lexrj wrote:I would never spend half of my income (110K) in a month, how is that not consider a risk to lenders?
First of all, the risk assessment isn't just based on amount of credit extended.
Second, remember that utilization plays a significant role in assessing your credit. While 10% or less is generally regarded as optimal 30% is the generally recommended max. You don't have to max your available credit to get in trouble. I wouldn't need to spend 1.7x my income (my total CL's) to get into trouble. I'd get in trouble much, much earlier than that. However, that's in general. I've certainly spent significant amounts on remodeling projects, trips and so on. It's not always just about regular spend.
If you're uncomfortable with such limits then why are you asking if you should continue seeking CLI's? What are you looking to achieve? You don't have to seek CLI's just for the sake of CLI's. You can even request CLD's if you think your available credit is too high.
lexrj wrote:Don't you guys agree?
Agree with what? That you could spend yourself into debt that you couldn't get out of? Of course you can. Many do so with much lower limits than what you have. You've established that you're responsible according to the metrics though or else they wouldn't have extended you the credit that you have. That said, you have to do what works for you. Just don't assume that your discomfort is universal.
lexrj wrote:Neither, I'm asking as a credit score/profile perspective since I'm already at an ideal credit util % based on my monthly spending.
In that regard it sounds like you've probably reached the point of diminishing returns. Probably won't hurt until creditors deny you credit (and you can always close, CLD, or find a different creditor if that's an issue) but gains will probably be minimal.
lexrj wrote:Is there a ratio based on income?
Popular discussion topic on several sites (definitely look at existing threads) and there doesn't seem to be an exclusive causal relationship though income is certainly a factor. Creditors do vary in their underwriting critieria as well so even if there was such a ratio it wouldn't be universal.