Like request

[davidrotts63]

You make it sound like you've mastered the FICO algorithm. Where are you coming from.
Btw "knowing otherwise" doesn't = fact.

If you feel I made it all up. Bless you.
What I was saying was, you can't question someone else's fact just because you want to, unless you know otherwise...

[davidrotts63]

So what's my FICO going to do? Are these numbers the same for all FICO models across all three CRA's?

It's a credit score thread it's only safe to assume we are referring to credit score. He specifically mentioned getting approved for credit cards, which leaves us mostly with a FICO 08 model which the model is the same for each CRA.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

If you feel I made it all up. Bless you.
What I was saying was, you can't question someone else's fact just because you want to, unless you know otherwise...

I don't think you made it up at all. My guess is you are accepting CB's research.

[davidrotts63]

I don't think you made it up at all. My guess is you are accepting CB's research.

For the most part yes, it's information gathered on CB, as well as some other sites.
(I wasn't replying to you, you aren't discrediting my whole post, just a line which is acceptable being that you believe it's false, the other guy is trying to discredit it all by saying "how do you know" )

[ChaimMoskowitz]

It's a credit score thread it's only safe to assume we are referring to credit score. He specifically mentioned getting approved for credit cards, which leaves us mostly with a FICO 08 model which the model is the same for each CRA.

So the three CRA's use FICO 08. I have the same utilization on all three but have three different scores. Sounds to me they are using utilization or another factor differently.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

For the most part yes, it's information gathered on CB, as well as some other sites.
(I wasn't replying to you, you aren't discrediting my whole post, just a line which is acceptable being that you believe it's false, the other guy is trying to discredit it all by saying "how do you know" )

I am not discrediting any part of your post. IMHO the %'s are not magical numbers. We just disagree.

[davidrotts63]

So the three CRA's use FICO 08. I have the same utilization on all three but have three different scores. Sounds to me they are using utilization or another factor differently.

What's relevant isn't the CRAs model, it's the banks model they use. The most popular model for banks to use, regardless of the CR they pull is a FICO 08 (for credit cards)

[davidrotts63]

I am not discrediting any part of your post. IMHO the %'s are not magical numbers. We just disagree.

That's what I meant
You disagreed =acceptable
He's discrediting without reason =plain old stupid.

When you say those numbers aren't magical numbers, are you trying to say they dint exist, or that these aren't those?

[ChaimMoskowitz]

When you say those numbers aren't magical numbers, are you trying to say they dint exist, or that these aren't those?

What I am saying many believe when you hit those numbers magical things are going to happen. It is not that simple.
Don't lose any sleep over being at 10% instead of 9%.
There is also a thing called credit buckets. Many believe depending what bucket you are in effects things differently.

[davidrotts63]

What I am saying many believe when you hit those numbers magical things are going to happen. It is not that simple.
Don't lose any sleep over being at 10% instead of 9%.

Not at all. But like 1 year for AAOA is a world apart from 11 Months. 29% is a nice jump from 30%

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Not at all. But like 1 year for AAOA is a world apart from 11 Months. 29% is a nice jump from 30%

Again that is for you. Would it be the same for a person with 5 accounts reporting compared to 25 accounts reporting?

[PillanSmye]

"Try to keep your utilization below these numbers, each number is a step 100%, 99%, (95%,) 90%, 75%, 50%, 30%,10%, and from there down."
What is going to happen on my report when utilization goes from 10 to 9 that wont happen when I go from 11 to 10?

Nothing will happen from 11 to 10 if it was isolated.  Lots of the FICO algorithm works off steps instead of slopes.  Utilization, AAoA, oldest account ages, percentages of balances on installment loans, late payment ageing, inquiry aging etc.

But I think the biggest flaw with the above statement is the 100, 99, 95.  Fairly certain FICO considers anything 90 or above as maxed out.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

But I think the biggest flaw with the above statement is the 100, 99, 95.  Fairly certain FICO considers anything 90 or above as maxed out.

Can you really pin it down to exact percentages for every credit profile?

Remember years ago on CB it was gospel that disputing inquires would lead to FA's? I and many other did it like candy and not one issue. IMHO it was because we had strong credit files but CB would hear none of that. I understand for their membership it was a bad idea but to say that for everyone was plain out wrong.

[ExGingi]

Nothing will happen from 11 to 10 if it was isolated.  Lots of the FICO algorithm works off steps instead of slopes.  Utilization, AAoA, oldest account ages, percentages of balances on installment loans, late payment ageing, inquiry aging etc.

But I think the biggest flaw with the above statement is the 100, 99, 95.  Fairly certain FICO considers anything 90 or above as maxed out.

What other components of FICO work in steps rather than slopes?

I would say that any algorithm that wouldn't consider 90 or above as maxed out (on overall credit, rather than individual account, which could often be taking advantage of a lucrative offer) would be totally flawed.

[PillanSmye]

.
There is also a thing called credit buckets. Many believe depending what bucket you are in effects things differently.

Its called population segmentation.  And it is real.  Not just used by FICO, but in insurance, business etc.

http://www.fico.com/en/predictive-analytics/analytic-technologies/recursive-scorecard-segmentation

[PillanSmye]

What other components of FICO work in steps rather than slopes?

I would say that any algorithm that wouldn't consider 90 or above as maxed out (on overall credit, rather than individual account, which could often be taking advantage of a lucrative offer) would be totally flawed.

Those utilization percentages are relevant to overall utilization numbers as well as individual account utilization numbers.

The FICO algorithm doesn't take into account your specific reasons for a maxed out unsecured credit card - even if it is for a lucrative 0% offer or because you didn't want to waste a couple days of your Wells Fargo 6 months.  That's where the human interaction of manual underwriting comes into play.  And even then an underwriter might not have your same enthusiasm for that lucrative offer.

[aygart]

Why in the world is this informative conversation here in JS?

[PillanSmye]

Why in the world is this informative conversation here in JS?

Because Rotts was trolling for likes.  LOL

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Why in the world is this informative conversation here in JS?

Because contrary to DDF thinking this is where the intelligent people hang out.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Its called population segmentation. 

So now we have a fancy name for it.