CK scores much higher???

[nate79416]

I just checked my score on Credit Karma..its like a 50 pt difference?? Not sure about that. I signed up because I read they update more, I have a few collections that are suppose to be removed soon. Anyway thats a big difference. TU here is 607 TU on ck is 665

[Anonymous]

Credit Karma does not give FICO scores, it is clearly posted on their site that they give Vantage Scores. Vantage scores are useless, ignore them. The only thing that Credit Karma is good for is to see what is on your Equifax and Transunion reports and to be targeted by the advertisers that pay for the site. IGNORE SCORES ON CREDIT KARMA!!!

[Anonymous]

The vantage scoring system was created by the 3 credit bureau's.  There are differences in how they score.  I actually like how they score things better.  Some differences are, they don't score a collection if it is paid.  Fico dings you if it is a collection, period.  Vantage doesn't calculate medical collections under $200.  Fico dings you for a collection.  On the flip side though, Vantage doesn't score an account that is closed whereas Fico will give credit for up to 10 years.  Unfortunately, it isn't as widely used by lenders as Fico.  Some lenders actually do use the vantage scores though.  As mentioned, credit karma is great for monitoring your report but don't focus on anything more than that.

When applying for credit, know your fico scores.  

[Anonymous]

I generally use CK to see how things change on a week to week basis, rather than for the score itself. For example, if your CK score goes up five points, there is likely a driver of it, and your actual FICO scores will also likely increase. Sometimes, it makes no difference, but then you learn the differences between what matters to Vantage and what matters to FICO. 

[takeshi74]

---

@nate79416 wrote:

I just checked my score on Credit Karma..its like a 50 pt difference??

---

Never expect different scoring models to produce the same score even if you're comparing FICO to FICO.  As stated above and on the CK site, CK provides VantageScore 3.0.  You should expect different algorithms to produce different results.  The CRA, the scoring model and even the date the data was pulled from the CRA (as data can change over time) to generate the score all have an impact on the score.

If you visit the VantageScore site you'll see that VantageScore isn't even marketed as a model to mimic FICO models but as a "more predictive, more consistent and more stable" model.

[Revelate]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

The vantage scoring system was created by the 3 credit bureau's.  There are differences in how they score.  I actually like how they score things better.  Some differences are, they don't score a collection if it is paid.  Fico dings you if it is a collection, period.  Vantage doesn't calculate medical collections under $200.  Fico dings you for a collection.  On the flip side though, Vantage doesn't score an account that is closed whereas Fico will give credit for up to 10 years.  Unfortunately, it isn't as widely used by lenders as Fico.  Some lenders actually do use the vantage scores though.  As mentioned, credit karma is great for monitoring your report but don't focus on anything more than that.

When applying for credit, know your fico scores.  

---

Vantage does score closed accounts AFAIK.

Think somewhere CK's interface of yesteryear confused the issue.  Just because they calculated (and still do somewhere) off open accounts, has absolutely no bearing as to whether VS does or not.

FWIW every other VS peddler has my closed accounts factored into AAOA just like FICO.  I'd be awfully surprised if the CRA's discounted closed accounts, like absolutely astonished even .

[Existentialist]

---

@nate79416 wrote:

I just checked my score on Credit Karma..its like a 50 pt difference?? Not sure about that. I signed up because I read they update more, I have a few collections that are suppose to be removed soon. Anyway thats a big difference. TU here is 607 TU on ck is 665

---

@Anonymous is great @ some things - poor @ others. And although they tout VS as being created by the three bureaus, as a matter of practicality the scores on the whole are meaningless. In fact although I will submit that some lenders may use VS I will equally submit that in all likelihood it makes more sense that it would be used in conjuction with Fico(?) (possibly another seconday scoring measure) as opposed to being a lenders stand alone measurement for calculating credit. Furthermore given that the numbers they use are unsubstantiated it is questionable that they can even be perceived as truthful. We are therefore left to simply accept their word that its methodology is (as they claim) 'more intuitive'.

Too many unknown variables (to me) makes it a fairly easy decision although countless CK members continue to rely on VS only to end up frustrated when as you've seen for yourself... the numbers dont quite add up. Again, there are things they do well but using their scores as a benchmark for attaining credit would be risky (and dare I say foolhardy) to say the least. Bottom line....

Its a simple ? of which scoring model is most reliable?