Asset-based financing—often called Asset-Based Lending (ABL)—is one of the most practical, collateral-driven forms of commercial credit. In a traditional loan, lenders mainly assess a company’s overall balance sheet, projected cash flows, and credit profile. In ABL, the logic shifts: the facility is built around specific assets—typically receivables, inventory, machinery/equipment, and sometimes bank accounts/cash controls—and the borrower’s availability expands or contracts based on the value and quality of those assets.
In Turkey, ABL has become especially relevant for businesses operating in volatile markets, import-dependent supply chains, and sectors where working capital is the primary constraint. Exporters, manufacturers, wholesalers, distributors, logistics operators, and fast-moving retailers often look to ABL structures when unsecured financing is either expensive or insufficient. Yet ABL is not a single product. It is a family of models with different collateral mechanics, monitoring needs, and enforcement realities.
This article provides a 1500-word, SEO-friendly overview of ABL in Turkey: the main models, how collateral packages are typically structured, and a risk map that shows where deals most often break in practice.
What Is ABL and How Is It Different From a Traditional Loan?
The heart of ABL is the borrowing base concept. Instead of granting a fixed limit primarily on the borrower’s general creditworthiness, the lender calculates availability based on an “eligible” pool of assets. For example, a lender might advance up to 70% of eligible receivables plus 40% of eligible inventory, with machinery/equipment acting as a stabilizing secondary collateral layer. The key word is eligible: not every invoice or every unit of stock is financeable. Eligibility rules are where commercial logic and legal risk control meet.
ABL differs from traditional lending in one essential way: monitoring is not optional. Receivables and inventory change daily. If the lender cannot verify and control the asset pool through reporting, audits, and triggers, the facility stops being “asset-based” and becomes an ordinary loan with extra paperwork.
A strong ABL structure therefore rests on three pillars:
- Identifiable collateral (clear asset definition and ownership),
- Perfection and priority (third-party effectiveness and ranking),
- Operational monitoring (reporting, audits, controls, and leakage prevention).
If any pillar is weak, the structure may look bankable on paper but fail under stress.
The Main ABL Models Used in Turkey
1) Receivables Financing (Invoice-Based Borrowing Base)
Receivables financing is the most common ABL model in Turkey, especially in trade-heavy sectors. The lender advances funds against a pool of invoices that meet eligibility rules such as:
- invoice age limits (e.g., not older than 90–120 days),
- exclusion of disputed invoices and credit notes,
- exclusion of related-party receivables,
- concentration caps (limits on the largest customer exposures),
- proof of delivery/acceptance for certain industries.
Why it works: It scales with sales volume. As the borrower invoices more, the borrowing base can increase—if eligibility and collectability remain strong.
Where it breaks: Receivables are not “cash.” They are claims subject to defenses. Debtors may assert set-off, quality disputes, returns, performance defects, or contract restrictions. In distress, these defenses become more aggressive. That is why lenders rely heavily on aging reports, dilution tracking, audit rights, and sometimes collection-routing controls.
2) Factoring (With or Without Recourse)
Factoring is widespread in Turkey and often overlaps with ABL logic. In simple terms, the company sells its receivables to a factor or financial institution in exchange for immediate liquidity.
- With recourse: if the debtor does not pay, the seller remains responsible (credit risk remains linked to the seller).
- Without recourse: the factor absorbs more debtor credit risk, typically with stricter eligibility, pricing, and documentation standards.
Key practical risks: debtor disputes, set-off, assignment restrictions, concentration risk, and document mismatch between invoices and actual delivery/performance.
Factoring can function as a standalone liquidity solution or be integrated into broader ABL packages as a receivables monetization component.
3) Inventory Financing (Warehouse/Stock-Based Lending)
Inventory financing sounds attractive—inventory is visible, measurable, and linked to revenue. In practice, it is operationally challenging because inventory is dynamic: it is sold and replaced continuously.
Inventory financing in Turkey tends to work best when:
- goods are standardized and easily valued,
- storage is controlled (third-party warehouses, bonded warehouses, reliable logistics),
- inventory reporting is consistent and verifiable,
- insurance and inspection regimes are strong.
The classic failure mode: the “empty warehouse” problem—by the time enforcement starts, inventory has moved, been sold, deteriorated, or cannot be matched to collateral definitions.
Inventory-based borrowing bases therefore require more frequent reporting, tighter controls, and strong triggers that restrict extraordinary disposal when risk rises.
4) Machinery and Equipment Financing (Fixed Asset ABL)
Machinery and equipment are stable compared to inventory, making them useful as collateral—especially in manufacturing, logistics, and services with asset-heavy operations.
Strong machinery collateral design typically includes:
- serial-number schedules and location mapping,
- insurance and maintenance undertakings,
- restrictions on relocation or extraordinary disposal,
- periodic site inspections or third-party verification.
Common risks: specialized assets have limited resale markets (discounted valuations in distress), hidden disposals, deterioration due to poor maintenance, and title problems (finance leasing is the frequent surprise).
5) Trade Finance and Supply Chain Finance (ABL-Adjacent Structures)
Trade finance often operates like ABL: lenders rely on the value of goods in transit, documentary flows, and predictable payment cycles.
Examples include:
- import/export finance tied to shipping documents,
- supplier finance programs linked to approved payables,
- structured trade facilities based on commodity flows.
These structures live or die by documentation discipline and operational controls (including customs/bonded warehouse realities in some cases).
6) Hybrid ABL Packages (Receivables + Inventory + Fixed Assets + Guarantees)
In Turkey, lenders often prefer packages, not single-instrument collateral. A typical hybrid structure might include:
- receivables financing as the primary borrowing base,
- inventory as secondary collateral,
- machinery/equipment to stabilize recoveries,
- and corporate guarantees/covenants as additional protection.
Hybrid packages help when one collateral class weakens (e.g., inventory disappears or receivables disputes rise).
The Collateral Toolkit Behind ABL: What Actually Secures the Facility?
ABL is not only an availability formula—it is a legal and operational security system. Typical building blocks include:
- Receivables pledge / assignment for security (to capture cash flow and enforce collectability),
- Movable security over machinery and equipment (stable asset layer),
- Enterprise-level collateral approaches where appropriate,
- Share pledges (especially in group structures) to create control leverage,
- Account control / cash routing mechanisms when feasible,
- Mortgages if real estate exists,
- Guarantees as a personal-security layer to cover collateral shortfalls.
The commercial goal is always the same: make collateral identifiable, monitorable, and enforceable, with predictable priority.
ABL Risk Map in Turkey: Where Deals Most Often Break
Risk 1: Ownership and Title Risk (Leasing, ROT, Third-Party Goods)
Many “assets” visible on-site are not legally owned by the borrower. Finance leasing, retention of title clauses, consignment stock, and third-party warehouse arrangements can destroy collateral coverage.
Control strategy: title verification for key assets, segregation and labeling of consigned goods, and clear exclusions in borrowing base definitions unless ownership is proven.
Risk 2: Perfection Risk (Third-Party Effect Not Properly Achieved)
A lender’s security is only as strong as its perfection. Delayed or incomplete perfection can lead to priority loss or challenges in insolvency.
Risk 3: Priority Risk (Competing Claims and Statutory Privileges)
Priority battles are common in distress: earlier pledges, statutory preferred claims, conflicting collateral definitions, and inconsistent registry entries can all change ranking.
Control strategy: lien searches, clean collateral descriptions, and conservative assumptions about statutory and procedural deductions from proceeds.
Risk 4: Receivables Risk (Set-Off, Disputes, Dilution)
Receivables can be reduced by returns, discounts, disputes, and debtor set-off rights. In downturns, dilution rises and collections slow.
Control strategy: eligibility rules, concentration caps, regular aging/dilution reporting, and audit rights; for higher-risk borrowers, collection controls and debtor notification strategies.
Risk 5: Inventory Risk (Disappearance, Valuation, Obsolescence)
Inventory can move quickly, lose value, or become obsolete. Enforcement timing matters.
Control strategy: controlled warehousing, frequent counts, insurance, and triggers that restrict extraordinary disposals when risk increases.
Risk 6: Operational Risk (Fraud and Weak Controls)
ABL depends on data integrity. Fake invoices, circular trading, poor ERP systems, or weak reporting can break the borrowing base.
Control strategy: field exams, independent verification, strong representations, and “red flag” triggers (sudden sales spikes, concentration shifts, unusual credit notes).
Risk 7: Enforcement and Restructuring Risk (Concordat Dynamics)
In distress, the best outcome may be restructuring rather than immediate liquidation. Collateral can also “leak” if monitoring collapses.
Control strategy: early warning covenants, tighter controls in pre-default periods, and clear rules on asset sales and proceeds management.
Monitoring: The Engine That Makes ABL Work
Typical ABL monitoring tools include:
- borrowing base certificates (weekly/monthly),
- receivables aging and dilution reports,
- inventory reports and warehouse reconciliations,
- audit and inspection rights (field exams),
- concentration limits and eligibility rules,
- triggers that tighten controls as risk rises.
Without monitoring, ABL is not ABL.
Practical Closing Checklist (Transaction-Ready)
- Asset mapping: identify receivables, inventory, machinery, accounts.
- Title diligence: separate leased/consigned/ROT assets.
- Lien searches: identify existing encumbrances and ranking issues.
- Documentation: align definitions across facility and security documents.
- Perfection: complete and evidence registry steps as closing conditions.
- Monitoring design: define reporting cadence, audit rights, triggers.
- Enforcement plan: model collateral liquidation vs. restructuring options.
Conclusion
Asset-based financing in Turkey is a powerful way to unlock liquidity while controlling credit risk—when structured as a system rather than a template. The most resilient ABL transactions combine a credible borrowing base, properly perfected collateral with priority safety, and operational monitoring designed to prevent value leakage. By using a disciplined risk map—title, perfection, priority, receivables dilution, inventory control, operational integrity, and enforcement planning—lenders and borrowers can build ABL structures that remain bankable not only at signing, but also under stress.
Yanıt yok