Considering these two options that's one of the easiest to get, taking a loan sometimes comes with a whole lot of strict terms and conditions and with the high interest rate expecially in my region, it's even deficult to put that as an option. Looking at the case with most investors who are just looking for ways to double there already dormant funds, and care little about the owner of the business, it seems to be another problem dealing with them as most of the ratio they intend getting from you seems to be too big expecially when they already know that your proposed business have an higher chance of doing well in the long run.
I know that as a start-up, these sources could potentially help your business to upscale at a very sharp pace and that from the angle of allowing an investor to buy into your business, you could get other added advantage like getting advice and connection that will help boost your business but I'm just curious to ask;
Loans require sudden repayment structure, that's the biggest trouble. If there was an option of "take the loan now, start paying a year later" then I would say that it would be better to keep 100% of your company.
Plus, if we could just take the loan on the companies name, meaning that if we fail to pay then the company bankrupts, then that would be fine too because it would mean that the business did not work, but when we are talking about a new one, you won't get a loan under the business name, you take it personally which means even if the business fails, you still have to pay it. That's why I believe that we are going to end up with loan not being the best option, but to be fair you can't find an investor that easily neither.