The specs
CrediblyAccord Business Funding
Product typeMulti-productMCA
Amount range$5K – $600K$5K – $150K
Cost (factor / APR)Factor 1.11+ (MCA); APR varies (term)Factor varies by paper grade
Speed to fundAs fast as 4 hoursNext-day for approved files
Min time in business6 months3 months
Min monthly revenue$15,000Flexible — no published floor
Min credit score550+Flexible — accepts B/C-paper
Products
- MCA
- Working capital LOC
- Short-term term loan
- MCA (1st / 2nd / 3rd position)
Verdicts by use case
- A-paper merchant ($25K+/mo, 600+ FICO, 12+ months TIB) seeking best published factor on $50K – $400K MCA — Winner: Credibly. Credibly's published 1.11+ MCA factor for clean A-paper files is structurally the best published factor among the three. Accord's pricing isn't published transparently (deal-by-deal) — Accord's structural value is in B/C-paper flexibility, not A-paper cost competitiveness. Greenbox's 2-stip MCA program is competitive on A-paper but caps at $250K MCA vs Credibly's $600K. For A-paper merchants needing $50K – $400K Credibly is structural primary on factor cost; for $50K – $250K with Greenbox's 2-stip program Greenbox is the structural alternative for ISOs prioritizing speed-to-close on cleanest files.
- B/C-paper merchant with NSFs, existing first or second positions, irregular revenue, or 3 – 6 months TIB — Winner: Accord Business Funding. Accord Business Funding is structurally primary for genuinely B/C-paper files — 3-month TIB minimum (lowest in this 3-way), no published revenue floor, explicit B/C-paper acceptance, willing to fund stacked positions where Credibly declines. The cost is materially higher (factor 1.40+ typical for B/C-paper deals) but Accord funds when Credibly and Greenbox both decline on TIB or paper grade. For B/C-paper merchants Accord is structurally the only consistent option among the three; Greenbox accepts down to 500 FICO on some programs but the 6+ months TIB requirement gates out the shortest-trading-history files.
- ISO wanting widest product breadth under one funder relationship — Winner: Tie. Greenbox Capital is structurally primary for ISOs wanting broad product line under one relationship — MCA + invoice factoring + equipment financing + LOC + collateral loans (five products vs Credibly's three and Accord's MCA-only). Published commission up to 19% to ISOs, white-label contracts, Priority 1 status for new ISOs. For ISOs building diversified-product broker books Greenbox is the structural primary; Credibly is competitive for ISO product breadth (MCA + LOC + term) but Accord is MCA-only and doesn't fit multi-product ISO strategies. Tie because the structural primary depends on whether the ISO prioritizes A-paper pricing (Credibly), B-paper flexibility (Accord), or product breadth (Greenbox).
- Largest deal size capability ($300K+) — Winner: Credibly. Credibly's $600K MCA cap is structurally the largest in this 3-way. Accord caps at $150K (the lowest in this 3-way). Greenbox MCA caps at $250K. For deals $300K+ Credibly is the only structural option among the three; for $150K – $250K Greenbox is competitive with Credibly on size with stronger ISO commission economics; for sub-$150K all three are size-competitive and the pick depends on paper grade and product breadth.
- Best ISO renewal economics over merchant lifecycle — Winner: Accord Business Funding. Accord pays 100% commission on renewals — unusual in the market and structurally favorable for ISO book economics over the merchant lifecycle. Credibly's ISO commission isn't public so renewal economics aren't transparently comparable. Greenbox publishes up to 19% commission on initial deals but renewal economics are typically reduced (5 – 10% range on renewals depending on tier). For ISOs building long-term merchant books where renewals drive 50%+ of book economics Accord's 100% renewal commission is decisive — over a 3-year merchant lifecycle with 3 – 4 renewals Accord's structural renewal economics often beat Credibly or Greenbox even on initial deal commission comparison.
The honest takeaway
Credibly and Accord Business Funding solve overlapping but distinct problems. The right choice depends on three things you already know about your business: how fast you need the money, how long you've been operating, and whether the capital need is one-time or recurring.
Frequently asked questions
- How does Greenbox fit into the detailed Credibly vs Accord vs Greenbox 3-way picture?
- Greenbox Capital is structurally primary for ISOs wanting the broadest product line under one funder relationship — MCA + invoice factoring + equipment financing + LOC + collateral loans (five products vs Credibly's three working-capital products and Accord's MCA-only). Published ISO commission up to 19% on initial MCA deals (decisively higher than typical 8 – 12% from competing direct funders) plus Priority 1 status for new ISOs plus white-label contracts make Greenbox the structural fit for ISOs building diversified broker books on $50K – $250K deal sizes. Greenbox accepts down to 500 FICO on some programs — more flexible than Credibly's 550+ floor but less flexible than Accord's deal-by-deal B/C-paper acceptance. The $250K MCA cap means Greenbox isn't structural primary for $250K+ deals (Credibly's $600K cap wins). The 2-stip MCA program (only two stipulations required for clean A-paper) is competitive with the fastest A-paper underwriting in the market. As of 2026-06-28 the realistic 3-way ISO submission strategy: route clean A-paper to Credibly first (best published factor for $50K – $400K), B/C-paper deals to Accord first (only consistent funder for stacked / short-TIB / NSF files), multi-product opportunities to Greenbox (factoring + equipment + MCA bundled under one broker relationship with strongest published ISO commission). For ISOs building books on the $50K – $250K MCA sweet spot Greenbox's combination of A-paper 2-stip program + 19% commission + product breadth is often the structural primary; for $250K – $600K MCA Credibly is structural primary on size and factor cost.
- Why is Accord structurally the only consistent option for B/C-paper files in this 3-way?
- Accord's underwriting model is genuinely B/C-paper-specialized — 3-month TIB minimum (the lowest in this 3-way and among the lowest in the broader MCA market), no published revenue floor (flexible deal-by-deal underwriting), explicit B/C-paper acceptance including merchants with recent NSFs, existing first or second positions, or irregular revenue patterns that pattern-match to declines at Credibly and Greenbox. Credibly's 550+ FICO floor and 6+ months TIB excludes files with sub-550 FICO or 3 – 6 months operating history; Greenbox accepts down to 500 FICO on some programs but the 6+ months TIB still gates out the shortest-trading-history files. Accord's pricing reflects the B/C-paper risk (factor 1.35 – 1.55+ typical for genuinely distressed files vs factor 1.11 – 1.25 at Credibly for clean A-paper) but the deal closes when Credibly and Greenbox both decline. The structural implication for ISOs: don't try to submit B/C-paper files to Credibly hoping for an exception — Credibly's underwriting model is built for A/B-paper and the file will decline cleanly. Route B/C-paper files to Accord first (and Forward Financing or Yellowstone Capital as alternatives outside this 3-way) where the structural fit produces actual funded deals. For ISOs building diversified books across paper grades the realistic structural primary by paper grade is: clean A-paper to Credibly, B/B+-paper to Greenbox, B/C-paper to Accord, distressed C/D-paper to Yellowstone or Pearl Capital (outside this 3-way set).
- Which is best for a Florida restaurant doing $25K/mo with 8 months TIB and 580 FICO needing $50K working capital?
- All three could potentially fund this file but with materially different structural outcomes. Credibly: file qualifies (8+ months TIB exceeds 6-month floor, 580 FICO exceeds 550 floor, $25K/mo exceeds $15K/mo floor) — expect factor 1.28 – 1.38 for a $50K MCA (effective APR 45 – 65% on 6 – 9 month payback). Greenbox: file qualifies (8+ months TIB exceeds 6-month floor, 580 FICO exceeds 500 floor on flexible programs, $25K/mo is fine but specific revenue floor depends on program) — expect factor 1.30 – 1.42 with stronger ISO commission economics if routed through a broker, structural similar pricing to Credibly with slightly more flexibility on paper grade. Accord: file easily qualifies (8+ months exceeds 3-month floor, no published revenue floor, FICO floor flexible) — expect factor 1.32 – 1.45 for a $50K MCA reflecting the B-paper risk grade. For this specific file the structural pick depends on factor offers received and the ISO's existing relationship economics: Credibly likely wins on cost for clean B-paper (the merchant pattern-matches to mid-band Credibly underwriting), Greenbox wins if the ISO benefits from the broader product relationship (later restaurant equipment financing, invoice factoring for catering receivables, LOC structure for seasonal capital), Accord wins if the file has hidden issues (recent NSF, existing first position, weak bank statements) that surface during underwriting and cause Credibly or Greenbox to decline. The realistic restaurant playbook for this file: route to Credibly first for cheapest factor on clean B-paper, fallback to Greenbox if Credibly declines for product-breadth or ISO-economics reasons, fallback to Accord if both decline on paper grade. Avoid stacking a second MCA on top of the first deal — restaurants stacking MCAs within the first year of operation is the most common cause of operating-cash-flow collapse in the segment.