>0% <9% utilization, one card FICO boost data points: bank card versus store card?

[Anonymous]

Do we have any data points on if FICO differentiates between a bank card and a store card on the FICO boost from having one CC report minimal utilization greater than zero?

All 3 of my CB FICO08s dropped due to accidentally reporting $0 across all cards.  I stuck $5 on my Williams Sonoma store card just before statement cuts (5/16) so I'm curious if store cards are still acceptable for FICO since it does appear that the CBs differentiate between store cards and bank cards.

Any data points from past monitoring?

[HeavenOhio]

Yeah. My Experian FICO 8 took a four-point hit when a store card was the only one reporting a balance. When a major card reported in addition to the store card, the points came back. TransUnion and Equifax didn't care that the only card was a store card, but Equifax dings me whenever a second card reports a balance.

[Anonymous]

Interesting HeavenOhio.  I never thought that FICO saw a difference between regular bank cards and store cards.  I only have 1 store card (Lowe's) but would like to test this out now just for S&Gs.

[Anonymous]

Thanks HO, good data points!

Report back, Brutal, I'm curious. My TU alert mentioned "bank cards" specifically by name. What are non bank cards called?

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Report back, Brutal, I'm curious. My TU alert mentioned "bank cards" specifically by name. What are non bank cards called?

---

Good question. 

I believe that bank cards are coded as "credit card" where store cards are coded as "charge card" or "charge account."  I believe this to be the difference.

In looking at all of my bank cards, on CCT and CK they are listed as credit cards.  My Lowe's card on CCT is listed as "unknown" as type where on CK it's listed as a "charge account."  In looking at my Experian hard copy credit report that was sent to me via snail mail less than a week ago, all of my bank cards are listed as "credit card" where the Lowe's card is listed as "charge card."

Basically the word "charge" as opposed to "credit" is the difference here... "charge account" or "charge card" instead of "credit card" means STORE card instead of bank card.  Hopefully that makes sense.  I only have that one store card though so I'm only speaking on what I'm seeing in terms of coding with 1 account.  Those that have multiple store cards would be welcomed to chime in on this to see if they're seeing the same thing I am. 

I find this curious, because I always thought of "charge cards" and "charge accounts" as basically being credit cards that have to be PIF every month... like Amex charge cards for example.  So, then, does that mean that store cards are coded the same as these "charge cards" that I'm speaking of? 

[Revelate]

Hrm, I tested my Walmart card a while back, and couldn't find any difference in FICO 04 or FICO 8.

It was there for Nextgen presumably since they broke out retail cards explicitly for reason codes, I know for FICO 9 there's a difference between revolving and credit card (TLDR from a different post, let a CC report a balance when optimizing) but I don't think there's been any difference between CC and store card, though FWIW when I optimize I would always suggest put it on a bankcard just in case.

Re: TU monitoring, the core monitoring algorithm was setup a while back, like possibly back in 2000 era and sold to lenders: just because it tracks mortgage / HELOC / bankcard / store card / etc seperately now, doesn't mean it's applicable to current algorithm.  Equifax's breaking out mortgage info on their report is the same, I can't find any difference as that and the Alliant SSL factor into the exact same reason code as another such example, and I'm relatively confident in suggesting balance on bankcard or storecard doesn't take part in the segmentation process, and as such should likely be same across all scorecards.... may vary by bureau though, maybe, some strangeness there even in FICO 8 still.

[HeavenOhio]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Interesting HeavenOhio.  I never thought that FICO saw a difference between regular bank cards and store cards.  I only have 1 store card (Lowe's) but would like to test this out now just for S&Gs.

---

When I've seen AZEO advice posted here, "preferebly a major card" has been included at times. I didn't originate it, but I've regurgitated that tidbit when passing along the advice to others.

Here's how store and major cards appear on my reports.

Equifax

Store cards: Charge Account
Major cards: Credit Card, Flexible Spending Credit Card

Experian
Store cards: Charge Card
Major cards: Credit Card

TransUnion
Store cards: Charge Account
Major cards: Credit Card, Flexible Spending Credit Card

[Anonymous]

Gotcha.  So that's right in line with what I see from my one store card.  It's certainly possible, then, based on the language that these accounts are coded differently and thus could be scored differently under the FICO algorithm.

[Revelate]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Gotcha.  So that's right in line with what I see from my one store card.  It's certainly possible, then, based on the language that these accounts are coded differently and thus could be scored differently under the FICO algorithm.

---

Speculation without data is getting a little fustruating here at times .  Lot of people have tested store cards over time and more datapoints are absurdly easy to garner if you have any store cards at all (which I don't, but it would've been interesting with the rest of my all zeros testing I guess).

[HeavenOhio]

I suppose the store card effect can depend on one's profile. We can run into situations where we might say, "mine works this way, but yours might not." Likewise, someone might be OK letting multiple cards report a balance. I get the two-card ding on Equifax, although it's still my best score despite the fact that it isn't fully optimized. So I'm letting two cards report.

Given that it affects at least some of us, when someone asks about optimizing, suggesting that it's preferable to let a major card be the one to report is certainly appropriate. It's best to be safe.