9y AAoA threshold on EX8 but not EX2

Birdman wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 4:36 pm @BrutalBodyShots He can see them I think, but short account history wasn’t there, if I understand correctly. Congratulations @Justaguy I believe you have found the max AAOA for EX8 family as well! I’m fairly confident they are the same within a version and bureau. It could be different by bureau tho, due to the fact the algorithm is generated by the unique data set at each Bureau plus customization.

My score is low enough that the reasons are sometimes visible, but I have the same difficulties everyone has seeing any reasons on F8s. The best source I have is MF “Credit Alerts,” which show all four reasons for any F8 score, but only if some other Alertable event occurs and the score has changed since my last 3B. Or something like that. The phase of the moon might also play a role. And goat entrails. It’s complicated. Short Account History was present on my EX8 in February, in fourth position. I’m pretty confident it is now gone from the top 4. But something else will have taken its place in fourth position, so I can’t rule out the possibility that Short Account History is lurking unseen in, say, fifth position.

Version 8 codes are crazy anyway, they seem to be funny sometimes. It’s hard to count on them sometimes. Sometimes they’re just weird.

Also to add what I said above it could vary by scorecard too obviously.

Since @cassie is tracking AAoA thresholds on industry variants too, here’s what has happened to mine when my AAoA has crossed hit 9y0m, or fallen below it. It’s the magnitude of the changes that matter, not the direction, so I’m ignoring plus and minus signs. The numbers are score changes on EX’s F8/AU8/BC8, all at the same point in time.

3/3/4
3/3/11
3/3/3
3/3/3

The extra movement in some BC8 scores looks like conflation of some kind. Seems pretty clear they each “want” to give/take 3 points at AAoA=9y.

@Cassie it looks like I’m not the only one that had an issue with the mentions (see above post), but I did find a way to make it work. When I hit the symbol and then the first two letters, if I just hit return, it automatically places the name there if I’ve typed enough letters to select it. So I can work around it for now. @Justaguy @Cassie I have redone my aging formulas in excel, I stupidly was looking at the years and rounding myself, now I have both months and years. (and I’m the one that’s been harping on months) I don’t have it rounding but putting two decimal points out. So I’m gonna watch and see where I see aging thresholds. I would definitely like to confirm it rounds up or down or standard, if we don’t know 100%. I guess it would be hard to devise a test, just have to watch score changes, negative reason code shifts, along with calculated metrics. I have a couple files I can watch closely. Cassie if we have definitive evidence, let me know. I’m gonna go search for the one off thread at MF. But justaguy, keep in mind fico views all account openings as happening on the first of the month of the month it was opened. So even if you open an account January 31, the algorithm views it as January 1 and then counts by months. I remember you asked that earlier as I reread the thread and I don’t think I answered it.

Here’s a cool natural experiment. As I have posted in this thread, I consistently see +3 on EX8 when my AAoA hits 9y (or 108 mo if you prefer).

I got +3 points on EX8 on 10/1, and all signs point to it being from aging. When I quickly checked my Aging spreadsheet, I did a double take, because it showed my AAoA as 8y 11m. That’s not supposed to happen. But wait! That calculation had included the one card I recently became an AU on. That card is about 6 years old. When I exclude it from my AAoA calculation, my October number is… 9y!

I haven’t studied this carefully enough to rule out other possible causes, but I think this strongly suggests AU accounts are excluded from AAoA calculations on EX8. Is this already well established?

Justaguy wrote: ↑Mon Oct 03, 2022 2:26 am Here’s a cool natural experiment. As I have posted in this thread, I consistently see +3 on EX8 when my AAoA hits 9y (or 108 mo if you prefer). I got +3 points on EX8 on 10/1, and all signs point to it being from aging. When I quickly checked my Aging spreadsheet, I did a double take, because it showed my AAoA as 8y 11m. That’s not supposed to happen. But wait! That calculation had included the one card I recently became an AU on. That card is about 6 years old. When I exclude it from my AAoA calculation, my October number is… 9y! I haven’t studied this carefully enough to rule out other possible causes, but I think this strongly suggests AU accounts are excluded from AAoA calculations on EX8. Is this already well established?

@Justaguy If that’s the case, it should be excluded from all categories; it means it’s not counting, ime. Do you have a different last name or address on that TL? Have you confirmed it’s counting anywhere else. I’m so that would be an anomaly. I expect the card is excluded everywhere.

Birdman wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 12:21 am

Justaguy wrote: ↑Mon Oct 03, 2022 2:26 am Here’s a cool natural experiment. As I have posted in this thread, I consistently see +3 on EX8 when my AAoA hits 9y (or 108 mo if you prefer). I got +3 points on EX8 on 10/1, and all signs point to it being from aging. When I quickly checked my Aging spreadsheet, I did a double take, because it showed my AAoA as 8y 11m. That’s not supposed to happen. But wait! That calculation had included the one card I recently became an AU on. That card is about 6 years old. When I exclude it from my AAoA calculation, my October number is… 9y! I haven’t studied this carefully enough to rule out other possible causes, but I think this strongly suggests AU accounts are excluded from AAoA calculations on EX8. Is this already well established?

@Justaguy If that’s the case, it should be excluded from all categories; it means it’s not counting, ime. Do you have a different last name or address on that TL? Have you confirmed it’s counting anywhere else. I’m so that would be an anomaly. I expect the card is excluded everywhere.

Hi @Birdman! Great to see you active again. I hope your health is good, or at least improving. No, EX8 is not disregarding this AU card. It’s my only AU account and it’s the one that provided the basis of the findings I reported in the EX AU Termination Point Loss thread. I can’t get the link to copy on mobile, but see, e.g,. post 67 of that thread. Reinforcing that point, the primary account holder is my wife; same last name, same address, she’s been an AU on some of my cards for many years. The anti-abuse algorithm would have to be pretty crappy to flag this one.

Justaguy wrote: ↑Wed Nov 02, 2022 10:07 am

Birdman wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 12:21 am

Justaguy wrote: ↑Mon Oct 03, 2022 2:26 am Here’s a cool natural experiment. As I have posted in this thread, I consistently see +3 on EX8 when my AAoA hits 9y (or 108 mo if you prefer). I got +3 points on EX8 on 10/1, and all signs point to it being from aging. When I quickly checked my Aging spreadsheet, I did a double take, because it showed my AAoA as 8y 11m. That’s not supposed to happen. But wait! That calculation had included the one card I recently became an AU on. That card is about 6 years old. When I exclude it from my AAoA calculation, my October number is… 9y! I haven’t studied this carefully enough to rule out other possible causes, but I think this strongly suggests AU accounts are excluded from AAoA calculations on EX8. Is this already well established?

@Justaguy If that’s the case, it should be excluded from all categories; it means it’s not counting, ime. Do you have a different last name or address on that TL? Have you confirmed it’s counting anywhere else. I’m so that would be an anomaly. I expect the card is excluded everywhere.

Hi @Birdman! Great to see you active again. I hope your health is good, or at least improving. No, EX8 is not disregarding this AU card. It’s my only AU account and it’s the one that provided the basis of the findings I reported in the EX AU Termination Point Loss thread. I can’t get the link to copy on mobile, but see, e.g,. post 67 of that thread. Reinforcing that point, the primary account holder is my wife; same last name, same address, she’s been an AU on some of my cards for many years. The anti-abuse algorithm would have to be pretty crappy to flag this one.

@Justaguy sorry for the late response and yes, starting to feel a little better again thank goodness thank you. It’s very interesting. If authorized user accounts are not counted in average age, then, adding them and points increasing, must come from the number of bankcards factor and the replicated utilization award. So that could mean it’s only coming from mix pymt history and amount owed categories, not aging. Does make sense. You don’t see a bigger award for a older authorized user account being added, do you?