cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

57% Account --> 0, EX FICO 8 --> +10

SouthJamaica
Super Contributor

57% Account --> 0, EX FICO 8 --> +10

My highest utilization revolving account dropped from 57% to zero.  This caused drops in (a) number of accounts with balances from 10/32 to 9/32, and (b) overall utilization from rounded 8% to rounded 7%. I still have one account at > 30% (32%).

 

Effect on several EX FICO scores:

 

EX FICO 8                      +10

EX FICO Auto 8             +12

EX FICO Bankcard 8    +11

EX FICO 2                      +-0


Total revolving limits 663000 (585000 reporting) FICO 8: EQ 716 TU 747 EX 713

16 REPLIES 16
Jnbmom
Community Leader
Senior Contributor

Re: 57% Account --> 0, EX FICO 8 --> +10

Congrats on boost, always nice to get some points. I would think it would be a little higher but I guess over utilization is the bigger factor? 

 

FICO clear as mud😯

EXP 758 TU 783 EQ 729
Message 2 of 17
SouthJamaica
Super Contributor

Re: 57% Account --> 0, EX FICO 8 --> +10


@Jnbmom wrote:

Congrats on boost, always nice to get some points. I would think it would be a little higher but I guess over utilization is the bigger factor? 

 

FICO clear as mud😯


Just edited my post to mention that I still do have one account >30% (32%).


Total revolving limits 663000 (585000 reporting) FICO 8: EQ 716 TU 747 EX 713

Message 3 of 17
BrutalBodyShots
Super Contributor

Re: 57% Account --> 0, EX FICO 8 --> +10

That sounds about right.  I was thinking more like 7-8 points in crossing the 48.9% threshold on an individual card while keeping aggregate utilization in the same (ideal) range. 

 

Looking back at my data, in going from 59% highest card utilization to 24% highest card utilization, I only gained 8 points on EX FICO 8 and that was of course with crossing 2 potential thresholds.  The difference though was that it was the same card going from 59% to 24%, so I did not have one fewer account with a balance.

 

 

Message 4 of 17
SouthJamaica
Super Contributor

Re: 57% Account --> 0, EX FICO 8 --> +10


@BrutalBodyShots wrote:

That sounds about right.  I was thinking more like 7-8 points in crossing the 48.9% threshold on an individual card while keeping aggregate utilization in the same (ideal) range. 

 

Looking back at my data, in going from 59% highest card utilization to 24% highest card utilization, I only gained 8 points on EX FICO 8 and that was of course with crossing 2 potential thresholds.  The difference though was that it was the same card going from 59% to 24%, so I did not have one fewer account with a balance.

 

 


It's possible that my profile reacts more vigorously than more seasoned ones to utilization events because of its somewhat extreme newness (AAoA, AoYA, inquiries).


Total revolving limits 663000 (585000 reporting) FICO 8: EQ 716 TU 747 EX 713

Message 5 of 17
BrutalBodyShots
Super Contributor

Re: 57% Account --> 0, EX FICO 8 --> +10

That may definitely be the case, as these things are always very profile-specific.

Message 6 of 17
Thomas_Thumb
Senior Contributor

Re: 57% Account --> 0, EX FICO 8 --> +10


@BrutalBodyShots wrote:

That sounds about right.  I was thinking more like 7-8 points in crossing the 48.9% threshold on an individual card while keeping aggregate utilization in the same (ideal) range. 

 

Looking back at my data, in going from 59% highest card utilization to 24% highest card utilization, I only gained 8 points on EX FICO 8 and that was of course with crossing 2 potential thresholds.  The difference though was that it was the same card going from 59% to 24%, so I did not have one fewer account with a balance.

 


SJ, I suspect your profile is more sensitive given you have a few accounts under 12 months age. Age of youngest account(s) is a scorecard assignment factor. I know the young/thin scorecard reacts more strongly to individual card utilization(s).

 

Although this may not be relevent in your case - I have also wondered if a "new" account reporting a high utilization could have more signal strength than an "established" account reporting the same high utilization. In other words could a "new" 3 month old account reporting a high utilization be viewed as higher risk than a "seasoned", 10 year old account?

 

BTW -  How many cards were reporting balances before vs after the score update and how many reporting were above 29% UT before/after? Perhaps # accounts dropping below a given UT% threshold can influence score (outside the influence on aggrwegte utiliztion). 

 

 

Fico 9: .......EQ 850 TU 850 EX 850
Fico 8: .......EQ 850 TU 850 EX 850
Fico 4 .....:. EQ 809 TU 823 EX 830 EX Fico 98: 842
Fico 8 BC:. EQ 892 TU 900 EX 900
Fico 8 AU:. EQ 887 TU 897 EX 899
Fico 4 BC:. EQ 826 TU 858, EX Fico 98 BC: 870
Fico 4 AU:. EQ 831 TU 872, EX Fico 98 AU: 861
VS 3.0:...... EQ 835 TU 835 EX 835
CBIS: ........EQ LN Auto 940 EQ LN Home 870 TU Auto 902 TU Home 950
Message 7 of 17
Birdman7
Super Contributor

Re: 57% Account --> 0, EX FICO 8 --> +10

Data points: I made a single charge on an established revolver, brought me to 56% util on that card, 13-14% aggregate, well....-15 TU, -14 EX, -16 EQ. All other revolvers <10%, except one at 19%..... Paid a couple small balance revolvers to 0 and paid 56% revolver to 29%. So all revolvers reporting 0%, except the 29% revolver, the 19% revolver and one revolver reporting 8%. (The 8% revolver reports to EQ and EX only.) After payment, +13 TU, +14 EX, and +11 EQ.
-Scoring wisdom: Credit Scoring Primer, Payment History, Amount of Debt, Length of History/New Credit, Mix/Disputes/Freezes/Searches, Mortgage Scores/Negative Reason Codes/V.9, Helpful Links,
Anonymous’s Reason Statements Thread,
iv's friendly statement to reason statement concordance,

ccquest’s Workbook to calculate metrics.
Clean/Thick/Mature/No New Revolver - 8,9; Clean/Thick/Mature/No New Account - 5/4/2.
Correct Ag.Util. under 5% all times. (Oldest/avg varies. Estimates above.)
Real world mortgage maxes are: EQ5-818, TU4-839, EX2-844.




(Everything said is JMHO and is not endorsed by FICO or MF. I have no affiliation with either, just a grateful member.)
Message 8 of 17
SouthJamaica
Super Contributor

Re: 57% Account --> 0, EX FICO 8 --> +10


@Thomas_Thumb wrote:

@BrutalBodyShots wrote:

That sounds about right.  I was thinking more like 7-8 points in crossing the 48.9% threshold on an individual card while keeping aggregate utilization in the same (ideal) range. 

 

Looking back at my data, in going from 59% highest card utilization to 24% highest card utilization, I only gained 8 points on EX FICO 8 and that was of course with crossing 2 potential thresholds.  The difference though was that it was the same card going from 59% to 24%, so I did not have one fewer account with a balance.

 


SJ, I suspect your profile is more sensitive given you have a few accounts under 12 months age. Age of youngest account(s) is a scorecard assignment factor. I know the young/thin scorecard reacts more strongly to individual card utilization(s).

 

Although this may not be relevent in your case - I have also wondered if a "new" account reporting a high utilization could have more signal strength than an "established" account reporting the same high utilization. In other words could a "new" 3 month old account reporting a high utilization be viewed as higher risk than a "seasoned", 10 year old account?

 

BTW -  How many cards were reporting balances before vs after the score update

 

10/32 vs 9/32

 

and how many reporting were above 29% UT before/after?

 

2 vs 1

 

Perhaps # accounts dropping below a given UT% threshold can influence score (outside the influence on aggrwegte utiliztion). 

 

 


 


Total revolving limits 663000 (585000 reporting) FICO 8: EQ 716 TU 747 EX 713

Message 9 of 17
Thomas_Thumb
Senior Contributor

Re: 57% Account --> 0, EX FICO 8 --> +10

Thanks for the additional info.

The magnitude of score shift seems to be pointing toward scorecard assignment/profile as an influencing factor.

Fico 9: .......EQ 850 TU 850 EX 850
Fico 8: .......EQ 850 TU 850 EX 850
Fico 4 .....:. EQ 809 TU 823 EX 830 EX Fico 98: 842
Fico 8 BC:. EQ 892 TU 900 EX 900
Fico 8 AU:. EQ 887 TU 897 EX 899
Fico 4 BC:. EQ 826 TU 858, EX Fico 98 BC: 870
Fico 4 AU:. EQ 831 TU 872, EX Fico 98 AU: 861
VS 3.0:...... EQ 835 TU 835 EX 835
CBIS: ........EQ LN Auto 940 EQ LN Home 870 TU Auto 902 TU Home 950
Message 10 of 17
Advertiser Disclosure: The offers that appear on this site are from third party advertisers from whom FICO receives compensation.