Closing OLDEST Account DOES Affect your FICO Score

[Anonymous]

BBS what I mean is he asked to upgrade today something he had canceled two weeks prior.

And yes I agree we should stop posting in this thread. And I assumed it was a FICO score SJ, because that’s what the title of the thread said.

[Remedios]

Just because OP lost interest, it doesn't mean that somebody else with similar question/concern will not find it useful.

Most threads are abandoned by those who started them, and if conversation stopped because of it, we'd lack about 75% of the knowledge we have around here.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:
BBS what I mean is he asked to upgrade today something he had canceled two weeks prior.

---

I didn't even read that part of his post.  I didn't get much past the thread title, to be honest.

[iv]

---

@SouthJamaica wrote:

1. OP was probably talking about a Vantage score, which would only include open accounts in average age of accounts.

---

Just for the record, that's incorrect.  Vantage includes both open and closed accounts in AAoA, just like FICO does.

(Yes, CK only shows open accounts in their front-end fluff AAoA display.  CK is, as usual, wrong.)

[SouthJamaica]

---

@iv wrote:

---

@SouthJamaica wrote:

1. OP was probably talking about a Vantage score, which would only include open accounts in average age of accounts.

---

Just for the record, that's incorrect.  Vantage includes both open and closed accounts in AAoA, just like FICO does.

(Yes, CK only shows open accounts in their front-end fluff AAoA display.  CK is, as usual, wrong.)

---

I disagree. I have seen Vantage 3.0's calculation of my average age of accounts across various sites, and it appears to me that only the open accounts are considered in AAoA. Credit Karma's "front end" calculation of it is no different than the other sites, so I'm sure it's Vantage 3.0, not Credit Karma, that's the culprit on this one.

[iv]

---

@SouthJamaica wrote:

I disagree. I have seen Vantage 3.0's calculation of my average age of accounts across various sites, and it appears to me that only the open accounts are considered in AAoA. Credit Karma's "front end" calculation of it is no different than the other sites, so I'm sure it's Vantage 3.0, not Credit Karma, that's the culprit on this one.

---

Multiple sources of incorrect fluff are still incorrect...

How many sites with FICO scores have you also seen display incorrect AAoA stats?  (Discounting AU accounts, not including closed accounts, only including certain types of accounts...)

Fluff is not an accurate representation of ANY scoring algorithm.

Also, refer to Vantage's own FAQ on the issue:

https://your.vantagescore.com/resource/81

[Anonymous]

I'm quite sure that VS 3.0 counts closed accounts in age of accounts calculations just like Fico does. 

A couple of years ago my AoOOA dropped from around 15 years to 7-8 years and my AAoOA took a decent drop as well and my Vantage scores didn't budge. 

[SouthJamaica]

So every single site that reports Vantage scores is wrong, and yet Vantage is not wrong?

OK, if you say so.

[Anonymous]

It’s not the score that is wrong. It’s each individual website’s separate calculation of the attributes, which have nothing to do with the execution of the algorithm on the data itself.

Neither a FICO algorithm nor a VS algorithm outputs attributes such as ages delinquencies inquires etc. etc. They input the data and the output is a score and some reason codes; that’s it, to MY knowledge. Everything else you see is a websites calculation and potentially fluff.

That’s why a creditor doesn’t just look at your score. They also look at your credit report itself, so they can see all the attributes themselves. Or they have their own software that hopefully displays and accounts for those attributes more correctly than these commercial CMS sites which are free half the time and therefore don’t have anywhere near the effort engineered into them that commercial software for financial institutions has.

[Anonymous]

As a matter of fact, for example, even a website like MF, their website has errors glitches and problems, as well. Right now they’re working on an issue for me where a hard pull is not displaying. Imagine at these free sites?

But we know most, hopefully all, financial institutions have software that has been rigorously tested and has a much higher degree of accuracy. And then again if not, maybe that accounts for some of the denials or approvals people get when they shouldn’t.