No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
# The available credit across your open credit card accounts is too low. Having low available credit amounts on credit card accounts has a negative impact on your credit score. ('Scuse me? $52K+ CC CL's, $38K+ CC CL without AU account; util is 1/100 of 1%)The complaint about low available credit on CC's and not enough mortgage debt makes this look to me like they are deliberately skewing this to encourage us to app, which certainly will make their customers (lenders) happy. And maybe, maybe, they're not counting the AU account, which is interesting. The whole thing seems more sell-more-credit-driven than actuarially-driven.
# The average loan amount across open, recently reported real estate accounts, such as a mortgage, is too low. Having low loan amounts has a negative impact on your credit score. (Geeze, sorry that I don't live in CA or Hawaii or Boston, and that we only needed a $100K mortgage, plus now I have the $50K HELOC)
# Your report shows that the time since your oldest credit account or loan was opened is too short. Having credit accounts or loans open for a longer period of time has a positive impact on your credit score. (20 years on closed gas card, 18 years on AU CC, 12 years on re-fi'd mortgage)
# Your report shows that the time since your most recent late payment on a credit account or loan is too short. Recent late payments have a negative impact on your credit score. (well, yeah..)
# Your report shows one or more inquiries on file. Each time a potential lender pulls your credit report for review, an inquiry is placed on your file. While having inquiries on file does affect your score, the impact is minimal. (2 on EQ, 1 on EX, 0 on TU)
Credit score formulas continue to revise their formulas to be less about predicting how likely you are to make payments on time, and more about how much of a sucker you are. It's very hard to get a high score without at least 4 significant accounts with balances...but who's really more likely to make a payment on a new loan on time:
Someone who: a) Maintains a variety of account types with large amounts owed yet good utilization ratios and payment history or b) Someone who PAYS OFF THEIR STUPID DEBTS. Scenario (a) will recieve a high credit score despite all the debt they are juggling when obviously someone who strives to pay off their debts has MUCH BETTER odds of being able to keep up payments on a new debt. Scenario (b) will watch their credit score drop to 450 and 80% of banks will refuse them credit because of their score or make them a crappy offer.
Anyone bothering to jump through the hoops creditors have built into credit scoring so they can have a high credit score is indeed a slave to them and a sucker! I keep closing credit cards that jack up my interest rate or implement annual/monthly fees and I am working on paying off all debt. I have watched my credit score dive 55 points because of it, but at least I can see being debt free on the horizon. It will be nice when my possessions and soul belong to me instead of some bank.
For Reference:
Vantage: TU = 813/B, EX = 791/C, EQ = 802/B
Vantage reasons:
- You have no real estate accounts that can be used in determining a credit score. [ TransUnion , Experian , Equifax ] A healthy balance of credit and loan accounts is key to achieving a high credit score. It is important to build a record of responsible credit use over time with different types of accounts. True, but not much of a reason.
- Not enough of your accounts are consistently paid on time. [ TransUnion , Experian , Equifax ] Payment history is a significant factor in the credit scoring process. Regular on time payments may make you more creditworthy to potential lenders. I have no lates on TU whatsoever, 10+ year history.
- The available credit on your open revolving credit accounts is too low. [ TransUnion , Experian , Equifax ] Having credit available to you is a sign that you are able to manage your finances responsibly. Lenders usually like to see that consumers have a large amount of credit available to them. Sure. [NOT!]
- The sum of your bank credit card account balances is too high. [ TransUnion , Experian , Equifax ] High credit balances may be considered by lenders to be a negative factor when determining creditworthiness. Paying down your balance may improve your score. UTIL = 8%.
FICO: TU = 755, EQ = 724
Other that a few INQ's the information on EX and EQ is the same. TU info is different (no lates, one less TL - a newish one).
Like I've said before, Vantage favors high CL's and more TL's. It also favors mortgage holders. It seems to be another one of those scoring models that favors app'ing.
True Credit now gives Vantage Scores...I happen to love this - I have 2 paid never late mortgages on my CR. This is the thanks i get
yeah, cause they were paid!! Never late! two mortgages! (thank you ex husband)
then I get conflicting information:
I paid off my car, never late!
I got a new car loan, never late!
The explanations are not accurate.
Mine told me my 2% util, all from one CC at 7% util was too high.
LOL lucky those comments dont get forwarded to potential lenders, especially those that also can't do math or RTFR.
In my experience, the suggestions given by some of these FAKO scores can be damaging. For example, a TransRisk score will give you your best rating in number of accounts only if you have 40+ accounts.
Because of school loans that keep getting transferred around, I currently have 35 accounts on my EQ report. I have a red flag on my FICO report by my number of accounts that tells me that having 35 accounts is hurting my FICO score.
Therefore, TransRisk would have you do exactly the opposite of what my EQ FICO is indicating.