In asset-based lending, collateral plays an important role in protecting lenders, but it does not replace a thorough assessment of the borrower itself. Understanding how a company generates cash, manages working capital, and performs financially remains essential during underwriting and throughout the life of the facility. Collateral speaks to what a lender might recover if things go wrong. Whether the loan gets repaid in the first place is a separate question. Even when collateral coverage is strong, lenders still need visibility into the company’s financial performance and any changes that could affect repayment capacity.

Consider a distributor with a strong borrowing base, receivables and inventory well within advance rates, collateral coverage comfortably above 100%. On paper, the loan looks well protected. But the borrower's margins erode over several quarters, cash flow tightens, and it eventually defaults. The lender is left enforcing on collateral that looked solid on a report but proves harder to convert to cash than expected: receivables turn out to be concentrated with a few slow-paying customers, and inventory sells at a discount in liquidation. What should have been a straightforward recovery becomes a drawn-out, costly process.

Financial Ratios are Only Useful When Viewed in Context

A ratio on its own is a single number on a page, and a number without context can mislead as easily as it informs. Liquidity and leverage ratios are fundamental tools in credit analysis, but their meaning depends on the wider financial picture. Their value comes from understanding what has changed, why it has changed, and what those changes could mean for the borrower’s ability to meet its obligations. The signals worth chasing tend to show up as movement. For example, a declining current ratio, increasing leverage, or weaker operating cash generation may indicate growing pressure on a company’s financial position. Other warning signals can include accounts receivable increasing faster than revenue, or a company reporting profits while generating negative operating cash flow. None of this is a verdict. These indicators do not necessarily mean that a borrower is facing financial distress. However, they can signal that further investigation is needed, whether through additional financial review, or closer monitoring.

Take a company whose current ratio has held steady around 1.5x for several quarters. Observed in isolation, there's little cause for concern. But over the same period, receivables have grown faster than revenue, and a closer look shows the ratio has stayed flat only because inventory has been building up alongside slower-paying customers. The static ratio was masking a shift: cash was taking longer to come in, and more of it was tied up in goods that hadn't yet sold. The number hadn't moved, but the story behind it had. Analysts need to dig deep into the number trends to identify the change in the story.

Consistent Company-Level Analysis Supports Better Credit Decisions

Credit teams assess borrowers across a wide range of industries, markets, and reporting environments. A structured approach to reviewing financial performance helps analysts identify relevant trends and compare borrowers more effectively. Financial spreading is only one part of the review process. Analysts also need to understand changes in liquidity, profitability, leverage, and cash generation, and how these factors affect the company’s ability to meet its obligations.

Automation Can Support Analysis While Keeping Judgment with the Analyst

This is where automation earns its place. Many credit teams already use technology to automate parts of the financial spreading and ratio calculation process. The next step is using automation to support more of the analytical process, helping analysts identify changes in financial performance that may require attention. Automation of this kind is support, and the judgment stays where it belongs. By reducing time spent preparing and organising financial data, automation allows credit professionals to focus more on assessing risk, asking the right questions, and making informed decisions.

Stronger Borrower Analysis Strengthens Portfolio Monitoring

Effective portfolio monitoring starts with a clear understanding of each individual borrower. Reviewing companies using a structured analytical framework helps lenders monitor changes in financial performance, track risk developments, and determine where additional review may be appropriate. Step back from the single name, and the same discipline pays off again. At a portfolio level, this company-by-company view also helps recognise broader trends and potential areas of risk before they become more significant issues.

Technology Supports Analysts by Improving the Credit Review Process

Put those pieces together and the role of technology comes into focus. Automating company-level credit analysis allows analysts to spend more time evaluating borrower performance and less time manually preparing information. Financial Management Tool (FMT) automates financial spreading and ratio calculations, while generating a structured assessment of each company’s liquidity, profitability, leverage, cash flow trends, and key credit observations. The result is a steadier foundation to build on. This provides analysts with a consistent starting point for underwriting, annual reviews, and portfolio monitoring, while keeping the final decision with the professionals responsible for assessing risk.

For more information about FMT and a tailored offering, please visit our website.