Credit Scores are like Las Vegas Casinos

[Flyingifr]

How, you ask? Simple - you just can't win. Look at the two items I have here from Credit Karma  (yeah, I know - FAKO not FICO, but the principle remains the same).

 

 

Same date.......

Same amount of change in total Credit Card debt

Same direction in the amount of debt - down.

Same Credit Card Company involved in the change.

Same change in number of Credit Core points

 

What's different? One (EFX) went UP six points, and one (TU) went DOWN six points.

 

It's not the number of points that I am questioning, it is the fact that the exact same documented change cause one score to h=go up, nd another to go down, and both by the exact same number of points.

 

You have better odds in a Casino, and a crooked one at that.

.

 

[parrothead1]

Mine are identical across the board. All three are different scores. 

[shifter]

25 minutes ago, Flyingifr said:

(yeah, I know - FAKO not FICO, but the principle remains the same).

Umm... No. That's one reason why FAKOs are entirely useless. They are unreliable and not worth even the free price tag. 

[hegemony]

also, each CRA has a different data architecture and feeds into FICO calculations slightly differently.

 

moreover, it is easier to predict the outcome of most games of chance... those big casinos weren' built for free...

[Flyingifr]

3 hours ago, parrothead1 said:

Mine are identical across the board. All three are different scores. 

Mine are also identical across the board, but that was not my point. The point is that how does the same change on two different CRA's have opposite effects of the score?

[Flyingifr]

3 hours ago, shifter said:

Umm... No. That's one reason why FAKOs are entirely useless. They are unreliable and not worth even the free price tag. 

When I was on MyFico I had the same thing happen with genuine FICO scores. It isn't the difference between FICO and FAKO, it's something else thrown into the calculation that is designed to prevent score improvement by rewards in certain behavior on one CRA and penalizing that same behavior on another.

[hdporter]

1 hour ago, Flyingifr said:

When I was on MyFico I had the same thing happen with genuine FICO scores. It isn't the difference between FICO and FAKO, it's something else thrown into the calculation that is designed to prevent score improvement by rewards in certain behavior on one CRA and penalizing that same behavior on another.

 

Toss out the "designed" conclusion and I buy it entirely.   You can drive yourself mad if you expect to rationalize every FICO 8 score change.  And that's without even taking into account when divergent score changes are involved from one CRA to the next.

 

But if you "big picture" the score stuff, and ignore the more modest day to day fluctuations, the basics of scoring tend to provide a decent guidance to managing one's balances/accounts/inquiries/etc in a manner that yields FICO score improvement. 

 

That's good enough for me.

[centex]

Without seeing the complete breakdown of the paper reports, I will not presume that both reports are IDENTICAL.

 

Anyone trying to make sense of a FAKO is wasting their time or is a candidate for the rubber room whilst lounging in a strait jacket. 

 

Oh, and if you cannot win in Vegas, then you are not Vegas'ing properly...many of us on this very board do quite well there and elsewhere...

[Knight]

[RehabbingANDBlabbing]

I know what you mean OP.

 

My Equifax FICO is always lower than my other two. TU is the highest because the report is clean and well seasoned. What surprises me is that Equifax is the lowest because there is only 1 negative account on that report. Meanwhile, my Experian report is usually 20-30 points higher with 5 negative accounts showing. How TF is Equifax lower? The open reporting accounts are the same on the two, but I think I have a few less older paid account showing on EQ. And I am talking about FICO8s, just because those are the most widely used ones, IMO.

[PotO]

@centex is, of course, correct.  Your reports are most certainly not identical.  I'm beginning to think  @Flyingifr is paranoid.

 

My EX FICO is the lowest at 827 while EQ and TU are 16 and 17 points higher.  When I look at each report side by side, I see substantial differences.  Some accounts report a balance at one CRA and not the other(s).  EQ and TU have over 150 accounts listed.  EX has about 10 less.  EX reports account opening dates only as MM/YY while EQ and TU report MM/DD/YY.  My AAoA on EQ and TU is 8.2 and on EX 7.9.  

 

If that means that each CRA reports the same to you, I'd suggest an optometrist.  

[A Credit Ed]

11 hours ago, PotO said:

EQ and TU have over 150 accounts listed

I'm always in awe of the heroes that walk among us.

[hdporter]

1 hour ago, A Credit Ed said:

I'm always in awe of the heroes that walk among us.

 

Heroes?  (I'll give you "legends")  😄

[TheVig]

Too bad @Ron1 is not around anymore. 

[nemo]

You lost me at Credit Karma, and I didn't come back until just now when I forgot that that's how this thread started out.  Now that FICO has been mentioned, there is something to talk about.

 

There are almost always differences in the three reports.  Sometimes you have to look at them with a microscope, sometimes not.  The score game is opaque; that isn't the same thing as being rigged.  Clearly scores don't perfectly reflect risk.  For example, if they did, the $2 trick would not exist.

 

If you just keep doing the right thing, eventually the 10-year moving average of your scores will track in the right direction.  Worrying about anything less is an ulcer with no purpose.

[PotO]

9 hours ago, A Credit Ed said:

I'm always in awe of the heroes that walk among us.

 

It's easy when you try ... especially if you are a disciple of @Ron1 and also a financial OCD.

 

It does have it's negative aspects, though.  Hundreds of tree huggers and assorted SJWs want me dead because printing my credit reports cost several trees each time.  

[PotO]

5 hours ago, TheVig said:

Too bad @Ron1 is not around anymore. 

 

Where is Ron?  I miss him ... and many of the other board masters such as @mendelssohn, @Konrad, @mrjuggalo9er, @Kat58, @hegemony and others.

 

But I especially miss ❤️❤️ @breeze ❤️❤️.

[shifter]

Don't forget @BobWang @cv91915 @Occam and many others. 

[PotO]

1 hour ago, shifter said:

Don't forget @BobWang @cv91915 @Occam and many others. 

 

You are right about @BobWang, @Occam and others.  

 

On the other hand, I do NOT miss any porch pirate thieves and guys in pink flowered jackets such as @cv91915.

[Knight]

Apple reported a $0 balance way earlier than expected and that on its own dropped my score by 70 points. 🤷‍♂️

[PotO]

6 minutes ago, Knight said:

Apple reported a $0 balance way earlier than expected and that on its own dropped my score by 70 points. 🤷‍♂️

 

It's unlikely a 70-point FICO drop was the result of $0 balances.

[hdporter]

9 minutes ago, Knight said:

Apple reported a $0 balance way earlier than expected and that on its own dropped my score by 70 points. 🤷‍♂️

 

Did that result in $0 in reported outstanding balances?  Even then, I'm with @PotO; this doesn't sound like FICO (in which case the score change rates as inconsequential).

[Knight]

12 minutes ago, PotO said:

 

It's unlikely a 70-point FICO drop was the result of $0 balances.

No it was due to my tradelines' average age dropping dramatically and the new account factor. I still have another TL reporting a small balance. I am expecting my FICO to drop some more when the others start reporting at the end of the month.

Edited August 17, 2022 by Knight

[PotO]

25 minutes ago, Knight said:

No it was due to my tradelines' average age dropping dramatically and the new account factor. I still have another TL reporting a small balance. I am expecting my FICO to drop some more when the others start reporting at the end of the month.

 

That makes sense.

 

There shouldn't be more than an approximately 20-point fluctuation when you go between $0 UTIL and around 10%.  

[Knight]

3 minutes ago, PotO said:

 

That makes sense.

 

There shouldn't be more than an approximately 20-point fluctuation when you go between $0 UTIL and around 10%.  

 

Hey what do you think about getting an express store card? I can get $5 gift card on every $62 I spend. Not bad.