Skip to main content
Demo mode, registration is bypassed for review. Not production behavior.

AFO · Manufacturing

Capital matched to a manufacturer's balance sheet.

Manufacturers carry hard assets, long working-capital cycles, and a programmatic R&D spend — three traits that open distinct funding pools in the Canadian system. The hard assets unlock equipment finance and asset-based revolvers; the working-capital cycle drives the ABL or factoring conversation; the R&D spend pulls SR&ED, IRAP, SIF, and Clean Tech ITC into the stack.

What makes this industry vertical distinct

  • Hard assets unlock equipment finance and ABL at 75–90% LTV.
  • Long working-capital cycle modelled against ABL vs factoring vs senior.
  • SR&ED + IRAP + SIF + Clean Tech ITC stacked, not chosen between.

How the capital stack works for manufacturing

Manufacturing, in practice.

The first capital conversation for most operating manufacturers is the equipment side. CSBFP funds equipment + leaseholds up to a combined $1.15M at Prime + 3% — usually the cheapest dollar in the category when the business and the equipment both qualify. Above the ceiling, conventional equipment finance and leases handle the rest at 75–90% LTV on the asset itself, with rates climbing through Prime + 2–5% depending on the equipment class and credit profile.

The working-capital conversation is the second. Distributors, contract manufacturers, and OEMs with long DSO and inventory turns are a clean fit for an ABL revolver — 85% advance on eligible AR, 50–65% on finished goods. Factoring is a faster, smaller-scale alternative when the issue is DSO rather than coverage. Conventional senior revolvers from a chartered bank work for established manufacturers with a clean coverage story; ABL is the answer when the asset base outpaces the cash flow.

The R&D and innovation side is where Canadian manufacturers most often leave money on the table. SR&ED refunds 35% of qualified expenditures up to $3M as cash (CCPCs); IRAP funds up to 80% of internal technical salaries plus advisory; the Strategic Innovation Fund covers larger industrial projects at 25–50% cost-share; the Clean Tech ITC refunds 30% on eligible clean-tech equipment investments. Layering these credits and grants under a senior or ABL facility is the single biggest lever on the blended cost of capital.

12 programs in the catalog · 6 live

Programs that fit manufacturing.

Curated by underwriting profile, not by tagging — each card links to the program profile. Coming-soon programs are surfaced honestly: the screener routes there with a consultation CTA instead of a self-serve apply link until the integration is wired through.

Common stacks for this vertical

The combinations a CPA usually assembles for manufacturing.

A stack combines two or more of the programs above into a single capital-structuring answer — equipment + working capital, non-dilutive R&D, grant + debt. Each card names the programs AND the role each one plays.

  • 3 layers

    CSBFP + working-capital line

    The single most common owner-operator capital stack in Canada layers a CSBFP equipment + leasehold loan with a conventional working-capital revolver. CSBFP covers the asset purchases at the cheapest available rate (Prime + 3%, government-guaranteed); the revolver handles the AR + inventory cycle. The two facilities never compete for the same dollar — they fund different parts of the business — but the package needs to be designed together so the lender sees a coherent overall ask.

    Read the stack

  • 3 layers

    SR&ED + IRAP

    SR&ED and IRAP are the two workhorses of Canadian R&D funding. They cover overlapping eligible expenditures but work through fundamentally different mechanisms — SR&ED is a refundable tax credit claimed in arrears against the corporate return; IRAP is a contribution program with pre-approval and draw-down funding. Run together on the same project, the two programs fund a meaningful share of a Canadian tech company’s technical labour. The trap is double-claiming the same hours: IRAP cannot pay for time also claimed as SR&ED, and the timesheet discipline matters.

    Read the stack

  • 6 layers

    Clean-tech grant stack

    Canada has built one of the deepest federal funding stacks in the world for clean technology, but the programs don’t self-orchestrate — each has its own application, eligibility, and matching-capital rule. The skill is layering them coherently so the project carries the lowest blended cost of capital without disqualifying itself from any individual program by stacking-rule conflict. Done well, a Canadian clean-tech project can pull 40–60% of total project cost as non-repayable contributions plus refundable tax credits, with the balance covered by senior debt or strategic equity.

    Read the stack

  • 5 layers

    Exporter stack

    Exporters face two distinct capital gaps simultaneously: the up-front cost of entering a new market (research, travel, trade shows, IP protection, translation) and the working-capital cycle of fulfilling export orders (longer DSO, currency exposure, foreign-buyer credit risk). Different instruments cover each gap; the right structure layers two or three of them together rather than picking one. The CPA designs the financing plan and the FX hedge against the same set of assumptions so the export plan and the capital plan don’t drift apart.

    Read the stack

  • 8 layers

    Manufacturer growth stack

    Manufacturers carry hard assets, long working-capital cycles, and a programmatic R&D spend — three traits that open distinct funding pools in the Canadian system. The default growth-stage stack layers equipment finance (the asset side), ABL or senior revolvers (the working-capital cycle), and the non-dilutive R&D layer (SR&ED + IRAP + Clean Tech ITC where applicable). Each piece is independently underwritten but designed against a single business case so the lenders and the grant programs see a coherent overall plan.

    Read the stack

Other industries

Different industry, different stack.

Each vertical has its own structuring conversation. A manufacturer’s balance sheet drives a different mix than a SaaS company’s payroll-heavy R&D — the programs that fit each shouldn’t be the same.

  • 9 programs

    Technology & SaaS

    Tech and SaaS businesses have an inverted balance sheet: little hard collateral, lots of payroll-heavy R&D, recurring revenue that scales faster than the company can self-fund. Most conventional debt structures don't fit. What does fit is the Canadian non-dilutive stack — SR&ED, IRAP, SDTC, digital media credits — followed by revenue-based financing on the working-capital side and equity only when the round is the right use of capital.

    Explore the vertical

  • 8 programs

    Exporters

    Exporters face two distinct capital gaps at once: the up-front cost of entering a new market (research, travel, trade shows, IP protection, translation) and the working-capital cycle of fulfilling export orders (longer DSO, currency exposure, foreign-buyer credit risk). Different instruments cover each gap; the right structure usually layers two or three rather than picking one.

    Explore the vertical

  • 9 programs

    Clean tech & sustainability

    Canada has built one of the deepest federal funding stacks in the world for clean technology — SDTC, the Strategic Innovation Fund, the Clean Tech Investment Tax Credit, IRAP, SR&ED, and the regional development agencies all touch clean-tech projects in different ways. The skill is layering them coherently so the project carries the lowest blended cost of capital without disqualifying itself from any individual program by stacking-rule conflict.

    Explore the vertical

Match the structure to the industry, not the other way round.

Twenty-minute call. Bring the business profile and the project; we’ll walk through which programs in this vertical fit, which grants and credits stack underneath, and how long the engagement takes.