No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
Been a Credit Karma subscriber for a long time and have watched the ebbs and flows of my two scores compared to the myfico TU for some time now.
Has anyone ever been able to infer or learn the difference in how factors influence the scores? Is there even an answer?
Sometimes, one will slighlty drop while the other goes up and vice versa. Eventually, they both follow the same upward/downward trend but they can vary along the way. Why would: ...one jump a lot and the other a little or not at all? ...they go in opposite directions temporarily? etc....
Does one tend to focus on favoring one apsect of credit reports over the other? Any clarity would be helpful.
Big difference. TransRisk is a score developed by TU that no lender I know of is using it.
VantageScore is jointly developed by EX, EQ, and TU as an alternative to FICO scoring model. It is modeled after FICO with greater emphasis on recent activity (benefits those with thin file). Chase is one of the lender that uses VantageScore.
I know all that. I am talking about the scoring methods view the same credit report.
Example: One favors longer credit history and puts less negativity on higher utiization while the other favors higher AAoA and more heavily penalizes new accounts in the short run.
Again, hypothetical. But that's the kind of answer I was looking for.
Vantage also changes dramatically with cc balance increases. It favors very low utilizations. Also +1 to the fact it weighs heavily negative on multiple new acccounts in a short time.
My Vantage Score was terrible (an F) when I was nearly maxed out on my credit cards but when I got near a zero balance on all my cards it went to an A. The F Score seemed unfair because I had a long history of paying my cards always on time and having used credit for 22 years and having a successful auto loan and mortgage on my recent record. Getting an F Vantage Score seemed unfair for someone with such a long successful use of credit, they had too much emphasis on balances and utilization.
VANTAGE is junk in my opinion.
Dingler,
Yeah. I agree. I have noticed those huge swings in my vantage score with respect to ultilizations but not on my concurrent transrisk score. I would presume or roughly infer that the transrisk score's ebbs and flows more closely follow the true FICO movement of the same information.
Having recently read through Credit Karma's details on my score, I mentally noted the following points:
1) They count all hard pulls across the full 2 year history. No mention if they age or if they group "rate shopping" pulls. FICO only uses 1 year and the pulls age.
2) The score increases with number of accounts (open and closed). They mentioned mix of credit lines, but did not say how that influences their score. The increase with number of accounts was much higher than I would expect with FICO.
There were probably other obvious differences, but these were the ones I mentally noted.
@ztnjpv wrote:Dingler,
Yeah. I agree. I have noticed those huge swings in my vantage score with respect to ultilizations but not on my concurrent transrisk score. I would presume or roughly infer that the transrisk score's ebbs and flows more closely follow the true FICO movement of the same information.
I would not make this assumption. If that's the case for you right now, it's peculiar to your report. I can attest to wild swings in my Transrisk score where my FICO scores did not move. I think there are many people that have the same experience.
I doubt that anyone can provide you much more granularity about how Transrisk and Vantage work. I could be wrong, but there hasn't been nearly the same amount of discussion over them and you're going to get a lot of anecdote. But, for what it's worth, I can say that in my experience, Vantage seems to give you a break after late payments age past 4 years. My lates just recently aged past that mark, and my Vantage is now at 984. Again, I don't really know why it shot up, but that's the most significant change I can think of.
Unlike FICO they do not factor in AAoA of closed accounts.