The engine is a documented scoring system, not a black box. Each of the six metrics has named inputs, a known scale, and a defined path to improvement. If a deal scores low, you know exactly which lever to pull.
Each metric reads one dimension of the file. Read together, they tell capital sources whether to fund — and if not, exactly what to fix.
An A–F grade on borrower experience, liquidity, and verified track record. This is the first signal every lender reads. A B– sponsor on an A deal still gets declined at the tier-1 desks — the rating tells you which doors are even worth knocking on.
A 0–100 score weighted across sponsor, asset, structure, and market conditions. It answers the only question that matters at the top of the funnel: what are the odds this specific file gets a written term sheet from a real capital source in the next 30 days?
A forecast of how likely the asset reaches stable, lender-accepted cash flow on the projected timeline. Lenders use this to size reserves, set interest-only periods, and decide whether to do the deal at all on value-add and ground-up files.
Models the takeout before you enter. The engine forecasts the odds and timing of refinancing into long-term debt at the projected exit. Lenders care because it's their exit too — a deal with a soft takeout is a deal they price defensively.
The lender directory, filtered. From the engine's understanding of who funds what right now, it returns a ranked list of capital sources whose box this deal fits inside — not who their marketing says they fund, but who they actually closed in the last 90 days.
The ranked, specific changes that move a borderline file into fundable territory before submission. Not generic advice — the exact moves, in order, with the projected grade impact of each. This is what closes the gap between a 78 and an 86.
Submit a scenario and see it scored, structured, and packaged the way capital sources actually underwrite — in minutes.