Credit Bureaus Aim To Bulk Up Files For Borrowers With Little Credit History By Using Rent-Payment Data

Credit bureaus FICO score

Credit bureaus are aiming to thicken up the “thin” credit files of borrowers who have too little credit history to qualify for loans using the traditional FICO credit score, launching new products that use information banks hadn’t been typically considered in the credit-scoring process.

    Get the Full Story

    Complete the form to unlock this article and enjoy unlimited free access to all PYMNTS content — no additional logins required.

    yesSubscribe to our daily newsletter, PYMNTS Today.

    By completing this form, you agree to receive marketing communications from PYMNTS and to the sharing of your information with our sponsor, if applicable, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions.

    By looking at things like on-time rent payments or a lack of bounced checks, credit bureaus are aiming to generate “alternate credit scores” for consumers who otherwise have too little credit history to receive the traditional credit scores that banks typically require for loans.

    For example, Equifax just announced plans to team up with U.K. rent-reporting platform CreditLadder so that Equifax credit assessments include a consumer’s rental-payment history. The tie-up will help CreditLadder customers who pay their rent on time obtain better credit ratings — and ultimately, better rates on loans like mortgages.

    Equifax Data Director Janice Rudd said that “the inclusion of rental data in credit assessments is a huge lift to improve financial inclusion and fairer access to the right financial products. This data insight provides lenders with a much more reflective picture of the amount renters can afford to borrow.”

    Rudd added that “renters who make full and timely monthly payments should see a significant benefit in proving their ability to repay a commitment, just like mortgage payers.”

    Industry analyst Ted Rossman of CreditCards.com told PYMNTS.com that 53 million Americans have no credit scores because they don’t have enough information on file to generate a traditional FICO score. That usually requires a consumer to have current or past credit-card accounts, car loans, mortgages or personal loans. Rossman said individuals who lack such information are mostly older consumers who might have paid off their mortgages long ago or young adults who are just getting started.

    The expert believes that the latter group is more concerning, as individuals in it have a greater need for credit score. They might need scores not just to receive loans, but also to attain an apartment lease, a cell-phone plan or utilities without putting down a deposit.

    Looking at such consumers’ rent payments could provide credit bureaus with important information about financial reliability, as Rossman noted that rent is often the “largest financial obligation that they have every month.”

    “I would like to see more rent payments reported to the credit bureaus,” as it’s indicative of the responsibility level of individuals with their finances, Rossman said.

    Much of the other forms of alternative credit data to date revolves around what is called “consumer permissioned data,” such as access to a bank account. For example, one alternative credit score system called Experian Boost uses such access to help consumers with thin credit get points for paying phone and utility bills on time. Another alternative system called UltraFICO looks for a lack of overdrafts and responsible use of a checking account.

    Also, Fair Isaac Co. — the firm that creates the software behind FICO scores — is revamping its credit-scoring methodology. For example, Fair Isaac’s new FICO 10 T credit score incorporates so-called “trended credit bureau data” into a consumer’s credit score, as per the FICO website.

    Trended data differs from traditional credit-bureau information in that it takes into account a historical view with information, such as account balances for the past more than two years, which offers lenders “more insight into how individuals are managing their credit.”

    Rossman believes that FICO 10 T is a “good idea,” as trend data will offer “a more granular assessment of one’s credit standing.” But he doesn’t believe that method will assist unbanked/underbanked households in building credit. Instead, the expert says the UltraFICO score should help those communities.

    The bottom line: From taking banking data into account with UltraFICO to looking at rental-payment data using CreditLadder, new approaches to credit scoring are aiming to thicken up millions of consumers’ thin credit files.


    SEC Says ‘Caveat Liquid Staker’ to Corporate Treasury Teams Buying Crypto

    Highlights

    The SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance stated that, under specific and controlled conditions, liquid staking and its “staking receipt tokens” do not constitute securities offerings, reducing compliance burdens for CFOs and treasury teams.

    Liquid staking lets companies earn staking rewards while maintaining liquidity, enabling flexible treasury strategies and potentially higher yields.

    For corporates considering liquid staking, the SEC’s allowance hinges on the provider’s strictly administrative role.

    Opportunities and risks tend to present themselves in equal measure for CFOs and treasury teams — and that becomes infinitely more so when it relates to crypto.

      Get the Full Story

      Complete the form to unlock this article and enjoy unlimited free access to all PYMNTS content — no additional logins required.

      yesSubscribe to our daily newsletter, PYMNTS Today.

      By completing this form, you agree to receive marketing communications from PYMNTS and to the sharing of your information with our sponsor, if applicable, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions.

      Particularly as the movement of cryptocurrency markets from fringe speculation, bordering on untouchable, to the present day landscape of widening corporate embrace is being hastened along by an unlikely ally: the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) corporate finance division.

      In a recent detailed statement, the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance concluded that under a very specific set of facts liquid staking arrangements, and the “staking receipt tokens” they produce, do not involve the offer or sale of securities. Securities classification triggers a host of registration, disclosure, and compliance obligations.

      Upwards of 154 public companies have committed $98.4 billion of their treasury dollars for crypto purchases just this year alone. For chief financial officers (CFOs) and treasury managers weighing whether, or how, to put idle crypto assets to work, that distinction over staking from the SEC matters.

      “It is the Division’s view that participants in Liquid Staking Activities do not need to register with the Commission transactions under the Securities Act, or fall within one of the Securities Act’s exemptions from registration in connection with these Liquid Staking Activities,” the SEC wrote.

      But the catch is that the SEC’s green light applies only under a highly controlled set of assumptions. Step outside those parameters, and you may be in regulatory gray, or even red, territory.

      After all, for finance teams, and as SEC Commissioner Caroline Crenshaw wrote in a dissenting opinion, a truer reality may be “caveat liquid staker.”

      Read more: 4 Questions CFOs Need to Ask as Wall Street Embraces Stablecoins 

      What the SEC Actually Said and Why It Matters to Finance Teams

      Liquid staking has exploded in popularity since Ethereum’s transition to proof-of-stake and the subsequent unlocking of staked ether in 2023. It offers token holders a way to participate in network staking rewards while maintaining liquidity. Instead of locking up assets for months, participants deposit their tokens with a “liquid staking provider” and receive a newly minted “staking receipt token” in return.

      The SEC’s Aug. 5 statement defines two core models, protocol-based providers and third-party custodians or service providers.

      Protocol-based providers are ecosystems where smart contracts automatically handle custody, staking and receipt-token issuance, with no human intermediary; while third-party custodians or service providers represent entities that hold the assets, arrange for staking (directly or via a node operator) and issue the receipt tokens themselves.

      From a corporate perspective, the key takeaway is that under either model, if the provider’s role is strictly “administrative or ministerial” and not managerial, the arrangement likely falls outside the definition of a security.

      Still, for CFOs, that translates to heightened due diligence: you can’t just take a provider’s word that their service is “compliant with the SEC’s view.” You need independent verification of their operational model against the Division’s fact pattern. Risk-focused assessments, for example, can include things like code audit reviews, capital adequacy analysis, operational resilience, regulatory posture, custody model details, insurance layers (e.g., to cover loss from bugs or hacks) and historical uptime.

      Ultimately, any highly interconnected financial infrastructure can carry compounding risks. Unlike traditional assets, crypto systems, once thought to be relatively siloed, are increasingly webbed via staking aggregators, synthetic token markets, cross-chain bridges and lending desks. A shock to one node could propagate across counterparties, protocols and liquidity pools, impacting treasury liquidity just as it might in legacy systems.

      See also: Stablecoin Sandwiches? Here’s What CFOs Need to Know About Crypto Jargon

      Setting the Table for Strategic Experimentation

      At its essence, liquid staking permits crypto holders to deposit their tokens (for example, Ethereum) with a staking provider. In return, they receive synthetic derivatives, often ERC-20 tokens, that represent a claim on the staked assets plus accrued rewards.

      Users continue earning staking yields while retaining market exposure via the synthetic variant. In practical terms, liquid staking combines two traditionally opposed functions: earning staking rewards (normally requiring lockups) and maintaining liquidity for trading, lending or other corporate purposes.

      For CFOs and treasurers, liquid staking need not be a leap of faith. It can be a calibrated experiment.

      “Ethereum isn’t a static asset. It’s programmable infrastructure,” Dave Merin, co-founder and CEO of The Ether Machine, told PYMNTS. “Ethereum is the largest proof-of-stake network by a wide margin. That scale means more yield opportunities, a broader security moat, and a stronger economic flywheel.”

      “We think we can generate 2x the yield of an ETF, conservatively,” Merin added. “And when you layer on things like restaking or engaging in DeFi, we think we can deliver a vastly superior product. Our team knows these protocols intimately. We’re not guessing, we’re building the infrastructure that others will later follow.”