How high did your FICO go after paying off CC's?

[Anonymous]

---

@Revelate wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Forgot to mention the jump after the DCU report was +35 points.

---

Any chance you'd be willing to break down the before utilization report (cards / original balance / limit) and then as they were paid down each interstitial step and corresponding score increase?  I know it's a lot ot ask but it's rare that we have a heavy utilization individual tracking their scores well as it's been paid down in my experience.

---

Sure. I can try at least. I can give you my scores prior to my payoffs in early March, and then give you the updates as they came in via myFICO and CCT, per date that it happened. Is that what you are looking for?

[Revelate]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Revelate wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Forgot to mention the jump after the DCU report was +35 points.

---

Any chance you'd be willing to break down the before utilization report (cards / original balance / limit) and then as they were paid down each interstitial step and corresponding score increase?  I know it's a lot ot ask but it's rare that we have a heavy utilization individual tracking their scores well as it's been paid down in my experience.

---

Sure. I can try at least. I can give you my scores prior to my payoffs in early March, and then give you the updates as they came in via myFICO and CCT, per date that it happened. Is that what you are looking for?

---

Basically as complete a picture as you can; scores and original balances / limits then updates for scores and what the new balance on the tradeline was.

What I'm trying to tease out if you have the data is some useful points to help confirm where there may be utilization breakpoints at varying different spots: we know they exist, but I don't know if that's ever really been codified with FICO 8 as to where they might be both individual and aggregate.  Hard for many of us to test aggregate utilization.

[JustinA]

608,619,613 across the board

78% utilization

4 major cards under 1000 cl. Maxed out or over CL.
1 gas card maxed out.
3 store cards 0 balance.

Lump sum of money coming this week. I can't wait to get back on track.

And obviously see the results of paying individual balances and overall utilization down to 4%

Praying for 670s or miracles

[Anonymous]

---

@Revelate wrote:

Basically as complete a picture as you can; scores and original balances / limits then updates for scores and what the new balance on the tradeline was.

What I'm trying to tease out if you have the data is some useful points to help confirm where there may be utilization breakpoints at varying different spots: we know they exist, but I don't know if that's ever really been codified with FICO 8 as to where they might be both individual and aggregate.  Hard for many of us to test aggregate utilization.

---

Ok I am in the process of documenting this in a timeline to make it easy to analyze.

Help me understand something on my 3B report from back in Feb that is confusing.

Under the FICO Score section, under negative factors, under "amount owed on revolving accounts is too high" is says total owed as $41,684. That total takes into account a closed card's balance, but is missing my Discover balance. It doesn't include any cards I am an AU on.

In that same section, under negative factors, under "heavy use", the utilization says 80%. Assuming the above cards count/don't count, that 80% excludes the Discover, but includes the credit line the closed card had before it was closed. Again, doesn't include any cards I am an AU on.

Is this normal?

[Revelate]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Revelate wrote:

Basically as complete a picture as you can; scores and original balances / limits then updates for scores and what the new balance on the tradeline was.

What I'm trying to tease out if you have the data is some useful points to help confirm where there may be utilization breakpoints at varying different spots: we know they exist, but I don't know if that's ever really been codified with FICO 8 as to where they might be both individual and aggregate.  Hard for many of us to test aggregate utilization.

---

Ok I am in the process of documenting this in a timeline to make it easy to analyze.

Help me understand something on my 3B report from back in Feb that is confusing.

Under the FICO Score section, under negative factors, under "amount owed on revolving accounts is too high" is says total owed as $41,684. That total takes into account a closed card's balance, but is missing my Discover balance. It doesn't include any cards I am an AU on.

In that same section, under negative factors, under "heavy use", the utilization says 80%. Assuming the above cards count/don't count, that 80% excludes the Discover, but includes the credit line the closed card had before it was closed. Again, doesn't include any cards I am an AU on.

Is this normal?

---

It's a 3rd party intepretation / presentation of the base report data.  Even MF isn't 100% accurate with the reasons on the additional analysis... while it's a useful bit of guideance, without actually seeing how your AU's are handled (traditionally by having every other account report $0 with the AU having a balance and see if you take a hit) there's really nothing to say... the intepretation only looks at the data, it doesn't have access to whether the algorithm discounted a tradeline or not.  Put simply, the algorithm that analyzes your report on the presentation side is different than the FICO algorithm to determine your score: they aren't 1:1 so one can't rely on the first one to figure out the second.

I.E. I could possibly go to Equifax, dispute my tax lien, likely watch it get discounted for a period of days until it came back verified, and pull a report here and I'd probably get a pop on FICO 8, but the presentation would still list the PR (possibly not under the reason codes which come from the bureau) but I'm guessing it'd still have the verbiage outside of that telling me I have a massive derogatory on my reports from the time period.

It's a little more awkward but use the tradeline data rather than the summary information to build the timeline... will wind up being a much much better dataset though the AU will throw things off somewhat as it may or may not be counted in your case on FICO 8.

[Anonymous]

---

@Revelate wrote:

It's a 3rd party intepretation / presentation of the base report data.  Even MF isn't 100% accurate with the reasons on the additional analysis... while it's a useful bit of guideance, without actually seeing how your AU's are handled (traditionally by having every other account report $0 with the AU having a balance and see if you take a hit) there's really nothing to say... the intepretation only looks at the data, it doesn't have access to whether the algorithm discounted a tradeline or not.  Put simply, the algorithm that analyzes your report on the presentation side is different than the FICO algorithm to determine your score: they aren't 1:1 so one can't rely on the first one to figure out the second.

I.E. I could possibly go to Equifax, dispute my tax lien, likely watch it get discounted for a period of days until it came back verified, and pull a report here and I'd probably get a pop on FICO 8, but the presentation would still list the PR (possibly not under the reason codes which come from the bureau) but I'm guessing it'd still have the verbiage outside of that telling me I have a massive derogatory on my reports from the time period.

It's a little more awkward but use the tradeline data rather than the summary information to build the timeline... will wind up being a much much better dataset though the AU will throw things off somewhat as it may or may not be counted in your case on FICO 8.

---

Thanks. I think I figured most of it out using a combo of CCT and myFICO. The AU accounts are in some cases counted.

I've had a work project that I need to complete so I probably won't get anything posted for a couple more days. Once I post it, we can go through it and clarify it and try to fill in any blanks.

[jcalvert86]

Just an additional data point for anyone curious...

Went from 670 to 740 with the following:

Went from 18k balance to 8k on 20k limit NFCU

Opened 3k limit Discover

Opened 2k limit Capital One

1 late pay on the file from 2010.

Waiting for CLI of 3k each on the Discover/Cap1 to report.

[Anonymous]

Here is a preliminary report of my utilization reported over the last couple of months. Still incomplete. I will fill out more details once I figure out the UT for the most recent scores.

Date        CA   $   Debt        Total Line  Util

2016-02-10  EQ  699  $52,822.00  $59,000.00  89.6%

2016-03-28  EQ  726  $34,125.00  $60,400.00  56.5%
2016-04-04  EQ  751  $23,834.00  $60,400.00  39.5%
2016-04-08  EQ  780  $10,635.00  $60,400.00  17.6%

2016-04-10  EQ  771  $10,595.00  $60,400.00  17.5%  SoFi Reported, SW Visa 1%->0%

2016-01-26  EX  713  

2016-02-10  EX  740  $50,258.00  $55,100.00  91.2% 

2016-03-28  EX  766  $22,396.00  $56,800.00  39.4%
2016-04-04  EX  773  $22,609.00  $56,800.00  39.8%
2016-04-05  EX  773  $22,609.00  $56,800.00  39.8%
2016-04-06  EX  773  $22,574.00  $56,800.00  39.7%
2016-04-07  EX  808   $9,209.00  $56,800.00  16.2%

2016-04-10  EX  805   $9,191.00  $56,800.00  16.2%  SoFi Reported

2016-04-10  EX  798   $9,191.00  $56,800.00  16.2%  Chase Inquiry

2016-12-31  TU  694

2016-01-31  TU  696  

2016-02-10  TU  709  $52,822.00  $59,000.00  89.6%

2016-03-28  TU  722  $34,125.00  $60,700.00  56.2%
2016-04-04  TU  735  $24,917.00  $60,700.00  41.0%

2016-04-08  TU  752  $23,947.00  $60,400.00  39.6%

2016-04-10  TU  748  $23,947.00  $60,400.00  39.6%  SoFi Reported

DCU has still not shown up as $0 on TU.

AMEX has not shown up as $0 on any of the three. I expect them to report sometime in the next week.

[erdoganog]

back around 2011 when i had to max out my only low limit few cards i had    i went from like 700-720 fico  to like 600-630!!!! i cant believe how debt to limits effectts that much!  So crazy it was as if i have BK or a Collections on my reports !!! nuts