topic Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points in Understanding FICO® Scoring

Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

Trudy — Sat, 29 Aug 2020 20:37:37 GMT

This is in no way complaining, just questioning the 28.9% individual threshold and 8.9% aggregate threshold.

Experian today after 2nd revolver reported 27.72%.

F8: -5 (846 to 841)

F2: -16 (824 to 808)

AU2: -15 (857 to 842)

AU8: -6 (881 to 875)

CC2: -44 (847 to 803)

CC3: -12 (816 to 804)

CC8: -5 (887 to 882)

Had an expense where I went from 1/11 revolver reporting 1.9%, total UTL 1% to 2 reporting, 1.9% (will report $0 by end of month) and 27.72%, total 6.34%. No other changes for sure. I brought up 2 reporting to get that out of the way because I've previously had 2 reporting but both less than 8% and total lower than the now 6.34% and it only impacted my EX2 scores.

I've long felt that raw dollars may be a factor and in this case it seems it may be as I'm below 28.9% for individual and 8.9% for total UTL.

Thoughts?

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

SouthJamaica — Fri, 28 Aug 2020 21:10:35 GMT

@Trudy wrote:
This is in now way complaining, just questioning the 28.9% individual threshold and 8.9% aggregate threshold.

Experian today after 2nd revolver reported 27.72%.
F8: -5 (846 to 841)
F2: -16 (824 to 808)
AU2: -15 (857 to 842)
AU8: -6 (881 to 875)
CC2: -44 (847 to 803)
CC3: -12 (816 to 804)
CC8: -5 (887 to 882)

Had an expense where I went from 1/11 revolver reporting 1.9%, total UTL 1% to 2 reporting, 1.9% (will report $0 by end of month) and 27.72%, total 6.34%. No other changes for sure. I brought up 2 reporting to get that out of the way because I've previously had 2 reporting but both less than 8% and total lower than the now 6.34% and it only impacted my EX2 scores.

I've long felt that raw dollars may be a factor and in this case it seems it may be as I'm below 28.9% for individual and 8.9% for total UTL.

Thoughts?

There's nothing magical about 8.9% aggregate utilization. The lower you go, the higher your scores. In my experience 1% to 3% was a sweet spot.

But the 29% number, in individual utilization, is definitely a biggy.

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

Trudy — Fri, 28 Aug 2020 21:34:19 GMT

Yeah I thought about the varying thresholds some people find below 8.9%. I noticed the below from EX's site today. I know 4% and below hasn't caused a change in EX F8 for me in the past. Not sure I can recall if I ever had 5% aggregate and/or without something else happening. I'll eventually find out. I will see when the one revolver reports $0 in a few days and drops me below 6%.

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

SouthJamaica — Sat, 29 Aug 2020 02:55:04 GMT

@Trudy wrote:
Yeah I thought about the varying thresholds some people find below 8.9%. I noticed the below from EX's site today. I know 4% and below hasn't caused a change in EX F8 for me in the past. Not sure I can recall if I ever had 5% aggregate and/or without something else happening. I'll eventually find out. I will see when the one revolver reports $0 in a few days and drops me below 6%.

In my experience, there were no thresholds. Every full integer percentage change resulted in a score change.

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

Anonymous — Sat, 29 Aug 2020 06:20:38 GMT

@Trudy wrote:
This is in now way complaining, just questioning the 28.9% individual threshold and 8.9% aggregate threshold.

I've long felt that raw dollars may be a factor and in this case it seems it may be as I'm below 28.9% for individual and 8.9% for total UTL.

You're definitely right about the raw dollars - it's listed in one of FICO's documents:

(Full list with link to source document is here. I'm only showing dollar balance and percentage reason statements here, because they are tracked separately.)

EQ/TU/EX FICO 8 Reason Code List Bold statements indicate possible variations in scoring between CRAs.
Reason Statement	EQ	TU	EX	Remarks
Amount owed on accounts is too high	1	1	1	Balance track
Amount owed on revolving accounts is too high	11	11	11	Balance track
Proportion of balances to credit limits on bank/national revolving or other revolving accounts is too high	10	10		Percent track
Ratio of balance to limit on bank revolving or other rev accts too high			10	Percent track
Proportion of loan balances to loan amounts is too high	33	3	33	Percent track

Definitely question everything.

Those utilization thresholds that have been posted here forever seem to be good general guidelines that work for relatively low dollar balances - maybe under $1000 or $2000 aggregate and individual.

I'm not sure at all about the dollar thresholds, but I do know that I don't see very much movement in the entire (0,9]% utilization range. I've never let a card report above 9% or $1035 individual, aggregate high of $1688. There is some movement above $1000 on all 3 mortgage scores, and reason statements that mention balances will shift up one or two spots.

There is a 5% threshold (not 0 to 4% exactly to be under it) which gives +3/+1/+3 on EQ/TU/EX 8, but that's on my new-to-credit scorecard. This one seems to be a percentage only thing, as I've seen it even with $538 aggregate.

I absolutely believe that SouthJamaica has score changes at every single integer percentage, and that it's caused by the actual dollar balances being reported.

There must be something in the profile data set that FICO used that showed people with relatively high balances (compared to profile population average) - even if low percentage - were more of a risk somehow.

A lot of people say "But my util was only 3%, why would my score drop?". 3% of what though? $1 million TCL? That's $30,000 and TCL doesn't say anything about a person's ability to pay. Lenders obviously trusted that person, but it's all about what people actually did with it.

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

Trudy — Sun, 30 Aug 2020 19:14:05 GMT

Thanks for the info @Anonymous . Good point regarding the dollar value of 3% in your example. This is not the 1st time where raw dollars seemed to support a change but previously I never saw it impact my F8 score and not sure it has in this case as I went from 0.50% ($475) to 6.43% ($6018.17). Thought possibly 6K may be a raw dollar figure but interestingly that previously reported revolver reported $0 today. Bringing my total reporting from 2 back to 1 rev (2 inst). Dollars from $6018.17 to $5543.17, aggregate 6.34% to 5.84%....and I lost 1 point on all EX2 scores, gained 2 points on CC3. Not even going to try to figure that one out So clearly it's not 6K nor <6%.

As @Anonymous reminded, testing after August may be challenging as my AoYA will be 1Y on 9/1, new scorecard.

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

Anonymous — Sun, 30 Aug 2020 21:32:34 GMT

Yeah great information by Cassie as always.

Could be 5% or $5000, like the simulator asks, I think about a $5000 amount.

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

Anonymous — Mon, 31 Aug 2020 02:37:20 GMT

I've always been of the opinion that raw dollar amounts matter in addition to utilization percentages. For those with very high relative credit limits (both individual and aggregate) the dollar amounts will have a greater impact of course than for those with smaller limits.

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

SouthJamaica — Mon, 31 Aug 2020 03:29:15 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
I've always been of the opinion that raw dollar amounts matter in addition to utilization percentages. For those with very high relative credit limits (both individual and aggregate) the dollar amounts will have a greater impact of course than for those with smaller limits.

I'm of the opinion that it's percentages, not raw dollar amounts.

I'm not able to prove it, but since we're talking about opinions.....

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

Anonymous — Mon, 31 Aug 2020 03:35:04 GMT

@SouthJamaica wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:
I've always been of the opinion that raw dollar amounts matter in addition to utilization percentages. For those with very high relative credit limits (both individual and aggregate) the dollar amounts will have a greater impact of course than for those with smaller limits.
I'm of the opinion that it's percentages, not raw dollar amounts.

I'm not able to prove it, but since we're talking about opinions.....

How can you say that it's all about percentages when 'Amount owed on revolving accounts is too high' is right there in the Reason Statement/Code list for all 3 bureaus?

It's proof positive that yes, dollar amounts do matter. To what extent we don't really know, but I know that you're one of the few in a position to even begin to test it.

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

Anonymous — Mon, 31 Aug 2020 05:55:51 GMT

^^^^Agreed.

Yeah we do know that it is a metric due to the published reason codes, so its factual, not opinion, that raw dollar amounts matter.

But as @Anonymous said, to what extent we can only speculate.

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

Anonymous — Mon, 31 Aug 2020 11:45:56 GMT

I've kept aggregate utilization constant at 2% or 3% but taken a single card from a tiny reported 2-digit balance to a 4-digit balance (bringing the single card from 1% utilization to say 6%) and have seen minor Fico score fluctuations. That's enough for me to say that raw dollar amounts are considered since I see no way that percentages would matter in that example.

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

SouthJamaica — Mon, 31 Aug 2020 14:52:08 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
@SouthJamaica wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:
I've always been of the opinion that raw dollar amounts matter in addition to utilization percentages. For those with very high relative credit limits (both individual and aggregate) the dollar amounts will have a greater impact of course than for those with smaller limits.
I'm of the opinion that it's percentages, not raw dollar amounts.

I'm not able to prove it, but since we're talking about opinions.....
How can you say that it's all about percentages when 'Amount owed on revolving accounts is too high' is right there in the Reason Statement/Code list for all 3 bureaus?

It's proof positive that yes, dollar amounts do matter. To what extent we don't really know, but I know that you're one of the few in a position to even begin to test it.

The choice of language in a FICO reason code is not "proof positive" of the content of the algorithm.

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

Anonymous — Mon, 31 Aug 2020 16:08:22 GMT

@SouthJamaica wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:
@SouthJamaica wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:
I've always been of the opinion that raw dollar amounts matter in addition to utilization percentages. For those with very high relative credit limits (both individual and aggregate) the dollar amounts will have a greater impact of course than for those with smaller limits.
I'm of the opinion that it's percentages, not raw dollar amounts.

I'm not able to prove it, but since we're talking about opinions.....
How can you say that it's all about percentages when 'Amount owed on revolving accounts is too high' is right there in the Reason Statement/Code list for all 3 bureaus?

It's proof positive that yes, dollar amounts do matter. To what extent we don't really know, but I know that you're one of the few in a position to even begin to test it.
The choice of language in a FICO reason code is not "proof positive" of the content of the algorithm.

It absolutely is proof.

The presence of the reason statement in that list tells us that the algorithm has code to penalize in some manner based on the dollar amount owed on all revolving accounts. When that code path gets executed and points are deducted, that reason statement can be thrown.

Whether or not we see the reason statement depends on the particular CMS and where it is in the list. Even with myFICO 3B monitoring, I sometimes see 2 reasons for my TU 8 score on the PDF report, where the score change alerts always show me 4 of them.

It might also be that high dollar balances on revolving accounts trigger (maybe a simple boolean flag at threshold, or weighted) a higher penalty for the percentage-based code and a reason statement related to percentages takes higher precedence.

You've never seen 'Amount owed on revolving accounts too high', yet you observe many score changes in the (0,9]% interval , so that's my reason for thinking it's some sort of trigger.

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

Trudy — Mon, 31 Aug 2020 18:03:55 GMT

@Trudy wrote:
Yeah I thought about the varying thresholds some people find below 8.9%. I noticed the below from EX's site today. I know 4% and below hasn't caused a change in EX F8 for me in the past. Not sure I can recall if I ever had 5% aggregate and/or without something else happening. I'll eventually find out. I will see when the one revolver reports $0 in a few days and drops me below 6%.

@Trudy wrote:
Thanks for the info @Anonymous . Good point regarding the dollar value of 3% in your example. This is not the 1st time where raw dollars seemed to support a change but previously I never saw it impact my F8 score and not sure it has in this case as I went from 0.50% ($475) to 6.43% ($6018.17). Thought possibly 6K may be a raw dollar figure but interestingly that previously reported revolver reported $0 today. Bringing my total reporting from 2 back to 1 rev (2 inst). Dollars from $6018.17 to $5543.17, aggregate 6.34% to 5.84%....and I lost 1 point on all EX2 scores, gained 2 points on CC3. Not even going to try to figure that one out So clearly it's not 6K nor <6%.

As @Anonymous reminded, testing after August may be challenging as my AoYA will be 1Y on 9/1, new scorecard.

Although EX showed the 1 acct reporting zero a day later and I somehow lost a point on EX2 scores, today I received the alert for the $0 bringing me below 6K. Surprisingly today my scores increased. EQ & TU reported the increase in UTL >6K and went from EQ (850 to 849) and TU (850 to 846). I also received an alert for EQ that the $0 balance reported and did not gain back any points but TU has not reported the $0 bal card.

Wish I had 1 more day in August (not really) to see if the $0 bal reporting to TU makes a difference but I assume I'll be back to 850 for EQ & TU and finally hit 850 with EX tomorrow since my AoYA hits 1yr 9/1.

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

Anonymous — Tue, 01 Sep 2020 18:24:43 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
I've kept aggregate utilization constant at 2% or 3% but taken a single card from a tiny reported 2-digit balance to a 4-digit balance (bringing the single card from 1% utilization to say 6%) and have seen minor Fico score fluctuations. That's enough for me to say that raw dollar amounts are considered since I see no way that percentages would matter in that example.

@Anonymous interestingly enough on a young thin card, Cassie observed, I believe, aggregate and individual thresholds at 4%.

While remaining with aggregate under 4%, any time one revolver went over 4% individual, there was a penalty.

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

Anonymous — Tue, 01 Sep 2020 18:34:51 GMT

@Trudy wrote:
@Trudy wrote:
Yeah I thought about the varying thresholds some people find below 8.9%. I noticed the below from EX's site today. I know 4% and below hasn't caused a change in EX F8 for me in the past. Not sure I can recall if I ever had 5% aggregate and/or without something else happening. I'll eventually find out. I will see when the one revolver reports $0 in a few days and drops me below 6%.

@Trudy wrote:
Thanks for the info @Anonymous . Good point regarding the dollar value of 3% in your example. This is not the 1st time where raw dollars seemed to support a change but previously I never saw it impact my F8 score and not sure it has in this case as I went from 0.50% ($475) to 6.43% ($6018.17). Thought possibly 6K may be a raw dollar figure but interestingly that previously reported revolver reported $0 today. Bringing my total reporting from 2 back to 1 rev (2 inst). Dollars from $6018.17 to $5543.17, aggregate 6.34% to 5.84%....and I lost 1 point on all EX2 scores, gained 2 points on CC3. Not even going to try to figure that one out   So clearly it's not 6K nor <6%.

As @Anonymous reminded, testing after August may be challenging as my AoYA will be 1Y on 9/1, new scorecard.
Although EX showed the 1 acct reporting zero a day later and I somehow lost a point on EX2 scores, today I received the alert for the $0 bringing me below 6K. Surprisingly today my scores increased. EQ & TU reported the increase in UTL >6K and went from EQ (850 to 849) and TU (850 to 846). I also received an alert for EQ that the $0 balance reported and did not gain back any points but TU has not reported the $0 bal card.

Wish I had 1 more day in August (not really) to see if the $0 bal reporting to TU makes a difference but I assume I'll be back to 850 for EQ & TU and finally hit 850 with EX tomorrow since my AoYA hits 1yr 9/1.

@Trudy keep in mind if you log into Experian, thats your pull for the day. It won't refresh again if anything changes later in the day.

Also keep in mind there have been weird coincidences where it seems the change has appeared and then the score change the following day or vice versa. I don't know if it has something to do with the order of operations or what. And it's not something that I have seen or read about often, but good to keep in mind.

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

Anonymous — Tue, 01 Sep 2020 21:46:11 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
@Anonymous interestingly enough on a young thin card, Cassie observed, I believe, aggregate and individual thresholds at 4%.

Right, so on a old/thick one like myself that's all the more evidence IMO that raw dollars can matter outside of percentage.

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

Trudy — Tue, 01 Sep 2020 23:04:45 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
@Trudy wrote:
@Trudy wrote:
Yeah I thought about the varying thresholds some people find below 8.9%. I noticed the below from EX's site today. I know 4% and below hasn't caused a change in EX F8 for me in the past. Not sure I can recall if I ever had 5% aggregate and/or without something else happening. I'll eventually find out. I will see when the one revolver reports $0 in a few days and drops me below 6%.

@Trudy wrote:
Thanks for the info @Anonymous . Good point regarding the dollar value of 3% in your example. This is not the 1st time where raw dollars seemed to support a change but previously I never saw it impact my F8 score and not sure it has in this case as I went from 0.50% ($475) to 6.43% ($6018.17). Thought possibly 6K may be a raw dollar figure but interestingly that previously reported revolver reported $0 today. Bringing my total reporting from 2 back to 1 rev (2 inst). Dollars from $6018.17 to $5543.17, aggregate 6.34% to 5.84%....and I lost 1 point on all EX2 scores, gained 2 points on CC3. Not even going to try to figure that one out   So clearly it's not 6K nor <6%.

As @Anonymous reminded, testing after August may be challenging as my AoYA will be 1Y on 9/1, new scorecard.
Although EX showed the 1 acct reporting zero a day later and I somehow lost a point on EX2 scores, today I received the alert for the $0 bringing me below 6K. Surprisingly today my scores increased. EQ & TU reported the increase in UTL >6K and went from EQ (850 to 849) and TU (850 to 846). I also received an alert for EQ that the $0 balance reported and did not gain back any points but TU has not reported the $0 bal card.

Wish I had 1 more day in August (not really) to see if the $0 bal reporting to TU makes a difference but I assume I'll be back to 850 for EQ & TU and finally hit 850 with EX tomorrow since my AoYA hits 1yr 9/1.

@Trudy keep in mind if you log into Experian, thats your pull for the day. It won't refresh again if anything changes later in the day.
Balance was updated at the time I logged in so I would normally expect to see a change in score at that time if one would occur.

Also keep in mind there have been weird coincidences where it seems the change has appeared and then the score change the following day or vice versa. I don't know if it has something to do with the order of operations or what. And it's not something that I have seen or read about often, but good to keep in mind.

Yep, I recall you mentioning the possible delay in score update otherwise I would feel completely lost about the change happening the next day, a change that I assume would happen when the account was updated the day before.

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

Anonymous — Wed, 02 Sep 2020 09:01:01 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:
I've kept aggregate utilization constant at 2% or 3% but taken a single card from a tiny reported 2-digit balance to a 4-digit balance (bringing the single card from 1% utilization to say 6%) and have seen minor Fico score fluctuations. That's enough for me to say that raw dollar amounts are considered since I see no way that percentages would matter in that example.
@Anonymous interestingly enough on a young thin card, Cassie observed, I believe, aggregate and individual thresholds at 4%.

While remaining with aggregate under 4%, any time one revolver went over 4% individual, there was a penalty.

That report is here.

EQ/TU 8 always give the +3/+1 award with aggregate in the (0,4]% interval on my scorecard - it doesn't matter for those 2 if one of the cards is at 5% or 7%. Also probably why many will miss this one if they only use EX monitoring - all the cards have to be at 4% or below.