在线观看| 国产成人精品一,二区| 国产免费视频播放在线视频 | 久久精品国产鲁丝片午夜精品| 国产精品女同一区二区软件| 永久网站在线| 欧美成人午夜免费资源| 一级二级三级毛片免费看| 永久免费av网站大全| 欧美高清性xxxxhd video| 18禁在线播放成人免费| 中文天堂在线官网| 中文在线观看免费www的网站| 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区|