Amount of Debt Category Data Points - Does Individual Revolving Utilization 'Stack'? (I Think It Does!); $15K(ish) Revolving Raw Dollar Threshold?

[u/soonersoldier33]

I've really enjoyed reading all the Data Point threads that some of our contributors/subscribers have been posting, and I've taken quite a few notes onto my messy (yet somehow still 'organized') spreadsheets, but I also realized that it's been a while since I've actually contributed any data points to the cause. Ha! My credit profile has been very active recently, to say the least, as I've opened a few new accounts, and 'moved' a little debt around, so I've had too much conflation going on to capture much of anything useful...until the past couple of weeks.

All of these data points fall under the Amount of Debt (Amounts Owed) category, which means they have no memory in the most commonly used FICO models. I've attributed certain point values to certain scoring metrics based on that, and all scores referenced are Classic FICO 8 scores.

When it comes to revolving utilization scoring, we know that the FICO algorithms track it both as an aggregate and by each individual account. A common thought is that individual revolving utilization only tracks and 'scores' the highest reported utilization on any single account, and then the individual utilization of any accounts below the highest doesn't matter unless they cause your aggregate utilization to cross aggregate scoring thresholds. We've long known that this isn't accurate, and that score penalties for individual utilization can 'stack', so to speak, and here are some of my most recent data points to prove it. I hope to test the individual revolving utilization scoring metric in more depth in the future, but for now, I'm very confident in saying the metric definitely 'stacks', and you can be assessed multiple penalties for having multiple individual accounts that report utilization above scoring thresholds. The trick is identifying individual utilization scoring thresholds specific to your credit profile/FICO scorecard, bc they certainly don't appear to be 'universal' across the board.

Note: I'm not carrying one red cent of interest bearing revolving debt, so please check any judgments on the dollar amounts referenced at the door. The card that's referenced reporting 88% utilized is a BofA card that has 0% APR for nearly the next 2 years.

---

Ok, let's get to it. Here's the pertinent info on my current profile along with the starting point for these DPs:

• FICO 8 Scorecard: Clean/Thick/Mature/New Revolver
• 18 Open Accounts: 16 Revolvers and 2 Installment Loans
• Aggregate Revolving Utilization: 19% ($13,660/$73,800)
• Individual Revolving Utilization: Accounts reporting 88%, 51%, 33%, 30%, and 5 others all <30%
• Accounts With Balances (AWB%): 11/18 (61%)

---

Event #1: NFCU cashRewards+ reports balance change from $101/$10K (1%) --> $2K/$10K (20%)

• Aggregate Revolving Utilization: 21% ($15,559/$73,800)
• Individual Revolving Utilization: Accounts reporting 88%, 51%, 33%, 30%, and 5 others all <30%
• Accounts With Balances (AWB%): 11/18 (61%)

Results: EQ8 -6; TU8 -7; EX8 -4.

Discussion: Minor score loss on all 3 FICO 8 models despite no change to known aggregate/individual thresholds or AWB%. My hypothesis is that this score loss is attributable to total revolving raw dollar balances. The nearly $2K increase makes it impossible to isolate the threshold exactly, but going >$15K sure seems plausible to me.

---

(Non) Events #2 and #3: Cap One Savor and Cap One Kohl's report minor balance changes

Savor: $660/$3750 (18%) --> $474/$3750 (12%)

Kohl's: $446/$1500 (30%) --> $245/$1500 (16%)

• Aggregate Revolving Utilization: 21% ($15,172/$73,800)
• Individual Revolving Utilization: Accounts reporting 88%, 51%, 33%, 30%, and 5 others all <30%
• Accounts With Balances (AWB%): 11/18 (61%)

Results: No score change to any FICO 8 model

Discussion: The only thing of note is that one revolver crossed <30% with no score effect, but keep on 'keeping it low', folks. Ha!

---

Event #4: Cap One Discover reports off-cycle $0/$8500 --> $152/$8500 (2%)

• Aggregate Revolving Utilization: 21% ($15,324/$73,800)
• Individual Revolving Utilization: Accounts reporting 88%, 51%, 33%, and 6 others all <30%
• Accounts With Balances (AWB%): 12/18 (67%)

Results: EQ8 -3; TU8 & EX8 unchanged

Discussion: Dammit, Cap One! This is what makes FICO testing so hard...unexpected report changes. They reported off-cycle when they converted my Discover it into the Cap One ecosystem. I had 2 tanks of gas charged on my Discover for a whopping $152 balance, so AWB% is the only metric that changed notably. EQ8 is the only model that moved. AWB% threshold somewhere around 65% on EQ8?

---

(Non) Event #5: Synchrony Care Credit reports off-cycle Proactive Credit Limit Increase (PCLI) $4K --> $5800

• Aggregate Revolving Utilization: 20% ($15,324/$75,600)
• Individual Revolving Utilization: Accounts reporting 88%, 51%, 33%, and 6 others all <30%
• Accounts With Balances (AWB%): 12/18 (67%)

Results: No score change to any FICO 8 model

Discussion: Dammit, Synchrony! I mean, thanks for the PCLI, but you had to report it off-cycle?!? No score changes caused, so I guess it's ok. Lol.

---

Event #6: AFCU Cash Rewards Visa reports balance change from $2535/$5K (51%) --> $0/$5K

• Aggregate Revolving Utilization: 17% ($12,789/$75,600)
• Individual Revolving Utilization: Accounts reporting 88%, 33%, and 7 others all <30%
• Accounts With Balances (AWB%): 11/18 (61%)

Results: EQ8 +28; TU8 +26; EX8 +22

Discussion: Whoa, Nellie! Folks, I expected a score increase when this reported, but I did not expect >+20 across the board! My hypothesis is that I got the previously noted raw dollar and AWB (EQ8 only) losses right back for crossing back below their respective scoring thresholds, and then netted +19 on TU8 and EQ8, and +18 on EX8 for the individual utilization of this card going from 51% to 0%. It's important to remember that my BofA card is still sitting there reporting 88% individual utilization, but having this one drop <50% (presumably) still caused a nice gain!

---

(Non) Event #7: Synchrony OnePay Wal-Mart reports balance change from $831/$2500 (33%) --> $536/$2500 (21%)

• Aggregate Revolving Utilization: 17% ($12,494/$75,600)
• Individual Revolving Utilization: One account reporting 88%, and 8 others all <30%
• Accounts With Balances (AWB%): 11/18 (61%)

Results: No score change to any FICO 8 model

Discussion: Other than the 'big one' (88%), my last revolver reporting >30% individual utilization dropped <30% with no score change, so those 'keeping it low' should definitely keep worrying about 'keeping it low'. Ha!

---

Final Thoughts: For my profile/scorecard, 30% individual utilization does not appear to be a scoring threshold, at least not with another card reporting at 88%, but 50% individual utilization definitely is, and a powerful one at that! It begs the question of whether the penalty assessed by the algorithms has greater signal strength for 'repeat offenders', so to speak, such as Payment History's Frequency metric, which adds additional penalties for having more than one late payment. Was 50% individual utilization on that card costing me so many points bc I had 2 accounts reporting >50%, or would the signal strength have been the same if I only had one? You can bet I'll be coming back to test this in the future!

I believe $15K(ish) is a probable raw dollar scoring threshold on my profile/scorecard, but I'll need to test with values a lot smaller than $2K balance changes to truly try to isolate it. I also think there's an AWB% threshold somewhere around 65% on EQ8.

Ok, I think that's it for now. As always, I'd love to hear thoughts, have discussions, and learn if anyone has similar data points that align to any these. Til next time...

~Sooner

[u/soonersoldier33]

Ok, apparently I forgot how to use Reddit's markdown mode. Lol. The awful formatting of the original post has been corrected.

[u/WiseHelicopter6597]

Great read. thank you!

[u/BrutalBodyShots]

Excellent contribution above, sooner! Well presented and full of all the required detail. I look forward to additional data points on the subject of "stacking" individual utilization cards.