@RobertEG wrote:The simulator on this site is produced by Fair Isaac, and is based on their actual algorithm.
It is accoridingly not inaccurate, but does not permit the kind of specifics one mightt want to isolate in order to see the impact of one single action on immedatie score changes.
Such a simulator would permit, with some time and effort, amassing adequate details to assist in reverse engineering.
The algorithms must be preserved as trade secrets, so specificity will never be permittted.
It is good for broad, longer range planning, but not for immediate and specifc/single parameter simulations.
I think loosely based would be an appropriate term; the odds that the developers of the simulator had actual access to the algorithm is incredibly remote.
On the plus side they're able to ask questions of people that do; if I had to guess the FICO simulator is probably the best, but fact is it's still a simulator. It doesn't track with my scores and my file isn't astonishingly complex. Might be right at the 2 year time horizon, wasn't even close on the 1-3 month horizon, and I'm not so sure on the 2 years bit either based on a lot of datapoints on this forum... 780 or bust yo!
That said, going two years without a change in score, I resemble that remark so it's emminently possible... at constant utilization (low) without the negatives coming off, and AAOA just past 2 years and on the assumption no inquiries on file, can sit there for a while as I have, and I'm certain there's other profiles which we could theorize that would behave similarly. Really all I can do is pick up an inquiry, pick up an absolute slew of new tradelines, change up my reported balances, or take a negative... otherwise I just kinda sit there scorewise.
