Just a little data point about revolving balances of 30% or greater: I rarely have any accounts posting a balance > 28% or so. Last month I wasn't able to do my normal micromanaging, and 7 accounts wound up with reported balances > 30% (range of 32% to 60%). My FICO 8 scores fell out of the 700's, by an average of 55 points, to EQ 675, TU 693, and EX 682. Fast forward 14 days:
With all accounts now reporting at less than 30% on EX my FICO 8 score rebounded to 714 (+32).
With 6 of 7 reporting at less than 30% on EQ my FICO 8 score rebounded to 699 (+24).
With 5 of 7 reporting at less than 30% on TU my FICO 8 score rebounded to 721 (+28).
Interestingly, the mortgage scores didn't seem to care much : EQ FICO 5: 702 (+2), TU FICO 4: 742 (+21), and EX FICO 2: 709 (+1).
In anticipation of the usual questions as to whether these were credit unions, and whether they had limits >35k, the answer is: 5 out of 7 of the > 30% accounts were with credit unions, and 1 out of 7 was in the > 35% category.
UPDATE 2/14/20 Now all 3 bureaus correctly have all accounts reporting at < 30%. End result was EQ +35, TU +40, EX +32.
Good data. Thanks. Those are pretty significant losses/recoveries for crossing that threshold.
@Trudy wrote:Good data. Thanks. Those are pretty significant losses/recoveries for crossing that threshold.
Yes, that 30% line is not to be trifled with 
I know profiles are different. But as a note I didn't see such a hit when I reported 42% on EX. I only lost 3 pts but at the time EX was the one bureau where I had a 30D two months shy of 7yrs. Do you have a clean file across the board? I wonder if for me it also had something to do with the 42% being a new account??. I didn't lose anything for the new acct when it hit, only after the UTL hit approximately a month later.
Now I can't tell with EQ and TU as I was at 850 on both at the time and all I heard when inquiring about the minimal hit was that I had a buffer due to the scores. But I lost 7 and 10pts, not including the small hit for the new acct reporting about a month before balance reported.
But if yours are clean, then the UTL might impact me similarly should it happen now that all are clean and below 850. I don't want to find out 
Thanks for the warning
@Trudy wrote:I know profiles are different. But as a note I didn't see such a hit when I reported 42% on EX. I only lost 3 pts but at the time EX was the one bureau where I had a 30D two months shy of 7yrs. Do you have a clean file across the board? I wonder if for me it also had something to do with the 42% being a new account??. I didn't lose anything for the new acct when it hit, only after the UTL hit approximately a month later.
Now I can't tell with EQ and TU as I was at 850 on both at the time and all I heard when inquiring about the minimal hit was that I had a buffer due to the scores. But I lost 7 and 10pts, not including the small hit for the new acct reporting about a month before balance reported.
But if yours are clean, then the UTL might impact me similarly should it happen now that all are clean and below 850. I don't want to find out
I do have a 'clean' file across the board [I hate that terminology]
How many total tradelines (which should be irrelevant unless other accounts were shifting balances) and what was your aggregate at these various points?
@Revelate wrote:How many total tradelines
28
(which should be irrelevant unless other accounts were shifting balances) and what was your aggregate at these various points?
160k > 117k
@Anonymous wrote:
Well I think this makes it pretty explicit that there are additional penalties beyond just the highest individual card’s utilization.
Because even on the bureaus where you still have one that’s higher than 30 you still earn a significant amount of points, more than you would’ve gotten for jumping 1 ag. util threshold, so that means subsequent cards are going to take additional points under individual utilization of revolvers even if there is a card with higher utilization.
Perhaps confirming that, EQ moved up another 11 points when the 7th account dropped into place.
Perhaps refuting also confirming that, TU didn't budge rose 12 points when the 6th and 7th culprits finally came around.
Which is yet another example of why Nevertheless I don't treat our hypotheses as facts. There is just too much we don't know out here.
@SouthJamaica wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:
Well I think this makes it pretty explicit that there are additional penalties beyond just the highest individual card’s utilization.
Because even on the bureaus where you still have one that’s higher than 30 you still earn a significant amount of points, more than you would’ve gotten for jumping 1 ag. util threshold, so that means subsequent cards are going to take additional points under individual utilization of revolvers even if there is a card with higher utilization.Perhaps confirming that, EQ moved up another 11 points when the 7th account dropped into place.
Perhaps refuting that, TU didn't budge when the 6th and 7th culprits finally came around.
Which is yet another example of why I don't treat our hypotheses as facts. There is just too much we don't know out here.
Which is fair. Within the last 18 months there's been debunking of a number of commonly held beliefs.
Regarding utilization I'm pretty sure we have broad strokes (i.e. AZEO is optimal for everyone) but when it comes to exact factors and breakpoints, some of which appear to be scorecard dependent at least with FICO 8, there's some stuff which isn't concretely nailed down.
I'm basically 100% sure there's a line around 10% aggregate, Cassie's doing some good work trying to nail that down explicitly and you're well above that and the aggregate data is one where I think we don't have a lot of good data on... I can't concievably get to 100k+ on my credit cards, even if in my case that'd be more like 50k as you have more than double my TCL.
Maybe that'll change if I get the ability to do some godlike refinancing with NFCU, if I have anything left on the possible second mortgage (5.25% if I take that option) darned right that's getting transferred if I understand how it works correctly. As is I might lump sum it to get rid of PMI on the primary mortgage too. Lot to be said for no fee BT's when you can refinance 20K at a time or whatever especially when lenders push payments forward like my auto loan, that's another to consider 3.85% -> 1.99 or whatever and they will absolutely push my date in advance on that one.