cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Can Someone Explain This Scoring @$%&@

tag
DaveSignal
Valued Contributor

Re: Can Someone Explain This Scoring @$%&@


@Anonymous wrote:

@DaveSignal wrote:

@marty56 wrote:

As a formula, it just crunches data so I would look at the input data.  Since it's based on probability and statistics, it's output may not predict the correct result but it is consistent.

 

There never could be a perfect scoring formula.  Someone will always be given too much credit so to speak or not enough.


FICO doesn't always correctly interpret the input data.  Slight changes that result from disputes (such as date reported on a charge-off) that would have no effect on the decision of a human reading the report can cause drastic fluctuations in a FICO score.


Don't kid yourself. The date of a CO is always going to affect how a human reads your report.

 

Surely you would be more forgiving of someone who had a CO 6 years ago compared to someone who have one 6 months ago -- so would I, and so does the Fico formulas.


You misinterpreted what I said.  The CO is for the same date.  The date didn't change.  It shows in the history as CO at the same time as before.  Only now it was just verified and updated as a valid charge off on the current date as result of the dispute.... but the CO date has not changed.  Therefore a human would see a CO 6 years ago, however it is written.  But FICO would see a CO within the last month.  FICO doesn't always calculate like this.  Only sometimes, for some accounts.... all of which a human would read the same way (CO 6 years ago).  Something throws off the scoring system.

EX:694 TU:744 EQ:777
Amex ED $19.5k - BoA Travel Rewards $15k - CSP $5k - SDFCU EMV $15k - NFCU goRewards $20k - Barclays Arrival $6.5k
Message 21 of 22
Revelate
Moderator Emeritus

Re: Can Someone Explain This Scoring @$%&@


@DaveSignal wrote:
You misinterpreted what I said.  The CO is for the same date.  The date didn't change.  It shows in the history as CO at the same time as before.  Only now it was just verified and updated as a valid charge off on the current date as result of the dispute.... but the CO date has not changed.  Therefore a human would see a CO 6 years ago, however it is written.  But FICO would see a CO within the last month.  FICO doesn't always calculate like this.  Only sometimes, for some accounts.... all of which a human would read the same way (CO 6 years ago).  Something throws off the scoring system.

There are two dates associated with any negative item: Date of First Delinquency (DOFD) and Date of Last Activity (DOLA).

 

DOFD is generally accepted as the important date from a FICO scoring perspective.  DOLA has less, if any, impact on how a negative item is scored as I understand it.  Disputes do strange things to scoring all on their own, but not because of a change to DOLA I believe.  Robert or another individual can certainly give a much better analysis on that than I can.

 

As illecs suggested, there was probably some other change in the report which accounted for the score disparity; however, the OP is correct: FICO is, and is supposed to be, a mystery in many respects.  Whether it should be or not is a different issue.




        
Message 22 of 22
Advertiser Disclosure: The offers that appear on this site are from third party advertisers from whom FICO receives compensation.