Adding paid down loan is rocket fuel to TU FICO 8

[Revelate]

Could you dump your TU 04 reason codes from then SJ?

Like I would've expected your TU FICO 4 reason codes to be something like this:

• You have a short credit history.
• You opened a new credit account relatively recently.
• You have not established a long revolving and/or open-ended account credit history.
• You have too few or too many credit accounts

Which FWIW were my reason codes from January haha.

Anyway like BBS I'm surprised at the magnitude of the gain but admittedly everything is magnitified for pretty files, but am glad playing said FICO reindeer games did indeed help as expected .  Congrats on the score boost!

[SouthJamaica]

---

@Revelate wrote:

Could you dump your TU 04 reason codes from then SJ?

Like I would've expected your TU FICO 4 reason codes to be something like this:

• You have a short credit history.
• You opened a new credit account relatively recently.
• You have not established a long revolving and/or open-ended account credit history.
• You have too few or too many credit accounts

Which FWIW were my reason codes from January haha.

Anyway like BBS I'm surprised at the magnitude of the gain but admittedly everything is magnitified for pretty files, but am glad playing said FICO reindeer games did indeed help as expected .  Congrats on the score boost!

---

Last month after I'd lost my only open installment loan the TU FICO 4 negative reason codes became:

• 1. You opened a new credit account relatively recently.
• 2. You have not established a long revolving and/or open-ended account credit history.
• 3. You have a short credit history.
• 4. You have no recent activity from a non-mortgage installment loan.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

SJ, why do you think you are seeing 46-60 points when most reference a number around 30 points?  This has to be the highest reported gain I've seen from a SSL or similar lone installment loan.

---

There is a lot of precedent for huge gains from the SSL technique.  In this monster SSL thread there were people who would report 45 point gains.  In my own posts I finally settled on the simple meme of "roughly 30 point gain" as something fairly accurate but also something that would be a bit conservative, so that if somebody got a 38 point gain (say) they could be pleasantly surprised.

[SouthJamaica]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

SJ, why do you think you are seeing 46-60 points when most reference a number around 30 points?  This has to be the highest reported gain I've seen from a SSL or similar lone installment loan.

---

There is a lot of precedent for huge gains from the SSL technique.  In this monster SSL thread there were people who would report 45 point gains.  In my own posts I finally settled on the simple meme of "roughly 30 point gain" as something fairly accurate but also something that would be a bit conservative, so that if somebody got a 38 point gain (say) they could be pleasantly surprised.

---

The amazing thing about 46 points is that it came at the same time as some negatives in CC utilization.

[Anonymous]

---

@SouthJamaica wrote:

---

---

Is it possible TU is more interested in "credit mix" than the others?

---

I think we often use that phrase as a shorthand for all the different beneficial scoring factors that would be involved in a boost from the SSL technique, and that's fine -- as long as we know what we mean.  But just for clarity it may be worth remembering that a huge part of the boost one gets from the SSLT has nothing to do with the Credit Mix category (one of the five categories typically shown in a pie-chart of FICO's scoring factors).

The biggest part of the boost is probably the installment utilization piece (going from 100% to < 8.99%).  Installment U is part of the much more heavily weighted Amounts Owed category.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous

---

There is a lot of precedent for huge gains from the SSL technique.  In this monster SSL thread there were people who would report 45 point gains.  In my own posts I finally settled on the simple meme of "roughly 30 point gain" as something fairly accurate but also something that would be a bit conservative, so that if somebody got a 38 point gain (say) they could be pleasantly surprised.

---

Right, I do recall seeing some people report greater than 30 point gains, but SJ is suggesting as much as a 60 point gross gain here based on other negative profile factors that are likely surpressing his 46 point net gain.

I'm not sure I've read through the entire SSL thread, but I do not recall a ~60 point gain data point related to a SSL.  If SJs example is not the record, at the very least it's going to be an extreme outlier.

SJ, going back to your point on the previous page where you suggested that TU may simply weigh criteria differently (with respect to the SSL) than does EX and EQ, I'm sure that could very well be the case.  We've seen the bureaus react differently relative to score changes with the same profile changes. 

I haven't started a thread on it yet as I'm still concluding my number of accounts/cards with balances reported test in reverse, but on my profile my initial results are showing that EX doesn't care at all (0 points) about number of accounts/cards with balances reported, where TU and EQ were impacted 15 and 11 points respectively.  

[Thomas_Thumb]

---

@SouthJamaica wrote:

I knew that adding my paid down NFCU SSL would be a plus in FICO 8, but it surprised me how much.

Despite lousy developments occurring at the same time in my revolving utilization stats, my TU FICO 8 jumped 46 points upon the arrival of the loan.

I would bet that, had there not been the negative developments in CC utilization going on, the gain would have looked more like 60 points.

@Anonymous to @Revelate for his pioneering research on the Reindeer Games.

---

Well you're the rocket man.

Here's a video for you from Elton.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtVBCG6ThDk&list=RDDtVBCG6ThDk

[Revelate]

---

@SouthJamaica wrote:

---

@Revelate wrote:

Could you dump your TU 04 reason codes from then SJ?

Like I would've expected your TU FICO 4 reason codes to be something like this:

• You have a short credit history.
• You opened a new credit account relatively recently.
• You have not established a long revolving and/or open-ended account credit history.
• You have too few or too many credit accounts

Which FWIW were my reason codes from January haha.

Anyway like BBS I'm surprised at the magnitude of the gain but admittedly everything is magnitified for pretty files, but am glad playing said FICO reindeer games did indeed help as expected .  Congrats on the score boost!

---

Last month after I'd lost my only open installment loan the TU FICO 4 negative reason codes became:

• 1. You opened a new credit account relatively recently.
• 2. You have not established a long revolving and/or open-ended account credit history.
• 3. You have a short credit history.
• 4. You have no recent activity from a non-mortgage installment loan.

---

Interesting tangential point: would you mind sharing your AAOA and oldest account too from back then?  Virtually identical but the reason codes are shuffled differently which suggests we might be at different breakpoints... maybe not, but it's curious to me anyway.

In January on TU when I made that pull I would've been at:

AAOA: 45 months

Oldest closed: 115 months

Oldest closed revolver: 115 months

Oldest open: 74 months

Oldest open revolver: 74 months

Also credit mix: this thing got seriously blurred in FICO 8; FICO 04 doesn't care about installment utilization as near as I can tell, but does care about having an installment loan and yours is the first instance I've seen or heard reported of needing an open loan on it for score optimization.

[SouthJamaica]

As an update, when the SSL showed up on EQ I experienced a 39-point pop in FICO 8! Also EX added 5 more. Again despite multiple increases in revolving utilization. So FICO 8 reacted:

TU +46

EQ +39

EX +30

[SouthJamaica]

---

@Revelate wrote:

---

@SouthJamaica wrote:

---

@Revelate wrote:

Could you dump your TU 04 reason codes from then SJ?

Like I would've expected your TU FICO 4 reason codes to be something like this:

• You have a short credit history.
• You opened a new credit account relatively recently.
• You have not established a long revolving and/or open-ended account credit history.
• You have too few or too many credit accounts

Which FWIW were my reason codes from January haha.

Anyway like BBS I'm surprised at the magnitude of the gain but admittedly everything is magnitified for pretty files, but am glad playing said FICO reindeer games did indeed help as expected .  Congrats on the score boost!

---

Last month after I'd lost my only open installment loan the TU FICO 4 negative reason codes became:

• 1. You opened a new credit account relatively recently.
• 2. You have not established a long revolving and/or open-ended account credit history.
• 3. You have a short credit history.
• 4. You have no recent activity from a non-mortgage installment loan.

---

Interesting tangential point: would you mind sharing your AAOA and oldest account too from back then?  Virtually identical but the reason codes are shuffled differently which suggests we might be at different breakpoints... maybe not, but it's curious to me anyway.

In January on TU when I made that pull I would've been at:

AAOA: 45 months

Oldest closed: 115 months

Oldest closed revolver: 115 months

Oldest open: 74 months

Oldest open revolver: 74 months

Also credit mix: this thing got seriously blurred in FICO 8; FICO 04 doesn't care about installment utilization as near as I can tell, but does care about having an installment loan and yours is the first instance I've seen or heard reported of needing an open loan on it for score optimization.

---

1. Oldest account was 30 years, and average age of accounts was 3 years 3 months.

2. My experience with TU FICO 4 is different than yours; I find that it reacts just like FICO 8 and 9 do, only with a signal strength of only 20-25%