The 2026 Broker Stack Section 2 of 6 Reading a Deal in 90 Seconds

By The Funded Method · Published April 29, 2026 · Updated August 12, 2026 · Free report

The 2026 Broker Stack · Section 2

Reading a Deal in 90 Seconds.

Five signals. Ten seconds. The whole deal: the underwriting skill every broker runs even when AI runs it faster.

The broker's eye

What a trained broker sees in 10 seconds.

The AI stack from Section 4 reads a statement in 0.3 seconds. That doesn't make this skill optional. It makes it mandatory.

A broker who can't read a statement can't catch the model when it mis-codes a transaction. Can't defend the tier call to a merchant on the phone. Can't override the model when a restaurant with two bad months is actually a clean deal with a seasonal dip. Every working broker runs this scan mentally on every deal, even after the model has already finished, because the model is a calculator and you're the one signing your name to the submission.

This section teaches the framework. The skill itself is built through reps. Two weeks of practice against 30+ real, sanitized statements and the scan becomes automatic. That's what the $47 "Underwriting in 60 Seconds" mini course is for. Framework here. Reps there.

The five numbers

Every underwriter in this industry, human or model, is hunting the same five.

They're not the only numbers that matter. They're the ones that decide whether the deal moves forward or dies. Tap any tile to expand its calculation, thresholds, and the "why" most new brokers miss.

What it is

Gross business revenue landing in the account. Funders want the real number, not whatever the merchant claims on the application.

How to calculate it

Sum the credit transactions for the month. Then subtract what isn't revenue:

Owner-to-owner transfers (merchant moving money between their own accounts)
Loan or advance proceeds (big round-number deposits with originator names that look like a lender)
Refunds, chargebacks, reversals
ATM cash deposits the merchant made themselves. This inflates revenue on paper and blows up when the funder catches it.

Thresholds

Most Tier 1 MCA buy boxes open at $15K–$20K/month
Sweet spot sits at $40K+/month
3-month average standard; 6-month average for seasonal businesses
If the 3-month and 6-month averages disagree sharply, that's the question to answer before submitting

Why it matters more than you think

"Total deposits" at the top of a statement can lie. A merchant depositing $80K/month is a $50K/month merchant if $30K of it is owner injections. The underwriter will catch it. You should catch it first, because every minute the funder spends untangling your deposit math is a minute they're not approving your file.

MCC mismatch as a red flag

If the merchant lists one industry on the application and the card processor codes show a different MCC on the statement (e.g., "restaurant" on the app but 5999 "miscellaneous retail" on the processor line), that's a verification issue. Sometimes innocent. Often not. Either way, it gets reconciled before submission, or the funder flags it for you.

What it is

The average amount sitting in the account across the statement period.

How to calculate it

Use the figure on the statement if reported. If not, sum the daily ending balances and divide by the day count. Most funder applications ask for the 3-month average.

Thresholds (as of 2026)

Tier 1: $3K+ average daily balance on a $40K/mo deal
Tier 2: $1K–$3K
Hard pass: sustained negative daily balances, or an average under $500 on a $40K/mo merchant

Why it matters more than revenue

A merchant with $80K/month revenue and a $400 average daily balance is a harder deal than one with $40K revenue and a $3K average.[1] High revenue with a thin daily balance signals cash-flow brittleness. Money comes in and leaves the same day to cover obligations, often including existing advances. Funders price for the daily balance, not the top line, because the daily balance is what's actually there when the ACH debit hits at 6 AM.

If a merchant claims $80K/month and the statement shows a $400 average daily balance, the first question is always: where is the money going? Answering that before the funder asks is half the broker's job.

What it is

Non-sufficient funds events. Charges returned because the account didn't have the money. Shows on a statement as "NSF," "Returned Item," "Overdraft Fee," "OD Protection Pull," or variants.

Thresholds (post-2024 tightening)

Clean / Tier 1: 0–2 NSFs in the trailing 90 days[2][3]
Tier 2: 3–5 NSFs in any single month
Hard pass: 6+ NSFs in any month, or sustained NSF activity across three consecutive months

2026 context

Most Tier 1 MCA funders tightened NSF tolerance after the 2024–2025 default cycle. A 5-NSF month that would have funded in 2023 is a Tier 1 decline in 2026.[2]

NSF-adjacent patterns to catch

Overdraft protection pulls that don't show as NSFs but signal the same cash-flow problem. Transfers from a secondary account or line of credit landing on the same days the NSFs would have hit. Scan for the pattern, not just the word.

Why it matters

NSF count is the single cleanest signal of cash-flow stress. Everything else on a statement can be explained. A cluster of NSFs rarely can.

What it is

Daily or weekly ACH withdrawals going to existing MCA funders. Each one represents an active advance on the merchant.

How to spot them

Recurring ACH debits with these traits:

Same or near-same amount, daily (Monday–Friday) or weekly
ACH entries with originator codes like "DES:", batch descriptors, or ID references: e.g., DES:XXXXX43863 or ID:PAYXXXXX[4]
Originator names that look like holding-company LLCs or business-services shells rather than vendors or utilities

A note on deception

Some MCA funders deliberately vary daily debit amounts or use multiple subsidiary originator names to make the debits harder to block, and harder to spot on a fast scan.[4] Daily debits from three different-looking originators that all land on the same business-day cadence and total a consistent weekly amount almost always trace back to the same advance.

Position, and why it decides the deal

1st position (no open advances, or one advance that can be paid off with this funding): routes to Tier 1.
2nd position (one active advance): limited funder appetite. A subset of Tier 1 MCA houses will go 2nd, usually at higher factor rates.
3rd position and beyond: most funders decline on sight. These deals route to specialty C-paper houses or don't fund at all.

Why this one data point kills more deals than any other

A broker submits a file believing it's 1st position, misses two subsidiary-named debits, and the funder catches the stack in underwriting. The submission gets declined. Worse, the broker's reputation with that funder takes a hit. Funders track submission accuracy, and an ISO who submits mis-positioned deals gets deprioritized fast. The fix is reading the originator codes, not the originator names.

What it is

The count and variance of deposit days across the month. Not just the total.

How to evaluate

Deposit count: 20 deposit days in a month is a stronger signal than 8 deposit days at the same monthly total. Daily credit-card batches, steady check deposits, consistent e-commerce settlements. All of it tells the funder the business is operating.
Variance: Revenue swinging from $10K to $60K to $25K month-over-month is harder to underwrite than $30K ± $5K across three months, even at a lower total.

Thin deposit patterns that signal trouble

A few large round-number deposits with no daily transaction rhythm (looks like transfers, not sales)
Deposits clustered at the start of each month with two dry weeks after
A single large deposit that lands right before an advance payoff attempt

Seasonality

Landscaping is slow in January. Tax prep is slow in August. Retail spikes in November–December. Funders with mature underwriting normalize for seasonality. Less mature funders don't. Part of the broker's job is knowing which is which and routing accordingly.

The 90-second scan framework

Run this on every statement. It runs alongside the AI. Not instead of it.

The sequence. Run it on every statement. It doesn't replace the AI. It runs alongside the AI, so you know when the model is right, wrong, or missing something the model isn't trained to see.

0–15smonthly deposits

Land on a real revenue number.

Glance at the total credits line. Mentally subtract anything that looks like a transfer or round-number injection.
15–30sdaily balance pattern

Climbing, flat, or gasping?

Look at the ending balances across the statement. Is there an average daily balance reported? Does it match the revenue story?
30–45sNSFs & existing advances

Scan for stress, then scan for stack.

NSF or returned-item language first. Then daily ACH debits with MCA-style originators.
45–60sdeposit count & consistency

Does the month look like a business operating?

How many distinct deposit days? Clustered or spread? Real rhythm, or three big transfers dressed as revenue?
60–90sthe gut call

Tier 1, Tier 2, specialty, or hard pass.

Fundable, maybe, or no. And which two categories from the Lender Map does it route to?

This is a drill, not a theory. Do it on 10 statements and you're faster than half the industry. Do it on 30 and you're calibrated. Do it on 100 and you're the broker the AE calls first when she has a tough file and wants a second read.

The AI stack runs this in 0.3 seconds. The broker still runs it on every deal for three reasons:

To catch when the model is wrong. Even the best underwriting models mis-code a small percentage of statements in production. Edge cases with malformed scans, unusual deposit patterns, or merchant category mismatches the model hasn't seen. Those cases are expensive to miss.
To defend the tier call to a merchant who wants to know why their deal priced a certain way.
To know which edge cases the model will mis-read before the submission goes out.

The stip checklist

Stips are what the funder requires before funding. Collect every one of these on the first call.

"Stips," short for stipulations. The documents a funder requires before funding. Every funder has a slightly different list. The core is the same across the industry. The standard Tier 1 MCA stip package as of 2026:[5]

3–4 most recent business bank statements Some Tier 1 houses want 6 months for seasonal businesses or larger advances.
Driver's license Of the owner, or all owners above a certain ownership threshold.
Voided business check Or a bank letter, so the funder can confirm the account and set up ACH.
Proof of business ownership Articles of organization, operating agreement, or EIN letter from the IRS.
Landlord info or proof of property ownership A lease or mortgage statement to verify the business address.
Business tax returns Generally on larger deals (often $100K+) or when the merchant is pushing a buy box edge.
P&L and balance sheet Rare on MCA, standard on term loans and SBA, required on larger advances.

Why this list deserves its own section: The single biggest reason new brokers lose deals isn't bad underwriting. It's that they don't know what to collect upfront. The merchant sends over the bank statements. Two days later the funder asks for the voided check. The broker emails the merchant. Merchant doesn't respond for 24 hours. Meanwhile, a competing broker who collected everything on the first call already submitted, got an offer back, and signed the merchant. Deal dead.

Collect every document on this list on the first call with the merchant. Not "I'll follow up later." Not "send it when you get a chance." On the call. If the merchant won't send them during or right after the call, the merchant isn't serious, and the faster you find that out the less pipeline you waste on deals that were never going to fund.

This mistake has its own dollar figure attached in Section 5. It's the highest-ROI habit change a new broker can make.

The deposit pattern visualizer

Three sample patterns. Watch what the funder sees.

Toggle between three anonymized deposit patterns. Each renders as an animated daily balance chart across 30 days, with a one-line verdict from a funder's-eye reviewer.

Deposit days22 of 30

NSFs0

Avg daily balance$4,200

Existing advancesnone

daily ending balance deposit day

Verdict

Route to Tier 1. Full buy box fit.

Toggle all three in under a minute. The point isn't the verdict. The point is pattern recognition. After ten statements, these three shapes are automatic.

The 90-second scan drill

90-second timer. One sanitized statement. Run the framework.

A countdown clock, an anonymized statement, and the five-point scan in order. The tool times you, asks for your gut call at the buzzer, and compares your call to the underwriter's tier call on that statement. Skippable on the first read. Dumb to skip on the tenth.

statement · sanitized Statement period · 30 days

Total credits$36,420

Total debits$35,810

Avg daily balance$1,140

Ending balance$612

NSF events (90d)4

Deposit days17

recurring debits · ACH originator scan

DES:**843·ID:PAYXX−$210.00daily M–F
CAPLINE LLC·ID:CAP9912−$184.00daily M–F
PAYROLL·ID:PR-3201−$3,820.00bi-weekly
RENT-TRANSFER·ID:RT07−$2,400.001st of month

B2C retail merchant. 14 months in business. Owner FICO 615. $32K requested. Sanitized for the drill: numbers preserved, identifiers redacted.

seconds

Run the framework against the file on the left. When you're ready, start the clock.

seconds remaining

0–15smonthly deposits
15–30sdaily balance pattern
30–45sNSFs & existing advances
45–60sdeposit count & consistency
60–90sgut call

What's the call?

Your call

Correct call

Hard pass. Or specialty C-paper at best.

Revenue real number: ~$36K/mo gross credits looks ok at first. But the $1,140 avg daily balance on a $36K/mo merchant is well under the Tier 2 floor.
NSF count: 4 in 90 days lands in Tier 2 territory on its own; combined with the rest, it's a hard signal.
Existing advances: two daily ACH debits to different-looking originators on the same M–F cadence, totaling ~$394/day. That's stack behavior, not a single advance. Even if it traces back to one funder under two names, this submission is 2nd or 3rd position.
Deposit consistency: 17 deposit days is borderline acceptable, but doesn't rescue the rest.
Gut call: the cash-flow profile, NSF count, and stack pattern together push this off Tier 1 entirely. Routes to a specialty 2nd/3rd-position house if anywhere, or back to the merchant for consolidation before re-submitting.

The drill is how the framework turns into instinct. Reading about the scan does nothing. Running it against a clock and getting the call right or wrong is where calibration happens.

Worked example

Five numbers. 90 seconds. One honest call.

A merchant submits 4 months of bank statements for a wholesale auto-parts business. Here's what the 90-second scan turns up.

The file

Wholesale auto-parts business. 4 months of bank statements. ~$58K/month in gross credits. Owner asking for working capital.

01

Monthly deposits · 0–15s

Gross credits average $58,000/month across four months. Subtract roughly $5,000/month in what look like owner transfers from a matching personal account. Real revenue: ~$53,000/month.
02

Daily balance pattern · 15–30s

Reported average daily balance each month: $1,400, $1,800, $1,650, $1,200. Trending down. Ending balances compress toward the end of each month. Money comes in early, leaves by week three.
03

NSFs & existing advances · 30–45s

NSFs across 90 days: 3 (one each in two months, none in the most recent). Existing advances: yes. Two daily ACH debits of $287 and $194 going to two different originators, both Monday–Friday, totaling about $2,400/week. That's an active advance, likely consolidated under two subsidiary originator names by the same funder. Remaining balance: substantial.
04

Deposit consistency · 45–60s

19–22 deposit days per month across all four months. Variance low. Deposits look like real B2B wholesale activity. Mix of ACH-in from commercial customers plus a handful of larger check deposits.
05

Gut call · 60–90s

Tier 2 MCA deal. One active advance in 1st position means this submission is 2nd position. Revenue supports a new advance, but the daily balance and NSFs put it out of Tier 1 pricing. Wholesale auto parts is fundable, though watch for the auto-dealer confusion (wholesale parts is not a dealer, and the processor code should confirm it).

Primary · submit first

Tier 2 MCA, 2nd position

Roughly $25K probable advance at ~1.38 factor, 5-month term. Primary submission goes to a specialty 2nd-position house. Daily debit will run about $200, so plan for roughly $1,000/week off the top.

Backup · if primary declines

Equipment Financing

If the merchant has a specific piece of equipment to collateralize (the wholesale business likely has lift equipment or shelving systems that would qualify), equipment financing is the backup play. Equipment is the collateral, and the credit profile matters less.

What I'd say to the merchant next

"Based on the statements, I can get you an offer today. The number will come in around $25,000. Daily debit will run about $200, so plan for roughly $1,000 a week off the top. We can submit now, or if your November number is stronger than August, we can pull one more month of statements first. Your call."

That's the whole thing. Five numbers. 90 seconds. One straight conversation with the merchant. No pricing negotiation yet. That's not in this report. Just the diagnosis.

What this section does not teach

This section teaches you how to read a deal. It does not teach you how to price one.

Factor rate vs. APR conversion. Buy rate vs. sell rate. Broker markup. Rate-sheet interpretation. How to quote terms to a merchant on the phone. None of that is in this report, and the omission is deliberate. A new broker who tries to quote pricing without a funder's current rate sheet in front of them gets burned fast. Wrong quote on a phone call either kills the deal outright or commits the broker to terms the funder won't honor, at which point the broker has to eat the spread or tell the merchant the price just went up. Both outcomes are career-limiting.

Pricing is Accelerator curriculum because it requires live funder rate sheets, 1:1 walkthroughs on real deals, and judgment calls that don't survive a written framework. What's in this report is the diagnostic skill: reading the deal and calling the tier. That alone is more than most new brokers can do on day one, and it's enough to be useful from the first phone call.

This isn't gatekeeping. It's keeping you out of a knife fight you're not ready for.

Decision point · End of SEC 02 / 07

The $47 mini-course

Underwriting in 60 Seconds.

Two weeks of reps against 30+ real, sanitized statements. The framework is in this report. The reps are in the course. By the end of week two, the 90-second scan happens before you've finished thinking about it.

30+ sanitized statements across MCA, term, LOC, and equipment buy boxes
Tier-call self-grading after every drill
The five common mis-reads new brokers make, and the override rule for each
Lifetime access. No subscription.

$47 one-time, lifetime access Learn more Compare all three doors

Path A $47 Underwriting in 60 Seconds Two weeks of reps on 30+ real sanitized bank statements with worked tier calls. Path B $297 The Submission Vault Templates, scripts, and checklists for merchant intake, stip collection, submission emails, and objection handling. Path C $2,997 The Funded Method Accelerator 12 weeks of live training. The AI stack pre-built and configured.

Sources · Section 2

Citations referenced in this section.

← Section 1: The Lender Map Read the full report Section 3: The 90-Day Framework →

Want the whole system, not just the report? See the three ways to work with The Funded Method.