Okay, Just went to worthknowing.com to pull my report from there. It is supposed to be pulled from TU, and per the info on the web page about their method of scoring, it's not FICO but supposedly uses a similar method and formula, and should closely correlate to your FICO. FICO ranges from 300-800 or 350 to 800, something like that, and the WK ranges from 1-100. So, they say if you have a middle-range FICO, your WK score should be about 50. Well, a couple of weeks ago I pulled a TU FICO and had 599, but the WK score was 10!!!! WHAT???!!!! On WK, they give an account summary, then show Delinquent/Derogatory accounts, and then Account Detail for Delinquent Accounts, Detail for Satisfactory Accounts, and then Inquiry info. Let me list what I have on the WK report and then tell me what's bad and good and why my score is 10! I could not find on the WK web page any explanation or how the figured the score. Account Summary: Account Type Number of Balance Amt Past Due Revolving 6 $11,807 $0 Insallment 4 $36,247 $0 Mortgage 1 $117,000 $0 Charge 0 $0 $0 Closed w/ Bal 0 $0 $0 Total: 11 $165,000 $0 Delinquent/Derog Info: Collections Public Records # of Accts w/ Negatives 0 0 0 Account Detail: Delinquent Accounts Nothing listed Satisfactory Accounts Lender Bal/As of/ Type/Status Del. Dates CL FNANB $0 7/1/03 Revolv/ 03/30/2003 $800 Sears $1610 7/1/03 Revol/closed 05/01/2002 02/28/2002 07/01/2001 Cap1 $1800 7/1/03 Revolv/ 05/31/2003 11/30/2002 Providian $3580 7/1/03 Revolv/ 05/31/2003 $3700 02/28/2003 MBNA $1880 7/1/03 Revolv/ 01/28/2003 $3000 CITI $2900 7/1/03 Revolv/ $3000 GMAC $18,000 7/1/03 Install 05/31/2003 WAMU $117,000 6/1/03 Mort. CITI $0 7/1/02 Instal/Closed CITI $0 3/1/01 Instal/Closed US DEP ED $17,000 Instal/ HArd Inq's on 6/24/2002, 3/06/2002, 12/29/2001, and 11//30/2001 That US DEP ED is a student loan that I don't start paying for until 12/2003. I notice that 2 Cap 1 accounts are not listed, and a First Union Visa not listed, and my last 2 car loans not listed The Sears was opened in 1987, the FNANB in 1997, the Cap 1, PRovidian, and MBNA in 1998, the CITI in 2000, GMAC in 2001, WAMU mortgage in 1998, the 2 CITI's with Zero balance were loans, opend in 1998 and one in 2001, and the Student loan started in 1999. I know the recent 30 day lates are bad, but that's what happens when you get laid off and can't find a job for 7 months, then start working again but for $13K less than what you were making - it tends to make it hard to make ends meet and always pay everything on time.... What do you think, is this worth a 10 on WK and a 599 FAKO from TU??? All comments welcomed. FedUp2003 P.S. A previous GMAC car loan, started in 1992 and paid in 1997 is missing, a FU Visa opened in about 1990, closed be me in 1995, a car loan opened in 1986 and paid in 1992, 2 other installment loans from around 190, 1991, or 1992 - all paid as agreed, no baddies, etc ... are missing from my history on TU.
1-100 IS SUPPOSED TO BE % OF SCORES...AT 5%---95% OF THE PEOPLE HAVE BETTER SCORES THAN YOU---AT 75%...YOU ARE BETTER THAN 74% OF OTHER SCORES... It has NO basis in reality...so don't worry about it!!! My first WK score was 100...now it ranges from 50-65 or so... My F.I.C.O. is 665-739---LAST SCORE WAS 714...BUT I OWE PROBALY $30,000 <LESS> THAN WHEN I HAD 739!!!
Just as a point of information, when WorthKnowing.com launched, they specifically stated that their score would NOT scale to FICO. The FICO is a straight additive scale, while the WorthKnowing score is purposely skewed to a bell curve. For that reason, they state, 75% of the people will score between 37 and 75, with a WK score of 50 being equivalent to the "average" FICO of 728, with 50% of the population being above the twin scores of FICO-728/WK-50 and 50% being below. Here's a chart from FICO illustrating the average 728 score: https://www.myfico.com/Images/ScoreBarCharts/728.jpg Here's a passage quoting WorthKnowing execs regarding this same issue: But the scores the Worthknowing website provides bear no resemblance to the FICO scores used by the majority of lenders. While the classic FICOscores range from 300 to 850, Worthknowing scores range from 0 to 100, and are designed to tell consumers how they rank compared to the credit population as a whole. "It's a true bell curve," says James A. Eckstein, founder and chief executive. "It's a percentile ranking," adds Lisa J. Volmar, vice president of operations. "A score of 50 is average, not failing." Worthknowing's patent-pending scoring model was developed by industry veteran K.K Srinivasan and a team of assistants with years of experience developing generic scoring models. "We believe ours is different but better," Eckstein says. "We don't have to match up to FICO scores to show consumers their creditworthiness." (source: http://www.creditcollectionsworld.com/04sr01.htm) I realize that it may sound strange to hear that a FICO of 728 or a WK of 50 is the average score, or even that they equate in that way. Here on Creditnet, most of us started out in the 400 or 500 club -- at least I did -- so from our frame of reference that 728 seems like it would be in the 90 percentile, lol! The truth, though, is that the vast majority of Americans pay their bills on time and never found themselves in our spot. Doc P.S. That said, the WorthKnowing score is garbage anyway. Even though they CLAIM to put the FICO on a bell curve, they really don't. Instead, the WK score is derived from their own formulas. Still, they are ATTEMPTING to present it as a percentile with 50 being a GREAT score and with much of anything greater than 80 or so being practically unattainable.
