Ryan Mitchell, CAIA

The real challenges MCA will face in 2026 ⚠️ 2026 is shaping up to be a structural year for the MCA industry—not just another growth cycle. Three pressures will define who scales and who stalls: 1) Faster money, tighter margins Decision speed will matter more than ever. As spreads tighten, capital needs to turn faster, and delays in cash visibility, renewals, and exposure will directly reduce yield. Teams that still wait days to understand yesterday’s cash movement will fall behind. 2) Behavioral risk, not just credit risk Static underwriting models won’t be enough. The industry is moving from score-based decisions to behavior-based signals: how merchants actually move money, not just how they looked at onboarding. 3) Operational truth over polished reports In 2026, leadership will be tested less by how clean reports look—and more by how early exceptions surface. When bank activity, CRM, and accounting don’t align in real time, the operation runs on interpretation instead of truth. This is where most MCA teams feel the friction today: • Late visibility into cash movement • Renewals priced with partial context • Manual reconciliations slowing decisions • Portfolio risk discovered after it materializes • Leadership managing through lag instead of signal At NISO, we solve this at the infrastructure level. We connect bank → CRM → underwriting → accounting so data moves once, stays true everywhere, and turns into operational signals your team can actually act on—daily, not monthly. The MCA shops that will win in 2026 won’t just fund more deals. They’ll operate with clarity, speed, and unified control ✅ If you’d like, I can give you a quick look at how that infrastructure works in practice: https://lnkd.in/dAR9w_XC #MerchantCashAdvance #MCAIndustry #AlternativeLending #BusinessLending #SmallBusinessFunding #CommercialFinance

10

1 Comment

Direct indexing and portfolio personalization without a risk model is like nutrition without a label — you don’t really know what you’re serving clients. As a portfolio manager, I see risk models as essential tools for advisors (but are still underutilized). They don’t add noise — they create clarity. By showing where portfolios are truly exposed, they give you the confidence to move beyond generic models and deliver direct indexing and personalized portfolios at scale (all while balancing out the tax implications). When you understand the factors driving risk — equities vs. bonds, sectors, rates — rebalancing isn’t just maintenance. It’s a chance to guide clients with intention, align portfolios with their goals, and prove the value of personalization. 👉 Risk models aren’t just about measuring risk — they unlock the strategies that set your practice apart.

36

6 Comments

SEC directs companies to pay dividends older than 12 years, clarifies Finance Act 2020 provisions The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has issued a directive instructing all public companies and Registrars to stop treating dividends older than 12 years as “statute-barred.” A claim is “statute-barred” when a legal action to enforce it cannot be taken because the deadline set by the statute of limitations has passed. SEC emphasized that dividends declared before the enactment of the Finance Act 2020 must be handled in accordance with existing legal provisions, ensuring shareholders retain their rights to claim them. In a statement on Tuesday, the regulatory body reaffirmed the importance of compliance with Section 60 of the Finance Act 2020, which outlines the treatment of unclaimed dividends. According to the Act, dividends that remain unclaimed for more than six years must be transferred to the Unclaimed Funds Trust Fund (UFTF), where they are held until rightful shareholders come forward to claim them. Clarification on Dividend Eligibility SEC Director-General Emomotimi Agama emphasized the significance of this directive, noting that numerous companies and Registrars have incorrectly categorized dividends older than 12 years as statute-barred. This misinterpretation has led to some shareholders being denied their rightful payments. Agama explained that shareholders may still claim dividends issued up to 12 years prior to December 31, 2020, contrary to the incorrect assumptions held by some entities. “In response to ongoing inquiries, the Commission wishes to clarify the correct interpretation and handling of unclaimed dividends,” Agama stated. He stressed that the Finance Act mandates that unclaimed dividends exceeding six years must be moved to the UFTF, ensuring they remain accessible for legitimate claims at any time in the future. Enforcement and Compliance Measures While the UFTF is not yet fully operational, the SEC has mandated that all affected companies and Registrars must honor valid dividend claims dating back to December 31, 2020. The Commission expects immediate compliance with this directive, ensuring shareholders are not deprived of their entitlements due to incorrect interpretations of the law. Furthermore, the SEC has instructed companies and Registrars to submit regular reports detailing their adherence to this directive, in accordance with the Commission’s regulatory requirements. By enforcing these measures, the SEC aims to uphold investor rights, foster greater transparency, and maintain trust within Nigeria’s capital market. What you should know This directive serves as a safeguard for shareholders, reinforcing their rights to claim dividends that would otherwise have been categorized as unclaimable. Investors are encouraged to review their financial records and engage with companies or Registrars if they believe they are entitled to dividends previously deemed statute-barred.

EFFECTS OF LONG-TERM GROWTH TRENDS ON U.S. FISCAL DEBT-TO-GDP RATIO The CBO (Congressional Budget Office) is a frequently cited source in the U.S. when new laws are debated. Interestingly, CBO typically bases its baseline projection on an unchanged long-term productivity growth rate, regardless of specific legislative changes, assuming an economic real growth rate of around 1.8% annually. However, the Trump administration is actively pursuing a series of ambitious, growth-promoting initiatives that could significantly elevate the long-term growth trend. Tax relief for businesses and workforce participation, streamlining complex regulations, and massive investments in AI, robotics, and energy projects—supported by simple legislation, rapid approvals, and immediate tax write-offs—could spark an acceleration wave and substantially alter the long-term growth trajectory. Add to this the attraction of foreign investors building new factories and millionaires relocating to the U.S. via "golden visas," and we might be on the brink of a growth boom. This could potentially reduce the debt-to-GDP burden even without major spending cuts. Below are three scenarios from the CBO model, where they have actually calculated this. Even a very moderate increase in the annual growth trend by 0.5 percentage points per year effectively addresses the issue. Sources: CBO and Deutsche Bank.

26

2 Comments

Jobs = Weak Week 📉 August Payrolls: +22K (vs. +75K consensus) June Payrolls: Revised down (from growth → contraction) Underemployment: 8.1% (vs. 7.9% prior) Initial Jobless Claims: 237K (vs. 229K prior) Market Reaction: September Rate Cut: ✅ 100% priced in Equities: 🚀 Record highs High Yield: 🔒 Tight (<6.75%) #Jobs #Markets #HighYield #Macro #Investing

4

Advisors aren't avoiding wholesalers. They're avoiding bad meetings. Everyone complains about how hard it is to get in front of advisors these days. But look at what's actually happening in distribution. Asset managers are cutting external wholesaler headcount while each remaining wholesaler covers more advisors. The usual explanation is cost pressure and efficiency. But there's something else going on. Advisors have always had limited time. What's changed is they now have other ways to learn about managers and strategies that don't require blocking off an hour. A well-produced webinar gets them the information they need while they're eating lunch. Good content on a manager's website lets them do research at 10pm when they're catching up. A targeted email series builds familiarity before any conversation happens. The relationship isn't going away. What it's for is changing. When a wholesaler finally gets that meeting, the advisor already knows the story. They've seen the performance, understand the philosophy, maybe even watched the PM explain the strategy. The meeting can be a conversation instead of a pitch. That's why firms are pouring resources into digital strategy, content, and communications. They've figured out that showing up prepared to an advisor who's already engaged beats showing up cold to someone who's just being polite. The meeting was never the hard part. Getting advisors to care before the meeting was. Nice story Daniel Gil, Ignites. Link to article in comments.

9

1 Comment

Employment for both ISM Manufacturing (blue) and Services (orange) has been improving over past several months … more notable recovery for former 

15

2 Comments

L&B White Paper: The Executive Compensation Conundrum - How Much is Too Much? Link to white paper: https://lnkd.in/e4rpX4BD 15 REIT CEOs have consistently underperformed their proxy peers, yet their executive compensation was rarely adjusted Executives should be subject to the same review standards as other employees and removed for underperformance Shareholders can best express their frustration by voting against the compensation committee members and say on pay

30

5 Comments

What's In A Name? Investment managers tend to use the term "Asset Based Finance" and "Asset Based Lending" interchangeably. There is a big distinction between the ABF and ABL. ABF is heavily weighted toward financial assets as the collateral pool: BNPL receivables, student loans, credit card loans, litigation finance, life settlements. These are claims on future cash flows from consumers and counterparties, and the credit risk is real. ABF also captures corporate 'paper assets" such Amazon Aggregator loans, asset-based facilities (loans on loans) and trade finance receivables. Consumer finance has a huge TAM, which many of the ABF managers focus on, including sub-prime auto loans that generate similar returns and losses to many of the ABF sub-sectors. Most consumer loans are non-prime borrowers, those with lower FICO scores that experience high delinquency rates since banks tend to focus on Prime borrowers. ABF scales well, so it is ideal for those seeking to invest large sums of capital. Consumer delinquency rates are trending higher, the highest level since 2017 (see chart below). Asset Based Lending, the way Marathon practices it, is built on HALO: Hard Assets, Low Obsolescence. Aircraft, engines, maritime assets, rail assets and ground logistics, equipment, commercial real estate, residential home loans, equipment and machinery. Holding a perfected interest in the collateral pool that is bankruptcy remote allowing the ABL manager to truly protect principal is a core element of ABL. Physical assets that maintain residual value not only hold value in a re-sale secondary market but are also mission critical serving an essential economic function. Comparison: For instance, the Airbus A320-neo is a mission critical asset for a commercial airline. In the rare case of bankruptcy, the airline is likely to reaffirm its lease, so it can continue to operate. The Airbus A320-neo has a 5+ year order back-log with significant demand; the airline is required to make monthly lease payments, and under Section 1110 of the Bankruptcy Code, the aircraft can be repossessed if payment remains outstanding for 60 days. Compare the aircraft example to an unsecured consumer loan that has no collateral, no repossession rights, with recovery rates that collapse when consumer (borrower) decides not to pay back the loan. My strong preference is focusing on mission-critical ABL, which I believe carries superior risk-reward, and that's why Marathon Asset Management favors ABL over ABF. Study the realized loss rates on the underlying loans, and I think that you will agree. The risk is not only superior, so is the loss-adjusted returns and the multiple of invested capital (MOIC) is generally higher for HALO. Do you agree?

117

7 Comments

Linqto, the private-market investment platform that allowed individual investors to buy fractional or pooled interests in pre-IPO private company shares, filed their disclosure statement and bankruptcy plan last night. The Plan creates two primary distribution vehicles which customers may choose from: A. Liquidating Trust which will hold most Platform Securities by issuing Liquidating Trust Interests to customers representing their proportional share. Customers will be able to sell shares over time, subject to transfer restrictions. Investors may request liquidity (a sale), subject to market and legal limits. B. Closed-End Fund (CEF). Customers may elect (or be deemed to elect, in some cases) to convert certain trust interests into listed CEF shares, a publicly listed vehicle. The CEF will hold specific Platform Securities designated for this purpose. In addition, the Plan proposes to create a Wind-Down Trust. This trust will handle final administration of the estates, pursue retained litigation claims (e.g., potential claims against insiders or third parties). Holds certain remaining assets (e.g., “Reserved Securities,” certain cash pools). It will also pay creditors such as trade creditors, governmental claims, rescission claims, and customer deficiency claims. Customers' interests in private-company shares are valued as of Nov. 30, 2025, to standardize: -Customer deficiency claims, -Rescission claims, and -Voting rights. The Plan cancels all existing equity interests in Linqto entities. Authorizes restructuring transactions to implement the trusts and CEF. Grants the Liquidating Trustee and Wind-Down Trustee broad authority to carry out sales, distributions, and litigation. The Plan becomes effective only when: Regulatory approvals are satisfied, The trusts and CEF are ready for launch, Court orders are final, and Required funding is available. There are still alot of regulatory approvals and mechanics to be worked out but: the plan is designed to: -Transfer customer-related assets into a Liquidating Trust and/or a public Closed-End Fund -Create a Wind-Down Trust to pursue litigation and distribute cash recoveries -Resolve all customer, creditor, and rescission claims under a global settlement -Liquidate or distribute assets over time to restore as much customer value as possible. Our fund, Strategic Liquidity Fund Acquisitions, SLFAQ, LLC owns numerous Linqto claims and is always ready to speak with customers about liquidity alternatives. #Linqto #bankruptcy #privateshares #DisclosureStatement #PlanOfReorganization

22

2 Comments

92% of financial advisors charge based on assets under management. The median is about 1% on portfolios up to $1 million, declining for larger balances. Sounds straightforward. It isn't. The fee schedule doesn't tell you about commissions from product providers. Insurance companies. Fund managers. Structured products. In developed markets, most advisers are paid by clients. In emerging markets, commissions dominate. And they're huge. A structured product might pay 2% in the UK but 5-7% elsewhere. The problem is obvious. Commissions push advisers toward products that pay well, not products that serve you best. Think this only happens at shady firms? Vanguard — the company built on investor-first principles — paid $19.5 million to settle SEC charges. Their "salaried" advisors were getting bonuses to steer clients toward certain products. If Vanguard can't keep its house clean, what does that say about the rest? Questions to ask any adviser: 1. Do you receive commissions or referral fees? 2. Is your AUM fee tiered? 3. Are there hidden costs like transaction or platform fees? 4. Are you legally a fiduciary? Choosing an independent adviser paid exclusively by you helps. It doesn't eliminate conflicts entirely. Link to Playbook in comments. (Opinions are my own. Not investment advice. Do your own research.) PS. If you enjoyed reading it, ♻️ share this with your network and 🔔 follow my profile.

2

3 Comments

Despite the many headlines and some but not material widening of credit spreads on publicly traded BDCs (seen in the chart below), the private credit asset class fundamentals remain solid - loan losses are low and stable, especially for sponsor-backed loans, loan-to-value (LTV) ratios are low, equity cushions are large, and revenue/earnings growth is stable. At Partners Group we are constructive on private credit’s long‑term outlook, despite the near‑term noise. #privatecredit #directlending #BDC #privatemarkets 

88

1 Comment

𝗔𝗹𝗹-𝗰𝗮𝘀𝗵 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗱𝗲𝗮𝗹𝘀 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗴𝗼𝘁 𝗮 𝗻𝗲𝘄 𝗿𝘂𝗹𝗲𝗯𝗼𝗼𝗸. 📌 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗗𝗲𝗰. 𝟭, 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟱, 𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗖𝗘𝗡 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗿𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗹𝗹-𝗰𝗮𝘀𝗵 𝗵𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝗽𝘂𝗿𝗰𝗵𝗮𝘀𝗲𝘀 𝗺𝗮𝗱𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵 𝗟𝗟𝗖𝘀, 𝘁𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁𝘀, 𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗽𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀, 𝗼𝗿 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗻𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽𝘀. This 𝗔𝗻𝘁𝗶-𝗠𝗼𝗻𝗲𝘆 𝗟𝗮𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗥𝘂𝗹𝗲 is aimed at curbing illicit funds in U.S. housing. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗮:  • Roughly 𝟭 𝗶𝗻 𝟯 𝗨.𝗦. 𝗵𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝘀𝗮𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗛𝟭 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟱 𝘄𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗹𝗹-𝗰𝗮𝘀𝗵 (Realtor.com).  • About 𝟭𝟯% 𝗼𝗳 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟰 𝗽𝘂𝗿𝗰𝗵𝗮𝘀𝗲𝘀 used entities like LLCs or trusts.  • In Miami, nearly 𝟴𝟬% 𝗼𝗳 𝗹𝘂𝘅𝘂𝗿𝘆 𝘀𝗮𝗹𝗲𝘀 above $2,000/sq. ft. were all-cash (Analytics Miami). 𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗜𝘁 𝗠𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀:  • 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝘀𝘁𝘀 𝗴𝗼 𝘂𝗽 → Settlement agents, attorneys, and title companies must report covered deals.  • 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗲𝘀 → Entity-based anonymity is reduced, which could slow high-end or cross-border transactions.  • 𝗠𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁 𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁𝘀 → Luxury and investor-heavy markets may see short-term friction — but long-term, cleaner capital flows build trust. 👉 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗧𝗮𝗸𝗲𝗮𝘄𝗮𝘆: While this rule adds complexity, it also clears out bad actors and strengthens confidence in U.S. real estate. For investors operating transparently, this may create 𝗹𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗲𝘁𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗼𝗽𝗮𝗾𝘂𝗲 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝘆𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 in the market. 💡 At JKAM, we’re focused on structuring compliant, resilient opportunities — turning challenges into advantages for our investors.

5

2 Comments

You negotiated hard on valuation. But three clauses you accepted to close the gap will matter more when you exit, raise again, or need the board to move fast. Over the next three posts, I'll cover each one. Today: liquidation preference. ✅ The standard 1x non-participating structure is investor protection. They get their money back first on exit; if the exit is below the post-money valuation, they take a larger share of the proceeds than their ownership percentage would suggest. Uncomfortable, but fair. ⚠️ The participating preference is a different animal. Investors take their 1x return first. Then they participate in what's left alongside you, in proportion to their holding. It is often presented as a compromise: we accept your valuation, you accept this structure. The gap gets bridged. Everyone moves on. The problem is not just the low exit scenario. It is every scenario. 📊 Take a simple example: founders hold 80% post-round. With a non-participating preference, they keep 80% of proceeds at any exit multiple above 1. With a participating preference: 64% at a 1x exit 72% at a 2x exit 75% at a 3x exit 78% at a 10x exit The founder's share never catches up. The double-dip is permanent. 🔁 And that is before the next round. New investors rarely subordinate to prior participating terms. They match them or go senior: last-in-first-out. So each new round adds another layer of participation on top. What started as a compromise in one term sheet becomes a stacking problem across the cap table. By the time you reach a real exit, the waterfall has been quietly working against you for years. The dilution you avoided in the round comes back, with interest. Then it compounds. 💡 If you're facing this in a negotiation, three things matter. 🔹 Hold the 1x non-participating line. It is market standard. Most investors know it. If they are using the preference structure to bridge a price gap, that tells you something about the valuation itself. 🔹 If you accept participation, negotiate a cap: typically 2x or 3x the investment. It limits the double-dip and at least contains the damage at that round. 🔹 Run the exit scenarios before you sign. Model founder proceeds at 1x, 2x, 3x, and 10x exit under both structures. The difference is not abstract; it is visible in the numbers, and it is easier to push back when you can see it clearly. ➡️ Next post: investor consent rights, and why the clause that constrains your day-to-day decisions most gets finalised when you have the least energy left to fight for it. #Fundraising #SeriesA #VentureCapital #ScaleUp

3

Diversifying by Correlation: A Smarter Way to Select Investment Managers In building multi-manager portfolios, selecting managers with strong track records isn’t enough. What matters just as much—but is often overlooked—is how their returns correlate with one another. I recently explored this in a case study comparing two portfolios:- • One composed of highly correlated managers, and • Another with low correlation dispersion among managers. Despite similar average returns, the low-correlation portfolio delivered smoother performance, lower volatility, and better drawdown protection. The takeaway? True diversification comes from combining distinct strategies and uncorrelated return streams, not just adding more names. Here are a few key reflections:- • Correlation isn’t intuitive—managers can appear different but behave similarly. • Diversification benefits are non-linear; adding an uncorrelated strategy can significantly improve risk-adjusted returns. • Regularly reassessing correlation is essential, especially after market regime changes. For investment committees, incorporating correlation analysis into manager selection is no longer optional—it’s strategic. However in light of these, there are also common pitfalls on correlation-based diversification and here's how to avoid them:- 1) Relying solely on historical data without considering forward-looking scenarios 2) Ignoring the impact of extreme events on correlations 3) Failing to account for changing correlations over time 4) Overlooking the costs associated with frequent rebalancing To avoid these pitfalls, investors should adopt a comprehensive approach that combines historical analysis with forward-looking scenarios and considers the practical implications of implementation. #InvestmentStrategy #PortfolioConstruction #FundSelection #Diversification #AssetManagement #RiskManagement

56

3 Comments

If you are going to include an allocation to trend following, given the observation of a strong #dispersion of annualized returns among #CTAs, you should consider diversifying across multiple CTAs (or trend following strategies). To finish reading, see blog by Larry Swedroe in comments field.

51

11 Comments