Statistics - A score of 684 is better than 36% of U.S. consumers

[zbret]

Back in 2005 or so, I could believe the statement "A score of 684 is better than 36% of U.S. consumers" but somehow I get the feeling that the data for this comparison has not been updated.  (For those unfamiliar, it shows up when you look at your "Score Watch" graph).

I realize 684 is not stellar, but I find it hard to believe its in the bottom third, particularly given the number of bankruptsies, lates, etc there are today, plus credit contraction such as lenders reducing credit limits (which reduces available credit and pushes your scores down pretty hard - its what happened to me).

Can someone from myFICO comment on the dates for this statistics generator, and if I'm right and its old, consider updating it?

To anyone reading this, do you think this statistics data seems wrong to you (at least for 2011 data)?

[AndySoCal]

No the data is updated annually and is needed by bureau related to the FACT Act legislation .

[pizzadude]

I found this graphic today, compares FICO to FICO8.   Based on this, it appears that the 36% number is somewhat accurate.

http://bankinganalyticsblog.fico.com/2010/07/how-do-fico-8-scores-change-the-score-distribution-1.ht...

[Juan123]

can't wait to be in that 23.1%  with a 750-799 score... but that chart is a little discouraging

[zbret]

Thanks very much!  I'll have to bookmark that link.  

[zbret]

Curiously, I did the math.  684 is close enough to the range up to 699, so I just added the numbers (for FICO not FICO-8 but it doens't matter much)

4.4+8.7+10.4+10.6+12.8 = 46.9 (%)

I figure its probably more like 45% not 36%, better - but its still lower than I expected.  Its interesting to see how many people are in the 750-799 range.  While I bet the "tail" of low credit scores has grown over the last few years, the majority are still in the 750-799 range.  Interesting.  I'm willing to bet these are people that barely use credit at all.

[BGinVA]

I think the wording is wrong, even if the math is right.  It says "A score of 684 is better than 36% of consumers", however, I think it should read "A score of 684 is better than 36% of consumers who HAVE FICO scores".  Not everyone who is a consumer has a FICO score, as their chart clearly indicates, a FICO score starts at 300, but everyone does not automatically start at 300, as I understand they have to have at least one account that has been reporting for at least 6 months, so that could theoretically knock out a couple million consumers.  Some people choose to live debt free and do not incur debt to have a FICO score, some people just live a life that has not allowed them to ever open that one account, yet they are still consumers of goods.  So I personally say, that statement is flawed. 

[Anonymous]

---

@Juan123 wrote:

can't wait to be in that 23.1%  with a 750-799 score... but that chart is a little discouraging

---

Same here, on both counts.

It's shocking to me that the greatest distribution is in the 750-799 range.  I used to think the "excellent" FICO range was rare, but according to that graph 39.7% of the population fall in that category. 

Also, doesn't everyone's score change every month (AAoA, new inquiries, util, derog removals, etc)?  I'd like to know how and when these scores are recorded.  I'd be willing to bet that the average score is way down in January/February because of all the high utils from holiday shopping.

[Anonymous]

---

@BGinVA wrote:

I think the wording is wrong, even if the math is right.  It says "A score of 684 is better than 36% of consumers", however, I think it should read "A score of 684 is better than 36% of consumers who HAVE FICO scores".  Not everyone who is a consumer has a FICO score, as their chart clearly indicates, a FICO score starts at 300, but everyone does not automatically start at 300, as I understand they have to have at least one account that has been reporting for at least 6 months, so that could theoretically knock out a couple million consumers.  Some people choose to live debt free and do not incur debt to have a FICO score, some people just live a life that has not allowed them to ever open that one account, yet they are still consumers of goods.  So I personally say, that statement is flawed. 

---

I disagree.  Someone with a 684 has a better score than someone with no score. 

[RobertEG]

I believe that Fair Isaac uses the mean score rather than the average score when making such comparisons.

Mean score comparisons takes the score in the exact middle of the number of consumers, regardless of the scores of those above and below.  It is a statistical game.