Paid off cards Credit score went DOWN

[Anonymous]

I have about $40,000 in revolving debt, (Hey it used to be 100K ....I'm getting it down)    Last month I paid off 2 small cards where I owed a total of $8500.   My score dropped from 750 to 743.   I had no inquiries or other transactions.   Can anyone explain why ?   I've noticed that same thing on one other occassion in the past.

[Walt_K]

Were the cards closed accounts?  When you paid them off, if they were closed, the credit limits no longer counted in factoring into your utilization.  So, by paying them off completely, you may have increased your effective utilization % which would result in a score decrease.

[haulingthescoreup]

Hi, welcome to the forums!

Was that a FICO score, pulled from here? If not, where did you pull it?

There might not have been an increase from paying two off, depending on how much your reported revolving utilization changed. But there wouldn't be a drop as a direct result, as long as you have other CC's reporting, which it seems you do. Something else changed on your reports, something subtle --your oldest account got older, or your AAoA (average age of accounts) got older, or more CC's reported balances than usual, even though you did pay these off.

They did both report the new $0 on the latest statement, and those $0 balances are on the report that you pulled with the 743 score, correct?

Huge congrats on the remarkable paydown!!!

eta: oh, great point, Walt_K. I didn't even think of that.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the quick reply. 

These were not closed cards.  Just a run of the mill MC and Visa that I may use again someday.  I'm in good standing with both companies.  My utilization rate is about 35% after the payments. 

[Anonymous]

THanks for the reply.   I was 750 the month before the payments  738 the month after.    There were small balances on the cards aftert the payoffs for interest that had accrued ...maybe $15-20.  I know the oldest account I've had for 30 something years and the average is 8 years.  I'm using reports from Experian. 

I'm sure it's  a small change but I'll be darned if I can find it.    It's not a big deal......I jsut find it puzzling.

[haulingthescoreup]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

THanks for the reply.   I was 750 the month before the payments  738 the month after.    There were small balances on the cards aftert the payoffs for interest that had accrued ...maybe $15-20.  I know the oldest account I've had for 30 something years and the average is 8 years.  I'm using reports from Experian. 

I'm sure it's  a small change but I'll be darned if I can find it.    It's not a big deal......I jsut find it puzzling.

---

If you're also getting your score from Experian, you should be aware that it's not a FICO score, and we have no real idea what goes into the scoring formulas for non-FICO scores (PLUS scores, Vantage scores, TransRisk scores, etc.)

lol, FICO scoring is mysterious enough!

FICO scores are wickedly expensive, but one advantage is that if you pull them with a score report, it lists the negative factors affecting your scores, in order. If you have two reports with different scores (from the same bureau, that is), you can look at the negatives to see if anything changed there --new negative, new order, etc.

[MagicShot]

---

@haulingthescoreup wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

THanks for the reply.   I was 750 the month before the payments  738 the month after.    There were small balances on the cards aftert the payoffs for interest that had accrued ...maybe $15-20.  I know the oldest account I've had for 30 something years and the average is 8 years.  I'm using reports from Experian. 

I'm sure it's  a small change but I'll be darned if I can find it.    It's not a big deal......I jsut find it puzzling.

---

If you're also getting your score from Experian, you should be aware that it's not a FICO score, and we have no real idea what goes into the scoring formulas for non-FICO scores (PLUS scores, Vantage scores, TransRisk scores, etc.)

lol, FICO scoring is mysterious enough!

FICO scores are wickedly expensive, but one advantage is that if you pull them with a score report, it lists the negative factors affecting your scores, in order. If you have two reports with different scores (from the same bureau, that is), you can look at the negatives to see if anything changed there --new negative, new order, etc.

---

I would imagine his FICO score actually went up if he were to pull a FICO instead of a FAKO score. Since Utilization plays a big part in FICO scores.

[GregB]

I use an EX monitoring because EX reports update VERY fast. I tracked the Plus Score until I realized it is a joke.

EX is great for reports.

EX Plus Score is crap.

ETA: As of this morning EQ and EX have identical info on them since my last account updated on the 26th and EQ finally caught up.

EQ FICO: 701 

EX Plus: 767

[Anonymous]

---

@GregB wrote:

I use an EX monitoring because EX reports update VERY fast. I tracked the Plus Score until I realized it is a joke.

---

The Plus Score is very insensitive to utilization, unlike the FICO scores you get here.