Just a small datapoint, know historically I haven't taken a hit for a second balance on FICO 8 on any bureau, and I haven't found any differences in my <1% and <4% testing at least. Going to try to pay off the Sallie completely before I airstrike the Freedom to get to 1/9 just to isolate that but don't think it'll make a difference. Also may have the CSP reporting by that point which could skew things but unfortunately this is as good of a datapoint as I can get at the moment.
2 reported balances out of 9 tradelines:
$41/8400 - on previously, 0.49% of limit
$875/1000 - just reported, 87.5% of limit
Aggregate: $916 / $34600 = 2.65% utilization
EX FICO 8: 736 -> 728 = -8
EQ FICO 8: 726 -> 722 = -4
TU FICO 8: 736 -> 731 = -5
@jamie123 wrote:Wow...That's a pretty good hit for having 1 CC report high UTI even though your total aggregate UTI is so low.
Yeah, wasn't sure if there was a breakpoint at 80 or 90 as both numbers have been kicked around for years; maybe some other people will get opportunities to test this as well. Held the Freedom at 87.5% this time and there was a drop which isn't likely explained by 2.65% aggregate util nor by 2/9 tradelines reporting a balance.
May delay some Amazon purchases (new toilets) till October for Freedom 5X and see about getting another and possibly cleaner datapoint at 90+
@Thomas_Thumb wrote:
@Revelate wrote:Just a small datapoint, know historically I haven't taken a hit for a second balance reporting in EQ FICO 8, not sure on EX FICO 8, and I haven't found any differences in my <1% and <4% testing at least. Going to try to pay off the Sallie completely before I airstrike the Freedom to get to 1/9 just to isolate that but don't think it'll make a difference. Also may have the CSP reporting by that point which could skew things but unfortunately this is as good of a datapoint as I can get at the moment.
2 reported balances out of 9 tradelines:
$41/8400 - on previously, 0.49% of limit
$875/1000 - just reported, 87.5% of limit
Aggregate: $916 / $34600 = 2.65% utilization
EX FICO 8: 736 -> 728 = -8
EQ FICO 8: 726 -> 722 = -4
As I recall, you tested 2 cards reporting previously with not score change and I have not seen a negative aggregate UT impact at that low level. It sure looks like a card max out penalty on your Fico 8 score. Maybe it is in that 85% range. Could there be a more severe penalty above 95%?
Really that is a rather small score hit - it supports the theory that Fico 8 algorithms are tuned to put much less weight on individual cards relative to Fico 4. I hit 80.1% on a card and saw no change in Fico 8 but a large drop in Fico 4.
*** Any option to get a side by side impact comparison Fico 8/Fico 4 associated with this max out test? ***
I'm going to leave it on there to near the due date rather than paying it immediately; I will get a DCU data point at the end of the month but I may have other accounts on there by that point which might skew it though I think that's manageable. My report isn't unbusy, though I reduced my limit on my DCU secured card to $500 and that's easier to max out in any given month going forward so I should get other datapoints in the future.
Yeah I don't get a difference 1/9 or 2/9 actually now that you mention it, forgot I did 2 3B pulls on that count. The damage isn't obscene, an interesting question would be what happens if I get 2 or more tradelines maxxed out, or as you state, if there's a difference between 87% and 91% or 96%. Likewise I did get a larger FICO 04 drop previously in my old data testing (from a couple years back when Scorewatch was still Beacon 5.0 here) but I also had 10%<x<30% aggregate which might've factored too. I don't have good numbers for aggregate utilization, though depending how much I spend decorating the new place, maybe I can get a number >10% even with the new tradelines.
Transunion updated:
TU FICO 8: 736 -> 731 = -5
Had spending and therefore bonuses to chase, paid off the Freedom:
Equifax FICO 8: identical increase $875/1000 -> $0 gain of 4 points, to what I lost earlier.