Account Aging Metrics / Utilization spreadsheet

[Anonymous]

---

@ccquest wrote:
Made some of the changes in this version, didn't really get any time in recent days though and this still doesn't account for things regarding CA/CO accounts.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/lxbd3bs7g65lpmp/Account%20Aging%20Metrics%20%28for%20not%202019%20v2.1%29....

---

That's coming along nicely, @ccquest ! Everything calculated perfectly for me with 4 open revolvers and 1 closed installment.

Thank You for the acknowledgement in the first sheet. That was very nice.

[Anonymous]

@ccquest Oh wow that is coming along very nicely! Yes thank you for the acknowledgement, that is kind.

And I see you did do a change log LOL! Awesome! And I see you put extra sheets there for people that have authorized user accounts that don’t count or if they don’t know yet!

Awesome work!! 😁

[Anonymous]

@ccquestSuggestions:

Under revolver metrics, everywhere that says accounts should say revolvers.

Also where you have the dollar amounts should read “open revolving balances” and “all account balances,” not utilization. (Utilization is always a percentage; dollar amounts are balances, at least in fico-lingo, lol.)

Need a # of revolvers with a balance cell.

Then its good for clean profiles, IMHO. If they have a closed account with a balance, I think I'd just leave it as open while it has a balance.

If you wanna add the CO/CA: COs balances add to balances and to the numerator of revolver utilization. Its unknown how the CL is applied to the denominator for closed accounts with a balance or COs, so I suggest 2results to find the correct method. 

make CO and CA options and then:

For CAs, you cd just put a total CA balance cell, (they don't affect balances and utilization.)

1. Add CO (chargeoff) balances to total open revolving balances. 

2. put an additional cell saying “TOL + chargeoff limits” (TOL + CO CLs)

3. and a 2nd that says "TOL with chargeoff balances as their limits." (TOL + CO balances.)

4. Then put 2 more cells, each with utilization calculations using total revolving balances over the results from 2 & 3

@ccquestEdited 10.6.20 10:56 Ignore earlier post. Looking great look forward to the next update!

[ccquest]

@Anonymous I didn't forget about you! Just been limited on time for this and finally got some time tonight, so take a look at this one and let me know what you think. I believe I handled everything from that last post, maybe not written as nicely as would be wanted but IDK!

Here's a new sheet now.

[Anonymous]

---

@ccquest wrote:

@Anonymous I didn't forget about you! Just been limited on time for this and finally got some time tonight, so take a look at this one and let me know what you think. I believe I handled everything from that last post, maybe not written as nicely as would be wanted but IDK!

Here's a new sheet now.

---

@ccquest totally understand I've been busy as a cat on a hot tin roof myself LOL. I'll check that out shortly! 😉

Plus it worked out better because I edited my suggestions several times.

[Anonymous]

@ccquest OK I think a couple things are my fault because I went back and edited my post and I think you may not have caught the edit.

anyway let me go through a couple things I'll number paragraphs so you can respond:

1. give me a number of open revolvers with a balance cell under revolver metrics please. 

2. OK CAs(collections) are a totally separate category, all to themselves. they should not be added into any limits, utilization or any balances anywhere except a separate balance cell for them and that's it. That's my fault because I wrote before I thought things out, was tired and I originally told you to include them accidentally. remove CAs (collections) from all metrics/calcs except their own balance cell.

3. OK under the Beta, I just thought of something. There are two types of charge-offs. Loans and revolvers. I think they would both be calculated in their respective categories. So we have two options.

We can just proceed with the Beta for revolver chargeoffs and learn how it works and then we can update it and use only the correct method and add it for loans, or we can go ahead and do all the metrics for both. Even if we're going to do both, I think we should probably do one as a pattern and the second will follow it, make it simpler to execute.

So I suggest updating language to R chargeoff or revolver chargeoff. I think it'll be easier having to calculate multiple metrics to figure it out, just to do it for revolver chargeoffs first till we figure it out. Thoughts?

4. OK under the beta metrics, you are removing the CAs, but when you say revolvers there is that all revolvers or just open ones? Because it should be just open ones and I should've told you to write O or open there in the label. Please make sure that's just open revolvers and please label it.

5. did you add charge-offs into ages? if not, do so please. 

6. I'm not totally sure about the how it treats closed accounts with a balance, so let me go read a couple threads and get back to you on that. We may need to lay it out with separate utilization metrics like we did the charge-offs, but before you do that work im gonna read a couple threads. 

Edit:

7. what do you think about adding a counter for inquiries? And separating them into credit card, SL, car, mortgage, other loan, other HP.

[Anonymous]

@ccquest OK I just wanted to give an update: I have clarification that CA's, (collections), do not count towards any aging Metrics or amounts owed (Balance or Utilization) Metrics; they are only  Tradelines for purposes of the payment history category. 

so the only calculation or calculations that should be made for collections really should be how many and the date of opening of the most recent is really the only relevant facts, but I suppose if one wanted to, they could put a cell for total amount due on all collections, but I don't think that's really going to be relevant to anything, except maybe the setting of the initial penalty for it, it's not gonna affect any amounts owed Metrics, like balances or utilization. 

so the calculations that we were expecting to be able to need to make for collections are unnecessary now that we know that they do not affect those categories. 

[SouthJamaica]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

@ccquest OK I just wanted to give an update: I have clarification that CA's, (collections), do not count towards any aging Metrics or amounts owed (Balance or Utilization) Metrics; they are only  Tradelines for purposes of the payment history category. 

so the only calculation or calculations that should be made for collections really should be how many and the date of opening of the most recent is really the only relevant facts, but I suppose if one wanted to, they could put a cell for total amount due on all collections, but I don't think that's really going to be relevant to anything, except maybe the setting of the initial penalty for it, it's not gonna affect any amounts owed Metrics, like balances or utilization. 

so the calculations that we were expecting to be able to need to make for collections are unnecessary now that we know that they do not affect those categories. 

---

Just curious, how did you find that out?

[Anonymous]

---

@SouthJamaica wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

@ccquest OK I just wanted to give an update: I have clarification that CA's, (collections), do not count towards any aging Metrics or amounts owed (Balance or Utilization) Metrics; they are only  Tradelines for purposes of the payment history category. 

so the only calculation or calculations that should be made for collections really should be how many and the date of opening of the most recent is really the only relevant facts, but I suppose if one wanted to, they could put a cell for total amount due on all collections, but I don't think that's really going to be relevant to anything, except maybe the setting of the initial penalty for it, it's not gonna affect any amounts owed Metrics, like balances or utilization. 

so the calculations that we were expecting to be able to need to make for collections are unnecessary now that we know that they do not affect those categories. 

---

Just curious, how did you find that out?

---

@SouthJamaica RobertEG clarified in another thread with reasoning. Makes sense and seems to fit with the data too.

It's not a tradeline for purposes of the other categories because it's not an account that you opened, rather an attempt to collect an already existing debt, so it only affects payment history.

The other categories were already affected by the actual tradeline from the actual account.  

[Anonymous]

@ccquest also I updated the total list of aging Metrics for Version 8 in the Primer. So there are some additional Aging metrics that you may want to add.