AoYA 3month DPs?

[calyx]

I know how MFers love their data points.
My profile with EQ/TU/EX have significant deviations with ages of accounts, and I was a bit surprised to see that my scores increased so consisently 11/12/11 pts (respectively) for each.   I have not crossed any other obvious thresholds or milestones.

Further DPs below for anyone interested - the baddies (time since neg) were 120d lates due to fall off later this year (don't ask what's going on with EX, I don't know why they have a 5m neg, I'm working on that).

12/8/2018	Score	Inq/12	Inq/24	Util	AAoA	AoYA	AoOA	Time since Neg
EQ	671	7	8	1%	6y 6m	2m	22y 9m	4y 11m
EX	694	4	4	1%	4y 5m	2m	14y	4m
TU	674	1	1	1%	1y 8m	2m	5y 1m	4y 11m
1/2/2018	Score	Inq/12	Inq/24	Util	AAoA	AoYA	AoOA	Time since Neg
EQ	682	7	8	1%	6y 7m	3m	22y 10m	5y
EX	705	4	4	1%	4y 6m	3m	14y 1m	5m
TU	686	1	1	1%	1y 9m	3m	5y 2m	5y

[Anonymous]

Quite a few have reported mid-year score gains between AAoA whole numbers.  On your file that would have been last month on EQ (78 months) and this month on EX (54 months).  Did you see a small EQ score gain of 3-4 points last month by chance?

What is it account wise that causes such a variance between your TU and EQ age of accounts factors?

[Revelate]

Hrm.

These are FICO 8 scores?  I have lots of data from my tax lien days that demonstrate there is abosultely no new account penalty on the derogatory scorecards.  That and AOYA are basically synonomous to my understanding of the algorithm.

I would think your 120D late anywhere would fall into that honestly, but on the surface that's a surprising shift and being consistent across the three normally I would be thinking balance change.

That said even with lates and tax liens I see a non-trivial age difference in FICO 8 between 0 and 6 months so maybe.

[calyx]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Quite a few have reported mid-year score gains between AAoA whole numbers.  On your file that would have been last month on EQ (78 months) and this month on EX (54 months).  Did you see a small EQ score gain of 3-4 points last month by chance?

What is it account wise that causes such a variance between your TU and EQ age of accounts factors?

---

@Anonymous - I saw a EQ score gain of 1 pt last month.  I also brought my util from 20% to 1% that month, and I figured that's where I got my gain from.

EQ is holding onto a very old (positive) store card account.  That sucker has been closed since 2005 (quite a bit over the usual 10 years, the company itself closed), and I don't know why EQ still has it, but I'm not complaining since it gives me that higher average age.

I've also noticed that EQ is very stable, it has the smallest number of changes of any of the CRBs for me, but it also is the one that literally every company pulls.

[calyx]

---

@Revelate wrote:

Hrm.

These are FICO 8 scores?  I have lots of data from my tax lien days that demonstrate there is abosultely no new account penalty on the derogatory scorecards.  That and AOYA are basically synonomous to my understanding of the algorithm.

I would think your 120D late anywhere would fall into that honestly, but on the surface that's a surprising shift and being consistent across the three normally I would be thinking balance change.

That said even with lates and tax liens I see a non-trivial age difference in FICO 8 between 0 and 6 months so maybe.

---

They are all FICO8s
I tightly controlled the balances for reporting accounts so that the balances would not likely have an affect.
I do have an installment loan reporting, and I pulled the report before the 8th (my usual date), just because the loan balance change would not have been reported yet (it reports on the 4th and I confirmed in the reports that it is unchanged).

I didn't know if I would see a change with a 3m new account, and I certainly wasn't expecting 1) a ~10pt change or 2) a very consistent change.  

[Anonymous]

---

@calyx wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Quite a few have reported mid-year score gains between AAoA whole numbers.  On your file that would have been last month on EQ (78 months) and this month on EX (54 months).  Did you see a small EQ score gain of 3-4 points last month by chance?

What is it account wise that causes such a variance between your TU and EQ age of accounts factors?

---

@Anonymous - I saw a EQ score gain of 1 pt last month.  I also brought my util from 20% to 1% that month, and I figured that's where I got my gain from.

EQ is holding onto a very old (positive) store card account.  That sucker has been closed since 2005 (quite a bit over the usual 10 years, the company itself closed), and I don't know why EQ still has it, but I'm not complaining since it gives me that higher average age.

---

Interesting about the old account hanging around on EQ.  I take it that account was opened significantly earlier than the rest of your accounts based on the AoOA data you gave. 

Something sounds off regarding your score gain last month and utilization.  If you're talking overall utilization, going from 20% to 1% should under most circumstances have resulted in a significant score gain, not just 1 point.  I would have expected something more to the tune of at least 10 if not 15 points.  If you only saw a score gain of 1 point, that suggests to me that an adverse event muted the aggregate utilization point gain.  For example, let's say that the gain from crossing 8.9% aggregate should have been 14 points on your file for the sake of numbers.  If you saw a net gain of +1, that would mean another event caused -13 at or round the same time.  Looking ahead to this month, perhaps the reversal of that event (whatever it was) was what actually caused your score gains, not the AoYA increase.  Just a few things to think about and consider, as multiple events happening at the same time can often lead to false-positives.

[calyx]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@calyx wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Quite a few have reported mid-year score gains between AAoA whole numbers.  On your file that would have been last month on EQ (78 months) and this month on EX (54 months).  Did you see a small EQ score gain of 3-4 points last month by chance?

What is it account wise that causes such a variance between your TU and EQ age of accounts factors?

---

@Anonymous - I saw a EQ score gain of 1 pt last month.  I also brought my util from 20% to 1% that month, and I figured that's where I got my gain from.

EQ is holding onto a very old (positive) store card account.  That sucker has been closed since 2005 (quite a bit over the usual 10 years, the company itself closed), and I don't know why EQ still has it, but I'm not complaining since it gives me that higher average age.

---

Interesting about the old account hanging around on EQ.  I take it that account was opened significantly earlier than the rest of your accounts based on the AoOA data you gave. 

Something sounds off regarding your score gain last month and utilization.  If you're talking overall utilization, going from 20% to 1% should under most circumstances have resulted in a significant score gain, not just 1 point.  I would have expected something more to the tune of at least 10 if not 15 points.  If you only saw a score gain of 1 point, that suggests to me that an adverse event muted the aggregate utilization point gain.  For example, let's say that the gain from crossing 8.9% aggregate should have been 14 points on your file for the sake of numbers.  If you saw a net gain of +1, that would mean another event caused -13 at or round the same time.  Looking ahead to this month, perhaps the reversal of that event (whatever it was) was what actually caused your score gains, not the AoYA increase.  Just a few things to think about and consider, as multiple events happening at the same time can often lead to false-positives.

---

Yep, the old account they are reporting opened in 1996.   I probably only used it once or twice (it was a department store and I was getting my first "real job" clothing after college at the time), and then never again.  I had forgotten about that card's existence, honestly (TU and EX - did not have the card listed as of my 2013 credit report).   EQ has it listed as closed in 2005, and the store/corporation dissolved in the mid aughts, but it also has it paid "on time" through April 2015.   I don't know what's going on with this glitch, but I'll take it!  It's quite honestly my only credit account (until this year everything otherwise on my accounts have been installment loans) until 8/2018.

These FICO bits with all of their moving parts make things very difficult to nail down.
If anything happened on the back end that I was not able to see, I wouldn't be surprised - I had quite a few changes on my credit report that were 'finalized' with EQ in Oct & early Nov, and I suspect that they were settling everything out still in Dec.   My newest installment loan (from August) was also finally reported by EQ in late Nov, so that also likely had an impact (EX and TU had reported the loan in Oct). 
I sorted out some address and name issues, and I had them update the (incorrect) DoFD on my derog account (it wasn't reporting as old as it should have).    I have not done the same disputing with EX or TU since Aug/Sep - and other than that pesky 5month "negative" on EX, everything is correct as far as I can tell through EX & TU.

I am at AZEO (not for any other reason than ease of controlling reporting amounts), so my util is both a single card and across my revolving accounts.

Dec and Jan are the only months where I didn't expect anything significant, but that doesn't mean that something unexpected happened on the back end.     I think the main reason I looked closer at the account factors is that the 10-11 pts were so consistent across each CRB.  The only (obvious) commonality would be the new accounts.  The others are now 5m and 4m, so I haven't hit the 6m on any of those, yet.  Next month has so much going on that I don't think I'd be able to tease out anything useful.