Utilization

[Jarnog]

I've searched and only seemed to be able to find reference to the magical 1-9% utility to maximize scoring.

My question is does that 1-9% matter, as far as how it is distributed.

For example, DW has 11 cards 7 are at 0 balance but 4 have balances ranging from $125 - $300 dollars, maybe a little more.  Waiting for one card to report 0/6000 down from 5400/6000.  Now once that happens she will be at about 6% utility.  I know that is fine, but is that "fine" in Fico's eyes.

I always see everyone say pay all to zero then let 1 report that number. But if you get the same results using my scenario...it's the same right?

[Anonymous]

---

@Jarnog wrote:

I've searched and only seemed to be able to find reference to the magical 1-9% utility to maximize scoring.

My question is does that 1-9% matter, as far as how it is distributed.

For example, DW has 11 cards 7 are at 0 balance but 4 have balances ranging from $125 - $300 dollars, maybe a little more.  Waiting for one card to report 0/6000 down from 5400/6000.  Now once that happens she will be at about 6% utility.  I know that is fine, but is that "fine" in Fico's eyes.

I always see everyone say pay all to zero then let 1 report that number. But if you get the same results using my scenario...it's the same right?

---

It's not the same.. The Fico scoring model does not like to see balances on a lot of cards.  Better to be on one.

[JustBPatient]

+1

[Jarnog]

Interesting.  It's good to know that.

Now in that vain, lets say in the letting a few report scenario her scores go up or are around 650-675

If she does the "optimal" way, would there be a jump? 

Now I do know that there is no real way to tell, just from experiences you guys and gals have seen

And thanks for the info

[Anonymous]

---

@Jarnog wrote:

Interesting.  It's good to know that.

Now in that vain, lets say in the letting a few report scenario her scores go up or are around 650-675

If she does the "optimal" way, would there be a jump? 

Now I do know that there is no real way to tell, just from experiences you guys and gals have seen

And thanks for the info

---

Probably but as you said there is no way to know for sure.

[takeshi74]

---

@Jarnog wrote:

I always see everyone say pay all to zero then let 1 report that number. But if you get the same results using my scenario...it's the same right? 

---

You can't get the same results using a different approach.  "Let only balance report" only works one way.  It's not just the % or else the advice would exclude the number of balances.

---

@Jarnog wrote:

Now in that vain, lets say in the letting a few report scenario her scores go up or are around 650-675

If she does the "optimal" way, would there be a jump? 

Now I do know that there is no real way to tell, just from experiences you guys and gals have seen

---

Sure there is -- test and monitor the effect on score.  I found that number of balances had a negligible (IMO) impact on my score.  I'm fine with my scores with multiple balances reporting.  They could be higher with fewer or just balances but it's not worth the hassle to me and I'm currently using a couple of 0% offers which take priority for me anyway.  You have to find what works for you and determine the significance of the impact to help you decide.

You really can't rely on anecdotal evidence as one's credit matters in all this.  If you want to compare experiences then you need to fully understand what you're comparing and can't just single out utilization.

[elbori357]

Each credit profile is different. What I have done is to keep data allowing balances to report then PIF from 0-10 % from 1 card to 3 cards and what for is working best is allowing to report 3% on 2 cards 2% individual CL on 1 and 1% on individual CL on another for combine of 3% overall. Have been able to see a steady increase to what it is now. Hopefully will hit 800's in the next few months.. Good luck.