@Revelate wrote:
Dude seriously
. You are not correct in this based on everyone else's data to date. I will keep cutting and pasting but please stop ignoring everyone else's data because an 850 on a FICO 8 does not a good testing platform make. Or let a balance report on all your cards and see if you come off the 850, every single one. Betcha it does and that's not what you did from your last test that I saw.
Historical Score Bal Reported Total TLs Agg. Util % Change Equifax Beacon 9 693 2 9 0.4 Equifax Beacon 9 690 3 9 1.3 -3 Equifax Beacon 9 690 4 9 1.5 0 Equifax Beacon 9 686 5 9 1.6 -4 Equifax Beacon 9 703 5 9 1.6 N/A Equifax Beacon 9 707 4 9 1.2 4
What are the datestamps on these readings?
@NRB525 wrote:
@Revelate wrote:
Dude seriously
What are the datestamps on these readings?
Updated sheet from Scorewatch post FICO 8 conversion here: I'll take it further if people really want but I can assure everyone that this is legit as far as EQ FICO 8 (Beacon 9.0) is concerned. I don't have my old Beacon 5.0 data anymore unfortunately, and no real interest in signing up for Equifax Scorewatch to recreate it as it was already beaten to death before.
| Historical | Score | Bal Reported | Total TLs | Agg. Util % | Change | Date | |
| Equifax Beacon 9 | 693 | 2 | 9 | 0.4 | 5/13/14 | ||
| Equifax Beacon 9 | 690 | 3 | 9 | 1.3 | -3 | 5/15/14 | |
| Equifax Beacon 9 | 690 | 4 | 9 | 1.5 | 0 | 5/16/14 | |
| Equifax Beacon 9 | 686 | 5 | 9 | 1.6 | -4 | 5/22/14 | |
| Equifax Beacon 9 | 703 | 5 | 9 | 1.6 | N/A | 5/25/14 | (Tax Lien withdrawn) |
| Equifax Beacon 9 | 707 | 4 | 9 | 1.2 | 4 | 5/31/14 |
Congrats on the tax lien withdrawal.
And I agree that letting a card come online with reporting will result in a score change.
One of the... opinions, uncertainties, questions... I still have though, is what happens when those 5 cards are allowed to continue reporting for a month, two months? Does the score get familiar with that new profile and recover the "shock" points from a card coming from zero to something?
@NRB525 wrote:Congrats on the tax lien withdrawal.
And I agree that letting a card come online with reporting will result in a score change.
One of the... opinions, uncertainties, questions... I still have though, is what happens when those 5 cards are allowed to continue reporting for a month, two months? Does the score get familiar with that new profile and recover the "shock" points from a card coming from zero to something?
Not sure where this shock point bit is coming from: tradelines can go inactive as has been intimated previously, but it's because a lender doesn't report it for a period of time, not that suddenly it went from $0 to non-zero. It's probably 6 months if I had to guess based on the requirements to generate a FICO score.
The only alert around this is a configurable one in the Scorewatch options.
For those suggesting that a pattern of revolving utilization is bucketable well, I sort of doubt it as there's hardly been any reports of that ever: I can only recall one where someone had high aggregate utilization, he paid it down to some small number, and didn't see a score jump till 4 months later, but never saw any real data on that. Most people get a score change immediately.
As for it, I usually just let balances report where they may, and go from 3-5 cards regularly but when I get clean by reducing my cards with balances (in my case, 2/9 or 1/9 is optimal under Beacon 9) I get a score boost, and when I get laissez-faire about it, I walk back down the points as shown in my data.
The absolute value of those point movements have changed with time and my file, but it's still held drop a number of points, go back up same number of points at least when we're talking about aggregate utilization around the margins (1-2% in my case for pretty much most of my time).
Ah, the meaning of "high balance"
It's a descriptor for a field in an account entry but it can also be read that the word "high" is just an adjective modifying the noun "balance" while discussing the currently reporting balance I'd bet that is the intended meaning.
Butressing this is the fact that people that have high usage often have very high "high balance" fields and creditors like to see this. It means people can use the CL and pay it off.
As an aside, Ive run up pretty large "high balances" and it's never had an adverse affect on FICO scores once the utilization was reduced to nominal levels.
@Anonymous wrote:Hello CnC. If the choice of the word high was deliberate, it was a bad choice. Note that omitting the word entirely conveys the same meaning: "if a credit report shows a balance close to the card's limit...." A balance close to the card's limit is certainly one that is high. But by using the name of a field that appears on the credit report ("high balance") they ended up saying something very different than they (presumably) wanted to convey.
It's a bit like using the phrase "new haven" when discussing Ivy League schools. If you are trying to describe a haven that is new (as opposed to older more established havens) then you better be sure that the context admits of no misunderstanding. Otherwise expect that people might think you are talking about the town that Yale is located in.
I completely agree it's a bad choice of words but I'm not sure how many people would read it as the "high balance" field. Most all third party reports merge the two into high balance/ credit limit so it's likely not many will read it to mean the actual "high balance." MyFico is a bit schizoid and doesn't call it high balance but largest past balance on a single EX credit report but does list the item as "high balance" on the tri-merge reports.
I agree the phrasing needs to be reworded as a lot of folks here are credit geeks and could read it wrongly.
@Thomas_Thumb wrote:Revelate,
All I am saying is there are a # of posts here (profiles with scores in the 700s) reporting no changes in Fico 8 score when they changed # cards reporting a balance. Sure, the score is affected at some point ... but is it given as much weight as with the Fico 4 model?- From what I have read not as much as with Fico 4 (let's forget about my profile for the moment)
The bolded statement, as I read it, implies Fico 8 adds more weight to utilization % relative to older Fico models. Whether correct or not, that is how I interpret the meaning.
Ultimately, more weight on one factor generally means less weight on another to equal out.
As I stated before, bought some new furniture and put it across 4 cards (20k) and still had 2 reporting a smaller balance. I let this happen on purpose to see what effect it would have on my score. NONE. Now I will work on paying them down but not too much as I want to see what the simulator says also. Looks like the change, after all is said and done, will have a positive impact on my score. Fico 8. Not all of my new cards hit either. But when they do, they will have a zero balance. But never a change from one card reporting a balance below 9% to 6 cards reporting 15%. Not all new cc's with large CL's have reported yet to lower my UT.