How leverage cuts both ways
Higher leverage amplifies yield in good times and accelerates NAV destruction in bad times. 2008 wiped out several over-levered BDCs; 2020 stressed more.
Leverage regimes before and after 2018
| Leverage regime | Max debt / equity | Asset coverage | Risk profile |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-2018 (legacy) | 1.0x | 200% | Conservative |
| Post-SBCAA (modern) | 2.0x | 150% | Higher yield, more risk |
| With SBIC subsidiary | Excludes SBA debt | Effective ~2.25x | Cheap gov-backed leverage |
Find a BDC's asset coverage cushion
In ARCC's filings, find the asset coverage ratio. Anything below 165-170% means cushion is thin and a downturn could force forced asset sales.
How leverage magnifies NAV losses
Is boosting leverage strictly good for shareholders?
A BDC just increased regulatory leverage from 1.2x to 1.7x (debt/equity). Management says this boosts ROE. Honest assessment?
Check your understanding
Sit with the ideas.
A BDC operates at 1.5x debt-to-equity. The portfolio loses 10% of value. Roughly what happens to NAV per share?
Why: