How to Write a Commercial Credit Memo That Gets Approved
Most credit analysts are taught to document. The best loan officers learn to advocate. The difference is the credit memo — and understanding that difference is the single most important professional skill in commercial banking.
A credit memo is not a data dump. It is a structured argument. You are making the case that a specific borrower deserves credit, at a specific amount and structure, for a specific reason — and that the risk is understood, measured, and acceptable. Every sentence either advances that argument or distracts from it.
Credit committees and chief credit officers read dozens of memos. The ones that move quickly are the ones that tell a clear story. The ones that stall generate questions — and questions create delays, create doubt, and sometimes kill deals that deserved to be approved.
"Your memo should answer every question before the committee can ask it — and stop there. Every question it creates is a failure of presentation, not a failure of the deal."
The Structure That Works
Every institution has its own template. But the sequence that moves through committee efficiently follows a logic that transcends format: tell them what you're recommending, tell them who the borrower is, tell them the numbers work, address the risks, and close with your conviction.
Here is the section-by-section breakdown — with the guidance that doesn't appear in any training manual.
The executive summary is your recommendation stated upfront, supported by the three to five facts that matter most. It is written in bullet points — not because bullets are informal, but because a committee member skimming for the headline needs to find it in ten seconds.
Include: the loan amount and purpose in one sentence, your recommendation (approval/denial), the key ratios (DSCR, LTV, leverage), any policy exceptions flagged, and one sentence on why you believe in this deal.
What it is not: a summary of the entire memo. Do not repeat the borrower's full history, the industry analysis, or the collateral description here. The executive summary points to the memo — it does not replace it.
This is where most analysts fail — and where the best loan officers win deals. The Background section is your opportunity to make the committee care about this borrower before they look at a single ratio.
The goal is a narrative that establishes three things: who this person is, how they built what they built, and why they deserve the benefit of the doubt when the numbers are marginal. A well-written Background section creates context that makes the financial analysis more compelling.
Write it like a brief profile, not a data entry form. "John Smith founded ABC Contractors in 2008 after 12 years as a project manager at [Firm]. The business started with residential remodeling contracts and grew to commercial construction work serving the healthcare and municipal sectors." That's a sentence. The alternative — a table with "Year Founded: 2008, Industry: Construction" — tells you nothing about whether John Smith is worth betting on.
Management depth matters and belongs here too — who runs the business if the principal is incapacitated? What is the succession plan? For businesses heavily dependent on one person, this is a real risk that belongs in the story, addressed proactively rather than discovered by the committee.
This section documents the proposed loan structure in precise, unambiguous terms. It reads like a term sheet — amount, purpose, rate, index, floor, ceiling, maturity, amortization, payment frequency, fees, collateral, and any special conditions.
For complex deals — multiple loans, bridge structures, SBA conversions — document each facility separately and clearly. Spell out how each piece interacts. A committee member should be able to read the Terms section and understand the complete financing structure without referring to another document.
If you have a non-standard structure — an interest-only period, a bridge-to-permanent conversion, an unusual rate index — explain the rationale briefly. Don't make the committee puzzle out why you're doing something they haven't seen before.
Most analysts treat this section as boilerplate — a cut-and-paste from Vertical IQ, IBISWorld, or the Federal Reserve. That is a missed opportunity that costs loan officers deals they should win.
The Industry section done right does two things: it validates the borrower's market position within the industry context, and it neutralizes committee concerns about sector risk before they surface. When a committee member thinks "hotels got crushed in COVID" and your memo has already addressed post-pandemic recovery trajectory with specific market data, you've answered the question before it became an objection.
Use data selectively — one or two charts that tell a clear story, not a data dump. The Producer Price Index for hotels showing a full recovery to pre-COVID highs by February 2022 is one compelling chart. Twelve tables of tangentially related economic indicators is noise that buries your argument.
Localize when possible. National hospitality data is useful context. Local market data — occupancy rates in your specific submarket, competitive supply, demand drivers like event venues or corporate accounts — is what actually determines whether this hotel will perform. The analyst who walks in with local STR data and knowledge of the specific competitive set wins the deal over the analyst who cites national ADR averages.
Here's what most loan officers don't understand: a borrower who reads your credit memo — which sometimes happens, especially in relationship banking — will see how much you know about their world. An industry section that demonstrates genuine market knowledge builds the borrower's confidence in you as their banker. The deals that stay at your institution long-term are the ones where the banker understands the business as well as the owner does.
The financial analysis section is where the deal proves itself mathematically. But the numbers alone don't tell the story — the analyst's narrative around the numbers does.
Present three to four years of spreads — income statement and balance sheet — with trend analysis. Don't just show the numbers. Explain the movements. Revenue down 22% in 2020? One sentence: "Revenue declined 22% in 2020 driven by pandemic-related travel restrictions, consistent with the 35.7% industry-wide demand decline documented in the industry section." Now the committee doesn't have to ask why — you've told them why, contextualized it, and implicitly argued that it's a temporary industry effect rather than a company-specific problem.
Lead with DSCR. It's the ratio that matters most, so it belongs first. Show it for each year of the spread. Trend direction matters — is it improving, stable, or deteriorating? A 1.28x DSCR that has been rising from 1.10x over three years is a better story than a 1.35x DSCR that has been declining from 1.65x.
Include the global cash flow analysis with the same narrative discipline. Personal income and personal debt obligations belong in the story — and the conclusion (global DSCR passes or fails, and why) should be explicitly stated, not left for the committee to calculate.
Every collateral analysis should be written from one perspective: what would we recover if this loan defaults? Not what is the property worth at peak market — what would we net in a distressed sale, after costs, liens, and carrying time?
Document each piece of collateral: description, value basis (appraised value, book value, estimated forced liquidation value), advance rate, your bank's lien position, any prior liens, and the resulting loan-to-value at your advance rate. If you have an appraisal, cite it — appraiser, date, value, methodology. If you don't have an appraisal yet (common at the memo stage for some loan types), document when it will be obtained and what you've used as a proxy.
Lien position matters enormously and should be stated explicitly. A first position lien on real estate worth twice the loan is excellent collateral. A second position lien behind a first mortgage nearly equal to the property's value is thin collateral — call it what it is, document the risk, and explain what else supports the deal.
Flood zone determination belongs here — not because it's exciting, but because a property in a Special Flood Hazard Area without flood insurance is a compliance and credit problem that needs to be on record. Note the flood zone, the determination source, and the insurance requirement status.
Policy exceptions are not failures of the deal — they are features of the deal that require additional documentation. Every bank has exceptions. Every approval with exceptions has survived committee review. The exception section exists to acknowledge where the deal departs from standard policy and make the affirmative case for why it should still be approved.
The structure is simple: state the exception clearly (what policy is being exceeded or waived), explain why the exception exists (what about this deal requires it), and present the mitigant (what compensates for the additional risk). The mitigant must be specific and proportionate to the risk. "Strong borrower" is not a mitigant. "LTV will reduce to 50% upon SBA debenture funding, with a 5% cash deposit held in escrow until that occurs" is a mitigant.
Every exception that exists must be documented — even the ones you'd rather not draw attention to. The exception section is not optional, and committee members know when something is missing. An undisclosed exception that surfaces post-closing creates regulatory, legal, and career consequences far worse than the discomfort of disclosing it upfront and asking the committee to approve it anyway.
Covenants are early warning systems. They give the bank a contractual right to act before a problem becomes a loss. Document each covenant with its threshold, testing frequency, and why that specific threshold was chosen for this borrower.
The DSCR covenant is the most common and most important — typically set at 1.20x or 1.25x, tested annually using tax returns. But the DSCR covenant should be set thoughtfully, not reflexively. A borrower with a 1.45x DSCR at origination and a covenant at 1.25x has 20 cents of cushion before triggering. A borrower with a 1.28x DSCR at origination and the same 1.25x covenant has 3 cents of cushion. Those are very different risk profiles that the covenant structure should reflect.
Reporting covenants — when financial statements are due, what format, whether CPA-prepared or company-prepared — are the mechanism by which the bank monitors covenant compliance. They're not administrative formalities. Missed reporting deadlines are early warning signals that something is wrong. Structure them to give you information early enough to act, not information that arrives after the problem has already developed.
Document what happens upon a covenant breach. The covenant is only as useful as the bank's willingness to enforce it. The memo should reflect that the bank understands the covenant, why it was set where it was, and what the escalation path looks like if it's breached.
The risk section is where many analysts go soft — listing only the risks they think the committee won't notice, minimizing the real ones, and burying concerns in qualifying language. This is exactly backwards. The analyst who identifies all the risks and presents a coherent argument for why they're acceptable is the analyst whose recommendations get trusted. The analyst who lets risks surface after closing is the analyst who loses credibility, and sometimes their job.
State the primary risk clearly and directly. "The primary risk in this transaction is borrower concentration — 68% of revenue comes from two contracts with the municipal government. Loss of either contract would likely reduce DSCR below covenant levels." That sentence is better than a paragraph of hedged language that says the same thing while trying to minimize it.
Then make the case for why that risk is acceptable. "The contracts are multi-year agreements with automatic renewal provisions, both of which have been in place for seven years without interruption. The municipal government has a Aa2 credit rating and has not terminated a contractor relationship in the past decade."
Loan officer final comments are the place for your personal conviction — or honest doubt. If you believe in this deal, say why directly. If you have reservations, document them. A loan officer who surfaces concerns in the memo and argues for approval anyway builds credibility with credit. A loan officer who conceals concerns destroys it.
Cross-Sell and Deposit Relationship
Every credit approval is a relationship opportunity, and the memo is where that opportunity gets documented. The deposit relationship section should describe what deposits the borrower maintains — both currently and the opportunity to deepen the relationship post-approval.
When a borrower has no existing deposit relationship — common with acquired businesses or first-time commercial borrowers — document this honestly and address it. Many institutions have policies about lending without depository relationships. When that policy creates a challenge, the memo should present the plan to capture the deposits as part of the approval, not treat the absence as something to minimize.
Cross-sell opportunities — treasury management, additional lines of credit, insurance products, wealth management — belong in the memo because they represent the economic case for the broader relationship. A $2M commercial real estate loan with a borrower who also has $800K in operating deposits and a payroll processing relationship is a materially different economic proposition than the same loan with no deposits. Document the complete picture.
Community Reinvestment Act
CRA documentation is a regulatory requirement, not an afterthought. Note the census tract, the CRA designation, and how this loan maps to your institution's CRA commitments. For loans to small businesses, women-owned businesses, minority-owned businesses, or projects in low-to-moderate income areas, the CRA value of the loan is a legitimate positive factor that belongs in the credit analysis. Regulators examine CRA performance — and loan officers who document it well make the institution's exam easier.
Use BankLiterate tools to verify your analysis
The Quick Ratio Snapshot, DSCR calculator, and Borrowing Base tools help you verify borrower calculations before they go into your memo.
Open Ratio Tools →