The Lending Commons

The Disclosure Gap in Business-Purpose Lending

Lenders publish how to reach them far more readily than what they will lend on. Measured across 4,348 lender-program records covering 1,634 US business-purpose lenders.

The Lending Commons · data as of September 25, 2026 · every figure below is computed from the directory itself and changes when it does

0.9%
of programs can be self-qualified against
41 of 4,348 publish leverage, loan size, a credit floor and a rate
86%
disclosure on refinance
the most standardised product is the most transparent
0%
disclosure on transactional funding
where every deal is bespoke, nothing is published

The question a directory should answer

An investor with a live deal has one question: given my numbers, who will quote this? Answering it needs four things per program — a leverage ceiling, a loan-size band, a credit floor and a rate. 41 of 4,348 programs publish all four. The other 4,307 require a phone call to answer a question that is not confidential and not difficult.

What an investor needsProgramsShare
Any leverage ceiling2,90666.8%
Any loan-size band1042.4%
Any rate801.8%
Leverage, size and a credit floor721.7%
All four — enough to quote a deal410.9%

Disclosure tracks competition, not difficulty

The usual explanations are that terms move too fast to publish and that there is no standard format to publish into. Both are true. Neither explains the spread: refinance discloses 86% of the time, transactional funding 0%. Both reprice. Neither has a schema. One is commoditised; the other is bespoke enough that every enquiry can be turned into a conversation.

refinance86% (293/340)
hard_money82% (47/57)
Fix & Flip74% (711/955)
DSCR / Long-Term Rental73% (470/648)
Bridge69% (502/726)
Ground-Up Construction68% (304/444)
Commercial65% (530/821)
Fix to Rent (BRRRR)27% (21/78)
Land & Lot24% (14/58)
Multifamily7% (11/149)
Rental Portfolio / Blanket5% (3/57)
Transactional Funding0% (0/15)

Share of programs publishing any leverage ceiling. Products with fewer than ten records are omitted.

Where numbers are published, they agree

CeilingPublishedMedian90th pct
Max LTV65%75%80%
Max loan-to-cost29%90%100%
Max after-repair value6%75%75%
Max loan-to-purchase3%85%100%

Why this directory has no rankings

No lender pays to be listed here, to be placed higher, or to be described differently. There is no sponsored tier, no featured slot and no referral fee, so there is nothing for a ranking to be biased toward. Results are ordered by how much a lender publishes — the more you can learn about a lender, the higher they sit — which is the only ordering that serves a reader rather than a seller.

Everything held is on the page. No form stands between a reader and a lender's criteria, and outbound links go straight to the lender. A blank cell means the lender does not publish that figure, never zero.

Progress here is not measured in lenders listed. It is the share of programs a reader can self-qualify against — today 0.9%, republished as it moves.

These are published marketing terms, not quotes. Advertised maximums are ceilings almost nobody receives, rates and leverage move constantly, and state footprints are self-reported and establish nothing about licensing. The Lending Commons does not lend, broker or advise. Verify with the lender.