TU FAKO closest to FICO

[mattmil]

Has anyone else noticed that the TU FAKO score is pretty darn close to the TU FICO score? 

TU FICO - 668 TU FAKO - 676

EQ FICO - 577 EQ FAKO - 667

EX FICO - ? EX FAKO - 656

It seems like the EQ FAKO is way way off everytime whereas the TU FAKO is actually somewhat in the ballpark of the real score.

Knowing this, I'm wondering what the relationship between the EQ FAKO and EQ FICO is?  What I mean is, for those of you that had the opportuninty to pull your EQ FICO before Feb 13th, how close was it to your EQ FAKO score?

[mattmil]

anybody?  Is this a stupid question?

[haulingthescoreup]

No, it's not at all a stupid question. (Saturday afternoons are slow.)

But it's a coincidence. Back when I had TrueCredit with their TransRisk scores, my TU FAKO's were usually at least 40 points lower than my TU FICO's.

It sounds like whatever you have going on with your reports fits similarly with both scoring formulas. We have no clue how the TransRisk score formula works, so no telling why this happens in your case.

[llecs]

My CC-enhanced TransRisk score (found via Juniper) is 131 points lower than my TU FICO score when pulled on the same day this month. My TransRisk score via TrueCredit, last month, was about 45 points lower. Both scores have increased since and are about 10 points apart a week later. On average, my TransRisk via TC was about 70 points lower when pulled the same day.

ETA....DW's EQ FICO is over 100 points higher than her EQ PLUS score (a FAKO via Creditchecktotal) when pulled on the same day. Her TU FICO is about 20 points higher than her TU FAKO (PLUS also from CCT).

Message Edited by llecs on 07-11-2009 10:24 PM

[marty56]

LOL my TU FAKO from TrueCredit is 707 which is fair/good in their rating scheme.

[mattmil]

ok thanks for the info -- I was hoping the FAKOs were'nt completely useless but it appears they are. 

[marty56]

EX Vantage score is used by Kohls as I understand.

[RobertEG]

I hate to use this sexist analogy, but will do so at my peril!

It is kinda like putting two guys in a room, and asking them to fill out written profiles of themselves, all factually evaluated as correct. 

Then giving their individual personal profile of written past history to two women, and ask the women to evaluate their risk on attraction in a first date.

Let us call woman one "FICO," and let us call woman two "FAKO."

"FICO" and "FAKO" have the same data on the two men, but reach different conclusions based on their mental algorithms.  One wants a date, the other declines.

If you want to then tell Ms FICO or Ms FAKO that they are wrong, I dont think there is any basis for this derision.

If you want to tell Ms FAKO that her opinion is useless because she did not process it the same way that the superior Ms FICO did, that is your prerogative, but not based on fact.

That is how I see credit scoring.

So it is with credit scoring.

Message Edited by RobertEG on 07-14-2009 12:26 AM

[mattmil]

kind of a complex analogy...

[MattH]

---

@mattmil wrote:
kind of a complex analogy...

---

I understand what the FICO scoring model wants a lot better than I understand what my wife wants