Funding by industry
Restaurant funding, explained by what lenders actually check
A restaurant file is not judged the way a contractor's file is. Deposits arrive daily instead of per invoice, a large share of revenue lands as card settlements, and the lease is often the single most scrutinised document. This page sets out what that means in practice before you spend a week gathering the wrong paperwork.
Elora is not a lender, bank or broker. We coordinate: we prepare the file and introduce it to appropriate funding sources, who make every credit decision. Nothing here is an offer, a rate quote or a guarantee of approval.
What a funding source looks at first
In revenue-based structures the underwriter is not really asking "is this a good restaurant?" — they are asking "do deposits arrive often enough, and steadily enough, to support a fixed daily or weekly remittance?" That reframes what matters.
- Deposit frequency beats deposit size. A venue banking $40,000 a month across 26 deposit days reads as lower risk than one banking the same $40,000 in four lumps, because the remittance schedule matches the cash rhythm.
- Card volume is read separately from total revenue. Merchant processing statements show what settles through the terminal. A heavily cash venue can be perfectly healthy and still look thin on paper, which is worth knowing before it is mistaken for a decline reason.
- Negative days and NSF activity carry disproportionate weight. Three overdraft days in four months will be raised, even against strong revenue. It is better to explain them in the file than to let them be discovered.
- Existing advances are found, not disclosed away. Daily or weekly debits from another funder are visible in the statements. Stacking is a common reason a file that otherwise fits gets declined.
The documents that actually move a restaurant file
Four items resolve most of the questions above. Gathering these first is the difference between a review that takes days and one that drags for weeks.
| Document | Why it is asked for |
|---|---|
| Business bank statements — last 4 months | The core of the review. Shows deposit rhythm, ending balances, negative days and any existing daily debits. |
| Merchant processing statements — last 3 months | Separates card settlements from total deposits. For venues where most tickets are card, this is what the structure is sized against. |
| The signed lease, including remaining term | A location with eight months left on the lease and no renewal option is a different proposition from the same venue with four years. This is the document most often missing. |
| Photo ID and proof of ownership percentage | Identity and who is authorised to sign. Multi-owner venues stall here more often than anywhere else. |
A common misconception: tax returns are usually not the gate for revenue-based structures. They matter for term loans and for larger amounts, but a request that sizes against deposits is decided mostly on the statements.
Seasonality — the Florida detail that changes the file
A coastal Florida venue can do a large share of its year between January and April. That creates a real, avoidable problem: a four-month statement window landing entirely in the slow season understates the business, and the file gets sized against the worst quarter of the year.
- Say it in the file, not in the appeal. A one-page revenue-by-month summary alongside the statements lets the reviewer see the shape of the year instead of inferring a decline.
- Timing is a lever you control. Requesting in the month after peak season, when the statements carry the strong months, is a different conversation from requesting in September.
- Storm-season interruptions are worth documenting. A closure week shows up as a revenue dip. Left unexplained it reads as decline; explained, it reads as weather.
Which structures tend to fit — and which rarely do
Fit is about how repayment behaves against how the money arrives. That is why the same venue can be a straightforward candidate for one structure and a poor one for another.
| Structure | How it behaves |
|---|---|
| Revenue-based advance | Remittance follows the daily card rhythm, which matches how a venue actually earns. The trade-off is cost and the fact that a slow week still carries a remittance. |
| Equipment financing | For a hood system, walk-in or oven, the equipment secures the transaction, so the review leans on the asset rather than only on deposits. Rarely suitable for payroll or inventory. |
| Business line of credit | Well suited to a seasonal swing because you draw only what you use. Harder to qualify for: expects longer operating history and cleaner banking than an advance does. |
| Term loan | Fixed monthly repayment against variable weekly income. Workable for a stable, established venue; a poor match for one whose revenue swings hard by season. |
We do not publish rates, amounts or terms. Those are set by the funding source for your specific file, and any figure quoted before underwriting would be a guess. How these structures differ, in plain English →
Why restaurant files stall
In our experience preparing files, most delays are not credit decisions. They are gaps that could have been closed before submission.
- The lease is missing or unsigned. The single most frequent hold-up, and the easiest to fix in advance.
- Two bank accounts, one submitted. If takings are split across accounts, statements from one of them show half a business.
- The processing statements are from the wrong entity. Common where the venue changed processors or operates under a DBA that differs from the legal name.
- An existing advance is not mentioned. It will be seen in the statements. Disclosing it early keeps the file with sources that permit it instead of losing a week to a decline.
What happens if you start a review
You answer a short intake, upload documents through a secure portal, and a person — not an automated score — reads the file and tells you what is strong, what is missing and which kinds of funding source are a realistic fit. No upfront fees, and nothing at this stage affects your credit. If we cannot help, we say so.