What goes in a fundable submission?
The core revenue-based package is short: a completed, signed application and the most recent 3–6 months of complete business bank statements — plus a voided business check, photo ID, and full disclosure of any existing positions. What separates a fast approval from a stalled file isn't more documents. It's complete, current, consistent documents. Requirements vary by lender and product; term, SBA, and equipment files need more (see the per-product checklists).
Work the checklist
Check items off as you build the package. This is a working tool — nothing is saved or sent anywhere.
Revenue-based submission package
The application
Bank statements
Disclosure & verification
The red flags that kill files
What underwriters actually look for in the first pass — and how each one lands.
| What they see | How it reads | Impact | Your move |
|---|---|---|---|
| Undisclosed positions | The file is hiding something | Kill | Disclose everything upfront, with balances and payments |
| Missing statement pages | Same — what's on the missing page? | Kill | Complete PDFs, every page, every month |
| Name mismatch (app vs bank) | Possible wrong entity or worse | Kill | Match legal names; note DBAs explicitly |
| Heavy NSF / negative days | Cash-flow stress | Drag | Pre-explain the cause; recent clean months help |
| Declining monthly deposits | Trending down | Drag | Explain seasonality or one-offs with context |
| Statements over 30 days old | What's happened since? | Drag | Pull fresh statements before submitting |
| Round-number "revenue" transfers | Deposits may not be revenue | Drag | Label owner transfers and inter-account moves |
| Complete, current, consistent file | A broker who knows what they're doing | Green light | This page |
Reviewed August 2026 — underwriting criteria vary by lender and product; this is how files commonly read, not a rulebook for any specific funder.
Five packaging mistakes that cost brokers money
Shotgunning the file everywhere
Blasting 20 lenders creates duplicate-submission flags and burns the merchant's credibility. Targeted submission to lenders whose box fits — or one submission to a desk that routes it — beats volume.
Letting the merchant self-assemble the docs
You review everything before it goes out. The merchant doesn't know a missing page is a kill flag; you do.
Overselling the ask
Requesting far beyond what deposits support forces a counteroffer at best. Anchoring the request to the cash flow gets faster, cleaner offers.
Hiding the warts
The NSFs are in the statements. The positions are in the debits. Disclosure with context is the only version of this that ever works.
Forcing the wrong product
A 700-FICO merchant who wants monthly payments isn't an MCA file. Route it — here's where — instead of losing the merchant.
Why clean packages fund faster
Some programs can fund in as little as 24 hours for qualifying files — but timing varies by lender, product, and file completeness, and completeness is the part you control. Every missing page or surprise position adds a round trip.
Submission FAQs
What documents do MCA lenders require?
How many months of bank statements should I send?
Should I disclose a position the merchant says is "almost paid off"?
What if my lenders already declined the file?
Does a cleaner package actually change my economics?
Have a packaged file ready?
Send it. One submission, matched across a network of funding partners, statuses tracked honestly in the portal. $0 to submit, no obligation.