Calling CassieCard or anyone with data RE: <6% UTL

[Anonymous]

@Trudy Sorry I haven’t been online in a little while. Had I been online and saw that, I would’ve told you her research was 4% aggregate. But as you know, it has been theorized to only apply to young or thin or maybe even young and thin scorecards. But who knows? There’s definitely a lot we don’t know there.

[Trudy]

Yep I mistakenly stated 4% and noticed my error as it was <6% for an individual acct.  I'll know if it impacts my profile next month as I will have a revolver and AGG drop below 4%.

[Anonymous]

---

@Trudy wrote:

If <4% is a thing for all bureaus then I guess I'll see when EQ and TU update for that individual account as the last revolver to report doesn't have a report balance as of date until 4/3.

Birdman7...I think you're in tune with CassieCard's research.  Do you know if the <4% is AGG or IND in case she doesn't chime in?

---

I was away for several weeks, so I'm just seeing this now.

I just found something interesting this month regarding that 4% threshold: I'm back to 4% aggregate now, and got the expected +3 EQ 8 and +1 TU 8. But this time I didn't get the +3 on EX 8!

I went back and looked at the first time (FEB 19) I lost 3pts on EX 8 when utilization went above 4%. It was a single individual revolving account that caused it, going from 2% to 7% individual util with aggregate at 2%.

I think EX 8 is looking for all revolving account balances to be at 4% or less. Right now, with 4% aggregate, I have 5%, 2%, and 9% on my 3 open revolving accounts.

For my May 3B report, I am going to see what happens when I have all at ≤ 4%. My AMEX BCE will probably show up then as well (that will be 3rd statement), so I'll have 4 open revolving accounts.

(@HeavenOhio's post in this thread showing the effect of actual dollar amounts is very interesting!)

[Anonymous]

So you’ve discovered both individual and aggregate 4% thresholds on your scorecard then, @Anonymous ?

Welcome back! 😊

Did you also have a revolver under 12 months of age at the time you referred to before, when you also had the score change at EX? What about the difference in inquiry count at EX at those times?

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

So you’ve discovered both individual and aggregate 4% thresholds on your scorecard then, @Anonymous ?

Welcome back! 😊

Did you also have a revolver under 12 months of age at the time you referred to before, when you also had the score change at EX? What about the difference in inquiry count at EX at those times?

---

Thanks Birdman! I hope everything is ok with you and your family.

It's 4% aggregate, same as I found earlier, with EQ 8 and TU 8. It doesn't matter if any revolvers are above 4%.

With EX 8, 4% aggregate alone isn't giving me the +3pts this time. When I found this earlier, I had 4/4/4 utilization with 2 open revolvers (ind., ind., aggregate). Now I have 4% aggregate with 5/2/9 and 3 open revolvers.

Both times I had 100% of accounts with a balance, and also new accounts - EX 1 inq before, EX 2 inq today. So I'm thinking all revolvers have to be 4% or less with EX 8 only. I'm going to test for this next month.

[Anonymous]

@Anonymous I see, so at EX if any single revolver is above 4%. Very interesting.

Me and fam are as well as can be expected. I hope you and your family are doing well.

I was unable to send you a message.

[Anonymous]

Might just be my profile, but the bump I expected for getting to 3% never happened.

That may be due to:

-my scorecard assignment (thick, clean, and old but with 2 new accounts within the last year)

-my actual level of revolving debt (~$9K) despite it being a low level of utilization%

-number of cards with a balance (5)

-1 card between 9% and 29% utilization; all others below 9%

Hope that data helps someone else, as getting to 3% did not change my score.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Might just be my profile, but the bump I expected for getting to 3% never happened.

Was this just on EX 8, through Experian's monitoring?

I've noticed a lot of things over the past year that cause EQ/TU 8 to react whereas EX 8 doesn't move.

One of these is AZEO with 2 cards - +19/+14 on EQ/TU. EX 8 doesn't move unless it's an aging threshold.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Might just be my profile, but the bump I expected for getting to 3% never happened.

Was this just on EX 8, through Experian's monitoring?

I've noticed a lot of things over the past year that cause EQ/TU 8 to react whereas EX 8 doesn't move.

One of these is AZEO with 2 cards - +19/+14 on EQ/TU. EX 8 doesn't move unless it's an aging threshold.

---

Hey @Anonymous 

Across all 3 bureaus, and across both EX and MyFICO products. I place most attention to F8 scores, but I will compare and report upon the other versions as well.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Might just be my profile, but the bump I expected for getting to 3% never happened.

Was this just on EX 8, through Experian's monitoring?

I've noticed a lot of things over the past year that cause EQ/TU 8 to react whereas EX 8 doesn't move.

One of these is AZEO with 2 cards - +19/+14 on EQ/TU. EX 8 doesn't move unless it's an aging threshold.

---

Hey @Anonymous 

Across all 3 bureaus, and across both EX and MyFICO products. I place most attention to F8 scores, but I will compare and report upon the other versions as well.

It doesn't surprise me that you don't see any movement in scores with util ≤ 4% and your profile data. I just wanted to make sure it wasn't based solely on EX results. I know you have a myFICO subscription in addition to Experian monitoring.