Trying to wrap my head around this!

[tommctech]

I've been working on my score really hard for the past 6 months.  I've gotten it up to a 691 (TU FICO) and 668 (EQ FICO).  I understand things score differently and I can deal with the 20 point swing.  However, we just pulled my wife's scores for both TU & EQ  and TU FICO is 727 and EQ FICO is 632, both scored with almost the exact same data (one EQ has a HSBC card with 0 util and a 300CL).  Don't they use the same scoring model?  How is there a difference of almost 100Pts??

THanks,

Tommctech

[laz98]

no, they don't use the same scoring model.  are you sure that's the only difference?  everything is updated correctly, etc?

[tommctech]

Actually, looking a little further, on the TU (the one with the higher score) also has 7 INQs from when we bought our car last year that were all on the same day from different banks.  They also appear on the EQ.  There are 4 late payments in the history (same 2 accounts on both) but on the EQ on the "Understanding Your Score" section, Bad Payment history is on the hurting your score side, whereas it is not on the TU report.  Again, both are using the same exact data, with the exception of the 300cl card.

[Anonymous]

---

@tommctech wrote:

Actually, looking a little further, on the TU (the one with the higher score) also has 7 INQs from when we bought our car last year that were all on the same day from different banks.  They also appear on the EQ.  There are 4 late payments in the history (same 2 accounts on both) but on the EQ on the "Understanding Your Score" section, Bad Payment history is on the hurting your score side, whereas it is not on the TU report.  Again, both are using the same exact data, with the exception of the 300cl card.

---

Can you double-check to make sure those lates are on the TU report as well?

Sometimes CCCs don't report the same information to all the CRAs.

For example: DW has a GEMB account that was charged off -- with something like 12 lates total before it was charged off. None of the lates appear on TU, while all of them appear on EX and EQ. GE did report the CO to TU, so there is very little benefit to not having the lates report for her.

[RobertEG]

Fair Isaac has stated that the difference in scoring, with the same data, should not vary by more than approx 20-30 pts between the scoring models used by the big 3 CRAs.  So that is a rough guideline.  If the variance is more than that, there is most likely some difference buried in the data cranked into their models.

[LS2982]

---

@tommctech wrote:

I've been working on my score really hard for the past 6 months.  I've gotten it up to a 691 (TU FICO) and 668 (EQ FICO).  I understand things score differently and I can deal with the 20 point swing.  However, we just pulled my wife's scores for both TU & EQ  and TU FICO is 727 and EQ FICO is 632, both scored with almost the exact same data (one EQ has a HSBC card with 0 util and a 300CL).  Don't they use the same scoring model?  How is there a difference of almost 100Pts??

THanks,

Tommctech

---

Is there anything at all that is different between the two files?? Maybe a old CC still reporting positive info. on TU?? Also if you pulled a score power report look under the "Understanding my score" tab and see what factors are listed.

[tommctech]

TU Stuff Below:

Hurting

You have a serious delinquency (60 days past due or greater) or a derogatory description on your credit report.          

Number of your accounts that were ever 60 days late or worse:
1 account

You've made heavy use of your available revolving credit.      

Ratio of your revolving balances to your credit limits
48%

You have too many credit accounts with balances.      

Number of your accounts carrying a balance
5 accounts      

Helping

You have an established credit history.        

Your oldest account was opened
11 Years, 2 Months ago

You've recently been paying your bills on time.

Your most recent late payment happened
2 Years, 8 Months ago

You have many accounts that are in good standing.

Number of your accounts currently being paid as agreed
7 accounts

Credit at a glance

Your revolving accounts  $5,529

Your mortgages  None

Your installment loans  $63,495

Accounts   26 <---This is from multiple consolidated student loans

Accounts with balances 5  

Accounts opened in past year 2  

Recent inquiries  7  

Collections  0

Public Records 0

[tommctech]

EQ Stuff Below:

Hurting

You have a serious delinquency (60 days past due or greater) or a derogatory description on your credit report.          

Number of your accounts that were ever 60 days late or worse:
1 account

You've made heavy use of your available revolving credit.      

Ratio of your revolving balances to your credit limits
48%

You have too many credit accounts with balances.      

Number of your accounts carrying a balance
5 accounts      

Helping

You have an established credit history.        

Your oldest account was opened
11 Years, 2 Months ago

Average age of your accounts

7 years

You've recently been paying your bills on time.

Your most recent late payment happened
5 Months ago

You've shown recent use of credit cards.          

Credit at a glance

Your revolving accounts  $5,529

Your mortgages  None

Your installment loans  $63,495

Accounts   26 <---This is from multiple consolidated student loans

Accounts with balances 6  

Accounts opened in past year 2  

Recent inquiries  2  

Collections  0

Public Records 0

[tommctech]

FIGURED IT OUT!

So it appears that Chase reported 2 30 day lates to EQ and not TU.  Both were in the past year.  Also, EQ has that account with the 300CL (0 utilization).  Seems pretty drastic though.  And EQ also has less INQs (only 2 of the banks for the autoloan checked EQ also).

[Anonymous]

---

@tommctech wrote:

FIGURED IT OUT!

So it appears that Chase reported 2 30 day lates to EQ and not TU.  Both were in the past year.  Also, EQ has that account with the 300CL (0 utilization).  Seems pretty drastic though.  And EQ also has less INQs (only 2 of the banks for the autoloan checked EQ also).

---

Two lates in the last 12 months of any length is a red flag for creditors. Between that, another account reporting a balance and five more inquiries, I would expect to see a significant point difference between the two reports.

The good thing is that:

1) 30 day lates are not major derogatories and their impact will age off over the course of a couple of years.

2) Inquiries fall off in 2 years, but have no score impact beyond one year.

3) Differences in individual trade line reporting generally correct themselves within 30 days.

The bad news is that each of the 30 day lates will reduce the score for the next couple years (I've heard several people say that the negative score hit reduces to zero around 4 years for a 30 day late, but I'm not sure if that is true) -- with that impact diminising over time.