The specs
CrediblyOnDeck
Product typeMulti-productMulti-product
Amount range$5K – $600K$5K – $400K (term); $6K – $200K (LOC)
Cost (factor / APR)Factor 1.11+ (MCA); APR varies (term)Term APR 27%+; LOC APR 30%+
Speed to fundAs fast as 4 hoursSame-day for approved files
Min time in business6 months12 months
Min monthly revenue$15,000$8,000
Min credit score550+600+
Products
- MCA
- Working capital LOC
- Short-term term loan
- Term loan
- LOC
Verdicts by use case
- Merchant primarily worried about a Confession of Judgment (COJ) being filed against them on default — Winner: OnDeck. OnDeck's primary product is a true term loan (and revolving LOC), not a purchase of future receivables — its standard agreement does not include a Confession of Judgment clause. Credibly's MCA product line historically operated in an industry where COJs were a standard enforcement tool until New York's August 2019 SB 5395 amendment to CPLR 3218 barred New York courts from accepting COJs against out-of-state defendants. Even post-2019 most national MCA originators stripped COJs from contracts or shifted them to Delaware/New Jersey filings, but the structural risk of a COJ-shaped enforcement clause is materially higher in an MCA contract than in an OnDeck term loan. For COJ-risk-averse merchants OnDeck structurally primary on contract risk.
- ISO broker comparing contract risk surface between MCA and term loan products — Winner: OnDeck. An ISO routing to OnDeck hands the merchant a term-loan promissory note plus required commercial finance disclosure (CFDL in NY, SB 1235 in CA, FL HB 1353, GA SB 90, VA SB 1252, UT SB 183, MO SB 1359). An ISO routing to Credibly hands the merchant a Receivables Purchase Agreement that — depending on contract vintage and the merchant's home state — may still include a confession-of-judgment provision, an irrevocable power-of-attorney to file the COJ, and a waiver of jury trial. OnDeck's ISO program entry bar is materially higher (2+ years and $1M+/month MCA volume per public materials), so brokers operating at lower volume route to Credibly more frequently — but the contract-risk surface differential remains. For brokers concerned about FTC Holder Rule scrutiny and state UDAP exposure, OnDeck structurally lower-liability within this 2-way.
- Merchant domiciled in New York — Winner: OnDeck. NY SB 5395 (signed Aug 30 2019) amended CPLR 3218 to prohibit County Clerks from accepting COJs from non-NY-resident defendants. NY-domiciled merchants remain exposable to NY-filed COJs from MCA originators that route through NY governing law — Credibly contract templates have historically used NY governing law. OnDeck term loan does not use COJ architecture regardless of jurisdiction. For NY-domiciled merchants OnDeck structurally primary on COJ exposure within this 2-way.
- Merchant evaluating cross-state COJ enforcement risk — Winner: OnDeck. A COJ entered in NY against a non-NY defendant is unenforceable in NY post-SB 5395 but can still chill domicile-state assets through full-faith-and-credit recognition attempts. OnDeck term loan no-COJ posture removes the entire enforcement category. For merchants in FL/TX/GA/CA OnDeck structurally lower-friction within this 2-way on cross-state enforcement risk.
- Merchant comparing contract due-diligence burden — Winner: OnDeck. Reading an OnDeck term-loan promissory note for COJ exposure typically requires a 10 – 15 minute search of the contract for confession-of-judgment, irrevocable power of attorney, and pre-signed affidavit phrases — typically not present. Reading a Credibly MCA Receivables Purchase Agreement for COJ exposure requires more careful review given the historical industry pattern of including COJ or COJ-adjacent provisions (irrevocable power of attorney, jury-trial waiver, mandatory NY venue clause). For contract-due-diligence-discipline merchants OnDeck structurally lower-friction within this 2-way.
The honest takeaway
Credibly and OnDeck 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
- What is a Confession of Judgment (COJ) and why does it matter in a Credibly vs OnDeck comparison as of 2026-06-30?
- A Confession of Judgment is a contract clause in which the borrower agrees in advance — before any dispute exists — that the lender or funder may file a pre-signed judgment against the borrower in court on default, without notice and without an opportunity for the borrower to defend. COJs were historically a standard MCA-industry enforcement tool until New York's August 2019 SB 5395 amendment to CPLR 3218 barred NY County Clerks from accepting COJs against out-of-state defendants — driven by Bloomberg's November 2018 investigative series and state AG and FTC MCA enforcement actions. In a Credibly (MCA) vs OnDeck (term loan + LOC) comparison: OnDeck's primary products are true loans, not purchases of future receivables, and OnDeck contract templates do not use COJ architecture. Credibly's MCA contract vintage matters — post-2019 templates likely omit COJ provisions for NY-domiciled merchants but may retain COJ or COJ-adjacent provisions (irrevocable power of attorney to file judgment, jury-trial waiver, mandatory NY venue clause) for other merchants depending on deal structure. The realistic merchant playbook: (1) Request the full contract PDF before signing; (2) Search the contract for confession-of-judgment, irrevocable power of attorney, and waive any right to notice phrases; (3) Engage commercial finance counsel for focused review ($500 – $1,500 typical cost); (4) Compare side-by-side against OnDeck term loan which structurally does not include COJ provisions; (5) Negotiate COJ-clause removal as condition of signing — most originators will remove for A-paper deals. For COJ-risk-averse merchants OnDeck structurally lower-friction within this 2-way.
- Does OnDeck use COJs in its term loan or LOC contracts as of 2026-06-30?
- OnDeck does not use Confession of Judgment architecture in its standard term loan or LOC contracts as of 2026-06-30. OnDeck's term loan product is structured as a true commercial loan with promissory note, security agreement (UCC Article 9 blanket lien on receivables and assets), and personal guarantee from owner-guarantor. OnDeck's LOC product is structured as a revolving credit facility with similar architecture. Neither product uses COJ enforcement mechanism. OnDeck enforcement on default follows traditional commercial-loan workout: missed payment triggers late fee per contract, 30/60/90-day delinquency triggers credit-bureau reporting (Experian Business, Equifax Business, D&B), default declaration triggers acceleration of outstanding balance, third-party collection placement, and personal-guarantee enforcement against owner-guarantor. Litigation venue is typically NY or contractually-designated venue (OnDeck is headquartered in NY). OnDeck's no-COJ posture is consistent with its origin as a venture-backed online lender (founded 2006, IPO 2014, acquired by Enova International 2020) operating within bank-comparable compliance framework. By contrast, Credibly MCA contracts may retain COJ or COJ-adjacent provisions depending on contract vintage and merchant domicile state — request the full contract PDF and review for COJ-related phrases before signing.
- If I'm choosing between an OnDeck term loan and a Credibly MCA, what other contract-risk variables should I evaluate beyond COJ?
- Beyond COJ clause, the realistic contract-risk comparison variables between OnDeck term loan and Credibly MCA as of 2026-06-30: (1) Arbitration architecture — both contracts contain arbitration clauses with class-action waivers; OnDeck typically AAA-rules and NY-venue, Credibly typically AAA or JAMS rules and NY-venue. (2) Choice of law — both contracts typically NY governing law; this is materially funder-protective on contract interpretation. (3) Personal guarantee — both contracts require owner-guarantor personal guarantee at funding; default enforces against personal assets. (4) Security interest — OnDeck term loan typically takes UCC Article 9 blanket lien on receivables and assets; Credibly MCA takes UCC Article 9 lien on receivables and proceeds. The blanket lien structurally constrains future secured borrowing capacity (anti-stacking) more than the receivables-only lien. (5) Pre-payment treatment — OnDeck term loan typically offers pre-payment discount (interest forgiveness on accelerated payoff); Credibly MCA does not offer pre-payment discount because the factor-rate cost is fixed regardless of payback timing — earlier payoff increases effective APR. (6) Reporting — OnDeck reports to commercial credit bureaus (builds business credit when paid as agreed, reports delinquency when missed); Credibly MCA typically does not report to commercial credit bureaus. (7) Renewal and stacking — OnDeck offers renewal product with potentially-lower-cost terms after successful first-loan performance; Credibly offers renewal MCA with similar cost. Both contracts typically include anti-stacking provisions prohibiting additional MCA funding without consent. (8) Reconciliation right — Credibly MCA in CA, NY, and other reconciliation-state jurisdictions has formal reconciliation right under state commercial finance disclosure laws; OnDeck term loan does not have equivalent reconciliation framework because monthly payment is fixed regardless of revenue performance. (9) State commercial finance disclosure compliance — both funders subject to CFDL (NY), SB 1235 (CA), FL HB 1353, GA SB 90, VA SB 1252, UT SB 183, MO SB 1359 disclosure obligations. Request explicit disclosure form before signing. (10) Cost — OnDeck term loan APR 27 – 48% over 12 – 24 month term; Credibly MCA factor 1.11 – 1.30+ over typical 6 – 12 month payback. APR-equivalent comparison materially favors OnDeck term loan for most deal structures. For comprehensive contract-risk merchants OnDeck structurally lower-friction within this 2-way.