What They Share
You are choosing between two regulated specialist banks, not private credit funds, and the machinery is the same at both. Both lend on residential ground-up development and heavy refurbishment, both work mainly through brokers, and both release the money in stages against a monitoring surveyor.
That shared machinery decides how your build feels to fund. Nothing is drawn until the surveyor has been to site and signed the stage off, so when your contractor invoices ahead of that visit, the money comes out of your own cash flow until the drawdown catches up. Both banks also expect a prior track record on most deals. The practical difference is how much each will lend. That shows up the day your broker puts the same scheme to both.
How the Leverage Compares
Shawbrook will lend you more against the same costs. It stretches to around 85% of cost and caps the loan at about 65% of Gross Development Value (GDV), or about 70% on refurbishment. Aldermore takes a more conservative view and holds nearer 65%.
That gap is your equity cheque. Shawbrook’s higher gearing against the 65% loan-to-GDV cap can mean putting less in at the start, while Aldermore’s steadier stance asks for more equity and leaves less of the scheme riding on the finished value. Either way it is your own cash flow that carries the difference until the first drawdown. Run both caps against your own cost plan before you assume the two banks land on the same number, because they often do not.
Loan Sizes and Term
Aldermore is the one to choose for the largest schemes. It covers roughly £1m to £50m, while Shawbrook typically lends from about £1m to £30m on terms up to 36 months.
For most mid-market schemes you will never reach either ceiling, because both banks are comfortable in the same territory. The limit only bites at the top of the range, and the term only bites at the end of it. A longer programme also stretches the gap between spend and drawdown: when you pay for materials up front, that money sits in the scheme until the next stage is signed off.
Track Record and Appetite
Aldermore is the more realistic first call if your delivery record is short. As a challenger bank it takes a more flexible view on track record, while Shawbrook leans toward experienced developers with full planning already in place.
Your history and your planning status largely decide which door opens. A first scheme, or a lighter delivery record, tends to get a warmer reception at Aldermore, while Shawbrook rewards a proven record and prices it with tighter terms. Planning is the harder of the two gates. If you submit the scheme while your consent is still sitting at committee, Shawbrook is the more difficult of the two conversations to start, and no amount of broker relationship makes up for it.
Which One to Approach
Let the scheme and your track record point the way. Higher gearing on cost, or a proven record, leans Shawbrook. A larger facility, a lighter history, or a more flexible read of it, leans Aldermore.
When you submit the same appraisal to both, expect two different answers on how much they will lend, not two prices for the same loan. Neither bank publishes what it is really doing this quarter either: both move pricing, speed and criteria with capacity, so a broker who has placed deals with each of them recently is worth more than any comparison table, this one included. Ask which of the two is lending on your scheme type now, before the approach is built on last year’s reputation.
Shawbrook vs Aldermore FAQs
What is the main difference between Shawbrook and Aldermore development finance?
Both are regulated specialist banks lending on residential ground-up development and heavy refurbishment through brokers, so the model is similar. The main differences are leverage and appetite: Shawbrook stretches to around 85% of cost and rewards experienced developers with full planning, while Aldermore takes a more conservative view on loan-to-GDV but lends larger facilities and is generally more flexible on track record. Which one fits depends on your scheme size, leverage need and development history.
Which lends more, Shawbrook or Aldermore?
It depends whether you mean leverage or facility size. On leverage, Shawbrook goes higher on cost, to around 85% of total cost, and caps loan-to-GDV near 65% (about 70% on refurbishment). On facility size, Aldermore reaches further, lending up to around £50m against Shawbrook’s roughly £30m ceiling. So a highly geared mid-market scheme may suit Shawbrook, while a very large scheme may need Aldermore’s higher limit.
Which is better for a first-time developer?
Aldermore is often the more realistic starting point for a developer with a shorter track record, because as a challenger bank it tends to take a more flexible view on experience. Shawbrook’s appetite leans toward proven developers with full planning already in place. That said, both are specialist banks that expect a monitoring surveyor and staged drawdowns, so neither is a light-touch lender, and a broker will know each bank’s current stance on first-time developers.
How do you choose between Shawbrook and Aldermore?
Let the scheme and your track record decide. Higher cost leverage or a strong track record leans toward Shawbrook; a larger facility, a lighter history or a need for flexibility leans toward Aldermore. Because both banks move their pricing, speed and criteria with current capacity, a broker who works with each one regularly will usually give you a sharper read on this quarter’s appetite than any published comparison. Terms depend on the specific scheme and your record.
How we compared Shawbrook and Aldermore development finance
What we covered. We compare two specialist bank development finance lenders in 2026: Shawbrook and Aldermore, across leverage, facility size, term and track-record appetite. We do not rely on comparison-site summaries or the lenders’ marketing headlines alone.
Data sources. Leverage, facility-size and term ranges were checked against primary sources in July 2026, including each bank’s development finance pages and the assessment in our best development finance lenders roundup.
How we handle gaps. Where a figure varies by scheme, we give the market range rather than a single false-precision number, and we flag that appetite, pricing and speed move with each bank’s current capacity.
Update cadence. We re-verify this page at least monthly, and whenever a lender changes criteria or pricing. The verification date reflects the most recent full review. Some links on this page are affiliate links, see our editorial policy.
Regulatory note. This page is editorial content, not regulated financial advice. Development finance to a limited company or investor is generally unregulated lending, so compare facilities and read the terms before you sign.