I enrolled and it show EQ reporting an even 800. I knew there was a variance so if 800 is the low through EQ and 838 though TU, is it safe to say EX is somewhere in the middle?
Here's the breakdown: Top Positive Factors The positive factors listed below reflect areas of your credit behavior that are better than average, translating into a higher FICO score. Continuing to manage your credit this way will help to increase your FICO score over time. These factors are provided in order of impact - the first listed has impacted your FICO score most positively and so on. You have no late payments reported on your credit accounts You have 0 accounts that show evidence of missed payments in the past. The majority of U.S. consumers pay their credit obligations as agreed and are never late. For example, over 68% of the U.S. population did not miss a single credit payment in the recent past. Click here to review your Negative Items. Consumers with previous late payments are much more likely to pay late in the future. The score evaluates late payment behavior in a variety of ways. First, how many late payments appear on the credit record. Second, how late they were. Third, how recently they occurred. These factors can interact with each other. For example, a payment that was 90 days late represents greater risk than a payment that was 30 days late, if they occurred around the same time. However, if it occurred much farther in the past, it may actually represent less risk. Even a 30 day late payment represents much greater risk than a spotless payment history. Keeping current and up-to-date on all of your credit obligations - as you currently do - will help to keep your FICO score in the higher ranges. You have a low proportion of balances to credit limits on your revolving accounts The proportion of balances to credit limits (high credit) on your revolving accounts is 1%. The average proportion of balances to credit limits on revolving accounts carried by U.S. consumers is around 40%. Click here to review your Accounts Summary. Analysis of consumer credit behavior repeatedly finds that owing a substantial balance on revolving accounts (Visa, MasterCard, Discover, American Express, department store cards, etc.) relative to the amount of revolving credit available to you represents increased risk. In fact, the level of revolving debt is one of the most important factors in the FICO score. The score evaluates your total balances in relation to your total available credit on revolving accounts, as well as on individual revolving accounts. For a given amount of revolving credit available, a greater amount owed indicates a greater risk, and lowers the score. (For credit cards, the total outstanding balance on your last statement is generally the amount that will show in your credit bureau report. Bear in mind that even if you pay off your credit cards in full each and every month, your credit bureau report may show the last billing statement balance on those accounts.) Continuing to maintain lower balances on your credit cards and other revolving accounts will help to increase your FICO score over time. You demonstrate a relatively long credit history Your most established credit obligation is 157 months old and your newest credit account was opened 29 months ago. The majority of U.S. consumers have a relatively long credit history - with the average age of their most established credit account being 14 to 15 years. In addition, the average time since the most recent account opening is 20 months ago. Click here to review your Accounts Summary. This factor is based on the age of the accounts on your credit bureau report (the age of the oldest account, the average age of accounts, or both). Research shows that consumers with longer credit histories have better repayment risk than those with shorter credit histories. Also, consumers who frequently open new accounts have greater repayment risk than those who don't. Avoiding a sudden ramp-up of new credit openings will help you to continue receiving positive points for this area of consideration by the FICO score. You have established bank/national revolving credit obligations being reported The presence of bank/national revolving credit accounts (Visa, MasterCard, Discover, American Express, Diners Club, etc.) on your credit report illustrates that you can obtain credit, such as a bankcard, from a lender. Your ability to obtain credit (and use it responsibly) is evaluated by the score. The score evaluates the types of credit in your credit history and will consider your mix of credit cards, retail accounts, installment loans, finance company accounts and mortgage loans. It is not necessary to have one of each, and it is not a good idea to open credit accounts you have no need for, or don't intend to use. Continue to use your existing bankcards in a responsible manner to positively affect your FICO score. Top Negative Factors Because your FICO score is exceptionally high, there are no actionable negative factors present with your score. Continue to manage your credit as you currently are doing to maintain your very high FICO score.
Can be anywhere in that area but until you see it you wont know. Heck, who cares, your in credit score heaven, what else do you need!!!! Only a select few ever see 800, what percentage are you in? did it say?
For comparison, I have a WaMu card as well and it's reporting my score 5 points higher than TrueCredit reports it for the same period. I was going to put my numbers in there, but thought twice about putting them up next to an 838! Good Job!
The only thing I see here (regarding your "FICO" score) is that somehow it doesn't seem to fit the "algorithm" of the FICO formula. As suggested, I would verify it off the direct FICO website. Your FICO score may be an "industry score", there are derivatives out there of the FICO score. No question that you have an outstanding credit score, and there is no "financial" advantage for you in hitting 850. But, I would pull my scores directly from myfico.com just as verification. FICO scores move in ways that baffle the consumer. I have worked with similar "predictive algorithms" for economic forecasting, and they are always getting "tweaked". And, the FICO score is not a sum of the components, it is an analysis of all the components linked together. Your scores could be strictly for the credit card industry. Other industries have their own formulas and calculations.
One of the positive things it mentions is that you've got a long history. Does anyone know how much of a factor that plays? I've got a couple of lines that have opened in the last year and several haven't hit my credit reports yet. Among them is a mortgage (refinanced a previously private, unreported one), a boat loan, and a Home Depot Card. So, I've got a mix of credit lines coming in all back to back. It's certainly going to lower my average age and bump up the most recent opening, but is it all going to be bad? I haven't had a mortgage reported for 4 years now, so that's got to be good, right? The installment loan might be bad by itself, but isn't it mitigated somewhat by the presence of the mortgage? I guess the HD Credit Card would hurt the most, but it's a $4,000 line, so it's not the same as a $200 card coming in. I've got some things falling off in the next month too, so I guess I'm in for a roller coaster ride in the short term!
Update Today, I did some more reading on the Wamu score and discovered that they are listing their "FICO" as some sort of an adjusted bank card score. Needless to say, I was miffed and curious as to what all three agencies were reporting as my "Wamu FICO" was now up to a 839 as supposedly been reported by TU. Back in March, I pulled my EQ report and it was reading an even 800 and I assumed that the EX was somewhere in the middle and never actually pulled it. I bit the bullet today and purchased the MyFICO report for all three agencies and was a bit surprised as to what I found. Here are the numbers: EX: 820 EQ: 813 TU: 782 Now this TU score is what gets to me concerned. Although the EX and EQ reports state that my utilization is "great", TU reads "very good" and although I am at 1%, my balance is too high ($314). All the information is correct as of this day but TU seems to calculate the score differently than the others. Is this common for TU to be the lowest of the bunch? I would like to get all three over the 800 threshold but I am at a loss as to how I could do it since the information is accurate. Perhaps I just can't. Any insight is welcomed.
First, make sure your TU report is showing all the accounts EX & EQ are. Next check the dates of opening, etc. Then check "types" of accounts, somewhere an acct. could be called "installment" vs revolving. It's alot of work, but you have to cross refence all the accounts across all the reports, and highlight any differences. This includes checking dates of "latest information reported" on each account.
BIZ, that is exactly what I just did and here are my findings: The EQ and EX reports show 13 accounts and the TU reflects 12, however, the EX has an old closed JC Penny account from 1986 listed that is not on either the EQ or TU. I have still attained an 813 with EQ despite the omission. I think it's important to note that the JCP account is closed and I don't really want to have to go through the trouble to have an old closed account added by the agencies but if someone tells me it's a good idea and it can be done, I will. I have verified that the "installment" and "revolving" are being accurately listed. Each account is accurate between the three reports and are identical to one another with the exception of a couple of differences but none of them involve open accounts. Basically, there is one account on each that is not on the other two. Again, none of which is an open account. I see absolutely nothing with the TU report that sticks out as different than the other two to warrant a 38 point deviation.
Action Taken I decided to file dispute letters to TransUnion and Equifax. I have essentially sent them all the information to bring their information to resemble a mirror image of Expirian to include former addresses, former names used, and accounts. In theory, if the three reports are exactly the same, the scores should be a little closer to one another. It will be interesting to see what happens with my requests.
Well, the old JCP account will help raise the score, even though closed, it is still adding 21 years of history. The other differences on the two closed accounts could be a factor also. Understand that the FICO score calculates based upon putting you into a "bucket" with similar profiles. So, your score is "relative" to others. Since you are near the top of the scoring range, these simple and small differences may just be pushing your TU report into a different "bucket". See what the dispute w/TU does, and check your score again. Also, make a call to the FICO help desk. They do answer questions like this, and give insight into what is impacting your score.
Thanks for the insight, I had the same thought as to minute differences having an impact like that. I guess what concerns me most is that even the EQ report that lacked the JCP account still was 21 points higher and only a mere seven points away from the EX score. It just goes to show how complex the scores really are. Like I stated, I even went as far as to correct the names and former addresses. One thing I did notice was the fact that the old JCP account was issued with the wrong middle initial in my name. The only report that had that name was the one where that account was reported (EX). I'll report back how EQ and TU respond and if anything changes. I guess it could be a couple of months before I see any numbers change.
You can't fully go by "FICO's published scoring weights breakdown", for an algorithm does not work like a "straight formula". Credit reports which show long account histories behave differently relative to scores than ones w/newer accounts. It makes sense when you think of it, but is complex to put into a formula. One of my theories around the FICO scoring model is that it grants "bonus points", so to speak, when you show good credit history (no negs) with a long history over various types of accounts. So, what may seem to be "minor" differences could be impacting your score moreso. It could very well be that a missing account (even closed) could be holding you back from a "scoring threshhold", where you pick up those extra points. Also remember that the FICO model is "dynamic", not static. FICO is constantly tweaking the model with changes in the credit marketplace and consumer activity. Another example of how one account can make such a scoring difference is examining the big impact these "purchased AU accounts" make on people's credit scores. Adding one account with a long history (and they become a "closed account" very quickly) jumps scores 30, 40, 50 or more points. You are an example of the "reverse" with one missing account. You're doing all the correct moves, get all three reports "synchronized" as closely as you can, and then check the scores. It is these types of "quirks" that give us the best insight into how this FICO model really works!
