Resolve

Name: Resolve
Brand: Resolve

All-in-one net terms solution for credit checks, embedded B2B payments, and AR automation. The B2B spinout of Affirm.

Est 2019|Raised $96M|39 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 3K|Web traffic 45K|FTEs 60|HQ San Francisco, California, US

MarketsB2B Payments Invoicing & Payment Processing

Published Oct 14, 2026

01Common complaints

If a buyer requires posted, fixed pricing tiers and maximum upfront price transparency
- Resolve uses custom, risk-based pricing and a sales-led procurement model, which can make price benchmarking more complex.
If an organization’s brand or customer relationships are extremely sensitive to third-party collections communications
- Even when financing is structured as net-terms funding rather than traditional collections, the buyer-facing communications and escalation model should be reviewed for brand impact.
If the primary need is an enterprise invoice-to-cash suite rather than net-terms financing
- Vendors focused on invoice presentment and comprehensive AR controls may be a better fit for that core problem.
If a platform/marketplace requires deep API control over underwriting and the credit lifecycle
- API-first embedded finance providers may be a better fit for programmatic control and custom workflows.
If ERP or ecommerce data hygiene is poor and the organization cannot invest in integration and process cleanup
- Resolve’s documentation notes invoice merging and cross-system flows; poor data quality can delay implementation and reduce ROI.
Current limitations acknowledged in public materials
- Pricing is not published as standard tiers; the vendor uses custom plans and risk-based fees.
- Credit line sizes are discretionary and not guaranteed per pricing page fine print.
Roadmap visibility
- No public roadmap dates were found in the accessible sources.
Scale limitations
- No explicit public documentation of scale limits was found in the accessible materials.
Security and compliance documentation gaps (public info gaps)
- SOC 2 Type II is claimed; the public trust center did not provide directly accessible evidence or report scope in the automated crawl used for this review.
- GDPR/CCPA and PCI specifics for Resolve Pay were not clearly documented in the accessible sources.
API and integration constraints
- API uses OAuth 2.0 client credentials and a sandbox environment is available.
- Developer documentation describes invoice merging and ecommerce event flows, which can create operational complexity for some implementations.

- If a buyer requires posted, fixed pricing tiers and maximum upfront price transparency - Resolve uses custom, risk-based pricing and a sales-led procurement model, which can make price benchmarking more complex. - If an organization’s brand or customer relationships are extremely sensitive to third-party collections communications - Even when financing is structured as net-terms funding rather than traditional collections, the buyer-facing communications and escalation model should be reviewed for brand impact. - If the primary need is an enterprise invoice-to-cash suite rather than net-terms financing - Vendors focused on invoice presentment and comprehensive AR controls may be a better fit for that core problem. - If a platform/marketplace requires deep API control over underwriting and the credit lifecycle - API-first embedded finance providers may be a better fit for programmatic control and custom workflows. - If ERP or ecommerce data hygiene is poor and the organization cannot invest in integration and process cleanup - Resolve’s documentation notes invoice merging and cross-system flows; poor data quality can delay implementation and reduce ROI. - Current limitations acknowledged in public materials - Pricing is not published as standard tiers; the vendor uses custom plans and risk-based fees. - Credit line sizes are discretionary and not guaranteed per pricing page fine print. - Roadmap visibility - No public roadmap dates were found in the accessible sources. - Scale limitations - No explicit public documentation of scale limits was found in the accessible materials. - Security and compliance documentation gaps (public info gaps) - SOC 2 Type II is claimed; the public trust center did not provide directly accessible evidence or report scope in the automated crawl used for this review. - GDPR/CCPA and PCI specifics for Resolve Pay were not clearly documented in the accessible sources. - API and integration constraints - API uses OAuth 2.0 client credentials and a sandbox environment is available. - Developer documentation describes invoice merging and ecommerce event flows, which can create operational complexity for some implementations.

Deal disqualifiers (poor fit)

Very low invoice volume where fees and process change outweigh benefits
Highly bespoke billing and dispute workflows that do not map to standard invoice/advance models
Organizations that require all buyer credit decisions to remain internal

02Why they buy

unique selling points described by the vendor and partially supported by third-party descriptions (subject to buyer validation)
- Advance funding model: enables sellers to offer terms while receiving funds upfront (vendor and review-platform descriptions align on this capability).
- Unified workflow from underwriting to invoice to collections to reconciliation: vendor positioning and product documentation describe this integrated workflow.
- Ecommerce and ERP integrations focused on B2B terms workflows: integrations and guides for Shopify, BigCommerce, and ERP connectors are documented.
Competitive caveats
- TreviPay may provide stronger capabilities for enterprise trade-credit programs and portal management.
- Billtrust may be stronger for organizations that prioritize sophisticated invoice presentment and AR controls.
- Balance or API-first providers may be preferable for organizations wanting direct checkout UX control and programmatic underwriting.

- unique selling points described by the vendor and partially supported by third-party descriptions (subject to buyer validation) - Advance funding model: enables sellers to offer terms while receiving funds upfront (vendor and review-platform descriptions align on this capability). - Unified workflow from underwriting to invoice to collections to reconciliation: vendor positioning and product documentation describe this integrated workflow. - Ecommerce and ERP integrations focused on B2B terms workflows: integrations and guides for Shopify, BigCommerce, and ERP connectors are documented. - Competitive caveats - TreviPay may provide stronger capabilities for enterprise trade-credit programs and portal management. - Billtrust may be stronger for organizations that prioritize sophisticated invoice presentment and AR controls. - Balance or API-first providers may be preferable for organizations wanting direct checkout UX control and programmatic underwriting.

03Field reports

Important context on review availability and relevance

The Resolve name collision significantly affects review signal quality. Many online reviews for “Resolve” refer to unrelated products. Only reviews that explicitly reference the vendor's website, B2B net terms, or Resolve Pay should be considered relevant to this product.
Review volume for Resolve Pay on major platforms appears modest (major review sites show a small number of reviews for the vendor profile as of the date of this report).

Review Platforms (summarized)

G2 (Resolve vendor page)
- A G2 reviewer stated that Resolve Pay streamlined their invoicing process and made payment collection more efficient. The crawl returned limited excerpts; buyers should read full review text and verify reviewer context such as company size and industry.
Capterra
- The vendor listing on Capterra showed a high average rating with a small number of reviews at the time of retrieval; high averages with low counts can be less predictive—review distribution and any neutral or negative texts should be read in full.

- G2 (Resolve vendor page) - A G2 reviewer stated that Resolve Pay streamlined their invoicing process and made payment collection more efficient. The crawl returned limited excerpts; buyers should read full review text and verify reviewer context such as company size and industry. - Capterra - The vendor listing on Capterra showed a high average rating with a small number of reviews at the time of retrieval; high averages with low counts can be less predictive—review distribution and any neutral or negative texts should be read in full.

Community/Social (summarized)

Reddit (Shopify eCommerce subreddit)
- A Reddit post referenced using the vendor's website for B2B net terms and reported a positive experience; the thread was brief and did not provide deep implementation or pricing detail, but it indicates some real-user discussion specific to Resolve Pay.
Reddit (loansforsmallbusiness)
- A community post expressed a concern common during vendor evaluation: getting paid upfront while a third party handles collections raises questions about how buyers are treated during collections. This was presented as a pre-purchase concern rather than a documented negative experience.

- Reddit (Shopify eCommerce subreddit) - A Reddit post referenced using the vendor's website for B2B net terms and reported a positive experience; the thread was brief and did not provide deep implementation or pricing detail, but it indicates some real-user discussion specific to Resolve Pay. - Reddit (loansforsmallbusiness) - A community post expressed a concern common during vendor evaluation: getting paid upfront while a third party handles collections raises questions about how buyers are treated during collections. This was presented as a pre-purchase concern rather than a documented negative experience.

Vendor testimonials (not independent evidence)

The vendor website includes named customer quotes that claim positive effects on cash flow, responsiveness, and automation; these should be treated as vendor-supplied evidence and verified separately.

Common themes from accessible reviews and discussions (neutral summary)

Reasons customers evaluate or adopt Resolve Pay (inferred from reviews and vendor positioning)
- Need to offer net terms to win or retain larger B2B accounts
- Desire to avoid building an internal credit and collections operation
- Seller cash conversion acceleration via advance funding
- Integration with Shopify/BigCommerce and accounting/ERP systems
Common concerns and evaluation questions
- How collections communications affect the seller’s brand
- How disputes, returns, and partial shipments are handled operationally
- Fee economics versus alternatives (risk-based advance fees; limited price transparency upfront)

- Reasons customers evaluate or adopt Resolve Pay (inferred from reviews and vendor positioning) - Need to offer net terms to win or retain larger B2B accounts - Desire to avoid building an internal credit and collections operation - Seller cash conversion acceleration via advance funding - Integration with Shopify/BigCommerce and accounting/ERP systems - Common concerns and evaluation questions - How collections communications affect the seller’s brand - How disputes, returns, and partial shipments are handled operationally - Fee economics versus alternatives (risk-based advance fees; limited price transparency upfront)

Case Studies

Vendor customer stories
- The vendor website links to multiple customer stories and provides quotes with claimed outcomes.
- Critical evaluation
  - These are vendor-curated materials and likely highlight favorable outcomes. Reported metrics such as reductions in DSO, improvements in days-to-pay, increases in repeat orders, and reductions in manual work are presented as vendor- or customer-reported outcomes; methodologies, baselines, and sample sizes are not disclosed in the public excerpts reviewed.
Third-party aggregator summaries
- Some aggregator pages include positive quotes about streamlining payment processes; these often compile vendor-submitted stories and should be treated as semi-marketing unless independently verified.

- Vendor customer stories - The vendor website links to multiple customer stories and provides quotes with claimed outcomes. - Critical evaluation - These are vendor-curated materials and likely highlight favorable outcomes. Reported metrics such as reductions in DSO, improvements in days-to-pay, increases in repeat orders, and reductions in manual work are presented as vendor- or customer-reported outcomes; methodologies, baselines, and sample sizes are not disclosed in the public excerpts reviewed. - Third-party aggregator summaries - Some aggregator pages include positive quotes about streamlining payment processes; these often compile vendor-submitted stories and should be treated as semi-marketing unless independently verified.

04Best fit

Company sizes (evidence-informed estimate)

Likely best fit: mid-market B2B sellers with meaningful invoice volume and buyers that commonly request Net 30/60/90 terms, and that prefer not to build an internal credit and collections team.
Working ICP hypothesis to validate in discovery
- Tens to a few hundred employees
- Multi‑million to low‑hundreds of millions in annual revenue
- Finance team experiencing AR/collections workload and cash conversion cycle pressure

Industries and verticals where adoption is strongest

Distribution, industrial supply, construction parts, lighting, and similar wholesale/manufacturing verticals (based on vendor examples and review‑platform descriptions).

Roles and personas

Decision makers: CFO, VP Finance, Controller, VP Operations/Revenue Operations, Head of Ecommerce (for online net terms)
End users: AR specialists, credit analysts (if any remain in‑house), sales operations, and customer support teams responsible for terms onboarding

Pain points the product addresses

Enabling sales to offer terms without harming cash flow
Reducing days‑sales‑outstanding and manual collection effort
Offloading credit assessment and collections workload
Reconciling payments across ACH/wire/check/card and syncing to ERP

Qualification criteria (good fit)

High average order values with buyers requesting terms
Cash‑flow sensitivity and need for working capital management
Desire to embed net terms in ecommerce checkout and invoicing
Willingness to have a third party manage buyer collections

05The pitch

What the product does (core value proposition in objective terms)

Resolve is a B2B net-terms and accounts receivable (AR) platform that:
- Underwrites/approves buyers quickly (vendor-stated capability)
- Enables sellers to offer Net 30/60/90 terms
- Advances cash to the seller while the buyer pays Resolve later (vendor-stated typical advance is a high percentage of invoice value)
- Automates invoicing, collections follow-ups, and reconciliation/ERP sync
The vendor describes the product as combining credit, invoicing, and collections in one platform; the vendor also states that many teams launch quickly and that DSO can decrease after implementation. These vendor statements are presented as claims and were not independently validated in this research.

- Resolve is a B2B net-terms and accounts receivable (AR) platform that: - Underwrites/approves buyers quickly (vendor-stated capability) - Enables sellers to offer Net 30/60/90 terms - Advances cash to the seller while the buyer pays Resolve later (vendor-stated typical advance is a high percentage of invoice value) - Automates invoicing, collections follow-ups, and reconciliation/ERP sync - The vendor describes the product as combining credit, invoicing, and collections in one platform; the vendor also states that many teams launch quickly and that DSO can decrease after implementation. These vendor statements are presented as claims and were not independently validated in this research.

Target market and market positioning

Primary target: B2B sellers (manufacturers, wholesalers, distributors, industrial supply, and other invoice-heavy B2B businesses) that want to offer net terms without building an internal credit and AR operation.
Positioning: embedded net terms that can be offered in e-commerce checkout and via offline invoicing, paired with AR automation.
Review-platform description: a review platform describes Resolve as a B2B payments solution for manufacturers/wholesalers/distributors focused on net terms and cash flow; that listing likely reflects a vendor-provided product description and moderated reviews rather than independent verification.

- Primary target: B2B sellers (manufacturers, wholesalers, distributors, industrial supply, and other invoice-heavy B2B businesses) that want to offer net terms without building an internal credit and AR operation. - Positioning: embedded net terms that can be offered in e-commerce checkout and via offline invoicing, paired with AR automation. - Review-platform description: a review platform describes Resolve as a B2B payments solution for manufacturers/wholesalers/distributors focused on net terms and cash flow; that listing likely reflects a vendor-provided product description and moderated reviews rather than independent verification.

Get a comprehensive analysis of Resolve including market position, competitive landscape, adoption trends, and peer benchmarks.

Download full report →