Golub Capital Bdc (GBDC) Risk Factors

We are a holding company and fund a majority of our investments through wholly-owned subsidiaries, and a majority of the assets that we hold directly are the equity interests in such subsidiaries, including any subordinated notes issued as part of our debt securitization transactions, which notes represent the residual claimant on distributions by the applicable securitization subsidiary. We depend upon the cash flow from our subsidiaries and the receipt of funds from them in the form of payments on any subordinated notes, dividends, and other distributions, any of which may be subject to restriction or limitations based on the organizational documents of the subsidiaries and the agreements governing the debt of any such subsidiary. In addition, because we are a holding company, any debt securities that we issue will be structurally subordinated to the obligations of our subsidiaries. In the event that one of our subsidiaries becomes insolvent, liquidates, reorganizes, dissolves or otherwise winds up, its assets will be used first to satisfy the claims of its creditors. Consequently, any claim by us or our creditors, including holders of any debt securities that we may issue, against any subsidiary will be structurally subordinated to all of the claims of the creditors of such subsidiary. We cannot assure security holders that they will receive any payments required to be made under the terms of any debt securities that we may issue, dividends or other distributions.

Under the 1940 Act, we are required to carry our portfolio investments at market value or, if there is no readily available market value, at fair value as determined pursuant to policies adopted by, and subject to the oversight of, our board of directors. The majority of our portfolio investments take the form of securities that are not publicly traded. The fair value of securities and other investments that are not publicly traded is often not readily determinable, and we value these securities at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors, including to reflect significant events affecting the value of our securities. As discussed in more detail under "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Critical Accounting Policies," most, if not all, of our investments (other than cash and cash equivalents) are classified as Level 3 under Accounting Standards Codification, or ASC, Topic 820, Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure, as amended, or ASC Topic 820. This means that our portfolio valuations are based on unobservable inputs and our own assumptions about how market participants would price the asset or liability in question. Inputs into the determination of fair value of our portfolio investments require significant management judgment or estimation, the level of which could increase or decrease during periods of volatility or uncertainty. See "-Risks Relating to Our Business and Structure – We are currently in a period of capital markets disruption and economic uncertainty." Even if observable market data are available, such information may be the result of consensus pricing information or broker quotes, which may include a disclaimer that the broker would not be held to such a price in an actual transaction. The non-binding nature of consensus pricing and/or quotes accompanied by disclaimers materially reduces the reliability of such information. We have retained the services of several independent service providers to review the valuation of these securities. At least once annually, the valuation for each portfolio investment for which a market quote is not readily available is reviewed by an independent valuation firm. The types of factors that the board of directors could take into account in determining the fair value of our investments generally include, as appropriate, comparison to publicly traded securities, including such factors as yield, maturity and measures of credit quality, the enterprise value of a portfolio company, the nature and realizable value of any collateral, the portfolio company's ability to make payments and its earnings and discounted cash flow, the markets in which the portfolio company does business and other relevant factors. Because such valuations, and particularly valuations of private securities and private companies, are inherently uncertain, could fluctuate over short periods of time and could be based on estimates, our determinations of fair value could differ materially from the values that would have been used if a ready market for these securities existed. Our net asset value could be adversely affected if our determinations regarding the fair value of our investments were materially higher than the values that we ultimately realize upon the disposal of such securities. We adjust quarterly the valuation of our portfolio to reflect our board of directors' determination of the fair value of each investment in our portfolio. Any changes in fair value are recorded in our consolidated statement of operations as net change in unrealized appreciation or depreciation.

For U.S. federal income tax purposes, we include in income certain amounts that we have not yet received in cash, such as the accretion of original issue discount. This could arise if we receive warrants in connection with the making of a loan and in other circumstances, or through contracted PIK interest, which represents contractual interest added to the loan balance and due at the end of the loan term. Such original issue discount, which could be significant relative to our overall investment activities, or increases in loan balances as a result of contractual PIK arrangements, is included in income before we receive any corresponding cash payments. We also could be required to include in income certain other amounts that we do not receive in cash. That part of the incentive fee payable by us that relates to our net investment income is computed and paid on income that includes interest that has been accrued but not yet received in cash, such as market discount, debt instruments with PIK interest, preferred stock with PIK dividends and zero coupon securities. If a portfolio company defaults on a loan that is structured to provide accrued interest, it is possible that accrued interest previously used in the calculation of the incentive fee will become uncollectible, and GC Advisors has no obligation to refund any fees it received in respect of such accrued income. Since in certain cases we could recognize income before or without receiving cash representing such income, we could have difficulty meeting the requirement to distribute dividends for U.S. federal income tax purposes of an amount generally at least equal to 90% of our investment company taxable income, determined without regard to any deduction for dividends paid, to our stockholders in order to maintain our qualification as a RIC. In such a case, we could have to sell some of our investments at times we would not consider advantageous, raise additional debt or equity capital or reduce new investment originations to meet these distribution requirements. If we are not able to obtain such cash from other sources, we could fail to qualify as a RIC and thus be subject to corporate-level income tax. See "Business - Taxation as a RIC."

Interest rate risk refers to the risk of market changes in interest rates. Interest rate changes affect the value of debt. In general, rising interest rates will negatively impact the price of fixed rate debt, and falling interest rates will have a positive effect on price. Adjustable rate debt also reacts to interest rate changes in a similar manner, although generally to a lesser degree. Interest rate sensitivity is generally larger and less predictable in debt with uncertain payment or prepayment schedules. Further, rising interest rates make it more difficult for borrowers to repay debt, which could increase the risk of payment defaults. Any failure of one or more portfolio companies to repay or refinance its debt at or prior to maturity or the inability of one or more portfolio companies to make ongoing payments following an increase in contractual interest rates could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

In July 2017, the Financial Conduct Authority, or the FCA, announced its intention to cease sustaining LIBOR by the end of 2021. The FCA's intention is that, after 2021, it will no longer be necessary for the FCA to persuade or compel banks to submit to LIBOR due to the development of alternative benchmark rates, which the FCA suggested should be based on transactions and not on reference rates that do not have active underlying markets to support them. In April 2018, the New York Federal Reserve Bank began publishing its alternative rate, the Secured Overnight Financing Rate or SOFR. The Bank of England followed suit in April 2018 by publishing its proposed alternative rate, the Sterling Overnight Index Average, or SONIA. Each of SOFR and SONIA significantly differ from LIBOR, both in the actual rate and how it is calculated, and therefore it is unclear whether and when markets will adopt either of these rates as a widely accepted replacement for LIBOR. On November 30, 2020, LIBOR's administrator, the ICE Benchmark Administration Limited, or the IBA, announced a consultation beginning in early December 2020 on its intention to cease the publication of the one-week and two-month U.S. dollar LIBOR settings immediately following the LIBOR publication on December 31, 2021, and the remaining U.S. dollar LIBOR settings, including one-month LIBOR, immediately following the LIBOR publication on June 30, 2023. On March 5, 2021, the FCA released an announcement confirming that such LIBOR settings would cease to be provided by any administrator or no longer be representative as of the dates specified in the IBA proposal, and confirmed that the FCA does not expect any LIBOR settings will become unrepresentative before such dates. The IBA closed the consultation for feedback at the end of January 2021. Concurrent with the IBA's proposal, the Federal Reserve Board, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation released a statement that (i) encouraged banks to cease entering into new contracts that use U.S. dollar LIBOR as a reference rate as soon as practicable and in any event by December 31, 2021, (ii) indicated that new contracts entered into before December 31, 2021 should either utilize a reference rate other than U.S. dollar LIBOR or have robust fallback language that includes a clearly defined alternative reference rate after U.S. dollar LIBOR's discontinuation and (iii) explained that extending the publication of certain U.S. dollar LIBOR tenors until June 30, 2023 would allow most legacy U.S. dollar LIBOR contracts to mature before LIBOR experiences disruptions. On March 8, 2021, the Alternative Reference Rates Committee confirmed that in its opinion the March 5, 2021 announcements by the IBA and the FCA on the future cessation and loss of the representativeness of the LIBOR benchmark rates constitutes a "benchmark transition event" with respect to all U.S. dollar LIBOR settings. A "benchmark transition event" may cause, or allow for, certain contracts to replace LIBOR with an alternative reference rate and such replacement could have a material and adverse impact on the CLO market, the leveraged loan market and/or us. On July 29, 2021, the Alternative Reference Rates Committee formally announced that it recommends the Chicago Mercantile Exchange's forward-looking SOFR term rates for use in business loans, including securities backed by such assets. However, forward-looking SOFR term rates will not be representative of three-month LIBOR, and there is no requirement that the Chicago Mercantile Exchange continue to publish forward-looking SOFR term rates, in which case we, our lenders, and our portfolio company borrowers may be required to use other measurements of SOFR, as applicable. As such, if LIBOR in its current form does not survive and a replacement rate is not widely agreed upon or if a replacement rate is significantly different from LIBOR, it could cause a disruption in the credit markets generally. Such a disruption could also negatively impact the market value and/or transferability of our portfolio company investments. Furthermore, disruptions related to loans and/or other debt financing securitizations (CLOs) in the marketplace could have a material adverse effect on the ability of GC Advisors or its affiliates to enter into loans in the future in accordance with our investment strategy and have a material adverse effect on us. We could also be materially and adversely impacted to the extent GC Advisors or its affiliates are unable to successfully implement an acceptable replacement rate in leverage utilized by us or if there is a prolonged period of mismatch on the interest rates on the interest rates payable on our leverage and our portfolio investments as a result of the continued publication of LIBOR. Further, if LIBOR does not survive and a replacement rate is not widely agreed upon, the mismatch on the interest rates payable by any leverage incurred by us and the interest rate payable on the portfolio company investments could result in a decrease in our net investment income and distributions we are able to pay to our stockholders.

We do not have any internal management capacity or employees. We rely on GC Advisors to manage and conduct our affairs and make all investment decisions. Subject to the oversight of our board of directors, GC Advisors has sole discretion in originating, structuring, negotiating, purchasing, financing and eventually divesting our investments, and our investors will not be able to evaluate for themselves the merits of particular investments prior to us making such investments. We depend on the diligence, skill and network of business contacts of the senior investment professionals of GC Advisors to achieve our investment objective. GC Advisors' investment committee, which consists of two members of our board of directors and additional employees of Golub Capital LLC, provides oversight over our investment activities. We also cannot assure you that we will replicate the historical results achieved by members of the investment committee, and we caution you that our investment returns could be substantially lower than the returns achieved by them in prior periods. We expect that GC Advisors will evaluate, negotiate, structure, close and monitor our investments in accordance with the terms of the Investment Advisory Agreement. We can offer no assurance, however, that the senior investment professionals of GC Advisors will continue to provide investment advice to us. If these individuals do not maintain their existing relationships with Golub Capital LLC and its affiliates and do not develop new relationships with other sources of investment opportunities, we can provide no assurance that GC Advisors or its affiliates will be able to identify appropriate replacements or grow our investment portfolio. The loss of any member of GC Advisors' investment committee or of other senior investment professionals of GC Advisors and its affiliates would limit our ability to achieve our investment objective and operate as we anticipate. This could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. The Staffing Agreement provides that Golub Capital LLC makes available to GC Advisors experienced investment professionals and provides access to the senior investment personnel of Golub Capital LLC for purposes of evaluating, negotiating, structuring, closing and monitoring our investments. We are not a party to the Staffing Agreement and cannot assure you that Golub Capital LLC will fulfill its obligations under the agreement. If Golub Capital LLC fails to perform, we cannot assure you that GC Advisors will enforce the Staffing Agreement, that such agreement will not be terminated by either party or that we will continue to have access to the investment professionals of Golub Capital LLC and its affiliates or their information and deal flow.

GC Advisors is highly dependent on relationships with private equity sponsors in connection with the sourcing of investments. If private equity sponsors find new sources of debt capital that are more advantageous to them, or if GC Advisors suffers reputational harm such that it becomes a less attractive source of capital for private equity sponsors, GC Advisors could have difficulty finding and sourcing new middle market debt investments. Private equity sponsors could experience financial distress, which could be related or unrelated to the portfolio companies to which we have exposure. Once in financial distress, such sponsors likely would be unable to provide the same level of managerial, operating or financial support to such portfolio companies, resulting in an increased risk of default or inability to repay remaining principal at maturity. From time to time, we expect to have direct or indirect exposure to companies controlled by private equity sponsors in which the sponsors have completed one or more dividend recapitalizations, thereby allowing the private equity sponsor to substantially reduce or eliminate its net investment in an underlying portfolio company. These investments generally present different investment characteristics to us than investments where a private equity sponsor retains a significant net contributed capital position in the company. These investments could experience a higher rate of default. Even when a default does not occur, private equity sponsors could be less willing to provide ongoing financial, managerial or operating support to a portfolio company after it has received one or more capital distributions on its investment. We believe that purchase price multiples of companies (as measured by the price paid by a private equity sponsor to purchase a company divided by the company's trailing twelve-month earnings) to which we have direct or indirect exposure are close to all-time highs. When considering the appropriate amount of financing to provide a prospective borrower, GC Advisors considers the value cushion as measured by the difference between the enterprise value of the company and the total amount of financing. If market purchase price multiples decline or if a portfolio company experiences financial distress, the value cushion supporting our investment could deteriorate and the investment could become impaired, resulting in losses for us. The risk of such losses for us are greater during periods when purchase price multiples are close to all-time highs.

In connection with investments made by us, GC Advisors and its affiliates often receive origination, commitment, documentation, structuring, facility, monitoring, amendment, refinancing, administrative agent and/or other fees from portfolio investments in which we invest or propose to invest. The potential for GC Advisors and its affiliates to receive such economic benefits creates conflicts of interest as GC Advisors and its affiliates have an incentive to invest in portfolio investments that provide such benefits. Similarly, GC Advisors and its affiliates could be incentivized to waive certain fees in connection with a refinancing in order to receive certain fees in the new transaction, including when we and/or other accounts advised by GC Advisors and its affiliates can participate in the original or refinanced investment, or both.

As a result of our arrangements with GC Advisors and its affiliates and GC Advisors' investment committee, there will be times when GC Advisors or such persons have interests that differ from those of our security holders, giving rise to a conflict of interest, many of which are described in the following risk factors. GC Advisors attempts to identify, monitor and mitigate conflicts of interest. Further, GC Advisors has implemented policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure its clients are treated fairly and equitably over time. GC Advisors believes that these factors, together with Golub Capital's commitment to put investors first, effectively mitigate the risks associated with such conflicts of interest. However, it can be difficult to ensure that conflicts of interest do not adversely affect us.

The members of GC Advisors' investment committee serve as officers, directors or principals of entities that operate in the same or a related line of business as we do or of accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates. Currently, our directors and certain of our officers also serve as directors and officers of GBDC 3 and GDLC, each a closed-end, non-diversified management investment company that has also elected to be regulated as a business development company under the 1940 Act. Similarly, GC Advisors and its affiliates manage other clients with similar or competing investment objectives. GC Advisors' management team will share its time and attention between us and other investment vehicles and accounts. Neither we nor any investor in us unaffiliated with GC Advisors will have any rights in or to independent ventures of GC Advisors or its affiliates or in the income or profits derived therefrom. GC Advisors does not expect to have any dedicated personnel who spend all or substantially all of their time managing our investing activities. In serving in these multiple capacities, GC Advisors and its personnel have obligations to other clients or investors in those entities, the fulfillment of which could conflict with the best interests of us or our stockholders. For example, the economic disruption and uncertainty precipitated by the COVID-19 pandemic has required GC Advisors and its affiliates to devote additional time and focus to existing portfolio companies in which other funds and accounts managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates hold investments. The allocation of time and focus by personnel of GC Advisors and its affiliates to these existing portfolio company investments held by other funds and accounts could reduce the time that such individuals have to spend on our investing activities. Our investment objective overlaps with the investment objectives of other affiliated accounts. For example, GC Advisors and its affiliates currently manage GBDC 3, GDLC and multiple private funds and separate accounts that pursue an investment strategy similar to ours, some of which will seek additional capital from time to time. We compete with these and other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates for capital and investment opportunities. As a result, GC Advisors and its affiliates face conflicts in the allocation of investment opportunities among us and other accounts advised by or affiliated with GC Advisors and, in certain circumstances, in the timing of the sale of an investment. Certain of these accounts provide for higher management or incentive fees, allow GC Advisors to recover greater expense reimbursements or overhead allocations, and/or permit GC Advisors and its affiliates to receive higher origination and other transaction fees, all of which could contribute to this conflict of interest and create an incentive for GC Advisors to favor such other accounts. For example, the 1940 Act restricts GC Advisors from receiving more than a 1% fee in connection with loans that we acquire, or originate, a limitation that does not exist for certain other accounts. GC Advisors seeks to allocate investment opportunities among eligible accounts in a manner that is fair and equitable over time and consistent with its allocation policy. However, we can offer no assurance that such opportunities will be allocated to us fairly or equitably in the short-term or over time, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to participate in all investment opportunities that are suitable to us. Furthermore, because allocations under GC Advisors' allocation policy are based on total capital of the relevant investing funds, including us, we expect to receive smaller allocations relative to larger accounts, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows during such ramp-up period. With respect to the sale of investments, the sale of an investment by one account advised by GC Advisors or its affiliates could potentially adversely affect the market value of the interests in such investment that continue to be held by other accounts, including us.

Under the documents governing each Debt Securitization, there are two asset coverage tests applicable to the Class A 2018 Notes, the Class B 2018 Notes, the Class C-1 2018 Notes, the Class C-2 2018 Notes and the Class D 2018 Notes, with respect to the 2018 Issuer; and the Class A GCIC 2018 Notes, Class B GCIC 2018 Notes, Class C GCIC 2018 Notes and Class D GCIC 2018, with respect to the GCIC 2018 Issuer. The first such test compares the amount of interest received on the portfolio loans held by the applicable Securitization Issuer to the amount of interest payable in respect of the applicable class of notes. To meet this first test, in the case of the 2018 Debt Securitization, interest received on the portfolio loans must equal at least 120% of the interest payable in respect of the Class A 2018 Notes and Class B 2018 Notes, taken together, at least 110% of the interest payable in respect of the Class C-1 2018 Notes and the Class C-2 2018 Notes, taken together, and at least 105% of the interest payable in respect of the Class D 2018 Notes; and, in the case of the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization, interest received on the portfolio loans must equal at least 120% of the interest payable in respect of the Class A GCIC 2018 Notes and Class B GCIC 2018 Notes, taken together, and at least 110% of the interest payable in respect of the Class C GCIC 2018 Notes and at least 105% of the interest payable in respect of the Class D GCIC 2018 Notes. The second such test compares the principal amount of the portfolio loans of the applicable Debt Securitization to the aggregate outstanding principal amount of the applicable class of notes. To meet this second test at any time in the case of the 2018 Debt Securitization, the aggregate principal amount of the portfolio loans must equal at least 145.6% of the Class A 2018 Notes and Class B 2018 Notes, taken together, at least 126.7% of the Class C-1 2018 Notes and Class C-2 2018 Notes, taken together, and at least 116.7% of the Class D 2018 Notes. To meet this second test at any time in the case of the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization, the aggregate principal amount of the portfolio loans must equal at least 147.9% of the Class A GCIC 2018 Notes and Class B GCIC 2018 Notes, taken together, at least 127.1% of the Class C GCIC 2018 Notes and at least 117.5% of the Class D GCIC 2018 Notes. If any asset coverage test with respect to a class of notes is not met, proceeds from the portfolio of loan investments that otherwise would have been distributed to the holders of the notes and membership interests that we hold will instead be used to redeem first the most senior class of notes in such Debt Securitization and then each next most senior class of notes, to the extent necessary to satisfy the applicable asset coverage tests on a pro forma basis after giving effect to all payments made in respect of the notes, which we refer to as a mandatory redemption, or to obtain the necessary ratings confirmation. The value of the Class C-2 2018 Notes, Class D 2018 Notes, Subordinated 2018 Notes, Class B-2 GCIC 2018 Notes, Class C GCIC 2018 Notes, Class D GCIC 2018 Notes or the Subordinated GCIC 2018 Notes could be adversely affected by a mandatory redemption because such redemption could result in the applicable notes being redeemed at par at a time when they are trading in the secondary market at a premium to their stated principal amount and when other investments bearing the same rate of interest could be difficult or expensive to acquire. A mandatory redemption could also result in a shorter investment duration than a holder of such notes could have wanted or anticipated, which could, in turn, result in such a holder incurring breakage costs on related hedging transactions. In addition, the reinvestment period under the 2018 Debt Securitization and the 2018 GCIC Debt Securitization could extend through as late as January 15, 2023 and January 20, 2023, respectively. During the respective reinvestment period, market conditions and restrictions on investment under the indenture governing the applicable Debt Securitization could result in periods of time in which the applicable Securitization Issuer is not able to fully invest its available collateral or during which collateral available is not of comparable quality or yield, which could affect the value of the collateral securing the notes issued by such Securitization Issuer that we hold.

The use of leverage accelerates and increases the potential for gain or loss on amounts invested. The use of leverage is generally considered a speculative investment technique and increases the risks associated with investing in our securities. The amount of leverage that we employ will depend on GC Advisors' and our board of directors' assessment of market and other factors at the time of any proposed borrowing. While we intend to target a leverage ratio of 0.85x to 1.25x debt-to-equity, this limitation will not prevent us from incurring additional leverage or otherwise exceeding such leverage ratio to the full extent permissible under the 1940 Act, including during periods when we are experiencing unusual market volatility or other unexpected conditions. We cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain credit at all or on terms acceptable to us. While leverage presents opportunities for increasing our total return, it also has the potential to increase losses. Accordingly, any event that adversely affects the value of an investment would be magnified to the extent we use leverage. Such events could result in a substantial loss to us, which would be greater than if leverage had not been used. In addition, our investment objectives are dependent on the continued availability of leverage at attractive relative interest rates. We could issue senior debt securities to banks, insurance companies and other lenders. Lenders of these senior securities will have fixed dollar claims on our assets that are superior to the claims of our common stockholders, and we would expect such lenders to seek recovery against our assets in the event of a default. We have the ability to pledge up to 100% of our assets and can grant a security interest in all of our assets under the terms of any debt instruments we could enter into with lenders. The terms of our existing indebtedness require us to comply with certain financial and operational covenants, and we expect similar covenants in future debt instruments. Failure to comply with such covenants could result in a default under the applicable credit facility or debt instrument if we are unable to obtain a waiver from the applicable lender or holder, and such lender or holder could accelerate repayment under such indebtedness and negatively affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. In addition, under the terms of any credit facility or other debt instrument we enter into, we are likely to be required by its terms to use the net proceeds of any investments that we sell to repay a portion of the amount borrowed under such facility or instrument before applying such net proceeds to any other uses. If the value of our assets decreases, leveraging would cause our net asset value to decline more sharply than it otherwise would have had we not used leverage, thereby magnifying losses or eliminating our equity stake in a leveraged investment. Similarly, any decrease in our net investment income will cause our net income to decline more sharply than it would have had we not borrowed. Such a decline would also negatively affect our ability to make distributions on our common stock or any outstanding preferred stock. Our ability to service our debt depends largely on our financial performance and is subject to prevailing economic conditions and competitive pressures. Our common stockholders bear the burden of any increase in our expenses as a result of our use of leverage, including interest expenses and any increase in the base management fee payable to GC Advisors. Following the approval of our stockholders of the reduced asset coverage requirements in Section 61(a)(2) of the 1940 Act and subject to our compliance with certain disclosure requirements, effective as of February 6, 2019, the reduced asset coverage requirement permits us to double the maximum amount of leverage that we are permitted to incur, which provides us with increased investment flexibility, but also increases our risks related to leverage. The following table illustrates the effect of leverage on returns from an investment in our common stock as of September 30, 2021, assuming various annual returns, net of expenses. The calculations in the table below are hypothetical and actual returns could be higher or lower than those appearing in the table below.Assumed Return on Our Portfolio (Net of Expenses)  -10%-5%0%5%10%Corresponding return to common stockholder(1)-22.99%-12.99%-2.99%7.00%17.00%(1)Assumes $5.2 billion in total assets, $2.6 billion in debt and secured borrowings outstanding and $2.6 billion in net assets as of September 30, 2021 and an effective annual interest rate of 3.01% as of September 30, 2021. Based on our outstanding indebtedness of $2.6 billion as of September 30, 2021 and the effective annual interest rate, which includes amortization of debt financing costs, amortization of discounts on notes issued and non-usage facility fees, of 3.01% as of that date, our investment portfolio would have been required to experience an annual return of at least 1.50% to cover annual interest payments on the outstanding debt. If we are unable to obtain leverage or if the interest rates of such leverage are not attractive, we could experience diminished returns. The number of leverage providers and the total amount of financing available could decrease or remain static. We could, directly or through subsidiaries, have concentrated exposure to a small number of commercial lenders or other financing providers, which could result in us being dependent on the continued availability of capital from such financing providers. Consequently, available financing could be more expensive or on terms that are less desirable than in an environment with a larger number of leverage providers.

As a result of the 2018 Debt Securitization and the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization, (each a "Debt Securitization" and, collectively, the "Debt Securitizations"), we are subject to a variety of risks, including those set forth below. We use the term "debt securitization" in this annual report on Form 10-K to describe a form of secured borrowing under which an operating company (sometimes referred to as an "originator" or "sponsor") acquires or originates mortgages, receivables, loans or other assets that earn income, whether on a one-time or recurring basis (collectively, "income producing assets"), and borrows money on a non-recourse basis against a legally separate pool of loans or other income producing assets. In a typical debt securitization, the originator transfers the loans or income producing assets to a single-purpose, bankruptcy-remote subsidiary (also referred to as a "special purpose entity"), which is established solely for the purpose of holding loans and income producing assets and issuing debt secured by these income producing assets. The special purpose entity completes the borrowing through the issuance of notes secured by the loans or other assets. The special purpose entity may issue the notes in the capital markets to a variety of investors, including banks, non-bank financial institutions and other investors. The special purpose entities that issued the notes in the 2018 Debt Securitization and the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization were the 2018 Issuer and the GCIC 2018 Issuer, respectively (each such special purpose entity, a "Securitization Issuer"). The 2018 Issuer and the GCIC 2018 Issuer are wholly-owned subsidiaries of 2018 CLO Depositor and GCIC CLO Depositor, respectively, each a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company (each a "CLO Depositor"). In each of the Debt Securitizations, institutional investors purchased certain notes issued by the applicable Securitization Issuer in private placements.

Under the terms of the respective loan sale agreement or loan sale agreements governing each Debt Securitization, we sold and/or contributed to the applicable Securitization Issuer all of our ownership interest in our portfolio loans and participations for the purchase price and other consideration set forth in such loan sale agreement. Following this transfer, the applicable Securitization Issuer held all of the ownership interest in such portfolio loans and participations. Under the terms of the respective loan sale agreements entered into upon closing of each of the 2018 Debt Securitization and the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization (each a "Closing Date Loan Sale Agreement"), which provided for the sale of assets on the applicable closing date to satisfy risk retention requirements, (1) we transferred to GC Advisors a portion of our ownership interest in the portfolio company investments securing such Debt Securitization for the purchase price and other consideration set forth in the applicable Closing Date Loan Sale Agreement and (2) immediately thereafter, GC Advisors sold to the respective Securitization Issuer all of its ownership interest in such portfolio loans for the purchase price and other consideration set forth in the applicable Closing Date Loan Sale Agreement. Under the terms of the other loan sale agreement governing each such Debt Securitization (each, a "Depositor Loan Sale Agreement"), which provides for the sale of assets on the applicable closing date as well as future sales from us to the applicable Securitization Issuer through the applicable CLO Depositor, (1) we sold and/or contributed to the applicable CLO Depositor the remainder of our ownership interest in the portfolio company investments securing the applicable Debt Securitization and participations for the purchase price and other consideration set forth in the applicable Depositor Loan Sale Agreement and (2) the applicable CLO Depositor, in turn, sold to the applicable Securitization Issuer all of its ownership interest in such portfolio loans and participations for the purchase price and other consideration set forth in one of the loan sale agreements. Following these transfers, the applicable Securitization Issuer, and not GC Advisors, the applicable CLO Depositor or us, held all of the ownership interest in such portfolio company investments and participations. As of September 30, 2021, we held indirectly through the applicable CLO Depositor, the Class C-2 2018 Notes, the Class D 2018 Notes, the Subordinated 2018 Notes, and 100% of the membership interests in the 2018 Issuer, the Class C GCIC 2018 Notes, the Class D GCIC 2018 Notes, the Subordinated GCIC 2018 Notes and 100% of the membership interests in the GCIC 2018 Issuer. As a result, we consolidate the financial statements of the 2018 Issuer and the GCIC 2018 Issuer, as well as our other subsidiaries, in our consolidated financial statements. Because each of the Securitization Issuers and CLO Depositors is disregarded as an entity separate from its owner for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the sale or contribution by us or a CLO Depositor to a Securitization Issuer or by us to a CLO Depositor did not constitute a taxable event for U.S. federal income tax purposes. If the U.S. Internal Revenue Service were to take a contrary position, there could be a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. We could, from time to time, hold asset-backed securities, or the economic equivalent thereof, issued by a securitization vehicle sponsored by another business development company to the extent permitted under the 1940 Act.

The notes issued by the Securitization Issuers and retained by us are the most junior class of notes issued by the applicable Securitization Issuer, are subordinated in priority of payment to the other notes issued by such Securitization Issuer and are subject to certain payment restrictions set forth in the indenture governing the notes issued by such Securitization Issuer. Therefore, we only receive cash distributions on such Notes if the applicable Securitization Issuer has made all cash interest payments to all other notes it has issued. Consequently, to the extent that the value of the portfolio of loan investments held by a Securitization Issuer has been reduced as a result of conditions in the credit markets, or as a result of defaulted loans or individual fund assets, the value of any notes that we have retained at their redemption could be reduced. If a Securitization Issuer does not meet the asset coverage tests or the interest coverage test set forth in the documents governing the applicable Debt Securitization, cash would be diverted from the notes that we hold to first pay the more senior notes issued by such Securitization Issuer in amounts sufficient to cause such tests to be satisfied. Each Securitization Issuer is the residual claimant on funds, if any, remaining after holders of all classes of notes issued by such Securitization Issuer have been paid in full on each payment date or upon maturity of such notes under the applicable Debt Securitization documents. As the holder of the membership interests in each Securitization Issuer, we could receive distributions, if any, only to the extent that the applicable Securitization Issuer makes distributions out of funds remaining after holders of all classes of notes issued by such Securitization Issuer have been paid in full on each payment date any amounts due and owing on such payment date or upon maturity of such notes. In the event that we fail to receive cash directly from a Securitization Issuer, we could be unable to make distributions in amounts sufficient to maintain our ability to be subject to tax as a RIC, or at all.

We are prohibited under the 1940 Act from participating in certain transactions with our affiliates without the prior approval of our independent directors and, in some cases, the SEC. Any person that owns, directly or indirectly, five percent or more of our outstanding voting securities is our affiliate for purposes of the 1940 Act, and we are generally prohibited from buying or selling any security from or to such affiliate, absent the prior approval of our independent directors. GC Advisors and its affiliates are considered our affiliates for such purposes. The 1940 Act also prohibits certain "joint" transactions with certain of our affiliates, which could include investments in the same portfolio company, without prior approval of our independent directors and, in some cases, the SEC. We are prohibited from buying or selling any security from or to, among others, any person who owns more than 25% of our voting securities or certain of that person's affiliates, or entering into prohibited joint transactions with such persons, absent the prior approval of the SEC. We can, however, invest alongside GC Advisors' and its affiliates' other clients in certain circumstances where doing so is consistent with applicable law, SEC staff, or Staff, interpretations, and the co-investment exemptive relief order from the SEC. For example, we can invest alongside such accounts consistent with guidance promulgated by the Staff permitting us and such other accounts to purchase interests in a single class of privately placed securities so long as certain conditions are met, including that GC Advisors, acting on our behalf and on behalf of its other clients, negotiates no term other than price. We can also invest alongside GC Advisors' other clients as otherwise permissible under regulatory guidance, applicable regulations and GC Advisors' allocation policy. Under this allocation policy, GC Advisors will determine the amount of any proposed investment to be made by us and similar eligible accounts. We expect that these determinations will be made similarly for other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates. If sufficient securities or loan amounts are available to satisfy our and each such account's proposed investment, the opportunity will be allocated in accordance with GC Advisors' pre-transaction determination. Where there is an insufficient amount of an investment opportunity to fully satisfy us and other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates, the allocation policy further provides that allocations among us and other accounts will generally be made pro rata based on the relative capital available for investment of each of us and such other eligible accounts, subject to minimum and maximum investment size limits. In situations in which co-investment with other entities sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates is not permitted or appropriate, GC Advisors will need to decide whether we or such other entity or entities will proceed with the investment. GC Advisors will make these determinations based on its policies and procedures, which generally require that such opportunities be offered to eligible accounts on a basis that will be fair and equitable over time, including, for example, through random or rotational methods. However, we can offer no assurance that investment opportunities will be allocated to us fairly or equitably in the short-term or over time. On occasion, an investment opportunity will be too large to satisfy our desired position size and that of other investment funds and accounts managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates. GC Advisors can provide no assurance that it will be able to identify counterparties to participate in such investment opportunities, and could be required to decline to make investments where it does not believe that it can successfully sell some of the investment opportunity to another market participant. In situations in which co-investment with other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates is not permitted or appropriate, such as when, in the absence of the exemptive relief described below, we and such other accounts cannot make investments in the same issuer or where the different investments could be expected to result in a conflict between our interest and those of other accounts, GC Advisors needs to decide whether we or such other accounts will proceed with such investments. GC Advisors makes these determinations based on its policies and procedures, which generally require that such investment opportunities be offered to eligible accounts on a basis that is fair and equitable over time, including, for example, through random or rotational methods. Moreover, we generally will be unable to invest in an issuer in which an account sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates has previously invested. Similar restrictions limit our ability to transact business with our officers or directors or their affiliates. These restrictions limit the scope of investment opportunities that would otherwise be available to us. On February 27, 2017, GC Advisors and certain other funds and accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates, received exemptive relief from the SEC to permit greater flexibility to negotiate the terms of co-investments if our board of directors determines that it would be advantageous for us to co-invest with other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates in a manner consistent with our investment objectives, positions, policies, strategies and restrictions as well as regulatory requirements and other pertinent factors. Under the terms of this exemptive relief, a "required majority" (as defined in Section 57(o) of the 1940 Act) of our independent directors is required to make certain conclusions in connection with a co-investment transaction, including that (1) the terms of the proposed transaction are reasonable and fair to us and our stockholders and do not involve overreaching of us or our stockholders on the part of any person concerned and (2) the transaction is consistent with the interests of our stockholders and is consistent with our investment strategies and policies. We believe that co-investment by us and accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates will afford us additional investment opportunities and the ability to achieve greater diversification. There could be many follow-on opportunities available to other entities advised by GC Advisors and its affiliates that are unavailable to us due to the limitations of the exemptive relief granted to GC Advisors and its affiliates. Although the terms of the exemptive relief require that GC Advisors will be given the opportunity to cause us to participate in certain transactions originated by affiliates of GC Advisors, GC Advisors may determine that we not participate in those transactions and for certain other transactions (as set forth in certain criteria approved by our board of directors) GC Advisors may not have the opportunity to cause us to participate. In addition, even if we and any such other entities sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates invest in the same securities or loans, conflicts of interest may still arise. For example, it is possible that, as a result of legal, tax, regulatory, accounting, political or other considerations, the terms of such investment (and divestment thereof) (including with respect to price and timing) for us and such other entities advised by GC Advisors and its affiliates could differ. Additionally, we and such other entities advised by GC Advisors and its affiliates will generally have different investment periods and/or investment objectives (including return profiles) and, as a result, have conflicting goals with respect to the price and timing of disposition opportunities. As such, to the extent permissible under applicable law and any applicable order issued by the SEC, we and such other entities could dispose of co-investments at different times and on different terms.

We could need additional capital to fund new investments and grow our portfolio of investments. We intend to access the capital markets periodically to issue debt or equity securities or borrow from financial institutions in order to obtain such additional capital. Unfavorable economic conditions could increase our funding costs, limit our access to the capital markets or result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit to us. A reduction in the availability of new capital could limit our ability to grow. In addition, in order to qualify as a RIC, we are required to distribute each taxable year an amount generally at least equal to 90% of the sum our net ordinary income and net short-term capital gains in excess of net long-term capital losses, or investment company taxable income, determined without regard to any deduction for dividends paid as dividends for U.S. federal income tax purposes, to our stockholders. As a result, these earnings are not available to fund new investments. An inability to access the capital markets successfully could limit our ability to grow our business and execute our business strategy fully and could decrease our earnings, if any, which could have an adverse effect on the value of our securities. Furthermore, to the extent we are not able to raise capital and are at or near our targeted leverage ratios, we could receive smaller allocations, if any, on new investment opportunities under GC Advisors' allocation policy and have, in the past, received such smaller allocations under similar circumstances.

GC Advisors will not make any investment on behalf of us that it does not believe to be in our best interest. However, conflicts can arise in any particular transaction between obtaining the most advantageous terms for an investment, which benefits us and other clients of GC Advisors participating in that investment, and maintaining GC Advisors' relationship with a borrower or private equity sponsor, which likely serves the long-term best interests of GC Advisors' clients overall, including us. For example, affiliates of GC Advisors hold relatively small, minority investments in unaffiliated private equity funds, which arguably creates an incentive for GC Advisors to cause us to invest in portfolio companies owned by such private equity funds and to treat such portfolio companies more favorably in a workout situation. As another example of the conflicts that could arise, GC Advisors is permitted to reduce or waive transaction or prepayment fees, offer loan terms that are more favorable to the borrower (and conversely, less favorable to us), accept a below target position size, agree to amend certain terms or waive existing terms or defaults or make other similar concessions to maintain or improve a relationship with a private equity sponsor or borrower, which GC Advisors believes will increase the likelihood of repeat business that will benefit us and GC Advisors' other clients.

We can, and have in the past, entered into repurchase agreements as part of our management of our investment portfolio. Under a repurchase agreement, we will effectively pledge our assets as collateral to secure a short-term loan where the counterparty acquires securities we hold as collateral subject to our obligation to repurchase and its obligation to resell the securities at an agreed upon time and price. Generally, the other party to the agreement makes the loan in an amount equal to a percentage of the fair value of the pledged collateral. At the maturity of the repurchase agreement, we will be required to repay the loan and correspondingly receive back our collateral. While used as collateral, the assets continue to pay principal and interest which are for our benefit. Our use of repurchase agreements, if any, involves many of the same risks involved in our use of leverage, as the proceeds from repurchase agreements generally will be invested in additional securities. There is a risk that the market value of the securities acquired in the repurchase agreement could decline below the price of the securities that we have sold but remain obligated to purchase. In addition, there is a risk that the market value of the securities retained by us could decline. If a buyer of securities under a repurchase agreement were to file for bankruptcy or experience insolvency, we could be adversely affected. Also, in entering into repurchase agreements, we would bear the risk of loss to the extent that the proceeds of such agreements at settlement are less than the fair value of the underlying securities being pledged. In addition, due to the interest costs associated with repurchase agreements, our net asset value would decline, and, in some cases, we could be worse off than if we had not used such agreements.

During the economic downturn in the United States that began in mid-2007, many commercial banks and other financial institutions stopped lending or significantly curtailed their lending activity. In addition, in an effort to stem losses and reduce their exposure to segments of the economy deemed to be high risk, some financial institutions limited routine refinancing and loan modification transactions and even reviewed the terms of existing facilities to identify bases for accelerating the maturity of existing lending facilities. To the extent these circumstances arise again in the future, it can be difficult for us to finance the growth of our investments on acceptable economic terms,or at all and one or more of our leverage facilities could be accelerated by the lenders.

Under the terms of the documents governing the 2018 Debt Securitization and the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization, the applicable Securitization Issuer could issue additional notes and use the net proceeds of such issuance to purchase additional portfolio loans. Any such additional issuance, however, would require the consent of the collateral manager to the applicable Debt Securitization and, in the case of each of the 2018 Debt Securitization and the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization, the applicable CLO Depositor and a supermajority of the Subordinated 2018 Notes or Subordinated GCIC 2018 Notes , as applicable. Among the other conditions that must be satisfied in connection with an additional issuance of notes, the aggregate principal amount of all additional issuances of notes may not exceed 100% of the respective original outstanding principal amount of such class of notes; the applicable Securitization Issuer must notify each rating agency of such issuance prior to the issuance date; and the terms of the notes to be issued must be identical to the terms of previously issued notes of the same class (except that all monies due on such additional notes will accrue from the issue date of such notes and that the spread over LIBOR and prices of such notes do not have to be identical to those of the initial notes, provided that the interest rate on such additional notes must not exceed the interest rate applicable to the initial class of such notes). We do not expect to cause the 2018 Issuer or the GCIC 2018 Issuer to issue any additional notes at this time. We could amend the documents governing each Debt Securitization from time to time, and without amendment, the 2018 Debt Securitization documents do not provide for additional issuances of Class A 2018 Notes. The total purchase price for any additional notes that could be issued may not always equal 100% of the par value of such notes, depending on several factors, including fees and closing expenses.

We own directly or indirectly 100% of the equity interests in each of our Funding Subsidiaries. We consolidate the financial statements of our Funding Subsidiaries in our consolidated financial statements and treat the indebtedness under the Revolving Credit Facilities as our leverage. Our interests in our Funding Subsidiaries are subordinated in priority of payment to every other obligation of such Funding Subsidiary and are subject to certain payment restrictions set forth in each Revolving Credit Facility. We receive cash distributions on our equity interests in our Funding Subsidiaries only if such Funding Subsidiary has made all required cash interest payments to the respective lenders and no default exists under the respective Revolving Credit Facility. We cannot assure you that distributions on the assets held by our Funding Subsidiaries will be sufficient to make any distributions to us or that such distributions will meet our expectations. We receive cash from a Funding Subsidiary only to the extent that we receive distributions on our equity interests in such Funding Subsidiary. Each Funding Subsidiary could make distributions on its equity interests only to the extent permitted by the payment priority provisions of the applicable Revolving Credit Facility. Each of the Revolving Credit Facilities generally provides that payments on the respective interests could not be made on any payment date unless all amounts owing to the lenders and other secured parties are paid in full. In addition, if a Funding Subsidiary does not meet the asset coverage tests or the interest coverage test set forth in the documents of the applicable Revolving Credit Facility, a default would occur. In the event of a default under a Revolving Credit Facility document, cash would be diverted from us to pay the applicable lender and other secured parties in amounts sufficient to cause such tests to be satisfied. In the event that we fail to receive cash from our Funding Subsidiaries, we could be unable to make distributions to our stockholders in amounts sufficient to maintain our status as a RIC, or at all. We also could be forced to sell investments in portfolio companies at less than their fair value in order to continue making such distributions. Our equity interests in each Funding Subsidiary rank behind all of the secured and unsecured creditors, known or unknown, of such Funding Subsidiary, including the lenders in the respective Revolving Credit Facility. Consequently, to the extent that the value of a Funding Subsidiary's portfolio of loan investments has been reduced as a result of conditions in the credit markets, defaulted loans, capital gains and losses on the underlying assets, prepayment or changes in interest rates, the returns on our investments in such Funding Subsidiary could be reduced. Accordingly, our investments in each of our Funding Subsidiaries could be subject to up to 100% loss.

Each of the Revolving Credit Facilities place significant restrictions on our ability, as servicer, to sell investments. As a result, there could be times or circumstances during which we are unable to sell investments or take other actions that might be in our best interests.

The debt that we invest in is typically not initially rated by any rating agency, but we believe that if such investments were rated, they would be below investment grade (rated lower than "Baa3" by Moody's Investors Service, lower than "BBB-" by Fitch Ratings or lower than "BBB-" by Standard & Poor's Ratings Services), which under the guidelines established by these entities is an indication of having predominantly speculative characteristics with respect to the issuer's capacity to pay interest and repay principal. Bonds that are rated below investment grade are sometimes referred to as "high yield bonds" or "junk bonds." Therefore, our investments could result in an above average amount of risk and volatility or loss of principal.

Investment in leveraged companies involves a number of significant risks. Leveraged companies in which we invest could have limited financial resources and could be unable to meet their obligations under their debt securities that we hold. These companies could be subject to restrictive financial and operating covenants and their leverage could impair their ability to finance their future operations and capital needs. As a result, these companies' flexibility to respond to changing business and economic conditions and to take advantage of business opportunities could be limited. Such developments could be accompanied by a deterioration in the value of any collateral and a reduction in the likelihood of our realizing any guarantees that we could have obtained in connection with our investment. Smaller leveraged companies also could have less predictable operating results and could require substantial additional capital to support their operations, finance their expansion or maintain their competitive position.

Any distributions made from sources other than cash flow from operations or relying on fee or expense reimbursement waivers, if any, from GC Advisors or the Administrator are not based on our investment performance, and can only be sustained if we achieve positive investment performance in future periods and/or GC Advisors or the Administrator continues to make such expense reimbursements, if any. The extent to which we pay distributions from sources other than cash flow from operations will depend on various factors, including the level of participation in our DRIP, how quickly we invest the proceeds from any offerings of our securities and the performance of our investments. There can be no assurance that we will achieve such performance in order to sustain any level of distributions, or be able to pay distributions at all. GC Advisors and the Administrator have no obligation to waive fees or receipt of expense reimbursements, if any.

It is possible that our portfolio could be concentrated in a limited number of portfolio companies and industries. As a result, our interests could be impaired by the concentration of our investments in any one obligor or obligors in a particular industry or geographic location in the event that such obligor, industry or geographic location were to experience adverse business conditions or other adverse events, including the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, defaults could be highly correlated with particular obligors, industries or geographic locations. If loans involving a particular obligor, industry or geographic location represent more than a small proportion of our portfolio, and that obligor, industry or geographic location were to experience difficulties that would affect payments on the loans, the overall timing and amount of collections on the loans held by us could differ from what was expected.

Leveraged companies could experience bankruptcy or similar financial distress, and the risk of these events has been significantly increased by the COVID-19 pandemic. The bankruptcy process has a number of significant inherent risks. Many events in a bankruptcy proceeding are products of contested matters and adversarial proceedings and are beyond the control of the creditors. A bankruptcy filing by an issuer could have adverse and permanent effects on the issuer. If the proceeding is converted to a liquidation, the value of the issuer will not necessarily equal the liquidation value that was believed to exist at the time of the investment. A bankruptcy or other workout, often raises conflicts of interests (including, for example, conflicts over proposed waivers and amendments to debt covenants), including between investors who hold different types of interests in the applicable company. The duration of a bankruptcy proceeding is also difficult to predict, and a creditor's return on investment can be adversely affected by delays until the plan of reorganization or liquidation ultimately becomes effective. The administrative costs of a bankruptcy proceeding are frequently high and are paid out of the debtor's estate prior to any return to creditors. Because the standards for classification of claims under bankruptcy law are vague, our influence with respect to the class of securities or other obligations it owns could be reduced by increases in the number and monetary value of claims in the same class or by different classification and treatment. In the early stages of the bankruptcy process, it is often difficult to estimate the extent of, or even to identify, any contingent claims that might be made. In addition, certain claims that have priority by law (for example, claims for taxes) can be substantial. Depending on the facts and circumstances of our investments and the extent of our involvement in the management of a portfolio company, upon the bankruptcy of a portfolio company, a bankruptcy court could recharacterize our debt investments as equity interests and subordinate all or a portion of our claim to that of other creditors. This could occur even though we have structured our investment as senior debt.

Under the 1940 Act, a business development company is restricted from acquiring any asset other than assets of the type listed in the 1940 Act, which are referred to as "qualifying assets," unless, at the time the acquisition is made, qualifying assets represent at least 70% of the company's total assets. In order for our investments to be classified as "qualifying assets," among other requirements, such investments must be in issuers organized under the laws of, and which have their principal place of business in, any state of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands or any other possession of the United States. We can invest in non-U.S. companies, including emerging market issuers, to the limited extent such investments are permitted under the 1940 Act. We expect that these investments would focus on the same types of investments that we make in U.S. middle market companies and accordingly would be complementary to our overall strategy and enhance the diversity of our holdings. Investing in securities of emerging market issuers involves many risks including economic, social, political, financial, tax and security conditions in the emerging market, potential inflationary economic environments, regulation by foreign governments, different accounting standards and political uncertainties. Economic, social, political, financial, tax and security conditions also could negatively affect the value of emerging market companies. These factors could include changes in the emerging market government's economic and fiscal policies, the possible imposition of, or changes in, currency exchange laws or other laws or restrictions applicable to the emerging market companies or investments in their securities and the possibility of fluctuations in the rate of exchange between currencies. Any of our portfolio company investments that are denominated in foreign currencies will be subject to the risks associated with fluctuations in currency exchange rates, which fluctuations could adversely affect our performance. We have and could in the future enter into hedging transactions to the limited extent such transactions are permitted under the 1940 Act and applicable commodities laws. Engaging in hedging transactions or investing in foreign securities would entail additional risks to our stockholders. We could, for example, use instruments such as interest rate swaps, caps, collars and floors and, if we were to invest in foreign securities, we could use instruments such as forward contracts or currency options in currencies selected to hedge against fluctuations in the relative values of our portfolio positions from changes in currency exchange rates and market interest rates. We could also, for example, borrow under a credit facility in currencies selected to minimize our foreign currency exposure. Use of these hedging instruments could include counterparty credit risk. In each such case, we generally would seek to hedge against fluctuations of the relative values of our portfolio positions from changes in market interest rates or currency exchange rates. While hedging transactions can reduce such risks, they generally will not be designed to prevent all loss from our position. There also could be barriers that prevent us from entering into certain hedging transactions. These barriers will not necessarily impact other investment funds managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates. Hedging transactions could result in a lower overall performance for us than if it had not entered into hedging transactions and generally introduces new risks, such as counterparty risk and greater illiquidity. In addition, we are permitted to borrow funds in one or more foreign currencies as a form of protection against currency risk. The use of such financing could create new risks not traditionally associated with credit facilities or other forms of leverage. Conversely, to the extent that we do not enter into hedging transactions, borrower defaults and fluctuations in currency exchange rates or interest rates could result in poorer overall performance for us than if it had entered into such hedging transactions. The success of any hedging transactions that we enter into will depend on our ability to correctly predict movements in currency and interest rates. Therefore, while we could enter into hedging transactions to seek to reduce currency exchange rate and interest rate risks, unanticipated changes in currency exchange rates or interest rates could result in poorer overall investment performance than if we had not engaged in any such hedging transactions. In addition, the degree of correlation between price movements of the instruments used in a hedging strategy and price movements in the portfolio positions being hedged could vary. Moreover, for a variety of reasons, we would not necessarily seek to (or be able to) establish a perfect correlation between the hedging instruments and the portfolio holdings being hedged. Any such imperfect correlation could prevent us from achieving the intended hedge and expose us to risk of loss. In addition, it is often not possible to hedge fully or perfectly against currency fluctuations affecting the value of securities denominated in non-U.S. currencies because the value of those securities would likely fluctuate as a result of factors not related to currency fluctuations. Our ability to engage in hedging transactions could also be limited under the Code as well as adversely affected by rules adopted by the CFTC.

While our investment portfolio will be focused on loans, we are also permitted to invest in equity securities. Such investments are expected to represent minority ownership in the issuer and are subordinate to the claims of the issuer's creditors and, to the extent such securities are common securities, to preferred equity holders. The value of equity securities is dependent on the performance of the issuer and can fluctuate based on the issuer's financial performance, market conditions, and overall economic conditions. Dividends paid to equity holders could be suspended or cancelled at any time, and minority owners could have limited protections. We also could be unable to realize any value if a portfolio company does not have a liquidity event, such as a sale of the business, recapitalization or public offering, which would allow us to sell our underlying equity interests. In addition, if an issuer of equity securities in which we have invested sells additional shares of its equity securities, our interest in the issuer will be diluted and the value of our investment could decrease. For the foregoing reasons, investments in equity securities can be highly speculative and carry a substantial risk of loss of investment. Investments in equity securities can carry additional risks or have other characteristics that require different structuring. As such, these investments can be made directly, or indirectly through blocker entities or otherwise.

A number of judicial decisions have upheld judgments for borrowers against lending institutions on the basis of various legal theories, collectively termed "lender liability." Generally, lender liability is founded on the premise that a lender has violated a duty (whether implied or contractual) of good faith, commercial reasonableness and fair dealing or a similar duty owed to the borrower, or has assumed an excessive degree of control over the borrower resulting in the creation of a fiduciary duty owed to the borrower or its other creditors or stockholders. We could be required to defend allegations of lender liability from time to time. Loans to companies operating in workout modes or under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code are, in certain circumstances, subject to certain potential liabilities that could exceed the amount of such loan purchased by us. Under common law principles that in some cases form the basis for lender liability claims, if a lender or bondholder (i) intentionally takes an action that results in the undercapitalization of a borrower to the detriment of other creditors of such borrower, (ii) engages in other inequitable conduct to the detriment of such other creditors, (iii) engages in fraud with respect to, or makes misrepresentations to, such other creditors or (iv) uses its influence as a stockholder to dominate or control a borrower to the detriment of other creditors of such borrower, a court could elect to subordinate the claim of the offending lender or bondholder to the claims of the disadvantaged creditor or creditors, a remedy called "equitable subordination." Because of the nature of the loans, the loans could be subject to claims of subordination.

We have invested and intend to invest a portion of our capital in second lien and subordinated loans issued by our portfolio companies, and we could have exposure to a variety of debt that captures particular layers of a borrower's credit structure, such as "last out" or "second lien" debt, or other subordinated investments that rank below other obligations of the borrower in right of payment. Subordinated investments are subject to greater risk of loss than senior obligations where there are adverse changes to the financial condition of the borrower or a decline in general economic conditions. Subordinated investments could expose us to particular risks in a distress scenario, such as the risk that creditors are not aligned. Holders of subordinated investments generally have less ability to affect the results of a distressed scenario than holders of more senior investments. Additionally, lenders to companies operating in workout modes are, in certain circumstances, subject to potential liabilities that could exceed the amount of such loan purchased by us. We have made in the past, and could make in the future, unsecured loans to portfolio companies, meaning that such loans will not benefit from any interest in collateral of such companies. Liens on a portfolio company's collateral, if any, will secure the portfolio company's obligations under its outstanding secured debt and could secure certain future debt that is permitted to be incurred by the portfolio company under its secured loan agreements. The holders of obligations secured by such liens will generally control the liquidation of, and be entitled to receive proceeds from, any realization of such collateral to repay their obligations in full before us. In addition, the value of such collateral in the event of liquidation will depend on market and economic conditions, the availability of buyers and other factors. There can be no assurance that the proceeds, if any, from sales of such collateral would be sufficient to satisfy our unsecured loan obligations after payment in full of all loans secured by collateral. If such proceeds were not sufficient to repay the outstanding secured loan obligations, then our unsecured claims would rank equally with the unpaid portion of such secured creditors' claims against the portfolio company's remaining assets, if any. The rights we could have with respect to the collateral securing any junior priority loans we make to our portfolio companies could also be limited pursuant to the terms of one or more intercreditor agreements that we enter into with the holders of senior debt. Under a typical intercreditor agreement, at any time that obligations that have the benefit of the first priority liens are outstanding, any of the following actions that could be taken in respect of the collateral will be at the direction of the holders of the obligations secured by the first priority liens: - the ability to cause the commencement of enforcement proceedings against the collateral;- the ability to control the conduct of such proceedings;- the approval of amendments to collateral documents;- releases of liens on the collateral; and - waivers of past defaults under collateral documents. We will not always have the ability to control or direct such actions, even if our rights as junior lenders are adversely affected.

A significant portion of our investments involve private securities. In connection with the disposition of an investment in private securities, we could be required to make representations about the business and financial affairs of the portfolio company typical of those made in connection with the sale of a business. We could also be required to indemnify the purchasers of such investment to the extent that any such representations turn out to be inaccurate or with respect to potential liabilities. These arrangements could result in contingent liabilities that ultimately result in funding obligations that we must satisfy through our return of payments previously received by us.

The debt to which we are primarily exposed is expected to consist predominantly of loans and notes that are obligations of corporations, partnerships or other entities. This debt often has no, or only a limited, trading market. The investment in illiquid debt will often restrict our ability to dispose of investments in a timely fashion, for a fair price, or at all. If an underlying issuer of debt experiences an adverse event, this illiquidity would make it more difficult for us to sell such debt, and we could instead be required to pursue a workout or alternate way out of the position. To the extent debt in a portfolio company is also held by other third-party investors, we would generally have limited control over a workout or alternate means of disposition and the person(s) having such control could have interests that are not aligned with ours. We would likely also face other restrictions on our ability to liquidate an investment in a portfolio company to the extent that we, GC Advisors, Golub Capital or any of its affiliates have material non-public information regarding such portfolio company.

As a business development company, we are required to carry our investments at market value or, if no market value is ascertainable, at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors. The fair value methodology utilized is in accordance with the fair value principles established by the Accounting Standards Codification Topic 820. Our board of directors uses the services of one or more independent service providers to review the valuation of our illiquid investments. Valuations reflect significant events that affect the value of the instruments. As part of the valuation process, we could take into account the following types of factors, if relevant, in determining the fair value of our investments: - a comparison of the portfolio company's securities to publicly traded securities;- the enterprise value of the portfolio company;- the nature and realizable value of any collateral;- the portfolio company's ability to make payments and its earnings and discounted cash flow;- the markets in which the portfolio company does business; and - changes in the interest rate environment and the credit markets generally that could affect the price at which similar investments could be made in the future and other relevant factors. The fair value measurement seeks to approximate the price that would be received for an investment on a current sale and assumes that the transaction to sell an asset occurs in the principal market for such asset or, in the absence of a principal market, the most advantageous market for such asset, which could be a hypothetical market, and excludes transaction costs. When an external event such as a purchase transaction, public offering or subsequent equity sale occurs, we use the pricing indicated by the external event to corroborate our valuation. We record decreases in the market values or fair values of our investments as unrealized depreciation. Declines in prices and liquidity in the corporate debt markets could result in significant net unrealized depreciation in our portfolio. The effect of all of these factors on our portfolio could reduce our net asset value by increasing net unrealized depreciation in our portfolio. Depending on market conditions, we could incur substantial realized losses and could suffer additional unrealized losses in future periods, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Because orderly markets currently do not exist for some investments, and because valuations, and particularly valuations of private investments and private companies, require judgment, are inherently uncertain, could fluctuate over short periods and are often based on estimates, our determinations of the fair value of investments could differ materially from the values that would have been used had a ready market existed for such investments.

The loans in our investment portfolio could be prepaid at any time, generally with little advance notice. Whether a loan is prepaid will depend both on the continued positive performance of the portfolio company and the existence of favorable financing market conditions that allow such company the ability to replace existing financing with less expensive capital. As market conditions change, we do not know when, and if, prepayment could be possible for each portfolio company. Certain fixed-income securities are subject to the risk of unanticipated prepayment. Prepayment risk is the risk that, when interest rates fall, the issuer will redeem the security prior to the security's expected maturity. It is possible that we will reinvest the proceeds from such a redemption at a lower interest rate, resulting in less income to us. Securities subject to prepayment risk generally offer less potential for gains when prevailing interest rates fall. If we buy those securities at a premium, accelerated prepayments on those securities could cause us to lose a portion of its principal investment. The impact of prepayments on the price of a security can be difficult to predict and could increase the security's price volatility.

Credit risk refers to the likelihood that a borrower will default in the payment of principal and/or interest. Financial strength and solvency of a borrower are the primary factors influencing credit risk. Lack or inadequacy of collateral or credit enhancement for a debt instrument could also affect its credit risk. Credit risk can change over the life of a loan, and securities and other debt instruments that are rated by rating agencies can be downgraded. This risk and the risk of default is increased to the extent that the loan documents do not require the portfolio companies to pay down the outstanding principal of such debt prior to maturity, which is expected to be a common feature among many of our loan investments. Investments with a deferred interest feature, such as original issue discount income and payment-in-kind interest, could represent a higher credit risk than investments that must pay interest in full in cash on a regular basis. A significant downturn in the economy or a particular economic sector could have a significant impact on the business prospects of the portfolio companies to which we are exposed, whether directly or indirectly. Such developments could adversely affect the ability of such companies to comply with their loan repayment obligations. It is possible that the issuer of a note or other instrument in which we invest could default on its debts, in which case we could lose most or all of its investment in that instrument, subjecting us to significant loss. The risk and magnitude of losses associated with defaults could be increased where the instrument is leveraged.

The Unsecured Notes are not secured by any of our assets or any of the assets of our subsidiaries. As a result, the Unsecured Notes are effectively subordinated, or junior, to any secured indebtedness or other obligations we or our subsidiaries have outstanding as of the date of issuance of the Unsecured Notes or that we or our subsidiaries may incur in the future (or any indebtedness that is initially unsecured in respect of which we subsequently grant security) to the extent of the value of the assets securing such indebtedness. A substantial portion of our assets are currently pledged as collateral under the Debt Securitizations and Revolving Credit Facilities. In any liquidation, dissolution, bankruptcy or other similar proceeding, the holders of any of our existing or future secured indebtedness and the secured indebtedness of our subsidiaries may assert rights against the assets pledged to secure that indebtedness in order to receive full payment of their indebtedness before the assets may be used to pay other creditors, including the holders of the Unsecured Notes. As of September 30, 2021, we had an aggregate of approximately $1.4 billion of outstanding borrowings under the Debt Securitizations and the Revolving Credit Facilities, all of which are secured and thus effectively senior to the Unsecured Notes.

The indenture governing the Unsecured Notes offers limited protection to holders of the Unsecured Notes. The terms of the indenture and the Unsecured Notes do not restrict our or any of our subsidiaries' ability to engage in, or otherwise be a party to, a variety of corporate transactions, circumstances or events that could have a material adverse impact on an investment in the Unsecured Notes. In particular, the terms of the indenture and the Unsecured Notes do not place any restrictions on our or our subsidiaries' ability to: - issue securities or otherwise incur additional indebtedness or other obligations, including (1) any indebtedness or other obligations that would be pari passu, or equal, in right of payment to the Unsecured Notes, (2) any indebtedness or other obligations that would be secured and therefore rank effectively senior in right of payment to the Unsecured Notes to the extent of the value of the assets securing such indebtedness, (3) indebtedness or other obligations of ours that are guaranteed by one or more of our subsidiaries and which therefore are structurally senior to the Unsecured Notes and (4) securities, indebtedness or other obligations issued or incurred by our subsidiaries that would be senior to our equity interests in our subsidiaries and therefore rank structurally senior to the Unsecured Notes with respect to the assets of our subsidiaries, in each case other than an incurrence of indebtedness or other obligations that would cause a violation of Section 18(a)(1)(A) of the 1940 Act as modified by Section 61(a)(1) and (2) of the 1940 Act or any successor provisions, as such obligations may be amended or superseded, giving effect to any exemptive relief granted to us by the SEC. Currently, these provisions generally prohibit us from incurring additional borrowings, including through the issuance of additional debt securities, unless our asset coverage, as defined in the 1940 Act, equals at least 150% after such borrowings;- pay dividends on, or purchase or redeem or make any payments in respect of, capital stock or other securities ranking junior in right of payment to the Unsecured Notes;- sell assets (other than certain limited restrictions on our ability to consolidate, merge or sell all or substantially all of our assets);- enter into transactions with affiliates;- create liens (including liens on the shares of our subsidiaries) or enter into sale and leaseback transactions;- make investments; or - create restrictions on the payment of dividends or other amounts to us from our subsidiaries. Furthermore, the terms of the indenture and the Unsecured Notes do not protect holders of the Unsecured Notes in the event that we experience changes (including significant adverse changes) in our financial condition, results of operations or credit ratings, as they do not require that we or our subsidiaries adhere to any financial tests or ratios or specified levels of net worth, revenues, income, cash flow or liquidity other than certain events of default under the indenture governing the Unsecured Notes. Our ability to recapitalize, incur additional debt and take a number of other actions are not limited by the terms of the Unsecured Notes and may have important consequences for holders of the Unsecured Notes, including making it more difficult for us to satisfy our obligations with respect to the Unsecured Notes or negatively affecting the trading value of the Unsecured Notes. Certain of our current debt instruments include more protections for their holders than the indenture and the Unsecured Notes. In addition, other debt we issue or incur in the future could contain more protections for its holders than the indenture and the Unsecured Notes, including additional covenants and events of default. The issuance or incurrence of any such debt with incremental protections could affect the market for and trading levels and prices of the Unsecured Notes.

The Unsecured Notes are new issuances of debt securities and currently may or may not have an active trading market. We do not intend to apply for listing of the Unsecured Notes on any securities exchange or for quotation of the Unsecured Notes on any automated dealer quotation system. If no active trading market develops, holder may not be able to resell the Unsecured Notes at their fair market value or at all. If the Unsecured Notes are traded after their initial issuance, they may trade at a discount from their initial offering price depending on prevailing interest rates, the market for similar securities, our credit ratings, general economic conditions, our financial condition, performance and prospects and other factors. Any market-making activity will be subject to limits imposed by law. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that a liquid trading market will develop for the Unsecured Notes, that holders will be able to sell the Unsecured Notes at a particular time or that the price received when sold will be favorable. To the extent an active trading market does not develop, the liquidity and trading price for the Unsecured Notes may be harmed. Accordingly, holders may be required to bear the financial risk of an investment in the Unsecured Notes for an indefinite period of time.

Any default under the agreements governing our indebtedness, including the Debt Securitizations, the Revolving Credit Facilities or other indebtedness to which we may be a party that is not waived by the required lenders or holders, and the remedies sought by the holders of such indebtedness could make us unable to pay principal, premium, if any, and interest on the Unsecured Notes and substantially decrease the market value of the Unsecured Notes. If we are unable to generate sufficient cash flow and are otherwise unable to obtain funds necessary to meet required payments of principal, premium, if any, and interest on our indebtedness, or if we otherwise fail to comply with the various covenants, including financial and operating covenants, in the instruments governing our indebtedness, we could be in default under the terms of the agreements governing such indebtedness. In the event of such default, the holders of such indebtedness could elect to declare all the funds borrowed thereunder to be due and payable,together with accrued and unpaid interest, the lenders under the Revolving Credit Facilities or other debt we may incur in the future could elect to terminate their commitments, cease making further loans and institute foreclosure proceedings against our assets, and we could be forced into bankruptcy or liquidation. If our operating performance declines, we may in the future need to seek to obtain waivers from the required lenders under the Revolving Credit Facilities or the required holders of the Debt Securitizations or other debt that we may incur in the future, to avoid being in default. If we breach our covenants under the Debt Securitizations, the Revolving Credit Facilities or other debt and seek a waiver, we may not be able to obtain a waiver from the required lenders or holders. If this occurs, we would be in default and our lenders or debt holders could exercise their rights as described above, and we could be forced into bankruptcy or liquidation. If we are unable to repay debt, lenders or holders having secured obligations, including the lenders and holders under the Debt Securitizations and the Revolving Credit Facilities could proceed against the collateral securing the debt. Because the Revolving Credit Facilities have, and any future credit facilities will likely have, customary cross-default provisions, if the indebtedness thereunder or under any future credit facility is accelerated, we may be unable to repay or finance the amounts due. In the event holders of any debt securities we have outstanding exercise their rights to accelerate following a cross-default, those holders would be entitled to receive the principal amount of their investment, subject to any subordination arrangements that may be in place. We cannot assure you that we will have sufficient liquidity to be able to repay such amounts, in which case we would be in default under the accelerated debt and holders would have the ability to sue us to recover amounts then owing.

Our credit ratings are an assessment by rating agencies of our ability to pay our debts when due. Consequently, real or anticipated changes in our credit ratings will generally affect the market value of the Unsecured Notes or other debt securities we may issue. These credit ratings may not reflect the potential impact of risks relating to the structure or marketing of the Unsecured Notes. Credit ratings are not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security, and may be revised or withdrawn at any time by the issuing organization in its sole discretion. Neither we nor any underwriter undertakes any obligation to maintain our credit ratings or to advise holders of the Unsecured Notes of any changes in our credit ratings.

The condition of the financial markets and prevailing interest rates have fluctuated in the past and are likely to fluctuate in the future, which could have an adverse effect on the market prices of the Unsecured Notes. In general, as market interest rates rise, debt securities bearing interest at fixed rates of interest decline in value. Consequently, if market interest rates increase, the market values of the Unsecured Notes with fixed interest rates may decline. We cannot predict the future level of market interest rates.

The Unsecured Notes are redeemable in whole or in part upon certain conditions at any time or from time to time at our option. We may choose to redeem the Unsecured Notes at times when prevailing interest rates are lower than the interest rate paid on the Unsecured Notes. In this circumstance, holders may not be able to reinvest the redemption proceeds in a comparable security at an effective interest rate as high as the Unsecured Notes being redeemed.

We may not be able to repurchase the Unsecured Notes upon a Change of Control Repurchase Event (as defined in the indenture governing the Unsecured Notes) because we may not have sufficient funds. Upon a Change of Control Repurchase Event, holders of the Unsecured Notes may require us to repurchase for cash some or all of the Unsecured Notes at a repurchase price equal to 100% of the aggregate principal amount of the Unsecured Notes being repurchased, plus accrued and unpaid interest to, but not including, the repurchase date. Our failure to purchase such tendered Unsecured Notes upon the occurrence of such Change of Control Repurchase Event would cause an event of default under the indenture governing the Unsecured Notes and a cross-default under the agreements governing certain of our other indebtedness, which may result in the acceleration of such indebtedness requiring us to repay that indebtedness immediately.

We have invested and continue to make investments in issuers located outside the United States. Investments in issuers located outside the United States that are generally denominated in non-U.S. currencies involve both risks and opportunities not typically associated with investing in securities of United States companies. The legal and regulatory environments often have material differences, particularly as to bankruptcy and reorganization. Other considerations include changes in exchange rates and exchange control regulations, political and social instability, general economic conditions, expropriation, imposition of non-U.S. taxes, less liquid markets and less available information than is generally the case in the United States, higher transaction costs, foreign government restrictions, less government supervision of exchanges, brokers and issuers, greater risks associated with counterparties and settlement, less developed bankruptcy laws, difficulty in enforcing contractual obligations, lack of uniform accounting and auditing standards and greater price volatility. Among the factors that could affect currency values are trade balances, the level of short-term interest rates, differences in relative values of similar assets in different currencies, long-term opportunities for investment and capital appreciation and political developments. We could employ hedging techniques to minimize these risks, but we cannot assure you that such strategies will be effective or without risk to us. As of September 30, 2021, we were invested in securities of twenty-three non-U.S. companies. Securities issued by non-U.S. companies are not "qualifying assets" under the 1940 Act, and we could invest in non-U.S. companies, including emerging markets issuers, to the limited extent such investments are permitted under the 1940 Act.

While we currently hold a portfolio of investments, we have not yet identified additional potential investments for our portfolio that we will acquire with the proceeds of any offering of securities or repayments of investments currently in our portfolio. Privately negotiated investments in loans and illiquid securities or private middle-market companies require substantial due diligence and structuring, and we cannot provide any assurance that we will achieve our anticipated investment pace. As a result, investors will not be able to evaluate any future portfolio company investments prior to purchasing our securities. Additionally, GC Advisors selects all of our investments, and our stockholders will have no input with respect to such investment decisions. These factors increase the uncertainty, and thus the risk, of investing in our securities. We anticipate that we will use substantially all of the net proceeds of any sale of our securities within approximately six months following the completion of any sale of our securities, depending on the availability of appropriate investment opportunities consistent with our investment objectives and market conditions. Until such appropriate investment opportunities can be found, we could also invest the net proceeds in cash, cash equivalents, U.S. government securities and high-quality debt investments that mature in one year or less from the date of investment. We expect these temporary investments to earn yields substantially lower than the income that we expect to receive in respect of our targeted investment types. As a result, any distributions we make during this period could be substantially smaller than the distributions that we expect to pay when our portfolio is fully invested.

Following an initial investment in a portfolio company, we could make additional investments in that portfolio company as "follow-on" investments, in seeking to: - increase or maintain in whole or in part our position as a creditor or equity ownership percentage in a portfolio company;- exercise warrants, options or convertible securities that were acquired in the original or subsequent financing; or - preserve or enhance the value of our investment. We have discretion to make follow-on investments, subject to the availability of capital resources. Failure on our part to make follow-on investments could, in some circumstances, jeopardize the continued viability of a portfolio company and our initial investment, or could result in a missed opportunity for us to increase our participation in a successful portfolio company. Even if we have sufficient capital to make a desired follow-on investment, we could elect not to make a follow-on investment because we do not want to increase our level of risk, because we prefer other opportunities or because of regulatory or other considerations. Our ability to make follow-on investments could also be limited by GC Advisors' allocation policy.

Investment in private and middle-market companies involves a number of significant risks. Generally, little public information exists about these companies, and we rely on the ability of GC Advisors' investment professionals to obtain adequate information to evaluate the potential returns from investing in these companies. If GC Advisors is unable to uncover all material information about these companies, it would not be able to make a fully informed investment decision and we could lose money on our investments. Compared to larger companies, middle market companies typically have shorter operating histories, more limited financial resources, newer technologies and/or products, smaller market shares, less experienced management teams and less predictable operating results, and often participate in quickly evolving markets, and are more reliant on a small number of products, managers or clients. Middle market companies could also require substantial additional capital to support their operations, finance expansion or maintain their competitive position and could have difficulty accessing the capital markets to meet future capital needs, which could limit their ability to grow or to repay their outstanding indebtedness upon maturity. In addition, the middle market companies in which we invest could be subject to governmental and non-governmental regulations, including by federal and state regulators and various self-regulatory organizations and the costs of complying with these laws and regulations could be more material to the company as compared to a larger company. If a company in which we directly or indirectly invest fails to comply with an applicable regulatory regime, it could be subject to fines, injunctions, operating restrictions or criminal prosecution, any of which could materially and adversely affect the value of our investment. We will not control a portfolio company's management or the manner in which a company's management addresses the company's risks except in the event that a portfolio company defaults on its loan from us and we seek to enforce our security interest. In addition, middle market companies often require additional financing to expand or maintain their competitive position, and they could have a more difficult time obtaining additional capital than larger companies. An important concern in making investments is the possibility of material misrepresentation or omission on the part of the portfolio company. Such inaccuracy or incompleteness can adversely affect, among other things, the valuation of collateral, other debt obligations, our ability to perfect or effectuate a lien on the collateral securing a loan or other debt obligation, the financial condition of the issuer, or the business prospects of the issuer. We will rely upon the accuracy and completeness of representations made by portfolio companies to the extent reasonable. However, there can be no guarantee that such representations are accurate or complete. If the issuer of securities purchased by us does not perform to GC Advisors' expectations, the value of its equity and debt securities would likely decline and the issuer could default on its obligations. Poor performance can be caused by a number of factors, including failures of management, competitive pressures, pressure by customers and suppliers, labor unrest, or force majeure events, such as the current COVID-19 pandemic. While GC Advisors intends to invest in portfolio companies in industries that it believes are insulated from the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, there can be no assurance that such portfolio companies will not be adversely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic or other market or economic conditions. The value of our investments in loans will likely be detrimentally affected to the extent a borrower defaults on its obligations, there is insufficient collateral, and/or there are extensive legal and other costs incurred in collecting on a defaulted loan. GC Advisors will attempt to minimize this risk, for example, by maintaining low loan-to-liquidation values with each loan and the collateral underlying the loan. However, there can be no assurance that the liquidation value assigned by GC Advisors would be realized by the portfolio company upon liquidation, nor can there be any assurance that such collateral will retain its value. In addition, certain of our loans will be supported, in whole or in part, by personal guarantees made by the borrower or an affiliate of the borrower. If such guarantee is called and the guarantor fails to meet its obligations under the guarantee, the amount realizable with respect to a loan will generally be detrimentally affected. There could be a monetary as well as a time cost involved in collecting on defaulted loans and, if applicable, taking possession of various types of collateral. In addition, any activity deemed to be active lending/origination by us could subject it to additional regulation.

We invest primarily in privately held companies. Because private companies have reduced access to the capital markets, such companies may have diminished capital resources and ability to withstand financial distress. Often, the depth and breadth of experience of management in private companies tends to be less than that at public companies, which makes such companies more likely to depend on the management talents and efforts of a smaller group of persons and/or persons with less depth and breadth of experience. Therefore, the decisions made by such management teams and/or the departure of one or more of these persons could have a material adverse impact on the portfolio company and, as a result our investments.

We, together with other funds managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates, would be expected to take over a portfolio company if the company defaults on its loans. Depending on factors including the health of the economy, the credit cycle, and the portfolio companies' various industries, it is reasonable to assume that portfolio companies will default over time, and this risk is significantly increased by the COVID-19 pandemic. In such circumstances, we and the other funds would likely seek to enforce our rights under the applicable credit documentation and could opt to take over such portfolio companies. When a portfolio company is taken over, we and the other funds and their investors are subject to different risks than we are as holders of interests in loans to such portfolio company. Operating a portfolio company, even for a limited period of time pending the sale of collateral, can distract senior personnel of GC Advisors and its affiliates from their normal business. Additionally, defaulting portfolio companies often require additional capital to be effectively turned around. There is no guarantee that any defaulting portfolio company can be turned around or that our investments in such portfolio company will be successful. Finally, operating a portfolio company could subject us to potential liabilities, including management, employment, and/or environmental liabilities

To maintain our status as a business development company, we are not permitted to acquire any assets other than "qualifying assets" specified in the 1940 Act unless, at the time the acquisition is made, at least 70% of our total assets are qualifying assets (with certain limited exceptions). Subject to certain exceptions for follow-on investments and investments in distressed companies, an investment in an issuer that has outstanding securities listed on a national securities exchange could be treated as qualifying assets only if such issuer has a common equity market capitalization that is less than $250.0 million at the time of such investment.

As a business development company, we are restricted from acquiring any assets other than "qualifying assets" unless, at the time of and after giving effect to such acquisition, at least 70% of our total assets are qualifying assets. See "Business - Regulation - Qualifying Assets." In the future, we believe that most of our investments will constitute qualifying assets. However, we could be precluded from investing in what we believe are attractive investments if such investments are not qualifying assets for purposes of the 1940 Act. If we do not invest a sufficient portion of our assets in qualifying assets, we could violate the 1940 Act provisions applicable to business development companies. As a result of such violation, specific rules under the 1940 Act could prevent us, for example, from making follow-on investments in existing portfolio companies (which could result in the dilution of our position) or could require us to dispose of investments at inappropriate times in order to come into compliance with the 1940 Act. If we need to dispose of such investments quickly, it could be difficult to dispose of such investments on favorable terms. We can provide no assurance that we will be able to find a buyer for such investments and, even if we do find a buyer, we could be forced to sell the investments at a substantial loss. Any such outcomes would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. If we do not maintain our status as a business development company, we would be subject to regulation as a registered closed-end investment company under the 1940 Act. As a registered closed-end investment company, we would be subject to substantially more regulatory restrictions under the 1940 Act which would significantly decrease our operating flexibility.

While Golub Capital maintains two major business lines, it has explored and will continue to explore opportunities outside these business lines. Such activity could adversely affect us. These risks include reputational damage, loss of management attention and time due to multiple constraints, regulatory sanctions, adverse impact to business relationships, increased competition of capital allocations, and expansion of potential risks to GC Advisors' business as a whole outside those previously disclosed. New business lines could also exacerbate existing conflicts of interest and raise new conflicts. Investors should be aware that other lines of business at Golub Capital could indirectly affect their investment in us, even if we are not directly exposed to those lines of business. While GC Advisors and its affiliates keep each investment client as a legally distinct entity or account, there are risks that a separate business line suffering a material adverse condition could affect other business lines to which we have direct exposure, and consequently, our performance. These risks could materially affect GC Advisors' business as a whole, and include loss of reputation, loss of management time and focus, regulatory sanctions, and adverse impact to business relationships.

We have entered into a license agreement with Golub Capital LLC under which Golub Capital LLC has granted us a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use the name "Golub Capital." See "Management Agreements - License Agreement." In addition, we pay to the Administrator our allocable portion of overhead and other expenses incurred by the Administrator in performing its obligations under the Administration Agreement, such as rent and our allocable portion of the cost of our chief financial officer and chief compliance officer and their respective staffs. These arrangements create conflicts of interest, including in the allocation of expenses and the enforcement of the respective agreements, that our board of directors must monitor.