@SouthJamaica wrote:
@NRB525 wrote:
My TU did not move last year with 2 INQ either, and EQ moved -7 for each INQ on two cards.
I think you have no score change due to letting all the cards report. The drop is only from the INQ.
Thanks for running the experiment, I'm not surprised at the result
I'm starting to think you're right NRB525... The EQ 11 point drop came in the same alert that advised me of the inquiry.
The EX 2 point drop, however, seemed to coincide with the 49% on the Discover Card.
But so far it looks like going from .3% overall utilization to 3.9% utilization had basically zero effect on my FICO scores.
Now I'm going to be reducing it back to where it was, to see if that has any effect.
That unfortunately doesn't mean much with the way updates get rolled up with regards to the drop 
. I wouldn't expect .3 to 3.9% to produce a meaningful change personally.
Can't really accurately test things with a very busy report, though I am following this thread with interest. Figuring I'm going to be pretty much sidelined from testing for six months post mortgage and post closing app spree. Might get some AAOA tests in as new tradelines report that don't affect my mix of credit though I have not much idea how the mortgage will factor in which will may skew the installment loan utilization testing I'm doing, but that's about it.
@Revelate wrote:
@SouthJamaica wrote:
@NRB525 wrote:
My TU did not move last year with 2 INQ either, and EQ moved -7 for each INQ on two cards.
I think you have no score change due to letting all the cards report. The drop is only from the INQ.
Thanks for running the experiment, I'm not surprised at the result
I'm starting to think you're right NRB525... The EQ 11 point drop came in the same alert that advised me of the inquiry.
The EX 2 point drop, however, seemed to coincide with the 49% on the Discover Card.
But so far it looks like going from .3% overall utilization to 3.9% utilization had basically zero effect on my FICO scores.
Now I'm going to be reducing it back to where it was, to see if that has any effect.
That unfortunately doesn't mean much with the way updates get rolled up with regards to the drop
Can't really accurately test things with a very busy report, though I am following this thread with interest. Figuring I'm going to be pretty much sidelined from testing for six months post mortgage and post closing app spree. Might get some AAOA tests in as new tradelines report that don't affect my mix of credit though I have not much idea how the mortgage will factor in which will may skew the installment loan utilization testing I'm doing, but that's about it.
I cannot get into the 'mix of credit' features they're looking for. I really don't have any wish to add instalment loans if I can avoid them.
There's just so far I'm willing to go to boost my credit scores. And structural borrowing is not where I want to go.
Long term borrowing is how I got into trouble in the first place.
I'm no longer impressed by the financial industry's hype.
To me the credit cards are a temporary passing thing, I pay them down to zero. And that's the way I like it.
Even letting utilization get up to 3.9% made me nervous. I don't like banks having their hooks in me.
@Revelate wrote:
That unfortunately doesn't mean much with the way updates get rolled up with regards to the drop
Well, as a test of letting more cards report, keeping the utilization to 0.3% --> 3.9% is mandatory. Otherwise the test is throwing more utilization on the mix, which will certainly quickly lead to more points lost. The INQ is pretty easiliy isolated because of the timing.
I think the SJ test is important for those who always want to see all cards zero except 1. In a stable file, with no utilization changes, there should be little to no change for letting more cards report. The temporary boost that "all cards but 1" sees is probably from the overall decline in utilization percentage for all cards in total, not so much the reduction in number of cards reporting.
@NRB525 wrote:
@Revelate wrote:
That unfortunately doesn't mean much with the way updates get rolled up with regards to the drop
Well, as a test of letting more cards report, keeping the utilization to 0.3% --> 3.9% is mandatory. Otherwise the test is throwing more utilization on the mix, which will certainly quickly lead to more points lost. The INQ is pretty easiliy isolated because of the timing.
I think the SJ test is important for those who always want to see all cards zero except 1. In a stable file, with no utilization changes, there should be little to no change for letting more cards report. The temporary boost that "all cards but 1" sees is probably from the overall decline in utilization percentage for all cards in total, not so much the reduction in number of cards reporting.
I've wondered if, and if so why, the "all cards but 1" rule would work
@SouthJamaica wrote:
@NRB525 wrote:
@Revelate wrote:
That unfortunately doesn't mean much with the way updates get rolled up with regards to the drop
Well, as a test of letting more cards report, keeping the utilization to 0.3% --> 3.9% is mandatory. Otherwise the test is throwing more utilization on the mix, which will certainly quickly lead to more points lost. The INQ is pretty easiliy isolated because of the timing.
I think the SJ test is important for those who always want to see all cards zero except 1. In a stable file, with no utilization changes, there should be little to no change for letting more cards report. The temporary boost that "all cards but 1" sees is probably from the overall decline in utilization percentage for all cards in total, not so much the reduction in number of cards reporting.
I've wondered if, and if so why, the "all cards but 1" rule would work
It works because the people who are implementing it are going from a higher utilization overall when multiple cards have a balance, to a lower utilization on all cards overall when only one is reporting a small balance 
Those who maintain their file at "all cards zero but one" are also making sure they never commit the mortal sin of missing a payment. So as they are rebuilding their file, their micromanagement of the card accounts keeps stringing together month after month of perfect payment history, which raises the score over time. Of course, you could get there by just paying the cards that report by the payment due date, and get the same string of on-time payments, which is the real driver of an improved credit score.
All cards but one is not the real driver of the score improvement: it is the resulting on-time payments that happen.
@NRB525 wrote:
@SouthJamaica wrote:
@NRB525 wrote:
@Revelate wrote:
That unfortunately doesn't mean much with the way updates get rolled up with regards to the drop
Well, as a test of letting more cards report, keeping the utilization to 0.3% --> 3.9% is mandatory. Otherwise the test is throwing more utilization on the mix, which will certainly quickly lead to more points lost. The INQ is pretty easiliy isolated because of the timing.
I think the SJ test is important for those who always want to see all cards zero except 1. In a stable file, with no utilization changes, there should be little to no change for letting more cards report. The temporary boost that "all cards but 1" sees is probably from the overall decline in utilization percentage for all cards in total, not so much the reduction in number of cards reporting.
I've wondered if, and if so why, the "all cards but 1" rule would work
It works because the people who are implementing it are going from a higher utilization overall when multiple cards have a balance, to a lower utilization on all cards overall when only one is reporting a small balance
Those who maintain their file at "all cards zero but one" are also making sure they never commit the mortal sin of missing a payment. So as they are rebuilding their file, their micromanagement of the card accounts keeps stringing together month after month of perfect payment history, which raises the score over time. Of course, you could get there by just paying the cards that report by the payment due date, and get the same string of on-time payments, which is the real driver of an improved credit score.
All cards but one is not the real driver of the score improvement: it is the resulting on-time payments that happen.
Agreed but it does factor into instant-in-time score maximization which most of us should / do care about when it comes to application time at least for anything we care about. Absolutely payment history is king, but if you solve that by not missing payments, revolving utilization is the next thing to tackle from a scoring perspective.
@Revelate wrote:
@NRB525 wrote:
@SouthJamaica wrote:
@NRB525 wrote:
@Revelate wrote:
That unfortunately doesn't mean much with the way updates get rolled up with regards to the drop
Well, as a test of letting more cards report, keeping the utilization to 0.3% --> 3.9% is mandatory. Otherwise the test is throwing more utilization on the mix, which will certainly quickly lead to more points lost. The INQ is pretty easiliy isolated because of the timing.
I think the SJ test is important for those who always want to see all cards zero except 1. In a stable file, with no utilization changes, there should be little to no change for letting more cards report. The temporary boost that "all cards but 1" sees is probably from the overall decline in utilization percentage for all cards in total, not so much the reduction in number of cards reporting.
I've wondered if, and if so why, the "all cards but 1" rule would work
It works because the people who are implementing it are going from a higher utilization overall when multiple cards have a balance, to a lower utilization on all cards overall when only one is reporting a small balance
Those who maintain their file at "all cards zero but one" are also making sure they never commit the mortal sin of missing a payment. So as they are rebuilding their file, their micromanagement of the card accounts keeps stringing together month after month of perfect payment history, which raises the score over time. Of course, you could get there by just paying the cards that report by the payment due date, and get the same string of on-time payments, which is the real driver of an improved credit score.
All cards but one is not the real driver of the score improvement: it is the resulting on-time payments that happen.
Agreed but it does factor into instant-in-time score maximization which most of us should / do care about when it comes to application time at least for anything we care about. Absolutely payment history is king, but if you solve that by not missing payments, revolving utilization is the next thing to tackle from a scoring perspective.
I'm convinced that having 1 account report, instead of none, does pay off: http://ficoforums.myfico.com/t5/Understanding-FICO-Scoring/FICO-scores-with-1-vs-2-cards-out-of-9-wi...
@Revelate wrote:
@NRB525 wrote:
All cards but one is not the real driver of the score improvement: it is the resulting on-time payments that happen.
Agreed but it does factor into instant-in-time score maximization which most of us should / do care about when it comes to application time at least for anything we care about. Absolutely payment history is king, but if you solve that by not missing payments, revolving utilization is the next thing to tackle from a scoring perspective.
We are in agreement, however then you have to still consider "How do I get to that instant in time maximization I want on the day I app?" And the answer is, you bring down utilization (to zero) on all cards but one, and leave a small total utilization as the remainder of all cards Can you see the incompleteness in the shorthand "all cards zero but one"? It isn't the one card that gives the score optimization, it's the low utilization at that set of reported balances, specifically one low balance only. You can get to the same place with 3 or 4 cards reporting, as long as that total utilization is the same as if 1 card only reported.
And yes, payment on time is primary, then you can work with utilization to further improve score ( or realize that using credit is what this is all about, and so as utility / utilization of credit goes up, the score will come down by some factor). Virtually everything else is noise, including AAoA because you can't really control them.