Fundnode · Learn

Best for construction working capital · Updated June 2026

Best MCA Funders for Construction With Material Pass-Through — 2026 Reviews

Material pass-through is the dominant working-capital driver on most modern commercial construction projects. On a $300K tenant build-out, the contractor might spend $150K-$180K on materials (steel framing, drywall, mechanical systems, electrical panels, plumbing fixtures, HVAC equipment, flooring, paint) in the first 30-60 days of mobilization, often paying suppliers up front for special-order items or on net-30 terms for standard inventory. The customer then pays the material cost back as part of a progress payment 30-90 days later — meaning the contractor floats $150K+ of material cost for 60-150 days before any pass-through revenue lands. The structurally correct answer is a revolving line of credit drawn against the contract for material orders and repaid as progress payments clear — not a fixed-daily-ACH MCA, which collides catastrophically with the lumpy material-pass-through revenue cycle. The 7 lenders below are the ones contractors with material-heavy project mixes actually close with — Bluevine and OnDeck LOC for the primary material order bridge, Credibly for multi-product flexibility, Altline for construction-payable factoring on large commercial receivables, Beacon and Crest for equipment financing, and Live Oak SBA for major capital events. Reviewed as of 2026-06-28.

By Keerthana Keti10 min read

How we picked

Filtered to lenders whose product structure actually fits the material pass-through cash-flow cycle — draw to fund material orders, repay as the progress payment carrying that material cost clears. Revolving LOC structures (Bluevine, OnDeck LOC) ranked first because draw-as-needed-and-repay-as-progress-payments-clear is the structurally correct shape for material pass-through. Credibly ranked next for multi-product flexibility (MCA + LOC + term) when the LOC alone doesn't fully cover the material cycle. Construction-payable factoring (Altline) included for large commercial receivables where material pass-through values are very large ($500K+). Equipment financing (Beacon, Crest) ranked for owned tools and equipment that build long-term contractor asset base. SBA (Live Oak) included for fleet expansion, yard expansion, and major capital events. Fixed-daily-ACH MCA generalists ranked last and only as last-resort bridge — daily ACH against lumpy material-pass-through revenue creates reconciliation distress fast.

Top picks at a glance

LenderBest forAmountSpeedMin creditAction
BluevineBest revolving LOC for material order bridges on commercial and multifamily contracts$10K – $250K1 – 3 business days625+Apply →
OnDeckBest second-call LOC when Bluevine declines or capacity is constrained$5K – $400K (term); $6K – $200K (LOC)Same-day for approved files600+Apply →
CrediblyBest multi-product working-capital relationship for contractors with mixed material and labor cycles$5K – $600KAs fast as 4 hours550+Apply →
altLINE (Southern Bank)Best construction-payable factoring for large commercial receivables with heavy material pass-through$30,000 – $4,000,000 per month1 – 3 business days from setupAnyApply →
Beacon FundingBest equipment financing for contractor trucks, trailers, and material-handling equipment$5,000 – $1,000,000Funding in 1 – 5 business days550+Apply →
Crest CapitalBest alternative equipment financing for specialty trade tools and smaller-ticket equipment$5,000 – $1,000,000Approval in 4 hours; funding 1 – 3 days650+Apply →
Live Oak BankBest SBA 7(a) for contractor fleet expansion, yard purchase, and contractor-business acquisition$25,000 – $25,000,000+30 – 90 days underwriting (SBA standard)680+ typicalApply →

Advertiser disclosure: Fundnode may earn referral fees from funders listed on this page when you apply through us. This does not affect editorial rankings — see our methodology.

Detailed reviews — our 7 picks

#1 · Best revolving LOC for material order bridges on commercial and multifamily contracts

Bluevine

Max amount

$250K

Cost

APR 6.2% – 27%

Speed

1 – 3 business days

Min credit

625+

Why we picked it

Bluevine revolving LOC up to $250K with 625+ credit and 24+ months operating is the structurally correct primary working-capital tool for contractors with heavy material pass-through. The contractor draws against signed contracts for material orders ($150K+ on a typical $300K tenant build-out), pays the supplier on net-30 or net-60 terms, repays as the progress payment carrying that material cost clears 30-90 days later, and pays interest only on the drawn portion. This avoids the fixed-daily-ACH trap that destroys most generalist MCA structures against lumpy material-pass-through revenue. For any commercial GC or specialty sub on $50K-$500K material-heavy projects, Bluevine LOC should be the first call for the primary working-capital relationship.

The strength

Materially cheaper than any MCA when you qualify. Strong product-led UX. Builds business credit (reports to commercial bureaus).

The watch-out

Higher qualification bar — 12+ months TIB, 625+ credit, established revenue. Not an option for thin-file or B/C-paper merchants.

Qualifications

Min TIB

12 months

Min revenue

$10,000

Min credit

625+

#2 · Best second-call LOC when Bluevine declines or capacity is constrained

OnDeck

Max amount

$400K (term); $6K

Cost

Term APR 27%+

Speed

Same-day for approved files

Min credit

600+

Why we picked it

OnDeck LOC up to $100K offers a comparable draw-as-needed structure when Bluevine declines, is at capacity, or the file profile fits OnDeck better. 625+ credit, 12+ months operating, $100K+/yr revenue. Same structural logic as Bluevine — the contractor controls draw timing for material orders and repayment timing for progress-payment receipts carrying material cost back. Often paired with Bluevine to give the contractor combined capacity above either single lender's individual underwriting cap, which matters when material pass-through values run high on simultaneous projects.

The strength

Direct-lender brand trust. Same-day funding on approved files. Term loan product fills the gap between SBA and MCA.

The watch-out

Their broker/ISO program has a high entry bar (2+ years, $1M+/mo volume). Most merchants access OnDeck directly, not via brokers.

Qualifications

Min TIB

12 months

Min revenue

$8,000

Min credit

600+

#3 · Best multi-product working-capital relationship for contractors with mixed material and labor cycles

Credibly

Max amount

$600K

Cost

Factor 1.11+ (MCA)

Speed

As fast as 4 hours

Min credit

550+

Why we picked it

Credibly is the cleanest multi-product working-capital relationship for contractors who need both LOC capacity for material pass-through bridges and term-loan or MCA capacity for specific equipment or expansion events. 550+ credit, 6+ months TIB, $15K+/mo revenue. The multi-product set means the contractor can structure the right shape for each use case rather than being forced into a single product. 4-hour funding for clean files when a material order has to mobilize on short notice. The right relationship for contractors below the Bluevine/OnDeck credit threshold (550-625 credit) who still need a draw-as-needed structure for material pass-through work.

The strength

March 2026 API V2 + Cloudsquare integration — most modern submission UX in MCA. $3B+ deployed, 60K+ SMBs. Publishes factor rates honestly (starting 1.11 for A-paper).

The watch-out

The 1.11 headline is the A-paper floor; average factor is closer to 1.32. ISO commission terms aren't public.

Qualifications

Min TIB

6 months

Min revenue

$15,000

Min credit

550+

#4 · Best construction-payable factoring for large commercial receivables with heavy material pass-through

altLINE (Southern Bank)

Max amount

$4,000,000 per month

Cost

0.5 – 3% per invoice (lower than non-bank competitors)

Speed

1 – 3 business days from setup

Min credit

Any

Why we picked it

Altline (Southern Bank) provides bank-backed factoring on construction-payable receivables for large commercial and public-works contracts where the material pass-through component drives receivable size above $500K. Advance rates 80-90% on construction payables, 5-10 day funding from clean documentation, and the underlying balance-sheet strength of a regulated commercial bank. Particularly useful when the contractor's LOC capacity is already drawn against active material orders and an additional large receivable needs to be monetized without further straining the LOC. The right pick for established commercial GCs and large specialty subs with $500K+ progress-payment receivables on creditworthy commercial customers.

The strength

Bank-direct factoring (Southern Bank subsidiary) — often lower rates than non-bank competitors due to bank funding costs. No long-term contract required. Good fit for B2B businesses with creditworthy customers.

The watch-out

Slower setup than non-bank competitors (longer due diligence). Smaller market presence than altLINE's parent bank suggests.

Qualifications

Min TIB

6 months

Min revenue

$30,000+ in AR

Min credit

Any

#5 · Best equipment financing for contractor trucks, trailers, and material-handling equipment

Beacon Funding

Max amount

$1,000,000

Cost

APR 8 – 25%

Speed

Funding in 1 – 5 business days

Min credit

550+

Why we picked it

Beacon Funding is the dominant equipment-financing relationship for construction contractors purchasing trucks, trailers, forklifts, skid steers, mini-excavators, scissor lifts, and material-handling equipment that supports material-heavy project workflow. Revenue-flexible underwriting (the equipment is the collateral), 5-7 year terms, monthly amortization. The right product for building out the owned-equipment asset base that long-term material-pass-through contractors need — owned material-handling equipment dramatically reduces per-project rental costs and improves bid competitiveness on labor-and-equipment-heavy contracts.

The strength

Equipment financing with broader industry acceptance than larger competitors. Will fund specialty equipment (food trucks, photography gear, fitness equipment, salon equipment). Lower credit threshold (550+).

The watch-out

Higher rates than bank equipment financing for prime credit. Smaller deal cap. Industry specialization can mean less depth in any single vertical.

Qualifications

Min TIB

12 months

Min revenue

$10,000+

Min credit

550+

#6 · Best alternative equipment financing for specialty trade tools and smaller-ticket equipment

Crest Capital

Max amount

$1,000,000

Cost

APR 7 – 22%

Speed

Approval in 4 hours; funding 1 – 3 days

Min credit

650+

Why we picked it

Crest Capital offers equipment financing as an alternative to Beacon, particularly strong for specialty trade equipment (mechanical, electrical, plumbing, HVAC tools and diagnostic equipment), smaller-ticket equipment ($5K-$100K range), and contractors wanting a second-source equipment-financing relationship to maintain competitive pricing on equipment purchases. Same monthly-amortization structure, revenue-flexible underwriting, 5-7 year terms. The right second-call equipment financing when Beacon's pricing comes in tight or the specific equipment doesn't fit Beacon's underwriting box.

The strength

Online-first equipment financing — application to funding in 1-3 days for clean files. Strong commercial vehicle program. Section 179 tax-deduction-friendly structures.

The watch-out

Higher credit + TIB requirements (650+, 24+ months). Equipment-only. Limited to specific equipment categories.

Qualifications

Min TIB

24 months

Min revenue

$10,000+

Min credit

650+

#7 · Best SBA 7(a) for contractor fleet expansion, yard purchase, and contractor-business acquisition

Live Oak Bank

Max amount

$25,000,000+

Cost

SBA 7(a) APR prime + 2.75% to 4.75%

Speed

30 – 90 days underwriting (SBA standard)

Min credit

680+ typical

Why we picked it

Live Oak Bank SBA 7(a) at prime + 2.75% APR with 10-25 year tenors is the structurally correct tool for major capital events that don't fit the LOC or equipment-financing products — fleet expansion, second-yard or warehouse expansion (which is especially useful for material-pass-through contractors who can stage bulk material orders rather than per-project orders), contractor-business acquisitions, or refinancing accumulated MCA stacks from prior cycles where the contractor took the wrong product shape. Monthly amortization survives material-pass-through cycle far better than any daily-ACH product. Typical qualifying file: 24+ months operating, $40K+/mo trailing average, 680+ credit, clean tax returns.

The strength

Largest SBA 7(a) lender in the US by dollar volume for 7+ consecutive years. Industry-specialty teams (veterinary, dental, funeral homes, self-storage, agriculture, hotels). Deep understanding of niche-vertical underwriting. Dramatically cheaper than MCA for qualifying merchants.

The watch-out

Long underwriting timeline (45-90 days typical). Requires strong credit (680+), 2+ years operating, clean financials. Industries outside their specialty get less attention.

Qualifications

Min TIB

24 months

Min revenue

$20,000+

Min credit

680+ typical

Frequently asked questions

Why is daily-ACH MCA structurally wrong for material pass-through construction work?
Material pass-through revenue is inherently lumpy and lagged behind material cost. On a $300K tenant build-out, the contractor might spend $150K on materials in days 1-30 of the project, then receive zero deposits for 30-60 days, then a $90K progress payment carrying material cost back in day 60-75, then zero for another 30 days, then $80K in day 100, and the final retainage 180+ days after substantial completion. A daily-ACH MCA written off the contractor's trailing-3-month revenue produces a fixed daily debit that hits the operating account regardless of material-pass-through timing. On the 60+ days between progress-payment receipts, the daily ACH grinds down whatever working-capital balance the contractor has accumulated, often forcing the contractor to delay supplier payments and risk losing the supplier relationships that material-heavy work absolutely depends on. The structurally correct product is a revolving LOC where draws cover material orders and repayments come from the progress payments carrying that material cost back.
How do I size a Bluevine LOC against my typical material pass-through cycle?
Calculate peak simultaneous material exposure across your typical project mix. If you run 3 simultaneous $300K tenant build-outs with 50% material content, peak material exposure (assuming staggered project timelines) is typically 1.2-1.5x average project material cost, so $180K-$225K of LOC capacity covers the typical peak. Build in 20-30% buffer for unexpected special-order materials, weather-driven schedule shifts that push material orders earlier than planned, and the 30-60 day gap between when material orders ship and when the progress payment carrying that cost back actually clears. For most established commercial GCs and specialty subs, $150K-$250K of Bluevine LOC capacity covers the typical material-pass-through cycle; larger fleets running simultaneous $500K+ projects often pair Bluevine with OnDeck or supplement with Altline factoring on the largest receivables.
When does construction-payable factoring make sense alongside a LOC for material-heavy work?
Construction-payable factoring (Altline, eCapital) makes sense when material pass-through values push individual receivables above $500K and the contractor's primary LOC is already drawn against simultaneous active material orders on other projects. The factoring product is structurally more expensive than LOC (advance rate of 80-90% versus full LOC capacity, plus discount fees) but provides specific receivable-secured capacity that doesn't compete with the LOC's underwriting cap. The right play for most material-heavy contractors is to use LOC as the primary working-capital relationship for the typical $50K-$500K material-pass-through cycle and add construction-payable factoring as a supplemental capacity tool for very large material-heavy receivables that exceed what the LOC can comfortably support without crowding out other simultaneous material orders.
What revenue and credit do I need for construction material pass-through funding?
Bluevine LOC: 625+ credit, 24+ months operating, $80K+/yr revenue. OnDeck LOC: 625+ credit, 12+ months operating, $100K+/yr revenue. Credibly multi-product: 550+ credit, 6+ months TIB, $15K+/mo revenue. Altline construction-payable factoring: established contractor with $500K+ commercial or public-works receivables on creditworthy customers, 24+ months operating typical. Beacon and Crest equipment financing: revenue-flexible because the equipment is the collateral, typically $5K+/mo revenue and 6+ months operating. Live Oak SBA: 680+ credit, 24+ months operating, $40K+/mo trailing average. Match yourself at /match to compare structures.

Related reading

Methodology

How we chose

Ranking criteria

  • Use-case fit — funder must qualify the merchant profile this page targets (credit, time-in-business, revenue, industry).
  • Pricing transparency — published factor-rate or APR-equivalent disclosure outweighs marketing-only quotes.
  • Speed-to-fund — verified time from signed contract to ACH deposit, not 'as fast as' marketing claims.
  • Contract terms — daily/weekly debit structure, prepayment treatment, COJ / personal guarantee posture.
  • Customer-experience signals — BBB profile, Trustpilot, ISO chatter, and direct merchant feedback collected via Fundnode applications.

Sources consulted

  • Funder-published rate cards, contract templates, and disclosure pages (refreshed quarterly).
  • Public regulatory filings — California DFPI commercial-financing disclosures, New York commercial-financing disclosure law filings.
  • Direct merchant feedback collected through Fundnode's /qualify funnel (n > 200 since 2026-01).
  • ISO desk operator interviews — anonymized commentary on approval patterns and stipulations.

Update cadence

Reviewed quarterly. Last updated 2026-06-24.

Conflict of interest

Fundnode may earn referral fees from funders listed on this page when merchants apply through us. Rankings are editorial and independent of fee economics — funders cannot pay for placement.