OMG! This can't be right!

[racer-x]

The amex and grocery store reference was made because it seemed like you were insinuating that since the info i posted came from their dite that it must ne skewed.

Is all the info on all websites inaccurate? That was my point.

Vantage for the win. It seems more consistent any way.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@racer-x wrote:

I read on it CK I think.  I saw other reads on it as well, business sites.

And since when are you not supposed to believe  something that is on one's website?  Is the info on myfico not true?  Is the info on your banks website not true?

Is the prices of the groceries at your favorite supermarket not true as advertised?  When you applied for Amex from their site, was their supporting info not true as well?

I understand that "EVERYTHING" you read on the internet isn't true. 

Why full on total aggression toward vantage by so many people?  Do some more research for yourself instead of just reading what I posted.  I don't know shat anyway. lol.

---

You're comparing completely different types of advertisements. Not sure what applying for an AMEX  or grocery store prices has to do with anything.

Whether you read it on CK and other business sites doesn't mean a thing.  All they are doing is parroting exactly what Vantage Score says on their website,word for word, and not providing any independent news.  Of course CK is going to promote it.  It's marketing just like them saying apply for this or that credit card

There isn't a full out aggression on Vantage Score.  I just keeping seeing all this info posted about how many banks etc are using them and I haven't seen one listed.  I've applied for a wide variety of products in the last few years and not once did any of them indicate that they are using Vantage Score.  Maybe down the road it will become popular.  Right now there is no comparison between the usefulness of a FICO score vs. a Vantage Score.

---

Yeah, on any approval or denial letters I've received it has always given some version of a FICO (usually fico 8 or bankcard) from one of the 3 CRA.  

Synchrony, Chase, Citi, AMEX, Barclaycard, CapitalOne, First Savings, Comenity, CFNA, Nordstrom, USAA, NFCU, Wells Fargo all gave me some version of FICO in the approval/or denial letter.  Some that I was approved for didn't give me any info though (I don't think they are required to if approved).

[racer-x]

From wikipedia: "All three agencies use the same formula to calculate the VantageScore; however, there are still discrepancies between the resulting scores if run for each of the credit reports. This is due to different data the three agencies have on the credit reports."

[nyancat]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

First of all, I've been cleaning up my credit score by actually improving my history, and not just disagreeing with what was on my report (although some things ARE incorrect). And it's been a LOT longer than a few months, or a couple years. I resent you posting that on my question. It sounds to me like you're being a bit judgmental without knowing the whole story. If you think my situation is a reason for you believing the Vantage Score, then I feel sorry for anybody who comes to you.

---

Don't take my comments personally, they're not personal. They apply to anyone. One of the ideas of VantageScore is that it will be harder to improve your VantageScore, and frankly, I don't know you. Maybe you changed, maybe you haven't. That's irrelevant, credit scoring isn't about an individual, it's about risk analysis in population groups. It's simply statistics, nothing personal.

Frankly, I tend to think that people rarely change, and thus, a score that is more stable and harder to clean up impresses me. I know, hardly the mantra of these forums, but that's okay. I'm not here because of my credit history, I'm here because I find the risk analysis interesting. And from what I've seen, VantageScore 3.0 has some very impressive traits. It impresses me that you've managed to improve your FICO, but your VantageScore is still quite poor.

Again, don't take that personally. It's not a judgement call. It's certainly not me saying you "deserve" a poor score, because again - it isn't about individuals, it's about population profiles.

Of course, the real test is time. Who will prove right? Banks trust FICO as they've been around forever, and it will take decades for VantageScore to demonstrate whether or not they have a better risk model. But every time I see one of these posts that amounts to "what am I doing wrong, I have a great FICO score now but my VantageScore is terrible" I am impressed. Not out of some personal judgement, but out of the risk analysis concept of stability - that a person will only very slowly truly become less of a risk.

[nyancat]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@nyancat wrote:

I would worry about your VantageScore. It is not a "FAKO" as some have said on here, it's a different model. And frankly, I think it's only going to become more popular with time.

One of the cited benefits is that it is harder to game (or, put politically correctly, "more stable over time"). In your case, this looks like it is working. It is SUPPOSED to be harder to improve your VantageScore, because, let's be realistic. A few months/couple years of trying to clean up reports doesn't make a person ACTUALLY more trustworthy. 

When I see these complaints about VantageScore, it makes part of me that finds credit analysis fascinating very interested - and impressed. I know I'd want to pull VantageScore on my customers, based JUST on reports like this.

---

Everything you posted is pure speculation.  You have no idea if it's going to be more popular in time and you absolutely have no idea if it's 'working' in the OP's case.  And given that the general definition of 'FAKO' is anything other than a FICO score, the Vantage score is a FAKO.  Whether in time it proves to be something that many lenders rely on,  only time will tell.  For now, it has no practical meaning.

---

These forums tend to way over-emotionalise credit! This is not about the OP, at all, as I explained to them. It's about statistics. There's no human involved, as far as I'm concerned. And the term "FAKO" is insulting to anyone trying to build a better mousetrap (or score model). They're not pretending to be FICO, which is what "FAKO" implies. They're offering a product they claim is better.

Also, I never said they were making some correct judgement call on the OP. Again, it's just statistics. Their model appears to be working on him in that it has proven more stable in this case - OP hasn't been able to improve their VantageScore, though their FICO has shot up. An anecdote is not data, of course, but all we have are these anecdotes and I've seen enough that they're starting to become some limited data and that data is impressive. VantageScore is demonstrating stability, and only time will tell the meaning. Of course it is speculation. But they remain impressive anecdotes.

And there are already lenders relying on VantageScore, so it already has practical meaning.

[Anonymous]

BUT ... My credit score didn't go into the toilet because of my spending habits or my habit of not paying bills. It was a drastic life change that caused it. It's not that I DIDN'T want to pay the bills or the loan payments. It's because I COULDN'T pay them. My husband (at the time) discovered that I could just call my banker at home, and the banker would tell me to write the check for the car or whatever I wanted, and come in the next day to sign the loan papers. So, my husband would call my banker, say "She wants to get ..." and then spend the money. I actually ended up paying for the car that my husband's girlfriend was driving!  No, I hadn't signed the loan papers ... My husband did. The banker trusted him because the banker trusted me. I discovered after I divorced the jerk that he owed over $25,000 in credit card bills that I knew nothing about. Yes, I did eventually pay it all off. But I also had to work 3 jobs to raise two young children just to keep the lights on. So I had hard decisions to make.  It took me YEARS to pay everything off, but I did. Then it took forever for the bad things to not show on my credit report, and even longer to rebuild a perfect payment record. So don't judge me just because the stupid Vantage thing gives me a bad score. Not every person can be judged by a poor number. I was rather proud of myself for getting the 3 good scores after all this time.

[Anonymous]

BTW, the whole time I was struggling to pay it all off, the ex refused to pay child support, and even moved out of state to get away from it. He then eventually married another woman who had excellent credit, and did the same thing again. :/  And yes, I know that he got the loans, so he should have paid them instead of me. BUT, at least in Iowa at the time, if one spouse doesn't pay, they go after the OTHER spouse for payment. Even if it's not in their name. So, after he refused & even filed bankruptcy, I was basically screwed.

[Anonymous]

So, nyancat, don't give me your holier than thou attitude that you think people don't change, and the VantageScore will be a better indicator. You couldn't possibly know a person or a situation by a stupid number.

[nyancat]

Like I said, no judgement at all. I don't claim to know anyone's situation. I'm interested in the maths. In your situation, obviously your true risk profile has changed dramatically. However, would you say you are typical? It's a challenge. It would be interesting to be able to take things like divorces and new jobs into account in the scoring models, and surely would make them far more accurate. Sadly it would also be incredibly illegal.

P.S. To add one thing I tend to avoid on here, emotion, my heart goes out to you. It truly does. I have been helping a relative sort out a very similar situation and it definitely just feels like adding insult to injury that banks seemingly hold you back despite your having moved on from a bad situation. You get punished for the wrongs others did to you. I understand that. That's why I said, no judgement on my part. Some people have situations that change. Some people have massive debt through no fault of their own (national single-payer healthcare would go a long way to solving this). But generally my interest isn't individuals. It is statistics. That's what credit scoring is. I hope you find sympathetic underwriters who can see past any credit report issues. Sadly, today, too many decisions are made by computer alone when they were intended merely to be an aide to humans.

[racer-x]

Yeah, thanks for clearing all that up for me nyancat.  That's all I was trying to say.