A merchant cash advance buys future receivables and repays as a share of daily receipts, funding in days with light documentation and costing the most. A term loan repays on a fixed schedule at a lower rate but takes longer and demands stronger credit. A line of credit is revolving and only costs when drawn. Speed and accessibility are what an advance sells; price is what it charges for them.
A broker who can place all three has a better conversation than one who can only sell what they have. Even placing advances exclusively, knowing where the product genuinely loses makes you more credible on the calls where it wins.
| Advance | Term loan | Line of credit | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Speed to funding | 1–3 days | 1–6 weeks | Days to weeks |
| Documentation | 3–6 months of statements | Full financials, tax returns | Financials, often collateral |
| Credit sensitivity | Low | High | Moderate to high |
| Repayment | Share of daily receipts | Fixed instalments | Only on drawn balance |
| Cost | Highest | Lowest | Between |
| Best for | Urgent, short, revenue-backed need | Planned capital expenditure | Recurring working-capital gaps |
Speed and access. A merchant with an equipment failure on Tuesday who needs it running Thursday is not choosing between an advance and a bank line — the bank line takes six weeks and they will not get it. They are choosing between an advance and being closed.
That framing matters because it is honest. The advance is expensive relative to bank credit and it exists for merchants who either cannot access bank credit or cannot wait for it. Pretending otherwise is how brokers lose credibility on the second call.
An advance is a purchase of future receivables that repays as a share of daily receipts, funds in days on light documentation and costs the most. A term loan is a fixed-schedule debt at a lower rate that takes weeks and demands stronger credit and full financials. Speed and accessibility are what the advance sells.
Yes, materially. Advances price for speed, light documentation and low credit sensitivity, and the merchants who take them frequently cannot access bank credit at all. If a business qualifies for a term loan and can wait for it, the loan is the better deal.
When the need is recurring rather than a one-off. A line only costs when drawn, which suits a business with periodic working-capital gaps. An advance repaid and re-taken repeatedly for the same recurring gap is an expensive way to solve a problem a line was designed for.
Often yes, but existing obligations affect what a funder will offer and at what price. Every open position ahead of a new advance raises the factor on it, and some agreements restrict taking on additional financing — worth checking before placing a second file.
Yes, and it pays. A merchant with strong credit, a planned purchase months away, or margins that cannot absorb a daily remittance is a bad fit, and a deal that breaks their cash flow costs you the renewal. Being told the truth is also why they come back when the bank declines them.
We will tell you straight up if we cannot help you. No commission deals, no free trials, no chasing you for three weeks.