cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Re-bucketing

tag
Anonymous
Not applicable

Re-bucketing

Can someone explain this to me? Seems this may be the source of my score drop when a large 30K collection was removed on EX.

Message 1 of 17
16 REPLIES 16
Anonymous
Not applicable

Re: Re-bucketing

Rebucketing is the concept that FICO puts folks into "buckets" based on a broad criteria. For example, a bucket could be "people who have a late payment," or "people who have two or more revolving accounts." Moving from one bucket to another - theoretically - affects how some items on your report are weighed.

 

To my knowledge, these buckets are not technically proved to even exist, but are used to explain large score differences when something big happens (I, for example, saw an ~80 point score increase after my last collection fell off... Now, I expect my score to be more sensitive to inquiries and util than before.)

 

IN your case, it could be a few factors that dropped your score - AAoA comes to mind. Others might have different info than above, of course Smiley Happy

Message 2 of 17
llecs
Moderator Emeritus

Re: Re-bucketing

Is the EX score you were looking at a FICO or FAKO?

Message 3 of 17
RobertEG
Legendary Contributor

Re: Re-bucketing

The use of segmentation of the population into sub-categories is not conjecture..... it is a factual part of FICO scoring.  FICO has discussed the use of segmentation of scorecards as part of its scoring methodology on numerous occasions.  See, for example, the FICO White Paper titled "Using Adaptive Random Trees (ART) for Optimal Scorecard Segmentation," Chris Ralph, Analytical Science Director, Fair Isaac Corp., April, 2006. 

 

The great unknown is exactly what those segments are, and the corresponding shift in scoring parameter weight based on the segment category of the file.

 

 

Message 4 of 17
Anonymous
Not applicable

Re: Re-bucketing

It was a new collection from late last year that was deleted and it was for a Private SL.

 

It dropped my FAKO score from 513 to 490. (Score from credit one pre-qual soft hits)

Message 5 of 17
Anonymous
Not applicable

Re: Re-bucketing


@llecs wrote:

Is the EX score you were looking at a FICO or FAKO?


Didn't even catch that...

 

Robert, I stand partially corrected Smiley Happy But again, no one really knows exactly what the buckets are.

Message 6 of 17
marty56
Super Contributor

Re: Re-bucketing

Forget the FAKO score.  Your reall FICO score good have changed in the oposite direction or not at all.

 

1/25/2021: FICO 850 EQ 848 TU 847 EX
Message 7 of 17
Anonymous
Not applicable

Re: Re-bucketing

Oh ok, well since it's EX, I won't find out until I do another lender pull in a few months.

Message 8 of 17
llecs
Moderator Emeritus

Re: Re-bucketing

I don't think FAKOs are that smart. Stupid EX. Smiley Sad

Message 9 of 17
Tuscani
Moderator Emeritus

Re: Re-bucketing

The purpose of pools (aka scorecards, buckets, ect.) works out more to the benefit of those with derogs or very little to no history than it does them harm.

 

If there was only one simple bell curve including all credit files then those fortunate, extremely long established folks would have the whole top half of the score numbers scale absolutely locked up tight.

 

So where would that leave the person who is only beginning to build a credit history at all? Or who has had some derogs in the past but now is trying to work toward a better CR and score? They would be locked down into the basement of the score range for probably ten, twenty years or more. There's no WAY that that new user or rebuilder individual has as much good history yet as that long established individual does.

 

So what the pools are attempting to do is to help potential lenders figure out which of the new-credit individuals are showing characteristics which usually go on to blossom into a long clean history, and which other ones don't. The same for rebuilding individuals. By assigning relatively better scores to top of each scorecard and lower scores to the least improved, the individuals who are making progress float to the top. They actually are scoring a bit better than they would if being compared head to head with Mr. Jones who has no derogs whatsoever and has 30+ years of history already.

 

By trying to compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges, that means that amongst the pool of individuals who share certain key history elements, Customer A looks most like someone who will continue to do better and better and is not as likely to default whereas Customer B from the same group is not showing those indicators of steady improvement.

 

If it weren't for scorecards, IMO, it would be very difficult to get decent mortgages and accounts and loans without thirty years of history already established. That would mean that it would be like climbing an ice mountain barefoot to buy a house or a car or open a credit card before the age of at least forty or fifty.

 

The pools tend to be split out according to:

 

-Age of file (length of credit history)

-Thickness of file (number of trade lines)

-Presence of a new account (opened within past X months)

-Presence of seriously negative payment history (90+ days late, charge off, etc.)

Message 10 of 17
Advertiser Disclosure: The offers that appear on this site are from third party advertisers from whom FICO receives compensation.