I was wrong, see CNC's post for better information
My suggestion is that instead of getting new cards, you request credit limit increases from those of your credit card companies which do credit limit increases with soft pulls.
New cards, recent cards, recent inquiries.... these all bring your score down.
Increasing your credit limits decreases your utilization, which raises your score.
It's not Quizzle that comes up with these reasons.
Quizzle reports VantageScores. While FICO doesn't use the absolute size of credit limits in score calculations VantageScore does. Scores that are used to grant credit must have reason codes describing the factors that negatively impact them. Thus FICO, which only looks at credit limit ratios to balances, does not have a reason code lfor the size of credit limits. VantageScore, which does look at credit limit size has a corresponding code.
There is a question as to whether people with high CLs and other ratios being equal actually have lower credit risk. VantageScore's algorithms say they do while FICO's algorithms say they don't.
@cashnocredit wrote:It's not Quizzle that comes up with these reasons.
Quizzle reports VantageScores. While FICO doesn't use the absolute size of credit limits in score calculations VantageScore does. Scores that are used to grant credit must have reason codes describing the factors that negatively impact them. Thus FICO, which only looks at credit limit ratios to balances, does not have a reason code lfor the size of credit limits. VantageScore, which does look at credit limit size has a corresponding code.
There is a question as to whether people with high CLs and other ratios being equal actually have lower credit risk. VantageScore's algorithms say they do while FICO's algorithms say they don't.
Google FTW, you were right see below.
Don't honestly think this is a major component, my VS doesn't suck and I don't get this with worse limits than what the OP has. Wonder what limit it does calculate at.
This may not be accurate but it's a semi-easy format to dump:
The balances on your accounts are too high compared to loan amounts
Too many of the delinquencies on your accounts are recent
You have too many accounts that were opened recently
You have too many delinquent or derogatory accounts
You have either very few loans or too many loans with recent delinquencies
The worst payment status on your accounts is delinquent or derogatory
You have either very few loans or too many loans with delinquencies
Too few of your bankcard or other revolving accounts have high limits
The date you opened your oldest bankcard or revolving account is too recent
Too few discharged bankruptcies
You have either very few loans or too many loans with delinquencies
The total of your delinquent or derogatory account balances is too high
The date that you opened your oldest account is too recent
Your most recently opened account is too new
Lack of sufficient credit history
Newest delinquent or derogatory payment status on your accounts is too recent
The total of all balances on your open accounts is too high
Balances on previously delinquent accounts are too high compared to loan amts
Total of balances on accounts never late is too high compared to loan amounts
No open accounts in your credit file
The date that you opened your oldest account is too recent
No open accounts in your credit file
No recently reported account information
Lack of sufficient relevant account information
Too many of your open bankcard or revolving accounts have a balance
Balances on bankcard or revolving accounts too high compared to credit limits
The date you opened your newest bankcard or revolving account is too recent
No recently reported real estate account information
Too many installment accounts with a delinquent or derogatory payment status
The date that you opened your oldest account is not too recent
Your most recently opened account is too new
Lack of sufficient relevant account information
Too few of your bankcard or other revolving accounts have high limits
Too many bankcard or other revolving accounts were opened recently
Balances on bankcard or revolving accounts too high compared to credit limits
Your worst bankcard or revolving account status is delinquent or derogatory
Total of all balances on bankcard or revolving accounts is too high
Your highest bankcard or revolving account balance is too high
Your largest credit limit on open bankcard or revolving accounts is too low
Available credit on your open bankcard or revolving accounts is too low
OK I'll stop there, you're correct thank you for pointing it out.
@Revelate wrote:This may not be accurate but it's a semi-easy format to dump:
The balances on your accounts are too high compared to loan amounts
Too many of the delinquencies on your accounts are recent
You have too many accounts that were opened recently
You have too many delinquent or derogatory accounts
You have either very few loans or too many loans with recent delinquencies
The worst payment status on your accounts is delinquent or derogatory
You have either very few loans or too many loans with delinquencies
Too few of your bankcard or other revolving accounts have high limits
The date you opened your oldest bankcard or revolving account is too recent
Too few discharged bankruptcies
You have either very few loans or too many loans with delinquencies
The total of your delinquent or derogatory account balances is too high
The date that you opened your oldest account is too recent
Your most recently opened account is too new
Lack of sufficient credit history
Newest delinquent or derogatory payment status on your accounts is too recent
The total of all balances on your open accounts is too high
Balances on previously delinquent accounts are too high compared to loan amts
Total of balances on accounts never late is too high compared to loan amounts
No open accounts in your credit file
The date that you opened your oldest account is too recent
No open accounts in your credit file
No recently reported account information
Lack of sufficient relevant account information
Too many of your open bankcard or revolving accounts have a balance
Balances on bankcard or revolving accounts too high compared to credit limits
The date you opened your newest bankcard or revolving account is too recent
No recently reported real estate account information
Too many installment accounts with a delinquent or derogatory payment status
The date that you opened your oldest account is not too recent
Your most recently opened account is too new
Lack of sufficient relevant account information
Too few of your bankcard or other revolving accounts have high limits
Too many bankcard or other revolving accounts were opened recently
Balances on bankcard or revolving accounts too high compared to credit limits
Your worst bankcard or revolving account status is delinquent or derogatory
Total of all balances on bankcard or revolving accounts is too high
Your highest bankcard or revolving account balance is too high
Your largest credit limit on open bankcard or revolving accounts is too low
Available credit on your open bankcard or revolving accounts is too low
OK I'll stop there, you're correct thank you for pointing it out.
It's VS code 39. The explanation expanded:
Bankcard accounts include credit cards and charge cards from a bank and are frequently revolving accounts. Revolving accounts allow you to carry a balance and your monthly payment will vary, based on the amount of your balance. The amount of credit you have available to use on your open bankcards or revolving accounts is low. Having higher limits gives you access to credit without seeking new loans or becoming overextended _ which are triggers for higher risk.
It's an interesting difference between FICO and VantageScore. I have no idea what VS considers good or not but I did have very high VantageScore 2 scores back when I had poor FICO scores. VS was at 90% while FICOs were at 40% where percentage was relative to the number of consumers with lower scores. At the time I had high limits but significant baddies. The high limits were a result of large security deposits on secured cards.
@cashnocredit wrote:It's VS code 39. The explanation expanded:
Bankcard accounts include credit cards and charge cards from a bank and are frequently revolving accounts. Revolving accounts allow you to carry a balance and your monthly payment will vary, based on the amount of your balance. The amount of credit you have available to use on your open bankcards or revolving accounts is low. Having higher limits gives you access to credit without seeking new loans or becoming overextended _ which are triggers for higher risk.
It's an interesting difference between FICO and VantageScore. I have no idea what VS considers good or not but I did have very high VantageScore 2 scores back when I had poor FICO scores. VS was at 90% while FICOs were at 40% where percentage was relative to the number of consumers with lower scores. At the time I had high limits but significant baddies. The high limits were a result of large security deposits on secured cards.
Making a liberal assumption based on my own FICO vs. VS comparison, I assume many of your derogatories were resolved?
As near as I can tell VS doesn't count paid collections nor paid tax liens, and that might apply to other things people have gotten righteous on. I didn't really get a good testing datapoint for VS with the tax lien that got tacked on late as it was released darned quickly after I let the IRS know they screwed up on this one; however, my VS was still high while it was on there nor moved when it came off (whereas FICO absolutely did though not by much with other liens still on the report).
The problem I have with that reason code is that limits aren't determined in a vacuum, and by regulation have to determined by "borrower's ability to repay" which is suspect given that low income individuals shouldn't be hurt and plausibly denied access to credit if their payment history is no different from someone making absurds amount of money and correspondingly high limits. That strikes me as way too close to the redlining in the mortgage world personally, and that's something that is worthy of being slapped for, much for the same reasons.
My theory anyway.
@Revelate wrote:
@cashnocredit wrote:It's VS code 39. The explanation expanded:
Bankcard accounts include credit cards and charge cards from a bank and are frequently revolving accounts. Revolving accounts allow you to carry a balance and your monthly payment will vary, based on the amount of your balance. The amount of credit you have available to use on your open bankcards or revolving accounts is low. Having higher limits gives you access to credit without seeking new loans or becoming overextended _ which are triggers for higher risk.
It's an interesting difference between FICO and VantageScore. I have no idea what VS considers good or not but I did have very high VantageScore 2 scores back when I had poor FICO scores. VS was at 90% while FICOs were at 40% where percentage was relative to the number of consumers with lower scores. At the time I had high limits but significant baddies. The high limits were a result of large security deposits on secured cards.
Making a liberal assumption based on my own FICO vs. VS comparison, I assume many of your derogatories were resolved?
As near as I can tell VS doesn't count paid collections nor paid tax liens, and that might apply to other things people have gotten righteous on. I didn't really get a good testing datapoint for VS with the tax lien that got tacked on late as it was released darned quickly after I let the IRS know they screwed up on this one; however, my VS was still high while it was on there nor moved when it came off (whereas FICO absolutely did though not by much with other liens still on the report).
The problem I have with that reason code is that limits aren't determined in a vacuum, and by regulation have to determined by "borrower's ability to repay" which is suspect given that low income individuals shouldn't be hurt and plausibly denied access to credit if their payment history is no different from someone making absurds amount of money and correspondingly high limits. That strikes me as way too close to the redlining in the mortgage world personally, and that's something that is worthy of being slapped for, much for the same reasons.
My theory anyway.
Absolutely, One of the major reasons of FICO score's ascendency was that it took the personal judgments of underwriters out of the equation. I doubt many underwriters were conciously discriminating but it is essentially impossible to remove one's biases when judgment is involved.
And yes, my baddies were paid at the time of that VS v FICO score anomoly. While VS3 states they no longer use paid CAs and there is some evidence they discounted paid liens VS2 has never documented the same treatment. It might well be the case though that VS2 did a similar thing.
Since my baddies dropped off my VS3 scores are quite close to FICO scores.
Still, FICO and VS mostly score procivity to repay and ability to repay can only be inferred since creditors have virtually no access to that information unless one also does regular banking with the creditor. The introduction of payments made in credit reports does provide additional information about ability to repay and FICO's banking blog has noted that people that pay 2x or more of the minimum payment corresponds to much lower risk of default. The newest VS3 and FICO 9 use this information and it may provide information about how close to the edge people use credit regardless of their total CLs which should be fairer than just looking at raw CL totals and infering ability to repay from those. If so then VS3 probably factors in total CLs to a much lower degree than VS2 which didn't use payment reporting.
