cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

Highlighted
Super Contributor

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

^^^^Agreed.

 

Yeah we do know that it is a metric due to the published reason codes, so its factual, not opinion, that raw dollar amounts matter.

But as @CassieCard said, to what extent we can only speculate.

For a collection of our current FICO scoring wisdom, updated as we learn, read the following. Watch the revision dates on the bottom of the first 8 posts as they are regularly updated: Link to Scoring Primer.


RIP:

Oldest/average age varies by bureau. Estimates above.


Updated Oct 2020, unless otherwise noted.

(Forgive typos, mobile.)(Everything said is Just IMHO.)

In order to better answer your questions and record your DPs, please provide your profile stats: Any baddies? Severity and recency? (clean/dirty), Number of accounts, both open and closed on CRs (thick/thin), AoOA? (Mature/young), AOYRA-Age of Youngest Revolving Account (new accounts/no new accounts)? Open/closed loan on CR?
For example, mine is clean/thick/mature/new account, with open loan on record.
If you don't know where you fall, just detail any baddies, your number of open and closed accounts, AoOA, AOYRA and whether you have a loan on record to start.

For utilization questions, list individual and aggregate utilizations, revolving and installment, please.
Message 11 of 26
Highlighted
Super Contributor

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points

I've kept aggregate utilization constant at 2% or 3% but taken a single card from a tiny reported 2-digit balance to a 4-digit balance (bringing the single card from 1% utilization to say 6%) and have seen minor Fico score fluctuations.  That's enough for me to say that raw dollar amounts are considered since I see no way that percentages would matter in that example.

Message 12 of 26
Highlighted
Super Contributor

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points


@CassieCard wrote:

@SouthJamaica wrote:

@BrutalBodyShots 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.


The choice of language in a FICO reason code is not "proof positive" of the content of the algorithm.


Total revolving limits 653000 (575000 reporting)

Message 13 of 26
Highlighted
Valued Contributor

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points


@SouthJamaica wrote:

@CassieCard wrote:

@SouthJamaica wrote:

@BrutalBodyShots 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.


The choice of language in a FICO reason code is not "proof positive" of the content of the algorithm.


It absolutely is proof.

 

The presence of the reason statement in that list tells us that the algorithm has code to penalize in some manner  based on the dollar amount owed on all revolving accounts. When that code path gets executed and points are deducted, that reason statement can be thrown.

 

Whether or not we see the reason statement depends on the particular CMS and where it is in the list. Even with myFICO 3B monitoring, I sometimes see 2 reasons for my TU 8 score on the PDF report, where the score change alerts always show me 4 of them.

 

It might also be that high dollar balances on revolving accounts trigger (maybe a simple boolean flag at threshold, or weighted) a higher penalty for the percentage-based code and a reason statement related to percentages takes higher precedence.

 

You've never seen 'Amount owed on revolving accounts too high', yet you observe many score changes in the (0,9]% interval , so that's my reason for thinking it's some sort of trigger.

27 FICO Scores + 3 VS3. MTG (Mortgage), AUT (Auto), and BKC (Bankcard) are scores 5,4, and 2 from the top.

Keeper of the Scrolls of ResilienceEQ FICO Resilience Index Score Leaderboard

46 forum members have shared this new credit score. Share yours today!

Message 14 of 26
Highlighted
Established Contributor

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points


@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%.  

6 percent.png


 

@Trudy wrote:

Thanks for the info @CassieCard .  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 Smiley Wink  So clearly it's not 6K nor <6%.

 

As @Birdman7  reminded, testing after August may be challenging as my AoYA will be 1Y on 9/1, new scorecard.


Although EX showed the 1 acct reporting zero a day later and I somehow lost a point on EX2 scores, today I received the alert for the $0 bringing me below 6K.  Surprisingly today my scores increased.  EQ & TU reported the increase in UTL >6K and went from EQ (850 to 849) and TU (850 to 846).  I also received an alert for EQ that the $0 balance reported and did not gain back any points but TU has not reported the $0 bal card.  

 

Wish I had 1 more day in August (not really) to see if the $0 bal reporting to TU makes a difference but I assume I'll be back to 850 for EQ & TU and finally hit 850 with EX tomorrow since my AoYA hits 1yr 9/1.

 

scores.png

FICO - 8: 10/01/20 AU 8 BC 8
FICO - 9: 10/01/20 AU 9 BC 9
F5,F4,F2 10/01/20 AU... BC...
Vantage 10/01/20
AoOA - 24Y7M | AoYA – 1Y1M | AAoA – 12Y2M
Open: 10 CC: (1 reporting 13.99% : 2.95% AGG UTL) | 1 PLOC | 1 MTG loan: 74.95% UTL | 1 Auto loan: 0.82% UTL
Closed: 1 MTG loan | 1 Auto loan | (EQ) 2 CC, (EX & TU) 1 CC
INQ: (EQ) 0/24 | (TU) 0/24 | (EX) 1/24
Message 15 of 26
Highlighted
Super Contributor

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points


@BrutalBodyShots wrote:

I've kept aggregate utilization constant at 2% or 3% but taken a single card from a tiny reported 2-digit balance to a 4-digit balance (bringing the single card from 1% utilization to say 6%) and have seen minor Fico score fluctuations.  That's enough for me to say that raw dollar amounts are considered since I see no way that percentages would matter in that example.


@BrutalBodyShots interestingly enough on a young thin card, Cassie observed, I believe, aggregate and individual thresholds at 4%.


While remaining with aggregate under 4%, any time one revolver went over 4% individual, there was a penalty. 

For a collection of our current FICO scoring wisdom, updated as we learn, read the following. Watch the revision dates on the bottom of the first 8 posts as they are regularly updated: Link to Scoring Primer.


RIP:

Oldest/average age varies by bureau. Estimates above.


Updated Oct 2020, unless otherwise noted.

(Forgive typos, mobile.)(Everything said is Just IMHO.)

In order to better answer your questions and record your DPs, please provide your profile stats: Any baddies? Severity and recency? (clean/dirty), Number of accounts, both open and closed on CRs (thick/thin), AoOA? (Mature/young), AOYRA-Age of Youngest Revolving Account (new accounts/no new accounts)? Open/closed loan on CR?
For example, mine is clean/thick/mature/new account, with open loan on record.
If you don't know where you fall, just detail any baddies, your number of open and closed accounts, AoOA, AOYRA and whether you have a loan on record to start.

For utilization questions, list individual and aggregate utilizations, revolving and installment, please.
Message 16 of 26
Highlighted
Super Contributor

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points


@Trudy wrote:

@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%.  

6 percent.png


 

@Trudy wrote:

Thanks for the info @CassieCard .  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 Smiley Wink  So clearly it's not 6K nor <6%.

 

As @Birdman7  reminded, testing after August may be challenging as my AoYA will be 1Y on 9/1, new scorecard.


Although EX showed the 1 acct reporting zero a day later and I somehow lost a point on EX2 scores, today I received the alert for the $0 bringing me below 6K.  Surprisingly today my scores increased.  EQ & TU reported the increase in UTL >6K and went from EQ (850 to 849) and TU (850 to 846).  I also received an alert for EQ that the $0 balance reported and did not gain back any points but TU has not reported the $0 bal card.  

 

Wish I had 1 more day in August (not really) to see if the $0 bal reporting to TU makes a difference but I assume I'll be back to 850 for EQ & TU and finally hit 850 with EX tomorrow since my AoYA hits 1yr 9/1.

 

scores.png


@Trudy keep in mind if you log into Experian, thats your pull for the day. It won't refresh again if anything changes later in the day.

 

Also keep in mind there have been weird coincidences where it seems the change has appeared and then the score change the following day or vice versa. I don't know if it has something to do with the order of operations or what. And it's not something that I have seen or read about often, but good to keep in mind. 

For a collection of our current FICO scoring wisdom, updated as we learn, read the following. Watch the revision dates on the bottom of the first 8 posts as they are regularly updated: Link to Scoring Primer.


RIP:

Oldest/average age varies by bureau. Estimates above.


Updated Oct 2020, unless otherwise noted.

(Forgive typos, mobile.)(Everything said is Just IMHO.)

In order to better answer your questions and record your DPs, please provide your profile stats: Any baddies? Severity and recency? (clean/dirty), Number of accounts, both open and closed on CRs (thick/thin), AoOA? (Mature/young), AOYRA-Age of Youngest Revolving Account (new accounts/no new accounts)? Open/closed loan on CR?
For example, mine is clean/thick/mature/new account, with open loan on record.
If you don't know where you fall, just detail any baddies, your number of open and closed accounts, AoOA, AOYRA and whether you have a loan on record to start.

For utilization questions, list individual and aggregate utilizations, revolving and installment, please.
Message 17 of 26
Highlighted
Super Contributor

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points


@Birdman7 wrote:


@BrutalBodyShots interestingly enough on a young thin card, Cassie observed, I believe, aggregate and individual thresholds at 4%.




Right, so on a old/thick one like myself that's all the more evidence IMO that raw dollars can matter outside of percentage.

Message 18 of 26
Highlighted
Established Contributor

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points


@Birdman7 wrote:

@Trudy wrote:

@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%.  

6 percent.png


 

@Trudy wrote:

Thanks for the info @CassieCard .  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 Smiley Wink  So clearly it's not 6K nor <6%.

 

As @Birdman7  reminded, testing after August may be challenging as my AoYA will be 1Y on 9/1, new scorecard.


Although EX showed the 1 acct reporting zero a day later and I somehow lost a point on EX2 scores, today I received the alert for the $0 bringing me below 6K.  Surprisingly today my scores increased.  EQ & TU reported the increase in UTL >6K and went from EQ (850 to 849) and TU (850 to 846).  I also received an alert for EQ that the $0 balance reported and did not gain back any points but TU has not reported the $0 bal card.  

 

Wish I had 1 more day in August (not really) to see if the $0 bal reporting to TU makes a difference but I assume I'll be back to 850 for EQ & TU and finally hit 850 with EX tomorrow since my AoYA hits 1yr 9/1.

 

scores.png


@Trudy keep in mind if you log into Experian, thats your pull for the day. It won't refresh again if anything changes later in the day.

Balance was updated at the time I logged in so I would normally expect to see a change in score at that time if one would occur.

 

Also keep in mind there have been weird coincidences where it seems the change has appeared and then the score change the following day or vice versa. I don't know if it has something to do with the order of operations or what. And it's not something that I have seen or read about often, but good to keep in mind. 


Yep, I recall you mentioning the possible delay in score update otherwise I would feel completely lost about the change happening the next day, a change that I assume would happen when the account was updated the day before.

FICO - 8: 10/01/20 AU 8 BC 8
FICO - 9: 10/01/20 AU 9 BC 9
F5,F4,F2 10/01/20 AU... BC...
Vantage 10/01/20
AoOA - 24Y7M | AoYA – 1Y1M | AAoA – 12Y2M
Open: 10 CC: (1 reporting 13.99% : 2.95% AGG UTL) | 1 PLOC | 1 MTG loan: 74.95% UTL | 1 Auto loan: 0.82% UTL
Closed: 1 MTG loan | 1 Auto loan | (EQ) 2 CC, (EX & TU) 1 CC
INQ: (EQ) 0/24 | (TU) 0/24 | (EX) 1/24
Message 19 of 26
Highlighted
Valued Contributor

Re: Individual card below 29%, Aggregate below 9% - Still Lost points


@Birdman7 wrote:

@BrutalBodyShots wrote:

I've kept aggregate utilization constant at 2% or 3% but taken a single card from a tiny reported 2-digit balance to a 4-digit balance (bringing the single card from 1% utilization to say 6%) and have seen minor Fico score fluctuations.  That's enough for me to say that raw dollar amounts are considered since I see no way that percentages would matter in that example.


@BrutalBodyShots interestingly enough on a young thin card, Cassie observed, I believe, aggregate and individual thresholds at 4%.


While remaining with aggregate under 4%, any time one revolver went over 4% individual, there was a penalty. 


That report is here.

 

EQ/TU 8 always give the +3/+1 award with aggregate in the (0,4]% interval on my scorecard - it doesn't matter for those 2 if one of the cards is at 5% or 7%. Also probably why many will miss this one if they only use EX monitoring - all the cards have to be at 4% or below.

27 FICO Scores + 3 VS3. MTG (Mortgage), AUT (Auto), and BKC (Bankcard) are scores 5,4, and 2 from the top.

Keeper of the Scrolls of ResilienceEQ FICO Resilience Index Score Leaderboard

46 forum members have shared this new credit score. Share yours today!

Message 20 of 26
Advertiser Disclosure: The offers that appear on this site are from third party advertisers from whom FICO receives compensation.