topic Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2% in Understanding FICO® Scoring

EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

Revelate — Thu, 11 Jul 2019 12:24:56 GMT

Quick datapoint on individual tradeline utilization for the suite of Experian scores other than FICO 9, really cute was one was the drop in EX FICO 2 BC, but really a 16 point swing even in EX FICO 2 = get pretty for mortgage. I triple checked that BC datapoint too, good grief that's nearly 30D late territory at 1 year.

Profile:

AAOA 4 years 10 months

AOOA 11 years 2 months

AOYA 3 months

5 inquiries

33 total accounts

Only change on the report 1 revolver reporting increased balance (had a balance previously), all other revolvers flatlined at $0, everything else as tight as I can make it. Total CL is over 200k regardless of how they are counting things we're well under the 9% line.

701/25000 -> 8301/25000

2.8% -> 33.2% individual tradeline utilization.

Ballpark <1% aggregate to 4.2% aggregate.

Still in grace period so if someone wants another datapoint on the way down might be able to pick it up before I PIF, just let me know.

	6/8/19	6/9/19	Delta	New reason code
FICO 8	794	790	-4
FICO 2	777	761	-16	#3 High Credit Usage
FICO 2 AU	793	778	-15	#3 High Credit Usage
FICO 8 AU	804	800	-4
FICO 2 BC	791	754	-37	#4 High Revolving Balances
FICO 3	767	763	-4
FICO 8 BC	829	825	-4

Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

SouthJamaica — Wed, 10 Jul 2019 21:04:33 GMT

@Revelate wrote:
Quick datapoint on individual tradeline utilization for the suite of Experian scores other than FICO 9, really cute was one was the drop in EX FICO 2 BC, but really a 16 point swing even in EX FICO 2 = get pretty for mortgage. I triple checked that BC datapoint too, good grief that's nearly 30D late territory at 1 year.

Only change on the report, 2 installment tradelines, 1 revolver reporting increased balance everything else flatlined at $0, everything else as tight as I can make it. Total CL is over 200k regardless of how they are counting things we're well under the 9% line.

701/25000 -> 8301/25000

2.8% -> 33.2% individual tradeline utilization.

Ballpark <1% aggregate to 4.2% aggregate.

Still in grace period so if someone wants another datapoint on the way down might be able to pick it up before I PIF, just let me know.

6/8/19 6/9/19 Delta New reason code
FICO 8 794 790 -4
FICO 2 777 761 -16 #3 High Credit Usage
FICO 2 AU 793 778 -15 #3 High Credit Usage
FICO 8 AU 804 800 -4
FICO 2 BC 791 754 -37 #4 High Revolving Balances
FICO 3 767 763 -4
FICO 8 BC 829 825 -4

~~What does BC refer to?~~

Never mind, I figured it out, BC = Bankcard, AU = Auto.

Sorry.

Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

Anonymous — Wed, 10 Jul 2019 21:20:16 GMT

Hi Rev. While it's sort of implied here, I wanted to verify just to make sure. In taking this one revolver to > 28.9% utilization (up from single-digit utilization) did you have any other revolvers at > 28.9% (or 8.9%) utilization? I'm thinking no, but wanted to make sure.

Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

Revelate — Wed, 10 Jul 2019 23:05:57 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
Hi Rev. While it's sort of implied here, I wanted to verify just to make sure. In taking this one revolver to > 28.9% utilization (up from single-digit utilization) did you have any other revolvers at > 28.9% (or 8.9%) utilization? I'm thinking no, but wanted to make sure.

Ah thought that I made that clear in my post, it is the only revolver with balance, everything else is $0. Reworded it slightly in the top post.

Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

Anonymous — Thu, 11 Jul 2019 02:10:19 GMT

Gotcha. Pretty wide range of point swings from 4 to 37 depending on model for an event that seemingly doesn't seem to be a huge deal.

Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

NRB525 — Thu, 11 Jul 2019 03:43:32 GMT

Well, the absolute dollars went up a lot.

Do you still have that 30d?

I wonder if a 30d tag, with large absolute value debt, could be a combination to raise risk under BC?

Do you have a toy limit to try 33% again, without the $8k debt?

Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

Revelate — Thu, 11 Jul 2019 12:44:24 GMT

@NRB525 wrote:
Well, the absolute dollars went up a lot.
Do you still have that 30d?

I wonder if a 30d tag, with large absolute value debt, could be a combination to raise risk under BC?

Do you have a toy limit to try 33% again, without the $8k debt?

Oh the 30D late is over on EQ, EX deleted the account for literally no reason I can understand. I don't have good data on EQ though might get a quality EQ FICO 5 datapoint from DCU, I will see about getting a TU datapoint though for giggles which has a 60D late and therefore is in the derogatory scorecards. I never saw much of anything until an individual threshold much higher than this under my old scorecards back in the day, likely profile dependent. Also I think @Anonymous may have found some threshold on her profile at 4% aggregate IIRC, so that would be a useful thing to check too.

I don't have a toy limit anymore, I may ask for a CLD on Discover though which was the original reason I picked up that card as secured and then they graduated me and meh, no more chasing individual breakpoints. Let me think on that, can't see any real reason not to other than it would look a little strange.

ETA: Oh I do have that DCU secured card at $500, hrm I can probably find $166 or darned close to drop on that and get that datapoint for you, good call. Oh it's simple, I can just go make an estimated tax payment and dial in the pretty much the exact balance. I'll get that done this weekend and it will report end of the month.

Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

Revelate — Thu, 11 Jul 2019 12:35:45 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
Gotcha. Pretty wide range of point swings from 4 to 37 depending on model for an event that seemingly doesn't seem to be a huge deal.

Well note that the biggest swings were on the oldest model, all on FICO 2 (released 1998) and enhanced options, and FICO 8 barely moved: 4 points is basically an inquiry, no big deal as you suggest so that clearly changed in FICO's analysis sometime in the last 20 years. Also the strongest movement was on Bankcard Enhanced which we all kinda knew it should weight revolving information more heavily it's still interesting to me to see it play out so concretely on the older scores.

It was a cute little datapoint that happened to be clean, I can get a clean datapoint off TU too and I think that will nail down the profile dependent nature or maybe my older data was a little squirrley, I never did really get to walk a tradeline down through it's baby steps.

Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

Anonymous — Thu, 11 Jul 2019 15:44:32 GMT

@Revelate wrote:
2.8% -> 33.2% individual tradeline utilization.

Ballpark <1% aggregate to 4.2% aggregate.

6/8/19 6/9/19 Delta New reason code
FICO 8 794 790 -4
FICO 2 777 761 -16 #3 High Credit Usage
FICO 2 AU 793 778 -15 #3 High Credit Usage
FICO 8 AU 804 800 -4
FICO 2 BC 791 754 -37 #4 High Revolving Balances
FICO 3 767 763 -4
FICO 8 BC 829 825 -4

You go from <1% to slightly above 4% aggregate and lose similar points - on the same scores - to what I gained from 9% to 4% (8.82 to 3.89).

Very interesting.

	9%		AoYA 6mo (Age only)		4%
	05/10/19	Δ	06/01/19	Δ	06/07/19
EX FICO 8	719	+6	725	+3	728
EX FICO AUTO 8	705	+7	712	+3	715
EX FICO Bankcard 8	723	+6	729	+4	733
EX FICO 2	721	+12	733
EX FICO 3	718	+4	722	+3	725
EX FICO Auto 2	698	+11	709
EX FICO Bankcard 2	726	+13	739

Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

Revelate — Sun, 14 Jul 2019 07:36:42 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
@Revelate wrote:
2.8% -> 33.2% individual tradeline utilization.

Ballpark <1% aggregate to 4.2% aggregate.

6/8/19 6/9/19 Delta New reason code
FICO 8 794 790 -4
FICO 2 777 761 -16 #3 High Credit Usage
FICO 2 AU 793 778 -15 #3 High Credit Usage
FICO 8 AU 804 800 -4
FICO 2 BC 791 754 -37 #4 High Revolving Balances
FICO 3 767 763 -4
FICO 8 BC 829 825 -4
You go from <1% to slightly above 4% aggregate and lose similar points - on the same scores - to what I gained from 9% to 4% (8.82 to 3.89).

Very interesting.

9%

AoYA 6mo
(Age only)

4%

05/10/19
Δ
06/01/19
Δ
06/07/19
EX FICO 8
719
+6
725
+3
728
EX FICO AUTO 8
705
+7
712
+3
715
EX FICO Bankcard 8
723
+6
729
+4
733
EX FICO 2
721
+12
733

EX FICO 3
718
+4
722
+3
725
EX FICO Auto 2
698
+11
709

EX FICO Bankcard 2
726
+13
739

Yeah I need to try to figure out how to test this concretely, unfortunately busy and I had a stray Cap 1 balance report (sigh $5 charge from testing the Apple Store broke this) but I can come back to this any time with the $166 experiment, so I may just worry about that in a month or two but you're right need to isolate 4% aggregate and maybe the size of the balance too.

I'm open to ideas on how to structure it, shift below 4% aggregate for next reported balance (I have enough in my checking account now to airstrike it) before PIFing it, try it at some other balance either to exclude the size of balance or try to nail down the percentage a little more closely and I haven't kept up with the latest trends in individual tradeline utilization.

Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

Anonymous — Thu, 18 Jul 2019 05:08:45 GMT

I went from 1/15 to 2/15 on EX FICO 8, which causes no loss on my profile.
Well ag. Util 1% to 1%.
Ind. util
Card 1=1%
0% to 22.51% on card 2

-3 points. I’ll check the rest of them when I get time later. Nothing else changed Obvious culprit individual utilization.

AoYA 11 mo
AooA over 25yr
AAoA 80 mo

***** I had to correct that from 1/15 to 2/15.

Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

Anonymous — Sun, 14 Jul 2019 13:57:07 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
AoYA 11 mo
AooA > 25yr
AAoA 80 mo

Are you going to be at 1 year AoYA on August 1st?

Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

Anonymous — Sun, 14 Jul 2019 19:31:20 GMT

As long as a new installment account posting doesn’t catch me, yes! 😉

Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

Anonymous — Thu, 18 Jul 2019 05:07:40 GMT

I apologize that I haven’t posted the rest of the scores yet. A lot of issues have kept me busy and I’ve been unable to sit down at my PC or take the time to try to do it via browser on my phone yet but I promise I will try to do it soon!

Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

Anonymous — Fri, 19 Jul 2019 12:53:17 GMT

OK score report finally. I went from 1/15 to 2/15 on EX FICO 8, which causes no loss on my profile.
Well ag. Util 1% to 1%.
Ind. util
Card 1=1%
Card 2=0% to 22.51%
No other changes.

Classic 8 -3
EX2 -5
AU8 -3
AU2 -5
BC8 -3
BC3 -11
BC2 -7

Another interesting tidbit. My number 4 negative reason code was accounts with a balance at 2/15. It disappears at 1/15 with nothing to replace it!

Also Experian specifically gave me an alert about the percentage increasing that correlated with a score ding alert. So there’s apparently a breakpoint somewhere between zero and 22 on my scorecard.

Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

SouthJamaica — Fri, 19 Jul 2019 15:13:47 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
OK score report finally. I went from 1/15 to 2/15 on EX FICO 8, which causes no loss on my profile.
Well ag. Util 1% to 1%.
Ind. util
Card 1=1%
Card 2=0% to 22.51%
No other changes.

Classic 8 -3
EX2 -5
AU8 -3
AU2 -5
BC8 -3
BC3 -11
BC2 -7

Another interesting tidbit. My number 4 negative reason code was accounts with a balance at 2/15. It disappears at 1/15 with nothing to replace it!

Also Experian specifically gave me an alert about the percentage increasing that correlated with a score ding alert. So there’s apparently a breakpoint somewhere between zero and 22 on my scorecard.

I wouldn't put any credence in the alerts themselves.

Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

Anonymous — Fri, 19 Jul 2019 16:09:42 GMT

@SouthJamaica wrote:
Also Experian specifically gave me an alert about the percentage increasing that correlated with a score ding alert. So there’s apparently a breakpoint somewhere between zero and 22 on my scorecard.

I don't know anything at all about Experian alerts being related to score changes, so I'm asking a legit question here. Does it work differently than MF which we all know can be very misleading/confusing to people in them always thinking that an alert is the reason for the score change?

Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

Anonymous — Fri, 19 Jul 2019 17:55:36 GMT

You cannot rely on the Experian alerts either but they definitely correlate way better than MyFICO. The reason is because they’re not delayed. However, again if you’ve got a busy file that just makes it harder. That’s why I try to control my variables and isolate my changes to only one change at a time. (But they definitely correlate a much higher degree of the time.)

It is worth noting the MyFICO service may combine several score changes with one alert, because it’s several days delayed.

That’s not true with Experian, so that’s why they are better and more often correlate.

Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

SouthJamaica — Fri, 19 Jul 2019 20:46:01 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
@SouthJamaica wrote:
Also Experian specifically gave me an alert about the percentage increasing that correlated with a score ding alert. So there’s apparently a breakpoint somewhere between zero and 22 on my scorecard.

I don't know anything at all about Experian alerts being related to score changes, so I'm asking a legit question here. Does it work differently than MF which we all know can be very misleading/confusing to people in them always thinking that an alert is the reason for the score change?

They're not related to score changes. The only relation is that EX has a user-configured alert you can get telling you of a score change.

Also, the alerts, in my experience, have always been exactly one day late. I.e. I receive the alert a day after I already know anything it has to say.

The value of the EX service is that it is essentially real time. Each day the report and 7 scores are updated when you log in. If there is a score change one day, and there was a change in the data that same day, and you can be CERTAIN that there was only one change in the data, it's the best way I have yet to find of knowing whether some change in the data changed the score, and to what extent.

To have delayed alerts is pretty pointless in that context.

And the score alert -- which I could easily disable if I chose, or limit if I chose -- is obviously unrelated to anything other than the provision of entertainment value.

Re: EX Individual Tradeline utilization 33.2%

Anonymous — Fri, 19 Jul 2019 22:34:22 GMT

Small edit/addition ***
Actually the alerts are not usually a day late, they just usually occur the second or third time you login after 3 AM or sometime later in the day. I frequently login right after 3 AM without an alert and log back in a second time and then the alert(s) are there. I think they do this to give you another reason to login and another reason to send you an email.

For example, I logged in and I had my balance increased on my new CR. I logged in again and I got the balance change alert. I logged in again and I got the alert for increased utilization on said card. After carefully scrutinizing the data in the credit report there were no other changes. Consequently I conclude since there is no other change in the data in the CR, that the increase in individual utilization on that card caused the point loss because I can go to three accounts on EX8 with a balance before I get a ding and that was only the second account with a balance.

And as I said to begin with, no you cannot count on them; however they are much more often correct than MyFICO‘s because the delay is way shorter. The longer time goes by, the more changes that can occur making it even more difficult for the alert to have any significance whatsoever.

However, again, if you control for variables and only change one thing at a time, You will see that change on your daily credit report and then typically receive an alert following it up that more often than not is on point.

Nevertheless no one can rely on anything other than the direct data in the credit report to be 100% certain, You cannot go by any alerts. But the ones from Experian at least have a small amount of worth, whereas MFs are so late and conflated as to be worthless typically, except to let you know a balance posted at TU or EQ.

Also I guess I should’ve wrote that better because it seemed kind of taken out of context, like I was making my conclusion based upon the alert. I was not. To be clear, my conclusion was based on everything that preceded my conclusion, not the one sentence that preceded it.