Most declines aren't close calls. They're files that went out with a number nobody checked, or a position nobody spotted. Here's what a lender is going to find, so you can find it first.
Deposits are not revenue
Total deposits include transfers between the merchant's own accounts, loan proceeds, refunds and one-off injections. Underwriters back those out to get to true operating revenue, and a file that leads with gross deposits reads as either careless or deliberately optimistic. Neither helps.
Look for round-number deposits that repeat, transfers labelled with the merchant's own business name, and any single deposit large enough to distort a month.
Negative days and the ending balance
Negative-balance days and NSF fees are the fastest read on whether a merchant can carry a daily or weekly remittance. Average daily balance matters more than ending balance — a merchant who ends the month strong but ran negative eleven days is a different risk from one who held a steady float.
Finding stacked positions
This is the one that costs deals. A merchant with existing advances often doesn't volunteer them, and sometimes genuinely doesn't think of them as loans.
The signature is a fixed-amount debit repeating on a daily or weekly cadence, usually ACH, often with a funder's name mangled in the description. Work backwards from the debit to find the lump-sum credit that started it — that funding deposit is the proof, and quoting it turns an accusation into a fact.
- Same-amount debits on a daily or weekly rhythm, excluding payroll and rent
- A lump-sum credit weeks earlier with no operating explanation
- Multiple such patterns overlapping — the merchant is already stacked
- A pattern that stops abruptly: a closed position worth knowing about
Signs a statement has been altered
Doctored statements are common enough that lenders check routinely, and a broker who submits one is the one whose reputation takes the hit.
- Balances that don't reconcile forward from one line to the next
- Fonts or alignment that shift within a single page
- A PDF with no bank-generated metadata, or one that's been through an editor
- Page totals that don't match the sum of the transactions above them
Doing this at volume
Every check above is mechanical, which is exactly why it should be automated. Lyte's statement engine reads every page as it lands — revenue, withdrawals, transaction counts, negative days, average daily balance — flags NSF events and tampering signals, and surfaces stacked positions with the funding deposit that proves each one, down to the page number.
The point isn't to replace an underwriter's judgement. It's that judgement should be spent on the borderline files, not on adding up deposits.
Common questions
- How do you spot a stacked position on a bank statement?
- Look for fixed-amount debits repeating daily or weekly, usually by ACH and often with a funder's name in the description, then trace backwards to the lump-sum credit that started the pattern. That funding deposit is what proves the position exists.
- What is true revenue in MCA underwriting?
- True revenue is operating revenue after backing out transfers between the merchant's own accounts, loan or advance proceeds, refunds and other non-operating credits. Gross deposits overstate it, sometimes badly.
- How many months of bank statements do MCA lenders need?
- Three months is the common baseline, with six to twelve requested for larger advances or when the file needs seasonality explained. More months also make stacked positions and negative-day patterns much easier to see.