No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
This is in no way complaining, just questioning the 28.9% individual threshold and 8.9% aggregate threshold.
Experian today after 2nd revolver reported 27.72%.
F8: -5 (846 to 841)
F2: -16 (824 to 808)
AU2: -15 (857 to 842)
AU8: -6 (881 to 875)
CC2: -44 (847 to 803)
CC3: -12 (816 to 804)
CC8: -5 (887 to 882)
Had an expense where I went from 1/11 revolver reporting 1.9%, total UTL 1% to 2 reporting, 1.9% (will report $0 by end of month) and 27.72%, total 6.34%. No other changes for sure. I brought up 2 reporting to get that out of the way because I've previously had 2 reporting but both less than 8% and total lower than the now 6.34% and it only impacted my EX2 scores.
I've long felt that raw dollars may be a factor and in this case it seems it may be as I'm below 28.9% for individual and 8.9% for total UTL.
Thoughts?
@Trudy wrote:This is in now way complaining, just questioning the 28.9% individual threshold and 8.9% aggregate threshold.
Experian today after 2nd revolver reported 27.72%.
F8: -5 (846 to 841)
F2: -16 (824 to 808)
AU2: -15 (857 to 842)
AU8: -6 (881 to 875)
CC2: -44 (847 to 803)
CC3: -12 (816 to 804)
CC8: -5 (887 to 882)
Had an expense where I went from 1/11 revolver reporting 1.9%, total UTL 1% to 2 reporting, 1.9% (will report $0 by end of month) and 27.72%, total 6.34%. No other changes for sure. I brought up 2 reporting to get that out of the way because I've previously had 2 reporting but both less than 8% and total lower than the now 6.34% and it only impacted my EX2 scores.
I've long felt that raw dollars may be a factor and in this case it seems it may be as I'm below 28.9% for individual and 8.9% for total UTL.
Thoughts?
There's nothing magical about 8.9% aggregate utilization. The lower you go, the higher your scores. In my experience 1% to 3% was a sweet spot.
But the 29% number, in individual utilization, is definitely a biggy.
Yeah I thought about the varying thresholds some people find below 8.9%. I noticed the below from EX's site today. I know 4% and below hasn't caused a change in EX F8 for me in the past. Not sure I can recall if I ever had 5% aggregate and/or without something else happening. I'll eventually find out. I will see when the one revolver reports $0 in a few days and drops me below 6%.
@Trudy wrote:Yeah I thought about the varying thresholds some people find below 8.9%. I noticed the below from EX's site today. I know 4% and below hasn't caused a change in EX F8 for me in the past. Not sure I can recall if I ever had 5% aggregate and/or without something else happening. I'll eventually find out. I will see when the one revolver reports $0 in a few days and drops me below 6%.
In my experience, there were no thresholds. Every full integer percentage change resulted in a score change.
@Trudy wrote:This is in now way complaining, just questioning the 28.9% individual threshold and 8.9% aggregate threshold.
I've long felt that raw dollars may be a factor and in this case it seems it may be as I'm below 28.9% for individual and 8.9% for total UTL.
You're definitely right about the raw dollars - it's listed in one of FICO's documents:
(Full list with link to source document is here. I'm only showing dollar balance and percentage reason statements here, because they are tracked separately.)
EQ/TU/EX FICO 8 Reason Code List Bold statements indicate possible variations in scoring between CRAs. | ||||
Reason Statement | EQ | TU | EX | Remarks |
Amount owed on accounts is too high | 1 | 1 | 1 | Balance track |
Amount owed on revolving accounts is too high | 11 | 11 | 11 | Balance track |
Proportion of balances to credit limits on bank/national revolving or other revolving accounts is too high | 10 | 10 |
| Percent track |
Ratio of balance to limit on bank revolving or other rev accts too high |
|
| 10 | Percent track |
Proportion of loan balances to loan amounts is too high | 33 | 3 | 33 | Percent track |
Definitely question everything.
Those utilization thresholds that have been posted here forever seem to be good general guidelines that work for relatively low dollar balances - maybe under $1000 or $2000 aggregate and individual.
I'm not sure at all about the dollar thresholds, but I do know that I don't see very much movement in the entire (0,9]% utilization range. I've never let a card report above 9% or $1035 individual, aggregate high of $1688. There is some movement above $1000 on all 3 mortgage scores, and reason statements that mention balances will shift up one or two spots.
There is a 5% threshold (not 0 to 4% exactly to be under it) which gives +3/+1/+3 on EQ/TU/EX 8, but that's on my new-to-credit scorecard. This one seems to be a percentage only thing, as I've seen it even with $538 aggregate.
I absolutely believe that SouthJamaica has score changes at every single integer percentage, and that it's caused by the actual dollar balances being reported.
There must be something in the profile data set that FICO used that showed people with relatively high balances (compared to profile population average) - even if low percentage - were more of a risk somehow.
A lot of people say "But my util was only 3%, why would my score drop?". 3% of what though? $1 million TCL? That's $30,000 and TCL doesn't say anything about a person's ability to pay. Lenders obviously trusted that person, but it's all about what people actually did with it.
Thanks for the info @Anonymous . Good point regarding the dollar value of 3% in your example. This is not the 1st time where raw dollars seemed to support a change but previously I never saw it impact my F8 score and not sure it has in this case as I went from 0.50% ($475) to 6.43% ($6018.17). Thought possibly 6K may be a raw dollar figure but interestingly that previously reported revolver reported $0 today. Bringing my total reporting from 2 back to 1 rev (2 inst). Dollars from $6018.17 to $5543.17, aggregate 6.34% to 5.84%....and I lost 1 point on all EX2 scores, gained 2 points on CC3. Not even going to try to figure that one out So clearly it's not 6K nor <6%.
As @Anonymous reminded, testing after August may be challenging as my AoYA will be 1Y on 9/1, new scorecard.
I've always been of the opinion that raw dollar amounts matter in addition to utilization percentages. For those with very high relative credit limits (both individual and aggregate) the dollar amounts will have a greater impact of course than for those with smaller limits.
@Anonymous wrote:I've always been of the opinion that raw dollar amounts matter in addition to utilization percentages. For those with very high relative credit limits (both individual and aggregate) the dollar amounts will have a greater impact of course than for those with smaller limits.
I'm of the opinion that it's percentages, not raw dollar amounts.
I'm not able to prove it, but since we're talking about opinions.....
@SouthJamaica wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:I've always been of the opinion that raw dollar amounts matter in addition to utilization percentages. For those with very high relative credit limits (both individual and aggregate) the dollar amounts will have a greater impact of course than for those with smaller limits.
I'm of the opinion that it's percentages, not raw dollar amounts.
I'm not able to prove it, but since we're talking about opinions.....
How can you say that it's all about percentages when 'Amount owed on revolving accounts is too high' is right there in the Reason Statement/Code list for all 3 bureaus?
It's proof positive that yes, dollar amounts do matter. To what extent we don't really know, but I know that you're one of the few in a position to even begin to test it.