accuracy of myfico simulator

[languedoctor]

Let me answer a couple questions up front: I recognize that these simulators can't be overly precise due to fears of someone reverse engineering the scoring formula. Relatedly (is that a word?), they are unrealistic in that they only allow you to vary one parameter (Sometimes two), while in real life there are tons of variables at work. So long-term projections are an educated guess at best.

My question is about the simulator's short term accuracy.

My basic credit profile basically is what it is. A month from now, there will be no new accounts, no new inquiries, no new derogatory marks . . . nothing. The only difference is that I've been reimbursed for a lot of work-related expenses, and I've paid my revolving balances down by $5k.

When I select "pay down balances by [$5000] over [1 month], the EQ projection is 650-690. Can other myfico users vouch for the accuracy of short-term projections like this? I don't care as much about precision. Obviously, 690 would be way better than 650 for mortgage preapproval. I'm more concerned about the possibility of an "out of range" simulation. That is, even when all the paydowns show up on the report, my Beacon5 comes back at 631 or something. That would be . . . annoying.

[languedoctor]

I couldn't find any other specific "tests" of the simulator searching the forum . . . so I'll be sure to report back predicted v actual FICO. It'll only be one data point, but better than nothing...

[cd2004]

Great question I was wondering the same thing because I have paid about $700 down on cc this month and waiting for it to update. When I choose the option that says pay down $700 over 1 mth it says 650-690 but if I choose pay down $700 of total overall revolving accts it says scored 620-640. I thought both would be the same thing but it gave different scores.

[ando35]

My guess is no. It told me my score will go up 70 points this year juts by paying bills. Doubt that.

[languedoctor]

Only one way to find out.

Unfortunately, I haven't followed my FICOs that closely since replacing my car last fall. At that point, I was mid-600s across all three, with revolving utilization around 50%

Now, I have a 6month old installment loan (the car), but utilization is lower than it was in the fall - around 35%. Current FICOs (down to 605-610) reflect 90% revolving util from floating work expenses. I'm not counting the inquiry for the car loan, because I've also had a couple drop off.

I dunno how badly that installment line is affecting me, but I've taken my revolving util from 90% (end of March) to about 35% (end of April). If that *doesn't* get me back up to the mid-600s, as the sim projects, I'll actually be really disappointed.

I've got score reports and simulations from EQ and TU98. I'll post accuracy for both when my tri-merge is pulled at the end of May. Now we're up to 2 data points, heh.

[RobertEG]

Yes, intentionally left broad for protection of trade secret information, so of limited use.

However, the simulations are provided by Fair Isaac, and are based on some form of their scoring algorithm, so no one else could do better.

Just know the assumptions going in. 

They can accurately project aging, as it simultaneously affects many categories, such as oldest account, average age of accounts, decline of impact of derogs, dropping of inquiries and accts <1yr, etc. without tipping off the scoring of any single item, so I would presume that the effects of aging would be fairly accurate.

With the significant variables in your case being aging and % util, I would assume it might be a better projection than some other scenarios.....

[bettercreditguy1]

That is because when you pay in full, the debt is gone, (assuming no additional charges). If you make payments,  you could pay the minimum due and really stretch it out or you could pay it off in a couple of months,  you could be late, charge more, etc. which then would escalate the unpaid balance faster. So the formula factors in some of those unknowns.

[kjm79]

IME, when playing with the score simulator on myFICO, is that the score change is closer to the lower range of the estimated score range given.  IMO I think the simulator works better in the short term vs the "pay down and pay your bills on time for 24 months" best scenario estimate.  Way to much can change in 2 years for that to be close to an accurate prediction.  I've always used the pay X for X month(s) and have wound up within the stated range, just the lower end of it. 

[languedoctor]

Thanks - that's reassuring.

In fact, it's exactly what I'm hoping. I made sure that I paid enough to get the lower end of the simulation a few points above where I thought I absolutely needed to be (640). I figured that the prospect of a, say, 70 point increase (upper range of sim) in one month was probably closer to fantasy than reality . . . though if FICO wants to prove me wrong, I won't complain!

[golo]

Any updates on this? I'm in the same boat,paid off some CC including a charge off that i suppose was included in the utilz.Also pay my car off,waiting for all that to post hopefully i get an alert,i will post back the results in a week or so in case anybody is interested.Thanks