cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

EQ fico 08 vs EQ fico bankcard 08

Community Leader
Super Contributor

Re: EQ fico 08 vs EQ fico bankcard 08

If you are curious when your EQ FICO 8 Classic hits 850, you are doing the right thing by joining Langley (or pulling the true Classic score some other way).  Your idea about subtracting 30 (or any other number) won't work.  There's no way to infer the precise Classic score from the BE, though of course you could infer with fair confidence when it was > 840.  Even if you had a BE of 900 you could not infer with certainty a Classic of 850, though it would be a good bet.

 

Congrats on having such good scores!  My TU hit 850 back in Feb/March, which was kinda fun.

Message 11 of 20
Super Contributor

Re: EQ fico 08 vs EQ fico bankcard 08

Here's how my EQ Classic 8 vs BE 8 compared over the last 6 cycles, generally using the same bureau data:

 

Classic 8       BE 8     Variance

847                  871          24

825                  845          20

828                  848          20

831                  853          22

828                  851          23

831                  850          19

 

The variance overall seems pretty consistent. 

Message 12 of 20
Valued Contributor

Re: EQ fico 08 vs EQ fico bankcard 08


@BrutalBodyShots wrote:

Here's how my EQ Classic 8 vs BE 8 compared over the last 6 cycles, generally using the same bureau data:

 

Classic 8       BE 8     Variance

847                  871          24

825                  845          20

828                  848          20

831                  853          22

828                  851          23

831                  850          19

 

The variance overall seems pretty consistent. 


Good data BBS...thanks!



TU fico08=831 05/31/18
EX fico08=800 06/18/18
EQ fico08=826 04/18/18
EX fico09=823 06/02/18
EQ fico bankcard08=856 05/22/18
Message 13 of 20
Valued Contributor

Re: EQ fico 08 vs EQ fico bankcard 08


@CreditGuyInDixie wrote:

If you are curious when your EQ FICO 8 Classic hits 850, you are doing the right thing by joining Langley (or pulling the true Classic score some other way).  Your idea about subtracting 30 (or any other number) won't work.  There's no way to infer the precise Classic score from the BE, though of course you could infer with fair confidence when it was > 840.  Even if you had a BE of 900 you could not infer with certainty a Classic of 850, though it would be a good bet.

 

Congrats on having such good scores!  My TU hit 850 back in Feb/March, which was kinda fun.


The Fico 8 Bankcard algorithm looks has more score cards and weighs factors somewhat differently than Classic Fico 8. So, as CGID mentions, no robust conversion exists. However, a BC Fico 8 score of 900 is more difficult to achieve than the Classic Fico 8 850 score counterpart. My guess is a given profile must meet the Classic 850 metrics before a BC 900 can be realized. The below paste is relates to both Bankcard and Auto enhanced.

 

Here are the article links:

https://www.equifax.com/pdfs/corp/EFS-913-ADV-BEACON-09-Auto-Industry-Option.pdf

https://www.equifax.com/pdfs/corp/EFS-914-ADV-BEACON-09_BankcardIndustryOption.pdf

 

Beacon 9 Industry Option.jpg

Fico 8: .......EQ 850 TU 850 EX 850
Fico 9: .......EQ 850 TU 850 EX 850
Fico 4 .....:. EQ 809 TU 823 EX 830 EX Fico 98: 842
VS 3.0:...... EQ 835 TU 835 EX 835
Fico 8 BC:. EQ 892 TU 900 EX 900
CBIS: ........EQ LN Auto 940 EQ LN Home 870 TU Auto 902 TU Home 950
Message 14 of 20
Super Contributor

Re: EQ fico 08 vs EQ fico bankcard 08

TT, what do you believe the factors are that impact the variance between an 850 Classic score and a 900 BCE score?  Since you've been able to top out both models you probably have a pretty good grasp of the top-end differences.

 

 

Message 15 of 20
Valued Contributor

Re: EQ fico 08 vs EQ fico bankcard 08

BBS,

 

Bankcard enhanced Fico 8 is more sensitive to # cards reporting than its Classic counterpart. The Auto enhanced counterpart looks specifically for an auto loan. I don't have an auto loan, open or closed, on file and suspect that' may be a reason why TU and EX Auto scores top out at 897 - while the BCEs versions were able to reach 900.

 

It would be helpful to know how the additional enhanced scorecard(s) segment profiles but, I have not found info detailing the segmentation.

Fico 8: .......EQ 850 TU 850 EX 850
Fico 9: .......EQ 850 TU 850 EX 850
Fico 4 .....:. EQ 809 TU 823 EX 830 EX Fico 98: 842
VS 3.0:...... EQ 835 TU 835 EX 835
Fico 8 BC:. EQ 892 TU 900 EX 900
CBIS: ........EQ LN Auto 940 EQ LN Home 870 TU Auto 902 TU Home 950
Message 16 of 20
Super Contributor

Re: EQ fico 08 vs EQ fico bankcard 08

What about when AZEO is in place?  If you look back up at Post 12 where I showed a 24 point variance between my EQ Classic and EQ BCE scores, both of those are with AZEO in place.  There's got to be other factors outside of number of cards with balances that BCE is more sensitive to, as I'm in an ideal place with respect to number of cards with balances (AZEO) and am only at 871. 

 

Is the BCE model possibly more critical of age of accounts factors?  All of my age of accounts factors are basically borderline in terms of being top-notch verses just below; I'd imagine in 6-12 months I'd be "ideal" across all of them.

 

Does the BCE model like to see a non-mortgage installment loan present?  I know such a loan (say, auto) in addition to a mortgage could be worth 5-10 points on the Classic model... perhaps on the BCE model it would be "worth" more?

 

 

Message 17 of 20
Valued Contributor

Re: EQ fico 08 vs EQ fico bankcard 08

There are undoubtedly many other differences. A couple that come to mind are:

1) Recent credit (including HPs for CLIs). I'd define recent in this case as 24 months age.

2) The enhanced versions looking for more accounts in general and more types of accounts specifically.

 

I have not had an inquiry on EX in more than 6 years. In August 2016 I had "no recent activity on revolving accounts". Auto score dropped substantially. In February 2016 I had 5 of 5 cards (6 of 6 including AU) reporting balances.

 

Fico Model NameMar-15Jul-15Nov-15Feb-16Mar-16Jul-16Aug-16Oct-16Mar-17Apr-18
EX Bankcard Fico 8898898900895898900892897900900
EX Classic Fico 8850850850850850850850850850850
EX score difference48485045485042475050

 

Fico Model NameMar-15Jul-15Nov-15Feb-16Mar-16Jul-16Aug-16Oct-16Mar-17Apr-18
EX Bankcard Fico 8898898900895898900892897900900
EX Auto Fico 8889889884883884894869891897895
EX Score difference99161214623635
Fico 8: .......EQ 850 TU 850 EX 850
Fico 9: .......EQ 850 TU 850 EX 850
Fico 4 .....:. EQ 809 TU 823 EX 830 EX Fico 98: 842
VS 3.0:...... EQ 835 TU 835 EX 835
Fico 8 BC:. EQ 892 TU 900 EX 900
CBIS: ........EQ LN Auto 940 EQ LN Home 870 TU Auto 902 TU Home 950
Message 18 of 20
Super Contributor

Re: EQ fico 08 vs EQ fico bankcard 08

You must have had a decent buffer than on the BCE model similar to your Classic 8 buffer, then. 

 

If you were able to allow all of your cards to report balances and only saw your 900 score go to 895, I'd say you had a good buffer in place on a model that as you stated is sensitive to number of cards with balances reported.

Message 19 of 20
Valued Contributor

Re: EQ fico 08 vs EQ fico bankcard 08


@BrutalBodyShots wrote:

You must have had a decent buffer than on the BCE model similar to your Classic 8 buffer, then. 

 

If you were able to allow all of your cards to report balances and only saw your 900 score go to 895, I'd say you had a good buffer in place on a model that as you stated is sensitive to number of cards with balances reported. [Yes, BCE is rather sensitive to # (or %) of cards reporting but less so with EX].


Overall, I don't see much of a top end buffer on BCE. Not sure how the additional 50 BCE points are allocated. Otherwise I would expect 900 to hold the way 850 does with Classic Fico 8.

 

EX puts less weight on # cards reporting than does either TU and EQ. See below comparison

 

CRANov-15Feb-16Mar-16Max-Min
Ag UT1%3%2%***
Cards2 of 65 of 63 of 6***
EQ BCE88687488212
TU BCE90088089920
EX BCE9008958985

 

Fico has 5 primary scoring factors with multiple attributes making up each category. Given each factor is allocated a certain number of points (or % of total points available for a given scorecard), a buffer for each is possible. That would help explain why some profiles with similar scores that appear to be on the same scorecard are more stable than others to changes in a specific attribute.

 

For a couple briefs on industry enhanced scores check out the Equifax links in the above post:

https://ficoforums.myfico.com/t5/Understanding-FICO-Scoring/EQ-fico-08-vs-EQ-fico-bankcard-08/m-p/52...

 

Fico 8: .......EQ 850 TU 850 EX 850
Fico 9: .......EQ 850 TU 850 EX 850
Fico 4 .....:. EQ 809 TU 823 EX 830 EX Fico 98: 842
VS 3.0:...... EQ 835 TU 835 EX 835
Fico 8 BC:. EQ 892 TU 900 EX 900
CBIS: ........EQ LN Auto 940 EQ LN Home 870 TU Auto 902 TU Home 950
Message 20 of 20