With such a thin file, having both cards report a balance causes a bigger score penalty vs. one card reporting.
During my "lean years" (2018-2021) when I only had a 2 or 3 low limit cards I AZEOed pretty consistently just to keep my scores from tanking. Not that I needed to since I rarely app, but I feel it's better to have it and not need it than the other way around. After adding a 4th card, my scores seem to be a lot more resilient... if 2 cards report a balance, my score doesn't drop as much.
I'd AZEO the month before applying or requesting a CLI, and at least shoot for AZEO when you aren't but it doesn't matter if you miss it because you can always get it back the following month. Then, when you and your scores are ready, add a 3rd card, which will help your scores a bunch, and even a 4th down the road for a little extra buffer. Gardening to let your accounts age and inquiries and/or baddies fall off will help too.
If you overpay the card slightly (anticipating any spend you'll put on the card before the statement cuts) you can ensure you achieve AZEO more reliably. I do that even now on my commonly-used cards that I like to report zero.
Good luck, and hopefully you'll be approved for the Chase card you want next time!
@uncredited wrote:Yeah, I've been super dilligent about paying to negative on Disco and only letting Citi report, but never expected a charge would post in one day from pending. I've never seen that happen before. I was paid to -0.78 until that pending posted in a mere 36 hours total.
I may end up paying Citi down to zero or negative, which I hate to do with them since it leaves the rewards on the table if it goes negative, but getting out of the all-reporting doghouse would be nice. That statement cuts in a week (or a week + weekend), so I'd be in the doghouse only for a week or so rather than a month if I did it that way. The only negative is then my TOTAL util would show zero (because the disco amount reporting is small and rounds down to zero% util) which is probably bad, too. Maybe worse?
I'm not understanding what you said about 'leaving the rewards on the table'.
@SouthJamaica wrote:I'm not understanding what you said about 'leaving the rewards on the table'.
Citi Double Cash pays 1% when you make a purchase and 1% when you pay it. But the 1% on paying doesn't apply to credit balances.
I guess it all depends on which is more important, a AZEO credit score or a small amount of cashback lost due to prepaying.
@CreditMarathoner wrote:
@SouthJamaica wrote:I'm not understanding what you said about 'leaving the rewards on the table'.
Citi Double Cash pays 1% when you make a purchase and 1% when you pay it. But the 1% on paying doesn't apply to credit balances.
I guess it all depends on which is more important, a AZEO credit score or a small amount of cashback lost due to prepaying.
I still don't get it. He's already gotten the payment points by paying ahead of time.
@uncredited wrote:@SouthJamaica It's only an issue if paying to negative before charges post. DC has that gimmic of "1% at purchase, and 1% at payment" which is meaningless semantics in all ways except if you pay negative where the way the calculations work it skips the "payment" half of the reward because it doesn't see a payment applied to a positive total.
It's not really that important, in practice it's no more than a few bucks a year you lose that way if you're not paying large sums negative, but it's just one of those principle things that it's not the card you pay negative with.
In this instance, I'm less worried about losing a buck in rewards, and more worried that my ENTIRE util being under $100 for the month (meaning only Disco's balance reporting which was nothing but a price correction charge that slipped through after I paid to negative), which will round either to 0% or 1% depending on how they do the calculations could actually be more damaging than "all reporting." If I let Citi report next week I'll be "all reporting" for a month. If I don't let Citi report my util will be 0%-ish for the month which also is a bad look.
I still don't get it. You've already gotten the payment points when you paid.
@SouthJamaicaHowever the system works, it applies the 1% for payment when a payment is applied to a positive balance. When you pay negative, it doesn't apply 1% to that payment to a non-balance. Internally it probably generates the 1% from some calculaton on balance reduction rather than payment added, so if there's no balance to reduce, it just doesn't generate the reward.
Not a big issue for the small amounts we're talking about occasionally overpaying. A few pennies adds up for them a lot more than for us. 0 util though....that's maybe worse than all reporting.
I think the TLDR is I can't wait to get those other 2 + accounts going so I don't have to worry about this stuff anymore 
@uncredited wrote:What's worse, next to no total util (under 1%), or all-reporting (2/2)?
And, if a Citi card reports 0 or negative, the same month as a limit increase should be reporting, would the new higher limit still report?
1. Low overall utilization is always good.
2. If you have 2 cards, for optimum scoring 1 should report a balance and 1 shouldn't.
3. Yes your new limit would report regardless of what the balance is.