Funding program
100% Purchase & Rehabilitation
As long as the numbers make sense and a joint venture is established, Real Estate Capital Resources can offer 100% funding for purchase, rehab, and closing costs up to 70% of the ARV. For new and experienced investors on non-owner-occupied real estate investments—when the business plan supports it.
This is not a guarantee of approval. Every transaction is evaluated on property, scope, experience, documentation, and available capital relationships.
This is the structure most investors are told does not exist. It does—for the deals that support it. Below is exactly how it works, exactly what it requires, and exactly when we will tell you it is the wrong path.
Up to 100% of purchase and rehab on qualifying joint-venture transactions. Subject to ARV limits, documentation, total project economics, program availability, underwriting, and final approval. Not all transactions qualify.
Program parameters
The Terms at a Glance
Published parameters, not marketing ranges. Where a figure is still being confirmed against current program sheets, it says so rather than guessing.
- Maximum capital
- Up to 100% of purchase price plus rehabilitation budget, on qualifying joint-venture transactions
- Structure
- Joint venture — the capital partner participates in project economics rather than lending against your equity
- Primary gating factor
- Total project cost relative to a defensible after-repair value
- Maximum ARV ratio
- {{CLAIM:jv.max_arv_ratio}} — confirming against current program sheet
- Profit split
- {{CLAIM:jv.split_structure}} — confirming against current program sheet
- Typical project size
- {{CLAIM:jv.project_size_range}} — confirming
- Term
- {{CLAIM:jv.term_range}} — confirming
- Rehab funding
- Released in draws against verified completed work
- Experience
- A risk factor, not always a hard stop. Scope complexity is weighed against track record
- Property types
- {{CLAIM:jv.eligible_property_types}} — confirming
- Markets
- {{CLAIM:global.active_markets}} — confirming
Who It Is For
This structure exists for a specific investor: someone who can find and execute a strong project but does not want to—or cannot—put the full acquisition and renovation cost in from their own balance sheet.
- Operators with deal flow and execution ability but limited deployable cash
- Investors who would rather run three projects at a shared economic split than one project alone
- Experienced flippers whose capital is already committed to other active projects
- Newer operators with a genuinely strong deal and a credible plan to execute it
- Investors who want to preserve reserves for contingency rather than deploy them into basis
Common Transaction Scenarios
- Purchase plus heavy rehabilitation where standard leverage leaves too large a gap
- A deal with strong margin where the operator prefers a partner to a stretched loan
- A project found at genuine discount where the spread supports shared economics
- An operator scaling deal count faster than their own capital allows
How the Transaction Is Evaluated
Because the capital partner is taking project risk rather than lending against your cash, the review concentrates on whether the project itself can carry the entire structure.
- Total project cost against ARV. The single most important number. Everything else is secondary
- ARV support. Comparable sales that survive an appraiser's scrutiny, not optimistic pricing
- Budget realism. Line-item scope with contingency, not a round number
- Exit credibility. A sale price the market actually supports, or a refinance that genuinely underwrites
- Operator capability. Whether this specific person can execute this specific scope
- Timeline. Whether the schedule is achievable for the work described
Documentation Checklist
- Purchase contract or LOI — establishes real basis, not an asking price
- Line-item rehab budget by trade — a lump sum will not underwrite
- Comparable sales supporting ARV — the number the whole structure rests on
- Photos or inspection — confirms scope matches budget
- Experience summary — prior projects, scope, outcomes
- Entity documents — the JV is contracted at entity level
- Contingency evidence — reserves for overruns, even at 100% capital
The full math
What a 100% Structure Actually Looks Like
Illustrative project. The arithmetic is real and the relationships are exactly how this is evaluated—only the specific program terms are pending confirmation.
| Purchase price | $180,000 | Contract basis |
|---|---|---|
| Rehabilitation budget | $65,000 | Line-item scope by trade |
| Contingency (10%) | $6,500 | Required, not optional |
| Total project cost | $251,500 | What the capital must cover |
| After-repair value | $340,000 | Supported by comparable sales |
| Project cost ÷ ARV | 74% | The number that gates the structure |
| Investor cash required | $0 | The point of the structure |
| Selling costs (8%) | $27,200 | Commission, closing, concessions |
| Holding costs (5 months) | $9,000 | Taxes, insurance, utilities, capital cost |
| Gross project profit | $52,300 | Divided per the JV agreement |
Reading the example
The deal works because total project cost lands at 74% of ARV. That spread is what allows a capital partner to fund the entire stack and still be protected if the exit comes in below plan. At an 85% ratio, the same deal does not support this structure at any price—there is not enough room between cost and value to absorb a soft market, a budget overrun, or a slow sale.
This is the whole test. Not your credit score, not your cash reserves, not how many deals you have done. Whether the project's own economics can carry 100% of the capital and still leave protected margin. An investor with no cash and a deal at 70% of ARV is a better candidate than an investor with substantial reserves and a deal at 88%.
The profit split is where a joint venture differs fundamentally from a loan. Instead of paying interest on borrowed money, you share project economics with the partner who funded it. On this example, the $52,300 gross profit is divided per the JV agreement—{{CLAIM:jv.split_structure}}, confirming against current program sheet.
Run your own numbers first. The Maximum Allowable Offer calculator models offer price against ARV and rehab, and the rehabilitation budget worksheet builds the line-item scope this review requires.
Capital-Structure Comparison
The same project, three ways. The right answer depends on your cash position and how you value control against leverage.
| Conventional hard money | High-leverage debt | 100% JV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cash required | Substantial | Moderate | None on qualifying deals |
| Cost of capital | Interest + points | Higher interest + points | Share of project profit |
| You keep | All profit | All profit | Your share per agreement |
| Downside exposure | Your cash first | Your cash first | Shared with partner |
| Deals you can run | Limited by cash | Somewhat limited | Limited by deal quality |
| Best when | You have capital and want all upside | You have some capital | You have deals, not cash |
Be honest about the trade. If you have the cash and the deal is strong, conventional debt keeps more of the profit. A joint venture is the right answer when you would otherwise not do the deal at all—or when running three projects at a shared split beats running one alone. We will say so directly if debt is the better path for you. See debt versus joint-venture capital for the full comparison.
Step-by-Step Process
Preliminary review
Send the address, purchase price, rehab budget, and your ARV support. That is enough for a first read on whether the structure fits.
Cost-to-ARV screen
We test total project cost against defensible value. This is where most deals are confirmed or redirected—quickly, so you are not waiting on a no.
Structure discussion
If the economics support it, we walk through the JV terms, the split, the draw process, and what each party is responsible for.
Full file and underwriting
Documentation, valuation, budget review, and entity structure move through the applicable process.
Close and fund
Acquisition funds at closing. Rehabilitation releases in draws against verified completed work.
When This Path Does Not Fit
We would rather tell you in the first conversation than after three weeks of document collection.
- ARV not supported by comparables. The most common reason. Optimistic pricing does not survive appraisal, and at 100% capital there is no equity cushion to absorb the gap
- Total project cost too close to ARV. Above roughly 80%, the margin cannot carry the structure
- No contingency in the budget. A budget without contingency is a budget that has not been thought through
- Scope beyond demonstrated experience. A first full gut on a structural rehab is a hard conversation
- No credible exit. "I'll sell it" is not an exit plan. What price, to what buyer, in what timeframe
- Timeline unrealistic for the scope. Holding costs compound and margin erodes
- Owner-occupied intent. These are business-purpose transactions on non-owner-occupied property only
If this path is not right, that does not end the conversation. RECR maintains multiple capital relationships—a declined structure is not a declined deal. Compare all programs.
FAQ
Questions About 100% Funding
It is a real structure on qualifying joint-venture transactions. It is not available on every deal, and any site claiming otherwise is selling you something. The gate is the project's own economics—total cost against a defensible ARV. Deals that clear that test can be structured at up to 100% of purchase and rehab. Deals that do not, cannot, at any price.
Purchase price plus the approved rehabilitation budget. Rehabilitation funds release in draws against verified completed work rather than as a lump sum at closing. Closing costs, holding costs, and contingency treatment are confirmed per transaction.
Because at 100% capital there is no borrower equity protecting the position. A lender needs your cash in the deal to absorb the first loss. A joint-venture partner takes project economics instead—sharing both the risk and the profit. That is the trade that makes zero-cash structures possible.
Credit is one input among several, weighed alongside the project economics, your experience, and the exit. It is not the primary gate the way it would be in conventional lending. Specific requirements are confirmed per program and transaction—{{CLAIM:jv.credit_policy}}, confirming.
Possible, depending on scope. Experience is a risk factor rather than an automatic disqualifier. A first-time investor with a cosmetic rehab, a strong ARV spread, and a realistic budget is a more straightforward conversation than an experienced operator with a thin deal. Scope complexity is weighed against demonstrated track record.
Split structure is set in the joint-venture agreement and depends on the transaction and the capital resource involved—{{CLAIM:jv.split_structure}}, confirming against current program sheet. It is confirmed in writing before you commit to anything.
In draws, against verified completed work. You or your contractor request a draw, the completed work is confirmed, and funds release for that stage. This protects both parties and is standard on rehabilitation capital. See how rehabilitation draws work.
The ratio is the primary gate on this structure—{{CLAIM:jv.max_arv_ratio}}, confirming against current program sheet. As a working guide, projects in the low-to-mid 70s are comfortable, upper 70s are a conversation, and above 80% the margin generally cannot support 100% capital.
Reserves are strongly preferred even when capital covers the full stack. Projects encounter surprises, and an operator with contingency available is a materially better risk than one with none. Reserves may be requested as a condition on some transactions.
Timing depends on file completeness, valuation, and the specific capital resource. A complete file with supported ARV and a clean budget moves substantially faster than one requiring reconstruction. We will give you a realistic timeline once we have seen the file—{{CLAIM:global.first_response_range}}, confirming.
Downside treatment is defined in the joint-venture agreement and varies by transaction. This is one of the most important terms to understand before signing, and it will be walked through explicitly rather than buried in a document.
No. Submission begins a review. All financing is subject to program availability, underwriting, property eligibility, borrower qualification, and final approval.
Have a Deal That Might Qualify?
Send the address, the purchase price, the rehab budget, and your ARV support. That is enough for a first read—you do not need a full application to find out whether this structure fits.
You will get a direct answer about the path, not a form-letter acknowledgment.
Related Resources
Understanding ARV
How after-repair value is supported—and why it gates this structure.
Debt vs Joint-Venture Capital
Which structure keeps more of your profit, and when.
How Rehabilitation Draws Work
The process that releases renovation capital as work completes.