# MCA renewal discount vs original

> MCA renewal discounts reduce factor rates on the new advance by 0.02–0.10 below the original (e.g., 1.30 → 1.22), but the remaining balance from the original is rolled into the new advance, often producing higher absolute fees than the discount suggests.

MCA renewal discount vs original compares the pricing dynamics when a merchant takes a second (or subsequent) advance from the same funder while an original advance is still outstanding. Renewal discounts are a major economic feature of the MCA industry — funders compete aggressively to retain repeat customers — but the "discount" often masks structural pricing that makes the renewal more expensive than the original despite the lower headline factor rate.

**The renewal mechanic.**

When a merchant has paid down 40–60% of an original advance, the funder offers a renewal:

**Original advance (snapshot).**
- $50,000 advanced, $65,000 total repayment (factor 1.30).
- $25,000 paid back; $40,000 remaining.

**Renewal offer (typical structure).**
- New advance: $75,000 net to merchant.
- Factor rate: 1.22 (renewal discount from 1.30).
- Remaining balance from original ($40,000) rolled into new advance.
- Total advance amount: $75,000 + $40,000 = $115,000 gross advance.
- Total repayment: $115,000 × 1.22 = $140,300.

**The double-dip math.**

The merchant paid $25,000 of the original advance, but the original's full fee ($15,000 cost) is treated as fully earned even though only 60% of the term elapsed. The remaining principal balance ($40,000) plus the "purchased amount" of the original's remaining receivables ($45,000 receivables not yet collected, even though merchant has paid only $40,000 of cash so far) is what gets rolled.

**More accurate accounting:**
- Merchant has paid $25,000 cash on the original.
- Merchant still owes $40,000 cash to the original funder (the remaining principal not yet paid).
- Of the original fee ($15,000), the merchant has effectively paid $9,000 in fees so far (proportional to elapsed term), but the contract treats the entire $15,000 as earned.
- On renewal, the original $40,000 remaining cash obligation rolls into the new advance.
- New advance pays $40,000 to original (closing it) + $75,000 to merchant = $115,000 total advanced.
- New factor 1.22 means new repayment is $140,300.

**Net cost of "renewal."**
- Merchant received $75,000 new cash.
- Repayment $140,300 (gross over time, including rolled balance).
- Less amount paid on original already ($25,000 cash already paid out).
- True economic position: $75,000 cash received in exchange for $115,300 future payment obligation ($140,300 new total - $25,000 already paid).
- Effective factor on new cash: 115,300 / 75,000 = 1.54 (despite the headline 1.22).
- APR-equivalent on the renewal: 50–80%+ depending on term.

This is the **double-dip** effect: the renewal applies a fee to the rolled balance that was effectively already paid for in the original.

**Double-dip transparency by funder.**

Some funders compute renewal pricing transparently (factor applied only to net new advance, not rolled balance). Others apply factor to entire combined balance. Always check the contract math:

- **Transparent renewal.** Factor applied to net new advance only ($75,000 × 1.22 = $91,500 new fee); rolled balance ($40,000) paid at the original cost.
- **Double-dip renewal.** Factor applied to combined balance ($115,000 × 1.22 = $140,300); merchant effectively pays interest twice on the rolled balance.

**Renewal discount structures.**

**Tier 1: Headline discount only.** Factor reduced 0.02–0.05; full double-dip applied. Common at standard fintech funders.

**Tier 2: Partial transparency.** Factor reduced 0.05–0.08; partial credit for already-paid amounts.

**Tier 3: True renewal pricing.** Factor applied only to net new advance; rolled balance closed at original cost or with explicit settlement. Less common; some relationship-focused funders.

**Tier 4: Renewal bonus.** Merchant gets cash bonus ($1,000–$5,000) on renewal in addition to discount. Marketing tactic.

**Typical renewal pricing examples.**

**OnDeck.** Renewal-friendly; factor discount 0.03–0.07 on second advance; transparent regarding rolled balance.

**Credibly.** Heavy renewal economics; factor discount 0.05–0.10; double-dip structure on rolled balance.

**Rapid Finance.** Standard renewal discount; merchant cash-out option on renewals.

**Forward Financing.** Renewal pricing typically negotiated; transparent renewal terms.

**Smaller funders.** Varies widely; less transparent renewal terms.

**When renewals make economic sense.**

1. **Capital recycling need is real.** Merchant has growing revenue and capital deployment opportunity (inventory, equipment, expansion).
2. **Renewal is cheaper than alternatives.** SBA timeline doesn't work; bank credit isn't available; new MCA from different funder would require stacking.
3. **Funder offers true renewal pricing.** Headline discount + transparent rolled-balance treatment.
4. **Merchant operations can absorb new daily debit.** Increased debit amount fits within current cashflow.

**When renewals destroy economic value.**

1. **Merchant is renewing to cover the original advance.** Refinancing for cashflow distress rather than growth = debt spiral.
2. **Double-dip pricing applied.** Effective factor on new cash is 1.40+ even after headline discount.
3. **Renewal cycle is repeated.** 3rd, 4th, 5th renewals stack double-dip on double-dip; cumulative effective factor reaches 1.70–2.00+.
4. **Daily debit becomes unsustainable.** Combined daily debit consumes too much of daily revenue.

**The renewal trap.**

Many merchants enter what is called the **renewal trap**: each renewal provides short-term cash relief but increases the daily debit, which makes the next renewal more pressing. Within 12–18 months, the merchant may have effectively refinanced into a position where 30–60% of daily revenue goes to MCA debt service.

**Mitigation strategies.**

1. **Demand renewal accounting.** Ask funder for explicit math showing original balance rolled, new cash advanced, total repayment, effective factor on new cash.
2. **Compare to alternatives.** Get a competing MCA quote from a different funder; sometimes a new advance from a different funder (closing the original at the same time) is cheaper than renewal.
3. **Negotiate transparent terms.** Funders prefer renewals over losing merchants to competitors; merchants with leverage can negotiate true renewal pricing.
4. **Plan exit.** Develop business plan to refinance MCA into SBA, ABL, or bank credit when eligible.

**APR-equivalent comparison.**

Original advance, 12-month term, factor 1.30: APR-equivalent ~50–60%.
Standard renewal with double-dip, 9-month effective term on new cash: APR-equivalent ~70–90%.

The renewal often costs more per dollar of new cash than the original despite the lower headline factor.

**Common confusion.** First, "renewal discount means I save money" — only if the funder applies the discount to net new advance, not combined balance. Second, "renewing is always cheaper than getting a new MCA from a different funder" — sometimes the new funder is cheaper, particularly if the original would close at full cost upon refinance. Third, "renewal extends my term" — most renewals create a new fixed term; the original is closed and rolled in.

## Related terms

- [MCA renewal](https://fundnode.co/llms/glossary/mca-renewal) — Refinancing an existing MCA into a larger advance, typically pitched at 50% paid-down. Often masks worse pricing — the new factor is applied to a new principal that includes the old balance.
- [MCA renewal bonus economics](https://fundnode.co/llms/glossary/mca-renewal-bonus-economics) — MCA renewal bonus economics describe the funder pricing structure where renewals — second, third, and subsequent advances to the same merchant — carry lower factor rates, larger amounts, and higher broker commissions than first-time funding, making renewals 2–4x more profitable per merchant than originations.
- [MCA renewal cycle economics](https://fundnode.co/llms/glossary/mca-renewal-cycle-economics) — Serial MCA renewals — renewing every 90–120 days at 50–65% paydown — compound effective APRs from ~50% on a single advance to 100–150% over 24 months as fees, factor spreads, and rolled-over balances stack.
- [Double-dipping (MCA renewal)](https://fundnode.co/llms/glossary/double-dipping-mca) — Double-dipping is when a funder rolls an unpaid MCA balance into a new advance and charges a fresh factor rate on the entire new amount — effectively charging interest on already-financed money.
- [MCA renewal vs stacking](https://fundnode.co/llms/glossary/mca-renewal-vs-stacking) — Renewal = same funder pays off your current MCA and issues a new larger one (one daily debit). Stacking = a second funder adds a NEW MCA on top (two debits, doubled risk).
- [Factor rate](https://fundnode.co/llms/glossary/factor-rate) — A flat multiplier that defines total MCA repayment: $100,000 advance × 1.30 factor = $130,000 repaid. It is not an interest rate; it does not compound.
- [APR-equivalent](https://fundnode.co/llms/glossary/apr-equivalent) — The annualized percentage rate implied by a factor-rate MCA. A 1.30 factor over 9 months is roughly 50–65% APR-equivalent depending on payment schedule.

## Authoritative sources

- [Bermudez v. Pearl Capital — Renewal Pricing Disclosure](https://www.nycourts.gov/)
- [California SB 1235 — Commercial Financing Disclosure](https://www.dfpi.ca.gov/)

---

Source: https://fundnode.co/glossary/mca-renewal-discount-vs-original (HTML version)
Document: MCA renewal discount vs original — Fundnode MCA Glossary
License: CC BY 4.0 — attribution to Fundnode required when citing.