I can't really offer much to the OP, having never heard of it before, but it does sound limited and voluntary for now:
Your UltraFICO™ Score lets you show lenders indicators of responsible financial behavior, not visible on a traditional credit report, including:
Evidence of savings and keeping a healthy average balance
Maintaining a bank account over time
Avoiding having a negative balance
Regularly paying bills and making other bank transactions
The UltraFICO™ Score will initially be available through a small group of lenders as part of a limited pilot phase for consumers who cannot currently access credit or, in certain cases, could be eligible for better terms. This initial pilot phase is designed for fine-tuning of the deployment of the score. As we complete the pilot phase, the UltraFICO™ Score will be more broadly available.
If you are interested in getting your UltraFICO™ Score when it becomes available please complete the form to receive news and updates.
https://www.fico.com/ultrafico/
That's an interesting twist. Though, with the increased interconnectivity and digitization of records, I suppose it was inevitable.
My understanding is that for someone to use FicoUltra, then you must give the CRAs access to your bank account so they can see you average daily balance which it sounds like you have not done.
That type of jump and considering it cam around the first of the month leads me to believe you had some baddie get excluded or perhaps a combination of aging factors and inquiries becoming excluded.
you may not see it yet as not all the report factors always show up immediately on you reports. MyFico will only update the account information when your 3b updates. One way to see now is to log into one of the dispute sites and look for changes. You can do this without actually submitting a dispute.
@Anonymous wrote:I agree, if they want utility payment history or cell phone payment history or even rental history, I'm all for it, but I will never allow them to look into my checking account, not now, not ever.
No mortgage for you then?
You have to provide statements just sayin' 
This is a non-sequitor conversation anyway, they're not going to use an alternative score if a traditional one will do... which should be sufficient for basically all of us on this forum.
To be realistic about it, however, OP reached 570. That implies some set of late payments. Late payments are a violation of the contract agreement one has with each lender.
Is a lender supposed to trust someone who has shown they might be late ( or very late, or stiff the lender) ? How about in a case of identity theft? How does the lender know to trust anyone? In rebuilding, showing good cash management skills, such as no bounced checks, is another way to get a view to reliability.
From some comments by others, the Ultra FICO steps may be as simple as a conference call between the creditor, applicant, and the bank with the applicant checking account, just to verbally verify basic info about the checking account, not necessarily sending in bank statements.
Is a lender supposed to trust someone who has shown they might be late ( or very late, or stiff the lender) ? How about in a case of identity theft? How does the lender know to trust anyone? In rebuilding, showing good cash management skills, such as no bounced checks, is another way to get a view to reliability.
From some comments by others, the Ultra FICO steps may be as simple as a conference call between the creditor, applicant, and the bank with the applicant checking account, just to verbally verify basic info about the checking account, not necessarily sending in bank statements.
@NRB525 wrote:
To be realistic about it, however, OP reached 570. That implies some set of late payments. Late payments are a violation of the contract agreement one has with each lender.
Is a lender supposed to trust someone who has shown they might be late ( or very late, or stiff the lender) ? How about in a case of identity theft? How does the lender know to trust anyone? In rebuilding, showing good cash management skills, such as no bounced checks, is another way to get a view to reliability.
From some comments by others, the Ultra FICO steps may be as simple as a conference call between the creditor, applicant, and the bank with the applicant checking account, just to verbally verify basic info about the checking account, not necessarily sending in bank statements.
It won't be verbal but it may be access to some summary information (like daily balance for the past 3 months) which is enough to napkin math out which way things are going.
I'm not an application architect but it'll probably be a limited time use token like we see elsewhere these days, actually that struck me recently when talking about a project for the customer I work with where we're trying to speed up resolution of cases by getting our support arm access to the data more easily with some consolidated logging solution and that has all the same issues in terms of privacy and longer term access... though to be fair it's not the same as personal financial data, but on the flipside if I never have to give them my true login credentials and they don't have full any-time access, getting my checking account transactions isn't that big of a deal: hell they've already established my identity anyway and if I didn't trust them with some personal data I wouldn't ever even apply for an account with them anyway.
Think people see the access to a checking account and the initial reaction was *gasp* but ultimately I'm not seeing the sensititivy issue: if you want a mortgage you have to provide checking and any account you are using for reserves or downpayment statements, and actually you usually have to do that on other non-traditional approvals too.
This really isn't any different, if you want a loan or credit card, and you don't have a credit history to base it on, show that you can repay it.
