Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.

Is 0% credit card utilization worse than 1-20% credit card utilization for any reason other than pure statistics?
The whole point of a credit report and, by extension, a credit score, is to demonstrate (and judge) your ability to repay borrowed funds.  Everything stems from that goal; available credit, payment history, collections, etc all serve to demonstrate whether or not you personally are a good investment for lenders to pursue. Revolving credit balances are tricky because they are more complicated than fixed loans (for the rest of this answer, I'll just talk about credit cards, though it also applies to lines of credit such as overdraft protection for checking accounts, HELOCs, and other such products). Having a large available balance relative to your income means that at any time you could suddenly drown yourself in debt.  Having no credit cards means you don't have experience managing them (and personal finances are governed largely by behavior, meaning experience is invaluable).  Having credit cards but carrying a high balance means you know how to borrow money, but not pay it back.  Having credit cards but carrying no balance means you don't know how to borrow money (or you don't trust yourself to pay it back). Ideally, lenders will see a pattern of you borrowing a portion of the available credit, and then paying it down.  Generally that means utilizing up to 30% of your available credit.  Even if you maintain the balance in that range without paying it off completely, it at least shows that you have restraint, and are able to stop spending at a limit you personally set, rather than the limit the bank sets for you. So, to answer your question, 0% balance on your credit cards is bad because you might as well not have them.  Use it, pay it off, rinse and repeat, and it will demonstrate your ability to exercise self control as well as your ability to repay your debts.