FICO Scoring Risk Rate

[Anonymous]

Cool, thanks for the info.  All of your scoring factors seem to be maximized outside of the late payments of course.  With your installment loans, where does their individual utilization sit and what's your aggregate installment loan utilization?

Perhaps the 30/60 late payments are part of the constraint that held you back from a > 39 point jump from the 90 day coming off?  If that is indeed the case, it would suggest that the 30/60 were also impacting your score to some degree when it was 771, meaning that it possibly could have been a little higher if the 30/60's weren't present. 

Still very good data points and I appreciate the feedback, but I would like to hear from someone with a nearly identical profile to yours just with only a 90 day late (no other late payments) just to compare.

[Trudy]

2007 re-fi Mortgage 78% (this will jump as I'm in the midst of another re-fi)

Auto 54% - purchased 9/2016 (youngest acount)

PLOC 0% but I believe this is considered revolving(?)

I believe the same about the 30/60 days.  Even though a 30 and the 60 will fall off in 9 months, it seems they, or at least the 60 still has more of an impact this late than what I've read in these forums.

[Thomas_Thumb]

---

@Trudy wrote:

I believe the same about the 30/60 days.  Even though a 30 and the 60 will fall off in 9 months, it seems they, or at least the 60 still has more of an impact this late than what I've read in these forums.

---

Impact of a well aged 60 day late (say 4 to 5 year) should be in the neighborhood of 25 to 35 points [refer to ABCD's graph]. It looks like that may be the situation for Trudy given scores of 790 to 817 scores with a 6 year old 60 day and two old 30 day lates still on file. The lower 790 TU score in comparison to the other CRAs is a bit of a puzzle.

BBS - Not sure if lates are addative when there is a 90 day or greater late in the mix. If a profile has a 90 day late then the impact of a 60 day late or a 30 day late may not not felt. Fico might look at lates something like the below (assume all lates are 6 year in age):

If longest late = 90, then score deduct = 75

If longest late = 60, then score deduct = 35

If longest late = 30, then score deduct = 25

For the above example, if the 90 day late falls off, score deduct drops to 35 for a net gain of 40 points.

However, Fico does mention that QTY of lates is a consideration in scoring and sites an example of multiple accounts with recent 30 day lates being more harmful than a single account with a 60 day late. It would be interesting to see some data on 30 day and 60 day lates with changes in QTY on file.

[Anonymous]

That makes sense.  It seems then that the 60 day late Trudy has is what held back his score from jumping probably another 25 points or so when the 90 went away.