< 9% 10% 11% ?

[vanillabean]

A card used for util calculation increases from 16% to 44%. The overall util increases from 4% to 10%. If you think this is bad, don't despair. It's not.

That's because the percentage that your rounded-up util should be less than is 11, not 10 or 9. DW's EQ dropped a mere 3 points.

[MarineVietVet]

---

@Anonymous-own-fico wrote:

A card used for util calculation increases from 16% to 44%. The overall util increases from 4% to 10%. If you think this is bad, don't despair. It's not.

That's because the percentage that your rounded-up util should be less than is 11, not 10 or 9. DW's EQ dropped a mere 3 points.

---

That's what works best for you but others have said that a utilization of <9% is the sweet spot. Everyone has to find what the optimum percentage is in their situation. As I have said many times there is no one size fits all approach.

From a BK years ago to:
EX - 9/09 pulled by lender 802, EQ - 10/10-813, TU - 10/10-774

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they've made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem".

[vanillabean]

---

@MarineVietVet wrote:

That's what works best for you but others have said that a utilization of <9% is the sweet spot. Everyone has to find what the optimum percentage is in their situation. As I have said many times there is no one size fits all approach.

---

Oh Heavens no! One tenth of 100% doesn't work for me. My sweet spot is much lower, specifically at one tenth of 1%. That's where I feel at ease. A util of half a percent raises both my eyebrows, and when it approaches a full percent, I'm start trembling uncontrollably, so that people, even strangers, politely direct me to the nearest rehab.

Anything above that, and I chain all doors and toss the key out the window, so I'm not a danger to the general public. Beyond one percent, I start seeing double and ponder the excess of even the smallest fraction that puts the util at two percent. Nearing five percent, I wake up from even short naps with sweat all over my forehead from dreams of pizzas with sardines or fried banana sandwiches and batter-dipped artificial cheese, not to mention bratwurst and brightly dressed beer maids with muscular arms.

At ten percent, any thought of a possible subjective sweet spot has long ago evaporated. My mind is left with the objective util cutoff of the scoring formula in question, to which all hope clings. I imagine there is one, but can't be sure of course. It could be the cutoff is different due to rebucketing. Some say utilization is not a consideration in score cards, but how do they know?

As for the <9%, could it be that it originated from an individual's accidental case one day of 8.6% that soon spread as a whirlwind because it worked for everyone who tried it? That it was embedded in the collective mindset so forcefully that 9.1% was dismissed due to its mere association with the disturbing double-digit 10% to which it's rounded up and at best was deemed as doomed?

[haulingthescoreup]

No, the FICO powers-that-be have confirmed the "under 10%" thing.

Not everyone will automatically see a score change for crossing this figure. It might be that someone's util isn't a very significant factor, outweighed by something else (age, score bucket change, etc.)

I occasionally see score changes when I rocket up to 2% from my usual less-than-1%-of-1%, which reports as 1%. 2% isn't much of anything. In my case, that means that I barely went over 1%, and 2% is certainly not any particular trigger level, but on my reports, it made a difference.

One thing to keep in mind is that with higher scores and negligible util, your (and my, and other's) experiences don't apply to many other people.

Most folks here that are working on their credit find demonstrable score increases when they drop util to 49% or below, 29% or below, and 9% or below. Further tweaking may result in further score changes, but these are known threshholds. At any rate, an awful lot of people have reported this over the 3-something years that I've been reading these boards.

[vanillabean]

---

@haulingthescoreup wrote:

No, the FICO powers-that-be have confirmed the "under 10%" thing.

...

Most folks here that are working on their credit find demonstrable score increases when they drop util to 49% or below, 29% or below, and 9% or below.

---

Thanks for checking. For verification, it's now accurate beyond any doubt that an overall util of say 9.01% is above the cutoff, because 9.01% rounds up to 10%, which is greater than 9%?

[haulingthescoreup]

Under 10% is the goal. Since anything over 9.00000000000000000(etc)% shows as 10%, I'd keep it at 9% precisely or less.

And again, this is a general guideline. Some people might not see the scoring effect precisely at that point on their own reports.

Trying to figure out some exact "this will always happen with your scores if you do thus-and-so" might be the forums equivalent of the supposed debate by medieval philosophers in trying to determine how many angels could dance on the head of a pin.

Anyone who has nothing else happening on their reports and wants to let 10% report one month and 9% the next is very welcome to be the guinea pig on this.

[vanillabean]

---

@haulingthescoreup wrote:

Under 10% is the goal. Since anything over 9.00000000000000000(etc)% shows as 10%, I'd keep it at 9% precisely or less.

---

It's appreciated you're sticking with this.

As a rule, I compare whole numbers (integers) with whole numbers and decimal numbers with decimal numbers, so I agree with you that a clean 9% would be the upper end. It's good to know that you're safe at 9%.

---

And again, this is a general guideline. Some people might not see the scoring effect precisely at that point on their own reports.

Trying to figure out some exact "this will always happen with your scores if you do thus-and-so" might be the forums equivalent of the supposed debate by medieval philosophers in trying to determine how many angels could dance on the head of a pin.

---

Sure, that'll differ.

---

Anyone who has nothing else happening on their reports and wants to let 10% report one month and 9% the next is very welcome to be the guinea pig on this.

---

I have nothing planned for next year, so your suggestion seems to be a very worthwhile project.

[haulingthescoreup]

---

@Anonymous-own-fico wrote:

---

@haulingthescoreup wrote:

Anyone who has nothing else happening on their reports and wants to let 10% report one month and 9% the next is very welcome to be the guinea pig on this.

---

I have nothing planned for next year, so your suggestion seems to be a very worthwhile project.

---

Well, there you go. Remembering, of course, that since your scores and reports are in very good shape, your experience might not be remotely similar to that of others.

I can't make myself make anything report, except by reminding myself that I lose 12 points on EQ when all report $0. But it's an effort of will to let something show up. And I've never, ever made it to the end of a 0% BT. I can't stand seeing that balance on there, month after month...

[Peach8321]

---

@haulingthescoreup wrote:

Anyone who has nothing else happening on their reports and wants to let 10% report one month and 9% the next is very welcome to be the guinea pig on this.

---

I'd like to see the results of this experiment, but for me, that would be letting ~$4350 report one month and ~$4800 report another month (or possibly more, since I am AU and I guess that also gets factored in...so bump those up another couple thousand).

Since I don't spend that much in two months, and my highest ever balance is under $3,600 (After two plane tickets to India)....I don't think I can participate.

Anyone with low cards want to help out? 

[vanillabean]

Come to think of it for the reason that peach brings up, I have only two chances next year, and they are not a month apart.

But we can make DW's situation be about the same a month after her described recent situation, so that'll do.

But since she dropped only three points with 9.4% for both EQ and TU, I can't imagine 8.4% will prove anything. We are obviously looking for 9.4% being bad, but how bad can three points be? Surely 8.4% can't be better than what she had before 9.4% which was 3.6%.

No, I think we'll test 10.4% to see if the score drops because of that. If a good drop, then the cutoff is >10%.