Paper aims: This paper presents a comparison of the performances of the Bayesian additive regression trees (BART), Random Forest (RF) and the logistic regression model (LRM) for the development of credit scoring models. Originality:It is not usual the use of BART methodology for the analysis of credit scoring data. The database was provided by Serasa-Experian with information regarding direct retail consumer credit operations. The use of credit bureau variables is not usual in academic papers.Research method: Several models were adjusted and their performances were compared by using regular methods. Main findings:The analysis confirms the superiority of the BART model over the LRM for the analyzed data. RF was superior to LRM only for the balanced sample. The best-adjusted BART model was superior to RF. Implications for theory and practice:The paper suggests that the use of BART or RF may bring better results for credit scoring modelling. KeywordsCredit. Machine learning. Logistic regression. BART. Random Forest.