Opinion post- Mortgage Scores

[Anonymous]

Of course everything is dependant on individual histories, that goes without saying, but in you opinions. which of the mortgage scores are most forgiving? which has usually been the highest for you?

[SouthJamaica]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Of course everything is dependant on individual histories, that goes without saying, but in you opinions. which of the mortgage scores are most forgiving? which has usually been the highest for you?

---

In my case TU has been the best.

But TU is usually my best across all scoring models.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

 which has usually been the highest for you?

---

doesn't matter because they drop the highest and lowest.

[Anonymous]

I know, I just wondered how people felt about different models

[Anonymous]

I feel it's an archaic model to be still used when they could simply merge the newer models into a 3B report just as easily.  The penalties under 2/4/5 are a bit heavy and from a different time.  The core measurements of 5 categories is still the same but, the presence of certain items under the newer models aren't as scorable as 2/4/5.

2/4/5 leads to a lot of confusion and bewilderment from people monitoring their scores under F8/9 models to find their 2/4/5 model scores are anywhere from 30-100 points lower.  I get the whole enhanced scores for bankcard / auto but, those industries are using F8/9 most of the time vs some of the CU's that still but rarely use a 2/4/5 model for everything.  Even USB was using 2/4/5 for CC approvals up unitl maybe 6 months ago.  One CU has been menitoned as movign to VS3.0 for approvals.  

The mortgage industry needs to catch up with the times.

[iv]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

The mortgage industry needs to catch up with the times.

---

The industry doesn't have a choice.  Take that one up with Freddie and Fannie.

[Anonymous]

---

@iv wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

The mortgage industry needs to catch up with the times.

---

The industry doesn't have a choice.  Take that one up with Freddie and Fannie.

---

If they play a part in the transaction they're part of the industry right?  They are private entities funded by the us government they were seized in 2008 during the crisis.  

[iv]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

If they play a part in the transaction they're part of the industry right?

---

I wouldn't say that, no.

---

@Anonymous wrote:
They are private entities funded by the us government they were seized in 2008 during the crisis.  

Yes... I'm aware.

Further comment on that runs the risk of running into https://ficoforums.myfico.com/t5/User-Guidelines-General/5-Things-We-Don-t-Talk-About/m-p/336929#M29 - so I'll stop there.

[Anonymous]

I just wanted to know if anyone thought one was a more accurate depiction over the other all things being equal. Someone people hate EQ some TU. Things like that...🤷🏾‍♀️

[iv]

---

@Anonymous wrote:
I just wanted to know if anyone thought one was a more accurate depiction over the other all things being equal. Someone people hate EQ some TU. Things like that...🤷🏾‍♀️

---

There's not really much to say about the mortgage scores themselves in that regard - they are just a reflection of the data in the reports.

I assume most people would "hate" whichever report/score had the most negative information (or incorrect information) on it, which is more a reflection of variation in CRA exclusion policies, and lenders that only report to a subset of CRAs.

But how about some random trivia?  It's not possible to have a "mortgage" mid-score higher than 839.

And that highest-possible mid-score will never be on Equifax.

Why? Because none of the "mortgage" FICO scores can actually get all the way to 850.

EX2 has a real-world maximum of 844

TU4 has a real-world maximum of 839

EQ5 has a real-world maximum of 818

...so if you want a mid-score higher than 818, it must be on EX or TU.

(Also, those old "low" maximums are much harder to get to than 850s on FICO 8 or FICO 9, because 8/9 have a "buffer" above the max - the older score models don't.)