Anyone dirty on one bureau but clean on another?

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

So you're inside of a year until you're clean across the board then, right?  That's pretty awesome!

---

I'm hoping the lien will go away this July when the 3 CRA start deleting liens and judgements.  Fingers crossed.

[Anonymous]

That would be awesome and make for a very solid Summer '17!

I'm hoping EX goes clean for me in the next week or two.  The creditor has already submitted to the CRAs to have the account report as clean.  TU and EQ cleaned up already, but EX for whatever reason despite multiple attempts by the creditor remains dirty.  At least I know it's only a matter of time, though.

The account that I have keeping TU dirty for me may take a little more work.  That too cleaned up on EX and EQ, likely from me hammering away at them with GW letters... so based on that I guess there is hope that TU will become clean as well.  I've never actually received a favorable response though from this creditor unlike the other, so I don't have the satisfaction of knowing that there's a light at the end of the tunnel on TU like there is with EX. 

We'll see what happens!

[Revelate]

---

@Thomas_Thumb wrote:

Cool - A couple more examples showing a 90 to 100 point offset dirty/clean.

As I recall, CAPTOOL, Revelate and Jamie 123 posted similar results last year - all had 1 clean and 2 dirty CRAs.

---

Think it was inverse not me; I still have some period of time to go before I get clean this year on EQ/EX.  TU I won't be clean and unless I get lucky on NCAP I may be hardcore dirty there for until late 2018.  *grumble* 

That's what I get for asking for an early removal based on NCAP, should've let sleeping dragons lie.

My last year fling was my tax lien coming off for a week on EX, but with a 60 day late on there I only gained 16 points.  756 doesn't suck, but compared to 740, meh.

[Revelate]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Thomas_Thumb wrote:

Cool - A couple more examples showing a 90 to 100 point offset dirty/clean.

As I recall, CAPTOOL, Revelate and Jamie 123 posted similar results last year - all had 1 clean and 2 dirty CRAs.

---

The point variance between dirty and clean is substantial.  Especially for baddies that are so old.  It shows that there is little diluting of majors with time, that's for sure. 

One thing I do find curious is that just before the 90 day late came off of my EQ report making it clean, the score was 787.  This is the same baddie that on my EX report is currently holding that score at 751.  I'm not sure why there is a 36 point difference here.  Any ideas?  The only difference between my EX and EQ reports outside of this baddie is that my Blispay account only reports to EX, so EX has 1 more "new account" at 9 months old as well as 1 more scoreable inquiry.  I wouldn't think 1 new account and 1 inquiry both 9 months old would constitute a 36 point difference.

---

You can't really compare bureaus like that for FICO 8 and earlier: the algorithms are fundamentally different between the bureaus and it's been a lender complaint for years.  Even with identical files the stated design was +/- 30 points, and we've seen incidences of a worse skew than that.  Or at least you can't compare them with much accuracy would be more proper to state.

That's somewhat changed with FICO 9 based on their marketing literature and my own personal anecdotal data, lot closer to being the same score with the same file between bureaus, much like Vantage.  

[Anonymous]

Really?  I'm not sure I've ever seen FICO 08 scores +/- 30 points without there being something, even it was just minor, different between the bureaus.  Usually I see all of the FICO 08 scores that someone has (like yours) within say 10-15 points of one another... again, assuming that the information contained between the 3 bureaus is the same.

[Anonymous]

In January:  TU:  772;  EQ  689;  EX:  683.  Obviously TU is my clean report.

March:  TU:  772;  EQ 755; EX  689.   EQ dropped my last collection so now EX is the only dirty report.

April 14:  TU:  772;  EQ 779;  EX 751  EX dropped my last collection  -- ALL CLEAN!!!

The difference between my EX score and TU/EQ is that Blispay is only reporting to EX.   Same issue as was pointed out above, 21 and 28 pt difference.  Not quite 36 though.

My AAoA is less than 2 years.  $135k line of credit;  14 accounts.

[Thomas_Thumb]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Really?  I'm not sure I've ever seen FICO 08 scores +/- 30 points without there being something, even it was just minor, different between the bureaus.  Usually I see all of the FICO 08 scores that someone has (like yours) within say 10-15 points of one another... again, assuming that the information contained between the 3 bureaus is the same.

---

This may be straying off topic a bit but hopefully still relevant. I looked at range of scores among the CRAs for BC Fico 8 and BC Fico 9. Fico, true to their promise, has constrained the degree of CRA customization allowed in Fico 9. 

Date	Range BC 8	Range BC 9
Mar-17	13	3
Oct-16	24	9
Aug-16	16	5
Jul-16	19	6
Mar-16	17	2
Feb-16	21	6

[Anonymous]

mimsof4 great to hear that as of yesterday you're clean across the board!  Your datapoints are very useful as you became clean on different bureaus at different times.  Thanks for the info.

---

@Thomas_Thumb wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Really?  I'm not sure I've ever seen FICO 08 scores +/- 30 points without there being something, even it was just minor, different between the bureaus.  Usually I see all of the FICO 08 scores that someone has (like yours) within say 10-15 points of one another... again, assuming that the information contained between the 3 bureaus is the same.

---

This may be straying off topic a bit but hopefully still relevant. I looked at range of scores among the CRAs for BC Fico 8 and BC Fico 9. Fico, true to their promise, has constrained the degree of CRA customization allowed in Fico 9. 

Date	Range BC 8	Range BC 9
Mar-17	13	3
Oct-16	24	9
Aug-16	16	5
Jul-16	19	6
Mar-16	17	2
Feb-16	21	6

---

TT, can you explain what I'm looking at there in that chart?  I would assume in the left column that's the range of FICO 08 scores between bureaus with the same information reported since that's what we were talking about but I'm not sure.  I get it in comparison that the 09 model shows less of a range, but where are those numbers coming from and why would they change from month to month?  Thanks.

[Revelate]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Really?  I'm not sure I've ever seen FICO 08 scores +/- 30 points without there being something, even it was just minor, different between the bureaus.  Usually I see all of the FICO 08 scores that someone has (like yours) within say 10-15 points of one another... again, assuming that the information contained between the 3 bureaus is the same.

---

You haven't been around long enough bud .

It doesn't happen often (and it shouldn't with FICO's design) but think the largest I saw was 36 points here on the forum. 

Anecdotally my FICO 04 models were >30 points away from each other, my FICO 08's think the greatest differential was 23 points between EX/EQ though now they're pretty similar.

[Thomas_Thumb]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

mimsof4 great to hear that as of yesterday you're clean across the board!  Your datapoints are very useful as you became clean on different bureaus at different times.  Thanks for the info.

---

@Thomas_Thumb wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Really?  I'm not sure I've ever seen FICO 08 scores +/- 30 points without there being something, even it was just minor, different between the bureaus.  Usually I see all of the FICO 08 scores that someone has (like yours) within say 10-15 points of one another... again, assuming that the information contained between the 3 bureaus is the same.

---

This may be straying off topic a bit but hopefully still relevant. I looked at range of scores among the CRAs for BC Fico 8 and BC Fico 9. Fico, true to their promise, has constrained the degree of CRA customization allowed in Fico 9. 

Date	Range BC 8	Range BC 9
Mar-17	13	3
Oct-16	24	9
Aug-16	16	5
Jul-16	19	6
Mar-16	17	2
Feb-16	21	6

---

TT, can you explain what I'm looking at there in that chart?  I would assume in the left column that's the range of FICO 08 scores between bureaus with the same information reported since that's what we were talking about but I'm not sure.  I get it in comparison that the 09 model shows less of a range, but where are those numbers coming from and why would they change from month to month?  Thanks.

---

The raw scores are from 3B reports. The CRAs weight # cards reporting balances a bit differently from one another on Fico 8 with EQ being the most sensitive. Also, one month I had zero revolvers reporting a balance and again the CRAs each spin that a little different as well. Therefore, because CRAs each weigh # cards reporting differently, range among the CRAs will fluctuate depending on # cards reporting balances. For me EQ drops score the most when most/all cards report balances. This customization was reduced under Fico 9. 

Also, depending on timing the # cards showing a balance on the same 3B report may differ by CRA. Yep not all CRAs update their data sets at the same time.

Shown below are the raw scores:

Date	EQ BC Fico 8	TU BC Fico 8	EX BC Fico 8	Range BC Fico 8	Date	EQ BC Fico 9	TU BC Fico 9	EX BC Fico 9	Range BC Fico 9
Mar-17	887	899	900	13	Mar-17	876	879	879	3
Oct-16	881	873	897	24	Oct-16	873	865	874	9
Aug-16	876	886	892	16	Aug-16	858	863	862	5
Jul-16	881	889	900	19	Jul-16	873	874	879	6
Mar-16	882	899	898	17	Mar-16	877	879	878	2
Feb-16	874	880	895	21	Feb-16	867	869	873	6

My rather pronounced BC Fico 8 score fluctuations are likely due to naturally allowing 0% to 100% of my revolvers report a balance. No doubt the bankcard enhanced version puts a bit more emphasis on card use behavior. [100% of cards reported a balance in Feb 2016, 0% reported a balance in August 2016].