Our Board may change our investment objective, operating policies and strategies without prior notice or stockholder approval, the effects of which may be adverse to our results of operations and financial condition.

Our Board has the authority to modify or waive our current investment objective, operating policies, investment criteria and strategies without prior notice and without stockholder approval. We cannot predict the effect any changes to our current operating policies, investment criteria and strategies would have on our business, net asset value, operating results and value of our securities. However, the effects might be adverse, which could negatively impact our ability to make distributions and cause you to lose all or part of your investment. Moreover, we have significant flexibility in investing our assets and may invest in ways investors may not agree with or in the future may invest in ways other than those previously disclosed or disclosed herein.

Price declines in the medium- and large-sized U.S. corporate debt market may adversely affect the fair value of our portfolio, reducing our net asset value through increased net unrealized depreciation.

Conditions in the medium- and large-sized U.S. corporate debt market may deteriorate, as seen during the global financial crisis from 2007-2009 and to a lesser extent in recent years following the COVID-19 pandemic, which may cause pricing levels to similarly decline or be volatile. During the financial crisis, many institutions were forced to raise cash by selling their interests in performing assets in order to satisfy margin requirements or the equivalent of margin requirements imposed by their lenders and/or, in the case of hedge funds and other investment vehicles, to satisfy widespread redemption requests. This resulted in a forced deleveraging cycle of price declines, compulsory sales, and further price declines, with falling underlying credit values, and other constraints resulting from the credit crisis generating further selling pressure. If similar events occurred in the medium- and large-sized U.S. corporate debt market, our net asset value could decline through an increase in unrealized depreciation and incurrence of realized losses in connection with the sale of our investments, which could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Capital markets may experience periods of disruption and instability. These market conditions could materially adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

As a BDC, we have to maintain our ability to raise additional capital for investment purposes. Without sufficient access to the capital markets or credit markets, we may be forced to curtail our business operations, or we may not be able to pursue new business opportunities. The U.S. and global capital markets have in the past experienced and may in the future experience periods of volatility and disruption, including during portions of the past three fiscal years, and accordingly, there has been and may continue to be uncertainty in the financial markets in general.

For example, the 2010 sovereign debt financial crisis in Europe and the 2011 downgrade of the U.S. credit rating by Standard & Poor's had negative impacts on the global economy and may have adversely impacted the operations of BDCs such as the Company.

Continuing U.S. debt ceiling and budget deficit concerns, including automatic spending cuts stemming from sequestration, together with signs of deteriorating sovereign debt conditions in Europe, have increased the possibility of additional credit-rating downgrades and economic slowdowns, or a recession in the U.S. The impact of this or any further downgrades to the U.S. government’s sovereign credit rating or its perceived creditworthiness could adversely affect the U.S. and global financial markets and economic conditions. These developments, along with the European sovereign debt crisis, could cause interest rates and borrowing costs to rise, which may negatively impact our ability to access the debt markets on favorable terms. Continued adverse economic conditions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Any further disruptive conditions in the financial industry and the impact of new legislation in response to those conditions could restrict our business operations and could adversely impact our results of operations and financial condition.

Additionally, the effect of the United Kingdom (the “UK”) ending its membership in the European Union (“Brexit”) may adversely affect European or worldwide economic or market conditions and could contribute to instability in global financial and real estate markets. In addition, Brexit could lead to legal uncertainty and potentially divergent national laws and regulations as the UK determines which EU laws to replace or replicate. Any of these effects of Brexit, and others we cannot anticipate, could adversely affect our business, business opportunities, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. Likewise, similar actions taken by other European and other countries in which we operate could have a similar or even more profound impact.

In recent years, the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the global economy and its supply chains, and may have adversely impacted the operations of BDCs, such as the Company, as well as contributed to ongoing inflation in the U.S. and globally.

Such periods of disruption may be accompanied by depressed levels of consumer and commercial spending, a lack of liquidity in debt capital markets, significant write-offs in the financial services sector and the re-pricing of credit risk. The Company and the portfolio companies in which it invests may be adversely affected by these deteriorations in the financial markets and economic conditions throughout the world.

If the fair value of our assets declines substantially, we may fail to maintain the asset coverage ratios imposed upon us by the 1940 Act. Any such failure would affect our ability to issue senior securities, including borrowings, and pay dividends, which could materially impair our business operations. Our liquidity could be impaired further by an inability to access the capital markets or to consummate new borrowing facilities to provide capital for normal operations, including new originations. In recent years, reflecting concern about the stability of the financial markets, many lenders and institutional investors have reduced or ceased providing funding to borrowers.

We had $15.0 million and $50.0 million, respectively, of 2026 Notes and 2032 Convertible Notes outstanding as of December 31, 2022. In addition, as of December 31, 2022, we had $55.9 million outstanding under the KeyBank Credit Facility that provides for borrowings of up to $75.0 million on a revolving basis and may be increased up to $125.0 million in accordance with the terms and in the manner described in the KeyBank Credit Facility. If we are unable to secure additional debt

financing on commercially reasonable terms, our liquidity could be reduced significantly. If we are unable to repay amounts outstanding under any debt facilities we may obtain and are declared in default or are unable to renew or refinance these facilities, we may not be able to operate our business in the normal course. These situations may arise due to circumstances that we may be unable to control, such as lack of access to the credit markets, a severe decline in the value of the U.S. dollar, another economic downturn or an operational problem that affects third parties or us and could materially damage our business.

Adverse developments in the credit markets may impair our ability to secure debt financing.

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, it may be difficult for us to obtain desired financing to finance the growth of our investments on acceptable economic terms, or at all.

The commencement, continuation, or cessation of government and central bank policies and economic stimulus programs in response to adverse economic developments, 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.

Further downgrades of the U.S. credit rating, impending automatic spending cuts, another government shutdown or a failure to raise the statutory debt limit of the United States could negatively impact our liquidity, financial condition and earnings.

The U.S. debt ceiling and budget deficit concerns have increased the possibility of additional credit-rating downgrades and economic slowdowns, or a recession in the United States. Although U.S. lawmakers passed legislation to raise the federal debt ceiling on multiple occasions, including recent suspensions of the federal debt ceiling and an increase in the debt ceiling signed into law by President Biden in December 2021, ratings agencies have lowered or threatened to lower the long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States.

The impact of this or any further downgrades to the U.S. government’s sovereign credit rating or its perceived credit worthiness could adversely affect the U.S. and global financial markets and economic conditions. Absent further quantitative easing by the Federal Reserve, these developments could cause interest rates and borrowing costs to rise, which may negatively impact our ability to access the debt markets on favorable terms. In addition, disagreement over the federal budget has caused the U.S. federal government to shut down for periods of time. Continued adverse political and economic conditions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If we cannot obtain additional capital because of either regulatory or market price constraints, we could be forced to curtail or cease our new lending and investment activities, our net asset value could decrease and our level of distributions and liquidity could be affected adversely.

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 prolonged continuation or 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 additional 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.

Terrorist attacks, acts of war or natural disasters may affect the market for our common stock, impact the businesses in which we invest and harm our business, operating results and financial condition.

Terrorist acts, acts of war or natural disasters may disrupt our operations, as well as the operations of the businesses in which we invest. Such acts have created, and continue to create, economic and political uncertainties and have contributed to global economic instability. Future terrorist activities, military or security operations, or natural disasters could further weaken the domestic/global economies and create additional uncertainties, which may negatively impact the businesses in which we invest directly or indirectly and, in turn, could have a material adverse impact on our business, operating results and financial condition. Losses from terrorist attacks and natural disasters are generally uninsurable.

In addition, the current U.S. political environment and the resulting uncertainties regarding actual and potential shifts in U.S. foreign investment, trade, taxation, economic, environmental and other policies under the current Administration, as well as the impact of geopolitical tension, such as a deterioration in the bilateral relationship between the U.S. and China or the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, could lead to disruption, instability and volatility in the global markets. Unfavorable economic conditions also would be expected to increase our funding costs, limit our access to the capital markets or result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit to us. These events may limit our investment originations, and limit our ability to grow and could have a material negative impact on our operating results, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows and the fair values of our debt and equity investments.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have a material adverse impact on us and our portfolio companies.

In February 2022, Russian President Vladimir Putin commenced a military invasion of Ukraine, which has continued into 2023, and which has had, and may continue to have, a negative impact on the economy and business activity globally (including in the countries in which the Company invests), and therefore could adversely affect the performance of the Company’s investments. Furthermore, the conflict between the two nations remains ongoing and the varying involvement of the United States and other NATO countries has had, and may continue to have, an unpredictable impact on global economic and market conditions, and, as a result, presents material uncertainty and risk with respect to the Company and the performance of its investments or operations, and the ability of the Company to achieve its investment objectives.

Additionally, to the extent that third parties, investors, or related customer bases have material operations or assets in Russia or Ukraine, they may have adverse consequences related to the ongoing conflict.

Economic sanction laws in the United States and other jurisdictions may prohibit us and our affiliates from transacting with certain countries, individuals and companies.

In the United States, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control administers and enforces laws, executive orders and regulations establishing U.S. economic and trade sanctions, which prohibit, among other things, transactions with, and the provision of services to, certain non-U.S. countries, territories, entities and individuals. These types of sanctions may significantly restrict or completely prohibit investment activities in certain jurisdictions, and if we, our portfolio companies or other issuers in which we invest were to violate any such laws or regulations, we may face significant legal and monetary penalties.

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or FCPA, and other anti-corruption laws and regulations, as well as anti-boycott regulations, may also apply to and restrict our activities, our portfolio companies and other issuers of our investments. If an issuer or we were to violate any such laws or regulations, such issuer or we may face significant legal and monetary penalties. The U.S. government has indicated that it is particularly focused on FCPA enforcement, which may increase the risk that an issuer or us becomes the subject of such actual or threatened enforcement. In addition, certain commentators have suggested that private investment firms and the funds that they manage may face increased scrutiny and/or liability with respect to the activities of their underlying portfolio companies. As such, a violation of the FCPA or other applicable regulations by us or an issuer of our portfolio investments could have a material adverse effect on us. We are committed to complying with the FCPA and other anti-corruption laws and regulations, as well as anti-boycott regulations, to which it is subject. As a result, we may be adversely affected because of our unwillingness to enter into transactions that violate any such laws or regulations.

Major public health issues could have an adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations and other aspects of our business.

Major public health issues have impacted and, in the future, may impact our business, financial condition, results of operations, liquidity or prospects and those of our portfolio companies in a number of ways. For instance, our investment portfolio (and, specifically, the valuations of investment assets we hold) was adversely affected as a result of market developments from the COVID-19 pandemic, including disruptions to the businesses of our portfolio companies, global supply chain disruptions, and increased inflationary pressures nationally and globally.

Moreover, changes in interest rates, reduced liquidity or a continued slowdown in U.S. or global economic conditions has, and may continue to, adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, liquidity and/or prospects and those of our portfolio companies. Further, extreme market volatility may leave us and our portfolio companies unable to react to market events in a prudent manner consistent with our historical practices in dealing with more orderly markets.

We will also continue to be negatively affected if our operations and effectiveness or the operations and effectiveness of a portfolio company (or any of the key personnel or service providers of the foregoing) is compromised or if necessary or beneficial systems and processes are disrupted.

Any public health emergency, including the COVID-19 pandemic or any outbreak of other existing or new epidemic diseases, or the threat thereof, and the resulting financial and economic market uncertainty could have a significant adverse impact on us and the fair value of our investments. Our valuations, and particularly valuations of private investments and private companies, are inherently uncertain, may fluctuate over short periods of time and are often based on estimates, comparisons and qualitative evaluations of private information that may not show the complete impact of the public health emergency and the resulting measures taken in response thereto. These potential impacts, while uncertain, could adversely affect our and our portfolio companies’ operating results.

Even after any major public health issue subsides, the U.S. economy and most other major global economies may experience a recession, and we anticipate our business and operations could be materially adversely affected by a prolonged recession in the United States and other major markets.

We are currently operating in a period of capital markets disruption and economic uncertainty.

The U.S. capital markets have experienced extreme volatility and disruption over the past several years.

Disruptions in the capital markets caused by inflation and rising interest rates, the war in Ukraine and Russia, health epidemics and pandemics and other globally significant trends and events have increased the spread between the yields realized on risk-free and higher risk securities, resulting in illiquidity in parts of the capital markets. These and future market disruptions and/or illiquidity would be expected to have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Unfavorable economic conditions also would be expected to increase our funding costs, limit our access to the capital markets or result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit to us. These events have limited and could continue to limit our investment originations, limit our ability to grow and have a material negative impact on our operating results and the fair values of our debt and equity investments.

Further, current market conditions may make it difficult for us to obtain debt capital on favorable terms and any failure to do so could have a material adverse effect on our business. The debt capital that will be available to us in the future, if at all, may be at a higher cost and on less favorable terms and conditions than what we would otherwise expect, including being at a higher cost in rising rate environments. If we are unable to raise debt, then our equity investors may not benefit from the potential for increased returns on equity resulting from leverage and we may be limited in our ability to make or fund commitments to portfolio companies. An inability to obtain indebtedness could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Our ability to achieve our investment objective depends on the ability of the Investment Adviser to manage and support our investment process. If the Investment Adviser were to lose any members of their respective senior management teams, our ability to achieve our investment objective could be significantly harmed.

Since we have no employees, we depend on the investment expertise, skill and network of business contacts of the broader networks of the Investment Adviser and its affiliates. The Investment Adviser evaluates, negotiates, structures, executes, monitors and services our investments. Our future success depends to a significant extent on the continued service and coordination of the Investment Adviser and its senior management team. The departure of any members of the Investment Adviser’s senior management team could have a material adverse effect on our ability to achieve our investment objective.

Our ability to achieve our investment objective depends on the Investment Adviser’s ability to identify and analyze, and to invest in, finance and monitor companies that meet our investment criteria. In addition to monitoring the performance of our existing investments, our Investment Adviser’s investment team may also be called upon, from time to time, to provide managerial assistance to some of our portfolio companies as well as other funds that they manage. These demands on their time may distract them or slow our rate of investment. See also “—Risks Related to the Investment Adviser and its Affiliates—There are significant potential conflicts of interest that could negatively affect our investment returns.” Even if we are able to grow and build upon our investment operations, any failure to manage our growth effectively could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. The results of our operations depend on many factors, including the availability of opportunities for investment, readily accessible short and long-term funding alternatives in the financial markets, and economic conditions.

Furthermore, if we cannot successfully operate our business or implement our investment policies and strategies, it could negatively impact our ability to make distributions.

The Investment Adviser’s capabilities in structuring the investment process, providing competent, attentive and efficient services to us, and facilitating access to financing on acceptable terms depend on the employment of investment professionals in an adequate number and of adequate sophistication to match the corresponding flow of transactions. To achieve our investment objective, the Investment Adviser may need to hire, train, supervise and manage new investment professionals to participate in our investment selection and monitoring process. The Investment Adviser may not be able to find investment professionals in a timely manner or at all. Failure to support our investment process could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The Investment Advisory Agreement between the Investment Adviser and us has been approved pursuant to Section 15 of the 1940 Act. In addition, the Investment Advisory Agreement has termination provisions that allow the parties to terminate the agreement. The Investment Advisory Agreement may be terminated at any time, without penalty, by us or by the Investment Adviser, upon 60 days’ notice. If the agreement is terminated, we may not be able to find a new external investment adviser or hire internal management with similar expertise and ability to provide the same or equivalent services on acceptable terms within 60 days, or at all. If we are unable to do so quickly, our operations are likely to experience a disruption, our financial condition, business and results of operations as well as our ability to pay distributions are likely to be adversely affected.

Any inability of our Investment Adviser to maintain or develop strong referral relationships, or the failure of these relationships to generate investment opportunities, could adversely affect our business.

We depend upon our Investment Adviser to maintain its relationships with venture capital and private equity firms, placement agents, investment banks, management groups and other financial institutions, and we expect to rely to a significant extent upon these relationships to provide us with potential investment opportunities. If our Investment Adviser fails to maintain such relationships, or to develop new relationships with other sources of investment opportunities, we will not be able to grow our investment portfolio. In addition, individuals with whom our Investment Adviser has relationships are not obligated to provide us with investment opportunities, and we can offer no assurance that these relationships will generate investment opportunities for us in the future.

We operate in a highly competitive market for investment opportunities, which could reduce returns and result in losses.

We compete for investments with other BDCs and investment funds (including private equity funds, venture lending funds, finance companies with venture lending units, banks focused on venture lending, mezzanine funds and funds that invest in CLOs, structured notes, derivatives and other types of collateralized securities and structured products), as well as traditional financial services companies such as commercial banks and other sources of funding. Moreover, alternative investment vehicles, such as hedge funds, have begun to invest in areas in which they have not traditionally invested, including making investments in small to mid-sized private U.S. companies. As a result of these new entrants, competition for investment opportunities in small and middle-market private U.S. companies may intensify. Many of our potential competitors are substantially larger and have considerably greater financial, technical and marketing resources than we have. For example, some competitors may have a lower cost of capital and access to funding sources that are not available to us. In addition, some of our competitors have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments than we have. These characteristics might allow our competitors to consider a wider variety of investments, establish more relationships or offer better pricing and more flexible structuring than we are able to offer. We may lose investment opportunities if we do not match our competitors’ pricing, terms or structure. If we are forced to match our competitors’ pricing, terms or structure, we may not be able to achieve acceptable returns on our investments or may bear substantial risk of capital loss. We believe a significant part of our competitive advantage stems from the fact that the market for investments in lower and traditional middle-market companies is underserved by traditional commercial banks and other financing sources. A significant increase in the number and/or the size of our competitors in this target market could force us to accept less attractive investment terms. Furthermore, many of our potential competitors have greater experience operating under, or will not be subject to, the regulatory restrictions that the 1940 Act impose on us as a BDC.

We may have difficulty sourcing investment opportunities.

We cannot assure investors that we will be able to locate a sufficient number of suitable investment opportunities to allow us to deploy capital successfully. In addition, privately-negotiated investments in loans and illiquid securities of private middle market companies require substantial due diligence and structuring, and we cannot assure investors that we will achieve our anticipated investment pace. As a result, investors will be unable to evaluate any future portfolio company investments prior to purchasing shares of our common stock. Additionally, our Investment Adviser will select 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 shares of our common stock. To the extent we are unable to deploy capital, our investment income and, in turn, our results of operations, will likely be materially adversely affected. There is no assurance that we will be able to consummate investment transactions or that such transactions will be successful. BC Partners, the Company and their affiliates may also face certain conflicts of interests in connection with any transaction, including any warehousing transaction involving an affiliate.

Until such time we invest such capital in portfolio companies, we may invest these amounts 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 investments in secured debt (including senior secured, unitranche and second lien debt) and unsecured debt (including senior unsecured and subordinated debt), as well as related equity securities.

As required by the 1940 Act, a significant portion of our investment portfolio is and will be recorded at fair value as determined by the Investment Adviser in its role as valuation designee, subject to the ultimate oversight of our Board and, as a result, there is and will be uncertainty as to the value of our portfolio investments.

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 by the Investment Adviser in its role as valuation designee, subject to the ultimate oversight of our Board. Typically, there will not be a public market for the securities of the privately held companies in which we invest. As a result, we value these securities quarterly at fair value as determined in good faith by the Investment Adviser, based on, among other things, input of third-party independent valuation firm(s).

Certain factors that may be considered in determining the fair value of our investments include external events, such as private mergers, sales and acquisitions involving comparable companies. As a result, our determinations of fair value may differ materially from the values that would have been used if a ready market for these non-traded securities existed. Due to this uncertainty, our fair value determinations may cause our net asset value on a given date to materially differ from the value that we may ultimately realize upon the sale of one or more of our investments. As a result, investors purchasing our common stock based on an overstated net asset value would pay a higher price than the value of our investments might warrant. Conversely, investors selling shares during a period in which the net asset value understates the value of our investments would receive a lower price for their shares than the value of our investments might warrant. In addition, we may not be able to realize the values on our investments needed to pay interest on our borrowings.

The involvement of our interested directors in the valuation process may create conflicts of interest.

We make many of our portfolio investments in the form of loans and securities that are not publicly traded and for which no market-based price quotation is available. As a result, our Investment Adviser determines the fair value of these loans and securities subject to the Board’s oversight, as described in the section titled “Valuation of Investments” in Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements. In connection with that determination, investment professionals from the Investment Adviser may provide our Board with valuations based upon the most recent portfolio company financial statements available and projected financial results of each portfolio company. While the valuation for certain portfolio investments is reviewed by an independent valuation firm quarterly, the Board remains ultimately responsibility for fair value determinations, including our interested directors, and not by such third-party valuation firm. The participation of the Investment Adviser’s investment professionals in our valuation process could result in conflicts of interest as the Investment Adviser’s management fee is based, in part, on the value of our gross assets, and its incentive fees will be based, in part, on realized and unrealized gains and depreciation.

There is a risk that investors in our equity securities may not receive distributions consistent with historical levels or at all, or that our distributions may not grow over time and a portion of our distributions may be a return of capital.

We cannot assure you that we will achieve investment results that will allow us to make a specified level of cash distributions. Our ability to pay distributions might be adversely affected by the impact of one or more of the risk factors described in this annual report or incorporated herein by reference, including recent macro-economic trends and events, such as geo-political conflicts and high levels of inflation. If we declare a distribution and if more stockholders opt to receive cash distributions rather than participate in our dividend reinvestment plan, we may be forced to sell some of our investments in order to make cash distribution payments. To the extent we make distributions to stockholders that include a return of capital, such portion of the distribution essentially constitutes a return of the stockholder’s investment. Although such return of capital may not be taxable, such distributions would generally decrease a stockholder’s basis in our common stock and may therefore increase such stockholder’s tax liability for capital gains upon the future sale of such stock. A return of capital distribution may cause a stockholder to recognize a capital gain from the sale of our common stock even if the stockholder sells its shares for less than the original purchase price.

As a RIC, if we do not distribute a certain percentage of our income annually, we may suffer adverse tax consequences, including possibly losing the U.S. federal income tax benefits allowable to RICs. We cannot assure you that you will receive distributions at a particular level or at all.

In certain cases, we may recognize income before or without receiving the accompanying cash. Depending on the amount of noncash income, this could result in difficulty satisfying the annual distribution requirement applicable to RICs. Accordingly, we may have to sell some portfolio investments at times it would not consider advantageous, raise additional debt or equity capital or reduce new investments to meet these distribution requirements.

We have not established any limit on the amount of funds we may use from available sources, such as borrowings, if any, to fund distributions (which may reduce the amount of capital we ultimately invest in assets).

Stockholders should understand that any distributions made from sources other than cash flow from operations or that are relying on fee or expense reimbursement waivers from the Investment Adviser 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 the Investment Adviser or the Administrator continues to make such expense reimbursements. Stockholders should also understand that our future repayments to the Investment Adviser will reduce the distributions that they would otherwise receive. There can be no assurance that we will achieve such performance in order to sustain these distributions, or be able to pay distributions at all. The Investment Adviser and the Administrator have no obligation to waive fees or receipt of expense reimbursements.

Changes in laws or regulations governing our operations may adversely affect our business or cause us to alter our business strategy.

We and our portfolio companies are subject to regulation at the local, state and federal level. New legislation may be enacted, or new interpretations, rulings or regulations could be adopted, including those governing the types of investments we are permitted to make, any of which could harm us and our stockholders, potentially with retroactive effect.

Additionally, any changes to the laws and regulations governing our operations relating to permitted investments may cause us to alter our investment strategy to avail ourselves of new or different opportunities. Such changes could result in material differences to our strategies and plans and may result in our investment focus shifting from the areas of expertise of the Investment Adviser to other types of investments in which the Investment Adviser may have less expertise or little or no experience. Thus, any such changes, if they occur, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations and the value of your investment.

Changes to U.S. tariff and import/export regulations may have a negative effect on our portfolio companies and, in turn, harm us.

There has been ongoing discussion and commentary regarding further potential significant changes to U.S. trade policies, treaties and tariffs. Since 2018, the U.S. has imposed various tariffs on Chinese goods, and China has retaliated by placing tariffs on various U.S. goods. Both countries signed a phase one trade agreement in January 2020 halting further tariffs and increasing sales of U.S. goods to China. The agreement left in place most tariffs, which remained in place as of the end of 2022. It is unclear what the final outcome of the negotiations and agreements will result in. These prior tariffs have resulted in, and may continue to trigger, retaliatory actions by affected countries, including the imposition of tariffs on the U.S. by other countries. These events have created significant uncertainty about the future relationship between the United States and other countries with respect to trade policies, treaties and tariffs. These developments, or the perception that any of them could occur, may have a material adverse effect on global economic conditions and the stability of global financial markets, and may significantly reduce global trade and, in particular, trade between the impacted nations and the United States. Any of these factors could depress economic activity, restrict our portfolio companies’ access to suppliers or customers, increase costs, decrease margins, reduce the competitiveness of products and services offered by current or future portfolio companies and have a material adverse effect on their business, financial condition and results of operations, which in turn would negatively impact us.

As a publicly traded company, we are subject to increasingly complex corporate governance, public disclosure and accounting requirements that are costly and could adversely affect our business and financial results.

As a publicly traded company, we incur legal, accounting and other expenses, including costs associated with the periodic reporting requirements applicable to a company whose securities are registered under the 1934 Act, or the 1934 Act, as well as additional corporate governance requirements, including requirements under the Sarbanes Oxley Act, and other rules implemented by the SEC. Also, we are subject to changing rules and regulations of federal and state government as well as the stock exchange on which our common stock is listed. These entities, including the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, the SEC and the NASDAQ Stock Market, have issued a significant number of new and increasingly complex requirements and regulations over the course of the last several years and continue to develop additional regulations and requirements in response to laws enacted by Congress. Our efforts to comply with these existing requirements, or any revised or amended requirements, have resulted in, and are likely to continue to result in, an increase in expenses and a diversion of management’s time from other business activities.

If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud. As a result, stockholders and noteholders could lose confidence in our financial and other public reporting, which would harm our business.

Effective internal controls over financial reporting are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and, together with adequate disclosure controls and procedures, are designed to prevent fraud. Any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. In addition, any testing by us conducted in connection with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, may reveal deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting that are deemed to be material weaknesses or that may require prospective or retroactive changes to our consolidated financial statements or identify other areas for further attention or improvement. Inferior internal controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative effect on our business.

We are required to disclose changes made in our internal controls and procedures over financial reporting on a quarterly basis and our management is required to assess the effectiveness of these controls annually.

An independent assessment of the effectiveness of our internal controls could detect problems that our management’s assessment might not. Undetected material weaknesses in our internal controls could lead to financial statement restatements and require us to incur the expense of remediation. As a public company, we may incur significant additional expenses in the near term, which may negatively impact our financial performance and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders. This process also will result in a diversion of management’s time and attention. We cannot be certain as to the timing of completion of any evaluation, testing and remediation actions or the impact of the same on our operations, and we may not be able to ensure that the process is effective or that our internal controls over financial reporting are or will be effective in a timely manner. In the event that we are unable to maintain or achieve compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and related rules, the market price of our common stock may be adversely affected.

There is uncertainty surrounding potential legal, regulatory and policy changes by new presidential administrations in the United States that may directly affect financial institutions and the global economy.

Changes in federal policy, including tax policies, and at regulatory agencies may occur over time through policy and personnel changes, which may lead to changes involving the level of oversight and focus on the financial services industry or the tax rates paid by corporate entities. The nature, timing and economic and political effects of potential changes to the current legal and regulatory framework affecting financial institutions remain highly uncertain. Uncertainty surrounding future changes may adversely affect our operating environment and therefore our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

The impact of financial reform legislation on us is uncertain.

The Company and the portfolio companies in which it invests are subject to laws and regulations at the U.S. federal, state and local levels and, in some cases, foreign levels. These laws and regulations, as well as their interpretation, may change from time to time, and new laws, regulations and interpretations may come into effect. Accordingly, any change in law and regulations, changes in administration or control of U.S. Congress, changes in interpretations, or newly enacted laws or regulations could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business or the business of the portfolio companies in which the Company invests.

Over the past several years, there also has been increasing regulatory attention to the extension of credit outside of the traditional banking sector, raising the possibility that some portion of the non-bank financial sector may be subject to new regulation. While it cannot be known at this time whether any regulation will be implemented or what form it will take, increased regulation of non-bank lending could be materially adverse to the Company’s business, financial conditions and results of operation. We may experience fluctuations in our quarterly results.

We may experience fluctuations in our quarterly and annual results.

We may experience fluctuations in our quarterly and annual operating results due to a number of factors, including our ability or inability to make investments in companies that meet our investment criteria, any sales, dispositions or liquidity events of our portfolio companies, the interest rate payable on the debt securities we acquire, the level of portfolio dividend and fee income, the level of our expenses, variations in and the timing of the recognition of realized and unrealized gains or losses, the degree to which we encounter competition in our markets and general economic conditions. Given that the portfolio is concentrated in a limited number of portfolio companies and industries, distributions, dispositions or liquidity events affecting a portfolio company or industry in which we own a significant position may adversely affect our net asset value and results of operations. As a result of these factors, results for any period should not be relied upon as being indicative of performance in future periods.

Any unrealized depreciation we experience on our loan portfolio may be an indication of future realized losses, which could reduce our income available for distribution.

As a BDC, we are required to carry our investments at market value or, if no market value is ascertainable, at the fair value as determined in good faith by our Adviser, in its role as valuation designee. Decreases in the market values or fair values of our investments will be 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. In addition, decreases in the market value or fair value of our investments will reduce our net asset value.

Recent legislation permits the Company to incur additional leverage.

Prior to the Small Business Credit Availability Act being signed into law, a BDC generally was not permitted to incur indebtedness unless immediately after such borrowing it had an asset coverage for total borrowings of at least 200% (i.e., a 1:1 leverage-to-equity ratio). The Small Business Credit Availability Act, signed into law on March 23, 2018, contains a provision that grants a BDC the option, subject to certain conditions and disclosure obligations, to increase the leverage of its portfolio to a maximum of 2:1. On November 1, 2018, the Board, including a “required majority” (as such term is defined in Section 57(o) of the 1940 Act) approved the application of the modified asset coverage. As a result, we are permitted to incur additional indebtedness, and, therefore, the risk of an investment in our common stock may increase.

We are highly dependent on information systems and systems failures could significantly disrupt our business, which may, in turn, negatively affect the market price of our common stock and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Our business is highly dependent on the communications and information systems of the Investment Adviser. Certain of these systems are provided to the Investment Adviser by third-party service providers. Any failure or interruption of such systems, including as a result of the termination of an agreement with any such

third-party service provider, sudden electrical or telecommunications outages, natural disasters such as earthquakes, tornadoes, and hurricanes, events arising from local or larger scale political or social matters, including terrorist attacks, and cyber-attacks could cause delays or other problems in our activities. Any of the above, in turn, could have a material adverse effect on our operating results and negatively affect the market price of our common stock and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

We, the Investment Adviser and our portfolio companies are subject to cybersecurity risks and cyber incidents which may adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results.

Cyber security incidents and cyber-attacks have been occurring globally at a more frequent and severe level and will likely continue to increase in frequency in the future. Despite careful security and controls design, implementation and updating, ours and our portfolio companies’ information technology systems could become subject to cyber-attacks. Cyber-attacks include, but are not limited to, gaining unauthorized access to digital systems (e.g., through “hacking”, malicious software coding, social engineering or “phishing” attempts) for purposes of misappropriating assets or sensitive information, corrupting data, or causing operational disruption. Cyber-attacks may also be carried out in a manner that does not require gaining unauthorized access, such as causing denial-of service attacks on websites (i.e., efforts to make network services unavailable to intended users).

The Investment Adviser, our and each of their and our affiliates and portfolio companies’ and service providers’ information and technology systems may be vulnerable to damage or interruption from cyber security breaches, computer viruses or other malicious code, network failures, computer and telecommunication failures, infiltration by unauthorized persons and other security breaches, or usage errors by their respective professionals or service providers. If unauthorized parties gain access to such information and technology systems, they may be able to steal, publish, delete or modify private and sensitive information, including non-public personal information related to stockholders (and their beneficial owners) and material non-public information.

In addition, we may be required to expend significant additional resources to modify our protective measures and to investigate and remediate vulnerabilities or other exposures arising from operational and security risks related to cyber-attacks.

The Investment Adviser’s employees have been and expect to continue to be the target of fraudulent calls, emails and other forms of activities. The result of these incidents may include disrupted operations, misstated or unreliable financial data, liability for stolen information, misappropriation of assets, increased cybersecurity protection and insurance costs, litigation and damage to our business relationships, regulatory fines or penalties, or other adverse effects on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

The Investment Adviser’s and other service providers’ increased use of mobile and cloud technologies could heighten the risk of a cyber-attack as well as other operational risks, as certain aspects of the security of such technologies may be complex, unpredictable or beyond their control. The Investment Adviser’s and other service providers’ reliance on mobile or cloud technology or any failure by mobile technology and cloud service providers to adequately safeguard their systems and prevent cyber-attacks could disrupt their operations and result in misappropriation, corruption or loss of personal, confidential or proprietary information. In addition, there is a risk that encryption and other protective measures against cyber-attacks may be circumvented, particularly to the extent that new computing technologies increase the speed and computing power available.

Additionally, remote working environments may be less secure and more susceptible to cyber-attacks, including phishing and social engineering attempts. Accordingly, the risks associated with cyber-attacks are heightened under current conditions.

Although the Investment Adviser implemented, and portfolio companies and service providers may implement, various measures to manage risks relating to these types of events, such systems could prove to be inadequate and, if compromised, could become inoperable for extended periods of time, cease to function properly or fail to adequately secure private information. The Investment Adviser does not control the cyber security plans and systems put in place by third-party service providers, and such third-party service providers may have limited indemnification obligations to the Investment Adviser, their affiliates, the Company, the stockholders and/or a portfolio company, each of which could be negatively impacted as a result. Breaches, such as those involving covertly introduced malware, impersonation of authorized users, “phishing” attacks and industrial or other espionage may not be identified even with sophisticated prevention and detection systems, potentially resulting in further harm and preventing them from being addressed appropriately.

The failure of these systems and/or of disaster recovery plans for any reason could cause significant interruptions in the Investment Adviser, its affiliates’, the Company’s and/or a portfolio company’s operations and result in a failure to maintain the security, confidentiality or privacy of sensitive data, including personal information relating to stockholders (and their beneficial owners), material non-public information and the intellectual property and trade secrets and other sensitive information of the Investment Adviser, us and/or portfolio companies. The Investment Adviser, the Company and/or a portfolio company could be required to make significant investments to remedy the effects of any such failures, harm to their reputations, legal claims that they and their respective affiliates may be subjected to, regulatory action or enforcement arising out of applicable privacy and other laws, adverse publicity, and other events that may affect their business and financial performance.

Internal and external cyber threats, as well as other disasters, could impair our ability to conduct business effectively.

The occurrence of a disaster, such as a cyber-attack against us or against a third-party that has access to our data or networks, a natural catastrophe, an industrial accident, failure of our disaster recovery systems, or consequential employee error, could have an adverse effect on our ability to communicate or conduct business, negatively impacting our operations and financial condition. This adverse effect can become particularly acute if those events affect our electronic data processing, transmission, storage, and retrieval systems, or impact the availability, integrity, or confidentiality of our data.

We depend heavily upon computer systems to perform necessary business functions. Despite our implementation of a variety of security measures, our computer systems, networks, and data, like those of other companies, could be subject to cyber-attacks and unauthorized access, use, alteration, or destruction, such as from physical and electronic break-ins or unauthorized tampering. If one or more of these events occurs, it could potentially jeopardize the confidential, proprietary, and other information processed, stored in, and transmitted through our computer systems and networks. Such an attack could cause interruptions or malfunctions in our operations, which could result in financial losses, litigation, regulatory penalties, client dissatisfaction or loss, reputational damage, and increased costs associated with mitigation of damages and remediation. If unauthorized parties gain access to such information and technology systems, they may be able to steal, publish, delete or modify private and sensitive information, including non-public personal information related to stockholders (and their beneficial owners) and material non-public information. The systems we have implemented to manage risks relating to these types of events could prove to be inadequate and, if compromised, could become inoperable for extended periods of time, cease to function properly or fail to adequately secure private information. Breaches such as those involving covertly introduced malware, impersonation of authorized users and industrial or other espionage may not be identified even with sophisticated prevention and detection systems, potentially resulting in further harm and preventing them from being addressed appropriately. The failure of these systems or of disaster recovery plans for any reason could cause significant interruptions in our and our Investment Adviser’s operations and result in a failure to maintain the security, confidentiality or privacy of sensitive data, including personal information relating to stockholders, material non-public information and other sensitive information in our possession.

A disaster or a disruption in the infrastructure that supports our business, including a disruption involving electronic communications or other services used by us or third parties with whom we conduct business, or directly affecting our headquarters, could have a material adverse impact on our ability to continue to operate our business without interruption. Our disaster recovery programs may not be sufficient to mitigate the harm that may result from such a disaster or disruption. In addition, insurance and other safeguards might only partially reimburse us for our losses, if at all.

Third parties with which we do business may also be sources of cybersecurity or other technological risk. We outsource certain functions and these relationships allow for the storage and processing of our information, as well as client, counterparty, employee and borrower information. While we engage in actions to reduce our exposure resulting from outsourcing, ongoing threats may result in unauthorized access, loss, exposure, destruction, or other cybersecurity incident that affects our data, resulting in increased costs and other consequences as described above.

In addition, cybersecurity has become a top priority for regulators around the world, and some jurisdictions have enacted laws requiring companies to notify individuals of data security breaches involving certain types of personal data. If we fail to comply with the relevant laws and regulations, we could suffer financial losses, a disruption of our businesses, liability to investors, regulatory intervention or reputational damage.

Inflation may adversely affect our business and operations and those of our portfolio companies.

Economic activity has continued to accelerate across sectors and regions. Nevertheless, due to global supply chain issues, a rise in energy prices and strong consumer demand as economies continue to reopen, inflation has accelerated significantly in recent months in the U.S. and globally, and the U.S. Federal Reserve has responded by tightening monetary policy. Inflation is likely to continue in the near to medium-term, particularly in the U.S., with the possibility that monetary policy may further tighten in response. Certain of our portfolio companies may be impacted by inflation and persistent inflationary pressures could negatively affect our portfolio companies’ profit margins. Inflation could become a serious problem in the future and have an adverse impact on the Company’s returns.

Certain historical data regarding our business, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity does not reflect the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and related containment measures and therefore does not purport to be representative of our future performance.

The information included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and our other reports filed with the SEC includes information regarding our business, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity as of dates and for periods before and during the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and related containment measures (including quarantines and governmental orders requiring the closure of certain businesses, limiting travel, requiring that individuals stay at home or shelter in place and closing borders). Therefore, certain historical information does not reflect the adverse impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and the related containment measures. Accordingly, investors are cautioned not to unduly rely on such historical information regarding our business, results of operations, financial condition or liquidity, as that data does not reflect the adverse impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and therefore does not purport to be representative of the future results of operations, financial condition, liquidity or other financial or operating results of us, or our business.

The Investment Adviser may not be able to achieve the same or similar returns as those achieved for other funds it currently manages or by its investment team while they were employed at prior positions.

The Investment Adviser manages other funds 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 the Investment Adviser because these other entities may have investment objectives and strategies that differ from ours.

The Investment Adviser and its affiliates, including our officers and some of our directors, face conflicts of interest caused by compensation arrangements with us and our affiliates, which could result in actions that are not in the best interests of our stockholders.

The Investment Adviser and its affiliates will receive substantial fees from us in return for their services, including certain incentive fees based on the performance of our investments. These fees could influence the advice provided to us. Generally, the more equity we sell and the greater the risk assumed by us with respect to our investments, the greater the potential for growth in our assets and profits, and, correlatively, the fees payable by us to our Investment Adviser. These compensation arrangements could affect our Investment Adviser’s or its affiliates’ judgment with respect to offerings of equity and investments made by us, which allow our Investment Adviser to earn increased asset management fees.

Additionally, we pay to the Investment Adviser an incentive fee that is based on the performance of our portfolio and an annual base management fee that is based on the average value of our gross assets, which are the total assets reflected on the consolidated statements of assets and liabilities and includes any borrowings for investment purposes, at the end of the two most recently completed calendar quarters. Because the incentive fee is based on the performance of our portfolio, the Investment Adviser may be incentivized to make investments on our behalf that are riskier or more speculative than would be the case in the absence of such compensation arrangement. The way in which the incentive fee is determined may also encourage the Investment Adviser to use leverage to increase the return on our investments. In addition, because the base management fee is based on the average value of our gross assets at the end of the two most recently completed calendar quarters, which includes any borrowings for investment purposes, the Investment Adviser may be incentivized to recommend the use of leverage or the issuance of additional equity to make additional investments and increase the average value of our gross assets at the end of the two most recently completed calendar quarters. Under certain circumstances, the use of leverage may increase the likelihood of default, which could disfavor our stockholders. Our compensation arrangements could therefore result in our making riskier or more speculative investments, or relying more on leverage to make investments, than would otherwise be the case. This could result in higher investment losses, particularly during cyclical economic downturns.

There are significant potential conflicts of interest that could negatively affect our investment returns.

The members of the Investment Adviser’s investment team also monitor and service other affiliated investment funds. In addition, our executive officers and directors, as well as the current and future members of our Investment Adviser’s investment team may serve as officers, directors or principals of other entities that operate in the same or a related line of business as we do. Accordingly, they may have obligations to investors in those entities, the fulfillment of which obligations may not be in the best interests of us or our stockholders.

In the course of our investing activities, we pay management and incentive fees to the Investment Adviser and reimburse the Investment Adviser for certain expenses it incurs. As a result, investors in our common stock 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 the Investment Adviser will have interests that differ from those of our stockholders, giving rise to a conflict. The Investment Adviser will not be reimbursed for any performance-related compensation for

its employees. We pay our Administrator our allocable portion of overhead and other expenses incurred by our Administrator 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, chief compliance officer and their respective administrative support staff. These arrangements create conflicts of interest that our Board must monitor.

The Investment Adviser and its affiliates may also manage other funds in the future that may have investment mandates that are similar, in whole or in part to ours. To the extent permitted by the 1940 Act and interpretation of the SEC staff, the Investment Adviser and its 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, the Investment Adviser 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 the Investment Adviser’s allocation procedures.

As a BDC, we are substantially limited in our ability to co-invest in privately negotiated transactions with affiliated funds unless we obtain an exemptive order from the SEC. On October 23, 2018, the SEC issued an order granting an application for exemptive relief to an affiliate of our Investment Adviser that allows BDCs managed by the Investment Adviser, including the Company, to co-invest, subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions in certain private placement transactions, with other funds managed by the Investment Adviser or its affiliates and any future funds that are advised by the Investment Adviser or its affiliated investment advisers. Under the terms of the exemptive order, in order for the Company to participate in a co-investment transaction, a “required majority” (as defined in Section 57(o) of the 1940 Act) of the Company’s independent directors must conclude that (i) the terms of the proposed transaction, including the consideration to be paid, are reasonable and fair to the Company and its stockholders and do not involve overreaching with respect of the Company or its stockholders on the part of any person concerned, and (ii) the proposed transaction is consistent with the interests of the Company’s stockholders and is consistent with the Company’s investment objectives and strategies and certain criteria established by the Board. We believe this relief may not only enhance our ability to further our investment objectives and strategies, but may also increase favorable investment opportunities for us, in part by allowing us to participate in larger investments, together with our co-investment affiliates, than would be available to us in the absence of such relief.

In the ordinary course of business, we may enter into transactions with portfolio companies that may be considered related party transactions. In order to ensure that we do not engage in any prohibited transactions with any persons affiliated with us, we have implemented certain written policies and procedures whereby our executive officers screen each of our transactions for any possible affiliations between the proposed portfolio investment and us, companies controlled by us or our executive officers and directors. We will not enter into any agreements unless and until we are satisfied that doing so will not raise concerns under the 1940 Act or, if such concerns exist, we have taken appropriate actions to seek review and approval by our Board or exemptive relief for such transaction. Our Board will review these procedures on an annual basis.

We may be obligated to pay the Investment Adviser incentive compensation even if we incur a net loss due to a decline in the value of our portfolio, and the incentive fee may be calculated using income that has not yet been received.

Our Investment Advisory Agreement entitles the Investment Adviser to receive incentive compensation on income regardless of any capital losses. In such case, we may be required to pay the Investment Adviser incentive compensation for a fiscal quarter even if there is a decline in the value of our portfolio or if we incur a net loss for that quarter. Any incentive fee payable by us that relates to our net investment income may be computed and paid on income that may include interest that has been accrued, but not yet received, including original issue discount, which may arise if we receive fees in connection with the origination of a loan or possibly in other circumstances, or contractual “payment-in-kind,” or PIK, interest, which represents contractual interest added to the loan balance and due at the end of the loan term. To the extent we do not distribute accrued PIK interest, the deferral of PIK interest has the simultaneous effects of increasing the assets under management and increasing the base management fee at a compounding rate, while generating investment income and increasing the incentive fee at a compounding rate.

In addition, the deferral of PIK interest would also increase the loan-to-value ratio at a compounding rate if the issuer’s assets do not increase in value, and investments with a deferred interest feature, such as PIK interest, may represent a higher credit risk than loans on which interest must be paid in full in cash on a regular basis. For example, if a portfolio company defaults on a loan that is structured to provide accrued interest, it is possible that accrued interest previously included in the calculation of the incentive fee will become uncollectible. The Investment Adviser is not under any obligation to reimburse us for any part of the incentive fee it received that was based on accrued income that we never received as a result of a default by an entity on the obligation that resulted in the accrual of such income, and such circumstances would result in our paying an incentive fee on income we never received.

The Investment Adviser is not obligated to reimburse us for any part of the incentive fee it receives that is based on accrued income that we never receive.

Part of the incentive fee payable by us to our Investment Adviser that relates to our net investment income is computed and paid on income that may include 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. Our Investment Adviser will not be under any obligation to reimburse us for any part of the incentive fees it received that was based on accrued income that we never receive as a result of a default by an entity on the obligation that resulted in the accrual of such income.

There may be conflicts of interest related to obligations that the Investment Adviser’s senior management and investment team has to other clients.

As of April 2021, we are advised by Mount Logan Management LLC, our Investment Adviser. The members of the senior management and investment team of the Investment Adviser serve or may serve as officers, directors or principals of entities that operate in the same or a related line of business as we do, or of investment funds managed by the same personnel. In serving in these multiple capacities, they may have obligations to other clients or investors in those entities, the fulfilment of which may not be in our best interests or in the best interest of our stockholders. Our investment objective may overlap with the investment objectives of such investment funds, accounts or other investment vehicles. In particular, we rely on the Investment Adviser to manage our day-to-day activities and to implement our investment strategy. The Investment Adviser and certain of its affiliates are presently, and plan in the future to continue to be, involved with activities that are unrelated to us. As a result of these activities, the Investment Adviser, its officers and employees and certain of its affiliates will have conflicts of interest in allocating their time between us and other activities in which they are or may become involved, including the management of its affiliated funds. The Investment Adviser and its officers and employees will devote only as much of its or their time to our business as the Investment Adviser and its officers and employees, in their judgment, determine is reasonably required, which may be substantially less than their full time.

We rely, in part, on the Investment Adviser to assist with identifying and executing upon investment opportunities and on the Board to review and approve the terms of our participation in co-investment transactions with the Investment Adviser and its affiliates. The Investment Adviser and its affiliates are not restricted from forming additional investment funds, entering into other investment advisory relationships or engaging in other business activities. These activities could be viewed as creating a conflict of interest in that the time and effort of the members of the Investment Adviser, its affiliates and their officers and employees will not be devoted exclusively to our business but will be allocated between us and such other business activities of the Investment Adviser and its affiliates in a manner that the Investment Adviser deems necessary and appropriate.

An affiliate of the Investment Adviser manages BC Partners Lending Corporation and Portman Ridge Finance Corporation, each of which is a BDC that invests primarily in debt and equity of privately-held middle-market companies, similar to our targets for investment. Therefore, there may be certain investment opportunities that satisfy the investment criteria for those BDCs and us. Each of BC Partners Lending Corporation and Portman Ridge Finance Corporation operates as a distinct and separate company and any investment in our common stock will not be an investment in either of those BDCs. In addition, certain of our executive officers serve in substantially similar capacities for BC Partners Lending Corporation and Portman Ridge Finance Corporation, and three of our independent directors serve as independent directors of those BDCs.

The time and resources that individuals employed by the Investment Adviser devote to us may be diverted and we may face additional competition due to the fact that individuals employed by the Investment Adviser are not prohibited from raising money for or managing other entities that make the same types of investments that we target.

Neither the Investment Adviser nor individuals employed by the Investment Adviser are generally prohibited from raising capital for and managing other investment entities that make the same types of investments as those we target. As a result, the time and resources that these individuals may devote to us may be diverted. In addition, we may compete with any such investment entity for the same investors and investment opportunities. On October 23, 2018, the SEC issued an order granting an application for exemptive relief to an affiliate of our Investment Adviser that allows BDCs managed by the Investment Adviser, including the Company, to co-invest, subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions in certain private placement transactions, with other funds managed by the Investment Adviser or its affiliates and any future funds that are advised by the Investment Adviser or its affiliated investment advisers.

Our base management and incentive fees may induce the Investment Adviser to make speculative investments or to incur leverage.

The incentive fee payable by us to the Investment Adviser may create an incentive for our Investment Adviser to make investments on our behalf that are risky or more speculative than would be the case in the absence of such compensation arrangement. The way in which the incentive fee payable to the Investment Adviser is determined may encourage our Investment Adviser to use leverage to increase the leveraged return on our investment portfolio. The part of the management and incentive fees payable to the Investment Adviser that relates to our net investment income is computed and paid on income that may include interest income 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. This fee structure may be considered to involve a conflict of interest for the Investment Adviser to the extent that it may encourage the Investment Adviser to favor debt financings that provide for deferred interest, rather than current cash payments of interest.

In addition, the fact that our base management fee is payable based upon our gross assets, which would include any borrowings for investment purposes, may encourage the Investment Adviser to use leverage to make additional investments. Under certain circumstances, the use of leverage may increase the likelihood of defaulting on our borrowings, which would disfavor holders of our common stock. Such a practice could result in us investing in more speculative securities than would otherwise be in our best interests, which could result in higher investment losses, particularly during cyclical economic downturns.

Shares of our common stock may be purchased by the Investment Adviser or its affiliates.

The Investment Adviser and its affiliates may purchase shares of our common stock for any reason deemed appropriate. The Investment Adviser and its affiliates will not acquire any shares of our common stock with the intention to resell or re-distribute such shares. The purchase of common stock by the Investment Adviser and its affiliates could create certain risks, including, but not limited to, the following:

We depend upon our Investment Adviser’s key personnel for our future success.

We depend on the diligence, skill and network of business contacts Ted Goldthorpe, Matthias Ederer, Henry Wang and Raymond Svider, each experienced members of the Investment Adviser’s investment personnel, who serve as the members of the investment committee of the Investment Adviser. Our success depends on the continued service of these individuals and the other senior investment professionals available to the Investment Adviser. We cannot assure you that unforeseen business, medical, personal or other circumstances would not lead any of these individuals to terminate his relationship with us. Additionally, we cannot assure you that a reduction in revenue to the Investment Adviser, including as a result of fee waivers or a decrease in our assets, would not lead to a loss of investment professionals in the future. Such loss of members of the Investment Adviser’s investment committee and other investment professionals could have a material adverse effect on our ability to achieve our investment objective as well as on our financial condition and results of operations. In addition, we can offer no assurance that the Investment Adviser will continue indefinitely as our investment adviser. The members of the Investment Adviser’s investment team are and may in the future become affiliated with entities engaged in business activities similar to those intended to be conducted by us and may have conflicts of interest in allocating their time.

The Investment Adviser may retain additional consultants, advisers and/or operating partners to provide services to the Company, and such additional personnel will perform similar functions and duties for other organizations which may give rise to conflicts of interest.

The Investment Adviser may work with or alongside one or more consultants, advisers (including senior advisers and CEOs) and/or operating partners who are retained by the Investment Adviser on a consultancy or retainer or other basis, to provide services to the Company and other entities sponsored by the Investment Adviser including the sourcing of investments and other investment-related and support services. The functions undertaken by such persons with respect to the Company and any of its investments will not be exclusive and such persons may perform similar functions and duties for other organizations which may give rise to conflicts of interest. Such persons may also be appointed to the board of directors of companies and have other business interests which give rise to conflicts of interest with the interests of the Company or a portfolio entity of the Company. Stockholders should note that such persons may retain compensation that will not offset the base management fee payable to the Investment Adviser, including that: (i) such persons are permitted to retain all directors’ fees, monitoring fees and other compensation received by them in respect of acting as a director or officer of, or providing other services to, a portfolio entity and such amounts shall not be credited against the base management fee; and (ii) certain of such persons may be paid a deal fee, a consultancy fee or other compensation where they are involved in a specific project relating to the Company, which fee will be paid either by the Company or, if applicable, the relevant portfolio entity.

The terms of the Investment Advisory Agreement and the Administration Agreement were determined without independent assessment on our behalf, and these terms may be less advantageous to us than if such terms had been the subject of arm’s-length negotiations.

The Investment Advisory Agreement and the Administration Agreement were negotiated between related parties. Consequently, their terms, including fees payable to the Investment Adviser and the Administrator, may not be as favorable to us as if they had been negotiated with an unaffiliated third-party.

The Investment Adviser’s influence on conducting our operations gives it the ability to increase its fees, which may reduce the amount of cash flow available for distribution to our stockholders.

The Investment Adviser is paid a base management fee calculated as a percentage of our gross assets and unrelated to net income or any other performance base or measure. The Investment Adviser may advise us to consummate transactions or conduct our operations in a manner that, in the Investment Adviser’s reasonable discretion, is in the best interests of our stockholders. These transactions, however, may increase the amount of fees paid to the Investment Adviser. The Investment Adviser’s ability to influence the base management fee paid to it by us could reduce the amount of cash flow available for distribution to our stockholders.

Our Investment Adviser’s liability is limited under the Investment Advisory Agreement, and we have agreed to indemnify the Investment Adviser against certain liabilities, which may lead the Investment Adviser to act in a riskier manner on our behalf than it would when acting for its own account.

Under the Investment Advisory Agreement, the Investment Adviser has not assumed any responsibility to us other than to render the services called for under that agreement. It is not responsible for any action of our Board in following or declining to follow the Investment Adviser’s advice or recommendations. Under the Investment Advisory Agreement, the Investment Adviser, its officers, members and personnel, and any person controlling or controlled by the Investment Adviser are not liable to us, any subsidiary of ours, our directors, our stockholders or any subsidiary’s stockholders or partners for acts or omissions performed in accordance with and pursuant to the Investment Advisory Agreement, except those resulting from acts constituting gross negligence, willful misfeasance, bad faith or reckless disregard of the duties that the Investment Adviser owes to us under the Investment Advisory Agreement. In addition, as part of the Investment Advisory Agreement, we have agreed to indemnify the Investment Adviser and each of its officers, directors, members, managers and employees from and against any claims or liabilities, including reasonable legal fees and other expenses reasonably incurred, arising out of or in connection with our business and operations or any action taken or omitted on our behalf pursuant to authority granted by the Investment Advisory Agreement, except where attributable to gross negligence, willful misfeasance, bad faith or reckless disregard of such person’s duties under the Investment Advisory Agreement. These protections may lead the Investment Adviser to act in a riskier manner when acting on our behalf than it would when acting for its own account.

Our Investment Adviser has the right to resign on 60 days’ notice, and we may not be able to find a suitable replacement within such time, resulting in a disruption in our operations that could adversely affect our financial condition, business and results of operations.

Our Investment Adviser has the right, under the Investment Advisory Agreement, to resign at any time on 60 days’ written notice, whether we have found a replacement or not. If our Investment Adviser resigns, we may not be able to find a new investment adviser or hire internal management with similar expertise and ability to provide the same or equivalent services on acceptable terms within 60 days, or at all. If we are unable to do so quickly, our operations are likely to experience a disruption, our financial condition, business and results of operations as well as our ability to pay distributions are likely to be adversely affected and the market price of our shares may decline. In addition, the coordination of our internal management and investment activities is likely to suffer if we are unable to identify and reach an agreement with a single institution or group of executives having the expertise possessed by our Investment Adviser and its affiliates. Even if we are able to retain comparable management, whether internal or external, the integration of such management and their lack of familiarity with our investment objective may result in additional costs and time delays that may adversely affect our financial condition, business and results of operations.

The investment committee and other investment professionals of the Investment Adviser may, from time to time, possess material non-public information about or related to our portfolio companies, limiting our investment discretion.

Members of our Investment Adviser’s investment committee and other investment professionals of the Investment Adviser may serve as directors of, or in a similar capacity to, portfolio companies in which we invest. In the event that material non-public information is obtained with respect to such companies, or we become subject to trading restrictions under the internal trading policies of those companies or as a result of applicable law or regulations, we could be prohibited for a period of time from purchasing or selling the securities of such companies, and this prohibition may have an adverse effect on us.

The requirement that we invest a sufficient portion of our assets in qualifying assets could preclude us from investing in accordance with our current business strategy; conversely, the failure to invest a sufficient portion of our assets in qualifying assets could result in our failure to maintain our status as a BDC.

As a BDC, we may not acquire 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. Therefore, we may be precluded from investing in what we believe are attractive investments if such investments are not qualifying assets. Conversely, if we fail to invest a sufficient portion of our assets in qualifying assets, we could lose our status as a BDC, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Similarly, these rules could prevent us from making additional investments in existing portfolio companies, which could result in the dilution of our position, or could require us to dispose of investments at an inopportune time to comply with the 1940 Act. If we were forced to sell non-qualifying investments in the portfolio for compliance purposes, the proceeds from such sale could be significantly less than the current value of such investments.

Failure to maintain our status as a BDC would reduce our operating flexibility.

If we do not remain a BDC, whether because we withdrew our election or failed to maintain our status as a BDC, we might be regulated as a registered closed-end investment company under the 1940 Act, which would subject us to substantially more regulatory restrictions under the 1940 Act and correspondingly decrease our operating flexibility and potentially significantly increase our costs of doing business.

Regulations governing our operation as a BDC affect our ability to raise additional capital and the way in which we do so. As a BDC, the necessity of raising additional capital may expose us to risks, including the typical risks associated with leverage.

We may issue debt securities or preferred stock and/or borrow money from banks or other financial institutions, which we refer to collectively as “senior securities,” up to the maximum amount permitted by the 1940 Act. Under the provisions of the 1940 Act, we are permitted, as a BDC, to issue senior securities in amounts such that our asset coverage ratio, as defined in the 1940 Act, equals at least 150%, if certain conditions are met, of gross assets less all liabilities and indebtedness not represented by senior securities, after each issuance of senior securities. If the value of our assets declines, we may be unable to satisfy this test. If that happens, we may be required to sell a portion of our investments and, depending on the nature of our leverage, repay a portion of our indebtedness at a time when such sales may be disadvantageous.

Also, any amounts that we use to service our indebtedness would not be available for distributions to our common stockholders. Furthermore, as a result of issuing senior securities, we would also be exposed to typical risks associated with leverage, including an increased risk of loss.

As of December 31, 2022, we had $15.0 million of 5.25% fixed rate convertible notes due April 1, 2032 (the “2032 Convertible Notes”) and $50.0 million of 5.25% fixed rate notes due October 30, 2026 (the “2026 Notes”) outstanding. If we issue preferred stock, the preferred stock would rank “senior” to common stock in our capital structure, preferred stockholders would have separate voting rights on certain matters and might have other rights, preferences, or privileges more favorable than those of our common stockholders, and the issuance of preferred stock could have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a transaction or a change of control that might involve a premium price for holders of our common stock or otherwise be in your best interests.

We generally may not issue and sell our common stock at a price below net asset value per share. We may, however, sell our common stock, or warrants, options or rights to acquire our common stock, at a price below the then-current net asset value per share of our common stock if our Board determines that such sale is in our best interests and in the best interests of our stockholders, and our stockholders approve such sale. In any such case, the price at which our securities are to be issued and sold may not be less than a price that, in the determination of our Board, closely approximates the market value of such securities (less any commission or discount). If we raise additional funds by issuing more common stock or senior securities convertible into, or exchangeable for, our common stock, then the percentage ownership of our stockholders at that time will decrease, and you may experience dilution.

In certain limited circumstances, pursuant to an SEC staff interpretation, we may also issue shares at a price below net asset value in connection with a transferable rights offering so long as: (1) the offer does not discriminate among stockholders; (2) we use our best efforts to ensure an adequate trading market exists for the rights; and (3) the ratio of the offering does not exceed one new share for each three rights held. If we raise additional funds by issuing more common stock or senior securities convertible into, or exchangeable for, our common stock, the percentage ownership of our stockholders at that time would decrease and they may experience dilution. Moreover, we can offer no assurance that we will be able to issue and sell additional equity securities in the future, on favorable terms or at all.

Our ability to enter into new transactions with our affiliates, and to restructure or exit our investments in portfolio companies that we are deemed to “control” under the 1940 Act, will be restricted by the 1940 Act, which may limit the scope of investment opportunities available to us.

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, 5% or more of our outstanding voting securities will be our affiliate for purposes of the 1940 Act and we are generally prohibited from buying or selling any security from or to such affiliate without the prior approval of our independent directors. The 1940 Act also prohibits certain “joint” transactions with certain of our affiliates, which could include concurrent investments in the same 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 any person that controls us or 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. Similar restrictions limit our ability to transact business with our officers, directors, investment advisers, sub-advisers or their affiliates. As a result of these restrictions, we may be prohibited from buying or selling any security (other than any security of which we are the issuer) from or to any company that is advised or managed by our Investment Adviser or its affiliates without the prior approval of the SEC, which may limit the scope of investment opportunities that would otherwise be available to us.

In the future, we may co-invest with investment funds, accounts and vehicles managed by our Investment Adviser or its affiliates when doing so is consistent with our investment strategy as well as applicable law and SEC staff interpretations. We generally will only be permitted to co-invest with such investment funds, accounts and vehicles where the only term that is negotiated is price. On October 23, 2018, the SEC issued an order granting an application for exemptive relief to an affiliate of our Investment Adviser that allows BDCs managed by the Investment Adviser, including the Company, to co-invest, subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions, in certain private placement transactions, with other funds managed by the Investment Adviser or its affiliates and any future funds that are advised by the Investment Adviser or its affiliated investment advisers. Under the terms of the exemptive order, in order for the Company to participate in a co-investment transaction, a “required majority” (as defined in Section 57(o) of the 1940 Act) of the Company’s independent directors must conclude that (i) the terms of the proposed transaction, including the consideration to be paid, are reasonable and fair to the Company and its stockholders and do not involve overreaching with respect of the Company or its stockholders on the part of any person concerned, and (ii) the proposed transaction is consistent with the interests of the Company’s stockholders and is consistent with the Company’s investment objectives and strategies and certain criteria established by the Board. We believe this relief may not only enhance our ability to further our investment objectives and strategies, but may also increase favorable investment opportunities for us, in part by allowing us to participate in larger investments, together with our co-investment affiliates, than would be available to us in the absence of such relief.

In addition, within our portfolio there are investments that may be deemed to be “controlled” investments under the 1940 Act. To the extent that our investments in such portfolio companies need to be restructured or that we choose to exit these investments in the future, our ability to do so may be limited if such restructuring or exit also involves the affiliates of our Investment Adviser because such a transaction could be considered a joint transaction prohibited by the 1940 Act in the absence of our receipt of relief from the SEC in connection with such transaction. For example, if an affiliate of our Investment Adviser were required to approve a restructuring of an investment in the portfolio and the affiliate of our Investment Adviser was deemed to be our affiliate, such a restructuring transaction may constitute a prohibited joint transaction under the 1940 Act.

We are uncertain of our sources for funding our future capital needs; if we cannot obtain debt or equity financing on acceptable terms, our ability to acquire investments and to expand our operations will be adversely affected.

The net proceeds from the sale of common stock or other securities will be used for our investment opportunities, operating expenses and for payment of various fees and expenses such as base management fees, incentive fees and other expenses. Any working capital reserves we maintain may not be sufficient for investment purposes, and we may require debt or equity financing to operate. Accordingly, in the event that we develop a need for additional capital in the future for investments or for any other reason, these sources of funding may not be available to us. Consequently, if we cannot obtain debt or equity financing on acceptable terms, our ability to acquire investments and to expand our operations will be adversely affected. As a result, we would be less able to create and maintain a broad portfolio of investments and achieve our investment objective, which may negatively impact our results of operations and reduce our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

We are a non-diversified investment company within the meaning of the 1940 Act, and therefore we are not limited with respect to the proportion of our assets that may be invested in securities of a single issuer.

We are classified as a non-diversified investment company within the meaning of the 1940 Act, which means that we are not limited by the 1940 Act with respect to the proportion of our assets that we may invest in securities of a single issuer. Beyond the asset diversification requirements associated with our RIC tax treatment under the Code, we do not have fixed guidelines for diversification. To the extent that we assume large positions in the securities of a small number of issuers or our investments are concentrated in relatively few industries, our net asset value may fluctuate to a greater extent than that of a diversified investment company as a result of

changes in the financial condition or the market’s assessment of the issuer. For the same reason, we may be more susceptible to failure if a single loan fails. The disposition or liquidity of a significant investment may also adversely impact our net asset value and our results of operations. Similarly, the aggregate returns we realize may be significantly adversely affected if a small number of investments perform poorly or if we need to write down the value of any one investment.

Our portfolio may be concentrated in a limited number of industries, which may subject us to a risk of significant loss if there is a downturn in a particular industry in which a number of our investments are concentrated.
 

Our portfolio may be concentrated in a limited number of industries. A downturn in any particular industry in which we are invested could significantly impact the aggregate returns we realize. If an industry in which we have significant investments suffers from adverse business or economic conditions, as these industries have to varying degrees, a material portion of our investment portfolio could be affected adversely, which, in turn, could adversely affect our financial position and results of operations.

If our portfolio companies are unable to protect their proprietary, technological and other intellectual property rights, our business and prospects could be harmed, and if portfolio companies are required to devote significant resources to protecting their intellectual property rights, the value of our investment could be reduced.

Our future success and competitive position will depend in part upon the ability of our portfolio companies to obtain, maintain and protect proprietary technology used in their products and services. The intellectual property held by our portfolio companies often represents a substantial portion of the collateral securing our investments and/or constitutes a significant portion of the portfolio companies’ value that may be available in a downside scenario to repay our loans. Our portfolio companies will rely, in part, on patent, trade secret and trademark law to protect that technology, but competitors may misappropriate their intellectual property, and disputes as to ownership of intellectual property may arise. Portfolio companies may, from time to time, be required to institute litigation to enforce their patents, copyrights or other intellectual property rights, protect their trade secrets, determine the validity and scope of the proprietary rights of others or defend against claims of infringement. Such litigation could result in substantial costs and diversion of resources. Similarly, if a portfolio company is found to infringe or misappropriate a third-party’s patent or other proprietary rights, it could be required to pay damages to the third-party, alter its products or processes, obtain a license from the third-party and/or cease activities utilizing the proprietary rights, including making or selling products utilizing the proprietary rights. Any of the foregoing events could negatively affect both the portfolio company’s ability to service our debt investment and the value of any related debt and equity securities that we own, as well as any collateral securing our investment.

The effect of global climate change may impact the operations of our portfolio companies.

There may be evidence of global climate change. Climate change creates physical and financial risk and some of our portfolio companies may be adversely affected by climate change. For example, the needs of customers of energy companies vary with weather conditions, primarily temperature and humidity. To the extent weather conditions are affected by climate change, energy use could increase or decrease depending on the duration and magnitude of any changes. Increases in the cost of energy could adversely affect the cost of operations of our portfolio companies if the use of energy products or services is material to their business. A decrease in energy use due to weather changes may affect some of our portfolio companies’ financial condition, through decreased revenues. Extreme weather conditions in general require more system backup, adding to costs, and can contribute to increased system stresses, including service interruptions. Energy companies could also be affected by the potential for lawsuits against or taxes or other regulatory costs imposed on greenhouse gas emitters, based on links drawn between greenhouse gas emissions and climate change.

In December 2015 the United Nations, of which the U.S. is a member, adopted a climate accord (the “Paris Agreement”) with the long-term goal of limiting global warming and the short-term goal of significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions. On November 4, 2016, the past administration announced that the U.S. would cease participation in the Paris Agreement with the withdrawal taking effect on November 4, 2020. However, on January 20, 2021, President Biden signed an executive order to rejoin the Paris Agreement. As a result, some of our portfolio companies may become subject to new or strengthened regulations or legislation, which could increase their operating costs and/or decrease their revenues.

Risks Related to Our Investments

Our investments in prospective portfolio companies may be risky, and we could lose all or part of our investment.

Our strategy focuses primarily on originating and making loans to, and making debt and equity investments in, U.S. middle market companies, with a focus on originated transactions sourced through the networks of our Investment Adviser.

First Lien Loans and Second Lien Loans. When we invest in senior secured term debt, including first lien loans and second lien loans, we generally take a security interest in the available assets of these portfolio companies, including the equity interests of their subsidiaries. We expect this security interest 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 or lose its entire value, 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. Also, in some circumstances, our security interest 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. Further, in connection with any “last out” first-lien loans in which we may invest, we enter into agreements among lenders. Under these agreements, our interest in the collateral of the first-lien loans may rank junior to those of other lenders in the loan under certain circumstances. This may result in greater risk and loss of principal on these loans.

Unitranche Loans. We also invest in unitranche loans, which are loans that combine both senior and subordinated financing, generally in a first-lien position. Unitranche loans provide all of the debt needed to finance a leveraged buyout or other corporate transaction, both senior and subordinated, but generally in a first lien position, while the borrower generally pays a blended, uniform interest rate rather than different rates for different tranches. Unitranche debt generally requires payments of both principal and interest throughout the life of the loan. Unitranche debt generally has contractual maturities of five to six years and interest is typically paid quarterly. Generally, we expect these securities to carry a blended yield that is between senior secured and subordinated debt interest rates. Unitranche loans provide a number of advantages for borrowers, including the following: simplified documentation, greater certainty of execution and reduced decision-making complexity throughout the life of the loan. In addition, we may receive additional returns from any warrants we may receive in connection with these investments. In some cases, a portion of the total interest may accrue or be paid in kind. Because unitranche loans combine characteristics of senior and subordinated financing, unitranche loans have risks similar to the risks associated with senior secured debt, including first lien loans and second lien loans, and subordinated debt in varying degrees according to the combination of loan characteristics of the unitranche loan.

Unsecured Debt. Our unsecured debt, including corporate bonds and subordinated, or mezzanine, investments generally rank junior in priority of payment to senior debt. This may result in a heightened level of risk and volatility or a loss of principal, which could lead to the loss of the entire investment. These investments may involve additional risks that could adversely affect our investment returns. To the extent interest payments associated with such debt are deferred, such debt may be subject to greater fluctuations in valuations, and such debt could subject us and our stockholders to non-cash income, including PIK interest and original issue discount. Loans structured with these features may represent a higher level of credit risk than loans that require interest to be paid in cash at regular intervals during the term of the loan. Since we generally will not receive any principal repayments prior to the maturity of some of our unsecured debt investments, such investments will have greater risk and may result in loss of principal.

Equity Investments. To a limited extent, we make selected equity investments. In addition, when we invest in senior secured debt, including first lien loans and second lien loans, or unsecured debt, we may acquire warrants to purchase equity securities. Our goal is ultimately to dispose of these 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.

Collateralized Securities, Structured Products and Other. To a limited extent, we invest in collateralized securities, structured products and other similar securities, which may include CDOs, CBOs, CLOs, structured notes and credit-linked notes. Investments in such securities and products involve risks, including, without limitation, credit risk and market risk. Certain of these securities and products may be thinly traded or have a limited trading market. Where our investments in collateralized securities, structured products and other similar securities are based upon the movement of one or more factors, including currency exchange rates, interest rates, reference bonds (or loans) and stock indices, depending on the factor used and the use of multipliers or deflators, changes in interest rates and movement of any factor may cause significant price fluctuations. Additionally, changes in the reference instrument or security may cause the interest rate on such a security or product to be reduced to zero, and any further changes in the reference instrument may then reduce the principal amount payable on maturity of the security or product. Collateralized securities, structured products and other similar securities may be less liquid than other types of securities and more volatile than the reference instrument or security underlying the product.

Non-U.S. Securities. We may invest in non-U.S. securities, which may include securities denominated in U.S. dollars or in non-U.S. currencies, to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act. Because evidence of ownership of such securities usually are held outside the United States, we would be subject to additional risks if we invested in non-U.S. securities, which include possible adverse political and economic developments, seizure or nationalization of foreign deposits and adoption of governmental restrictions which might adversely affect or restrict the payment of principal and interest on the non-U.S. securities to investors located outside the country of the issuer, whether from currency blockage or otherwise. Since non-U.S. securities may be purchased with and payable in foreign currencies, the value of these assets as measured in U.S. dollars may be affected unfavorably by changes in current rates and exchange control regulations.

In addition, we invest in debt securities that are rated below investment grade by rating agencies or that would be rated below investment grade if they were rated. Debt securities rated below investment grade quality are generally regarded as having predominantly speculative characteristics and may carry a greater risk with respect to a borrower’s capacity to pay interest and repay principal. They may also be difficult to value and illiquid.

Further, investing in lower middle-market and traditional middle-market companies involves a number of significant risks. See also “—Investment in private and middle market companies involves a number of significant risks.”

If we make subordinated investments, the obligors or the portfolio companies may not generate sufficient cash flow to service their debt obligations to us.

We have made, and may make, subordinated investments that rank below other obligations of the obligor in right of payment. Subordinated investments are subject to greater risk of default than senior obligations as a result of adverse changes in the financial condition of the obligor or economic conditions in general. If we make a subordinated investment in a portfolio company, the portfolio company may be highly leveraged, and its relatively high debt-to-equity ratio may create increased risks that its operations might not generate sufficient cash flow to service all of its debt obligations.

If the assets securing the loans that we make decrease in value, then we may lack sufficient collateral to cover losses.

To attempt to mitigate credit risks, we will typically take a security interest in the available assets of our portfolio companies. There is no assurance that we will obtain or properly perfect our liens.

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 a portfolio company to raise additional capital. In some circumstances, our lien could be subordinated to claims of other creditors. 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 that we will be able to collect on the loan should we be forced to enforce our remedies.

In addition, because we may invest in technology-related companies, a substantial portion of the assets securing our investment may be in the form of intellectual property, if any, inventory and equipment and, to a lesser extent, cash and accounts receivable. Intellectual property, if any, that is securing our loan could lose value if, among other things, the company’s rights to the intellectual property are challenged or if the company’s license to the intellectual property is revoked or expires, the technology fails to achieve its intended results or a new technology makes the intellectual property functionally obsolete. Inventory may not be adequate to secure our loan if our valuation of the inventory at the time that we made the loan was not accurate or if there is a reduction in the demand for the inventory.

Similarly, any equipment securing our loan may not provide us with the anticipated security if there are changes in technology or advances in new equipment that render the particular equipment obsolete or of limited value, or if the company fails to adequately maintain or repair the equipment. Any one or more of the preceding factors could materially impair our ability to recover principal in a foreclosure.

Our investments in securities rated below investment grade are speculative in nature and are subject to additional risk factors such as increased possibility of default, illiquidity of the security, and changes in value based on changes in interest rates.

The securities that we invest in are typically rated below investment grade. Securities rated below investment grade 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.

To the extent original issue discount and PIK interest constitute a portion of our income, we will be exposed to typical risks associated with such income being required to be included in taxable and accounting income prior to receipt of cash representing such income.

Our investments may include original issue discount instruments and contractual PIK interest, which represents contractual interest added to a loan balance and due at the end of such loan’s term. To the extent original issue discount or PIK interest constitute a portion of our income, we are exposed to typical risks associated with such income being required to be included in taxable and accounting income prior to receipt of cash, including the following:

Our investments in leveraged portfolio companies may be risky, and we could lose all or part of our investment.

Investment in leveraged companies involves a number of significant risks. Leveraged companies in which we invest may have limited financial resources and may be unable to meet their obligations under their loans and debt securities that we hold. Such developments may be accompanied by a deterioration in the value of any collateral and a reduction in the likelihood of our realizing any guarantees that we may have obtained in connection with our investment. Smaller leveraged companies also may have less predictable operating results and may require substantial additional capital to support their operations, finance their expansion or maintain their competitive position.

Our portfolio companies may incur debt that ranks equally with, or senior to, our investments in such companies.

Our portfolio companies may have, or may be permitted to incur, other debt that ranks equally with, or in some cases senior to, the debt in which we invest. By their terms, such debt instruments may entitle the holders to receive payment of interest or principal on or before the dates on which we are entitled to receive payments with respect to the debt instruments 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. After repaying such senior creditors, such portfolio company may not have sufficient remaining assets to repay its obligation to us. In the case of debt ranking equally with debt instruments 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.

Investment in private and middle market companies involves a number of significant risks.

Investment in private and middle market companies involves a number of significant risks including:

Our investments may be in portfolio companies which may have limited operating histories and financial resources.

We expect that our portfolio will continue to consist of investments that may have relatively limited operating histories. These companies may be particularly vulnerable to U.S. and foreign economic downturns such as the U.S. recession that began in mid-2007, the European financial crisis, and the COVID-19 related economic downturn, may have more limited access to capital and higher funding costs, may have a weaker financial position and may need more capital to expand or compete. These businesses also may experience substantial variations in operating results. They may face intense competition, including from companies with greater financial, technical and marketing resources. Furthermore, some of these companies do business in regulated industries and could be affected by changes in government regulation. Accordingly, these factors could impair their cash flow or result in other events, such as bankruptcy, which could limit their ability to repay their obligations to us, and may adversely affect the return on, or the recovery of, our investment in these companies. We cannot assure you that any of our investments in our portfolio companies will be successful. Our portfolio companies compete with larger, more established companies with greater access to, and resources for, further development in these new technologies. We may lose our entire investment in any or all of our portfolio companies.

There may be circumstances where our debt investments could be subordinated to claims of other creditors or we could be subject to lender liability claims.

If one of our portfolio companies were to file for bankruptcy, depending on the facts and circumstances, including the extent to which we actually provided managerial assistance to that portfolio company, a bankruptcy court might recharacterize our debt investment and subordinate all or a portion of our claim to that of other creditors. We may also be subject to lender liability claims for actions taken by us with respect to a borrower’s business or instances where we exercise control over the borrower.

We generally will not control our portfolio companies.

Although we may do so in the future, we do not expect to control most of our portfolio companies, even though we may have board representation or board observation rights, and our debt agreements with such portfolio companies may contain certain restrictive covenants. If we do not hold a controlling equity position in a portfolio company, we are subject to the risk that the portfolio company may make business decisions with which we disagree, and that the management and/or stockholders of the portfolio company may take risks or otherwise act in ways that are adverse to our interests. Due to the lack of liquidity of the debt and equity investments that we typically hold in our portfolio companies, we may not be able to dispose of our investments in the event we disagree with the actions of a portfolio company and may therefore suffer a decrease in the value of our investments.

Our equity ownership in a portfolio company may represent a control investment. Our ability to exit a control investment in a timely manner could result in a realized loss on the investment.

We currently have, and may acquire in the future, control investments in portfolio companies. Our ability to divest ourselves from a debt or equity investment in a controlled portfolio company could be restricted due to illiquidity in a private stock, limited trading volume on a public company’s stock, inside information on a company’s performance, insider blackout periods, or other factors that could prohibit us from disposing of the investment as we would if it were not a control investment. Additionally, we may choose not to take certain actions to protect a debt investment in a control investment portfolio company. As a result, we could experience a decrease in the value of our portfolio company holdings and potentially incur a realized loss on the investment.

We periodically invest through joint ventures, partnerships or other special purpose vehicles and investments through these vehicles may entail greater risks, or risks that we otherwise would not incur, if we otherwise made such investments directly.

We periodically co-invest with third parties through funds, joint ventures or other entities. Such investments may involve risks not present in investments where a third party is not involved, including the possibility that our co-venturer or partner may at any time have other business interests and investments other than the joint venture with us, or may have different economic or business goals. In addition, we may be liable for actions of our co-venturers or partners. Our ability to exercise control or significant influence over management in these cooperative efforts will depend upon the nature of the joint venture arrangement. In addition, such arrangements are likely to involve restrictions on the resale of our interest in the company.

We will be exposed to risks associated with changes in interest rates.

We are subject to financial market risks, including changes in interest rates. General interest rate fluctuations may have a substantial negative impact on our investments and investment opportunities and, accordingly, have a material adverse effect on our ability to achieve our investment objective and our target rate of return on invested capital. In addition, an increase in interest rates would make it more expensive to use debt for our financing needs, if any. See also “—To the extent we borrow money to finance our investments, changes in interest rates will affect our cost of capital and net investment income.”

In 2022, the U.S. Federal Reserve tightened monetary policy by increasing interest rates aggressively to combat inflation.

The interest rates of some of our floating-rate loans to our portfolio companies may be priced using a spread over LIBOR, which is being phased out.

We historically used LIBOR as a reference for setting the interest rates on our loans, including floating rate loans that we extend to portfolio companies. Certain LIBOR rates were generally phased out by the end of 2021, and some regulated entities have ceased to enter into new LIBOR-based contracts beginning January 1, 2022. However, it is expected that the most widely used tenors of USD LIBOR may continue to be provided on a representative basis until mid-2023. As such, the potential effect of a transition away from LIBOR on the Company or the LIBOR-based instruments in which the Company invests cannot yet be determined. The transition process away from LIBOR may involve, among other things, increased volatility or illiquidity in markets for instruments that currently rely on LIBOR. The transition process may also result in a reduction in the value of certain instruments held by the Company or reduce the effectiveness of related Company transactions, such as hedges. Any potential effects of the transition away from LIBOR on the Company or on financial instruments in which the Company invests, as well as other unforeseen effects, could result in losses to the Company. Since the usefulness of LIBOR as a benchmark or reference rate could deteriorate during the transition period, these effects could occur prior to and/or subsequent to mid-2023.

On July 27, 2017, the U.K Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”) announced that it would phase out LIBOR as a benchmark by the end of 2021. As of December 31, 2021, all non-U.S. dollar LIBOR publications have been phased out. The phase out of a majority of the U.S. dollar publications is delayed until June 30, 2023. The Alternative Reference Rates Committee (“ARRC”) of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York previously confirm that this constitutes a “benchmark transition event” and established “benchmark replacement dates” in ARRC standard LIBOR transition provisions that exist in many U.S. law contracts using LIBOR.

The publication of all EUR and CHF LIBOR settings, the Spot Next/Overnight, 1 week, 2 month and 12 month JPY and GBP LIBOR settings, and the 1 week and 2 months USD LIBOR settings has ceased. The publication of the overnight, 1 month, 3 month, 6 month, and 12 months USD LIBOR settings will cease after June 30, 2023. The FCA plans to consult the market on creating “synthetic” 1 month, 3 month and 6 month rates for GBP and JPY LIBOR, to be published for a limited time. The New York State legislation was signed into law to aid “tough legacy” LIBOR contracts. Other legislative solutions are being pursued at the Federal level, in the U.K. and in Europe. The U.S. Federal banking agencies have also issued guidance encouraging banking and global organizations to cease reference to USD LIBOR as soon as practicable and, in any event, by December 31, 2021. The E.U. Benchmarks Regulation imposed conditions under which only compliant benchmarks may be used in new contracts after 2021.

The ARRC has identified the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”) as its preferred alternative rate for LIBOR. SOFR is a measure of the cost of borrowing cash overnight, collateralized by the U.S. Treasury securities, and is based on directly observable U.S. Treasury-backed repurchase transactions. Although SOFR appears to be the preferred replacement rate for U.S. dollar LIBOR, it is not possible at this time to predict the effect of any such changes, any establishment of alternative reference rates, whether the COVID-19 pandemic will have further effect on LIBOR transition timelines or plans, or other reforms to LIBOR that may be enacted in the United States, United Kingdom or elsewhere.

The discontinuation of LIBOR could have a significant impact on our business. We anticipate significant operational challenges for the transition away from LIBOR, including, but not limited to, amending existing loan agreements with borrowers on investments that may have not been modified with fallback language and adding effective fallback language to new agreements in the event that LIBOR is discontinued before maturity. Beyond these challenges, we anticipate there may be additional risks to our current processes and information systems that we will need to identify and evaluate. Due to the uncertainty of the replacement for LIBOR, the potential effect of any such event on our cost of capital and net investment income cannot yet be determined. 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 value of any LIBOR-linked securities, loans and other financial obligations or extensions of credit held by or due to us and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The health and performance of our portfolio companies could be adversely affected by political and economic conditions in the countries in which they conduct business.

Some of the products of our portfolio companies are developed, manufactured, assembled, tested or marketed outside the U.S. Any conflict or uncertainty in these countries, including due to natural disasters, public health concerns (including the COVID-19 pandemic or a similar infectious disease outbreak), political unrest or safety concerns, could harm their business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, if the government of any country in which their products are developed, manufactured or sold sets technical or regulatory standards for products developed or manufactured in or imported into their country that are not widely shared, it may lead some of their customers to suspend imports of their products into that country, require manufacturers or developers in that country to manufacture or develop products with different technical or regulatory standards and disrupt cross-border manufacturing, marketing or business relationships which, in each case, could harm their businesses.

We may expose ourselves to risks if we engage in hedging transactions.

We may seek to hedge against interest rate and currency exchange rate fluctuations and credit risk by using financial instruments such as futures, options, swaps, forward contracts, caps, collars and floors, subject to the requirements of the 1940 Act. These financial instruments may be purchased on exchanges or may be individually negotiated and traded in over-the-counter markets. Use of such financial instruments for hedging purposes may present significant risks, including the risk of loss of the amounts invested. Defaults by the other party to a hedging transaction can result in losses in the hedging transaction.

Hedging activities also involve the risk of an imperfect correlation between the hedging instrument and the asset being hedged, which could result in losses both on the hedging transaction and on the instrument being hedged. 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 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. 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.

Further, hedging transactions may reduce cash available to pay distributions to our shareholders.

A derivative transaction is also subject to the risk that a counterparty will default on its payment obligations thereunder or that we will not be able to meet our obligations to the counterparty. In some cases, we may post collateral to secure our obligations to the counterparty, and we may be required to post additional collateral upon the occurrence of certain events such as a decrease in the value of the reference security or other asset. In some cases, the counterparty may not collateralize any of its obligations to us. Derivative investments effectively add leverage to a portfolio by providing investment exposure to a security or market without owning or taking physical custody of such security or investing directly in such market. In addition to the risks described above, such arrangements are subject to risks similar to those associated with the use of leverage. See “Risk Factors — Risks Related to Debt Financing.”

Our ability to enter into transactions involving derivatives and financial commitment transactions may be limited.

Through comprehensive new global regulatory regimes impacting derivatives (e.g., the Dodd-Frank Act, European Market Infrastructure Regulation (“EMIR”), Markets in Financial Investments Regulation (“MIFIR”)/Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (“MIFID II”)), certain over-the-counter derivatives transactions in which we may engage are either now or will soon be subject to various requirements, such as mandatory central clearing of transactions which include additional margin requirements and in certain cases trading on electronic platforms, pre-and post-trade transparency reporting requirements and mandatory bi-lateral exchange of initial margin for non-cleared swaps. The Dodd-Frank Act also created new categories of regulated market participants, such as “swap dealers,” “security-based swap dealers,” “major swap participants,” and “major security-based swap participants” who are subject to significant new capital, registration, recordkeeping, reporting, disclosure, business conduct and other regulatory requirements. The EU and some other jurisdictions are implementing similar requirements. Because these requirements are new and evolving (and some of the rules are not yet final), their ultimate impact remains unclear. However, even if the Company itself is not located in a particular jurisdiction or directly subject to the jurisdiction’s derivatives regulations, we may still be impacted to the extent we enter into a derivatives transaction with a regulated market participant or counterparty that is organized in that jurisdiction or otherwise subject to that jurisdiction’s derivatives regulations.

Based on information available as of the date of this annual report on Form 10-K, the effect of such requirements will be likely to (directly or indirectly) increase our overall costs of entering into derivatives transactions. In particular, new margin requirements, position limits and significantly higher capital charges resulting from

new global capital regulations, even if not directly applicable to us, may cause an increase in the pricing of derivatives transactions entered into by market participants to whom such requirements apply or affect our overall ability to enter into derivatives transactions with certain counterparties. Such new global capital regulations and the need to satisfy the various requirements by counterparties are resulting in increased funding costs, increased overall transaction costs, and significantly affecting balance sheets, thereby resulting in changes to financing terms and potentially impacting our ability to obtain financing. Administrative costs, due to new requirements such as registration, recordkeeping, reporting, and compliance, even if not directly applicable to us, may also be reflected in our derivatives transactions. New requirements to trade certain derivatives transactions on electronic trading platforms and trade reporting requirements may lead to (among other things) fragmentation of the markets, higher transaction costs or reduced availability of derivatives, and/or a reduced ability to hedge, all of which could adversely affect the performance of certain of our trading strategies. In addition, changes to derivatives regulations may impact the tax and/or accounting treatment of certain derivatives, which could adversely impact us.

In August 2022, new Rule 18f-4 under the 1940 Act became effective. This rule relates to the ability of a BDC (or a registered investment company) to use derivatives and other transactions that create future payment or delivery obligations. Under the new rule, BDCs that make significant use of derivatives are required to operate subject to a value-at-risk leverage limit, adopt a derivatives risk management program and appoint a derivatives risk manager, and comply with various testing and board reporting requirements. These new requirements apply unless the BDC qualifies as a “limited derivatives user,” as defined in the rule. Under an exemption included in the rule, a BDC may enter into an unfunded commitment agreement, such as an agreement to provide financing to a portfolio company, without treating the transaction as an derivatives transaction, provided that the BDC has, among other things, 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 the obligation becomes due. We currently operate and intend to continue to operate as a “limited derivatives user,” which may limit our ability to use derivatives and/or enter into certain other financial contracts. The Company intends to limit its engagement in derivative transactions such that it will qualify as a “limited derivatives user” for purposes of Rule 18f-4 such that the Company will be subject to substantially fewer substantive requirements under that rule than would be the case if it did not so qualify. However, there is no guarantee that the Company will meet or continue to meet such qualifications, and, as a result, there is a risk that the Company may become subject to more onerous requirements under Rule 18f-4 than currently intended.

Second priority liens on collateral securing loans that we make to our portfolio companies may be subject to control by senior creditors with first priority liens. If there is a default, the value of the collateral may not be sufficient to repay in full both the first priority creditors and us.

Certain loans that we make are secured by a second priority security interest in the same collateral pledged by a portfolio company to secure senior debt owed by the portfolio company to commercial banks or other traditional lenders. Often the senior lender has procured covenants from the portfolio company prohibiting the incurrence of additional secured debt without the senior lender’s consent. Prior to and as a condition of permitting the portfolio company to borrow money from us secured by the same collateral pledged to the senior lender, the senior lender may require assurances that it will control the disposition of any collateral in the event of bankruptcy or other default. In many such cases, the senior lender requires us to enter into an “intercreditor agreement” prior to permitting the portfolio company to borrow from us. Typically the intercreditor agreements we are requested to execute expressly subordinate our debt instruments to those held by the senior lender and further provide that the senior lender shall control: (i) the commencement of foreclosure or other proceedings to liquidate and collect on the collateral; (ii) the nature, timing and conduct of foreclosure or other collection proceedings; (iii) the amendment of any collateral document; (iv) the release of the security interests in respect of any collateral; and (v) the waiver of defaults under any security agreement. Because of the control we may cede to senior lenders under intercreditor agreements we may enter, we may be unable to realize the proceeds of any collateral securing some of our loans.

Many of our loans are not fully amortizing and if a borrower cannot repay or refinance such loans at maturity, our results will suffer.

Most of the loans in which we invest are not structured to fully amortize during their lifetime. Accordingly, a significant portion of the principal amount of such a loan may be due at maturity. As of December 31, 2022, generally all debt instruments in our portfolio will not fully amortize prior to maturity. In order to create liquidity to pay the final principal payment, borrowers typically must raise additional capital. If they are unable to raise sufficient funds to repay us or we have not elected to enter into a new loan agreement providing for an extended maturity, the loan will go into default, which will require us to foreclose on the borrower’s assets, even if the loan was otherwise performing prior to maturity. This will deprive the Company from immediately obtaining full recovery on the loan and prevent or delay the reinvestment of the loan proceeds in other, more profitable investments.

A covenant breach or other defaults by our portfolio companies may adversely affect our operating results.

A portfolio company’s failure to satisfy financial or operating covenants imposed by us or other lenders could lead to defaults and, potentially, termination of its loans and foreclosure on its secured assets, which could trigger cross-defaults under other agreements and jeopardize the portfolio company’s ability to meet its obligations under the debt securities that we hold. We may incur expenses to the extent necessary to seek recovery upon default or to negotiate new terms, which may include the waiver of certain financial covenants, with a defaulting portfolio company. See also “—We may choose to waive or defer enforcement of covenants in the debt securities held in our portfolio, which may cause us to lose all or part of our investment in these companies.”

Any extension or restructuring of our loans could adversely affect our cash flows. In addition, if one of our portfolio companies were to go bankrupt, even though we may have structured our interest as senior debt, depending on the facts and circumstances, including the extent to which we actually provided managerial assistance to that portfolio company, a bankruptcy court might recharacterize our debt holding and subordinate all or a portion of our claim to that of other creditors. If any of these occur, it could materially and adversely affect our operating results and cash flows.

We may choose to waive or defer enforcement of covenants in the debt securities held in our portfolio, which may cause us to lose all or part of our investment in these companies.

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 the Company 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 dividends, could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition and cause the loss of all or part of your investment.

We may not realize gains from our equity investments.

Certain investments that we may make include warrants or other equity securities. In addition, we may from time to time make non-control, equity investments in portfolio companies. Investments in equity securities involve a number of significant risks, including the risk of further dilution as a result of additional issuances, inability to access additional capital and failure to pay current distributions. Investments in preferred securities involve special risks, such as the risk of deferred distributions,

credit risk, illiquidity and limited voting rights. Our goal is ultimately to realize gains upon our disposition of such equity 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. We also may 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 the underlying equity interests. We will often seek puts or similar rights to give us the right to sell our equity securities back to the portfolio company issuer. We may be unable to exercise these put rights for the consideration provided in our investment documents if the issuer is in financial distress.

An investment strategy focused primarily on smaller privately held companies involves a high degree of risk and presents certain challenges, including the lack of available information about these companies, a dependence on the talents and efforts of only a few key portfolio company personnel and a greater vulnerability to economic downturns.

We intend to invest primarily in privately held companies. Investments in private companies pose significantly greater risks than investments in public companies. These companies often face intense competition from larger companies with greater financial, technical and marketing resources. Privately held companies also frequently have less diverse product lines and smaller market presence than larger competitors. Private companies have reduced access to the capital markets, resulting in diminished capital resources and the ability to withstand financial distress. The depth and breadth of experience of management in private companies tend 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 death, disability, resignation or termination of one or more of these persons could have a material adverse impact on our investments and, in turn, on us. Also, the investments themselves tend to be less liquid. As such, we may have difficulty exiting an investment promptly or at a desired price prior to maturity or outside of a normal amortization schedule. As a result, the relative lack of liquidity and the potential diminished capital resources of our target portfolio companies may affect our investment returns. Further, some of these companies conduct business in regulated industries that are susceptible to regulatory changes. These factors could impair the cash flow of our portfolio companies and result in other events, such as bankruptcy. These events could limit a portfolio company’s ability to repay its obligations to us, which may have an adverse effect on the return on, or the recovery of, our investment in these businesses. Deterioration in a borrower’s financial condition and prospects may be accompanied by deterioration in the value of the loan’s collateral. Additionally, little public information generally exists about private companies. Further, these companies may not have third-party debt ratings or audited financial statements. We must therefore rely on the ability of the Adviser to obtain adequate information through due diligence to evaluate the creditworthiness and potential returns from investing in these companies. These companies and their financial information will generally not be subject to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and other rules that govern public 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. These factors could adversely affect our investment returns as compared to companies investing primarily in the securities of public companies.

The lack of liquidity in our investments may adversely affect our business.

We generally invest in companies whose securities are not publicly traded, and whose securities will be subject to legal and other restrictions on resale or will otherwise be less liquid than publicly traded securities. There is no established trading market for the securities in which we invest. The illiquidity of these investments may make it difficult for us to sell these investments when desired. 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 had previously recorded these investments. As a result, we do not expect to achieve liquidity in our investments in the near-term. Further, 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.

We may not have the funds or ability to make additional investments in our portfolio companies or to fund our unfunded debt commitments which may impair the value of our portfolio.

After our initial investment in a portfolio company, we may be called upon from time to time to provide additional funds to such company or have the opportunity to increase our investment through the exercise of a warrant to purchase common stock. 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 equity ownership percentage; (ii) exercise warrants, options or convertible securities that were acquired in the original or a subsequent financing; or (iii) attempt to preserve or enhance the value of our investment. There is no assurance that we will make, or will have sufficient funds to make, follow-on investments. Any decisions not to make a follow-on investment or any inability on our part to make such an investment may have a negative impact on a portfolio company in need of such an investment, may result in a missed opportunity for us to increase our participation in a successful operation or may reduce the expected return on the investment.

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 do not want to increase our concentration of risk, we prefer other opportunities, we are subject to BDC requirements that would prevent such follow-on investments, or the follow-on investment would affect our qualification as a RIC. For example, we may be prohibited under the 1940 Act from making follow-on investments in our portfolio companies that we may be deemed to “control” or in which affiliates of our Investment Adviser are also invested.

Prepayments of our debt investments by our portfolio companies could adversely impact our results of operations and reduce our return on equity.

We are subject to the risk that the investments we make in our portfolio companies may be repaid prior to maturity. When this occurs, we will generally reinvest these proceeds in temporary investments or repay any revolving credit facility, depending on expected future investment in new portfolio companies. Temporary investments will typically have substantially lower yields than the debt 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 that was repaid. 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.