AoYA hits 24 mo, no increase on 28 scores

[Anonymous]

AoYA finally reached 24 months today, so I did a 28 score pull. 

None of my 28 scores increased even a single point.

My 28 score pull last month was with all of my accounts with balances and I kept that a constant for the 28 score pull this month as to eliminate any top end buffer.

I'm pretty surprised actually.  I know that negative reason codes exist related to AoYA on some scoring models (not sure which exactly) even with AoYA > 24 months and perhaps even > 36 months.  I figured that with 12 months being a very well-documented threshold that 24 months would "count" for something at least on some scoring model, but it seems that is not the case.

[SouthJamaica]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

AoYA finally reached 24 months today, so I did a 28 score pull. 

None of my 28 scores increased even a single point.

My 28 score pull last month was with all of my accounts with balances and I kept that a constant for the 28 score pull this month as to eliminate any top end buffer.

I'm pretty surprised actually.  I know that negative reason codes exist related to AoYA on some scoring models (not sure which exactly) even with AoYA > 24 months and perhaps even > 36 months.  I figured that with 12 months being a very well-documented threshold that 24 months would "count" for something at least on some scoring model, but it seems that is not the case.

---

1. Aren't your scores near perfect?

2. If so, isn't your profile a less than ideal testing ground for something like this? Wouldn't it be more meaningful to see what happens in a profile that has room for improvement?

[Anonymous]

No. As I stated in the original post, I brought my profile to all accounts with balances in an effort to lower my scores, eliminating any top end buffer factor. Some of them like EQ FICO 5 came down to 770 or so and I was able to take many of my scores like classic 8, BCE 8 etc. down decent chunks.

With my only maxed out score being EX FICO 8 (bulletproof to number of accounts with balances) that left the opportunity for 27 other scores to see a gain from AoYA reaching 24 months if that were indeed a threshold.

[rbentley]

I always assumed that the only AoYA threshold was 12 months, although there are multiple thresholds for AAoA.  Thank you BBS for the confirmation.  I think reason codes show up without any meaningful impact on scores.  It is as though they have to say something so they just pull something out of a hat.

[Anonymous]

Yes I definitely think that was a worthy contribution BBS. However I do offer an observation. In aged account like yours, I can understand why there’s no benefit at 24 months. That may not necessarily be true in a non-aged scorecard. Who knows it may be different in a thin scorecard as well.

But there’s something even more telling about this to me. This indicates you did not shift scorecards from a new account scorecard to a no new account scorecard.

Am I incorrect? Because if you went from the new account scorecard to the no new account scorecard there should’ve been a shift somewhere right? If so, does that mean the scorecard shift happens at 12 months and that is the cause of the score improvement?

I may be way off here, but it’s still early. Please guide me, teach me, if this is incorrect or impossible.

[Revelate]

AFAIK to roughly summarize:

Derogatory scorecards: no AOYA metric at all at least for FICO 8 and below: I might be able to check on TU whenever my 60D stops counting as recent for FICO 9.

Top 8 on FICO 8: 1 year and I think that might be it. Every CMS other than the TU service on myFICO totally suck for FICO 8 classic reason codes... I don’t understand why they are all so awful in not providing the full list.

Top 8 on earlier models, I have seen the new accounts reason code after a year and TT has seen it at something like 4.5 years on EQ FICO 5 I believe it was.

The more details we get the more I somewhat think that scorecard assignment based on age might be multiple factors rather than just A/B switching. Like AAOA between values X and Y, and AOOA between X’ and Y’ and maybe throw in youngest too though I suspect the new accounts may be a binary one.

We just don’t really know on exact scorecard assignment and I can’t really see how to explicitly test for them either.

[Anonymous]

Well from my understanding we highly believe based on good data that whether or not there are new accounts is a scorecard segmentation factor for clean scorecards. Correct? (as you said all bets are off with derogatory, and it would be great if you tested that for the derogatory score cards.)

If that is true, whenever that shift happens from new account to no new account scorecard on classic eight, there will necessarily have to be a score change maybe down, instead of up, but there will have to be some sort of change, right? So my thought is AoYA turning 12 months and giving that big point gain could in fact be a scorecard shift?

Maybe I’m way way off here, I’m still new to all of this. As a matter of fact, I’d love to know what both you and TT can teach me about this! ( and anyone else too!)

[Anonymous]

---

@Revelate wrote:

Top 8 on earlier models, I have seen the new accounts reason code after a year and TT has seen it at something like 4.5 years on EQ FICO 5 I believe it was.

---

Yeah, that's what I find puzzling.  I know TT mentioned seeing those reason codes with AoYA being > 2 years, perhaps all the way up to 5 years or so on some models.  I'm pretty sure that TT and I would fall into the same scorecard with thick/aged/clean files, but I'm no expert on that.  That being said, I would think there would have been some sort of minor shift somewhere (perhaps the older models) once hitting 2 years if there is a shift at 1 year and then another at some later point, say 4 or 5 years.

[Thomas_Thumb]

A couple points:

1) Recent account openings is a scorecard factor - BUT IT ONLY COMES IN PLAY ON CLEAN SCORECARDS . It is a factor with Fico 8 and Fico 04/Fico 98 as well. Almost certainly is for Fico 9 as the primary difference with Fico 9 is a 13th scorecard associated with high revolving credit utilization.

2) My "recent credit" negative reason code went away at exactly 5 years AoYA. It was showing up on EQ Auto Fico 04. When I reached 5 years AoYA and the code dropped off, my EQ Auto Fico 04 (score 5) increased from 827 => 831. Not sure that the 5 years relates to Fico 04 in general. It may be specific to the Fico 04 Auto industry adjuster scorecard. [BB credit card account opened 9/2011] - reason code present every pull up through 8/2016. Code not present from 10/2016 onward - My last 3B last pull was 4/2018.

[Anonymous]

Hi TT.

So, EQ Auto Score 5, eh?  Do you think that if there's a threshold then at 1 year and also 5 years that there may be one at the mid-point of 3 years and then nothing at 2 (that I reached) and 4?