@Anonymous wrote:Thanks all for the responses!!
This suggests that the scores lenders are buying may bear little or no resemblance to the scores consumers pay for. Would anyone agree?? I was surprised that the TU score (obtained here) was so different --30 points -- from what the lender said they got.
Perhaps its best to use one set of scores as a guideline for where one stands, rather than knowing the actual numbers? I would think that if you had a score marginally above or below an interest rate breakpoint and your purchased score was above and the lenders was below because it was a different version, this would be pretty exasperating, especially if you paid for the scores.
Actually I completely agree with you; however, tracking any of the random FAKO scores is an absolute waste of time other than entertainment value (however slight that would be).
End of the day, tracking the underlying report data is really far more important than the scores themselves. If you have a good looking report, you can expect a pretty score from virtually any of the available lender pulls, just understand that there are a few specific things which might knock you one way or the other (like auto enhanced, your record on prior auto loans is much more heavily weighted than other information).
If you really want to track a score, EQ Beacon 5.0 or if you live in PA, EX Risk v2 are the best bets: both FICO '04, both will be used by mortgage lenders, and FICO '04 is probably the most widely utilized lender model right now even if you exclude mortgage lending which is '04 all the time.
Next best is something of a toss-up between the TU98 found here, and the TU08 Walmart provided score dependant on what you feel the average use is out in the lending community. Personally I rate TU08 > TU98 but that's me, and others I know will disagree. Also I don't know what flavor of pull the TU08 is honestly.
Beyond that, the rest of the scores available are effectively junk and are to be completely ignored. Again, I'll stress that if your report looks good, pretty much any score you receive will be solid, and that's consistent regardless of algorithm and industry option chosen.
@stan_the_man wrote:
@Revelate wrote:Beyond that, the rest of the scores available are effectively junk and are to be completely ignored. Again, I'll stress that if your report looks good, pretty much any score you receive will be solid, and that's consistent regardless of algorithm and industry option chosen.While FAKOs are nearly universally worthless, the Vantage Score is used by a few lenders -- though the are few and far between. The problem with using the Vantage Score as a measure of your credit is that you need to know that your lender uses it for that specific type of credit transaction ahead of time for it to have any value to you.
Yeah, and that's a good point you're right I should've mentioned. Also it seems that the VS pulling agencies don't do it all the time either from reports; however, in fairness that does make it worth tracking, but in the grand scheme of things: FICO 04 > FICO '98 / 08 >> VS > all, at least in my opinion. I just don't really worry about it as my future credit wishes are all with lenders that use FICO, so until the bureaus make more headway into the industry, personally I won't bother tracking it.