Trying to understand how ck and fico are THAT different.

[elleagle]

I am having a hard time following the whole Vantage score calculation.

These are my scores as of now:

From CK:

TU: 598      EQ:  612

myFICO:

TU:  750     EQ:  685

Vantage Score for Equifax dropped 27 points today from these credit changes:

2 Collection accounts removed  (Was listed as started in Dec 2017  for $1092 and $198 from the same place)

Balance Decreases of:

$34 on CC (Util from 94% to 93%)

$4 on CC (Util from 4% to 0%)

$300 on auto loan.

Now 0 derogs, 59 total accounts, AAoA 4.5 years, 23% overall Credit Card use, 100% Payment History.

I would have expected to Vantage score to rise signifigantly.  A more pronounced drop happened on the TU when the collections were removed from there...642 to 598.  Can anyone explain this kind of behavior?

[Anonymous]

Two different scoring models, two different algorithms. Trying to compare them is like comparing apples to oranges and you'll drive yourself mad if you do that.

[Medic981]

Vantage Scores, developed by the 3Bs, are a failed attempt to compete with FICO and get into the credit scoring business. Thank Goodness, as my VS are much lower than my FICO scores!

[Anonymous]

In my experience CK / Vantage 3.0 scores are VERY susceptible to minor changes in account balances, inquiries, etc. - while FICO scores are a little more subdued. There's really no reason to try to understand why they work the way they do. Their worthless. No lender I'm aware of uses those scores to make lending decisions. They should be disclaimered with "*Purely for entertainment purposes only."

[Jnbmom]

CK should only be used for montitoring purposes  period.

Their scores don't mean squat.

[Medic981]

I suspect that CK offers VS as well as anyone else who shows VS because they are cheaper than FICO.