FICO vs. FAKO - AAoA Difference?

[Anonymous]

I searched the forums but couldn't find an answer to my question. If it is answered somewhere, I apologize.

---

Checking my three credit reports on Experian, I see that all three of my AAoA are between 6-7 years. When I login to Credit Karma, both my TransUnion and Equifax show that my AAoA is only around a year and a half.  I know that you shouldn't rely much on what is displayed on Credit Karma. I'm just curious why there is such a discrepency in the AAoA between the two scoring models.

[Anonymous]

Credit Karma front end software disregards closed accounts in their AAoA calculations.

[Anonymous]

Ahh, that pretty much sums it up. Thanks @oldman87.

When creditors look at AAoA, do they use the FICO variant? 

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

@Anonymous, that pretty much sums it up. Thanks @Anonymous.

When creditors look at AAoA, do they use the FICO variant? 

---

No creditor uses pieces of one scoring model combined with pieces of another.  (e.g. FICO 8's interpretation of AAoA plus Vantage's model for CC balances.)  They use the entire model, which is what they get when they purchase your score -- e.g. Vantage 3, FICO 8 Classic, FICO 8 Auto, etc.

A better way of framing your question would be: Is a creditor more likely to use a FICO score over Vantage?  The answer is Very Much So.

BTW, the previous responder did not say that the actual scoring model of Vantage and FICO (on the back end) interpret AAoA differently.  He said that the front-end summary page of Credit Karma displays AAoA differently from most front end summary pages.  The actual back end scoring model of Vantage and FICO include closed and open accounts in their age calculations.