@UncleB wrote:This is a very interesting topic, and as with many thing related to credit it's not only subjective from person to person, but even from lender to lender.
Some people on here say that certain lenders "like" to see lots of usage, while there's another camp that says this is only a meme and that it's the profile that matters, etc.
In my opinion - and in my experience - the truth is somewhere in-between. Usage isn't the "be-all and end-all" some will make it out to be, but it's not completely irrelevant, either, especially with some lenders such as Capital One.
Capital One seems to stand out a bit since they are known for citing lack of usage as a reason for denying a CLI.
Here's my own denial just from a few weeks back:
I do have a data point that might add to the conversation taking place on this thread... the card that was denied the CLI did have a BT for $2200 on it for a couple of months, so it has seen some usage (and earned them a few dollars in interest).
On the other hand my other QS card was granted a $1k CLI the same day this one was denied, and the only usage it's seen are tiny swipes with one exception - a single charge for $1500 back in February. Knowing all of this, it would seem that Capital One views usage differently if it's from a BT versus from 'actual' swipes.
My thought is very similar to this. I think it varies person to person and the lenders all handle it differently. Very tough to really guess. Sometimes I see people get rewarded and it seems to be heavy usage. But then, I'll see someone else barely use the same card and get the same or even more.
@Anonymous wrote:For example, do you guys think that if someone is putting say an average of $3500 a month through a $40k limit card that through the lens of the creditor it would be seen as heavy usage? It's <10% of the credit line, but dollar wise that spend is certainly higher than the majority meaning that this customer is likely making the creditor more money.
You're likely to get many opinions on this since it's likely none of us really know for sure (not to give you a short answer... it's actually a very good question).
That being said, I would suspect that with Capital One (for example, if the card was a $40k Venture) $3500 would be considered significant.
If you're talking about an Amex Platinum (or really any Amex) it would depend on what resources they had on file for you. If I were to consistently spend that much, I would probably get an FR since it's more than I make in a month. For somebody making $200k, it would be not be thought of as 'significant' at all, since for that person that's just normal spending.
I would also think that individual lenders would compare you to their other cardholders, at least somewhat... in other words, for a card issued by a small hometown CU $3.5k/month consistently would likely be thought of as high usage, while to Chase it would be 'meh'.
That's just my 2¢... you're likely to get other opinions that may differ significantly. 
For the few months leading up to a CLI request on a card, I like to show as heavy usage on the card as I can. I don't unnecessarily spend, I simply flow transactions through that card that I might have otherwise used a different card for. My goal leading up to the CLI request is to give the creditor the impression that I'm using their card heavily, the most, that it's my "daily driver" etc. as it may impact their CLI request decision making process. I know this is arguable as evidenced by a similar thread I started a week or two back with respect to a "strategy" in obtaining the greatest CLI. The bottom line is that some think heavy usage helps, some think it doesn't, but NO ONE thinks that it hurts... so my conclusion is I might as well do it
That was part of the reason why I started this thread though, trying to guage what a creditor really looks at with respect to usage being light, moderate, heavy, etc.
