The Analysis of Fintech Risks in China: Based on Fuzzy Models

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper covers an interesting and important topic of technical and credit risks, in the perspective of the Chinese financial markets. The overall quality of the paper is acceptable - the research methods were selected and applied correctly; the conlusions are grounded in the analysis. I have some minor comments.

1. Both abstract and introduction require substantial revisions - they should include more detailed overview of the aim of the paper and the research methods applied in the study as well as, in particular, the time period and sample of the study.
   
2. The aim of the study seems too vague - it should be more clear and linked to the paper's contribution.
   
3. The final section should be expanded and include more in-depth discussion of the issues such as comparisons to the results of the previous studies, limitations of the analysis and directions for the future research.
4. The use of more up-to-date literature is highly recommended.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

Here are my comments regarding your paper:

1. Please extend the Abstract to be more informative.
2. The last sentence in the Abstract does not make much sense: "Therefore we put forward such policy implications such as improving the level of."
3. The Introduction should be significantly extended, providing more details on available literature. Based on the literature review, the research gap should be defined more precisely. The statement "From the perspective of research trends, the application of fuzzy analytic hierarchy method in the field of financial technology risk has been very extensive, but it is mostly concentrated in the study of local areas, and there is less research on the overall risk of financial technology" is too vague. 
4. After the section title "2. Models Setting" please add a sentence, explaining what are headlines numbered with Roman numbers (I, II., etc.).
5. Please organize better the entire Section 2. It is difficult to follow the numbering with Roman and Arabic numbers. Better use sub-titles (E.g. 2.1, etc.)
6. The same comment refers to Section 3. 
7. Why the cell borders in Table 5 are depicted in different lines?
8. Please add another section titled Conclusion with the main findings of the paper, limitations of the study, and further research needed. 
9. The sources listed at the end of the paper were not referenced in the text. 

Best regards,

The reviewer

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

None.