The
research
comes
as
a
proposal
to
replace
the
longstanding
tri-merge
credit
report
with
a
single-file
model
has
reignited

debate
over
borrower
costs,
credit
access
and
systemic
risk.

“We
are
going
through
a
modernization
phase
in
the
mortgage
industry,”
Sanjeeban
Chatterjee,
director
of
behavioral
modeling
at
AD&Co,
said
in
a
statement.
“At
such
times,
it
is
important
to
understand
the
impact
of
the
changes
so
that
the
stakeholders
can
make
the
right
decisions.
This
study
shows
why
knowing
more
is
better
from
a
risk
management
and
affordability
perspective.”

By
credit
score
group

Score
variances
were
most
pronounced
among
lower-scoring
borrowers.
Among
consumers
with
median
scores
between
600
and
639,
47%
had
at
least
one
bureau
score
that
differed
from
the
tri-merge
standard
by
10
points
or
more.
Another
26%
saw
differences
of
at
least
20
points
while
10.5%
experienced
gaps
of
40
points
or
more. 

The
study
suggests
that
some
borrowers
could
fall
below
minimum
qualification
thresholds.
Roughly
30%
of
the
13
million
scored
consumers
in
the
620
to
639
range
—
including
an
estimated
240,000
GSE
loans
using
VantageScore
4.0
within
that
band
—
could
drop
below
a
620
cutoff
under
a
single-score
framework
and
potentially
be
denied
a
GSE
mortgage.

For
consumers
in
the
640
to
779
range,
40%
had
discrepancies
of
at
least
10
points,
21%
had
differences
of
20
points
or
more,
and
8.1%
had
gaps
of
at
least
40
points
when
compared
with
the
tri-merge
standard. 

Andrew
Davidson
&
Co.
noted
that
for
a
$350,000
GSE
loan
with
a
90%
loan-to-value
ratio,
moving
between
adjacent
pricing
tiers
due
to
a
score
shift
could
raise
or
lower
the
combined
cost
of
the
mortgage
and

mortgage
insurance
by
$3,000
to
$5,000
in
present
value
over
the
life
of
the
loan.

Different
proposals

Some
proposals
have
suggested
a

700
score
cutoff
to
determine
whether
a
tri-merge
report
would
be
required.
But
in
the
700
to
779
range,
the
study
found
that
18%
of
the
consumers
still
had
at
least
one
single-bureau
score
that
differed
from
the
tri-merge
result
by
20
points
or
more.

Under
a
hybrid
model
—
in
which
the
first
pulled
score
of
700
or
higher
would
serve
as
the
representative
score,
while
borrowers
below
700
would
still
require
a
tri-merge
—
4%
of
consumers
in
the
640
to
659
range
and
nearly
8%
in
the
660
to
679
range
had
a
maximum
bureau
score
of
at
least
700.
That
dynamic
could
shift
some
borrowers
into
different
pricing
or
eligibility
categories
depending
on
which
report
is
used,
the
study
shows. 

Conversely,
about
9%
of
all
consumers
—
and
11%
of
those
in
the
640
to
779
range
—
could
see
their
representative
credit
score
increase
by
20
points
or
more
compared
with
the
tri-merge
standard,
potentially
improving
pricing
or
eligibility
outcomes.