@Anonymous wrote:@Anonymous You know, @Anonymous makes the point. Compare the differences in her 2s vs. 4s and 5s. The only difference is inquiries and look at the striking difference.
That shows how important inquiries are to the older scores and then as we've said, the new accounts are much more punitive to the old scores. That really tells the story.
That CRADIS thing is so freaking cool! Someone is a graphics/coding master.
Seeing as you and CassieCard are in a clean scorecard, I still believe that the dirty scorecards are MUCH more penal on derogs than the newer models. That's not to say that INQs are incedibly important because they obviously are, I'm just thinking that being dirty is at least as impactful (if not more) as INQs.
It makes me wonder if anyone has done any in depth analysis on the rare cases where the 5/4/2 algos are higher than the 8/9 models.
@Anonymous wrote:
You mean the older models are harsher on the derogatories than the newer models.
I think the differences is the newer models are a harsher on recent derogatories. The older models did not have as many scorecards, They only had two dirty scorecards, so I think the derogatory was penalised uniformly for 7 years. (PR and DQ)
On the other hand version 8 and 9 give you a break when it’s no longer considered recent but they penalise you more when it is.
Yes, that makes so much sense to me.