Hey all, neglected to ask about this a couple weeks back. There seems be no discernable reason why my Experian fico is lower than my Equifax and Transunion. EQ and TU show scores of 725 and 720, respectively. Experian showed 690. I combed through the reports and could find no difference between EX and TU. Is this an odd occurance or more the norm ???
@user5387 wrote:I believe the scoring models vary across the three FICO scores found on this site.
For example, the TU version is TU 98.
If different formulas are applied to identical information, you will end up with discrepancies.
Another possible issue is time, if the three scores are not calculated on the same day.
Am guessing the 3 in 1 promotion was used since it was about that time; your other assertion is correct for the likely difference: '04 and '98 seem to track more closely than to '08 from various anecdotal reports on identical information: TU = '98, EQ = '04, EX = '08: all the base / classic versions (no industry options).
The EQ and EX fico scores I got from here. The Tu score I got from Discover and Barclays.
@Jayb5635 wrote:The EQ and EX fico scores I got from here. The Tu score I got from Discover and Barclays.
Discover / Barclay's are TU '08.
Each of the bureau's algoritms are slightly different: based on FICO but minor modifications as they compete against each other in more than just quality of data, though I'm not certain when that practice started or necessarily for what reason; might be some subtle things as well in the reporting of each tradeline that might be different on each, hard to say how deep and precisely what FICO is looking at.
It's on the high side of the guidance we've seen here for disparity between bureau scores of the same model and type (30 points) but it's certainly within the realm of possibility;: in general they're never going to be identical.