Yahoo Finance

Michael Forman

Thank you, Anna, and good morning, everyone. Thank you all for joining us today for FSK's third-quarter 2024 earnings call. FSK's financial and operating results showed continued strength during the third quarter. as we again exceeded our earnings guidance and over earned our quarterly base and supplemental distribution. During the third quarter, FSK generated net investment income of $0.77 per share and adjusted net investment income of $0.74 per share as compared to our public guidance of approximately $0.72 and $0.70 per share respectively.
Our net asset value per share at the end of the third quarter was $23.82. On October 8, 2024, we announced that our Board declared a total fourth quarter distribution of $0.70 per share consisting of our base distribution of $0.64 per share and a supplemental distribution of $0.06 per share. This results in $2.90 per share of total distributions in 2024, which equates to a 12.2% yield on our September 30, 2024 net asset value of $23.82 per share and a yield of approximately 14% based on our recent share price.
As Dan will discuss in more detail during his comments, the FSK care adviser continues to maintain its high bar on credit quality and disciplined underwriting process. During the third quarter, we originated approximately $1.1 billion of investments, and we ended the quarter with ample liquidity totaling approximately $4.4 billion.
As we begin focusing on 2025, FSK is well positioned to capitalize on expected market conditions. First, given the recent reduction interest rates and assuming some level of additional rate cuts over the next 12 months, our portfolio companies should experience improved credit metrics such as interest and fixed charge coverage ratios.
Next, based on our expectation for continued improvement in the M&A environment, there should be additional opportunities to rotate out of certain legacy portfolio companies, which have positioned themselves favorably over the last several years.
Lastly, we are optimistic about the outlook for new investment opportunities. I continue to believe that the KKR credit platform is well positioned to generate differentiated deal flow across private debt, and asset-based finance investments.
And with that, I'll turn the call over to Dan and the team to provide additional color on the market and the quarter.

Daniel Pietrzak

Thank you, Michael, and good morning, everyone. Despite the recent noise surrounding the presidential election, the US economy continues to remain on solid footing. Since the Fed began raising rates in early 2022, the US economy has experienced a 6.8% growth rate in real terms.
Recent economic data released through September illustrates that the labor market has remained resilient, boosting income levels for workers, which continues to support consumer spending. At the same time, inflation has declined from 9.1% in June of 2022, through approximately 2.4% today. Both of these inputs create a favorable backdrop for a sustained economic expansion.
As Michael alluded in his comments, we believe that M&A activity will increase meaningfully in 2025, as the market has seen interest rates peak and economic sentiment improve. In line with this, we have seen greater momentum in middle market deal volumes and our pipeline of new investment opportunities continues to grow.
The bar remains high when looking for new opportunities to deploy capital. The market continues to be competitive, which has resulted in tighter credit spreads and more borrower friendly terms. Nevertheless, we remain prudent and disciplined in our underwriting and have continued to pass on opportunities that do not meet our credit standards.
We continue to see compelling opportunities in asset based finance, as banks strategically reposition their portfolios, largely due to regulatory requirements. As we have discussed previously, our ABS investments are often structured as fixed rate which helps offset the impact of declining rates in the direct lending portion of our investment portfolio.
During the third quarter, FSK originated $1.1 billion of new investments. Approximately 57% of our new investments were focused on add-on financings to existing portfolio companies and long-term KKR relationships.
Our new investments, combined with $1 billion of net sales and repayments, when factoring in sales to our joint venture, equated to a net portfolio increase of $185 million. New originations consisted of approximately 84% in first lien loans and 16% in asset based finance investments. Our new direct lending investments had a weighted average EBITDA of approximately $211 million, 6.3times leverage through our security and the weighted average coupon of approximately SOFR, plus 505 basis points.
Through our ABF team and the broader KKR network, we have developed deep relationships, which allows us to access niche sectors that we find attractive within the ABF market. And to structure deals that many market participants are unable to execute on due to transaction size, complexity or platform capabilities.
One example of an asset-based finance deal that we originated during the quarter was the purchase of an approximately $10 billion pool of seasoned private student loans from Discover Financial Services. This portfolio is focused on prime borrowers or cosigners and has an average FICO score above 750. KKR Credit and another large manager jointly led and structured the multibillion dollar deal with FSK committing $94 million.
The trend of well performing portfolio companies proactively seeking re-pricings continued during the third quarter. We have also experienced instances of companies seeking overly aggressive price reductions or structural amendments, which don't align with our return or risk thresholds. In those situations, we have proactively chose to be repaid. When we look at aggregate trends across our portfolio companies, we observed a 13% year-over-year EBITDA growth rate at portfolio companies in which we have invested in since April of 2018.
Additionally, the weighted average and median EBITDA of our portfolio companies was $237 million and $121 million respectively, as of September 30, 2024. As of the end of the third quarter, non-accruals represented 3.8% of our portfolio on a cost basis and 1.7% of our portfolio on a fair value basis. This compares to 4.3% of our portfolio on a cost basis and 1.8% of our portfolio on a fair value basis as of June 30, 2024.
Brian will provide further details on this during his comments. We also believe it is helpful to provide the market with information based on the FSK assets originated by KKR Credit. Non-accruals relating to the 88% of our total portfolio, which has been originated by KKR Credit and the FS KKR adviser were 2.2% on a cost basis and 50 basis points on a fair value basis. as of the end of the third quarter. This compares to 2.4% on a cost basis and 60 basis points on a fair value basis as of June 30, 2024.
And with that, I'll turn the call over to Brian to discuss our portfolio in more detail.

Brian Gerson

Thanks, Dan. At the end of the third quarter, our investment portfolio had a fair value of $13.9 billion, consisting of 217 portfolio companies. This compares to a fair value of $14.1 billion and 208 portfolio companies as of June 30, 2024. Our net leverage remained flat quarter-over-quarter and the decline in our investment portfolio's fair value was primarily driven by unrealized depreciation relating to three investments, Production Resource Group, Miami Beach Medical Group and worldwide.
PRG continues to be impacted by the lingering effects of the Ryder strike and its corresponding impact on TV and film as well as softness in its live performance business due to the delay of certain artist tours. Miami Beach recently filed for Chapter 11 as part of its anticipated sale to Humana. Over the coming months, should this transaction close, we will exit our position in Seoul.
Worldwide has experienced headwinds in its core pet bed business due to increased competition from low-cost foreign suppliers. We are actively engaged with the sponsor worldwide to negotiate a potential restructuring and we will provide additional updates as we learn more. At the end of the third quarter, our 10 largest portfolio companies represented approximately 20% of the fair value of our portfolio, which is in line with prior quarters.
We continue to focus on senior secured investments as our portfolio consisted of approximately 60% first lien loans and 67% senior secured debt as of September 30. In addition, our joint venture represented 9.9% of the fair value of our portfolio. As a result, when investors consider our entire portfolio, looking through to the investments in our joint venture, then first lien loans totaled approximately 69% of our portfolio and senior secured investment totaled approximately 76% of our portfolio as of September 30.
The weighted average yield on accruing debt investments was 11.5% as of September 30, a decrease of 50 basis points compared to 12% at the end of the second quarter. The decrease is primarily attributable to lower spreads on new investments, the repayment of certain higher-yielding investments during the quarter and portfolio company repricing. As a reminder, the calculation of weighted average yield is adjusted to exclude the accretion associated with the merger with FSKR.
During the third quarter, Global Jet returned $76 million of capital to FSK, which is used to further reduce our position. This distribution brings our total capital received to $205 million over the last 2.5 years, and we continue to be pleased with the performance of the company.
During the quarter, one investment was added to non-accrual status and three investments were removed. Our subordinated delayed draw position in Miami Beach Medical was added to non-accrual status contributing $17 million of costs and $8 million of fair value.
Five Arch income fund, a legacy investment, which has been on nonaccrual since 2020 was fully exited removing $54 million of cost and $2 million of fair value. Lastly, a recapitalization of Belk resulted in the removal of $36 million of cost and $13 million of fair value across two investments.
And with that, I'll turn the call over to Steven to go through our financial results.

Steven Lilly

Thanks, Brian. Our total investment income increased by $2 million during the third quarter to $441 million. The primary components of our total investment income during the quarter were as follows, total interest income was $356 million, representing an increase of $3 million quarter-over-quarter. A component of interest income, PIK interest, was $66 million as three portfolio companies, ATX, ERG and KDS paid their interest in the form of PIK. Dividend and fee income totaled $85 million, a decrease of $1 million quarter-over-quarter.
Our total dividend and fee income during the quarter is summarized as follows, $46 million of recurring dividend income from our joint venture, other dividends from various portfolio companies totaling approximately $18 million during the quarter and fee income totaling approximately $21 million during the quarter. Our interest expense totaled $118 million, an increase of $3 million quarter-over-quarter and our weighted average cost of debt was 5.5% as of September 30.
Management fees totaled $54 million, unchanged quarter-over-quarter and incentive fees totaled $44 million, a decrease of $1 million quarter-over-quarter. Other expenses totaled $10 million unchanged quarter-over-quarter.
The detailed bridge in our net asset value per share on a quarter-over-quarter basis is as follows, our ending 2Q 2024, net asset value per share of $23.95 was increased by GAAP net investment income of $0.77 per share and was decreased by $0.20 per share due to a decrease in the overall value of our investment portfolio.
Our net asset value per share was reduced by our $0.70 per share total quarterly distribution paid during the quarter. The sum of these activities results in our September 30, 2024, net asset value per share of $23.82. From a forward-looking guidance perspective, we expect fourth quarter 2024 GAAP net investment income to approximate $0.63 per share and we expect our adjusted net investment income to approximate $0.68 per share.
Detailed fourth quarter guidance is as follows, our recurring interest income on a GAAP basis is expected to approximate $332 million. We expect recurring dividend income associated with our joint venture to approximate $52 million. an increase of approximately $6 million quarter-over-quarter.
The expected increase is a result of the recent sale of $370 million of assets to the joint venture from FSK's balance sheet. We expect other fee and dividend income to approximate $31 million due to lower non-recurring fee income within our investment portfolio.
From an expense standpoint, we expect our management fees to approximate $53 million. We expect incentive fees to approximate $36 million. We expect our interest expense to approximate $117 million, and we expect other G&A expenses to approximate $10 million. During the fourth quarter, we expect our excise taxes will approximate $24 million. We expect the net effect of excise taxes to be partially offset by the accretion of our investments due to merger accounting.
The primary drivers of the change from FSK's third quarter adjusted net investment income of $0.74 per share to our expected fourth quarter adjusted net investment income guidance of $0.68 per share are the reduction in interest rates by the Federal Reserve in September and lower fee income in the fourth quarter as compared to the third quarter.
Turning to our capital structure. Our gross and net debt to equity levels were 121% and 109%, respectively, at September 30, 2024, as compared to 119% and 109% at June 30, 2024. As of the end of the third quarter, our available liquidity was $4.4 billion and approximately 66% of our drawn balance sheet and 46% of our committed balance sheet was comprised of unsecured debt.
As a team, we are very focused on managing the right side of our balance sheet and optimizing our capital structure through multiple funding sources. like certain other BDCs, which took advantage of the lower rate environment in 2019 and 2020, FSK has some lower cost debt maturing next year.
In 2025, FSK has approximately $1.2 billion of unsecured notes maturing, representing approximately 10% of our total debt commitments and carrying a weighted average cost of 5.1%. FSK has been a frequent issuer in the unsecured market with a focus on well laddered maturities.
We will continue to opportunistically assess the unsecured market and we have over $3.5 billion of undrawn capacity under our senior secured revolving credit facility to utilize should we desire to aid with timing differences.
And with that, I'll turn the call back to Michael for a few closing remarks before we open the call for questions.

Michael Forman

Thank you, Steven. In closing, we are pleased with FSK's third quarter performance as we have further reduced our non-accrual investments and are continuing to see significant new investment opportunities. As we look towards 2025, we believe the next several quarters could yield meaningful opportunities for FSK as the M&A market continues to improve, as we actively pursue well-structured new investments and focus on rotating legacy investments, we believe that 2025 is the potential to be a very active year for FSK.
And with that, operator, we'd like to open the call for questions.

Question and Answer Session

Operator

(Operator Instructions)
Bryce Rowe, B Riley Securities.

Bryce Rowe

Thanks a lot. Good morning to everyone. Wanted to, maybe start on just on yields and what you're seeing there in the market. Obviously, you called out yield compression within the portfolio in the quarter of 50 basis points.
Just wanted to try to understand the impact from lower rates and spread compression within that 50 basis points. And then the guide that you're giving here for the fourth quarter of I guess, lower interest income from rate. Is that all lower rate? Or is there some spread compression kind of baked into that assumption too?

Michael Forman

Yeah. Good morning Bryce. Yeah. I think the simple summary is it's a little bit of both, right? Clearly, there was the initial Fed move of the 50 basis points. We have seen from a new deal perspective, your regular way, direct lending deal is probably 500 basis points to 550 basis points that's before kind of fees and OID.
We have seen some repricing across the book. I think we called that out in our prepared comments. I think for names that we're comfortable with, we like the risk, what we can be supportive of those. We have used a couple of those opportunities to just get repaid.
It is, I think, a little bit of a harder market these days, right? The M&A volumes that everybody has been forecasting, including ourselves have been a little bit slow to return. I think we've been happy with our deployment numbers, but there's a bit of an imbalance in terms of available capital and kind of deal flow, which I think is driving some of that.
All that being said, I think what you are earning on these loans in totality is still north of 10%. And considering, I think, the quality of the company that we are seeing, considering the LTV or the equity check below us that is one comforting fact in terms of total return on these deals.

Bryce Rowe

Okay. That's helpful. And then one more for me, and I'll jump back in queue. But when we think about kind of the guide and obviously, we're getting to a point where most BDCs are seeing earnings compression and putting themselves into a position where you've got dividend coverage starts to fall below 100%, especially when we're thinking about the supplemental plus the base. You guys have plenty of spillover income.
So I think you all have communicated in the past that spillover income is certainly sufficient to bridge any gaps, Kind of curious where you'd like the spillover to kind of base out, so to speak. We're do you want to try to reserve or keep two quarters of spillover versus what you have right now in roughly three?

Daniel Pietrzak

No, that's a fair question. I think your estimates there are pretty much on point. I do think the spillback income is quite beneficial in the environment that we're in. I would kind of note, I mean, our starting point from an earnings perspective is strong.
I think 12.2% on NAV from a yield perspective is attractive. I think we are, as Steven talked about, forecasting lower income and lower fee income in Q4. I think the one thing that we're going to, we'll watch play out is we do believe increased activity in '25 will occur, that should be beneficial to that fee income line and provide some offset. But yes, the nearly three quarters of spillback is available as it relates to $0.70.

Bryce Rowe

Okay. Thank you guys.

Daniel Pietrzak

Thank you.

Operator

Casey Alexander, Compass Point.

Casey Alexander

Yeah, hi, good morning. The income generation in the quarter was, I think, better actually than most of us expected. But there was a meaningful, especially over the last two quarters increase in PIK income. Can you give us some sense of how you expect that to develop next quarter and in some of the succeeding quarters?

Daniel Pietrzak

Yeah, good morning Casey. Yes. I think in PIK, in terms of the PIK, I kind of frame it in one way, and then maybe Brian will talk about some of the specific deals. While it's a smaller part of our portfolio, we have been active in certain junior debt deals. Athena health would be an example of that. So of the PIK income, roughly half of that is what I'll call regular way kind of new business.
A lot of those companies end up being kind of a larger size, which we like more risk perspective. I think when we did the Athena deal, as an example, it was like $1 billion of EBITDA. The rest of it, as Steve called out, was related to a handful of names.
And those names, we're using that as they were reinvesting dollars into kind of growth activities which I think we're supportive of them doing. But I think in terms of the forward outlook, I think we were roughly 15% this quarter. You're probably in and around that range my guess would be for the next couple of quarters. But Brian, you might want to add to that.

Brian Gerson

Yes. Look, I think when you step back, as it relates to these (inaudible) when we restructure businesses, we always have debt capacity to the current projecting earnings part of the business. But these businesses are being restructured because these are underperforming. They've lacked strategic guidance. They often need management upgrades.
They may have been under invested in SG&A or CapEx. And we structured these loans, this new debt with a PIK option, which gives us an management flexibility to address the underperformance issues and gives us, but we do have sign off on all the budgeting since we're on the Board.
So I do think these PIKs they're not surprising. They were intentionally structured. And I think currently, the deals that do have that option are utilizing it, that may address your question about the future. But again, there's a lot of thought that goes into how we structure these deals and really focusing on the ultimate outcome in activity.

Casey Alexander

Okay, thanks. My next question is, last year around this time, you gave kind of pretty clear indications of how you sort of intended to manage the dividend for 2024, and it ended up getting broken into kind of three components. I'm curious if you have any view of how you think the Board expects to handle it, especially against, a, rate compression, b, declining base rates would it be your expectation that in 2025, investors should think more in terms of the base dividend and then see how things develop through 2025.

Daniel Pietrzak

And thanks for that, Casey. I think we try to be pretty transparent the way we thought about dividend policy. And you are correct, we broke it into kind of three pieces, right? We wanted to reward shareholders for what's called outperformance on the income side, that was the $0.05 that was the additional that I think we paid for five straight quarters.
We have broken it down into the $0.64 and the six to get to the [$0.70]. I think when we do talk about this with the Board, we do think about it over a longer term and a longer-term horizon, right? That's why we did set the base at [$0.64]. I think we'll continue to evaluate that with the Board.
I think you had an interesting piece out yesterday, as it relates to the potential impact of the presidential election. Our, I think our initial gut is while rates will continue to trend down, it probably will be a little bit slower than maybe we would have guessed 30 or 60 days ago.
So I think we have to kind of watch that play out. I think we have to watch the deal volume sort of play out, see what that does to kind of fee income. But I would go back to Bryce's question, we're at the upper end of the range on the spill back and that's available to support that $0.70 number we've been paying out.

Michael Forman

And just to be clear and put a fine point on it, the $0.05 was the spillover that we were paying after five quarters and (inaudible) the was what reflects in the higher rate environment that we were not reading in.

Casey Alexander

All right, great. Thank you for taking my questions.

Michael Forman

Thank you, Casey.

Operator

John Hecht, Jefferies.

John Hecht

Thanks very much for taking my questions. Actually, a couple just were asked. But I'm wondering on the investment pipeline, I mean, Dan, it sounded like there's more activity, but maybe the kind of pipeline of activity growth isn't quite as much as you would have expected.
I guess my question is, as you look into 2025, given the forward curve and some anticipated maybe de-regulation. Do you think that the M&A pipeline and the investment pipeline will grow over the course of the next few quarters? Or is kind of where we are, where we are?

Daniel Pietrzak

Yes. Thanks, John. I think we do believe that it will grow, right? You have the continued fact out there that the holding period for a bunch of these deals that are sponsor owned has been probably longer than intended. You do have, I think, a continued focus from LPs to get capital back out of these funds. So I think there is a certain amount of pressure to sell some of these companies.
There's a lot of dry powder on the private equity side, that's arguably getting kind of further down the road inside of fun life. So you have the capital there to be involved or acquire these companies. So I think that setup kind of remains. It probably has been well, let's just call it slower to start than I think we would have guessed maybe at the start of '24.
I think we did out of a view that to make the bid-ask kind of difference narrow, you needed kind of market participants to get their arms around inflation being under control rates being, let's call it, more stable and kind of the hard landing being removed from people's kind of mines. I think that all happened, but I think we have seen more and more people anticipating these rate reductions.
So it has been kind of slower. Now all that said, when I do look at the pipeline, I do look at activity of the deal teams. It's been the highest, it's been since the start of '22, so I think that's positive. So I think we do expect that to play out as we get into 2025.

John Hecht

Okay, That's helpful context. And then maybe just from a credit outlook perspective, is there anything to talk about or maybe call out in terms of EBITDA or revenue trends within the portfolio at the company level?

Daniel Pietrzak

Yeah. I think two things. I mean number one, we've still seen revenue and EBITDA growth. I think that's positive. I would say that revenue and EBITDA growth has been slower than we would have seen maybe in the years prior.
So I think we are kind of watching that. And I think all market participants would probably say this, but we are in an environment with where rates have been that most companies interest coverage ratios are just tighter than we'd probably like it to be.
So I think that does provide a backdrop if there is a challenge, if somebody does lose a customer, they had done a bad M&A deal or what it might be. These kind of issues bubble to the surface more because there's not a lot of room to maneuver.
I think that obviously can change a little bit the one benefit of a falling rate environment is kind of more cash flow at these kind of companies. But I think in totality, it's generally been positive. I think some of the issues that we have seen either in the portfolio or in the market have been more idiosyncratic to the particular name than anything that's more widespread.

Brian Gerson

Yes. And really, the couple factor is that we've been seeing underperforming over the course of the year, sort of continue to be anything that sort of touching old (inaudible) exposure to. But consumer product companies are being far down because the retailers just are carrying much lower levels of inventory.
People keep talking about destocking. I don't know how you destock for two years, but I think you're talking about just a lower inventory model. And then within, in industrial, there's certain markets of weakness, given I think this year, there was more of a conservative outlook on capital spend in a lower rate environment, that should be positive.

John Hecht

Great. Thanks very much.

Daniel Pietrzak

Thanks, John.

Operator

Mark Hughes, Truist.

Mark Hughes

Yeah, thanks. Good morning. The repricing activity you've seen portfolio companies looking for better terms. How has that trended over the last few months? Is that kind of a step function you see the rates change? Or is that just flow with the day-to-day interest rates and spreads?

Daniel Pietrzak

I think it's probably, maybe a little bit more nuanced than that, right? I mean, I think it's based upon what I would call new deal activities. You have data points out there that someone can sort of comp to. I think companies can only really make those ask as they've had steady performance over a period of time.
So the one, let's call it, positive thing of the re-pricings would be a high correlation to well-performing businesses. I think we would have a thesis, Mark, that as rates do fall, I think that will put some, a little bit of pressure on spreads to widen.
I don't think that will be basis point per basis point in any scenario. But I think general kind of fixed income markets as the benchmark sort of change, there will be some impact on credit spreads. Obviously, the benchmark moved almost 500 basis points and you've seen some spread reduction since January '22. So I think it is sort of case by case, but I think we would expect as rates fall a bit of movement wider on spreads.

Mark Hughes

Okay. And then have you seen any change in the trajectory on that activity in the recent months? Or has it been reasonably steady?

Daniel Pietrzak

Yes. I would say it's probably been a little bit slower, right, or at least kind of spreads have settled at a level. I think there's a level of where our spreads are that on particular deals wouldn't make sense for pools of capital like this. So I think there's a little bit of a floor there. But I think you've seen, let's call it, a bit of slowdown notifying kind of that sort of bottom point.

Mark Hughes

Yes. And then you talked about passing on more deals, based on the pricing issue you're maintaining your discipline. When you think about kind of when you do pass credit versus competition, what's the usual dynamic there? And maybe if you can't separate those because they're interrelated. But, how significant is that when you get a little tighter market? How much harder is it to see the origination activity and your usual ratios?

Daniel Pietrzak

Yes. I'll probably answer it a little bit differently, but tell me if it makes sense. I think we have, as I mentioned, been happy to see, let's call it, an uptick of activity. I think the larger lenders like us do benefit from these existing portfolios, so you can maintain that incumbency position. We can pass on deals for a multitude of reasons. I mean sometimes it's just the sector of the credit. We're not going to do it. Those deals probably don't even make it to a screening or an investment committee.
It's more of a desk kill. There are deals we won't play in because of where it's priced versus where we think it should be priced. That said, I think our primary focus is on credit and then there are structural pieces, right?
I mean there are certain asks on certain deals that we think is a step too far for private debt or liquid credit and we've walked away from certain deals after having done a lot of work on it because it was not comfortable in the structure.

Brian Gerson

Yes. Look, I think the other thing to note is that our leverage is currently in the middle of our target range. So there's no pressure to deploy. I mean, we do benefit as Dan set from those compositions. And when repricings occur, we might to credit, we maintain.

Daniel Pietrzak

And maybe one last point, Mark, I think it is important. I think we're very focused on maintaining kind of that broad origination funnel, right? We've always talked about being active in the upper end of the middle market, we'd probably classify that as $50 million to $150 million of EBITDA.
Obviously, when the syndicated loan markets were shut in '22 and '23, we had the opportunity to participate in some larger deals. I think those were on a very, very good risk reward. We are prepared to go down to a lower number than that $50 million. The floor is probably 25%, but there's a very high bar for that. It would be an industry or a sector that we really like.
We're probably lending to one of their competitors. So we've got a real view in it that it's going to grow. But we do think it's important to have a broad kind of funnel there. We've got a very active non-sponsor business. We have people dedicated to that. We think that's helpful. We've been active in some of the ABL activity, let's call that receivables and inventory, right?
We find those deals quite interesting from a risk-adjusted return perspective. And then our asset based finance business remains active. We talked about discover in our prepared remarks, but those deals are generally returning several 100 basis points wide of what we're seeing in direct lending. So I think that broad funnel is an advantage to us and the ability to deploy across different companies, sponsor, non-sponsor and things like asset based finance is quite important.

Mark Hughes

Yeah. Thanks for that perspective. Appreciate it.

Daniel Pietrzak

Have a good day.

Mark Hughes

Thank you.

Operator

Kenneth Lee, RBC.

Kenneth Lee

Hey, good morning. Thanks for taking my question. Just one follow-up on that last comment around the asset based finance opportunities there. Wondering which benchmark rates are they typically keyed off given that they're fixed rates, and it sounds like the spreads are pretty wide right now. Just any kind of additional color there around that? Thanks.

Daniel Pietrzak

Yes. No, happy to give. It is a different, let's call it, return profile in a lot of ways than what you're seeing in direct lending. I think you could either have our loan portfolios that you're buying, that the underlying loans themselves are fixed rate. We're usually using the bank market or the capital markets to finance those loan portfolios. So you can generate kind of that, what I'll call fixed rate return.
Even though if it's floating rate loans, if we are financing, and we'll be financing with floating rate debt, you're effectively creating that more kind of stable or almost fixed rate return profile. In that part of the market, I don't think we think about it entirely like spreads, you're acquiring these asset portfolios thinking about making a kind of targeted return on it, that's generally in kind of the mid-teens type context. We remain quite bullish on the market opportunity there.
We think that market is approaching $7 trillion of market size. That doesn't mean everything is for us. But that does mean there's a lot of white space because there has not necessarily been a lot of scale capital raised, and we're fortunate to have 50 people dedicated to that space. There's some pretty good tailwinds there that we expect to continue to be quite active.

Kenneth Lee

Got you. Very helpful there. And just one follow-up on the comments around the PIK income and the earlier comments you made there. I just want to clarify, how much of the PIK income is, was originally underwritten as PIK versus electing? Thanks.

Daniel Pietrzak

Roughly half.

Kenneth Lee

Okay. Got you. That's all I had. Thanks again.

Daniel Pietrzak

Thank you.

Operator

Melissa Wedel, JPMorgan.

Melissa Wedel

Good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. Just to follow up on the theme of PIK, definitely take your point that those were, those deals were structured to give some flexibility during perhaps a return around. I'm curious how PIK versus cash paying income will impact sort of if it impacts and to what extent it impacts your fair value marks over time, particularly as you see in certain deals PIK persisting longer than you would have originally expected?

Daniel Pietrzak

Yeah, good morning, Melissa. Yes, I would say, and Brian, you might want to add to this. It's probably, it's going to be very much on a case-by-case basis. I think you could probably make a correlation that if a company is forced to pick for an extended period of time, the company could be underperforming.
But on the other side of that, you could have, because these companies are in turnaround kind of either the seeds being planted or some meaningful, let's call it, upside kind of on the revenue side. So I think you are independently valuing these businesses based upon what their financial performance is and all the other inputs that would go into the valuation model. So there's probably not kind of the perfect answer, but it's, and Brian, feel free to add to that.

Brian Gerson

Yes. I mean, look, when you own a business, you're always making capital decisions and trying to figure out how, what dollars can be invested at the highest return on capital. So I mean that sort of goes to the commentary of flexibility, because we are very much focused on the long-term exit in all of these. And look, it's going to be performance related in terms of and capital decision-making related decisions as we go forward in terms of what the company is continue to pick it up.

Melissa Wedel

Okay. And then to your comments about rates likely to trend lower, but the initial thought is maybe they won't go as low or as quickly as we would have thought a few months ago. Does that impact how you're thinking about sort of credit trends across the industry broadly. We think if there's a slower pace of rate decline that a natural trade-off on that would be a bit more distressed or default activity. Thanks.

Daniel Pietrzak

No, it's a fair question. And I think our thoughts on this are probably evolving because obviously, there were some pretty big market moves in the last couple of days. I think we've always expected the Fed to be kind of disciplined as they've bring down kind of rates.
I think the Fed has done a nice job of getting inflation under control. I think there are certain things that could happen in this Republic administration that could be viewed as inflationary. That said, I think the big focus was to, of the election was to make sure inflation is under control.
So I think it will be balanced there. I don't think that slower pace, though, Melissa, is kind of that long to have a real impact to kind of credit. I just, if you were thinking that there was going to be three or four rate cuts in the next, let's call it, 12 to 18 months, maybe you're just kind of one lower than that or one less than that. But it's, I think it will be interesting to watch how that kind of plays out in the coming months and the coming quarters.

Brian Gerson

Yes. Look, I'll add is where it's less constructive to the equity in these deals. Higher rates have extended the whole period for companies had less aid debt (inaudible). To the extent rates stay higher it could extend, but that's offset by the pressure that LPs are putting on GPs to sell assets and return capital. So there's certainly a balance there.

Melissa Wedel

Got it. Thank you.

Operator

That concludes our question and answer session. I'd now like to hand back over to Dan Pietrzak for closing remark.

Daniel Pietrzak

Well, thank you everyone for your time today. We're always available for any follow up points as needed. We do wish everyone a great holiday season and we'll talk with you next quarter. Thank you.

Operator

Thank you for attending today's call. You may now disconnect. Have a wonderful day.