The Proposed Transition from Tri-Merge to Bi-Merge Credit Scoring: A Nuanced Threat to FICO's Revenue Stream

How would the proposed transition from tri-merge to bi-merge credit scoring represent another significant threat to FICO's revenue stream? Gemini 2.5 Flash answers

To be clear, everything below was written by Google’s Gemini 2.5 Flash model. All I did was provide the prompt.

Executive Summary

The proposed transition from tri-merge to bi-merge credit reporting, a pivotal element of the Federal Housing Finance Agency's (FHFA) Enterprise Credit Score and Credit Reports Initiative, introduces a complex set of dynamics for FICO's revenue stream. While this shift, coupled with the mandatory adoption of new scoring models (FICO 10T and VantageScore 4.0), presents competitive pressures and a theoretical reduction in score volume for mortgage originations, the immediate and long-term implications for FICO appear more nuanced than initially perceived. This report will detail the mechanics of the transition, analyze FICO's revenue architecture, and assess the potential financial impact, considering regulatory shifts, industry feedback, and FICO's strategic responses.

The proposed transition from tri-merge to bi-merge credit reporting, part of the broader FHFA Enterprise Credit Score and Credit Reports Initiative, presents a nuanced, rather than immediately catastrophic, threat to FICO's revenue stream. While it introduces competitive pressures and potential volume reductions in mortgage-related scoring, FICO's diversified business model, strategic price increases, and ongoing delays in implementation mitigate the immediate impact. The analysis indicates that FICO, a dominant force in credit scoring, is well-positioned to navigate these changes through its robust software segment and proactive engagement with alternative data, which collectively offer significant buffers against potential revenue erosion in its core mortgage scoring business.

1. The Evolving Landscape of Credit Reporting: Tri-Merge to Bi-Merge

This section lays the foundational understanding of the current and proposed credit reporting frameworks, essential for comprehending the downstream impacts on FICO.

1.1. Defining Tri-Merge Credit Reports

A tri-merge credit report, also known as a 3-in-1 credit report, is a comprehensive document that consolidates credit information from all three major credit bureaus in the United States: Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion.¹ These reports provide a holistic view of a consumer's credit history, encompassing details such as credit activity, account status and balances, payment history, debt collections, bankruptcies, and account opening/closing dates.³ Each bureau maintains its own unique data, as not every lender reports to all three, which can result in variations across individual credit reports.³

Historically, when a consumer applied for a mortgage, each of these three bureaus would generate a credit report for the borrower. The middle score among the three was typically used to determine the mortgage interest rate and eligibility.⁵ This established a consistent and predictable demand for three distinct credit reports and their associated scores for every mortgage application. This traditional structure created a stable and significant revenue base for FICO in the lucrative mortgage sector. Furthermore, FICO's Classic FICO score was the mandated standard across all three bureaus for Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, minimizing direct competition for FICO within this critical market segment.

1.2. Introducing the Bi-Merge Framework

In the fall of 2022, the Federal Housing Finance Authority (FHFA) unveiled the Enterprise Credit Score and Credit Reports Initiative, proposing a significant shift from requiring three credit reports for borrowers to just two, a framework termed 'bi-merge'.⁷ Under this proposed bi-merge system, the two selected scores would be averaged to create the determinative score for mortgage interest rates.⁵ The selection of which two credit bureaus to use would be left to the mortgage lender's discretion.⁶

This shift to bi-merge, even as an option, inherently reduces the maximum number of credit reports (and thus potentially FICO scores) required per mortgage application by one-third. This signals a direct volume threat to FICO's mortgage-related scoring revenue, as fewer scores would theoretically be needed per transaction.

However, the proposed bi-merge framework has sparked considerable concerns within the industry. A primary concern revolves around its potential to present an inaccurate or incomplete picture of a borrower's creditworthiness. This is because not all creditors report to every bureau; some may report to only two or even just one.⁷ Consequently, using a bi-merge could lead to missing credit information for the borrower. This missing data could potentially disqualify otherwise credit-worthy borrowers in some instances, or conversely, lead to approvals for individuals who might not actually qualify, thereby increasing the risk of defaults and elevating repurchase risk for lenders.⁷ An analysis conducted by TransUnion highlighted this potential impact, finding that a bi-merge could render "two million consumers becoming ineligible for a mortgage backed by the GSEs (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac)" due to these data gaps.⁷

The FHFA's stated rationale for introducing the bi-merge option is to "promote competition between the credit bureaus and reduce lender credit reporting costs".⁶ However, industry experts have voiced concerns that this initiative could paradoxically lead to increased costs for the borrower, particularly if they are deemed ineligible for a better interest rate that could have been obtained through a tri-merge credit report.⁷ The concerns about data completeness and potential negative consumer impact highlight the operational and risk-management challenges that could significantly influence the pace and extent of lender adoption.

Table 1: Comparison of Tri-Merge and Bi-Merge Credit Reporting

2. The FHFA's Enterprise Credit Score and Credit Reports Initiative

This section delves into the broader regulatory initiative, highlighting its multi-faceted nature and the dynamic implementation timeline, which significantly influences the threat assessment for FICO.

2.1. Objectives and Core Components: FICO 10T and VantageScore 4.0

The FHFA's Enterprise Credit Score and Credit Reports Initiative is a comprehensive, dual-phase plan. Beyond the shift to bi-merge reporting, it mandates the transition from the long-standing "Classic FICO" credit score model to requiring lenders to use both FICO® Score 10 T and VantageScore® 4.0 models for single-family loans sold to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (GSEs).⁶ The FHFA asserts that these new models "exceed required thresholds for accuracy, reliability, and integrity".⁶ The overarching objectives of this initiative are to responsibly increase access to credit, provide more precise assessments of credit risk, and foster competition among credit bureaus.¹⁴

The FHFA's dual mandate of fostering competition and increasing financial inclusion directly challenges FICO's historical near-monopoly in GSE-backed mortgage lending. The mandatory adoption of VantageScore 4.0 alongside FICO 10T introduces a direct competitor into FICO's most lucrative market segment, compelling FICO to compete not only on predictive power but also on cost and inclusivity.

VantageScore 4.0 is particularly noteworthy for its distinct advantages. It requires only one month of credit history to generate a score, a significant departure from FICO 10T's requirement of at least six months.⁶ Furthermore, VantageScore 4.0 incorporates alternative data, such as rent, utility, and telecom payments, making it capable of scoring approximately 37 million "credit invisible" Americans who may not have traditional FICO scores.⁶ This capability allows VantageScore to expand the scorable universe, potentially capturing new market segments that FICO's traditional models might miss. Both FICO 10T and VantageScore 4.0 utilize "trended data," which provides a more comprehensive 24-month view of credit history compared to the snapshot provided by Classic FICO.⁶ This represents a strategic advantage for VantageScore in its ability to reach and assess a broader population, positioning it to capture growth in emerging borrower segments and posing a strategic challenge to FICO's long-term market share.

2.2. Navigating the Implementation Timeline and Stakeholder Feedback

The implementation timeline for this comprehensive initiative has been notably fluid, reflecting the complexities involved and significant industry feedback. Initially, the bi-merge requirement was anticipated to take effect in Q1 2024.⁶ This deadline was subsequently aligned with the new credit scoring models for a Q4 2025 implementation.⁶ However, as of January 16, 2025, the FHFA and GSEs revised the implementation date to a "to-be-determined date" for both the new credit score model requirements and the now optional "bi-merge" credit reports.⁹ This crucial shift to optionality for bi-merge, rather than a mandate, is a direct response to widespread industry concerns.⁹

The repeated delays and the shift to an optional bi-merge reflect significant industry pushback and a pragmatic recognition by the FHFA of the substantial operational complexities and potential negative consequences for lenders and consumers. This significantly mitigates the immediate revenue threat to FICO. Lenders, facing system retooling costs and concerns about data completeness, may opt to continue pulling tri-merge reports, especially given the current lack of FICO 10T historical data. This "friction" in adoption provides FICO with a valuable window to adapt its strategies, including potentially offering more competitive pricing or enhanced services for its 10T model, to retain market position.

Industry stakeholders, including the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) and the Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA), have consistently raised concerns about the initiative. Their feedback highlights that the plan, as currently defined, is "overly complex, costly to consumers, and missing key requirements necessary for a successful transition".²⁰ These groups specifically argue that the introduction of bi-merge creates "significant regulatory uncertainty and operational complexity," which could ultimately "increase costs for lenders and consumers".²⁰ They have also called for greater data transparency and a recalibrated timeline to allow sufficient time for analysis and system adjustments.¹⁶ To support the transition, historical VantageScore 4.0 data was released in early Q3 2024, but FICO 10T historical data is still pending, which is critical for lenders to analyze and adapt their systems.⁶ The strong industry opposition and subsequent regulatory delays indicate that the practical implementation of bi-merge, even as an option, will be challenging and potentially slow. This provides FICO with more time to adapt its strategies.

Table 2: Key Milestones of the FHFA Credit Score Initiative

3. FICO's Revenue Architecture: A Focus on the Scores Segment

This section dissects FICO's financial structure, emphasizing the critical role of its Scores segment and its reliance on mortgage-related activities, while also highlighting its strategic pricing power.

3.1. Overview of FICO's Primary Revenue Streams

FICO (Fair Isaac Corporation) generates its revenue primarily through two distinct operating segments: Scores and Software.²¹ In the second quarter of fiscal year 2025, which concluded on March 31, 2025, FICO reported total revenues of $498.7 million. The Scores segment contributed the largest portion, accounting for $297.0 million, or approximately 60% of the total revenue. The Software segment, encompassing the company's analytics and digital decisioning technology, contributed the remaining $201.7 million, representing approximately 40% of total revenue.²¹

The Scores segment, which includes both business-to-business (B2B) and business-to-consumer (B2C) scoring solutions, is consistently identified as the company's "primary growth engine".²² While the Scores segment is FICO's largest revenue driver and growth engine, the Software segment's significant contribution provides a crucial diversification buffer against potential headwinds in the Scores business, particularly those stemming from shifts in the mortgage market. This financial structure indicates a degree of resilience, as FICO is not solely dependent on a single revenue stream. The ability to leverage its analytical expertise in broader enterprise solutions across various industries, including financial services, insurance, telecommunications, healthcare, and retail, reduces its sole reliance on credit scoring for its overall financial health and provides a stable, recurring revenue base.²¹

3.2. The Critical Role of Mortgage Originations and B2B Pricing

FICO's Scores segment has demonstrated robust growth, with a 25% increase in revenue in Q2 FY2025 compared to the prior year, a rise "driven largely by higher unit prices".²¹ This trend of increasing prices is further evidenced by the Q1 FY2025 performance, where B2B revenue within the Scores segment surged by 30%. This growth was explicitly attributed to both "higher unit prices and an increase in volume of mortgage originations".²³ Mortgage-related revenue specifically accounted for a substantial 44% of FICO's B2B sales in Q1 FY2025, underscoring its strategic importance to the company's core scoring business.²²

FICO's demonstrated ability to implement significant price increases for its scoring services, particularly in the mortgage sector, highlights its strong pricing power and entrenched market dominance. This pricing strategy has been a key driver of recent revenue growth and could partially offset any volume reduction stemming from a shift to bi-merge, assuming lenders continue to rely on FICO scores due to their industry standard status and predictive reliability.

However, these pricing practices have not gone unnoticed by regulators. FICO announced an increase in its wholesale price on credit scores for mortgage applications from $3.50 to $4.95.²⁴ This price hike drew sharp criticism from CFPB Director Chopra, who stated it "increased credit report costs by 400% for many lenders." Director Chopra also noted that credit reporting companies now pay FICO a licensing fee of $3.50 per score used, or about $10 for a tri-merge bundle, with costs doubling for joint borrowers.⁸ The public criticism from the CFPB Director regarding FICO's pricing practices, coupled with the FHFA's stated goal of fostering competition, indicates a concerted regulatory effort to curb FICO's market power. This suggests that while FICO currently enjoys substantial pricing power, future price increases or even the sustained current pricing could face increased scrutiny and pressure from regulators and industry stakeholders. This introduces a long-term risk to FICO's revenue growth trajectory, potentially limiting its ability to offset volume declines with price hikes in the future.

Table 3: FICO's Segment Revenue Breakdown (Q2 Fiscal 2025)

4. Assessing the Threat: Bi-Merge's Potential Impact on FICO's Revenue

This section directly addresses the user's query, analyzing the specific mechanisms through which the bi-merge transition could impact FICO's revenue, considering both direct and indirect factors.

4.1. Direct Implications: Reduced Volume and Licensing Fee Pressure

The most straightforward implication of a shift from tri-merge to bi-merge for mortgage applications is a theoretical reduction in the volume of credit reports, and consequently, FICO scores, pulled by one-third per transaction.⁶ If lenders fully embrace the bi-merge option, FICO's volume for mortgage scores could indeed decrease.²⁴ The market's immediate reaction to this potential change was evident when FHFA Director Bill Pulte's critical comments regarding the necessity of tri-merged scores and the investigation into a bi-merged switch directly contributed to a significant slump in FICO's stock.²⁴ This market response underscores the perceived threat of reduced volume and potential pricing pressure on FICO's core business.

However, the direct threat from bi-merge is primarily a volume threat to FICO's mortgage-related scoring revenue. Because the bi-merge is now optional and significant industry concerns exist regarding its operational complexity and potential for data incompleteness ⁷, widespread and rapid adoption by lenders is unlikely. This indicates that the immediate volume impact on FICO will be softened and gradual, rather than a sudden, sharp decline. The reluctance of lenders to fully transition, coupled with the ongoing need for FICO 10T historical data for system analysis and adaptation, will provide FICO with a buffer period.

4.2. Competitive Dynamics: The Rise of VantageScore

The FHFA's mandate for lenders to deliver both FICO® Score 10 T and VantageScore® 4.0 credit scores for single-family loans sold to the GSEs introduces direct competition for FICO in a market where it previously held a near-monopoly.⁹ This fundamental change means FICO will no longer be the sole, unchallenged gatekeeper for mortgage eligibility.

VantageScore 4.0 possesses distinct advantages that position it as a formidable competitor. It only requires one month of credit history to generate a score, and it incorporates alternative data, such as rent, utility, and telecom payments.⁶ These features enable VantageScore to score millions of "credit invisible" consumers, a population estimated to include 37 million Americans who may lack traditional FICO scores.⁶ This capability directly aligns with regulatory goals of financial inclusion and could lead lenders to favor VantageScore for certain borrower segments, potentially shifting market share in new or underserved populations. While an Urban Institute analysis found that VantageScore 4.0 scores are, on average, higher than Classic FICO scores and it is marginally more effective at identifying high-risk borrowers at the lower end of the credit spectrum, the overall impact on mortgage qualification outcomes and default performance among typical GSE mortgages is expected to be "fairly minimal" initially.¹⁰ Despite this minimal initial impact on existing mortgage qualifications, VantageScore's superior reach into credit-invisible populations and its integration of alternative data could position it as a preferred model for lenders seeking to expand their market reach. This represents a strategic challenge to FICO, as it could lose out on capturing growth in emerging borrower segments, potentially eroding its long-term market share in areas of future expansion.

4.3. Industry Concerns and Lender Adoption Challenges

The mortgage industry has consistently expressed concerns that the bi-merge option could lead to an "inaccurate picture of the borrower's creditworthiness" due to incomplete data, as not all creditors report to all three bureaus.⁶ TransUnion's analysis, for example, suggested this could make 2 million consumers ineligible for GSE-backed mortgages.⁷ Lenders and prominent industry associations, such as the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) and the Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA), have argued that the entire FHFA initiative, as proposed, is "overly complex, costly to consumers, and missing key requirements" for a successful transition.²⁰ They specifically believe the introduction of bi-merge creates "significant regulatory uncertainty and operational complexity," which could ultimately "increase costs for lenders and consumers".²⁰

The indefinite postponement of the implementation date ⁹ and the crucial shift to optional bi-merge ⁹ directly reflect these widespread industry concerns. This indicates that the practical implementation of bi-merge, even as an option, will be challenging and potentially slow. This "friction" in lender adoption provides FICO with more time to adapt its strategies, including potentially offering more competitive pricing or enhanced services for its 10T model, to retain its market position. Furthermore, the industry's preference for data completeness and the complexities of integrating new models suggest that many lenders may initially opt to continue using tri-merge reports, further buffering FICO from an immediate revenue shock. Lenders are also awaiting the release of FICO 10T historical data, which is critical for their systems to analyze and adapt to the new model.⁶

5. FICO's Resilience and Strategic Countermeasures

This section explores FICO's existing strengths and proactive strategies that serve to mitigate the potential threats posed by the evolving credit reporting landscape.

5.1. Diversification Beyond Mortgage Scoring: The Software Segment

FICO's Software segment, which encompasses its analytics and digital decisioning technology, represents a significant portion of its overall revenue, generating $201.7 million in Q2 FY2025 and accounting for approximately 40% of the company's total revenue.²¹ While the overall Software revenue growth was modest at 2% year-over-year in Q2 FY2025, its platform Annual Recurring Revenue (ARR) demonstrated stronger growth at 17%.²¹ In Q1 FY2025, Software revenue grew 8% with platform ARR up 20%.²³

This substantial and growing Software segment provides a critical hedge against potential revenue declines in the Scores segment, particularly those stemming from mortgage market shifts. This diversification allows FICO to leverage its analytical expertise in broader enterprise solutions across various industries, including financial services, insurance, telecommunications, healthcare, and retail.²¹ By offering solutions like AI-driven fraud detection and integrating Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) data, FICO is actively investing in and expanding its Software segment, positioning it for long-term growth.²² This strategic expansion reduces FICO's sole reliance on credit scoring for its overall financial health and provides a stable, recurring revenue base, thereby strengthening its overall business resilience.

5.2. Leveraging Alternative Data: FICO Score XD and X Data

FICO has proactively developed and offers its own alternative data scoring solutions, including FICO® Score XD and FICO® Score X Data.²⁷ These models are specifically designed to improve consumer credit access by identifying creditworthy borrowers who cannot be scored using traditional credit bureau data alone.²⁸ They achieve this by incorporating a variety of alternative data sources, such as phone and utility provider payment history, public records, and asset insights.²⁸

FICO Score XD, for instance, can generate a credit score for over 70% of credit loan applicants with thin or no credit files.²⁹ This segment is estimated to include 25 million "credit-invisible" consumers and another 28 million US consumers with insufficient credit reports, totaling approximately 53 million individuals.²⁹ FICO's own research indicates that incorporating alternative data adds predictive value to risk models.³¹ By proactively developing and promoting its own alternative data scoring models, FICO is not only addressing the financial inclusion objectives of regulators like FHFA but also directly competing with VantageScore on one of its key strengths. This strategy allows FICO to potentially capture new market segments, specifically the "credit-invisible" and "thin-file" populations, and maintain its relevance and market leadership even as the industry shifts towards more inclusive data sources. This proactive approach mitigates the competitive threat posed by VantageScore and positions FICO to expand its addressable market.

6. Conclusion and Outlook for FICO

While the proposed transition from tri-merge to bi-merge credit reporting and the mandated dual-score requirement (FICO 10T and VantageScore 4.0) represent a structural shift in the mortgage credit market, the immediate threat to FICO's revenue stream is mitigated by several critical factors. These include the optionality of bi-merge, significant industry resistance leading to implementation delays, FICO's strong pricing power, and its diversified revenue base, particularly its growing software segment and proactive engagement with alternative data.

6.1. Quantifying the Potential Impact

Despite the market's initial negative reaction, as evidenced by FICO's stock slump, external analyses suggest a contained financial impact. Sell-side analyst Surinder Thind from Jefferies estimated that even if bi-merged scoring were widely adopted, FICO's earnings per share (EPS) may only be affected by "about 16%, at most".²⁴ This quantitative perspective is partly attributed to the fact that FICO's non-scoring businesses, primarily its robust Software segment, constituted approximately 40% of its revenue in the last quarter.²⁴ This quantitative assessment, combined with the ongoing regulatory delays and the optionality of bi-merge, reinforces that FICO possesses considerable financial resilience and time to adapt its business strategies. The actual revenue erosion may be less than the theoretical maximum, as FICO can leverage its pricing power and diversified portfolio to absorb or offset some of the impact.

6.2. Outlook for FICO

FICO's management has reiterated its fiscal year 2025 guidance, projecting double-digit percentage growth for both revenue and earnings, with a revenue target of $1.98 billion.²¹ This reiterated positive guidance, despite the ongoing regulatory changes and competitive pressures, signals management's confidence in its ability to navigate these challenges. This confidence likely stems from its proven pricing power, the strategic diversification of its revenue streams, and its proactive efforts to expand its scoring applications beyond mortgages (e.g., into BNPL data) and leverage its broader analytics capabilities.

Key growth drivers identified by FICO include the expansion of FICO 10T into non-mortgage lending sectors such as credit cards and auto loans, continued innovations in Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) and Artificial Intelligence (AI) integration, and the pursuit of global partnerships.²² These initiatives indicate a strategic pivot to mitigate mortgage-specific risks by broadening its market reach and reinforcing its position as a comprehensive analytics leader, rather than solely a credit scoring provider. However, FICO acknowledges ongoing risks, such as potential softness in the mortgage market or rising interest rates impacting B2B revenue, and persistent headwinds in the software segment.²² Overall, FICO's proactive strategies and diversified business model suggest a resilient outlook in the face of evolving credit reporting standards.

Works cited

1. www.chase.com, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.chase.com/personal/credit-cards/education/build-credit/tri-merge-credit-report#:~:text=A%20tri%2Dmerge%20credit%20report%2C%20also%20known%20as%20a%203,Equifax%C2%AE%20and%20TransUnion%C2%AE.

2. Tri Merge credit report - Isoftpull, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.isoftpull.com/resources/tri-merge-credit-report

3. The Differences Between the 3 Credit Bureaus - Chase Bank, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.chase.com/personal/credit-cards/education/credit-score/credit-bureau-differences

4. The 3 credit bureaus: Equifax, Experian and TransUnion - Capital One, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.capitalone.com/learn-grow/money-management/three-credit-bureaus/

5. www.advcredit.com, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.advcredit.com/bi-merge-vs-tri-merge/#:~:text=Currently%2C%20when%20a%20consumer%20applies,to%20create%20a%20determinative%20score.

6. New Changes Coming to Credit Scoring Models & Credit Reporting, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.certifiedcredit.com/new-changes-coming-to-credit-scoring-models-credit-reporting/

7. Bi-Merge vs. Tri-Merge Credit Report – Advantage Credit, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.advcredit.com/bi-merge-vs-tri-merge/

8. CFPB Director Addresses Credit Report Fees Before the Mortgage Bankers Association, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.consumerfinancemonitor.com/2024/05/24/cfpb-director-addresses-credit-report-fees-before-the-mortgage-bankers-association/

9. Credit Score Models and Reports Initiative - Freddie Mac Single-Family, accessed May 27, 2025, https://sf.freddiemac.com/general/credit-score-models

10. Classic FICO versus VantageScore 4.0 - Urban Institute, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/2024-12/Classic_FICO_versus_VantageScore_4.0.pdf

11. Classic FICO versus Vantage 4.0 - Urban Institute, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.urban.org/research/publication/classic-fico-versus-vantage-40

12. Credit Scores | FHFA, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.fhfa.gov/policy/credit-scores

13. FHFA Update: Credit Score and Credit Reports Initiative - Xactus, accessed May 27, 2025, https://xactus.com/fhfa-update-credit-score-and-credit-reports-initiative/

14. Enterprise Credit Score and Credit Reports Initiative - Fannie Mae, accessed May 27, 2025, https://singlefamily.fanniemae.com/media/34286/display

15. ABA, associations clarify concerns regarding FHFA credit score modernization initiatives, accessed May 27, 2025, https://bankingjournal.aba.com/2025/03/aba-associations-clarify-concerns-regarding-fhfa-credit-score-modernization-initiatives/

16. ICBA, groups raise concerns with new FHFA credit score models, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.icba.org/newsroom/news-and-articles/2023/06/23/icba-groups-raise-concerns-with-new-fhfa-credit-score-models

17. FHFA Updates GSE Credit Score Requirements - The MortgagePoint, accessed May 27, 2025, https://themortgagepoint.com/2024/03/01/fhfa-updates-gse-credit-score-requirements/

18. Mortgage - VantageScore, accessed May 27, 2025, https://vantagescore.com/what-we-do/mortgage/

19. 0000814547-25-000014 | 10-Q | FICO, accessed May 27, 2025, https://fico.gcs-web.com/sec-filings/sec-filing/10-q/0000814547-25-000014

20. March 19, 2025 The Honorable William Pulte Director Federal Housing Finance Agency 400 7th Street, SW Washington, DC 20219 RE - Mortgage Bankers Association, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.mba.org/docs/default-source/advertising/fhfa_d1_credit_score_initiative_2025_final.pdf?sfvrsn=82de088f_1

21. FICO Announces Earnings of $6.59 per Share for Second Quarter ..., accessed May 27, 2025, https://fico.gcs-web.com/news-releases/news-release-details/fico-announces-earnings-659-share-second-quarter-fiscal-2025/

22. FICO's Profit Surge: A Credit to Its Scores Business - AInvest, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.ainvest.com/news/fico-profit-surge-credit-scores-business-2504/

23. FICO Announces Earnings of $6.14 per Share for First Quarter Fiscal 2025, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.fico.com/en/newsroom/fico-announces-earnings-6-14-share-first-quarter-fiscal-2025

24. Why Fair Isaac Plunged Over 20% This Week - Mitrade, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.mitrade.com/au/insights/news/live-news/article-8-840742-20250524

25. Why Fair Isaac Plunged Over 20% This Week | The Motley Fool, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.fool.com/investing/2025/05/23/why-fair-isaac-plunged-over-20-this-week/

26. Credit Advancements on Hold for Now - Advantage Credit, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.advcredit.com/credit-advancements-on-hold-for-now/

27. FICO Products | FICO Solutions, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.fico.com/en/products

28. FICO® Score XD | Equifax, accessed May 27, 2025, https://assets.equifax.com/assets/usis/ficoScoreXD_ps.pdf

29. FICO Score XD | FICO Credit Score Scale, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.fico.com/en/products/fico-score-xd

30. FICO® Score X Data | FICO, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.fico.com/en/products/fico-score-x-data

31. How to Use Alternative Data in Credit Risk Analytics - FICO, accessed May 27, 2025, https://www.fico.com/blogs/how-use-alternative-data-credit-risk-analytics