1 revolver from 0%-48% = 4 point drop

[Anonymous]

Yeah, a $500 limit card would be absolutely fantastic for testing purposes.  The card I reported ~$5800 on has a $12,300 limit, so it's a bit too high to have any real fun with testing on my average salary.

I do think that while AZEO benefits just about everyone, it doesn't benefit everyone equally.  On my profile if I lose 3-5 points from going from AZE1 with a $10 balance reported to AZE3 with $6000 in balances reported to me it isn't incredibly beneficial in terms of scoring. 

[Thomas_Thumb]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Just a data point here in taking aggregate utilization from 1% to 4% due to taking a single card from 0% to 48% (47.5% rounding up) resulted in a 4 point drop on my EX FICO 08 score.  Number of cards with a balance reported went from 2 to 3 out of 8, so that factor wouldn't have played a role in the drop.

---

BBS - Some say that with Fico 8: 33% cards reporting may be a boundry in addition to 50%. I would hesitate to attribute the change to individual UT% since # cards was not held constant - or reduced. Now if you went from 3 card to 2 cards reporting with one increasing to 48% that would be more convincing.

With respect to Fico 04 I see an impact for each of the following:

EQ: 3 => 4, 4 => 5, 5 => 6 with the score drop increasing in magnitude for each added card.

TU: 4=> 5, 5 => 6

I see no change 2 => 3 for either EQ or TU. I have not tested 2 => 1 as the minimum # cards I report balances on is 2 each month.

The above indicates there is more in play than some exclusive 50% threshold for cards reporting balances.

[Anonymous]

I hear you. Like I said earlier, I'll have the opportunity in 2 weeks to bring one of my 2 reported small balances to $0, thus returning me to 2 of 8 revolvers with balances while still having one revolver at 48% utilization. If the 4 points return, it's the number of cards (or accounts) with balances. If not, the 48% util was the cause.

[atarvuzdar]

"Small" data point, but fascinating thread.

On my profile, EX seemed more interested in my overall util dropping from 11% to <1% as well as no individual account over 9%, and didn't change from the point where I had exactly half of my accounts reporting a balance to when I went to AZEO.

EQ seems to care that I'm under 50% of accounts reporting--no change between this and AZEO.

TU seems to care that I have one third or fewer accounts reporting--no change between this and AZEO.

For my own personal profile it seems that, overall, so long as I'm @ or under one third of accounts I'm maximizing for all 3 CBs. (ETA: based on the movement of this one account, on my profile both the individual util and the overall # of accounts reporting would have impacted my score, depending on the CB. Wondering if it's the same for BBS).

Looking forward to hearing the update going from 3/8 to 2/8 on your report, BBS!