Three numbers, and we lead with the middle one
The full distribution, including the orders that funded nothing.
Exclusive leads
Funded deals
That is the benchmark our clients report on an order of fifty. At an average funded deal around $62k, two deals is $124,000 funded off a $3,000 spend.
Worst recorded
funded per 50 leads. It has happened. Every single time it came down to the same thing, and it was not the leads.
Benchmark
funded per 50 leads. Where most shops land on an order of 50. This is the number we quote, not the best one. Client-reported across orders placed to September 2026.
Best recorded
funded per 50 leads. One shop, one order. Worth knowing the ceiling exists; not worth planning around.
Run it at two deals, not at eight
If the math only works at the top of the range it does not work.
So here it is at the bottom — the number we tell you to plan against.
| You spend | $3,000 — 50 leads at $60 |
|---|---|
| Deals funded | 2 — bottom of the benchmark |
| Total funded | $124,000 at $62,000 average |
| Your commission | $12,400 at 10 points |
$9,400 net, roughly 4.1× on the spend — at the low end.
And if you split commissions with a lender and clear half of that, you are still ahead. That is the whole point of running the bottom of the range.
Fifty is the unit, not the ceiling
One measured ratio, held flat, at monthly volume.
We prove the ratio on fifty because fifty is small enough that a shop will actually test it and large enough that the average means something. Nobody stays there. Hold the benchmark flat — same two deals per fifty, same $62,000 average, same 10 points — and run it at monthly volume:
| Leads / month | Lead spend | Funded | Funded volume | Your commission |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50 | $3,000at $60 a lead | 2 | $124,000 | $12,400 |
| 500 | $25,000at $50 a lead | 20 | $1,240,000 | $124,000 |
| 1,000 | $50,000at $50 a lead | 40 | $2,480,000 | $248,000 |
The ratio never moves in that table. The only input that changes is the per-lead price, which drops to the volume tier at 500 — so the return on spend goes up with size rather than down. A shop at a thousand a month is running the same funnel as a shop at fifty, on leads that cost it $10 less each.
$248,000 of commission a month at a thousand leads, against $12,400 at fifty.
Off the same benchmark we refuse to quote at its ceiling. Orders run to 1,000 at a time and the pacing is yours to set.
The constraint on that table is not our supply. It is whether your floor can dial a thousand merchants a month inside five minutes of each one landing — which is the next section, and the only variable that has ever decided one of these accounts.
We would rather tell you this before you pay
The one variable that has decided every account.
A shop came to us convinced the batch was dead — nobody picking up, whole order garbage, wanted a refund. We asked them to export their CRM data and ran a report on it.
Their average time to first dial
Measured from that client’s own CRM export in 2026, their average time to first dial was 14 hours — on a merchant who filled out a funding application at 9am and was actively shopping that morning. By the time anyone called, three other brokers had already been through him. That is not a lead quality problem wearing its own name — it is a sales process problem wearing a lead quality costume.
What the shops with positive ROI do
- Call within 5 minutes of the lead landing — not 5 hours
- Text and email immediately, not just call
- Double dial
- Follow up more than once before writing the merchant off
That is the entire list. It is not clever and it is not proprietary. It is done, or it is not — and it is the variable that decides everything else.