cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

FICO scoring; baffled by the variance based on nearly identical data...

tag
Anonymous
Not applicable

FICO scoring; baffled by the variance based on nearly identical data...

Hi guys. I am ecstatic and yet puzzled. Last week, I pulled my free annual reports (through annualcreditreport.com) and saw 2 baddies on TU, 3 on EX, and 1 on EQ. I immediately disputed all of them online with each of the CRAs.

 

- TU dropped both baddies within 4 hours!

- EX dropped 1 but left 2 on (I am now firing off DV letters to both CAs)

- EQ is still investigating the only baddie they show for me

 

I have been a ScoreWatch subscriber through myFICO for several months but never paid to pull my TU score through them. Now that both baddies were gone, I decided to do so. Guess what I saw? My TU FICO score is 763! Just a few years ago, I was below 550, so becoming a 'high achiever' certainly has some personal pride for me. I have worked very hard towards it.

 

But here's why I'm puzzled. My latest EQ FICO (that I get as an SW subscriber) is 696. I have pondered over both TU and EQ reports through myFICO very closely and found that the only difference between them is the one baddie EQ has and TU does not. It is a very small collections account from 2005 that I paid off in Feb, 2006.

 

How could there be a 68 point variance based on just one item? FICO's formula must be identical regardless of the CRA they are getting the data from, correct? Why such disparity?

 

BTW, my EX score (the FAKO) is 752. If a lender pulls that plus my two FICOs, is it safe to assume they would base their judgement on just the TU score since it is the highest?

 

Thanks in advance guys. I credit (no pun intended) this forum with all my success in getting the finances in order so far!

Message 1 of 4
3 REPLIES 3
Lel
Moderator Emeritus

Re: FICO scoring; baffled by the variance based on nearly identical data...

 


@Anonymous wrote:

Hi guys. I am ecstatic and yet puzzled. Last week, I pulled my free annual reports (through annualcreditreport.com) and saw 2 baddies on TU, 3 on EX, and 1 on EQ. I immediately disputed all of them online with each of the CRAs.

 

- TU dropped both baddies within 4 hours!

- EX dropped 1 but left 2 on (I am now firing off DV letters to both CAs)

- EQ is still investigating the only baddie they show for me

 

I have been a ScoreWatch subscriber through myFICO for several months but never paid to pull my TU score through them. Now that both baddies were gone, I decided to do so. Guess what I saw? My TU FICO score is 763! Just a few years ago, I was below 550, so becoming a 'high achiever' certainly has some personal pride for me. I have worked very hard towards it.

 

But here's why I'm puzzled. My latest EQ FICO (that I get as an SW subscriber) is 696. I have pondered over both TU and EQ reports through myFICO very closely and found that the only difference between them is the one baddie EQ has and TU does not. It is a very small collections account from 2005 that I paid off in Feb, 2006.

 

How could there be a 68 point variance based on just one item? FICO's formula must be identical regardless of the CRA they are getting the data from, correct? Why such disparity?

 

BTW, my EX score (the FAKO) is 752. If a lender pulls that plus my two FICOs, is it safe to assume they would base their judgement on just the TU score since it is the highest?

 

Thanks in advance guys. I credit (no pun intended) this forum with all my success in getting the finances in order so far!


 

To answer the first highlight question, the answer is no, the formulae are not identical.  There are different FICO scoring models developed for each credit bureau, so even if there is completely identical information on both EQ and TU, it may yield different scores.  In my case, my EQ and TU have nearly identical information with no baddies (EQ has 2 more closed accounts that don't appear on TU; no derogs on either), yet my scores were recently over 40 points apart.

 

(Actually, the whole formula question is more complicated than that, because there are some special FICO scores that are used for certain industries, such as the auto-enhanced FICO scores.)

 

To answer you second question, credit decisions are not based solely on scores.  They are also based on the actual content of your credit report.  And with regard to how scores are considered, if a lender pulls more than one score then they may all factor into the lending decision.  Mortgage lenders, for example, pull scores from the 3 major credit bureaus and tend to make their decisions on the middle score.  But again, it's not just the scores that matter.

Message 2 of 4
Anonymous
Not applicable

Re: FICO scoring; baffled by the variance based on nearly identical data...

Thanks for the quick response. This is quite disheartening to hear though; if there are that many variations of FICO's scoring formula, then why do we even bother keeping track of where we are? As in, if I apply for a car loan (I have no intention to) based on the scores as I know them, but the lender gets this 'auto-enhanced' score you mentioned, then why do I even need to know what my FICO scores are?

 

A 68 point variance based on just one fairly minor baddie is beyond me.

 

Why do I get the feeling that Fair Isaac's goal behind all the number crunching is to crunch our brains into so much confusion that we become slaves to their various products while holding on to the faintest glimmer of hope that perhaps if we subscribe to enough of them, we will have a general-enough idea of where our score might be?

Message 3 of 4
MarineVietVet
Moderator Emeritus

Re: FICO scoring; baffled by the variance based on nearly identical data...

 


@Anonymous wrote:

Thanks for the quick response. This is quite disheartening to hear though; if there are that many variations of FICO's scoring formula, then why do we even bother keeping track of where we are? As in, if I apply for a car loan (I have no intention to) based on the scores as I know them, but the lender gets this 'auto-enhanced' score you mentioned, then why do I even need to know what my FICO scores are?

 

A 68 point variance based on just one fairly minor baddie is beyond me.

 

Why do I get the feeling that Fair Isaac's goal behind all the number crunching is to crunch our brains into so much confusion that we become slaves to their various products while holding on to the faintest glimmer of hope that perhaps if we subscribe to enough of them, we will have a general-enough idea of where our score might be?


 

Yes it can be confusing and frustrating at times but I have learned so much here about credit, debt and the proper management of both. No one can ever have all the answers but I invite you to stick around these forums and soak in all the information you can. It's not really that hard to learn how to make the system work for you and not against you. Keep an open mind.

 

And for what it's worth I don't subscribe to any FICO service or product and have no desire to do so in the future. I pull my free reports once a year at annualcreditreport.com and buy my scores perhaps twice a year.

 

 

 

From a BK years ago to:
EX - 9/09 pulled by lender 802, EQ - 10/10-813, TU - 10/10-774

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they've made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem".

Message 4 of 4
Advertiser Disclosure: The offers that appear on this site are from third party advertisers from whom FICO receives compensation.