The Company consolidates entities in which it has a direct or indirect controlling financial interest based on either a variable interest model or voting interest model. A limited partnership or similar entity is a variable interest entity (“VIE”) if the unaffiliated limited partners do not have substantive kick-out or participating rights. Most of the Oaktree funds are VIEs because they have not granted unaffiliated limited partners substantive kick-out or participating rights. The Company consolidates those VIEs in which it is the primary beneficiary. An entity is deemed to be the primary beneficiary if it holds a controlling financial interest. A controlling financial interest is defined as (a) the power to direct the activities of a VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance and (b) the obligation to absorb losses of the entity or the right to receive benefits from the entity that could potentially be significant to the VIE. The consolidation guidance requires an analysis to determine (a) whether an entity in which the Company holds a variable interest is a VIE and (b) whether the Company’s involvement, through holding interests directly or indirectly in the entity or contractually through other variable interests (e.g., management and performance-based fees), would give it a controlling financial interest. A decision maker’s fee arrangement is not considered a variable interest if (a) it is compensation for services provided, commensurate with the level of effort required to provide those services, and part of a compensation arrangement that includes only terms, conditions or amounts that are customarily present in arrangements for similar services negotiated at arm’s length (“at-market”), and (b) the decision maker does not hold any other variable interests that absorb more than an insignificant amount of the potential VIE’s expected residual returns.

The Company determines whether it is the primary beneficiary of a VIE at the time it becomes involved with a VIE and reconsiders that conclusion at each reporting date. In evaluating whether the Company is the primary beneficiary, the Company evaluates its economic interests in the entity held either directly by the Company or indirectly through related parties. The consolidation analysis can generally be performed qualitatively; however, if it is not readily apparent that the Company is not the primary beneficiary, a quantitative analysis may also be performed. Investments and redemptions (either by the Company, affiliates of the Company or third parties) or amendments to the governing documents of the respective Oaktree funds could affect an entity’s status as a VIE or the determination of the primary beneficiary. The Company does not consolidate most of the Oaktree funds because it is not the primary beneficiary of those funds due to the fact that its fee arrangements are considered at-market and thus not deemed to be variable interests, and it does not hold any other interests in those funds that are considered to be more than insignificant. Please see note 4 for more information regarding both consolidated and unconsolidated VIEs. For entities that are not VIEs, consolidation is evaluated through a majority voting interest model.

expenses and cash flows of the funds or CLOs on a gross basis, and the majority of the economic interests in those funds or CLOs, which are held by third-party investors, are reflected as non-controlling interests in consolidated funds or debt obligations of CLOs in the condensed consolidated financial statements. All of the revenues earned by the Company as investment manager of the consolidated funds are eliminated in consolidation. However, because the eliminated amounts are earned from and funded by third-party investors, the consolidation of a fund does not impact net income or loss attributable to the Company.

The Company records non-controlling interests to reflect the economic interests of the unaffiliated limited partners. These interests are presented as non-controlling redeemable interests in consolidated funds within the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition, outside of the permanent capital section. Limited partners in open-end and evergreen funds generally have the right to withdraw their capital, subject to the terms of the respective limited partnership agreements, over periods ranging from one month to three years. While limited partners in consolidated closed-end funds generally have not been granted redemption rights, these limited partners do have withdrawal or redemption rights in certain limited circumstances that are beyond the control of the Company, such as instances in which retaining the limited partnership interest could cause the limited partner to violate a law, regulation or rule.

The allocation of net income or loss to non-controlling redeemable interests in consolidated funds is based on the relative ownership interests of the unaffiliated limited partners after the consideration of contractual arrangements that govern allocations of income or loss. At the consolidated level, potential incentives are allocated to non-controlling redeemable interests in consolidated funds until such incentives become allocable to the Company under the substantive contractual terms of the limited partnership agreements of the funds.

Non-controlling interests in consolidated funds represent the equity interests held by third-party investors in CLOs that had not yet priced as of the respective period end. All non-controlling interests in those CLOs are attributed a share of income or loss arising from the respective CLO based on the relative ownership interests of third-party investors after consideration of contractual arrangements that govern allocations of income or loss. Investors in those CLOs are generally unable to redeem their interests until the respective CLO liquidates, is called or otherwise terminates.

Non-controlling interests in consolidated subsidiaries reflect the portion of unitholders’ capital attributable to OCGH unitholders (“OCGH non-controlling interest”) and third parties. All non-controlling interests in consolidated subsidiaries are attributed a share of income or loss in the respective consolidated subsidiary based on the relative economic interests of the OCGH unitholders or third parties after consideration of contractual arrangements that govern allocations of income or loss. Please see note 13 for more information.

The Company determines whether an arrangement contains a lease at inception. A lease is a contract that provides the right to control an identified asset for a period of time in exchange for consideration. For identified leases, the Company determines whether it should be classified as an operating or finance lease. Operating leases are recorded in the statements of financial condition as separate line items: operating lease right-of-use assets (“ROU assets”) and operating lease liabilities. ROU assets represent the Company’s right to use an underlying asset for the lease term and lease liabilities represent the Company’s obligation to make lease payments arising from the lease. ROU assets and operating lease liabilities are recognized at the commencement date of the lease and measured based on the present value of lease payments over the lease term. The ROU asset also includes deferred rent liabilities and lease incentives. The Company’s lease arrangements generally do not provide an

implicit rate. As a result, in such situations the Company uses its incremental borrowing rate based on the information available at commencement date in determining the present value of lease payments. The Company may also include options to extend or terminate the lease when it is reasonably certain that it will exercise that option in the measurement of its ROU assets and liabilities. Lease expense for operating leases is recognized on a straight-line basis over the lease term. The Company has lease agreements with lease and non-lease components, which are generally accounted for separately. Please see note 11 for more information.

The Company earns management fees and incentive income from the investment advisory services it provides to its customers. Revenue is recognized when control of the promised services is transferred to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration the Company expects to receive in exchange for those services. The Company typically enters into contracts with investment funds to provide investment management and administrative services. These services are generally capable of being distinct and each is accounted for as separate performance obligations comprised of distinct service periods because the services are performed over time. The Company determined that for accounting purposes the investment funds are generally considered to be the customers with respect to commingled funds, while the individual investors are the customers with respect to separate account and fund-of-one vehicles. The Company receives management fees and/or incentive income with respect to its investment management services, and it is reimbursed by the funds for expenses incurred or paid on behalf of the funds with respect to its investment advisory services and its administrative services. The Company evaluates whether it is the principal (i.e., report as management fees on a gross basis) or agent (i.e., report as management fees on a net basis) with respect to each performance obligation and associated reimbursement arrangements. The Company has elected to apply the variable consideration exemption for its fee arrangements with its customers. Please see note 3 for more information on revenues.

Management fees are recognized over the period in which the investment management services are performed because customers simultaneously consume and receive benefits that are satisfied over time. The contractual terms of management fees generally vary by fund structure. For most closed-end funds, the management fee rate is applied against committed capital during the fund’s investment period and the lesser of total funded capital or cost basis of assets in the liquidation period. Certain closed-end funds pay management fees during the investment period based on drawn capital or cost basis. Additionally, for closed-end funds that pay management fees based on committed capital, the Company may elect to delay the start of the fund’s investment period and thus its full management fees, in which case it earns management fees based on drawn capital, and in certain cases outstanding borrowings under a fund-level credit facility made in lieu of drawing capital, until the Company elects to start the fund’s investment period. The Company’s right to receive management fees typically ends after 10 or 11 years from either the initial closing date or the start of the investment period, even if assets remain in the fund. In the case of CLOs, the management fee is based on the aggregate par value of collateral assets and principal cash, as defined in the applicable CLO indentures, and a portion of the management fees is dependent on the sufficiency of the particular vehicle’s cash flow. For open-end and evergreen funds, the management fee is generally based on the NAV of the fund. For the publicly-traded BDCs, the management fee is based on gross assets (including assets acquired with leverage), net of cash. In the case of certain open-end fund accounts, the Company has the potential to earn performance-based fees, typically in reference to a relevant benchmark index or hurdle rate, which are classified as management fees. The Company also earns quarterly incentive fees on the investment income from certain evergreen funds, such as the publicly-traded BDCs and other fund accounts, which are generally recurring in nature and reflected as management fees.

Incentive income generally represents 20% of each closed-end fund’s profits, subject to the return of contributed capital and a preferred return of typically 8% per annum, and up to 20% of certain evergreen fund’s annual profits, subject to high-water marks or hurdle rates. Incentive income is recognized when it is probable that a significant reversal will not occur. Revenue recognition is typically met (a) for closed-end funds, after all contributed capital and the preferred return on that capital have been distributed to the fund’s investors, and (b) for certain evergreen funds, at the conclusion of each annual measurement period. Potential incentive income is highly susceptible to market volatility, the judgment and actions of third parties, and other factors outside of the Company’s control. The Company’s experience has demonstrated little predictive value in the amount of potential incentive income ultimately earned due to the highly uncertain nature of returns inherent in the markets and contingencies associated with many realization events. As a result, the amount of incentive income recognized in any given period is generally determined after giving consideration to a number of factors, including whether the fund is in its investment or liquidation period, and the nature and level of risk associated with changes in fair value of the remaining assets in the fund. In general, it would be unlikely that any amount of potential incentive income would be recognized until (a) the uncertainty is resolved or (b) the fund is near final liquidation, assets are under contract for sale or are of low risk of significant fluctuation in fair value, and the assets are significantly in excess of the threshold at which incentive income would be earned.

Incentives received by Oaktree before the revenue recognition criteria have been met are deferred and recorded as a deferred incentive income liability within accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities in the consolidated statements of financial condition. The Company may receive tax distributions related to taxable income allocated by funds, which are treated as an advance of incentive income and subject to the same recognition criteria. Tax distributions are contractually not subject to clawback.

GAAP establishes a hierarchical disclosure framework that prioritizes the inputs used in measuring financial instruments at fair value into three levels based on their market observability. Market price observability is affected by a number of factors, such as the type of instrument and the characteristics specific to the instrument. Financial instruments with readily available quoted prices from an active market or for which fair value can be measured based on actively quoted prices generally will have a higher degree of market price observability and a lesser degree of judgment inherent in measuring fair value.

assessment of the significance of an input requires judgment and considers factors specific to the instrument. Transfers of assets into or out of each fair value hierarchy level as a result of changes in the observability of the inputs used in measuring fair value are accounted for as of the beginning of the reporting period. Transfers resulting from a specific event, such as a reorganization or restructuring, are accounted for as of the date of the event that caused the transfer.

In the absence of observable market prices, the Company values Level III investments using valuation methodologies applied on a consistent basis. The quarterly valuation process for Level III investments begins with each portfolio company, property or security being valued by the investment and/or valuation teams. With the exception of open-end funds, all unquoted Level III investment values are reviewed and approved by (i) the Company’s valuation officer, who is independent of the investment teams, (ii) a designated investment professional of each strategy and (iii) for a substantial majority of unquoted Level III holdings as measured by market value, a valuation committee of the respective strategy. For open-end funds, unquoted Level III investment values are reviewed and approved by the Company’s valuation officer. For certain investments, the valuation process also includes a review by independent valuation parties, at least annually, to determine whether the fair values determined by management are reasonable. Results of the valuation process are evaluated each quarter, including an assessment of whether the underlying calculations should be adjusted or recalibrated. In connection with this process, the Company periodically evaluates changes in fair-value measurements for reasonableness, considering items such as industry trends, general economic and market conditions, and factors specific to the investment.

Certain assets are valued using prices obtained from pricing vendors or brokers. The Company seeks to obtain prices from at least two pricing vendors for the subject or similar securities. In cases where vendor pricing is not reflective of fair value, a secondary vendor is unavailable, or no vendor pricing is available, a comparison value made up of quotes for the subject or similar securities received from broker dealers may be used. These investments may be classified as Level III because the quoted prices may be indicative in nature for securities that are in an inactive market, may be for similar securities, or may require adjustment for investment-specific factors or restrictions. The Company evaluates the prices obtained from brokers or pricing vendors based on available market information, including trading activity of the subject or similar securities, or by performing a comparable security analysis to ensure that fair values are reasonably estimated. The Company also performs back-testing of valuation information obtained from pricing vendors and brokers against actual prices received in transactions. In addition to ongoing monitoring and back-testing, the Company performs due diligence procedures surrounding pricing vendors to understand their methodology and controls to support their use in the valuation process.

The Company has elected the fair value option for certain corporate investments that otherwise would not have reflected unrealized gains and losses in current-period earnings. Such election is irrevocable and is applied on an investment-by-investment basis at initial recognition. Unrealized gains and losses resulting from changes in fair value are reflected as a component of investment income in the condensed consolidated statements of operations. The Company’s accounting for these investments is similar to its accounting for investments held by the consolidated funds at fair value and the valuation methods are consistent with those used to determine the fair value of the consolidated funds’ investments.

The Company has elected the fair value option for the financial assets and financial liabilities of its consolidated CLOs. The assets and liabilities of CLOs are primarily reflected within the investments, at fair value and within the debt obligations of CLOs line items in the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition. The Company’s accounting for CLO assets is similar to its accounting for its funds with respect to both carrying investments held by CLOs at fair value and the valuation methods used to determine the fair value of those investments. The fair value of CLO liabilities are measured as the fair value of CLO assets less the sum of (a) the fair value of any beneficial interests held by the Company and (b) the carrying value of any beneficial interests that represent compensation for services. Realized gains or losses and changes in the fair value of CLO assets, respectively, are included in net realized gain on consolidated funds’ investments and net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on consolidated funds’ investments in the condensed consolidated statements of operations. Interest income of CLOs is included in interest and dividend income, and interest expense and other expenses, respectively, are included in interest expense and consolidated fund expenses in the condensed consolidated statements of operations. Changes in the fair value of a CLO’s financial liabilities in accordance with

The consolidated funds include investment limited partnerships and CLOs that reflect their investments, including majority-owned and controlled investments, at fair value. The Company has retained the specialized investment company accounting guidance under GAAP for investment limited partnerships with respect to consolidated investments and has elected the fair value option for the financial assets of CLOs. Thus, the consolidated investments are reflected in the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition at fair value, with unrealized gains and losses resulting from changes in fair value reflected as a component of net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on consolidated funds’ investments in the condensed consolidated statements of operations. Fair value is the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date (i.e., the exit price).

Non-publicly traded debt and equity securities and other securities or instruments for which reliable market quotations are not available are valued by management using valuation methodologies applied on a consistent basis. These securities may initially be valued at the acquisition price as the best indicator of fair value. The Company reviews the significant unobservable inputs, valuations of comparable investments and other similar transactions for investments valued at acquisition price to determine whether another valuation methodology should be utilized. Subsequent valuations will depend on the facts and circumstances known as of the valuation date and the application of valuation methodologies as further described below under “—Non-publicly Traded Equity and Real Estate Investments.” The fair value may also be based on a pending transaction expected to close after the valuation date.

Securities listed on one or more national securities exchanges are valued at their last reported sales price on the date of valuation. If no sale occurred on the valuation date, the security is valued at the mean of the last “bid” and “ask” prices on the valuation date. Securities that are not readily marketable due to legal restrictions that may limit or restrict transferability are generally valued at a discount from quoted market prices. The discount would reflect the amount market participants would require due to the risk relating to the inability to access a public market for the security for the specified period and would vary depending on the nature and duration of the restriction and the perceived risk and volatility of the underlying securities. Securities with longer duration restrictions or higher volatility are generally valued at a higher discount. Such discounts are generally estimated based on put option models or an analysis of market studies. Instances where the Company has applied discounts to quoted prices of restricted listed securities have been infrequent. The impact of such discounts is not material to the Company’s condensed consolidated statements of financial condition and results of operations for all periods presented.

The market-yield approach is considered in the valuation of non-publicly traded debt securities, utilizing expected future cash flows and discounted using estimated current market rates. Discounted cash-flow calculations may be adjusted to reflect current market conditions and/or the perceived credit risk of the borrower. Consideration is also given to a borrower’s ability to meet principal and interest obligations; this may include an evaluation of collateral and/or the underlying value of the borrower utilizing techniques described below under “—Non-publicly Traded Equity and Real Estate Investments.”

functional and economic obsolescence. The market approach utilizes valuations of comparable public companies and transactions, and generally seeks to establish the enterprise value of the portfolio company or investment property using a market-multiple methodology. This approach takes into account the financial measure (such as EBITDA, adjusted EBITDA, free cash flow, net operating income, net income, book value or net asset value) believed to be most relevant for the given company or investment property. Consideration also may be given to factors such as acquisition price of the security or investment property, historical and projected operational and financial results for the portfolio company, the strengths and weaknesses of the portfolio company or investment property relative to its comparable companies or properties, industry trends, general economic and market conditions, and others deemed relevant. The income approach is typically a discounted cash-flow method that incorporates expected timing and level of cash flows. It incorporates assumptions in determining growth rates, income and expense projections, discount and capitalization rates, capital structure, terminal values, and other factors. The applicability and weight assigned to market and income approaches are determined based on the availability of reliable projections and comparable companies and transactions.

The valuation of securities may be impacted by expectations of investors’ receptiveness to a public offering of the securities, the size of the holding of the securities and any associated control, information with respect to transactions or offers for the securities (including the transaction pursuant to which the investment was made and the elapsed time from the date of the investment to the valuation date), and applicable restrictions on the transferability of the securities.

These valuation methodologies involve a significant degree of management judgment. Accordingly, valuations by the Company do not necessarily represent the amounts that eventually may be realized from sales or other dispositions of investments. Fair values may differ from the values that would have been used had a ready market for the investment existed, and the differences could be material to the condensed consolidated financial statements.

In January 2017, the FASB issued guidance to simplify the accounting for goodwill impairments by eliminating step 2 of the goodwill impairment test. This step currently requires an entity to perform a hypothetical purchase price allocation to derive the implied fair value of goodwill. Under the new guidance, an impairment loss is recognized if the carrying value of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value. The impairment loss would equal the amount of that excess, limited to the total amount of goodwill. All other goodwill impairment guidance remains largely unchanged. Entities will continue to have the option to perform a qualitative assessment to determine if a quantitative impairment test is necessary. The guidance is effective for the Company in the first quarter of 2020 on a prospective basis, with early adoption permitted. The Company expects that adoption of this guidance will not have a material impact on the consolidated financial statements.

In February 2016, the FASB issued guidance that requires a lessee to recognize a lease asset and a lease liability for most of its operating leases. Under legacy GAAP, operating leases were not recognized by a lessee in its statements of financial position. In general, the asset and liability each equal the present value of lease payments. The guidance does not significantly change the recognition, measurement and presentation of expenses and cash flows arising from a lease by a lessee. The Company adopted the guidance in the first quarter of 2019 under the simplified transition method, which allows companies to forgo the comparative reporting requirements initially required under the modified retrospective transition approach and apply the new guidance prospectively. The adoption did not have an impact on the consolidated statements of operations because all of the Company’s leases are currently classified as operating leases, which under the guidance will continue to be recognized as expense on a straight-line basis. The adoption, however, resulted in a significant gross-up in total assets and total liabilities on the consolidated statements of financial position. The amount of the liability represents the aggregate discounted amount of the Company’s minimum lease obligations as of the reporting date. The difference between