LenderAnalyzer reads a merchant's bank statements and surfaces the fixed daily and weekly ACH debits that mean an advance is already collecting, so an MCA funder, revenue-based financing provider or cash-flow lender sees every existing position before it commits capital. Self-serve from $99 a month, no platform contract.
Upload a document to extract
Drop files here or click to upload
Up to 50 files
Uploading...
Upload a bank statement and watch the analysis run live, free, no signup required.
Stacking is the fastest way an MCA or cash-flow book loses money, and it is almost always visible in the bank statements the funder already has. A stacked merchant is one already carrying one or more advances, each collecting a fixed amount every business day or every week under an ACH descriptor tied to the funder that made it. On paper the new deal looks affordable. In the account it is not, because the combined holdback from every active position is drawing on the same deposits, and a merchant who is already remitting to two funders cannot absorb a third without missing someone. LenderAnalyzer reads three to six months of statements and pulls out the recurring debits automatically: it groups the fixed daily and weekly outflows, surfaces the ones whose amount and cadence match an advance rather than an ordinary bill, and shows the descriptor, the amount and the frequency so an underwriter can confirm the position. It computes true revenue net of transfers and owner deposits, average daily balance, NSF and negative-day counts, and total existing debt service, so the affordability question is answered against real collected revenue rather than gross deposits. Every flag links back to the transactions behind it, so a credit committee can see the basis for the call and a second underwriter can reproduce it. Scope, honestly stated: LenderAnalyzer flags and computes, it does not decide. It is not an automated decisioning engine, a syndication ledger or a servicing platform, and it does not maintain a shared industry database of open positions. It reads the statements you collect and returns the positions, the revenue and the debt load, computed and traceable. The advance rate, the factor and the approval stay with your policy.
Stacking detection is a pattern-recognition problem in the transaction data, not a credit judgment. The judgment comes after: whether the combined load leaves room for your position. Getting the detection right first is what makes the judgment sound.
An advance collects the same way every time: a fixed amount, usually identical to the cent, pulled every business day or every week by ACH under a descriptor that names the funder or a generic processing entity. That regularity is what separates it from an ordinary bill, which varies, and from payroll, which lands on a schedule but flows out in different amounts. The work is grouping the recurring outflows, isolating the ones with advance-like cadence and amounts, and reading the descriptor. Done by eye across four months and several accounts it is slow and easy to miss. Done by extracting and grouping every recurring debit, it is fast and repeatable.
One advance a merchant is servicing comfortably is not the problem. The problem is what your position does on top of it. When two or three advances stack, the combined daily remittance can consume a large share of collections, and a business that looked like it cleared its obligations with room to spare no longer does. This is why the number that matters is total existing debt service measured against true revenue, not the presence or absence of a single competitor. A merchant with one small, nearly paid-off position may be a better risk than one with none but thin, volatile deposits.
Funders who catch stacking reliably do it by matching recurring debits against a list of known funder ACH descriptors, and by keeping that list current as new funders enter the market. The descriptor is not always obvious, because collections often run through a processor rather than the funder's own name, so the tell is the combination: a fixed amount, a daily or weekly cadence, and a descriptor that recurs across the merchant's file. Surfacing every recurring debit and letting the underwriter tag the ones that are advances, rather than hoping to spot them in a scroll, is what turns detection from luck into process.
A flagged debit is a lead, not a verdict. Some are advances that were paid off last month and stopped, some are equipment leases or software subscriptions that happen to look regular, and some are exactly what they appear to be. The point of detection is to put every candidate in front of the underwriter with its amount, cadence and descriptor, so the decision is made on confirmed positions rather than on a gut read of the scroll. Sometimes the finding kills the deal. Sometimes it reshapes it, and a consolidation that refinances two stacked advances is the strongest deal in the pipeline.
What each approach actually catches, how long it takes per file, and what it costs. Last updated July 2026.
| Approach | What it catches | Time per file | Typical cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| LenderAnalyzer This page | Recurring daily and weekly ACH debits grouped and surfaced with descriptor, amount and cadence, plus true revenue, ADB, NSF and total existing debt service, all traceable | Minutes, self-serve | Transparent, $99 to $399/mo |
| Manual statement review | Whatever the underwriter spots scrolling several months across multiple accounts, which is thorough on a slow day and leaky on a full pipeline | Thirty minutes to two hours | Free, but inconsistent and slow |
| Credit bureau data only | Reported term debt, but most merchant cash advances are structured as a sale of future receivables and never appear on a bureau file, so stacking stays invisible | Instant | Low, and it misses the exact risk you are checking for |
| Fraud-first forensic tool | Document tampering and identity fraud, which is a different problem; strong on forged statements, not built to compute affordability against stacked positions | Minutes | Quote-based, often per document |
Comparison compiled by LenderAnalyzer from public vendor materials, June 2026. Competitor names are trademarks of their respective owners; figures may change, so verify current details with each vendor.
Computed deterministically from every extracted transaction, every figure traceable to its source line.
Computed across the full statement period, carried forward day by day.
Deposits vs withdrawals and net flow, broken down month by month.
Every insufficient-funds and overdraft incident counted, with fees totaled.
Recurring deposits grouped into income streams with estimated monthly amounts.
Debits to other lenders and funders detected and totaled per month.
Days below zero across the period, a direct stress signal.
The biggest credits with dates and sources, concentration flagged.
Automatic red and yellow flags your analysts can review in seconds.
Drop in PDFs, scans or photos, one statement or a multi-month package, from any bank.
Every transaction is extracted, then cash flow, balances, income streams, NSF activity and debt payments are computed.
Read the underwriting snapshot, download the Excel report, or pull structured JSON into your LOS via API.
28 lending document types extracted out of the box, build the complete picture of an applicant's financial situation.
Common questions from lending and credit teams.
Loan stacking is when a business takes on a new loan or merchant cash advance while one or more existing advances are still collecting. Each position draws a fixed amount from the same deposits, usually daily or weekly, so the combined remittance can exceed what the business's cash flow supports. For a funder it is a primary source of loss, because a deal that looks affordable on its own becomes unaffordable once the existing positions are counted. Detecting it means finding every active advance before funding.
Look for fixed debits arriving daily or weekly, usually in identical amounts, under an ACH descriptor that names a funder or a generic processing entity. The regularity is the tell: an advance collects the same amount on the same cadence, unlike an ordinary bill that varies. Software speeds this up by extracting every recurring debit across three to six months, grouping the ones with advance-like cadence, and surfacing the descriptor and amount so the underwriter can confirm the position rather than hunt for it.
Yes, and many do, which is exactly why detection matters. Nothing stops a merchant from taking a second or third advance while the first is still collecting, and some funders even offer them. The risk sits with each new funder, because every additional daily remittance draws on the same deposits. When the combined holdback climbs too high, the business misses a payment on one position or all of them, and the last funder in is often the one left short.
Because affordability is cumulative. A single advance a merchant services comfortably tells you nothing about whether it can service yours on top. Multiple advances stacked on the same cash flow raise the combined daily remittance until it consumes a large share of collections, and a business that looked healthy on gross deposits can no longer cover its obligations. Undetected stacking is why deals that priced as low risk default, so measuring total existing debt service against true revenue is the control that protects the position.
By matching the recurring debits in a merchant's statements against a list of known funder ACH descriptors and confirming the cadence and amount. Collections often run through a processor rather than the funder's own name, so the reliable signal is the pattern: a fixed amount pulled daily or weekly under a descriptor that recurs across the file. Keeping the descriptor list current as new funders enter the market is part of the job, because a position you do not recognize is a position you will not flag.
No. LenderAnalyzer surfaces the positions and computes the numbers; the decision is yours. It groups the recurring debits, flags the ones that look like advances with their descriptor, amount and cadence, and reports true revenue, average daily balance, NSF activity and total existing debt service, all traceable to the transactions. Your team confirms which flags are live advances and applies your own affordability and pricing rules. It is an analysis layer, not a decisioning engine or a servicing platform.
Three to six months is standard, and more is better for catching positions that started partway through the period or paused. A single month can hide an advance that funded late or a merchant who timed the application around a gap in collections. Reading four to six months shows whether a fixed debit is genuinely recurring, whether a position was recently paid off, and how the combined remittance has trended, which is the context an affordability decision actually needs.
Analyze your first statements free, plans from $99/month, 50% off billed annually.
From the same family of tools
