Factors 'hurting score' & 'helping score', funny

[SouthJamaica]

The relativity, and arguable meaninglessness, of FICO's 'factors helping your score' and 'factors hurting your score' is richly demonstrated by this comical anecdote.

In reviewing my 3-bureau report on Credit Check Total, I just noticed the following anomaly:

On EX and EQ, where my scores are slightly below 800, the only negative factor listed is "Short credit history. You have a short credit history"

But on TU, where my score is slightly above 800, there are no negative factors listed and, as a positive "factor helping your score" there is listed the following:

"Long credit history. You have an established credit history"

My credit history is identical on all 3 bureaus, but apparently, if you're over 800, it's all good

Bad boy:

Good boy:

[805orbust]

I say you should have been happy with "very dependable".  

[Anonymous]

Hi there SouthJamaica,

What is CCT saying is the average age of accounts for each of the Big 3?

[SouthJamaica]

---

@805orbust wrote:

I say you should have been happy with "very dependable".  

---

I'm thrilled to be considered very dependable

[SouthJamaica]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Hi there SouthJamaica,

What is CCT saying is the average age of accounts for each of the Big 3?

---

EX=3.1 years

EQ & TU=3 years

[Anonymous]

I had the same exact thing happen with CCT regarding length of credit history being short on 2 bureaus and long on the 3rd.  This is why I only look at the numbers and data and never read much into the words generated by their system because they are often bogus. 

[Anonymous]

---

@SouthJamaica wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Hi there SouthJamaica,

What is CCT saying is the average age of accounts for each of the Big 3?

---

EX=3.1 years

EQ & TU=3 years

---

That sounds OK in my opinion.  *Wow*.... it's crazy how there is a contradiciton there.  Sometimes, although I hate to say this, but sometimes..... they just seem to make stuff up.... *wow*... heh....