No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
My FICO9 score has always been lower than my FICO8. Can anyone offer any glimpse as to why that might be? Current scores are:
FICO9: 738/747/740
FICO8: 776/766/772
No derogs, 34% aggregate usage, highest balance is 74%, balance reporting on 3/9 revolving accounts. Newest account is 3 months old (refi'd a student loan), oldest account is 15 years, 11 months old.
From what I could interpret from here and checking your current information, it looks like FICO 9 is giving you a stronger penalty to your scores due to your utilization. F9 factors your debt more than F8 both with total usage and single card utilization and that is what I think is causing the score discrepancy. Apparently it's to help lenders identify customers who carry a higher risk of bankruptcy/delinquency
My Fico9s are lower also at 12% utilization.
GL OP!
DON'T WORK FOR CREDIT CARDS ... MAKE CREDIT CARDS WORK FOR YOU!
I was wondering the same thing as my EQ FICO 9 Score is 34 points lower than FICO 8 Score -but- I have one paid CO remaining until 12/2022. That's the only adverse item on my EQ report -and- TU/EX = 100% clean . . . I don't know their FICO 9 Scores.
NOTE: My utilization is 4%.
@babygirl1256 wrote:I was wondering the same thing as my EQ FICO 9 Score is 34 points lower than FICO 8 Score -but- I have one paid CO remaining until 12/2022. That's the only adverse item on my EQ report -and- TU/EX = 100% clean . . . I don't know their FICO 9 Scores.
Interesting. My understanding of FICO 9 is that paid charge-offs don't count for scoring purposes. Is the CO paid as agreed or did you do a settlement? Believe paying less than full balance could hit you harder than on FICO 8
*** Not to sidetrack the OP's posting*** but . . . I paid the full amount of $429.07 and I never bothered to try and offer a settlement at all. I thought that FICO 9 "medical" COs didn't count -but- I am not sure. My EQ FICO 9 Score is 762 and my EQ FICO 8 Score is 796. When I Googled it stated that 762 was an ok score . . . so I didn't worry about it. I'm still sorta confused as to the calculation. No other derogs.
@Gallager2014 wrote:My FICO9 score has always been lower than my FICO8. Can anyone offer any glimpse as to why that might be? Current scores are:
FICO9: 738/747/740
FICO8: 776/766/772
No derogs, 34% aggregate usage, highest balance is 74%, balance reporting on 3/9 revolving accounts. Newest account is 3 months old (refi'd a student loan), oldest account is 15 years, 11 months old.
You have high utilization.
IMHO FICO 9 is less tolerant of high utilization, and that is why your FICO 9's are lower than your 8's.
For about 5 years I had very low utilization. My FICO 9's were always much higher than my 8's. Then, starting last March, my utilization started creeping up. Then FICO 8 and 9 reversed. My 8's are now higher than my 9's.
Hmmm, this thread is kind of bending my brain as my FICO 8 scores are the ones which are always lagging my FICO 9 scores, and by "lagging" I mean by an average of 40 points. My datapoints are as follows:
History:
Since my discharge every card has been paid in full each month prior to the due date, however a few late charges typically trickle in between due date and statement date, so my cards typically report small balances each month.
So, to bring this conversation full circle, I'm not sure why my FICO 9 scores are so much higher than my FICO 8 scores. I don't know, maybe my scores will balance out next January when my Chapter 13 drops off my reports.
EDIT: I just saw @SouthJamaica's post which was apparently written and posted while I was writing mine; utilization makes sense, my normal utilization is pretty close to 0% each month.
Chapter 13:
I categorically refuse to do AZEO!
I agree with the others who've pointed out it's all about utilization. When my overall utilization was around 25%-30% my FICO 9 scores ranged from 710-720 while my FICO 8s were 725-730.
My utilization is 10% now and my FICO 9s have jumped up to 750ish, while the 8s have barely improved and hover around 730-735. Utilization should be reporting under 5% soon and I'm interested to see the results of that on both.
IIRC from the high level discription of FICO9, its main purpose was to exclude medical collections and be kinder with regards to paid collections than FICO8. This seems to suggest that they made more tweeks to the algorithm than that.