On this page
A high decline rate is expensive twice — the rep time on files that go nowhere, and the standing you lose with funders who start treating your submissions as low quality. Both are worth attacking.
| Reason | Fixable by you? |
|---|---|
| Negative days across the statements | No |
| Average daily balance too low for the ask | Partly — resize the ask |
| Too many existing positions | No |
| Inconsistent or lumpy deposits | Partly — provide context |
| Under the time-in-business floor | No |
| Restricted or high-risk industry | Partly — placement |
| Ask unrealistic against revenue | Yes |
| Incomplete or illegible file | Yes |
The ones you cannot fix
Negative days, existing positions and time in business are facts about the merchant. What you control is finding them out before you submit rather than after — a decline you predicted costs a phone call, one you did not costs a submission and some credibility.
This is also where qualifying properly on the first call pays for itself. Three questions — how many positions, any negative days, how long trading — filter most of the files that were never going to fund.
The ones that are entirely yours
- An unrealistic ask. Requesting three or four times what the revenue supports tells the underwriter you did not read the statements, and it colours how they read the rest of the file.
- An incomplete file. Missing months, missing pages, screenshots instead of statements. This reads as concealment even when it is not, and it is the easiest decline to eliminate.
- Wrong funder. Placement is judgement — sending restaurant paper to a funder who does not take it is a decline you generated.
- No context. An anomalous month with an explanation attached is a different file from the same month left to speak for itself.
What to do with a decline
- Ask the funder why, specifically. A pattern across declines is worth more than any individual answer.
- Consider whether another funder takes that profile before writing the merchant off.
- Tell the merchant plainly what the obstacle was. A merchant who understands why gets a chance to fix it and come back.
- Diary the ones that fail on time in business or a single bad month. Those become fundable later, and almost nobody follows up on them.
Questions brokers ask
What is the most common reason an MCA application is declined?
Negative days in the bank statements, followed by an average daily balance too low to service the requested remittance and too many existing positions. Those three account for a large share of declines and none is fixable by the broker after the fact.
Can a broker reduce their decline rate?
Yes, on roughly half of them. Unrealistic asks, incomplete files, missing context and wrong placement are entirely within your control. Split your declines into fixable and not, count them, and the ratio tells you whether the problem is your process or your lead qualification.
How many existing positions is too many?
It varies by funder and by how much of the receipts the existing remittances already consume. Two is common and placeable; four or more narrows the field sharply. What matters more is disclosure — a position found in the statements after you submitted costs the deal and some standing with that funder.
What should you do after a merchant is declined?
Ask the funder for the specific reason, consider whether another funder takes that profile, tell the merchant plainly what the obstacle was, and diary the ones that failed on time in business or a single bad month. Those become fundable later and almost nobody follows up.
Does an incomplete file really cause declines?
Yes, and it is the cheapest one to eliminate. Missing months, missing pages or screenshots instead of statements read as concealment even when they are only carelessness, and they colour how an underwriter reads everything else in the file.
