Prepared for lenders, CDCs, and federal agencies to SBA SOP 50 10 8, USDA 7 CFR Part 5001, and conventional underwriting standards. Fiduciary duty runs to the lender and the agency, never the borrower. 4,000+ engagements since 1998 covering $41.2 billion in evaluated project value. So far in 2026: 41 engagements and $1.54 billion evaluated — 17 SBA, 11 USDA.
Manufacturing feasibility joins market demand to production economics. The study establishes demand for the plant's output — contracted, identified, or market-derived — then tests the production model: capacity and utilization ramp, input cost structure, labor availability at the required skill level, and the capital budget against industry benchmarks. Fabrication, machining, and structural-steel operations are analyzed on backlog quality, steel-price pass-through, certification requirements (AWS, AISC, aerospace where applicable), and skilled-labor availability that constrains capacity more often than equipment. Because USDA and SBA reviewers read manufacturing studies against job-creation and rural-impact criteria as well as repayment, the study documents employment, wage levels, and local economic effect to the standard the program requires.
Methodology combines industry production and pricing data, steel pricing and construction-demand series, RSMeans location-adjusted facility budgets, BLS occupational wage data for the staffing model, and RMA and IBISWorld operating benchmarks. The financial model carries the utilization ramp, input-cost sensitivity, and program coverage tests across the firm's standard stress discipline, with every assumption sourced.
Every Wert-Berater financial model is fully linked with no hardcoded values, so any reviewer can stress any input. Deliverables comprise a complete narrative report and the linked Excel model, with ten-year pro forma, sensitivity analysis at ±5, 10, and 15 percent, interest-rate stress from +0.5 to +3.0 percent, and ratio analysis benchmarked against RMA and IBISWorld data.
SBA engagements are prepared to SOP 50 10 8, including its debt-service-coverage minimums of 1.15x operating and 1.00x global. USDA engagements follow RD Staff Instruction 5001 across the Business & Industry, Community Facilities, REAP, and Value-Added Producer Grant programs. Conventional engagements are built to the lender's stated coverage standard, typically 1.20x. Manufacturing reaches us predominantly through USDA B&I — where rural plant economics and job creation align with program purpose — alongside SBA 504 for owner-occupied facilities and conventional lending; Value-Added Producer Grant studies are prepared to 7 CFR Part 5001 where agricultural producers integrate forward into processing.
The firm's manufacturing and processing record spans USDA B&I and SBA engagements nationwide, including cold-chain, food-system, and industrial projects; manufacturing studies are prepared with the same fully linked financial models and stress discipline as every Wert-Berater engagement. Independence is non-negotiable: determinations follow the evidence and are not revised under pressure, and studies are built to pass lender, agency, and third-party review without exception items.
Screening the industrial market before committing to a full engagement? Manufacturing Market Risk Intelligence is a report prepared by our analysts to a published structure: supply, demand and the operating conditions in one market, with coverage shown before the order is taken. It is a market risk view, not a feasibility determination on your project, and it does not replace the study described on this page.
A feasibility study for a fabrication or machining operation must resolve questions that generic manufacturing templates do not reach. The scope is built around the specific production process — whether that is structural-steel fabrication, precision CNC machining, custom weldments, or a combination — because each carries a distinct cost structure, certification burden, and customer base. The study opens with a clear definition of the production unit: what is being made, to what tolerance or specification, for which end markets, and under what contractual or market conditions.
Demand analysis for a fabrication or machining operation does not begin with a top-down industry market-size figure. It begins with the customer. The study identifies who will buy the plant's output, at what volume, under what pricing arrangement, and why that customer would source from this facility rather than an incumbent supplier. That discipline produces a demand case that a credit officer can interrogate rather than a revenue projection unsupported by named buyers.
Primary demand evidence is drawn from executed contracts, letters of intent, purchase-order history, and documented customer conversations. Where the operation targets open-market demand — fabricated structural steel for regional construction, for example — the study draws on construction-permit data, Dodge Data project pipelines, state transportation-improvement programs, and regional economic-development project announcements to size the addressable opportunity. Competitive supply is mapped through state contractor-licensing registries, AWS and AISC certified-fabricator directories, and direct field research into existing shop capacity, lead times, and geographic reach. For operations pursuing aerospace or defense work, cage-code registries and NAICS-level procurement data from USASpending.gov provide a documented baseline of existing supplier concentration. Utility and industrial-park records can confirm whether competing facilities are expanding. The result is a supply-demand balance specific to the product type, geography, and customer segment — not a national industry statistic applied to a local plant.
Four inputs move the debt-service-coverage ratio for a fabrication or machining operation more than any others. The study isolates each, documents the basis for the base-case value, and stress-tests it across the standard sensitivity schedule so the lender can see where the project breaks and by how much.
Every assumption is sourced. No value is hardcoded.
SBA, USDA, and conventional lenders each bring a distinct lens to a fabrication or machining credit, and the study is structured to address all three without requiring the lender to reconcile conflicting presentations.
Under SBA SOP 50 10 8, the primary tests are operating debt-service coverage of 1.15x and global coverage of 1.00x, with a demand analysis that demonstrates the revenue basis is not speculative. SBA reviewers for manufacturing credits pay particular attention to whether projected utilization is supported by backlog or identified customers, and whether the capital budget is complete — including tooling, fixtures, and working-capital requirements that fabrication startups routinely underestimate.
USDA Business & Industry reviewers apply RD Staff Instruction 5001 and weight job creation, wage levels, and rural economic impact alongside repayment. A fabrication plant in a rural county that employs certified welders at above-median wages satisfies program purpose in a way the study must document explicitly, not incidentally. REAP eligibility may apply where the facility incorporates qualifying energy systems.
Conventional lenders typically require 1.20x coverage and focus on collateral adequacy — fabrication equipment depreciates and is illiquid, so the study addresses orderly-liquidation value relative to the loan balance. Customer concentration is a recurring concern: a plant whose revenue is 60 percent dependent on one buyer carries a risk profile the lender will price or condition, and the study identifies that exposure rather than obscuring it.
The fee for a metal fabrication or machining feasibility study is fixed and quoted in writing within one business day of a project inquiry. No fee is contingent on the finding, and the quoted amount does not change if the analysis produces an unfavorable determination. That structure protects the lender: an analyst whose fee depends on a positive conclusion cannot produce an independent study.
Standard delivery is ten to fifteen business days from receipt of a complete data room. The data room for a fabrication or machining engagement typically includes: financial statements or projections from the sponsor, equipment specifications and vendor quotes, any executed contracts or letters of intent, the facility lease or purchase agreement, and documentation of certifications held or in process. Incomplete submissions extend the timeline; the engagement clock starts when the data room is complete, not when the retainer is received.
Rush delivery is available and is quoted at the time of engagement. Every engagement is published to a secure client portal where the linked Excel model remains live. Because every value in the model is a formula — no hardcoded inputs — a lender or agency reviewer can change any assumption and watch every output, ratio, and coverage test recalculate in real time. The narrative report includes an explicit statement of conditions: the assumptions on which the favorable or unfavorable determination rests, stated plainly so that a credit officer knows exactly what would have to change to alter the conclusion.
The fee is fixed, quoted in writing within one business day, and does not change based on the finding. Because no fee is contingent on a favorable determination, the amount varies by project complexity — scope, program type, and data-room completeness — rather than by loan size. Contact the firm with a project summary for a same-day quote.
Standard delivery is ten to fifteen business days from receipt of a complete data room. Rush delivery is available and quoted at engagement. The timeline begins when all required project documents are received — financial statements, equipment quotes, contracts, and facility information — not at retainer receipt. Incomplete submissions are the most common cause of delay.
Three factors complicate the analysis more than in most manufacturing credits: raw-material price volatility that can compress margin faster than revenue grows, skilled-labor scarcity that constrains the utilization ramp even when equipment is in place, and customer concentration that makes projected revenue fragile if a single buyer reduces orders. A credible study addresses all three with sourced assumptions and documented stress tests, not narrative reassurance.
Yes. USDA RD Staff Instruction 5001 requires documentation of employment, wage levels, and rural economic impact alongside the repayment analysis. For a fabrication or machining plant, that means a staffing schedule by classification, wages benchmarked to BLS data for the county or MSA, and a clear statement of net new jobs created — not positions retained or indirectly supported.
AWS structural-welding certification, AISC fabricator certification, ASME pressure-vessel certification, and ITAR or aerospace approvals each gate access to specific customer segments. If a plant's revenue projections depend on certified work but the certification is not yet held and the path to obtaining it is not documented, that is a material risk the study must identify and the lender must weigh.
The coverage standards differ — SBA SOP 50 10 8 requires 1.15x operating and 1.00x global; USDA 7 CFR Part 5001 applies its own tests and program-purpose criteria. A single study can be structured to satisfy both if the financial model is built to carry both sets of tests simultaneously, with the program-specific documentation — job creation, rural impact, eligible use of proceeds — addressed for each program in the narrative.
Qualify a project. Tell us about the project and the program. We will tell you the truth about it — scope, timeline, and fee confirmed before work begins.
Schedule a Zoom Call →Legal disclosure. Wert-Berater, Inc. offices are mailing addresses only. Following the COVID-19 pandemic the firm has elected to work remotely; its office locations receive mail and are not staffed for visitors or in-person meetings. Headquarters mailing address: 1968 South Coast Hwy, Ste 2382, Laguna Beach, CA 92651.
Wert-Berater, Inc. is an independent provider of feasibility studies and other related services. The firm does not provide financing or equity investment advice, and does not arrange, broker, or place debt or equity capital of any kind.
All appraisal assignments are performed by Bruce E. Jones, MAI, ASA-GC, BCA, CMEA, a member of the Appraisal Institute since 2006, a staff member of Wert-Berater, Inc. and owner of Special Purpose Realty Valuation.