Sunrise Realty Trust Inc (SUNS) Risk Factors

Our current lenders have, and any future lender or lenders may have, fixed dollar claims on our assets that are senior to the claims of our stockholders and, thus, will have a preference over our stockholders with respect to our assets in the collateral pool. Our credit facilities and borrowings also subject us to various financial and operating covenants, including, but not limited to, maintaining certain financial ratios and minimum tangible net worth amounts. Future credit facilities and borrowings will likely subject us to similar or additional covenants. In addition, we may grant a security interest in our assets in connection with any such credit facilities and borrowings. Our credit facilities generally contain customary default provisions such as a minimum net worth amount, a profitability test, and a restriction on changing our business and loan quality standards. In addition, our credit facilities require the repayment of all outstanding debt on the maturity which may disrupt our business and potentially the business of our portfolio companies that are financed through our credit facilities. An event of default under our credit facilities would likely result, among other things, in termination of the availability of further funds under our credit facilities and accelerated maturity dates for all amounts outstanding under our credit facilities, which would likely disrupt our business and, potentially, the business of the portfolio companies whose loans we finance through our credit facilities. This could reduce our revenues and, by delaying any cash payment allowed to us under our credit facilities until the lender has been paid in full, reduce our liquidity and cash flow and impair our ability to grow our business and maintain RIC tax treatment. The terms of future available financing may place limits on our financial and operation flexibility. If we are unable to obtain sufficient capital in the future, we may be forced to reduce or discontinue our operations, not be able to make new investments, or otherwise respond to changing business conditions or competitive pressures.

Our executive officers and directors, as well as the current and future partners of our investment adviser, Solar Capital Partners, may serve as officers, directors or principals of entities that operate in the same or a related line of business as we do. For example, Solar Capital Partners, presently serves as the investment adviser to Solar Capital Ltd., a publicly-traded BDC and SCP Private Credit Income BDC LLC, an unlisted BDC. In addition, Michael S. Gross, our Chairman, Co-Chief Executive Officer and President, Bruce Spohler, our Co-Chief Executive Officer and Chief Operating Officer and board member, and Richard L. Peteka, our Chief Financial Officer, serve in similar capacities for Solar Capital Ltd and SCP Private Credit Income BDC LLC. Accordingly, they may have obligations to investors in those entities, the fulfillment of which obligations might not be in the best interests of us or our stockholders. In addition, we note that any affiliated investment vehicle formed in the future, and managed by our investment adviser or its affiliates may, notwithstanding different stated investment objectives, have overlapping investment objectives with our own and, accordingly, may invest in asset classes similar to those targeted by us. As a result, Solar Capital Partners may face conflicts in allocating investment opportunities between us and such other entities. Although Solar Capital Partners will endeavor to allocate investment opportunities in a fair and equitable manner, it is possible that, in the future, we may not be given the opportunity to participate in investments made by investment funds managed by our investment adviser or an investment manager affiliated with our investment adviser. In any such case, when Solar Capital Partners identifies an investment, it will be forced to choose which investment fund should make the investment. As a BDC, we were substantially limited in our ability to co-invest in privately negotiated transactions with affiliated funds until we obtained an exemptive order from the SEC on July 28, 2014 (the "Prior Exemptive Order"). The Prior Exemptive Order permitted us to participate in negotiated co-investment transactions with certain affiliates, each of whose investment adviser is Solar Capital Partners, in a manner consistent with our investment objective, positions, policies, strategies and restrictions as well as regulatory requirements and other pertinent factors, and pursuant to the conditions to the Prior Exemptive Order. On June 13, 2017, the Company, Solar Capital Ltd., and Solar Capital Partners received an exemptive order (the "New Exemptive Order") for a co-investment order that supersedes the Prior Exemptive Order and extends the relief granted in the Prior Exemptive Order such that it no longer applies to certain affiliates only if their respective investment adviser is Solar Capital Partners, but also applies to certain affiliates whose investment adviser is an investment adviser that controls, is controlled by or is under common control with Solar Capital Partners and is registered as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended. The terms of the New Exemptive Order are otherwise substantially similar to the Prior Exemptive Order. If we are unable to rely on the New Exemptive Order for a particular opportunity, such opportunity will be allocated first to the entity whose investment strategy is the most consistent with the opportunity being allocated, and second, if the terms of the opportunity are consistent with more than one entity's investment strategy, on an alternating basis. Although our investment professionals will endeavor to allocate investment opportunities in a fair and equitable manner, we and our common stockholders could be adversely affected to the extent investment opportunities are allocated among us and other investment vehicles managed or sponsored by, or affiliated with, our executive officers, directors and members of our investment adviser. Solar Capital Partners and certain investment advisory affiliates may determine that an investment is appropriate for us and for one or more of those other funds. In such event, depending on the availability of such investment and other appropriate factors, Solar Capital Partners or its affiliates may determine that we should invest side-by-side with one or more other funds. Any such investments will be made only to the extent permitted by applicable law and interpretive positions of the SEC and its staff, and consistent with Solar Capital Partners' allocation procedures. Related party transactions may occur among Solar Senior Capital and Gemino and NMC. These transactions may occur in the normal course of business. No administrative fees are paid to Solar Capital Partners by Gemino or NMC. In the ordinary course of our investing activities, we pay management and incentive fees to Solar Capital Partners and reimburse Solar Capital Partners for certain expenses it incurs. As a result, investors in our common stock will invest on a "gross" basis and receive distributions on a "net" basis after expenses, resulting in a lower rate of return than an investor might achieve through direct investments. Accordingly, there may be times when the management team of Solar Capital Partners has interests that differ from those of our stockholders, giving rise to a conflict. We have entered into a royalty-free license agreement with our investment adviser, pursuant to which our investment adviser has granted us a non-exclusive license to use the name "Solar Capital." Under the License Agreement, we have the right to use the "Solar Capital" name for so long as Solar Capital Partners or one of its affiliates remains our investment adviser. In addition, we pay Solar Capital Management, an affiliate of Solar Capital Partners, our allocable portion of overhead and other expenses incurred by Solar Capital Management in performing its obligations under the Administration Agreement, including rent, the fees and expenses associated with performing compliance functions, and our allocable portion of the compensation of our chief financial officer and their respective staffs. These arrangements create conflicts of interest that our board of directors must monitor.

In November 2019, the SEC proposed a rule regarding the ability of a BDC (or a registered investment company) to use derivatives and other transactions that create future payment or delivery obligations (except reverse repurchase agreements and similar financing transactions). If adopted as proposed, BDCs that use derivatives would be subject to a value-at-risk ("VaR") leverage limit, certain other derivatives risk management program and testing requirements and requirements related to board reporting. These new requirements would apply unless the BDC qualified as a "limited derivatives user," as defined in the SEC's proposal. A BDC that enters into reverse repurchase agreements or similar financing transactions would need to aggregate the amount of indebtedness associated with the reverse repurchase agreements or similar financing transactions with the aggregate amount of any other senior securities representing indebtedness when calculating the BDC's asset coverage ratio. Under the proposed rule, a BDC may enter into an unfunded commitment agreement that is not a derivatives transaction, such as an agreement to provide financing to a portfolio company, if the BDC has a reasonable belief, at the time it enters into such an agreement, that it will have sufficient cash and cash equivalents to meet its obligations with respect to all of its unfunded commitment agreements, in each case as it becomes due. If the BDC cannot meet this test, it is required to treat unfunded commitments as a derivatives transaction subject to the requirements of the rule. Collectively, these proposed requirements, if adopted, may limit our ability to use derivatives and/or enter into certain other financial contracts.

Our investment adviser will be entitled to incentive compensation for each fiscal quarter in an amount equal to a percentage of the excess of our pre-incentive fee net investment income for that quarter (before deducting incentive compensation) above a performance threshold for that quarter. Accordingly, since the performance threshold is based on a percentage of our net asset value, decreases in our net asset value make it easier to achieve the performance threshold. Our pre-incentive fee net investment income for incentive compensation purposes excludes realized and unrealized capital losses or depreciation that we may incur in the fiscal quarter, even if such capital losses or depreciation result in a net loss on our statement of operations for that quarter. Thus, we may be required to pay Solar Capital Partners incentive compensation for a fiscal quarter even if there is a decline in the value of our portfolio or we incur a net loss for that quarter.

Our credit ratings are an assessment by third parties of our ability to pay our obligations. Consequently, real or anticipated changes in our credit ratings will generally affect the market value of our publicly issued debt securities. Our credit ratings, however, may not reflect the potential impact of risks related to market conditions generally or other factors discussed above on the market value of, or trading market for, any publicly issued debt securities.

A large percentage of our portfolio investments are in the form of securities that are not publicly traded. The fair value of securities and other investments that are not publicly traded may not be readily determinable. We value these securities on a quarterly basis in accordance with our valuation policy, which is at all times consistent with GAAP. Our board of directors utilizes the services of third-party valuation firms to aid it in determining the fair value of material assets. The board of directors discusses valuations and determines the fair value in good faith based on the input of our investment adviser and, when utilized, the respective third-party valuation firms. The factors that may be considered in fair value pricing our investments include the nature and realizable value of any collateral, the portfolio company's ability to make payments and its earnings, the markets in which the portfolio company does business, comparisons to publicly traded companies, discounted cash flow and other relevant factors. Because such valuations, and particularly valuations of private securities and private companies, are inherently uncertain, may fluctuate over short periods of time and may be based on estimates, our determinations of fair value may 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.

To the extent we borrow money, or issue preferred stock, to make investments, our net investment income will depend, in part, upon the difference between the rate at which we borrow funds or pay distributions on preferred stock and the rate at which we invest those funds. As a result, we can offer no assurance that a significant change in market interest rates will not have a material adverse effect on our net investment income in the event we use debt to finance our investments. In periods of rising interest rates, our cost of funds would increase, except to the extent we issue fixed rate debt or preferred stock, which could reduce our net investment income. We expect that our long-term fixed-rate investments will be financed primarily with equity and long-term debt. We may use interest rate risk management techniques in an effort to limit our exposure to interest rate fluctuations. Such techniques may include various interest rate hedging activities to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act. You should also be aware that a rise in the general level of interest rates can be expected to lead to higher interest rates applicable to our debt investments. Accordingly, an increase in interest rates would make it easier for us to meet or exceed the incentive fee hurdle rate and may result in a substantial increase of the amount of incentive fees payable to our investment adviser with respect to our pre-incentive fee net investment income. Further, rising interest rates could also adversely affect our performance if we hold investments with floating interest rates, subject to specified minimum interest rates (such as a LIBOR floor), while at the same time engaging in borrowings subject to floating interest rates not subject to such minimums. In such a scenario, rising interest rates may increase our interest expense, even though our interest income from Investments is not increasing in a corresponding manner as a result of such minimum interest rates.

Preferred stock, which is another form of leverage, has the same risks to our common stockholders as borrowings because the distributions on any preferred stock we issue must be cumulative. Payment of such distributions and repayment of the liquidation preference of such preferred stock must take preference over any distributions or other payments to our common stockholders, and preferred stockholders are not subject to any of our expenses or losses and are not entitled to participate in any income or appreciation in excess of their stated preference.

We cannot assure you that we will be able to find enough appropriate investments that meet our investment criteria or that any investment we complete using the proceeds from any securities offering will produce a sufficient return. Until we identify new investment opportunities, we intend to either invest the net proceeds of future offerings in cash equivalents, U.S. government securities and other high-quality debt investments that mature in one year or less or use the net proceeds from such offerings to reduce then-outstanding obligations. We have significant flexibility in investing the net proceeds of any offering of our securities and may use the net proceeds from an offering in ways with which you may not agree or for purposes other than those contemplated at the time of the offering.

We expect that the principals of our investment adviser will maintain and develop their relationships with financial sponsors, and we will rely to a significant extent upon these relationships to provide us with potential investment opportunities. If the senior investment professionals of our investment adviser fail to maintain their existing relationships or develop new relationships with other sponsors or sources of investment opportunities, we will not be able to grow our investment portfolio. In addition, individuals with whom the senior investment professionals of our investment adviser have relationships are not obligated to provide us with investment opportunities, and, therefore, there is no assurance that such relationships will generate investment opportunities for us. If our investment adviser is unable to source investment opportunities, we may hold a greater percentage of our assets in cash and cash equivalents than anticipated, which could impact potential returns on our portfolio.

Our ability to achieve our investment objective and to grow depends on Solar Capital Partners' ability to identify, invest in and monitor companies that meet our investment criteria. Accomplishing this result on a cost-effective basis is largely a function of Solar Capital Partners' structuring of the investment process, its ability to provide competent, attentive and efficient services to us and its ability to access financing for us on acceptable terms. The investment team of Solar Capital Partners has substantial responsibilities under the Investment Advisory and Management Agreement, and they may also be called upon to provide managerial assistance to our portfolio companies as the principals of our administrator. In addition, the members of Solar Capital Partners' investment team have similar responsibilities with respect to the management of Solar Capital's investment portfolio and SCP Private Credit Income BDC LLC's investment portfolio. Such demands on their time may distract them or slow our rate of investment. In order to grow, we and Solar Capital Partners will need to retain,train, supervise and manage new investment professionals. However, we can offer no assurance that any such investment professionals will contribute effectively to the work of the investment adviser. Any failure to manage our future growth effectively could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may need additional capital to fund growth in our investments. We expect to issue equity securities and expect to borrow from financial institutions in the future. A reduction in the availability of new capital could limit our ability to grow. We must distribute at least 90% of our investment company taxable income to our stockholders to maintain our tax treatment as a RIC. As a result, any such cash earnings may not be available to fund investment originations. We expect to borrow from financial institutions and issue additional debt and equity securities. If we fail to obtain funds from such sources or from other sources to fund our investments, it could limit our ability to grow, which may have an adverse effect on the value of our securities. In addition, as a BDC, our ability to borrow or issue additional preferred stock may be restricted if our total assets are less than 150% of our total borrowings and preferred stock.

The 1940 Act imposes numerous constraints on the operations of BDCs. For example, BDCs are required to invest at least 70% of their total assets in specified types of securities, primarily in private companies or thinly-traded U.S. public companies, cash, cash equivalents, U.S. government securities and other high quality debt investments that mature in one year or less. Furthermore, any failure to comply with the requirements imposed on BDCs by the 1940 Act could cause the SEC to bring an enforcement action against us and/or expose us to claims of private litigants. In addition, upon approval of a majority of our stockholders, we may elect to withdraw our status as a BDC. If we decide to withdraw our election, or if we otherwise fail to qualify, or maintain our qualification, as a BDC, we may be subject to the substantially greater regulation under the 1940 Act as a closed-end investment company. Compliance with such regulations would significantly decrease our operating flexibility, and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to the risk that the investments we make in our portfolio companies may be prepaid prior to maturity. When this occurs, we may reduce our borrowings outstanding or reinvest these proceeds in temporary investments, pending their future investment in new portfolio companies. These temporary investments, if any, will typically have substantially lower yields than the debt investment being prepaid and we could experience significant delays in reinvesting these amounts. Any future investment in a new portfolio company may also be at lower yields than the debt investment that was prepaid. As a result, our results of operations could be materially adversely affected if one or more of our portfolio companies elect to prepay amounts owed to us. Additionally, prepayments could negatively impact our return on equity, which could result in a decline in the market price of our common stock.

We structure the debt investments in our portfolio companies to include business and financial covenants placing affirmative and negative obligations on the operation of the company's business and its financial condition. However, from time to time, we may elect to waive breaches of these covenants, including our right to payment, or waive or defer enforcement of remedies, such as acceleration of obligations or foreclosure on collateral, depending upon the financial condition and prospects of the particular portfolio company. These actions may reduce the likelihood of our receiving the full amount of future payments of interest or principal and be accompanied by a deterioration in the value of the underlying collateral as many of these companies may have limited financial resources, may be unable to meet future obligations and may go bankrupt. This could negatively impact our ability to pay distributions, could adversely affect our results of operation and financial condition and cause the loss of all or part of your investment. In addition, some of the loans in which we may invest may be "covenant-lite" loans. We use the term "covenant-lite" loans to refer generally to loans that do not have a complete set of financial maintenance covenants. Generally, "covenant-lite" loans provide borrower companies more freedom to negatively impact lenders because their covenants are incurrence-based, which means they are only tested and can only be breached following an affirmative action of the borrower, rather than by a deterioration in the borrower's financial condition. Accordingly, to the extent we invest in "covenant-lite" loans, we may have fewer rights against a borrower and may have a greater risk of loss on such investments as compared to investments in or exposure to loans with financial maintenance covenants.

Courts may apply the doctrine of equitable subordination to subordinate the claim or lien of a lender against a borrower to claims or liens of other creditors of the borrower, when the lender or its affiliates is found to have engaged in unfair, inequitable or fraudulent conduct. The courts have also applied the doctrine of equitable subordination when a lender or its affiliates is found to have exerted inappropriate control over a client, including control resulting from the ownership of equity interests in a client. We have made direct equity investments or received warrants in connection with loans. Payments on one or more of our loans, particularly a loan to a client in which we may also hold an equity interest, may be subject to claims of equitable subordination. If we were deemed to have the ability to control or otherwise exercise influence over the business and affairs of one or more of our portfolio companies resulting in economic hardship to other creditors of that company, this control or influence may constitute grounds for equitable subordination and a court may treat one or more of our loans as if it were unsecured or common equity in the portfolio company. In that case, if the portfolio company were to liquidate, we would be entitled to repayment of our loan on a pro-rata basis with other unsecured debt or, if the effect of subordination was to place us at the level of common equity, then on an equal basis with other holders of the portfolio company's common equity only after all of its obligations relating to its debt and preferred securities had been satisfied.

We invest primarily in privately held companies. Generally, little public information exists about these companies, and we are required to rely on the ability of Solar Capital Partners' investment professionals to obtain adequate information to evaluate the potential returns from investing in these companies. If we are unable to uncover all material information about these companies, we may not make a fully informed investment decision, and we may lose money on our investments. Also, smaller privately held companies frequently have less diverse product lines and smaller market presence than larger competitors. These factors could adversely affect our investment returns as compared to companies investing primarily in the securities of public companies.

We invest primarily in senior secured loans, including second lien, as well as unsecured debt instruments issued by our portfolio companies. If we invest in second lien, or unsecured debt instruments, our portfolio companies typically may be permitted to incur other debt that ranks equally with, or senior to, such debt instruments. By their terms, such debt instruments may provide that the holders are entitled to receive payment of interest or principal on or before the dates on which we are entitled to receive payments in respect of the debt securities in which we invest. Also, in the event of insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or bankruptcy of a portfolio company, holders of debt instruments ranking senior to our investment in that portfolio company would typically be entitled to receive payment in full before we receive any distribution in respect of our investment. In such case, after repaying such senior creditors, such portfolio company may not have any remaining assets to use for repaying its obligation to us. In the case of debt ranking equally with debt securities in which we invest, we would have to share on an equal basis any distributions with other creditors holding such debt in the event of an insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or bankruptcy of the relevant portfolio company. Any such limitations on the ability of our portfolio companies to make principal or interest payments to us, if at all, may reduce our net asset value and have a negative material adverse impact to our business, financial condition and results of operation.

Our investment strategy contemplates potential investments in debt securities of foreign companies. Investing in foreign companies may expose us to additional risks not typically associated with investing in U.S. companies. These risks include changes in exchange control regulations, political and social instability, expropriation, imposition of foreign taxes, less liquid markets and less available information than is generally the case in the United States, higher transaction costs, less government supervision of exchanges, brokers and issuers, less developed bankruptcy laws, difficulty in enforcing contractual obligations, lack of uniform accounting and auditing standards and greater price volatility. These risks may be more pronounced for portfolio companies located or operating primarily in emerging markets, whose economies, markets and legal systems may be less developed. Although most of our investments will be U.S. dollar-denominated, any investments denominated in a foreign currency will be subject to the risk that the value of a particular currency will change in relation to one or more other currencies. Among the factors that may 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 may employ hedging techniques to minimize these risks, but we can offer no assurance that we will, in fact, hedge currency risk, or that if we do, such strategies will be effective.

If we engage in hedging transactions, we may expose ourselves to risks associated with such transactions. We may utilize instruments such as forward contracts, currency options and interest rate swaps, caps, collars and floors to seek to hedge against fluctuations in the relative values of our portfolio positions from changes in currency exchange rates and market interest rates. Hedging against a decline in the values of our portfolio positions does not eliminate the possibility of fluctuations in the values of such positions or prevent losses if the values of such positions decline. However, such hedging can establish other positions designed to gain from those same developments, thereby offsetting the decline in the value of such portfolio positions. Such hedging transactions may also limit the opportunity for gain if the values of the underlying portfolio positions should increase. It may not be possible to hedge against an exchange rate or interest rate fluctuation that is so generally anticipated that we are not able to enter into a hedging transaction at an acceptable price. The success of our hedging transactions will depend on our ability to correctly predict movements in currencies and interest rates. Therefore, while we may enter into such transactions to seek to reduce currency exchange rate and interest rate risks, unanticipated changes in currency exchange rates or interest rates may 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 may vary. Moreover, for a variety of reasons, we may not seek to establish a perfect correlation between such hedging instruments and the portfolio holdings being hedged. Any such imperfect correlation may prevent us from achieving the intended hedge and expose us to risk of loss. In addition, it may not be 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 is likely to fluctuate as a result of factors not related to currency fluctuations. To the extent we engage in hedging transactions, we also face the risk that counterparties to the derivative instruments we hold may default, which may expose us to unexpected losses from positions where we believed that our risk had been appropriately hedged.

Our investment adviser manages other funds, including other BDCs, and may manage other entities in the future. The track record and achievements of these other entities are not necessarily indicative of future results that will be achieved by our investment adviser because these other entities may have investment objectives and strategies that differ from ours. Additionally, although in the past our senior investment professionals held senior positions at a number of investment firms, their track record and achievements are not necessarily indicative of future results that will be achieved by our investment adviser. In their roles at such other firms, our senior investment professionals were part of investment teams, and they were not solely responsible for generating investment ideas. In addition, such investment teams arrived at investment decisions by consensus.

Our ability to secure additional financing and satisfy our financial obligations under indebtedness outstanding from time to time will depend upon our future operating performance, which is subject to the prevailing general economic and credit market conditions, including interest rate levels and the availability of credit generally, and financial, business and other factors, many of which are beyond our control. The worsening of current economic and capital market conditions could have a material adverse effect on our ability to secure financing on favorable terms, if at all. If we are unable to obtain debt capital, then our equity investors will not benefit from the potential for increased returns on equity resulting from leverage to the extent that our investment strategy is successful and we may be limited in our ability to make new commitments or fundings to our portfolio companies.

LIBOR, the London Interbank Offered Rate, is the basic rate of interest used in lending transactions between banks on the London interbank market and is widely used as a reference for setting the interest rate on loans globally. We typically use LIBOR as a reference rate in floating-rate loans we extend to portfolio companies such that the interest due to us pursuant to a term loan extended to a portfolio company is calculated using LIBOR. The terms of our debt investments may include minimum interest rate floors which are calculated based on LIBOR. On July 27, 2017, the United Kingdom's Financial Conduct Authority, which regulates LIBOR, announced that it intends to phase out LIBOR by the end of 2021. It is expected that a transition away from the widespread use of LIBOR to alternative rates will occur over the course of the next several years. As a result of this transition, interest rates on financial instruments tied to LIBOR rates, as well as the revenue and expenses associated with those financial instruments, may be adversely affected. Further, any uncertainty regarding the continued use and reliability of LIBOR as a benchmark interest rate could adversely affect the value of our financial instruments tied to LIBOR rates. The U.S. Federal Reserve, in conjunction with the Alternative Reference Rates Committee, a steering committee comprised of large U.S. financial institutions, is considering replacing U.S. dollar LIBOR with a new index calculated by short term repurchase agreements, backed by Treasury securities, called the Secured Overnight Financing Rate ("SOFR"). The first publication of SOFR was released in April 2018. Whether or not SOFR attains market traction as a LIBOR replacement remains a questions and the future of LIBOR at this time is uncertain. Additionally, on June 12, 2019 the Staff of the SEC's Division of Corporate Finance, Division of Investment Management, Division of Trading and Markets, and Office of the Chief Accountant issued a statement about the potentially significant effects on financial markets and market participants when LIBOR is discontinued in 2021 and no longer available as a reference benchmark rate. The Staff encouraged all market participants to identify contracts that reference LIBOR and begin transitions to alternative rates. On December 30, 2019, the SEC's Chairman, Division of Corporate Finance and Office of the Chief Accountant issued a statement to encourage audit committees in particular to understand management's plans to identify and address the risks associated with the elimination of LIBOR, and, specifically, the impact on accounting and financial reporting and any related issues associated with financial products and contracts that reference LIBOR, as the risks associated with the discontinuation of LIBOR and transition to an alternative reference rate will be exacerbated if the work is not completed in a timely manner. The elimination of LIBOR or any other changes or reforms to the determination or supervision of LIBOR could have an adverse impact on the market for or value of any LIBOR-linked securities, loans, and other financial obligations or extensions of credit held by or due to us, or on our overall financial condition or results of operations. If LIBOR ceases to exist, we may need to renegotiate the credit agreements extending beyond 2021 with our portfolio companies that utilize LIBOR as a factor in determining the interest rate to replace LIBOR with the new standard that is established. In addition, the cessation of LIBOR could: -   Adversely impact the pricing, liquidity, value of, return on and trading for a broad array of financial products, including any LIBOR-linked securities, loans and derivatives that are included in our assets and liabilities;-   Require extensive changes to documentation that governs or references LIBOR or LIBOR-based products, including, for example, pursuant to time-consuming renegotiations of existing documentation to modify the terms of outstanding investments;-   Result in inquiries or other actions from regulators in respect of our preparation and readiness for the replacement of LIBOR with one or more alternative reference rates;-   Result in disputes, litigation or other actions with portfolio companies, or other counterparties, regarding the interpretation and enforceability of provisions in our LIBOR-based investments, such as fallback language or other related provisions, including, in the case of fallbacks to the alternative reference rates, any economic, legal, operational or other impact resulting from the fundamental differences between LIBOR and the various alternative reference rates;-   Require the transition and/or development of appropriate systems and analytics to effectively transition our risk management processes from LIBOR-based products to those based on one or more alternative reference rates, which may prove challenging given the limited history of the proposed alternative reference rates; and -   Cause us to incur additional costs in relation to any of the above factors. There is no guarantee that a transition from LIBOR to an alternative will not result in financial market disruptions, significant increases in benchmark rates, or borrowing costs to borrowers, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, result of operations, financial condition, and unit price.

LIBOR, the London Interbank Offered Rate, is the basic rate of interest used in lending transactions between banks on the London interbank market and is widely used as a reference for setting the interest rate on loans globally. We typically use LIBOR as a reference rate in floating-rate loans we extend to portfolio companies such that the interest due to us pursuant to a term loan extended to a portfolio company is calculated using LIBOR. The terms of our debt investments generally include minimum interest rate floors which are calculated based on LIBOR. In the recent past, concerns have been publicized that some of the member banks surveyed by the British Bankers' Association ("BBA") in connection with the calculation of LIBOR across a range of maturities and currencies may have been under-reporting or otherwise manipulating the inter-bank lending rate applicable to them in order to profit on their derivative positions or to avoid an appearance of capital insufficiency or adverse reputational or other consequences that may have resulted from reporting inter-bank lending rates higher than those they actually submitted. A number of BBA member banks entered into settlements with their regulators and law enforcement agencies with respect to alleged manipulation of LIBOR, and investigations by regulators and governmental authorities in various jurisdictions are ongoing. Actions by the ICE Benchmark Administration, regulators or law enforcement agencies as a result of these or future events, may result in changes to the manner in which LIBOR is determined. Potential changes, or uncertainty related to such potential changes may adversely affect the market for LIBOR-based securities, including our portfolio of LIBOR-indexed, floating-rate debt securities. In addition, any further changes or reforms to the determination or supervision of LIBOR may result in a sudden or prolonged increase or decrease in reported LIBOR, which could have an adverse impact on the market for LIBOR-based securities or the value of our portfolio of LIBOR-indexed, floating-rate debt securities, loans, and other financial obligations or extensions of credit held by or due to us. On July 27, 2017, the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority (the "FCA"), which regulates LIBOR, announced that it intends to stop persuading or compelling banks to submit LIBOR rates after 2021. In addition, on March 25, 2020, the FCA stated that although the central assumption that firms cannot rely on LIBOR being published after the end of 2021 has not changed, the outbreak of COVID-19 has impacted the timing of many firms' transition planning, and the FCA will continue to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on transition timelines and update the marketplace as soon as possible. It is unclear if after 2021 LIBOR will cease to exist or if new methods of calculating LIBOR will be established such that it continues to exist after 2021. We have exposure to LIBOR, including in financial instruments that mature after 2021. Our exposure arises from the value of our portfolio of LIBOR-indexed, floating-rate debt securities. In the United States, the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, in conjunction with the Alternative Reference Rates Committee, a steering committee comprised of large U.S. financial institutions, is considering replacing U.S. dollar LIBOR with a new index calculated by short-term repurchase agreements, backed by Treasury securities called the Secured Overnight Financing Rate ("SOFR"). The Federal Reserve Bank of New York began publishing SOFR in April 2018. Whether or not SOFR attains market traction as a LIBOR replacement remains a question and the future of LIBOR at this time is uncertain, including whether the COVID-19 pandemic will have further effect on LIBOR transition plans. The elimination of LIBOR or any other changes or reforms to the determination or supervision of LIBOR could have an adverse impact on the market for or value of any LIBOR-indexed, floating-rate debt securities, loans, and other financial obligations or extensions of credit held by or due to us or on our overall financial condition or results of operations. If LIBOR ceases to exist, we may need to renegotiate the credit agreements extending beyond 2021 with our portfolio companies that utilize LIBOR as a factor in determining the interest rate to replace LIBOR with the new standard that is established. In the event that the LIBOR Rate is no longer available or published on a current basis or no longer made available or used for determining the interest rate of loans, our administrative agent that manages our loans will generally select a comparable successor rate; provided that (i) to the extent a comparable or successor rate is approved by the administrative agent, the approved rate shall be applied in a manner consistent with market practice; and (ii) to the extent such market practice is not administratively feasible for the administrative agent, such approved rate shall be applied as otherwise reasonably determined by the administrative agent.

In the event of a default by a portfolio company on a secured loan, we will only have recourse to the assets collateralizing the loan. If the underlying collateral value is less than the loan amount, we will suffer a loss. In addition, we sometimes make loans that are unsecured, which are subject to the risk that other lenders may be directly secured by the assets of the portfolio company. In the event of a default, those collateralized lenders would have priority over us with respect to the proceeds of a sale of the underlying assets. In cases described above, we may lack control over the underlying asset collateralizing our loan or the underlying assets of the portfolio company prior to a default and, as a result, the value of the collateral may be reduced by acts or omissions by owners or managers of the assets. In the event of bankruptcy of a portfolio company, we may not have full recourse to its assets in order to satisfy our loan, or our loan may be subject to equitable subordination. In addition, certain of our loans are subordinate to other debt of the portfolio company. If a portfolio company defaults on our loan or on debt senior to our loan, or in the event of a portfolio company bankruptcy, our loan will be satisfied only after the senior debt receives payment. Where debt senior to our loan exists, the presence of inter-creditor arrangements may limit our ability to amend our loan documents, assign our loans, accept prepayments, exercise our remedies (through "standstill" periods) and control decisions made in bankruptcy proceedings relating to the portfolio company. Bankruptcy and portfolio company litigation can significantly increase collection losses and the time needed for us to acquire the underlying collateral in the event of a default, during which time the collateral may decline in value, causing us to suffer further losses. If the value of collateral underlying our loan declines or interest rates increase during the term of our loan, a portfolio company may not be able to obtain the necessary funds to repay our loan at maturity through refinancing. Decreasing collateral value and/or increasing interest rates may hinder a portfolio company's ability to refinance our loan because the underlying collateral cannot satisfy the debt service coverage requirements necessary to obtain new financing. If a borrower is unable to repay our loan at maturity, we could suffer a loss which may adversely impact our financial performance.

In past economic downturns, such as the financial crisis in the United States that began in mid-2007 and during other times of extreme market volatility, 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. If these conditions recur, for example as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, it may be difficult for us to obtain desired financing to finance the growth of our investments on acceptable economic terms, or at all. So far, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in, and until fully resolved is likely to continue to result in, among other things, increased draws by borrowers on revolving lines of credit and increased requests by borrowers for amendments, modifications and waivers of their credit agreements to avoid default or change payment terms, increased defaults by such borrowers and/or increased difficulty in obtaining refinancing at the maturity dates of their loans. In addition, the duration and effectiveness of responsive measures implemented by governments and central banks cannot be predicted. The commencement, continuation, or cessation of government and central bank policies and economic stimulus programs, including changes in monetary policy involving interest rate adjustments or governmental policies, may contribute to the development of or result in an increase in market volatility, illiquidity and other adverse effects that could negatively impact the credit markets and the Company. If we are unable to consummate credit facilities on commercially reasonable terms, our liquidity may be reduced significantly. If we are unable to repay amounts outstanding under any facility we may enter into and are declared in default or are unable to renew or refinance any such facility, it would limit our ability to initiate significant originations or to operate our business in the normal course. These situations may arise due to circumstances that we may be unable to control, such as inaccessibility of the credit markets, a severe decline in the value of the U.S. dollar, a further economic downturn or an operational problem that affects third parties or us, and could materially damage our business. Moreover, we are unable to predict when economic and market conditions may become more favorable. Even if such conditions improve broadly and significantly over the long term, adverse conditions in particular sectors of the financial markets could adversely impact our business.

A number of entities compete with us to make the types of investments that we target in leveraged companies. We compete with other BDCs, public and private funds, commercial and investment banks,commercial financing companies and, to the extent they provide an alternative form of financing, private equity funds. Many of our competitors are substantially larger and have considerably greater financial, technical and marketing resources than we do. For example, some competitors may have a lower cost of funds and access to funding sources that are not available to us. In addition, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments than we have, which could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments and establish more relationships and offer better pricing and more flexible structure than we are able to do. Furthermore, many of our potential competitors are not subject to the regulatory restrictions that the 1940 Act imposes on us as a BDC. If we are unable to source attractive investments, we may hold a greater percentage of our assets in cash and cash equivalents than anticipated, which could impact potential returns on our portfolio. We cannot assure you that the competitive pressures we face will not have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Also, as a result of this competition, we may not be able to take advantage of attractive investment opportunities from time to time, and we can offer no assurance that we will be able to identify and make investments that are consistent with our investment objective. Participants in our industry compete on several factors, including price, flexibility in transaction structure, customer service, reputation, market knowledge and speed in decision-making. We do not seek to compete primarily based on the interest rates we offer, and we believe that some of our competitors may make loans with interest rates that may be comparable to or lower than the rates we may offer. We may lose investment opportunities if we do not match our competitors' pricing, terms and structure. However, if we match our competitors' pricing, terms and structure, we may experience decreased net interest income and increased risk of credit loss.

We invest primarily in senior secured loans, including first lien, stretch-senior and second lien debt instruments, made to leveraged private middle-market companies whose debt is rated below investment grade. We may also invest in debt of public companies that are thinly traded or equity securities. Securities rated below investment grade are speculative and are often referred to as "leveraged loans," "high yield" or "junk" securities, and may be considered "high risk" compared to debt instruments that are rated investment grade. Senior Secured Loans. When we make a senior secured term loan investment, including a first lien, stretch-senior or second lien debt investment, in a portfolio company, we generally take a security interest in the available assets of the portfolio company, including the equity interests of its subsidiaries, which we expect to help mitigate the risk that we will not be repaid. However, there is a risk that the collateral securing our loans may decrease in value over time, may be difficult to sell in a timely manner, may be difficult to appraise and may fluctuate in value based upon the success of the business and market conditions, including as a result of the inability of the portfolio company to raise additional capital, and, in some circumstances, our lien could be subordinated to claims of other creditors. In addition, deterioration in a portfolio company's financial condition and prospects, including its inability to raise additional capital, may be accompanied by deterioration in the value of the collateral for the loan. Consequently, the fact that a loan is secured does not guarantee that we will receive principal and interest payments according to the loan's terms, or at all, or that we will be able to collect on the loan should we be forced to enforce our remedies. Equity Investments. When we invest in senior secured loans we may acquire common equity securities as well. In certain other unique circumstances we may also make equity investments in businesses that make senior loans, such as our investments in Gemino and NMC. In addition, we may invest directly in the equity securities of portfolio companies without limitation as to market capitalization. For instance, we may invest in thinly traded companies, the prices of which may be subject to erratic market movement. Our goal is ultimately to exit such equity interests and realize gains upon our disposition of such interests. However, the equity interests we receive may not appreciate in value and, in fact, may decline in value. Accordingly, we may not be able to realize gains from our equity interests, and any gains that we do realize on the disposition of any equity interests may not be sufficient to offset any other losses we experience. In addition, investing in middle-market companies involves a number of significant risks, including: -   these companies may have limited financial resources and may be unable to meet their obligations under their debt securities that we hold, which may be accompanied by a deterioration in the value of any collateral and a reduction in the likelihood of us realizing any guarantees we may have obtained in connection with our investment;-   they typically have shorter operating histories, narrower product lines and smaller market shares than larger businesses, which tend to render them more vulnerable to competitors' actions and market conditions, as well as general economic downturns;-   they are more likely to depend on the management talents and efforts of a small group of persons; therefore, the death, disability, resignation or termination of one or more of these persons could have a material adverse impact on our portfolio company and, in turn, on us;-   they generally have less predictable operating results, may from time to time be parties to litigation, may be engaged in rapidly changing businesses with products subject to a substantial risk of obsolescence, and may require substantial additional capital to support their operations, finance expansion or maintain their competitive position. In addition, our executive officers, directors and our investment adviser may, in the ordinary course of business, be named as defendants in litigation arising from our investments in the portfolio companies; and -   they may have difficulty accessing the capital markets to meet future capital needs, which may limit their ability to grow or to repay their outstanding indebtedness upon maturity.

We generally make investments in private companies. We invest and expect to continue investing in companies whose securities have no established trading market and whose securities are and will be subject to legal and other restrictions on resale or whose securities are and will be less liquid than are publicly-traded securities. Investments purchased by us that are liquid at the time of purchase may subsequently become illiquid due to events relating to the issuer of the investments, market events, economic conditions or investor perceptions. The illiquidity of our investments may make it difficult for us to sell such investments if the need arises. In addition, if we are required to liquidate all or a portion of our portfolio quickly, we may realize significantly less than the value at which we have previously recorded our investments. As a result, we do not expect to achieve liquidity in our investments in the near-term. However, to maintain our qualification as a BDC and as a RIC, we may have to dispose of investments if we do not satisfy one or more of the applicable criteria under the respective regulatory frameworks. Domestic and foreign markets are complex and interrelated, so that events in one sector of the world markets or economy, or in one geographical region, can reverberate and have materially negative consequences for other markets, economic or regional sectors in a manner that may not be foreseen and which may negatively impact the liquidity of our investments and materially harm our business. In addition, we may face other restrictions on our ability to liquidate an investment in a portfolio company to the extent that we have material non-public information regarding such portfolio company.

The securities that we invest in are typically rated below investment grade. Securities rated below investment grade are speculative and are often referred to as "leveraged loans," "high yield" or "junk" securities, and may be considered "high risk" compared to debt instruments that are rated investment grade. High yield securities are regarded as having predominantly speculative characteristics with respect to the issuer's capacity to pay interest and repay principal in accordance with the terms of the obligations and involve major risk exposure to adverse conditions. In addition, high yield securities generally offer a higher current yield than that available from higher grade issues, but typically involve greater risk. These securities are especially sensitive to adverse changes in general economic conditions, to changes in the financial condition of their issuers and to price fluctuation in response to changes in interest rates. During periods of economic downturn or rising interest rates, issuers of below investment grade instruments may experience financial stress that could adversely affect their ability to make payments of principal and interest and increase the possibility of default. The secondary market for high yield securities may not be as liquid as the secondary market for more highly rated securities. In addition, many of our debt investments will not fully amortize during their lifetime, which means that a borrower may be unable to payoff its debt due to bankruptcy or other reasons and therefore we may write-off such debt investment prior to its scheduled maturity. Upon such an occurrence, we may realize a loss or a substantial amount of unpaid principal and interest due upon maturity.

As a BDC, 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 or under the direction of our board of directors. Decreases in the market values or fair values of our investments are recorded as unrealized depreciation. Any unrealized depreciation in our loan portfolio could be an indication of a portfolio company's inability to meet its repayment obligations to us with respect to the affected loans. This could result in realized losses in the future and ultimately in reductions of our income available for distribution in future periods and could materially adversely affect our ability to service our outstanding borrowings. Depending on market conditions, we could incur substantial losses in future periods, which could further reduce our net asset value and have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Following an initial investment in a portfolio company, we may make additional investments in that portfolio company as "follow-on" investments, in order to: (i) increase or maintain in whole or in part our ownership percentage; (ii) exercise warrants, options or convertible securities that were acquired in the original or subsequent financing; or (iii) attempt to preserve or enhance the value of our investment. We may elect not to make follow-on investments or otherwise lack sufficient funds to make those investments. We will have the discretion to make any follow-on investments, subject to the availability of capital resources. The failure to make follow-on investments may, in some circumstances, jeopardize the continued viability of a portfolio company and our initial investment, or may result in a missed opportunity for us to increase our participation in a successful operation. Even if we have sufficient capital to make a desired follow-on investment, we may elect not to make a follow-on investment because we may not want to increase our concentration of risk, either because we prefer other opportunities or because we are subject to BDC requirements that would prevent such follow-on investments or the desire to maintain RIC tax treatment.