No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
Vantage scores my secumd LOC as installment while FICO reports it as revolving/other.
I don't think it's a VantageScore vs. FICO thing. And I'm not even sure it has to do with the actual reports. Rather, I think it comes from where you're pulling your scores.
I'm basing that on how my gas and electric company shows up. There's an "account type" and a "loan type." myFICO doesn't handle this well, while other services do better.
Where are you getting your reports?
@HeavenOhio wrote:I don't think it's a VantageScore vs. FICO thing. And I'm not even sure it has to do with the actual reports. Rather, I think it comes from where you're pulling your scores.
I'm basing that on how my gas and electric company shows up. There's an "account type" and a "loan type." myFICO doesn't handle this well, while other services do better.
Where are you getting your reports?
CreditCheckTotal,Creditwise,CreditKarma, and Scorecard.
Heaven is right. FICO and Vantage are scoring algorithms, not data repositories (which is what the credit bureaus are).
So what you may need to do is say something like:
When I pull my 3-bureau report at CCT, it shows my 2nd LOC classified like this:
TU _____ EQ ______ EX ______
When I pull my reports at Credit Karma, it shows my 2nd LOC classified like this:
TU _____ EQ ______
When I pull my reports using (yet some other 3rd-party tool), it shows....
etc.
What it sounds like you may be seeing is a difference in how the CRAs are classifying the same tradeline, or possibly a difference in how various 3rd-party tools are rendering data at the bureaus.
Regardless, FICO and Vantage are not classifying your tradelines (as revolving vs. installment). The classification is done prior to the data being dropped into the scoring algorithm.
@Anonymous wrote:Heaven is right. FICO and Vantage are scoring algorithms, not data repositories (which is what the credit bureaus are).
So what you may need to do is say something like:
When I pull my 3-bureau report at CCT, it shows my 2nd LOC classified like this:
TU _____ EQ ______ EX ______
When I pull my reports at Credit Karma, it shows my 2nd LOC classified like this:
TU _____ EQ ______
When I pull my reports using (yet some other 3rd-party tool), it shows....
etc.
What it sounds like you may be seeing is a difference in how the CRAs are classifying the same tradeline, or possibly a difference in how various 3rd-party tools are rendering data at the bureaus.
Regardless, FICO and Vantage are not classifying your tradelines (as revolving vs. installment). The classification is done prior to the data being dropped into the scoring algorithm.
This is my creditchecktotal
This is CK
This is credit.com
As you can see Vantage has my revolving credit limit at like 3000 while FICO has it at 3,500. Also creditcheck considers it revolving while Vantage considers it other.
Interesting. So, just for clarity, you have four accounts total, three open and one closed.
The first three were opened on the same day (Oct 14) at State Employee CU of Maryland. The fourth was your Discover card opened 5 days after (Oct 19).
I am going to reproduce the Karma rendering because it seems to give the most information. Then maybe you can clear up a few things for me about the accounts:
ACCOUNT NAME TYPE STATUS
------------- ---- ------
Discover Bank Credit Card Open
State Employee Credi Credit Card Open
State Employee Credi Credit Card Closed
State Employee's FCU Other Open
The Discover card is clear, and it sounds like all your reports agree about that.
Can you help me understand better what the next three are? Rows two and three have exactly the same name. Were they both the same product? If you could tell me exactly what each of those three things are in reality, that would help. Are two LOCs and the other is a credit card? Two credit cards and one LOC? Which is which? It looks like one of them was closed. What is the "Date Closed" given by Karma? And what were the circumstances around it being closed?
And also, can you give me the credit limit associated with each account?
It does look from your screenshots that Karma and CCT are in agreement that you had three accounts opened on the same day at SECU with one being closed at some point.
I agree with you that it does appear that one account has been given an "account type" that is ambiguous somehow -- such that the summary page of some credit monitoring systems are making a guess and calling it revolving and others are considering not revolving.
It's important to emphasize that those "summary" front-end interfaces with each CMS do not necessarily correspond to the scoring model on the back end. For example, CCT will claim that a $10 balance on a total credit limit of $20,000 is 0%. But that is not actually how the FICO model on the back end sees it (FICO rounds it up to 1%). Likewise the summary page for Credit Karma will exclude closed accounts when it calculates AAoA. But the scoring model on Karma's back end (Vantage) actually does include them.
A final thought: as far as the practical implications of all this for you -- there are none. Your reported balances are always extremely low. I think the way you have described your situation it is difficult for you to spend even $50 in a month. Therefore whether you have a total CL of $3000 or $3500 will never matter in the slightest.
@Anonymous wrote:Interesting. So, just for clarity, you have four accounts total, three open and one closed.
The first three were opened on the same day (Oct 14) at State Employee CU of Maryland. The fourth was your Discover card opened 5 days after (Oct 19).
I am going to reproduce the Karma rendering because it seems to give the most information. Then maybe you can clear up a few things for me about the accounts:
ACCOUNT NAME TYPE STATUS
------------- ---- ------
Discover Bank Credit Card Open
State Employee Credi Credit Card Open
State Employee Credi Credit Card Closed
State Employee's FCU Other Open
The Discover card is clear, and it sounds like all your reports agree about that.
Can you help me understand better what the next three are? Rows two and three have exactly the same name. Were they both the same product? If you could tell me exactly what each of those three things are in reality, that would help. Are two LOCs and the other is a credit card? Two credit cards and one LOC? Which is which? It looks like one of them was closed. What is the "Date Closed" given by Karma? And what were the circumstances around it being closed?
And also, can you give me the credit limit associated with each account?
It does look from your screenshots that Karma and CCT are in agreement that you had three accounts opened on the same day at SECU with one being closed at some point.
I agree with you that it does appear that one account has been given an "account type" that is ambiguous somehow -- such that the summary page of some credit monitoring systems are making a guess and calling it revolving and others are considering not revolving.
It's important to emphasize that those "summary" front-end interfaces with each CMS do not necessarily correspond to the scoring model on the back end. For example, CCT will claim that a $10 balance on a total credit limit of $20,000 is 0%. But that is not actually how the FICO model on the back end sees it (FICO rounds it up to 1%). Likewise the summary page for Credit Karma will exclude closed accounts when it calculates AAoA. But the scoring model on Karma's back end (Vantage) actually does include them.
A final thought: as far as the practical implications of all this for you -- there are none. Your reported balances are always extremely low. I think the way you have described your situation it is difficult for you to spend even $50 in a month. Therefore whether you have a total CL of $3000 or $3500 will never matter in the slightest.
I got my secu credit card and LOC opened same day(14) and both are $500 limit. Then my secu cc number was compromised so I closed it and requested a new replacement. The replacement should have been the same account but it appears that a new account was made instead with the same information. I could dispute that because I don't think my score should be dropped(from new account) just because I asked for a replacement. However I decided that in the long run, the mistake works in my favor because having a closed and an open account rather than just one account helps with AAoA. The reason I cared about whether it's revolving or not revolving was because of the hope that I would have credit mix from the LOC. You are right that $3,500 vs $3,000 limit doesn't really matter but I really was hoping I wouldn't have to do anything additional for credit mix. The situation now stands that I will be trying your SSL technique sometime this month or next month.
Also this answers the question that drove me to this forum in the first place
The SSLT has a lot of nice things going for it, for somebody in your shoes. First is the obvious benefit that it will give you to both credit mix and installment utilization. (Installment U is from the much weightier Amount Owed category.)
But it will also give you another account. At this stage every new account that you add has some advantages. It's not known for certain where FICO and Vantage decide that one's profile is no longer "thin" (with Vantage it takes more accounts than it does with FICO). But going from 4 to 5 can't hurt. And down the road, when your closed SECU account falls off, you'll have that SSL still gaining age. Given that there is no hard pull associated with adding an Alliant SSL, it's a really low impact way of adding another account to one's profile.
@Anonymous wrote:The SSLT has a lot of nice things going for it, for somebody in your shoes. First is the obvious benefit that it will give you to both credit mix and installment utilization. (Installment U is from the much weightier Amount Owed category.)
But it will also give you another account. At this stage every new account that you add has some advantages. It's not known for certain where FICO and Vantage decide that one's profile is no longer "thin" (with Vantage it takes more accounts than it does with FICO). But going from 4 to 5 can't hurt. And down the road, when your closed SECU account falls off, you'll have that SSL still gaining age. Given that there is no hard pull associated with adding an Alliant SSL, it's a really low impact way of adding another account to one's profile.
I'll definitely report on how SSL affected my score once I begin utilizing it.
That makes a lot of sense that I want new accounts. It might be one of the rare situations where an app spree is beneficial. Since SSL has no inquiry but it adds new account, it's a good deal. I might apply this concept elsewhere like in Penfed. Like I could use one initial inquiry to get as many credit products as I can get from them.
It's just third party presentation as CGID correctly states, nothing to do with how the tradeline is being scored under any algorithm.
The Experian service is the closest to my actual credit report from my own anecdotal point of view, but ultimately annualcreditreport is the source of truth as that pulls the actual consumer file that the bureaus have... no filter, no mistakes in presentation or interpretation, of which there are many even in useful services like Credit Karma.