No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
Yeah, what the others said. When you have a good score/report, don't think of those as literal negatives, but instead they are items you can better improve on to raise your score even more. So in your case, it's saying, "You have a good credit profile, and about the only thing you can do to improve it more is to let your credit age - and keep paying your bills of course..."
The listing of the 'negative(s)' is simply a way to note to you how to improve your score even more.
haulingthescoreup wrote:
Interestingly, the negatives are still on the reports pulled by lenders. It's myFICO that shows fewer and fewer negatives as your score rises.
Mine showed 3 negatives at 759, and 2 at 761. Every time my score flip-flops back and forth, I gain or lose a negative. They're still there all along, no matter what the score, but it seems that myFICO worries about the delicate self-esteem of FICO High Achievers.
Yes, the number of reported negatives diminishes as the score goes up. (That's per Barry.) What's not too clear to me is if the FICO reports from myFICO and transunioncs report the same number of negative reasons at the same score level, or if the myFICO reports from EQ and TU do.
Of course if you want to really confuse yourself and see all the negatives (personally I don't see the point in adding further unnecessary information) you can always pull from myFICO /12.
I suppose all of the agencies want to keep us guessing, after all that is how they keep making money. If they all had the same scoring, and our score was identical with them, we would only need to buy from one cra. That would not be profitable for them. I finally received an alert from SW, they are really slow. My EQ and TU reports are identical in all respects. When my new US Bank accounts showed up on TU my score increased 5 points to 718, however, when they hit my EQ report my score went down 7 points to 694. This makes no sense to me. Thanks to all who shared their thoughts on this.
@Imhotrodcrazy wrote:I suppose all of the agencies want to keep us guessing, after all that is how they keep making money. If they all had the same scoring, and our score was identical with them, we would only need to buy from one cra. That would not be profitable for them. I finally received an alert from SW, they are really slow. My EQ and TU reports are identical in all respects. When my new US Bank accounts showed up on TU my score increased 5 points to 718, however, when they hit my EQ report my score went down 7 points to 694. This makes no sense to me. Thanks to all who shared their thoughts on this.
That's because the scoring models they licensed from FICO are not identical across CRB's. Conisder that their utilmate customer is the credit provider - perhaps they have to distinguish themselves to have some thing to sell them!
@Anonymous wrote:
That's because the scoring models they licensed from FICO are not identical across CRB's. Conisder that their ultimate customer is the credit provider - perhaps they have to distinguish themselves to have some thing to sell them!
Yep, in many an industry participants will try extremely hard to avoid having their product or service become seen by their customers as a commodity, because a commodity market is dominated by price and convenience. Think of the typical filling station where the most prominent information on their sign is the price per gallon of each standard grade of fuel. I certainly have no brand loyalty when it comes to gasoline; I couldn't tell you which brand is in my tank right now.