Just a little data point. A relative with a fairly thin, fairly young, file -- 1 store card + 3 bank cards -- got hit with "all zero" penalty; it was 14 points in FICO 8.
Wow, that's a significant hit.
Thank you for sharing the dp.
(+102) | 
(+106) | 
(+151)
You'd think logically that a thick, mature file would take a bigger hit then thin, young. Seems awfully penal to me for someone young taking 14 points to pay off all their cards. They like when you pay interest I guess.
@TheKid2 wrote:You'd think logically that a thick, mature file would take a bigger hit then thin, young. Seems awfully penal to me for someone young taking 14 points to pay off all their cards. They like when you pay interest I guess.
Yeah well I find both the "all zero" penalty and the "no open loan" penalty to be oddly penal.
My penalties are -21 EX & -25 TU. I accidentally hit it last month.
No monitoring on EQ, so I don't know that one. My ave age is around 8yrs.
@SouthJamaica wrote:
@TheKid2 wrote:You'd think logically that a thick, mature file would take a bigger hit then thin, young. Seems awfully penal to me for someone young taking 14 points to pay off all their cards. They like when you pay interest I guess.
Yeah well I find the "all zero" penalty to be oddly penal.
I wonder WHY users that use <10% of their credit during any given month are some minute percentage more trustworthy with credit than those who use 0% of their revolving credit in any given month.
I'm sure they have the data that suggests that it's true, but I'd be curious to learn why it's true.
@GZG wrote:
@SouthJamaica wrote:
@TheKid2 wrote:You'd think logically that a thick, mature file would take a bigger hit then thin, young. Seems awfully penal to me for someone young taking 14 points to pay off all their cards. They like when you pay interest I guess.
Yeah well I find the "all zero" penalty to be oddly penal.
I wonder WHY users that use <10% of their credit during any given month are some minute percentage more trustworthy with credit than those who use 0% of their revolving credit in any given month.
I'm sure they have the data that suggests that it's true, but I'd be curious to learn why it's true.
Curious as well, but I'm guessing this leaks into the question of profit for lenders who use the FICO service. It's not that someone with no balances is more RISKY, it seems like that person is less ATTRACTIVE to lend since they aren't paying any interest when they don't carry any revolving balance at all. It could be that the ideal consumer isn't all about RISK, it also factors in ones willingness to pay some interest (profit for the lender).
I second that... I'm still under 800 due to the no open loan penalty.. My Alliant loan ran out... and I havent been able to break 800 since.... was nicely over that hump before the loan closed....
-J
@OmarR wrote:My penalties are -21 EX & -25 TU. I accidentally hit it last month.
No monitoring on EQ, so I don't know that one. My ave age is around 8yrs.
Thanks for adding to our data pool 
@GZG wrote:
@SouthJamaica wrote:
@TheKid2 wrote:You'd think logically that a thick, mature file would take a bigger hit then thin, young. Seems awfully penal to me for someone young taking 14 points to pay off all their cards. They like when you pay interest I guess.
Yeah well I find the "all zero" penalty to be oddly penal.
I wonder WHY users that use <10% of their credit during any given month are some minute percentage more trustworthy with credit than those who use 0% of their revolving credit in any given month.
I'm sure they have the data that suggests that it's true, but I'd be curious to learn why it's true.
They say they do but I'm skeptical. They claim their stats show that people with zero balances are "slightly" more likely to default than people with low balances. But there's nothing "slight" about the penalty. Between the two of them, you could easily get a 50 point drop in your FICO 8's. And they have never shown any details as to the data on which they claim to rely.
IMHO the real reason for the penalty is to weed out the less profitable people, who don't like being in debt.