Lowest possible AAoA with score over 800?

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Is that illustration in the above post a hypothetical, or is it an actual profile?

---

Hypothetical, where AAoA, AoOA, AoYA, credit mix, 0% CC util, and 'no negatives' are actual from my TU report, which is 791 FICO8

All other variables are a much, much better version of my actual TU report:

-Actual # of accounts is 4, instead of 8 as in the example, which would take the score to the next level

-Total CL is $1,700 ($1,000+$300+$400) instead of $44,000 as in the example, big difference, big score improvement

-For the car loan I never made advance payments as in the example, therefore mine still has 80% owed, the example is under 25%, which improves the score

-My 3 HP's are worse than those in the example, since one is about to come off, 2 years old, but the other 2 are new, less than 6mo. The example shows only 2 hp for EX, and 3 for TU but those 3 are older than my actual HPs, so my actual HP's are lowering the score more than the ones in the example

Info like which bureau each issuer pulls is actual too in FL, and the SL's for the newer ones are based on real data points, I just got approved yesterday for a DCU CC with 10K SL, HP EQ only, and HP is showing on EQ report but score not uptdated yet.

My TU report is not showing my oldest account, my EX and EQ reports are much older than TU, and as you can see their scores are way lower than TU, where the other variables are very similar, most identical, and also EX has 1 negative.

My Vantage-3 from TU is 724 (way lower than 791 fico8) and the lowest of the 3 Vantage's, so Vantage3 cares more about TU's younger age than about the negative on EX (Vantage EX is 728). And the way i've been following almost daily both vantage and fico scores from all 3 bureaus for the last year I can confirm that FICO does NOT care much about age, where Vantage cares a lot.

FICO cares a lot about HP's, and negatives, where Vantage penalizes less.

You can tell FICO score is designed by FICO and purely for risk assesment, default prediction.

Vantage score is designed by the 3 bureaus, and it's mixing their own interests, they value a lot the amount of information on record so their service provides as much info as possible, they value age, so you simply wait, and they penalize less the negatives so they don't get flooded with 6 million dispute letters every year, bc "it doesn't affect that much, wait and let it come off by itself"

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

---

Hypothetical, where AAoA, AoOA, AoYA, credit mix, 0% CC util, and 'no negatives' are actual from my TU report, which is 791 FICO8

All other variables are a much, much better version of my actual TU report:

-Actual # of accounts is 4, instead of 8 as in the example, which would take the score to the next level

-Total CL is $1,700 ($1,000+$300+$400) instead of $44,000 as in the example, big difference, big score improvement

-For the car loan I never made advance payments as in the example, therefore mine still has 80% owed, the example is under 25%, which improves the score

-My 3 HP's are worse than those in the example, since one is about to come off, 2 years old, but the other 2 are new, less than 6mo. The example shows only 2 hp for EX, and 3 for TU but those 3 are older than my actual HPs, so my actual HP's are lowering the score more than the ones in the example

---

Some of the points you make above aren't accurate with respect to FICO scoring.  Having 8 accounts verses 4 doesn't necessarily take a "score to the next level."  It's completely feasible that 4 accounts may accomplish just as much as 8 accounts with respect to scoring, so long as 3 of them are revolvers and 1 is an installment loan.

Second, total CL has no bearing at all on FICO score.  One person could have $1000 in total limits and another person $100,000.  If their utilization percentages are equal, they are scored equally with respect to the utilization sector of the FICO pie.  For example, the person with the $1000 in total limits may owe $80 and the person with $100,000 in limits may owe $8000.  Both are 8% utilization, so both are scored the same.  It's very important that you understand that total credit limits are not a FICO scoring factor.

What you said regarding the auto loan may or may not be true.  Going from 80% utilization on an auto loan to under 25% may have a slight scoring impact, or it may have none.  Some members of this forum (SJ being one of them) have referenced seeing NO scoring increase in paying down their installment loan until the utilization percentage on it drops below 9%.  On such a profile, it's possible that paying the loan down from 80% to below 25% may have no positive impact to score.

An inquiry that is almost 2 years old is not impacting FICO score at all.  Inquiries are only scoreable for 1 year, even though they're visible on your credit report for 2 years.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Some of the points you make above aren't accurate with respect to FICO scoring.  Having 8 accounts verses 4 doesn't necessarily take a "score to the next level."  It's completely feasible that 4 accounts may accomplish just as much as 8 accounts with respect to scoring, so long as 3 of them are revolvers and 1 is an installment loan.

---

Wrong.

Since I can't post html apparently, go to this same website by googling "myfico fico score estimator", then click 1st result and see what's the 1st out of 10 questions it's asked. They ask for it bc it doesn't affect?

---

@Anonymous wrote:

What you said regarding the auto loan may or may not be true.  Going from 80% utilization on an auto loan to under 25% may have a slight scoring impact, or it may have none.  Some members of this forum (SJ being one of them) have referenced seeing NO scoring increase in paying down their installment loan until the utilization percentage on it drops below 9%.  On such a profile, it's possible that paying the loan down from 80% to below 25% may have no positive impact to score.

---

That's just wrong. It is the exact way I said it and you're misleading people.

Check the thread here titled "Adding an installment loan -- the Share Secure technique" by CreditGuyInDixie for further education on this point. Then apply that info to the example I posted and let me know if after that you still conclude that "may or may not be true".

Balance on installment loans is a credit scoring factor, somewhat similar to util % on CCs, and the absolut amount of $ is a scoring factor too.

I am talking about the example I gave and not about SJ's profile which IDK, and bringing that up is presenting anecdotal evidence as proof of a desired conclusion. IDK how many installment loans he or she has, open/closed accounts, AoOA, credit mix, and I don't even know if his observation was affected by other factors. But truth is it's exactly that way for my example, and for any other profile paying its 1st installment loan.

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Second, total CL has no bearing at all on FICO score.  One person could have $1000 in total limits and another person $100,000.  If their utilization percentages are equal, they are scored equally with respect to the utilization sector of the FICO pie.  For example, the person with the $1000 in total limits may owe $80 and the person with $100,000 in limits may owe $8000.  Both are 8% utilization, so both are scored the same.  It's very important that you understand that total credit limits are not a FICO scoring factor.

---

True. The isolated factor of total CL does not affect Fico8, it affects indirectly through the ratio utilization/total CL, also through each individual CC util ratio, and it affects when trying to keep a 1% util ratio distributed in 2 CCs maximum (as I do) to optimize score, with a very low total CL reported of $1,700.

When trying to summarize a whole report into one quick example on a forum, and when there's other scores that do consider CL as an isolated variable, I can have this kind of slips as well as grammar and spelling errors too. Thanks for pointing it out anyway.

I still recommend anyone who reads this to get the highest CL they can on each CC and the overall highest CL possible, it won't raise your fico on its own, but it can never hurt your fico, it will either increase it or remain neutral, and it'll help to use credit cards for real life purposes without hurting much your score

Also it's worth mentioning that total CL does affect Vantage3 score regardless of util ratios --not an essential score but it helps to keep the morals high for this long term fight.

Also, as you know, for credit approval decisions many issuers don't consider your fico alone, they get other variables directly from your report. One key variable is the highest CL on a CC, and the average CL overall. With that in hand they decide how much to give you. So 2 identical applicants with identical fico scores can get completely different CL from same issuer based only on their prior CLs. Actually one of them could get even denied if his CL is too low compared to the minimum SL that CC approves for.

---

@Anonymous wrote:

An inquiry that is almost 2 years old is not impacting FICO score at all.  Inquiries are only scoreable for 1 year, even though they're visible on your credit report for 2 years.

---

Yes I know, what's your point? I never said the opposite. Re-read the paragraph in regards the HPs, which reads something along "my 3 HP's affect negatively more than the 3 HP's on the example bc 1 is going to come off since it's 2 years old BUT the other 2 are new, and on the example they're all older"

Look, I really don't have the time for this, it seems as if my position proving that a FICO8 is achievable with AAoA=1y and with AoYA=0mo was maybe contrary to what you were saying before and that hurt your ego maybe? IDK, if that is so I didn't read what you said before my 1st post here, but I am not going to get into useless (and boring for anyone else) eternal posts with you while missing the point of the thread.

I can confirm 800+ FICO8 is achievable as explained in prior posts, it needs some knowledge (or help) and planning from the very beginning, since some strategies are not intuitive, but in a couple of years and with an AAoA=1y can be made. That's the whole point

Can it be made with AAoA<1y?? That should be the next question

[Anonymous]

All I read was the first line of your long-winded response.  I stopped when you referenced a scoring simulator as some sort of evidence to back what I presume is an argument you were going on to make.      

[Revelate]

Reading the SSL technique thread should conclusively demonstrate it's all percentages.  Revolvers are all percentages too under FICO size of the tradeline doesn't matter; that said VS3 does want to see a big honking revolving line, appears to be around ~40K before that reason code goes away, entirely possible that the simulator was quoting that, and as BBS alludes to, simulators are notoriously bad and misleading at times.

Auto loans, mortgages, shared secured loans, every other installment loan, sum up balances, divide by sum of original amount, and score.  There's been some theory that mortgages count somewhat differently but never any conclusive proof either way, and it's really hard to play reindeer games with a mortgage.

If I were trying to maximize score I'd be on 4 or for quality of life reasons 5 revolvers (Equifax FICO 8 1/3 of revolvers reporting a balance is a ding on many profiles, and 2/4 is a ding on all 3 bureaus), and 1 installment loan where I pulled the abovementioned FICO strategist trick regarding installment loans.

We've never seen anyone over 760-765 FICO 8 after 1 year, zero.  We have seen an 800 at 2 years, I don't know explicitly if it was ticking over the 2 year mark or what their oldest account was at a the time... if I ever get to build a credit file for someone I'm going to ruthlessly maximize it and see what happens, but the vast majority of people that find this forum aren't awesome test cases: there's a few college students that took people's advice here on building and then sitting on their hands, but I'm not sure if they're going to stick around the forums for 2 years as that's a pretty rare occurrence.  

That's not to say it's not possible, but 1 year at 800 with an brand new account, I don't think that's possible under any FICO algorithm... there's too many things awkward on that profile with how the scoring algorithms are setup.  

[xenon3030]

Do not reference to VantageScore simulations for discussions on Fico8. They are very different from Fico8 scores and can misguide. Nobody uses them for CC or loan evaluations.

The simulators are very simplified and do not predict properly, specially for loans.

[newhis]

---

@Revelate wrote:
...

We've never seen anyone over 760-765 FICO 8 after 1 year, zero.  We have seen an 800 at 2 years ...

That's not to say it's not possible, but 1 year at 800 with an brand new account, I don't think that's possible under any FICO algorithm... there's too many things awkward on that profile with how the scoring algorithms are setup.  

---

Also, it will not be a 'normal' credit profile. Examples:

- my kids will not start with new account on their own, they will start as AUs

- if you start new you don't know many/most tips to get a great FICO

- if you are new, you try to get a few good cards and even fall for store financing 

- getting HPs for new accounts every few months will not help your score to get to 800

I think 800 can be reached around 1-1.5 year mark from brand new account/history. But the only way I can think that's possible is to open 2-3 credit cards and follow the SSL technique, then nothing for a while until you reach 800. Low balance needed too.

DW reached 800 (TU FICO) after 2 years 9 months from no credit (2 years 3 months from first TU FICO score) with a regular 5 year auto loan.

[Thomas_Thumb]

---

@newhis wrote:

---

@Revelate wrote:

We've never seen anyone over 760-765 FICO 8 after 1 year, zero.  We have seen an 800 at 2 years ...

That's not to say it's not possible, but 1 year at 800 with an brand new account, I don't think that's possible under any FICO algorithm... there's too many things awkward on that profile with how the scoring algorithms are setup.  

---

Also, it will not be a 'normal' credit profile. Examples:

- my kids will not start with new account on their own, they will start as AUs

- if you start new you don't know many/most tips to get a great FICO

- if you are new, you try to get a few good cards and even fall for store financing 

- getting HPs for new accounts every few months will not help your score to get to 800

I think 800 can be reached around 1-1.5 year mark from brand new account/history. But the only way I can think that's possible is to open 2-3 credit cards and follow the SSL technique, then nothing for a while until you reach 800. Low balance needed too.

DW reached 800 (TU FICO) after 2 years 9 months from no credit (2 years 3 months from first TU FICO score) with a regular 5 year auto loan.

---

I'll stick with 2 years AAoA as a minimum for an 800 score - at least for those with AoOA under 5 years. Profiles "new" to credit that are establishing a credit history "on their own" can't have an AoOA in the 10 to 20 year range. It takes outside intervention - through AU status - to gain a long credit history artificially.

I'd guestimate max Fico 8 score for someone starting out (no artificial AU credit history) would be around 785 even with an optimized SSL given AAoA and AoOA under 2 years age. I have not seen any postings showing Fico 8 scores above 800 with AAoA under 2 years. However, I suspect someone with an AoOA of 10 years might get there with an AAoA under 2 years.