cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

High utilization individual accounts & FICO 8

Auto Loans for ANY Credit Situation. Immediate Response.
Advertiser disclosure
Super Contributor

Re: High utilization individual accounts & FICO 8

Update:

 

When the 38% account fell to below 30%, there was no change in EX FiCO 8. This was in a 40k account.

 

The last of the >30% accounts to fall into place was the 82% account. When that fell to to below 30%, I gained 7 points in EX FICO 8. This was a 15k account.


Total revolving limits 719k (592500 reporting) FICO 8 scores: EQ 735 TU 782 EX 746
Message 31 of 35
Valued Contributor

Re: High utilization individual accounts & FICO 8

Very interesting...so when the 82% dropped, you got +7, but the 58% card gave up +10 on EX FICO 8 when it dropped.

I''m assuming both dropped below 8.9%, SJ?

And with that negative reason code shift...EX has to be more reliable than MF, but you did say the code failed to disappear on MF. Do you base that on an alert or a 1B?

I can only think of 2 possibilities: NRB525's view, that subsequent CC's individual utilization is taken into account, individually, or there is something else as BBS alluded to where the number of revolvers over a threshold(s) can cause separate penalty.







Installment loan reported this month,so technically, I'm at 2 months, but AoYA points were NOT reset. When new CCs hit and it is reset, I'll put the number it is.+1,+2,+2(Forgive typos, mobile.)(Everything said is Just IMHO.)
Scores updated AUG 4, '19. Since then, 5 HP dings to add; will update again.
Message 32 of 35
Super Contributor

Re: High utilization individual accounts & FICO 8


@Birdman7 wrote:
Very interesting...so when the 82% dropped, you got +7, but the 58% card gave up +10 on EX FICO 8 when it dropped.

I''m assuming both dropped below 8.9%, SJ?

I don't know why you would make that assumption; I said they dropped below 30%.  The 82% account dropped to  12.37%. The 58% card dropped to 26.346%.

And with that negative reason code shift...EX has to be more reliable than MF, but you did say the code failed to disappear on MF. Do you base that on an alert or a 1B?

I don't have any timely information on the EX FICO 8 negative reason codes from MF.  My post about the negative reason code not dropping out in MF was in error, since FICO 8 had not updated there. All I have to go on is EX.

I can only think of 2 possibilities: NRB525's view, that subsequent CC's individual utilization is taken into account, individually, or there is something else as BBS alluded to where the number of revolvers over a threshold(s) can cause separate penalty.

I can't even come up with what I would consider a meaningful guess. The negative reason codes baffle me.


Total revolving limits 719k (592500 reporting) FICO 8 scores: EQ 735 TU 782 EX 746
Message 33 of 35
Valued Contributor

Re: High utilization individual accounts & FICO 8

SJ, the "assuming" was really a question. Thank you for the answers.

Yeah, you've stumbled on some interesting info, SJ.

Ok, after some thought, I kinda like what you said earlier SJ, with slight modification.

I posit percentage of revolvers greater than either 28.9% or 48.9% causes a ding and the high usage negative reason code. Could be just one threshold or 2 or more, but i believe just like we have number/percentage of revolvers/accounts with a balance as a metric, it appears we have another: number/percentage of revolvers greater than xx threshold.

Sure you don't wanna do some confirmation testing SJ? Smiley Happy







Installment loan reported this month,so technically, I'm at 2 months, but AoYA points were NOT reset. When new CCs hit and it is reset, I'll put the number it is.+1,+2,+2(Forgive typos, mobile.)(Everything said is Just IMHO.)
Scores updated AUG 4, '19. Since then, 5 HP dings to add; will update again.
Message 34 of 35
Super Contributor

Re: High utilization individual accounts & FICO 8


@Birdman7 wrote:
SJ, the "assuming" was really a question. Thank you for the answers.

Yeah, you've stumbled on some interesting info, SJ.

Ok, after some thought, I kinda like what you said earlier SJ, with slight modification.

I posit percentage of revolvers greater than either 28.9% or 48.9% causes a ding and the high usage negative reason code. Could be just one threshold or 2 or more, but i believe just like we have number/percentage of revolvers/accounts with a balance as a metric, it appears we have another: number/percentage of revolvers greater than xx threshold.

Sure you don't wanna do some confirmation testing SJ? Smiley Happy

Nah, you do the testing. Me I'm just struggling to improve my scores.

 

BTW you were right about DCU's oddball reporting. I just pulled my 3B report today and saw that DCU had different balances with each of the 3 bureaus, one of which was that 58% balance which is gone everywhere else, and one of which was from 2 months ago.

 

It's also noteworthy that EQ's reporting is later than the others.  Several of the paid down balances are still showing up as not paid down on EQ.


Total revolving limits 719k (592500 reporting) FICO 8 scores: EQ 735 TU 782 EX 746
Message 35 of 35
Advertiser Disclosure: The offers that appear on this site are from third party advertisers from whom FICO receives compensation.