VCC 2026-4 ABS-15G

Exhibit 99.01

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES

(1) Type of assets that were reviewed.

AMC Diligence, LLC (“AMC”) performed certain due diligence services described below on small balance commercial mortgage loans. The review was conducted on behalf of Velocity Commercial Capital, LLC (“Client” or “VCC”) between May 2026 and September 2026 via files imaged and provided by Client (the “Review”).

(2) Sample size of the assets reviewed.

The Client requested that AMC perform a review, based upon the Guideline Review and Non-Owner Occupancy (“NOO”) review scopes detailed in Section 5, on a total of five hundred forty-one (541) unique mortgage loans (the “Review”).

The Review totals, for mortgage loans within the initial securitization population, were as follows:

The seventeen (17) SBA loans below are a subset of the previous table.

*All investor 1-4 Fam in the Guideline Review were also review for Non-Owner Occupancy (“NOO”) NOO review was performed on all Investor 1-4 Family not included in the Guideline Review and seasoned less than twenty-four (24) months.

*One additional SBC loan was reviewed as part of the NOO review population, bringing the total reviewed to 177 loans. The addition resulted from a methodology difference between VCC and AMC, as VCC's population included 1-4 family properties, while AMC's methodology classified certain mixed-use properties separately. This variance was identified during reconciliation and the loan was subsequently reviewed to ensure alignment with the agreed-upon scope

In addition to the Guideline and NOO Review, AMC performed a Pay History, Servicer Comment and Title Review as detailed further in Section 8.

(3) Determination of the sample size and computation.

DBRS, Inc. (“DBRS”) and Kroll Bond Rating Agency, Inc. (“Kroll”) who are the NRSRO providing a rating on the transaction at the time of this disclosure, does not have published guidelines for this asset class. The sample sizes utilized were communicated by the Client to AMC. AMC did not choose the size of the samples, but AMC did select loans for inclusion in a sample once a number of loans to be reviewed had been determined. DBRS and Kroll are aware of the sample size covered during the Review.

(4) Quality or integrity of information or data about the assets: review and methodology.

AMC compared data fields on the bid tape provided by the Client to the data found in the actual mortgage loan file as captured by AMC. This comparison, when data was available (please note that not all fields were available for all Loans during the Review), involved forty-two (42) potential fields for the full Guideline Review and the Non-Owner Occupancy Review. The data fields are listed below.

(5) Origination of the assets and conformity to stated underwriting or credit extension guidelines, standards, criteria or other requirements: review and methodology.

The Review covered the: (i) Guideline Review, (ii) Non-Owner Occupancy Review, and (iii) Servicing Review. As a subset of the Guideline Review, AMC conducted a Valuation Review and Data Integrity Review. The details of each scope of review are covered below for the Guideline Review and the Non-Owner Occupancy Review, Section 6 for the Valuation Review and Section 8 for the Servicing and Data Integrity Review.

Guideline Review

Documents reviewed include the following items (* = where applicable):

Each loan was reviewed for adherence to the most recent VCC Master Credit Policy (“MCP”) revision that is dated prior to the loan approval date as indicated on the Final Loan Approval Worksheet for the loan being reviewed.

For this review, the procedures included:

Non-Owner Occupancy Review

Documents reviewed include the following items (* = where applicable):

For this review, the procedures included:

(6) Value of collateral securing the assets: review and methodology.

At the direction of the Client, AMC conducted a valuation review utilizing various values and methodologies as further detailed in Item 5 below. In total, for the entire original population, Client ordered secondary valuation products on one hundred fifty-nine (159) mortgage loans. Once these valuations were received, AMC compared these values versus the origination appraisal. If a variance between the origination appraisal / LTV value and the secondary valuation was greater than 10%, an adverse event level was placed on the loan.

(7) Compliance of the originator of the assets with federal, state and local laws and regulations: review and methodology.

AMC did not review residential mortgage compliance on any loans within the securitization.

(8) Other: review and methodology.

The final review results reflected in the Overall Review Results Summary herein may include additional exceptions identified after AMC’s initial review was completed where loan level issues were identified by external parties as a result of separate, distinct quality control evaluation of the loan files. In such cases, any additional exceptions cited by any such quality control evaluation would either be reflected (i) as an open exception or (ii) remediated if required documentation and/or curative actions were provided to AMC. The exception totals reflected herein, and corresponding Exception Rating, include exceptions that were so subsequently identified, if any. Please note that only a limited number of loans, if any, reflected in the Review Results Summary were subject to such external quality control evaluations.    

In addition to the procedures under Section 5 and 6 above, AMC conducted the following supplemental reviews:

Data Integrity Review (541 loans)

For the loans in the Guideline Review population, Non-Owner Occupancy Review and additional population, data points were reviewed between the data tape and the data collected by AMC.

Payment History Review (1 loan)

AMC performed up to 12-month review utilizing individual mortgage loan payment history reports provided by the servicer. Using the MBA methodology, AMC created a payment string using a 12 month look back for each mortgage loan within the payment history population.

Servicer Comment Review (1 loan)

AMC performed up to 12-month review utilizing individual mortgage loan collection comments provided by the servicer in order to provide a brief summary outlining current performance status, the borrower’s ability to pay, relative future/current risk including (hardship, life changes, etc.), possible servicer remedies, loss mitigation efforts, and modifications.

Title Review (1 loan)

SitusAMC was engaged to perform diligence on multiple pools of mortgage loans in August 2026. Property reports and images of recorded documents were provided by a title abstracting service provider selected by the engaging party (“Property Reports”). SitusAMC gathered, analyzed, and reviewed the Property Reports to assess any title, vesting, or lien issues and provided the engaging party a detailed report of all relevant findings.

The scope of the diligence included the following:

Limited Appraisal Review (286 Mortgage Loans, 337 Properties)

SitusAMC conducted a limited review of the origination appraisal documentation for each loan and property not included in the Guideline Review. For each loan and property, SitusAMC reviewed the applicable appraisal to determine what the property condition was and if the appraiser indicated any damage or safety concerns at the time of the inspection.

(9) Disclaimer.

Except as expressly enumerated above, please be advised that SitusAMC has not performed any review to determine whether the mortgage loans covered in this Report complied with federal, state or local laws, constitutional provisions, regulations, ordinances or any other laws or guidance, including, without limitation, licensing and general usury laws (“Applicable Law”).  Further, there can be no assurances that in performing the review and preparing this Report that SitusAMC has uncovered all relevant factors and potential issues relating to the origination of the mortgage loans, their compliance with Applicable Law, or the original appraisals relating to the mortgaged properties, or that SitusAMC has uncovered all relevant factors that could affect the future performance of the mortgage loans. Please note that the results set forth in this Report are dependent upon receipt of complete and accurate data regarding the mortgage loans from mortgage loan originators, sponsors, issuers, and other third parties upon which SitusAMC is relying in reaching such results.  Except as expressly stated herein, SitusAMC did not verify the data relied upon in performing its review and producing this Report.  In addition, the findings and conclusions set forth in this Report are provided on an “as is” basis and are based on available information and Applicable Law as of the date of this Report, and SitusAMC does not undertake any obligation to update or provide any revisions to this Report to reflect events, circumstances, changes in Applicable Law, or changes in expectations after the date this Report was issued.  

Please be further advised that SitusAMC does not employ personnel who are licensed to practice law in the various jurisdictions covered in this Report, and the results set forth in this Report do not constitute legal advice or legal opinions whatsoever. The findings are recommendations or conclusions based on information provided to SitusAMC, and are not statements of fact or legal conclusions. Information contained in the Report related to the applicable statute of limitations for certain claims may not be accurate or reflect the most recent controlling case law. Further, a particular court in a particular jurisdiction may extend, not enforce or otherwise allow claims beyond the statute of limitations identified in the Report based on certain factors, including the facts and circumstances of an individual mortgage loan.  The authorities administering the Applicable Law that was part of the review have broad discretionary powers which may permit such authorities, among other things, to withdraw exemptions accorded by statute or regulation, to impose additional requirements or to reach a conclusion that is not consistent with the results set forth in the Report. All decisions as to whether to issue, purchase, hold, sell or otherwise transact in securities backed by the mortgage loans reviewed in this Report, any investment strategy and any legal conclusions, including the potential liability related to the purchase or other transaction involving any such securities, shall be made solely by the parties to or investors in the transaction. The results set forth in this Report do not constitute tax or investment advice.  The scoring models in this Report are designed to identify potential risk in the securities backed by the mortgage loans reviewed, and each party or investor assumes sole responsibility for determining the suitability of the information for its particular use. SitusAMC does not make any representation or warranty (express or implied) as to the value of any mortgage loan or mortgage loan’s collateral that has been reviewed by SitusAMC.

Item 5. Summary of findings and conclusions of review

The NRSRO criteria referenced for this report and utilized for grading descriptions is based upon the NRSROs listed in Item 3 above.

There can be no assurance that the Review uncovered all relevant factors relating to the origination of the mortgage loans, their compliance with applicable law and regulation and the original appraisals relating of the mortgaged properties or uncovered all relevant factors that could affect the future performance of the mortgage loans. Furthermore, the findings reached by AMC are dependent upon its receiving complete and accurate data regarding the loans from loan originators and other third parties upon which AMC is relying in reaching such findings.

Please be further advised that AMC does not employ personnel who are licensed to practice law in the various jurisdictions, and the findings set forth in the reports prepared by AMC do not constitute legal advice or opinions. They are recommendations or conclusions based on information provided to AMC. All final decisions as to whether to purchase or enter into a transaction related to any individual loan or the loans in the aggregate, any investment strategy and any legal conclusions, including the potential liability related to the purchase or other transaction involving any such loan or loans, shall be made solely by the Client, or other agreed upon party, that has engaged AMC to prepare its reports pursuant to its instructions and guidelines. Client, or other agreed upon party, acknowledges and agrees that the scoring models applied by AMC are designed to identify potential risk and the Client, or other agreed upon party, assumes sole responsibility for determining the suitability of the information for its particular use. AMC does not make any representation or warranty as to the value of any mortgage loan or loan collateral that has been reviewed by AMC.

CREDIT REVIEW RESULTS

Guideline Review Credit Results:

Three hundred sixty-two (362) mortgage loans reviewed by AMC have a Credit grade of “B” or higher and 29.12% of the mortgage loans by number have a Credit grade of “A”. Two (2) mortgage loans reviewed by AMC have a Credit grade of “C”. Two hundred fifty-one (251) of the Credit grade “B” correspond to mortgages loans where the lender issued a guideline exception/waiver. There is a total of four hundred seventy-four (474) waived (and downgraded) credit exceptions affecting those two hundred fifty-one (251) mortgages loans. Some mortgage loans received multiple waivers.

Non-Owner Occupancy Review Credit Results

One hundred seventy-six (176) mortgage loans reviewed by AMC have a Credit grade of “A”, and one (1) mortgage loan has a Credit grade of “C”.

VALUATION REVIEW RESULTS

The valuation review was bi-furcated based upon the underlying property bucket (residential or commercial). All commercial mortgage loans received an “A” NRSRO valuation grade and per the scope of the review, no secondary valuation product was separately ordered by AMC during the review. The Client ordered a secondary valuation product one hundred fifty-nine (159) residential mortgage loans. Zeros (0) mortgage loans had a value more than 10% below Origination Value or a secondary valuation was not received.

Guideline Review Valuation Results:

Two hundred forty-seven (247) of the mortgage loans received a Property grade “A”, nine (9) of the mortgage loans received a Property grade “B”, and one hundred eight (108) of the mortgage loans received a Property grade “C”. The one hundred eight (108) mortgage loans with the Property grade “C” corresponds to one hundred four (104) mortgage loans with the “Subject property contains apparent environmental, health and/or safety problems notated by appraiser or visible on photo”, eleven (11) "Subject is not in average or better condition” exceptions”, one (1) “Appraisal does not support the appraised value.”, and two (2) “Missing Document: Appraisal was made "subject to" and Form 1004D/442 was not provided”. Some mortgage loans received multiple exceptions.

OVERALL RESULTS SUMMARY

Guideline Review Overall Results:

After giving consideration to the grading implications of the Credit and Property/Valuation sections above, two hundred fifty-four (254) mortgage loans reviewed by AMC in the Full Guideline Review scope have an Overall grade of “B” or higher and 21.70% of the mortgage loans by number have an Overall grade of “A.” One hundred ten (110) mortgage loans have an Overall grade of “C”.

The table below summarizes the Overall grade based on the Credit and Property Valuation sections above:

In the Guideline Review Population there are seventeen (17) SBA mortgage loans. SitusAMC conducted a review of the seventeen SBA loans in accordance with the established guidelines. Our review process aligned with the same criteria used for the guidelines review.

Specifically, we adhered to the following procedures:

1. Income Calculation: We did not recalculate income for these loans. We did confirm the income was within guidelines.

2. Document Verification: We confirmed the presence of all necessary documents.

3. Property Eligibility: We verified the eligibility of the properties associated with these loans.

4. SBA Occupancy Requirements: We ensured compliance with SBA occupancy requirements.

5. Property Types: All properties reviewed were either residential or commercial; there were no newly constructed properties.

6. Equipment/UCC Loans: There were no equipment or UCC loans included in our review/population.

Non-Owner Occupancy Review Overall Results:

After giving consideration to the grading implications of the Credit and Property/Valuation sections above, one hundred seventy-six (176) loans reviewed by AMC have an Overall grade of “A”, and one (1) mortgage loan has a Credit grade of “C”.

Payment History Review Summary

AMC conducted a Payment History Review on one (1) mortgage loan. One (1) (100.00%) of the Mortgage loans subjected to the Payment History Review had complete pay history strings. In total, one (1) mortgage loan showed at least one delinquency within the look back period. As of the 8/31/2026 cutoff date, one (1) mortgage loan (100.00%) was current. Some “% of Loans” may not add to 100% due to rounding.

Servicer Comment Review Summary

AMC conducted a Servicing Review on one (1) mortgage loan. The servicing review contained EV1 grade for one (1) mortgage loan.

Title Review

As requested by the Client, a title review was included in SitusAMC’s scope of review. To facilitate this review, the Client provided SitusAMC with identifying data on the population of mortgage loans. Data provided by the client, included mortgage loan and servicer identification numbers as well as subject property address, borrower names, origination date, original mortgage loan amount for the subject mortgage and title policies from origination as it relates to the subject mortgage. Using the data provided, SitusAMC ordered a current owner’s title search on these mortgage loans through a service provider. Upon receipt and review of the current owner’s title search results, SitusAMC identified whether or not the subject mortgage was of record, whether any deed vesting concerns of substance were present, and whether the title search report revealed any liens and/or judgments which could affect the seniority of the subject mortgage, including potentially superior post origination liens and/or judgments such as Property Tax Liens, Municipal Liens, and Association Super Liens. SitusAMC reviewed the title policies for all liens and/or judgments that were recorded before the recordation of the subject mortgage to determine if any identifiable liens and/or judgments were listed as an exception on schedule B of the applicable title policies.

SitusAMC TITLE REVIEW SUMMARY (1 Mortgage Loan)

As part of the due diligence services, the Client provided SitusAMC with identifying data on 1 mortgage loan. Based on the scope of review set forth herein, the critical findings are summarized as follows:

SitusAMC Limited Appraisal Review Summary (286 Mortgage Loans, 337 Properties)

SitusAMC conducted a Limited Appraisal Review of the origination appraisal documentation for each loan and property not included in the Guideline Review. This encompassed two hundred eighty-six (286) mortgage loans representing three hundred thirty-seven (337) properties. For each loan and property, SitusAMC reviewed the applicable appraisal to determine what the property condition was and if the appraiser indicated any damage or safety concerns at the time of the inspection.

ADDITIONAL MORTGAGE LOAN POPULATION SUMMARY*

All items are relevant for the three hundred sixty-four (364) loans in the guideline review that are part of the securitization population.

*Percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding.