@Anonymous wrote:EDIT: Alliant is no longer offering a $50 bonus if you open a checking account with them.
They have offered better bonuses before ($150) and if a person is looking to make some spare change from bank signup bonuses, he can do much better even than $150. To name only one, Chase offers a $300 bonus for their checking account. Many other big bonuses are out there.
Lucky I got the 80 then, 
@Anonymous wrote:When did you get it?
If speaking to moi, November 2014, did not pay down until spring of this year. I was following the 700 guide without filing bankruptcy, good to rebuild credit with (build some history, get rid of baddies, then apply for prime). I started to pay down, and noticed the next pay date was auto pushed out (alaska USA). So I went with it. It's only 48 months, but only 3.2% interest.
The conundrum, open another, or see what happens with BECU PLOC reporting as open installment loan without a balance. When the PLOC appeared on my reports, all scores went up about five to eight points, no drop for change in AAoA. It is also keeping all scores above 780 or better. . (But, they will not climb as fast with the new account, trade off).
@Imperfectfuture wrote:
@oilcan12 wrote:
@Revelate wrote:
@oilcan12 wrote:http://ficoforums.myfico.com/t5/Understanding-FICO-Scoring/update-Crossing-the-boundary-new-data-poi...
Obviously, mortgage loans are scored very differently. No further explanation needed.
How do you get that?
One installment loan crossed 80% and bada_bing got a bump: how from your read of that thread is it conclusive proof that it is scored very differently when my own mortgage loan dropped my prior installment utilization down effectively the same number of points I gained previously and we've seen auto loans and share secure loans are effectively the same? We already know there's a threshold at either 80 or 70% give or take. It's not unreasonable that there's going to be differing datapoints in any experimentation when trying to find something out especially in the somewhat unknown evironments that are people's credit reports... if you don't undestand that, well I can't come up with an explanation that isn't a violation of this forum's TOS.
Do some analysis and research dude, jesus: actually read the threads. I find the fact you have come here to simply troll the data that's been aggregated here anathema, if you hate this forum this much go back.
I had only 1 break point, at 10%, for a SSL.
There is not 1 single data point for anyone having a higher break point for a single SSL. Even if someone does come up with that data point it will only be relevant to that particular peron's profile. There is no reason to assume that anyone will ever come up with that data point.
If SSLs only have 1 break point, then they are obviously no being scored the same as other installment loans.
Incorrect. I had my installment for 1.5 years before pay down. 80% showed a pop. 70% showed a pop. More important, my scores stopped swinging wildly when I added another cc or two.
Incorrect about what? That I had only 1 break point? That is a true statement. True statements are not, by definition, incorrect.
If your scores were swinging wildly, how are you sure about scoring thresholds? My scores are stable and have been for quite some time. I have never experienced wildly swinging scores. I have been experimenting will FICO scores for quite some time and have accumulated a considerable amout of knowledge and experience. It frustrates me when posters with unstable scores claim to have proven anything regarding FICO scoring.
Are you suggesting that FICO has a different scoring system for you and me. That could be possible, since we are undoubtably in very different Score Cards. My scores are in the high 800s and have always been stable. My Equifax FICO 8 is at 850. However, It does seem strange. I will say that nothing surprises be regarding FICO scores.
Just to clarify, I proved conclusively that I had only 1 scoring threshold for a share secured loan. Based on all reports so far, I am the only person to have isolated the scoring effect of the SSL. Every report showing anything different involves conbinations of loans, wildly swing scores and conflicting data.
So, please explain why you think that the only person to have made an effort to clearly isolate the scoring threshold of an SSL is incorrect. And, what is your point in trying to say that the only isolated data so far is incorrect.
@Imperfectfuture wrote:
@oilcan12 wrote:
@Revelate wrote:
@oilcan12 wrote:http://ficoforums.myfico.com/t5/Understanding-FICO-Scoring/update-Crossing-the-boundary-new-data-poi...
Obviously, mortgage loans are scored very differently. No further explanation needed.
How do you get that?
One installment loan crossed 80% and bada_bing got a bump: how from your read of that thread is it conclusive proof that it is scored very differently when my own mortgage loan dropped my prior installment utilization down effectively the same number of points I gained previously and we've seen auto loans and share secure loans are effectively the same? We already know there's a threshold at either 80 or 70% give or take. It's not unreasonable that there's going to be differing datapoints in any experimentation when trying to find something out especially in the somewhat unknown evironments that are people's credit reports... if you don't undestand that, well I can't come up with an explanation that isn't a violation of this forum's TOS.
Do some analysis and research dude, jesus: actually read the threads. I find the fact you have come here to simply troll the data that's been aggregated here anathema, if you hate this forum this much go back.
I had only 1 break point, at 10%, for a SSL.
There is not 1 single data point for anyone having a higher break point for a single SSL. Even if someone does come up with that data point it will only be relevant to that particular peron's profile. There is no reason to assume that anyone will ever come up with that data point.
If SSLs only have 1 break point, then they are obviously no being scored the same as other installment loans.
Incorrect. I had my installment for 1.5 years before pay down. 80% showed a pop. 70% showed a pop. More important, my scores stopped swinging wildly when I added another cc or two.
Could you provide some data points, preferably in a table showing the 80% and 70% pops. It would be desirable if the data points showed the same utilization and # of cards reporting balances. It should also show the same utilization and # of cards reporting balances before and after the score changes. This would isolate the score changes.
How do you explain the fact that other posters, including SouthJamaica, have tested the 80% and 70% thresholds and found nothing.
It seems silly to me, that after a year people are making claims about something that is so easy to prove.
All it takes to prove what you are saying is for a few prople to pay down their loans to 12% and check their scores. Then, they can pay down their loans to <10% and check their scores. The score changes or lack of score changes at 12% would show whether or not their is an upper scoring threshold. There is no reason anyone should be trying to determine the upper threshold until its existence can be proven.
Also, their is no reason we need to continue to pretend that there is a 9% threshold. It is 10% and has always been 10%.
Since you are a Community Leader, maybe you could make use your position and popularity to obtain proof of the data points your claim. To me,that would seem to be much more desireable than pointing out a result that seems contrary to other published data points.
Some data points please.
@Imperfectfuture wrote:
@oilcan12 wrote:
@Revelate wrote:
@oilcan12 wrote:http://ficoforums.myfico.com/t5/Understanding-FICO-Scoring/update-Crossing-the-boundary-new-data-poi...
Obviously, mortgage loans are scored very differently. No further explanation needed.
How do you get that?
One installment loan crossed 80% and bada_bing got a bump: how from your read of that thread is it conclusive proof that it is scored very differently when my own mortgage loan dropped my prior installment utilization down effectively the same number of points I gained previously and we've seen auto loans and share secure loans are effectively the same? We already know there's a threshold at either 80 or 70% give or take. It's not unreasonable that there's going to be differing datapoints in any experimentation when trying to find something out especially in the somewhat unknown evironments that are people's credit reports... if you don't undestand that, well I can't come up with an explanation that isn't a violation of this forum's TOS.
Do some analysis and research dude, jesus: actually read the threads. I find the fact you have come here to simply troll the data that's been aggregated here anathema, if you hate this forum this much go back.
I had only 1 break point, at 10%, for a SSL.
There is not 1 single data point for anyone having a higher break point for a single SSL. Even if someone does come up with that data point it will only be relevant to that particular peron's profile. There is no reason to assume that anyone will ever come up with that data point.
If SSLs only have 1 break point, then they are obviously no being scored the same as other installment loans.
Incorrect. I had my installment for 1.5 years before pay down. 80% showed a pop. 70% showed a pop. More important, my scores stopped swinging wildly when I added another cc or two.
Thanks for the info.
I have seen some solid data from CAPTOOL and Masscredit showing a step change bump up in score when dropping below a nominal 70% threshold. CAPTOOL's 70% data is based on installment loans in aggregate. Masscredit's data is for an Auto loan and that result appears to conflict with SJ's result.
It has been said in the past that age of an open loan(s) is a factor in scoring. Perhaps solid payment history on loans with some age (over 12 months) are looked at differently than new loans relative to B/L ratio threshold.
@oilcan12 wrote:
@Imperfectfuture wrote:
@oilcan12 wrote:
@Revelate wrote:
@oilcan12 wrote:http://ficoforums.myfico.com/t5/Understanding-FICO-Scoring/update-Crossing-the-boundary-new-data-poi...
Obviously, mortgage loans are scored very differently. No further explanation needed.
How do you get that?
One installment loan crossed 80% and bada_bing got a bump: how from your read of that thread is it conclusive proof that it is scored very differently when my own mortgage loan dropped my prior installment utilization down effectively the same number of points I gained previously and we've seen auto loans and share secure loans are effectively the same? We already know there's a threshold at either 80 or 70% give or take. It's not unreasonable that there's going to be differing datapoints in any experimentation when trying to find something out especially in the somewhat unknown evironments that are people's credit reports... if you don't undestand that, well I can't come up with an explanation that isn't a violation of this forum's TOS.
Do some analysis and research dude, jesus: actually read the threads. I find the fact you have come here to simply troll the data that's been aggregated here anathema, if you hate this forum this much go back.
I had only 1 break point, at 10%, for a SSL.
There is not 1 single data point for anyone having a higher break point for a single SSL. Even if someone does come up with that data point it will only be relevant to that particular peron's profile. There is no reason to assume that anyone will ever come up with that data point.
If SSLs only have 1 break point, then they are obviously no being scored the same as other installment loans.
Incorrect. I had my installment for 1.5 years before pay down. 80% showed a pop. 70% showed a pop. More important, my scores stopped swinging wildly when I added another cc or two.
Could you provide some data points, preferably in a table showing the 80% and 70% pops. It would be desirable if the data points showed the same utilization and # of cards reporting balances. It should also show the same utilization and # of cards reporting balances before and after the score changes. This would isolate the score changes.
How do you explain the fact that other posters, including SouthJamaica, have tested the 80% and 70% thresholds and found nothing.
It seems silly to me, that after a year people are making claims about something that is so easy to prove.
All it takes to prove what you are saying is for a few prople to pay down their loans to 12% and check their scores. Then, they can pay down their loans to <10% and check their scores. The score changes or lack of score changes at 12% would show whether or not their is an upper scoring threshold. There is no reason anyone should be trying to determine the upper threshold until its existence can be proven.
Also, their is no reason we need to continue to pretend that there is a 9% threshold. It is 10% and has always been 10%.
Since you are a Community Leader, maybe you could make use your position and popularity to obtain proof of the data points your claim. To me,that would seem to be much more desireable than pointing out a result that seems contrary to other published data points.
Some data points please.
I'm not 100% sure I found absolutely nothing. In FICO 8, which is the only score I'm really confident in, because it's the only one I can monitor from day to day and with which I can almost to a certainty tie the installment utilization reporting event to the score, I found:
Crossing 80% ... +2 +2 +2
Crossing 70% ... +3 +8 +0
So there may well have been a tiny little something there, as opposed to absolutely nothing 
@SouthJamaica wrote:
@oilcan12 wrote:
@Imperfectfuture wrote:
@oilcan12 wrote:
@Revelate wrote:
@oilcan12 wrote:http://ficoforums.myfico.com/t5/Understanding-FICO-Scoring/update-Crossing-the-boundary-new-data-poi...
Obviously, mortgage loans are scored very differently. No further explanation needed.
How do you get that?
One installment loan crossed 80% and bada_bing got a bump: how from your read of that thread is it conclusive proof that it is scored very differently when my own mortgage loan dropped my prior installment utilization down effectively the same number of points I gained previously and we've seen auto loans and share secure loans are effectively the same? We already know there's a threshold at either 80 or 70% give or take. It's not unreasonable that there's going to be differing datapoints in any experimentation when trying to find something out especially in the somewhat unknown evironments that are people's credit reports... if you don't undestand that, well I can't come up with an explanation that isn't a violation of this forum's TOS.
Do some analysis and research dude, jesus: actually read the threads. I find the fact you have come here to simply troll the data that's been aggregated here anathema, if you hate this forum this much go back.
I had only 1 break point, at 10%, for a SSL.
There is not 1 single data point for anyone having a higher break point for a single SSL. Even if someone does come up with that data point it will only be relevant to that particular peron's profile. There is no reason to assume that anyone will ever come up with that data point.
If SSLs only have 1 break point, then they are obviously no being scored the same as other installment loans.
Incorrect. I had my installment for 1.5 years before pay down. 80% showed a pop. 70% showed a pop. More important, my scores stopped swinging wildly when I added another cc or two.
Could you provide some data points, preferably in a table showing the 80% and 70% pops. It would be desirable if the data points showed the same utilization and # of cards reporting balances. It should also show the same utilization and # of cards reporting balances before and after the score changes. This would isolate the score changes.
How do you explain the fact that other posters, including SouthJamaica, have tested the 80% and 70% thresholds and found nothing.
It seems silly to me, that after a year people are making claims about something that is so easy to prove.
All it takes to prove what you are saying is for a few prople to pay down their loans to 12% and check their scores. Then, they can pay down their loans to <10% and check their scores. The score changes or lack of score changes at 12% would show whether or not their is an upper scoring threshold. There is no reason anyone should be trying to determine the upper threshold until its existence can be proven.
Also, their is no reason we need to continue to pretend that there is a 9% threshold. It is 10% and has always been 10%.
Since you are a Community Leader, maybe you could make use your position and popularity to obtain proof of the data points your claim. To me,that would seem to be much more desireable than pointing out a result that seems contrary to other published data points.
Some data points please.
I'm not 100% sure I found absolutely nothing. In FICO 8, which is the only score I'm really confident in, because it's the only one I can monitor from day to day and with which I can almost to a certainty tie the installment utilization reporting event to the score, I found:
Crossing 80% ... +2 +2 +2
Crossing 70% ... +3 +8 +0
So there may well have been a tiny little something there, as opposed to absolutely nothing
Yes, SJ there could have been. And, I greatly appreciate your efforts.
But, you seem to have larger fluctuations not tied to crossing thresholds. In perspective, 2 points seems to be just another fluctuation.
The only real way to test the existence on an upper threshold is for someone with stable scores to pay an SSL down to 12%, check the scores, then pay down down to <10%.
My data is the only data that comes close to meeting that criteria. And, it shows that there is only 1 threshold, at 10%.
I would be happy to acknowledge an upper threshold, for some Score Cards (possibly dirty), if a few poster's data points meet that criteria. It doesn't seem like too much to ask. After all, we've been looking for this threshold for almost a year.
So far, no one, except SouthJamaica, has made any serious effort to establish that upper threshold. Kudos to SJ.
Until proven wrong I simply do not believe that the upper threshold exists. I know for a fact it doesn't exist for my profile.
I don't even understand why we are trying to establish the upper threshold without first proving its existence.
It seems to be the equivalent ot trying to prove whether visitors to Earth are from Mars for Venus without first proving that there are in fact visitors to Earth.
@Thomas_Thumb wrote:
@Imperfectfuture wrote:
@oilcan12 wrote:
@Revelate wrote:
@oilcan12 wrote:http://ficoforums.myfico.com/t5/Understanding-FICO-Scoring/update-Crossing-the-boundary-new-data-poi...
Obviously, mortgage loans are scored very differently. No further explanation needed.
How do you get that?
One installment loan crossed 80% and bada_bing got a bump: how from your read of that thread is it conclusive proof that it is scored very differently when my own mortgage loan dropped my prior installment utilization down effectively the same number of points I gained previously and we've seen auto loans and share secure loans are effectively the same? We already know there's a threshold at either 80 or 70% give or take. It's not unreasonable that there's going to be differing datapoints in any experimentation when trying to find something out especially in the somewhat unknown evironments that are people's credit reports... if you don't undestand that, well I can't come up with an explanation that isn't a violation of this forum's TOS.
Do some analysis and research dude, jesus: actually read the threads. I find the fact you have come here to simply troll the data that's been aggregated here anathema, if you hate this forum this much go back.
I had only 1 break point, at 10%, for a SSL.
There is not 1 single data point for anyone having a higher break point for a single SSL. Even if someone does come up with that data point it will only be relevant to that particular peron's profile. There is no reason to assume that anyone will ever come up with that data point.
If SSLs only have 1 break point, then they are obviously no being scored the same as other installment loans.
Incorrect. I had my installment for 1.5 years before pay down. 80% showed a pop. 70% showed a pop. More important, my scores stopped swinging wildly when I added another cc or two.
Thanks for the info.
I have seen some solid data from CAPTOOL and Masscredit showing a step change bump up in score when dropping below a nominal 70% threshold. CAPTOOL's 70% data is based on installment loans in aggregate. Masscredit's data is for an Auto loan and that result appears to conflict with SJ's result.
It has been said in the past that age of an open loan(s) is a factor in scoring. Perhaps solid payment history on loans with some age (over 12 months) are looked at differently than new loans relative to B/L ratio threshold.
As I've pointed out before, CAPTOOL's data was an aggregate of SSLs and Lending Club type loans. We have know idea how those typoe of loans are scored.
Masscredit's data made my head spin, but it was essentially for an auto loan. And as you said TT, it conficts with SJ's data.
We still, after almost a year, have no data points for an SSL having an upper scoring threshold.
The lack of clean data points after that much time is a data point in and of itself.