I have two credit cards and $500 total m
Ask
I have two credit cards and $500 total monthly budget to pay them down:
- Card 1: $6,400 balance, 22.9% AP, minimum payment $160/month
- Card 2: $2,100 balance, 17.5% AP, minimum payment $55/month
ent, utilities, survival medicine, and food are 100% covered and funded.
Can you run a comparison between the Avalanche strategy (highest AP first) and the Snowball strategy (lowest balance first), showing the months to payoff and total interest paid?
Answer
ent, utilities, survival medicine, and food are covered, so this is a repayment comparison, not a crisis ladder.
Both routes finish in 21 months; the difference is what each one buys.
| Strategy | Extra goes first | Months | Total interest | Last payment |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Avalanche | Card 1 (22.9% AP) | 21 | 1,673.76 USD | 173.76 |
| Snowball | Card 2 ($2,100 balance) | 21 | 1,823.05 USD | 323.05 |
Source: this turn's `payoff.py` ok:true stdout; monthly compounding assumed.
- Avalanche puts the extra toward Card 1 (higher AP). Card 1 closes in month 17, then the freed payment rolls into Card 2.
- Snowball puts the extra toward Card 2 (smaller balance). Card 2 closes in month 7, then the freed payment rolls into Card 1.
Avalanche saves about 149.29 USD over Snowball on total interest, paid at 22.9% vs 17.5%. Snowball clears a balance first (Card 2 at month 7) if seeing one card go to zero matters more than the interest line.
A finance charge on any card is that card's balance × its own AP — that is what the statement calls "interest charged this period," and it is not the ranking key by itself; ranking here uses the APs you stated. Both methods are estimates under monthly compounding and assume every month pays the same $500 on time.
Want a save snapshot for next month, or a one-card "what if I pay $X" run?