3 of my revolving accounts were above the comfortable 28% mark.
1 was at 82%, 1 at 76%, 1 at 35%.
Getting the 76% account down to a comfortable 25% appears to have resulted in a 10 point gain in EX FICO 8, despite the continued presence of the other 2.
No significant change in overall utilization occurred (went from 11.5% to 10.5%).
Doesn't this sort of cut against the theory that with the individual card utilization factor, the percentage utilization of the highest card is the one that causes the penalty? Even though I got rid of the 76% sore thumb, the 82% blemish remains.
Whoa post jump! Maybe just maybe it may have been the acounts that went to 6 months or more than anything else. Inquires not really. The others not so much. AJC is very knowlegable in the point department.
@FireMedic1 wrote:Whoa post jump! Maybe just maybe it may have been the acounts that went to 6 months or more than anything else. Inquires not really. The others not so much. AJC is very knowlegable in the point department.
I didn't understand anything of what you just said, other than the part about AJC being knowledgeable 
I never really subscribed to the theory that multiple high utilization cards weren't counted individually, but you have a seriously busy report SJ so it's hard to really isolate things .
@Revelate wrote:I never really subscribed to the theory that multiple high utilization cards weren't counted individually, but you have a seriously busy report SJ so it's hard to really isolate things
This correlation was easy to isolate: it was on experian.com, which is updated daily, and the balance change and score change were contemporaneous, and in a vacuum.
@Anonymous wrote:
What about the aggregate UTI? How much did it drop after getting that one card from 76% to 25%?
Aggregate utilization decreased from 11.5% to 10.5%.
@Anonymous wrote:If it didn't cross over 8.9% then I agree with your initial observation concerning individual UTI theory.
In my own experiment also using Experian's daily score/report updates to isolate correlation between events and scores, I also found few discrepancies with theories commonly posted, like softening blows of inquiries and individual new accounts reaching 6 month mark, I saw absolutely no changes until each inquiry hit the 1 year mark to the day, absolutely no changes with new accounts until the youngest one hit one year, other than the effects on AAoA.
That's good information to know.
Too bad we can't get that kind of data for the FICO scoring models other than Classic 8.
We can always pay for a new myFICO 3B report every day. 