NRB525 wrote:
You can get to the same place with 3 or 4 cards reporting, as long as that total utilization is the same as if 1 card only reported.
Hmmm, has that been tested? It was my understanding that part of the FICO maximization comes from the other accounts reporting zero balances, as opposed to small balances.
In my own case I had initially been posting tiny balances on all accounts. Then I read about the "all zero but one" theory and zeroed out all but 3. I did not notice any score increase from doing that. So maybe you're right.
@Vulcan1600 wrote:Last month I started doing the same thing as SJamaica. I let several cards report balances that brought my total reported at 3%. Like SJ - I get nervous when I see UTIL reported that high after the years of agony I had with credit cards being maxed out.
In May, I let several cards report their balances instead of 1. My myFICO scores on 5-20-15 were EQ: 790 TU: 796 EX: 786. In June, I PIF all cards except my HD card that I purchased a riding mower on for $1,350. So far, twice reported balances have dropped down to $1,150 on the HD card and a total of $1,250 total UTIL. That is still about 10% of my HD since my CL is $10k. So, over the next 4 weeks as the next round of cards reported $0 balances and my UTIL went to 1% again, my scores on 6/16/15 were EQ: 793 TU:810 EX:791 so they did go up. Today I woke up and signed into creditchecktotal and for some stupid reason my EX dropped to 787, which is the lowest since the end of May.
I guess bottom line is even though I have the HD card reporting every month, I'm paying $100 each month towards it instead of the minimum $25, reported CLI on my Discover card went from $11,500 to $13,500, my reported balances went back to $0, and EX drops to 787 today?
What I do is SD my debit card and pay everything on a rewards card and then pay them off. I have them in a rotation where each month I will show extra love to one of the cards then PIF before they report. This past month I used my US Bank Cash + card as that one, right now it has a balance of $785 out of a $5k limit. I was going to PIF that on 6/26 and the close date is 7/5. I've also been told that US Bank reports the end of each month no matter what the close date is. I'm thinking of trying an experiment and either letting the full $785 report or maybe report like $350 or maybe report $100. I don't want the other two scores to drop like EX did. My goal was to tweak and get all 3 of them over 800.
Also soon to be reported is the CLI on my AMEX Blue that went from $2k to $6k. I wonder if that will be a positive or a negative for me since my UTIL is low to begin with.
Thanks for the info. So, basically, your EX did not move, once the file was allowed to stabilize again? 786 earlier, now 787? So still net no change from all those cards going in and out of reporting, as long as utilization stays low overall.
@Vulcan1600 wrote:
@NRB525 wrote:
Thanks for the info. So, basically, your EX did not move, once the file was allowed to stabilize again? 786 earlier, now 787? So still net no change from all those cards going in and out of reporting, as long as utilization stays low overall.
Not sure what to think. I guess I'm fortunate that with all the new cards that reported that it wasn't that much of a disaster afterall. Next couple of months will be interesting to see.
"Not that much of a disaster". lol ... The level of fear about about how the FICO score may change from getting up out of bed and not putting the correct foot on the floor... 
What I'm trying to convey, and what this thread is bearing out, is number of cards with balances is not the factor, utilization level is the factor.
The Utilization Monster isn't all that sharp-toothed, but the "Number of Cards Reporting Monster" is non-existent.
@NRB525 wrote:
@Vulcan1600 wrote:
@NRB525 wrote:
Thanks for the info. So, basically, your EX did not move, once the file was allowed to stabilize again? 786 earlier, now 787? So still net no change from all those cards going in and out of reporting, as long as utilization stays low overall.
Not sure what to think. I guess I'm fortunate that with all the new cards that reported that it wasn't that much of a disaster afterall. Next couple of months will be interesting to see.
"Not that much of a disaster". lol ... The level of fear about about how the FICO score may change from getting up out of bed and not putting the correct foot on the floor...
The Utilization Monster isn't all that sharp-toothed, but the "Number of Cards Reporting Monster" is non-existent.
I didn't really mean disaster at all. It dropped but not as radically as I thought it could have. I guess having clean reports and oldest open line is 20 years old helps. Adding all those cards did drop my AAoA down to under 6 years though.
And, yes utilization seems to be that you have to utilize at least 2 cards or the CRAs will get semi-nervous. I will let them suffer if it means I have to utilize more than 2 or 3 percent. I will never get back into the hole I was in for many of the past 20 years.
@Vulcan1600 wrote:
I didn't really mean disaster at all. It dropped but not as radically as I thought it could have. I guess having clean reports and oldest open line is 20 years old helps. Adding all those cards did drop my AAoA down to under 6 years though.
And, yes utilization seems to be that you have to utilize at least 2 cards or the CRAs will get semi-nervous. I will let them suffer if it means I have to utilize more than 2 or 3 percent. I will never get back into the hole I was in for many of the past 20 years.
Ok, well my point is, even if you have all 11 of your CC (I exclude the HD card) with balances from daily spend as you cycle them and PIF by the payment due date, you can still keep your total utilization under control if that's all it is, daily spend, and be fine for scoring. Once they all get on the pattern of reporting something and have a chance to stabilize from any "taking on new debt" issues if they've been zero for several months, then your score will get used to the pattern and be fine.
@NRB525 wrote:
@Revelate wrote:
@NRB525 wrote:
All cards but one is not the real driver of the score improvement: it is the resulting on-time payments that happen.
Agreed but it does factor into instant-in-time score maximization which most of us should / do care about when it comes to application time at least for anything we care about. Absolutely payment history is king, but if you solve that by not missing payments, revolving utilization is the next thing to tackle from a scoring perspective.
We are in agreement, however then you have to still consider "How do I get to that instant in time maximization I want on the day I app?" And the answer is, you bring down utilization (to zero) on all cards but one, and leave a small total utilization as the remainder of all cards
And yes, payment on time is primary, then you can work with utilization to further improve score ( or realize that using credit is what this is all about, and so as utility / utilization of credit goes up, the score will come down by some factor). Virtually everything else is noise, including AAoA because you can't really control them.
Dude, seriously same thing to you as TT: test .
I drop when I have 3/9 cards reporting a balance, I take another drop at 5/9. Jamie drops at 2/7. Unmistakable, same silly low utilization with very similar files (other than his clean EX) and I don't think you can accuse us of sloppily testing the algorithm's implementation. Numbers of revolving tradelines reporting a balance is as close to absolutely a thing as we can get to with the algorithm: show me any real data where it's not, as honestly there's been zero to support what you or TT have suggested on that and overwhelming anecdotal evidence both here and elsewhere similar that it does exist.
Sure it does appear that thicker files such as yours have more leeway with this, but that doesn't obviate the rest of the data.
Even in my case: I have optimum reports (except TU Bankcard 04, excuse me while I yawn) at 2/9 cards reporting balances... but I also have it at 1/9. Which is easier for someone to understand? "All credit cards except one reporting $0 and one card with a small balance" or "it's a calculation based probably on the number of tradelines, which may well be less than 25% of your revolving tradelines reporting a balance..."
I think you see where I'm going with this. If we're going to give advice it needs to be concrete and actionable. You and TT both are absolutely right that it's not a complete answer, but it's accurate and simple, which makes it a very, very good one, and I'll take that any day.
@Revelate wrote:I drop when I have 3/9 cards reporting a balance, I take another drop at 5/9. Jamie drops at 2/7.
How many points
And how long are you leaving it at 3 or 5 cards reporting, so the file has a chance to adjust to that new normal?
@NRB525 wrote:
@Revelate wrote:I drop when I have 3/9 cards reporting a balance, I take another drop at 5/9. Jamie drops at 2/7.
How many points
And how long are you leaving it at 3 or 5 cards reporting, so the file has a chance to adjust to that new normal?
Had 3 cards reporting for a while. This has always been instant in time calculation from all of my data... not sure where this "normal" and "bucketing" came into it. Those apply to different parts and there's been zero evidence it does with number of tradelines reporting a balance.
@3 3 point drop, at 5, 4 point drop. 1-2 no change, 3-4 no change. Never tracked more than 5/9... EQ Beacon 9 and 3B monitoring too, none of the other services have the resolution I need to isolate this on small balances. As mentioned in another thread, the monitoring solutions are all kinda lacking in one regard or another and MF is no exception in my opinion.
This was at ~700ish scores FICO 8 not clean file, trifecta of derogatory types from late 2010. Beacon 5.0 when that was the Scorewatch version exhibited similar behavior and possibly larger point values: from DCU and this isn't very precise: 3 to 1 cards was 693 to 700 according to DCU. Granted that's monthly and there could've been another change, but nothing else changed in my file elsewhere according to repeated 3B pulls and Beacon 5.0 did not move either from the mortgage inquiries or the installment utilization change.
For the record, I would've lost a tier on my mortgage application at -7 points. You cannot possibly state it doesn't matter based on that .