Reply
Established Contributor
rom828
Posts: 932
Registered: ‎08-17-2007
0

TU 98 VS TU 04

[ Edited ]

I know there are posts here  on this, but I've been searching and can't find them !! 

 

Would someone please give me a brief rundown on the differences between TU 98 and TU 04, and maybe advise how they compare to EQ changes from 04 to 08.

 

My understanding is  that EQ 08 isnt in effect at myfico yet, is that correct?  When and if will TU 04 be?? (at myfico)

 

All I remember reading was that  baddies wouldnt count as much,  but utilization counts more, or something like that, which is a drag for me with perfectly clean report now but 30% utilization (which I'm diligently paying down).

 

Just looking for clarification. 

 

Many thanks!!!!!!!!

 

(And, yes, this post was prompted by my getting TU score from Walmart card!:smileyvery-happy:) even though it has not be determined yet if that score is indeed TU 04.;  Barry's investigating;  haven't heard back yet so he must not have been able to find anything out as yet. 

 

 

FICOS: TU 732(7-18-14) EQ '08 734( 7-23-14) EX 727 (7-23-14)


Moderator Emeritus
llecs
Posts: 32,881
Registered: ‎08-04-2007
0

Re: TU 98 VS TU 04

Don't compare off that TU score from WalMart just yet. It could be any number of things including TU04, TU08, any new or old version of the bankcard-enhanced FICO, NextGen FICO, etc. Though I suspect we'll know soon.

 

EQ doesn't have an 04 version (though it may have been developed in '04). They have a 2005 version called Beacon 5.0. The newer one is Beacon 9.0 (aka part of FICO08).

 

I'm grateful myFICO hasn't updated the EQ FICO here to Beacon 9.0. Virtually most all lenders use the older model and I don't believe I've seen any posts on here of a lender using the FICO08 version. I hope they keep it as is. IMO, TU is due in for an upgrade. There are still quite a few lenders that use the '98 version, though most use '04. If they switch, they should switch to whichever version is trending to be the most popular among lenders, even if that means skipping over TU04.

 

 

Established Contributor
rom828
Posts: 932
Registered: ‎08-17-2007
0

Re: TU 98 VS TU 04

Thanks, llecs!

 

While I'm not overly worried about the Wmart TU score (I know Barry's researching), it did prompt my question.

 

I don't understand the diff between tu98 and 04, but I do see that people have very strong opinions either way.

 

 

Could you explain  the key diffs  between the TU 98 and TU04?

 

You mention, too, that you're glad myfico doesnt use EQ08.  Please explain the diffs on what myfico uses and EQ08, too, please.

 

As always, I'm grateful for the education!!:smileyhappy:

 

 

FICOS: TU 732(7-18-14) EQ '08 734( 7-23-14) EX 727 (7-23-14)


Established Contributor
rom828
Posts: 932
Registered: ‎08-17-2007
0

Re: TU 98 VS TU 04

??????

 

PLEASE!

FICOS: TU 732(7-18-14) EQ '08 734( 7-23-14) EX 727 (7-23-14)


Moderator Emeritus
llecs
Posts: 32,881
Registered: ‎08-04-2007
0

Re: TU 98 VS TU 04

I don't think anyone can accurately describe the key differences between both versions. Info is vague from FICO and we don't have access to TU04 to do a daily, weekly, or monthly comparison. It's my understanding they added bucket(s), changed how inquiries are duplicated (auto & mortgage), they treat lates a bit differently and scores on trending a bit more, and treats NPSL and HELOCs a bit differently per util. All this info is available on FICO's website via webinars, docs, etc. Same applies to FICO08 versions, but info is really vague. I just don't want myFICO using an EQ version of FICO08 on here because mortgage lenders don't use it (or a very rare few). I haven't seen any posts. People would call Beacon 9.0 (FICO08) a "fako" just like they call TU98 a "fako". Sigh.

 

 

 

Member
rajbansjoshi
Posts: 20
Registered: ‎03-17-2011
0

Re: TU 98 VS TU 04

I had asked a question recently about whether Charge card is being included for Utilization or not considering that they dont have any Limit. I was told that TU' 04 doesnt consider the balance in Charge card for overall utilization but in a TU' 98 score, a charge card's balance would be used for utilization calculation.

Raj
Established Contributor
rom828
Posts: 932
Registered: ‎08-17-2007
0

Re: TU 98 VS TU 04

Thank yo so much for the info, llecs.

 

And if I understand what you're advising, in the whole scheme of things,  the real issue is not TU 98 vs TU04,  or either EQ5 vs EQ8 score differences.

 

What  matters is which version (of either)  is most commonly pulled by lenders.

 

It seems that more lenders are pulling TU04 , which from posts I've read, results in scores that tend to be lower than TU98, which myfico uses.  (If indeed the Walmart TU score turns out to be 04, holds true for me as well by about -10 points).

 

As for EQ,  if I'm understanding correctly,  EQ08 is not being used by mortgage lenders as a general rule, so changing here on myfico (which is older version) would not give accurate info.

 

To further clarify, you mention mortgage lenders, but what about the versions used by CCC?

 

Again, I'm grateful for the info.   Now  I can understand why some posters are so upset about their TU myfico scores being lower than what a lender pulled.

I don't expect to be in the market for a new mortgage anytime soon, so this issue may not really affect me personally in the long run, but just wanted have a better grasp of the issue.

 

 

 

 

FICOS: TU 732(7-18-14) EQ '08 734( 7-23-14) EX 727 (7-23-14)



myFICO is the consumer division of FICO. Since its introduction 20 years ago, the FICO® Score has become a global standard for measuring credit risk in the banking, mortgage, credit card, auto and retail industries. 90 of the top 100 largest U.S. financial institutions use the FICO Score to make consumer credit decisions.

>> About myFICO
FICO Score - The Score that matters
Click to Verify - This site chose VeriSign SSL for secure e-commerce and confidential communications.
Fair Isaac Corporation is a BBB Accredited Financial Service in San Rafael, CA
FOLLOW US Social Media Facebook Twitter Pinterest Google+