What a Secured Revolving Line Actually Is
A secured revolving line of credit, often called an asset-based line (ABL), is a facility where a bank or specialty finance company extends credit up to a percentage of the value of pledged collateral, typically accounts receivable and inventory, sometimes equipment. Unlike a term loan, the balance can be drawn down and repaid repeatedly during the facility's term, which usually runs one to three years and is renewed annually with an updated collateral review.
For businesses with pronounced seasonality, such as landscaping companies, agricultural suppliers, holiday retailers, marinas, or event and hospitality operators, this structure is built around the natural cash cycle. Availability expands as receivables and inventory build ahead of the peak season, then the business draws down working capital, sells through inventory, collects on invoices, and pays the line back down, often to zero, in the off season.
How the Borrowing Base Works
Availability is not a flat credit limit. It is calculated through a borrowing base formula that is recalculated monthly or even weekly, typically:
- 70 percent to 85 percent of eligible accounts receivable under 90 days old
- 25 percent to 50 percent of eligible finished goods inventory, with raw materials and work-in-process often excluded or heavily discounted
- Equipment or real estate sometimes added as a smaller, separate advance rate component
Eligible collateral typically excludes receivables from foreign buyers, related parties, or accounts over 90 days past due, and inventory that is obsolete, in transit, or consigned. Lenders subtract dilution (credits, returns, disputes) from the receivable pool before applying the advance rate. A seasonal business that looks strong on the balance sheet in October may have materially less availability in February when receivables have been collected and inventory has not yet been rebuilt, and the facility is designed to track that reality rather than fight it.
How Pricing Is Set
Secured revolving lines are priced off a floating benchmark, usually Prime or SOFR, plus a spread. As of late 2026, typical structures for small and lower-middle-market borrowers look like:
- Bank-underwritten ABL: Prime + 0.5 to Prime + 2.5, translating to roughly 9 percent to 11.5 percent APR-equivalent for stronger credits
- Non-bank or specialty finance ABL: SOFR + 4 to SOFR + 9, or flat rates in the 11 percent to 18 percent APR-equivalent range, common for thinner financials or concentrated customer bases
- Unused line fees of 0.25 percent to 0.5 percent annually on the undrawn portion
- Origination or closing fees of 0.5 percent to 1.5 percent of the facility size
- Field exam and monitoring fees, often several thousand dollars per exam, charged one to four times a year depending on facility size and risk
When origination fees, unused fees, and field exam costs are folded into an APR-equivalent calculation on a facility that is drawn seasonally rather than continuously, the effective cost on the dollars actually used can run several points higher than the headline spread suggests, particularly for smaller facilities where fixed costs are spread over a lower average balance.
Qualification Signals Lenders Examine
Banks and asset-based lenders look past the income statement to the quality and collectability of the specific assets pledged:
- Time in business: most bank ABL programs want two to three years of operating history; non-bank lenders will consider one year with strong collateral quality
- Revenue and margin trends: seasonal revenue swings are expected and modeled, but lenders want at least two full seasonal cycles of data showing the pattern repeats predictably
- Accounts receivable quality: customer concentration, average days sales outstanding, and historical dilution rates matter more than aggregate revenue
- Inventory quality and turns: perishable, custom, or highly seasonal inventory (holiday goods, agricultural products) is advanced at lower rates or excluded
- Personal and business credit profile: FICO scores in the high 600s and above are typical for bank facilities; personal guarantees are standard
- Reporting infrastructure: borrowers need to produce timely AR aging, inventory reports, and sometimes borrowing base certificates, which rules out businesses without decent bookkeeping systems
Trade-offs Against Other Instruments
Compared with an unsecured line of credit, a secured ABL generally carries a lower APR-equivalent and higher total availability, because the collateral reduces the lender's risk. The trade-off is UCC liens on assets, more restrictive covenants, ongoing collateral reporting, and periodic field exams that add both cost and administrative burden.
Compared with invoice factoring, an ABL is usually cheaper on an APR-equivalent basis and keeps the borrower in control of collections rather than selling invoices outright, but it requires stronger financials and more documentation to set up, and factoring can be faster to access for a business with weak credit but strong receivables.
Compared with an SBA 7(a) working capital loan or SBA CAPLine, an ABL is typically faster to establish and renew, and it flexes automatically with the season, but SBA-guaranteed structures often carry lower rate caps and longer terms once approved, at the cost of a slower, more document-heavy application process.
Compared with a term loan, the revolving structure avoids paying interest on capital that sits idle during the off season, which is precisely the cost problem seasonal borrowers face with fixed amortizing debt. The trade-off is that availability contracts exactly when a business might want more room, since the borrowing base shrinks as receivables and inventory decline.
Where It Fits and Where It Does Not
A secured revolving line tends to be a reasonable fit for businesses with real, collectible receivables or salable inventory, a repeatable seasonal pattern, and the internal reporting discipline to support monthly borrowing base certificates. It is generally a poor fit for pre-revenue companies, service businesses with little collateral to pledge, or operators unwilling to accept liens and field exams in exchange for lower pricing. Because pricing and availability are both variable, businesses considering this instrument should model cash flow across a full seasonal cycle rather than evaluating the facility only at its peak-season best case.