@surferchris wrote:
@silkysean wrote:Yep same problem for me too dactyl why I don't pay any attention to it.Its only good for keeping track of accounts only no scores.Kills me how many people swear by these scores and will argue it's accurate.When I go into debt My fico scores will go down well CK goes up and when I pay it off or down Fico up and CK down.
Agrred, those FAKO's are only good for tracking changes to credit reports, during credit rebuilding.
They're good for the reports, worthless for the scores.
@Aahz wrote:In this past week I paid off two cards with 0% Balance Transfers down to zero. Paying off $11,000+ of my $30,000 in debt I was carrying and dropping utlity from 12% to 7%
EQ FICO8 742 -> 761
TU FICO8 752 -> 772
EQ Vantage (CK) 732 -> 703
TU Vantage (CK) 726 -> 703
Yes, my Credit Karma FAKOs took massive hits for paying off more than a third of my credit card debt.
No, there were no other changes. I track my reportsactivity obsessively.
Weird, interesting data point though regarding Vantage, I never had much in the way of balances to really test anything regarding that. I have a very very early working theory that VS aggregates some data elements for a more complex calculation instead of FICO which appears to compute revolving utilization and some other metrics individually... like my TU with a recent 30 day late took a large drop when I added an inquiry, but my EQ/EX VS which didn't have the late lost substantially less.
Not sure how that correlates here though, but maybe their data showed wide swings in debt either positive or negative show some sort of propensity to default? That's kind of a stretch to be sure, I do wonder how the scores will be after a given period of time.
@Anonymous wrote:
@Aahz wrote:In this past week I paid off two cards with 0% Balance Transfers down to zero. Paying off $11,000+ of my $30,000 in debt I was carrying and dropping utlity from 12% to 7%
EQ FICO8 742 -> 761
TU FICO8 752 -> 772
EQ Vantage (CK) 732 -> 703
TU Vantage (CK) 726 -> 703
Yes, my Credit Karma FAKOs took massive hits for paying off more than a third of my credit card debt.
No, there were no other changes. I track my reportsactivity obsessively.
There is definitely something seriously wrong with the FAKO scoring model. Before I disputed 6 student loan baddies on my CR, my credit score on the TU site was 701 (Vantage I believe) - some 38 points higher than my TU Fico 8 score.
When TU removed the disputed student loans, my credit score on their site dropped some 91 points! My first thought was that the removal of those account seriously decreased my AAoA (previously 15yr 11 m). But that only changed to 13 yrs. So go figure. From that point, I decided not to use anything that reported a non-Fico score.
There is nothing "wrong" with Vantagescore 3.0. The 3 CRAs who developed the model clearly state its purpose is to IMPROVE upon (not mimic) Fico scoring models. The intent is for their scores to be a better indicator of borrower risk. Is Vantagescore a better predictor? - don't know, don't care.
My Fico 04 and Fico 98 scores are quite different from my Fico 08 and Fico 09 scores. Does that mean they are wrong? Of course not! Different model, different score - to be expected as they factors evaluated in scoring and the relative weight of those factors differs by model.
Interestingly, all Fico models (except NextGen) have the same general curvature. VantageScore is quite different.
Below is a copy paste from a 2012 study on correlation between models. Correlation is stronger at lower scores.
