Experian vs. Credit Karma

[Anonymous]

Ok, this isn't a question....I'm sharing this because I feel stupid, lol. But the lesson is good, and it was a positive outcome for me. So, I have been using Credit Karma and free Experian, to watch my scores. I wondered why my Experian score was like 40 points higher than my TU and Equifax scores (which were similar to the TU and the Eq scores on Credit Karma). Today, based on something I read on this forum, I decided to do the free trial of Experian, and was shocked that my TU and Eq scores are within 5 points of my Experian score! I came on here and found out that CK uses Vantage, so all this time I thought my TU and Eq score were around 735, they are actually like 40 points higher! I am thankful that I found you guys!! 
Experian: 782

TU: 779

Eq: 776

[SoCalGardener]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Ok, this isn't a question....I'm sharing this because I feel stupid, lol.

---

Silly!   There's no need to feel stupid. You're doing what we all started out doing, learning--and we're all still doing that. Shoot, I learn something new practically every single day. Keep up the good work, and congratulations on your nice scores!

[805orbust]

+1.  @SoCalGardener is spot on... you are not alone. But yes, Credit Karma is great (best?) For monitoring data, scores not so much... like really not so much. 😆

[Anonymous]

Thank you 😊 

[SoCalGardener]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Thank you 😊 

---

You're welcome! And don't ever think you're stupid just because you don't know something--yet.

[citymunky]

Weird.

Credit Kerma's TU and EQ VantageScores are usually higher than FICO scores. That's why most people say CK is "not accurate."

My EQ VantageScore is 720 but my EQ FICO score is about 100 point lower.

[EAJuggalo]

---

@citymunky wrote:

Weird.

Credit Kerma's TU and EQ VantageScores are usually higher than FICO scores. That's why most people say CK is "not accurate."

My EQ VantageScore is 720 but my EQ FICO score is about 100 point lower.

---

It depends on the profile.  Vantage seems to weigh utilization much heavier than FICO and actual derogs not nearly as much.  I have a clean report with high utilization and my Vantage scores are 90 points lower than my FICO scores.

[dragontears]

---

@EAJuggalo wrote:

---

@citymunky wrote:

Weird.

Credit Kerma's TU and EQ VantageScores are usually higher than FICO scores. That's why most people say CK is "not accurate."

My EQ VantageScore is 720 but my EQ FICO score is about 100 point lower.

---

It depends on the profile.  Vantage seems to weigh utilization much heavier than FICO and actual derogs not nearly as much.  I have a clean report with high utilization and my Vantage scores are 90 points lower than my FICO scores.

---

This.

There is no direct correlation between V3 and FICO (any model) as they weigh things differently. You can't just assume V3 is always higher than FICO. 

Sometimes the scores are very different, sometimes they are very close (which is the case for me).

This phenomenon also happens within in FICO, for example, people monitor their FICO 8 scores and are shocked when they apply for a mortgage and find out there is 100 point difference between them.

[coldfusion]

---

@EAJuggalo wrote:

---

@citymunky wrote:

Weird.

Credit Kerma's TU and EQ VantageScores are usually higher than FICO scores. That's why most people say CK is "not accurate."

My EQ VantageScore is 720 but my EQ FICO score is about 100 point lower.

---

It depends on the profile.  Vantage seems to weigh utilization much heavier than FICO and actual derogs not nearly as much.  I have a clean report with high utilization and my Vantage scores are 90 points lower than my FICO scores.

---

Many INQ + new cards reporting can also lead to a big hit with Vantage 3.0 scores even with clean history and low utilization, but to your point the amount and the direction (higher/lower) is very profile-specific.

[citymunky]

I'm not assuming.

This the general consensus across internet. I understand everyone credit profile is different.