The specs
CrediblyBluevine
Product typeMulti-productLOC
Amount range$5K – $600K$10K – $250K
Cost (factor / APR)Factor 1.11+ (MCA); APR varies (term)APR 6.2% – 27% (LOC)
Speed to fundAs fast as 4 hours1 – 3 business days
Min time in business6 months12 months
Min monthly revenue$15,000$10,000
Min credit score550+625+
Products
- MCA
- Working capital LOC
- Short-term term loan
- Line of credit
- Invoice factoring
Verdicts by use case
- Security guard company with B-paper owner credit (FICO 550 – 624) needing payroll-bridge capital — Winner: Credibly. Security guard companies with B-paper owner credit (FICO 550 – 624) qualify cleanly at Credibly (550+ FICO floor) but face Bluevine's 625+ FICO floor as structural decline. Credibly accepts B-paper security guard files at MCA factor 1.22 – 1.36 for weekly/bi-weekly payroll-bridge capital (security guard labor pay cycle is typically weekly while commercial-account receivables run Net 30 – 60), new-contract uniform/equipment deployment, and licensing/training compliance capital. For B-paper security guard files Credibly structurally primary as of 2026-06-30.
- Established security guard company with A-paper credit needing revolving LOC for commercial-contract receivables — Winner: Bluevine. Established security guard companies with A-paper credit (625+ FICO, 12+ months TIB, $10K+/mo revenue) needing revolving line of credit for commercial-contract receivables timing (typical Net 30 – 60 commercial payment terms against weekly/bi-weekly payroll obligation creating chronic working capital gap), workers comp insurance reserve cycling, and uniform/equipment cycling qualify for Bluevine LOC at APR 14 – 22% — materially cheaper than Credibly MCA at factor 1.18 – 1.36. For A-paper security guard working capital Bluevine structurally primary on cost.
- Payroll-receivables gap structure — invoice factoring vs MCA vs LOC — Winner: Tie. Security guard companies have structurally favorable invoice factoring alternative (Triumph Business Capital, eCapital, altLINE, Riviera Finance, RTS Financial) given clean commercial-account receivables profile — typical advance 80 – 90% of invoice at 1 – 3% fee per 30 days, materially cheaper than both Credibly MCA and often cheaper than Bluevine LOC depending on receivables turnover. Tie because realistic recommendation routes payroll-receivables gap to invoice factoring as structural primary; Credibly and Bluevine secondary for working capital not addressable through factoring. For commercial-account-heavy security guard operations invoice factoring structurally primary over both lenders in this comparison.
- Capital scale for new-contract mobilization (large commercial account ramp-up) — Winner: Credibly. Security guard new-contract mobilization for large commercial accounts (multi-site commercial property, healthcare campus, manufacturing facility, distribution center) typically requires capital scale of $50K – $300K for guard hiring, training, licensing, uniform/equipment deployment, and 30 – 60 day payroll bridge before first commercial receivables collection. Credibly's $5K – $600K range and lump-sum MCA structure accommodate new-contract mobilization. Bluevine LOC revolving structure works but $250K cap materially smaller for major contract mobilization. For security guard major new-contract mobilization capital Credibly primary on capital scale within this 2-way; invoice factoring often optimal hybrid (Credibly for initial mobilization, factoring for ongoing receivables advance).
- Speed for emergency contract acceptance or insurance pre-pay deadline — Winner: Credibly. Security guard companies face capital pressure on emergency contract acceptance windows (commercial account requires immediate guard deployment within 24 – 72 hours for security incident response) and workers comp insurance premium pre-pay deadlines (elevated for security guard vertical, often $30K – $150K/yr). Credibly's 4-hour funding beats Bluevine's 1 – 3 business day funding for same-day emergency deployment capital. For security guard emergency capital Credibly structurally primary on speed.
The honest takeaway
Credibly and Bluevine 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 do Credibly and Bluevine underwrite security guard companies as of 2026-06-30?
- Credibly and Bluevine underwrite security guard companies with materially different posture as of 2026-06-30 — neither lender has security-guard-specific underwriting product. Both lenders evaluate security guard companies against structural payroll-receivables timing gap (weekly/bi-weekly guard payroll vs Net 30 – 60 commercial receivables creates chronic working capital pressure), elevated workers comp insurance burden, and licensing/training compliance burden. Credibly accepts security guard companies at 550+ FICO floor, $15K/mo revenue floor, and 6+ months TIB with MCA and term loan products at $5K – $600K capital scale. Bluevine accepts security guard companies at 625+ FICO floor, $10K/mo revenue floor, and 12+ months TIB with revolving LOC at $10K – $250K capital scale and materially cheaper APR (14 – 22% vs Credibly factor 1.18 – 1.36). The realistic security guard Credibly vs Bluevine framework: (1) Invoice factoring (Triumph Business Capital, eCapital, altLINE, Riviera Finance, RTS Financial) for commercial-account receivables advance — typically primary capital structure for security guard payroll-receivables gap, materially cheaper than MCA and often cheaper than LOC; (2) Workers comp pay-as-you-go program (ADP TotalSource, Paychex, Insureon) for elevated workers comp burden; (3) Insurance premium financing (IPFS Corp, Premium Funding, AFCO) for commercial general liability premium pre-pay at 10 – 13% APR; (4) Payroll financing programs (some payroll providers offer integrated payroll financing); (5) B-paper security guard files (FICO 550 – 624) route to Credibly structurally — below Bluevine's 625+ floor; (6) A-paper security guard files (625+ FICO) needing revolving working capital route to Bluevine LOC for cost optimization, or invoice factoring for receivables-specific advance; (7) Speed-emergency files route to Credibly for 4-hour funding. Security guard industry-specific considerations: weekly/bi-weekly payroll cycle vs Net 30 – 60 commercial receivables creates chronic 30 – 75 day working capital gap; workers comp insurance burden (elevated, often 8 – 18% of payroll for armed guard, 5 – 12% unarmed); commercial general liability insurance burden; state licensing requirements (varies by state, most require company license + individual guard licensing); training compliance burden (initial training + ongoing CE requirements); armed vs unarmed guard pay differential; commercial-account contract terms (multi-year contracts with annual rate escalators typical); subcontractor-network economics for surge capacity; ASIS (American Society for Industrial Security) and NASCO (National Association of Security Companies) membership for industry benchmarking and certification programs.
- What capital structure makes sense for an established security guard company doing $200K/mo revenue with 700 FICO owner credit needing $150K for new healthcare-campus contract mobilization (50 new guards)?
- Invoice factoring, Bluevine LOC, and Credibly are structurally primary for this established security guard major new-contract mobilization as of 2026-06-30. The realistic established security guard new-contract mobilization playbook: (1) Route to Credibly for upfront mobilization capital (guard hiring, training, licensing, uniform/equipment deployment) — file qualifies cleanly for Credibly. Expected Credibly MCA offer: $100K – $200K at factor 1.18 – 1.30. Speed beneficial for 30 – 60 day mobilization deadline. (2) Route ongoing payroll-receivables gap to invoice factoring as structural primary — Triumph Business Capital, eCapital, altLINE, Riviera Finance offer 80 – 90% invoice advance at 1 – 3% fee per 30 days. Materially cheaper than MCA for ongoing receivables advance. (3) Route remaining working capital to Bluevine LOC — file qualifies cleanly for Bluevine (700 FICO, $200K/mo, 3+ years TIB). Expected Bluevine offer: $150K – $200K LOC at APR 14 – 20%. Revolving structure aligned with operating capital flexibility. Materially cheaper than Credibly MCA for ongoing draw. (4) Hybrid structure typical — Credibly for initial mobilization lump-sum, factoring for ongoing receivables advance, Bluevine LOC for operating capital flexibility. (5) Long-term capital strategy — build invoice factoring relationship as primary receivables-advance infrastructure; build Bluevine LOC as primary revolving working capital; build commercial-account portfolio for multi-year contract revenue predictability; pursue workers comp pay-as-you-go program; build certified-training pipeline (ASIS CPP, PSP certifications) for premium-pricing differentiation; pursue armed-guard certification capability for higher per-hour billing.
- Which is right for a 1-year security guard company doing $25K/mo revenue with 580 FICO owner credit needing $20K for payroll-bridge before commercial-account receivables collection?
- Credibly and invoice factoring are structurally primary for this file as of 2026-06-30 because 580 FICO falls below Bluevine's 625 floor — Bluevine declines structurally. The realistic small security guard payroll-bridge playbook: (1) Route to invoice factoring as structural primary — Triumph Business Capital, eCapital, altLINE, Riviera Finance, RTS Financial offer 80 – 90% invoice advance at 1 – 3% fee per 30 days. Factoring underwriting typically focuses on commercial-account creditworthiness rather than owner FICO, materially expanding qualification box for sub-Bluevine-floor security guard files. Materially cheaper than MCA. (2) Route remaining capital not addressable through factoring to Credibly — file qualifies for Credibly's box (580 FICO above 550 floor, 12+ months TIB, $25K/mo above $15K floor). Expected Credibly MCA offer: $15K – $30K at factor 1.26 – 1.36. (3) Workers comp pay-as-you-go program critical — ADP TotalSource, Paychex, Insureon offer pay-as-you-go workers comp that aligns insurance burden with payroll cycle. Materially reduces annual workers comp pre-pay capital need. (4) Commercial-account contract terms negotiation — negotiate Net 15 – 30 payment terms where possible (vs typical Net 30 – 60) to materially reduce payroll-receivables gap. Some commercial accounts will accept earlier payment for 1 – 2% discount. (5) Long-term capital strategy — plan FICO migration to 625+ for Bluevine LOC graduation; build invoice factoring as primary receivables-advance infrastructure; build commercial-account portfolio with shorter payment terms where possible; build workers comp pay-as-you-go program; pursue state licensing and certified-training pipeline (ASIS CPP, PSP) for premium-pricing differentiation.