Schizo FICO Scoring after Adding 2 Cards

[Credit_hawk]

I'm confused and hope you guys can shed some light on this for me. From last month to this month my Equifax dropped 20 points, my Experian rose 7 points and my Transunion dropped 6 points. The only thing that happened between last month and this month was 2 new cards were added. It only changed my AAoA by 1 month and added over 10k to my total credit.  All hard pulls were accounted for on the previous month so that can't explain the drops. My total utilization is <1%.

How can 1 bureau rise 7 points, one drop 6 points and another drop 20 points? This just disheartened me to really care that much anymore about score watching. 

Curious to hear anyone's reasoning. Thanks!

[Anonymous]

According to the simulation feature in MyFICO, my scores will have a similar phenomenon as a result of getting 2 new credit cards. Some go up, some go down. It probably has to do with what accounts are currently listed in each of the 3 credit bureaus and what comments they have about your credit. If they didn't like that you weren't using much credit or had higher utilization, your score would probably go up as a result of the new cards. If they liked how you had a consistent and steady credit profile, your score would probably go down as a result of the new cards because you're doing something unexpected, and they don't like that. 

Regardless of how the different bureaus took your opening new accounts, though, as long as you continue to use the new accounts well as you've done so far (based on  your good credit scores), even the negatives will recover and should turn into net positives over time.

[NRB525]

---

@Credit_hawk wrote:

I'm confused and hope you guys can shed some light on this for me. From last month to this month my Equifax dropped 20 points, my Experian rose 7 points and my Transunion dropped 6 points. The only thing that happened between last month and this month was 2 new cards were added. It only changed my AAoA by 1 month and added over 10k to my total credit.  All hard pulls were accounted for on the previous month so that can't explain the drops. My total utilization is <1%.

How can 1 bureau rise 7 points, one drop 6 points and another drop 20 points? This just disheartened me to really care that much anymore about score watching. 

Curious to hear anyone's reasoning. Thanks!

---

Are those scores in your siggy before or after this change?

What were each of your scores before the change, what are each of your scores after the change?

[myjourney]

---

@Credit_hawk wrote:

I'm confused and hope you guys can shed some light on this for me. From last month to this month my Equifax dropped 20 points, my Experian rose 7 points and my Transunion dropped 6 points. The only thing that happened between last month and this month was 2 new cards were added. It only changed my AAoA by 1 month and added over 10k to my total credit.  All hard pulls were accounted for on the previous month so that can't explain the drops. My total utilization is <1%.

How can 1 bureau rise 7 points, one drop 6 points and another drop 20 points? This just disheartened me to really care that much anymore about score watching. 

Curious to hear anyone's reasoning. Thanks!

---

While all CRA's may use Fico 08 for example 

Each CRA then applies their own algorithm in conjunction with Fico 

Thus different scores and results for the same info 

Same with some lenders when they pull

All depends on version of Fico and if they then apply an algorithm of there own 

Chase is a prime example of this 

[Thomas_Thumb]

---

@myjourney wrote:

---

@Credit_hawk wrote:

I'm confused and hope you guys can shed some light on this for me. From last month to this month my Equifax dropped 20 points, my Experian rose 7 points and my Transunion dropped 6 points. The only thing that happened between last month and this month was 2 new cards were added. It only changed my AAoA by 1 month and added over 10k to my total credit.  All hard pulls were accounted for on the previous month so that can't explain the drops. My total utilization is <1%.

How can 1 bureau rise 7 points, one drop 6 points and another drop 20 points? This just disheartened me to really care that much anymore about score watching. 

Curious to hear anyone's reasoning. Thanks!

---

While all CRA's may use Fico 08 for example 

Each CRA then applies their own algorithm in conjunction with Fico 

Thus different scores and results for the same info 

Same with some lenders when they pull

All depends on version of Fico and if they then apply an algorithm of there own 

Chase is a prime example of this 

---

With Fico 08, the CRAs have limited flexibility in "tweaking" the model's algorithm.

However, accounts may be classified/coded differently (example - charge card vs credit card). Beyond that, something may be different among the CRAs with accounts (examples include: a CL that is different on one CRA vs the other two, an account that has aged off one CRA but not the other two, differences in # inquiries amonmg CRAs, a degog that shows on one but not on the other CRAs).

If the new accounts are just now reporting due to use (which is independent of inquiries), then differences in CRA data may result in differences in how the model responds to the new account becoming active. Give it a couple months - hopefully things will settle down.

[myjourney]

---

@Thomas_Thumb wrote:

---

@myjourney wrote:

---

@Credit_hawk wrote:

I'm confused and hope you guys can shed some light on this for me. From last month to this month my Equifax dropped 20 points, my Experian rose 7 points and my Transunion dropped 6 points. The only thing that happened between last month and this month was 2 new cards were added. It only changed my AAoA by 1 month and added over 10k to my total credit.  All hard pulls were accounted for on the previous month so that can't explain the drops. My total utilization is <1%.

How can 1 bureau rise 7 points, one drop 6 points and another drop 20 points? This just disheartened me to really care that much anymore about score watching. 

Curious to hear anyone's reasoning. Thanks!

---

While all CRA's may use Fico 08 for example 

Each CRA then applies their own algorithm in conjunction with Fico 

Thus different scores and results for the same info 

Same with some lenders when they pull

All depends on version of Fico and if they then apply an algorithm of there own 

Chase is a prime example of this 

---

With Fico 08, the CRAs have limited flexibility in "tweaking" the model's algorithm.

However, accounts may be classified/coded differently (example - charge card vs credit card). Beyond that, something may be different among the CRAs with accounts (examples include: a CL that is different on one CRA vs the other two, an account that has aged off one CRA but not the other two, differences in # inquiries amonmg CRAs, a degog that shows on one but not on the other CRAs).

If the new accounts are just now reporting due to use (which is independent of inquiries), then differences in CRA data may result in differences in how the model responds to the new account becoming active. Give it a couple months - hopefully things will settle down.

---

Not sure what you mean by limited? Pls explain 

While each of the big 3 CRA's pull Fico each has the score tweaked to their algorithm standard

Could be wrong but I seem to remember Fico tailoring the score to what the big 3 wants/pay for based on their needs/requirements 

Chase and Amex both use internal scoring after pulling Fico 08 for approvals 

Chase = C.A.R.S scores 

Amex = Internal score

[Thomas_Thumb]

Sure -

In Fico 98 and Fico 04 CRAs had the ability to set a maximum score below 850. Not so with Fico 08 and Fico 09. Furthermore, the recent Fico models (particularly Fico 09) have limited how CRA tweaks can influence "default" impact of factors. That is more in keeping with VantageScore 3.0, which was jointly developed by the three CRAs. Why wouldn't lenders and consumers alike want the same score using the same model if data sets used for scoring were identical?

Below is a shortcut to tables summarizing "real world scores by credit scoring model and CRA.

http://ficoforums.myfico.com/t5/Understanding-FICO-Scoring/The-many-flavors-of-FICO-Editions-version...

[myjourney]

---

@Thomas_Thumb wrote:

Sure -

In Fico 98 and Fico 04 CRAs had the ability to set a maximum score below 850. Not so with Fico 08 and Fico 09. Furthermore, the recent Fico models (particularly Fico 09) have limited how CRA tweaks can influence "default" impact of factors. That is more in keeping with VantageScore 3.0, which was jointly developed by the three CRAs. Why wouldn't lenders and consumers alike want the same score using the same model if data sets used for scoring were identical?

Below is a shortcut to tables summarizing "real world scores by credit scoring model and CRA.

http://ficoforums.myfico.com/t5/Understanding-FICO-Scoring/The-many-flavors-of-FICO-Editions-version...

---

While your self prepared data is very informative none of that bears insight into what OP is asking about the current model being used here Fico 08

Fico 98.04,09 etc etc is not being referenced in this case ....Lol 

The basic traits of Fico I agree can't be changed/modified for that model  I.E. the medical adjustment under $100 for example but everything else the CB wishes to pay for and applied to the lenders algorithm I'm sure can be and is adjusted to fit the payees request EX, EQ,TU

Otherwise why would you pay Fico to pulls scores when you can use your own scoring system created by the 3 CB's 

Vantage etc etc 

Each CB will also tell you even if all info matches exactly scores can be different from each other ...

How do you think that happens other than say one CB takes 2 days to update while the other updated in 1 day?

[Thomas_Thumb]

---

@myjourney wrote:

---

@Thomas_Thumb wrote:

---

@myjourney wrote:

---

---

While all CRA's may use Fico 08 for example 

Each CRA then applies their own algorithm in conjunction with Fico 

Thus different scores and results for the same info 

Same with some lenders when they pull

All depends on version of Fico and if they then apply an algorithm of there own 

Chase is a prime example of this 

---

With Fico 08, the CRAs have limited flexibility in "tweaking" the model's algorithm.

However, accounts may be classified/coded differently (example - charge card vs credit card). Beyond that, something may be different among the CRAs with accounts (examples include: a CL that is different on one CRA vs the other two, an account that has aged off one CRA but not the other two, differences in # inquiries amonmg CRAs, a degog that shows on one but not on the other CRAs).

If the new accounts are just now reporting due to use (which is independent of inquiries), then differences in CRA data may result in differences in how the model responds to the new account becoming active. Give it a couple months - hopefully things will settle down.

---

Not sure what you mean by limited? Pls explain 

While each of the big 3 CRA's pull Fico each has the score tweaked to their algorithm standard

Could be wrong but I seem to remember Fico tailoring the score to what the big 3 wants/pay for based on their needs/requirements 

Chase and Amex both use internal scoring after pulling Fico 08 for approvals 

Chase = C.A.R.S scores 

Amex = Internal score

---

@myjourney wrote:

While your self prepared data is very informative none of that bears insight into what OP is asking about the current model being used here Fico 08

Fico 98.04,09 etc etc is not being referenced in this case ....Lol 

The basic traits of Fico I agree can't be changed/modified for that model  I.E. the medical adjustment under $100 for example but everything else the CB wishes to pay for and applied to the lenders algorithm I'm sure can be and is adjusted to fit the payees request EX, EQ,TU

Otherwise why would you pay Fico to pulls scores when you can use your own scoring system created by the 3 CB's 

Vantage etc etc 

Each CB will also tell you even if all info matches exactly scores can be different from each other ...

How do you think that happens other than say one CB takes 2 days to update while the other updated in 1 day?

---

Yep - Fico 08 has limited tweaking.  All CRAs must score Fico 08 to 850 - So yes, CRA flexibility is limited by that alone.

A good reason to pull from multiple sources is to see if data is different and if so, is it affecting score.

Really, "customers" be they lenders or consumers prefer consistent results for consistent data - why else do BOTH VantageScore and Fico tout improved consistency as a selling point for newer models? They even present summary data to show improved consistency among CRAs.

True, the OP wants an explanation but, hand waving to discount differences as just CRAs tweaks is concerning. As often as not, there is an underlying difference in report data in the files. Finding cause, if data related, may lead to actionable objectives that could help address irregulatities in data leading to a higher score. Assigning the root cause to tweaks is one possibility but perhaps not the root cause..

It would be prudent to comb through report details  - particularly when scores are moving in different directions depending on the CRA. Sure, if scores from respective CRAs relate to different points in time, that can be an explanation as data in files may be different.