Depends what version of the algorithm we're talking about.
I have a suspicion that recent data weights more heavily on FICO 8; actually I have a couple datapoints from both a 30 day late on TU and a tax lien on all 3 which strongly suggests that is indeed the case. In JB's case what I suspect happened was the vast majority of the damage was already factored in a recent 60 day late, and the subsequent entries on the path to the strategic foreclosure didn't really affect things as much.
Whether we consider lates being bucketable or not it would likely happen still the same way: fact is any recent dirty mark on FICO 8 is a big deal (or on any clean file as it was on JB's case regardless of algorithm), as it ages I would expect the 90/120+ days to be more dominant though as I saw a very sharp rise in my FICO 8 scores when a brand spanking new tax lien hit the six month mark... but I'd already had a tax lien from years ago so at that point it trended more like FICO 04 where I only lost a whopping 5 points for the same tax lien when it was tacked on to my account.
The interesting thing to me in JB's data was the severity of the 60 day late vs. the 30 day late, which suggests algorithmically a 30 day is something of an oopsie, but missing 3 payments to get a 60+ day late is a big deal from the algorithm perspective and past that isn't much worse in their analytics.
@Anonymous wrote:I don't think that's accurate.
Here are the first 2 articles that come up when I Google whether a 60 day derogatory is considered minor or major:
http://moneyminiblog.com/credit-cards/effects-minor-major-credit-delinquencies/
https://blog.mint.com/credit/can-missing-just-one-payment-affect-your-credit-score-1213/
Both state that 30/60 are considered minor and anything 90+ is considered major. It's also been said many times on this forum that 30/60 day late payments are viewed exactly the same in terms of FICO scoring and length of time that they impact scoring.
I'm not sure why at 60 days you saw the greatest hit to your scores compared to 30 days.
My personal experience tells me that a 60 day late is a major derogatory:
But even after reading those two links you provided, I decided to see how FICO describes a 60 day late - evidently, FICO says 60 days late is a serious delinquency:
Where are you getting this information from BBS? 90 day late = BK / tax lien? We've seen marked differences in scores at the 6.5ish year mark between a tax lien and a 90 day late on FICO 8 (~30 points); I'm not certain that lates are bucketable at all actually, that may just move you within your bucket.
In JB's case the 60 day late was on the way to a foreclosure, it wasn't brought current in the following month. Also I can emphatically state on my own date that a 30 day late doesn't matter whether it was brought current, the damage was done and is still there several months later comparitively. The model algorithm branches based on 30 vs. 60 day late?
Sure I wasn't a clean file but a late is a late is a late, whether the account is now current or not, or closed or not, is irrelevant based on all anecdotal data we've seen to date.
I think you're ascribing too much complexity to the algorithm TBH.
@Anonymous wrote:But a late isn't a late isn't a late. Are you suggesting that a 30 day late and a 120 day late carry equal weight in terms of scoring? I certainly don't think so. It's been said a million times on this forum that 30 and 60 day lates are grouped together as minor derogs and can have a big initial hit to ones score but it will recover and at the 2 year mark arguably not impact score at all for the remaining 5 years that it's on ones reports. Conversely, it's been said a million times on this forum that 90+ day late payments are considered major derogs and that their dents to your score will be longer lasting, impacting scores up to the full 7 years. Whether on this forum or in reading articles online, 99% of the time I read that the defining line between a minor and major late payment derog exists between the 60 day late and 90 day late time frame.
What I've also read is that a 60 day late is however viewed as a major derog (equal score dent impact of a 90+ day late) if it is current. Once it's not current, it's scored as a minor derog. I personally have never checked my scores the month I had a 60 day late reported, then paid the account current and checked my scores the following cycle once the account was reported current to see if I got back a portion of the lost points from the 60 day late so I can't verify this.
As far as BK/tax liens, I know absolutely nothing about them as the only derogs I have are late payments so I can't speak on those. I have however invested a considerable amount of time in studying up on the impact of different severity late payments over different periods of time across different profiles in an attempt to educated myself on what I could expect with my profile since again, they are my only type of derog.
No, what I meant was a 60 day late is a 60 day late, and a 90 day late is a 90 day late regardless of what the tradeline status is, only factor is how long ago it occurred in terms of it's impact. Never would I suggest that the severity of the deliquency didn't matter.
I have read that there's a line between 60 and 90 day lates, but how that shows up in the algorithm is unknown. Where did you read that if you paid the 60 day late to current that it would improve your score? That's suspect, and sounds like something made up by a CSR or collection agent to get someone to pay frankly.