Daily repayments on an advance are strangling my cash flow

The difficulty here is usually velocity rather than the headline cost. A structure that takes a share of daily receipts withdraws cash continuously, and a business that modelled it as a monthly payment finds the operating account never recovers. Where a second or third advance has been layered on top, each remittance compounds the last and the position deteriorates predictably.

Refinancing into a longer, monthly-amortising facility can restore the cash cycle, and it is worth understanding why that helps even when the stated rate looks similar. A factor fee is owed in full regardless of how fast it is repaid, so paying an advance off early raises its effective annualised cost rather than lowering it. Replacing it with an amortising facility changes the shape of the obligation, not merely its price.

More than one structure can usually solve the same presenting problem, and they are not equivalent. The differences that matter are what the facility is secured against, how repayment is taken, and whether the cost is quoted as an annual rate or as a fee on the amount advanced.

Speed is often the deciding factor in situations like this one. The fastest published timeline across the providers below is 24 hours, though published timelines assume a complete file — the preparation time before submission is usually the larger part of the calendar, and it is the part a business controls.

Published criteria gate consideration rather than approval, and the constraints below are the ones that most often end the conversation before pricing matters at all. It is worth checking them first: an application that was never eligible costs weeks and leaves a footprint.

It is also worth naming the case where the answer is not to borrow. Financing a shortfall that recurs every month does not fix it, and a repayment schedule layered on top of an unresolved margin or collection problem generally makes the position worse rather than better. If the same gap has appeared three times, the gap is the problem.

Preparation is the part of this that a business fully controls, and it moves terms more than most owners expect. Providers price uncertainty: a file that answers the obvious questions before they are asked is underwritten faster and more favourably than one that arrives incomplete, even when the underlying business is identical.

The list below is the common core. Individual providers ask for more, and anything that looks inconsistent between documents should be explained up front rather than left to be discovered.

The comparison that decides this is not the published ranges above but your own numbers: what the funds are for, what repays them, what the business can carry through a bad month, and which criteria you currently clear. Published ranges narrow the field; they cannot pick from it.

That is the work Caplift's assessment does. It takes your financial and operating inputs, tests debt-service capacity, compares structures on a consistent basis rather than on headline rates, and produces a funding-readiness view plus a lender-facing summary. The first assessment is free. Caplift is software — it is not a lender, it does not approve or guarantee financing, and the decision stays with you and your advisors.