
Stockholder transaction expenses:
Sales load (as a percentage of offering price)	0	%	(1)
Offering expenses (as a percentage of offering price)	0	%	(2)
Dividend reinvestment plan expenses	None		(3)
Total stockholder transaction expenses (as a percentage of offering price)	0	%


Annual expenses (as a percentage of net assets attributable to common stock):
Management fees	2.90	%	(4)
Incentive fees payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement	0.70	%	(5)
Interest payments on borrowed funds	3.51	%	(6)
Other expenses	0.49	%	(7)
Acquired fund fees and expenses	0	%
Total annual expenses	7.60	%	(8)

(1)In the event that the securities to which any applicable prospectus relates are sold to or through underwriters or agents, a corresponding prospectus supplement will disclose the applicable sales load.

(2)In the event that we conduct an offering of our securities, the related prospectus supplement will disclose the estimated amount of total offering expenses (which may include offering expenses borne by third parties on our behalf), the offering price and the offering expenses borne by us as a percentage of the offering price.

(3)The expenses associated with the dividend reinvestment plan are included in “Other expenses.” See “Dividend Reinvestment Plan.”

(4)Our management fee is calculated at an annual rate equal to 1.375% and is based on the average adjusted gross assets (including assets purchased with borrowed funds and securitization-related assets, leverage, unrealized depreciation or appreciation on derivative instruments and cash collateral on deposit with custodian but adjusted to exclude cash and cash equivalents so that investors do not pay the base management fee on such assets) at the end of the two most recently completed calendar quarters and is payable quarterly in arrears. See “Item 1. Business — Management Agreements — Investment Advisory Agreement — Management Fee”, as well as any amendments reflected in subsequent filings with the SEC. The management fee referenced in the table above is annualized and based on actual amounts incurred by us during the year ended September 30, 2022, excluding the one-time waiver recognized during the three months ended March 31, 2022 of $1.9 million. The estimate of our annualized base management fees based on actual expenses for the year ended September 30, 2022 assumes net assets of $2,545 million and leverage of $3,094 million, which reflects our net assets and leverage as of September 30, 2022.

GC Advisors, as collateral manager for the 2018 Issuer, under a collateral management agreement, or the 2018 Collateral Management Agreement, is entitled to receive an annual fee in an amount equal to 0.25% of the principal balance of the portfolio loans held by the 2018 Issuer at the beginning of the collection period relating to each payment date, which is payable in arrears on each payment date. Under the 2018 Collateral Management Agreement, the term "collection period" refers to the period commencing on the third business day prior to the preceding payment date and ending on (but excluding) the third business day prior to such payment date.

GC Advisors, as collateral manager for the GCIC 2018 Issuer, under a collateral management agreement, or the GCIC 2018 Collateral Management Agreement is entitled to receive an annual fee in an amount equal to 0.35% of the principal balance of the portfolio loans held by the GCIC 2018 Issuer at the beginning of the collection period relating to each payment date, which is payable in arrears on each payment date. Under the 2018 GCIC Collateral Management Agreement, the term “collection period” generally refers to a quarterly period commencing on the day after the end of the prior collection period to the tenth business day prior to the payment date.

The collateral management fees described above are less than the management fee payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement and are paid directly by the 2018 Issuer and GCIC 2018 Issuer, as applicable, to GC Advisors and are offset against the management fees payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement. Accordingly, the 1.375% base management fee paid by us to GC Advisors under the Investment Advisory Agreement on all of our assets, including those indirectly held through each of the 2018 Issuer and the GCIC 2018 Issuer, is reduced, on a dollar for dollar basis, by an amount equal to the 0.25% and 0.35% fees paid to GC Advisors by the 2018 Issuer and GCIC 2018 Issuer, respectively.

For purposes of this table, the SEC requires that the “Management fees” percentage be calculated as a percentage of net assets attributable to common stock, rather than total assets, including assets that have been funded with borrowed monies, because common stockholders bear all of this cost. If the base management fee portion of the “Management fees” percentage were calculated instead as a percentage of our total assets, our base management fee portion of the “Management fees” percentage would be approximately 1.30% of total assets.

(5)The incentive fee referenced in the table above is based on actual amounts of the income component of the incentive fee incurred during the year ended September 30, 2022, and the capital gains component payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement as of September 30, 2022. For the year ended September 30, 2022, there was $17.8 million incurred of the income component of the incentive fee and as of September 30, 2022, there was no capital gains component payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement. We have structured the calculation of the incentive fee to include a fee limitation such that no incentive fee will be paid to GC Advisors for any quarter if, after such payment, the cumulative incentive fees paid to GC Advisors since the effective date of our election to become a business development company would be greater than 20.0% of our cumulative pre-incentive fee net income per share. For a more detailed discussion of the calculation of the incentive fee, see “Item 1. Business — Management Agreements — Income and Capital Gains Incentive Fee Calculation” as well as any amendments reflected in subsequent filings with the SEC.

(6)Interest payments on borrowed funds is based on our cost of funds on our outstanding indebtedness for the year ended September 30, 2022, which consisted of $692.6 million of indebtedness outstanding under Revolving Credit Facilities, $1,446.9 million of principal outstanding less unamortized premium and / or unaccreted original issue discount on our unsecured notes and $954.2 million of principal outstanding less unaccreted discount recognized on the assumption of the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization in the Merger in notes issued through the Debt Securitizations. For the year ended September 30, 2022, the annualized cost of funds for our total debt outstanding, which includes all interest and amortization of debt issuance costs on the Debt Securitizations, was 3.0%. Debt issuance costs represent fees and other direct incremental costs incurred in connection with our Debt Securitizations. These fees also include a structuring and placement fee paid to Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC for its services in connection with the initial structuring of the 2018 Debt Securitization and legal fees, accounting fees, rating agency fees and all other costs associated with the 2018 Debt Securitization and GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization.

(7)Includes our overhead expenses, including payments under the Administration Agreement based on our allocable portion of overhead and other expenses incurred by the Administrator, and any acquired fund fees and expenses that are not required to be disclosed separately. See “Item 1. Business — Management Agreements — Administration Agreement”, as well as any amendments reflected in subsequent filings with the SEC. “Other expenses” are estimated based on the annualized amounts incurred for the year ended September 30, 2022.

(8)“Total annual expenses” as a percentage of consolidated net assets attributable to common stock are higher than the total annual expenses percentage would be for a company that is not leveraged. We borrow money to leverage our net assets and increase our total assets. The SEC requires that the “Total annual expenses” percentage be calculated as a percentage of net assets (defined as total assets less indebtedness and before taking into account any incentive fees payable during the period), rather than the total assets, including assets that have been funded with borrowed monies. The reason for presenting expenses as a percentage of net assets attributable to common stockholders is that our common stockholders bear all of our fees and expenses.

Sales Load [Percent]

0.00%

Dividend Reinvestment and Cash Purchase Fees

$ 0

Other Transaction Expenses [Abstract]

Other Transaction Expenses [Percent]

0.00%

Annual Expenses [Table Text Block]


Stockholder transaction expenses:
Sales load (as a percentage of offering price)	0	%	(1)
Offering expenses (as a percentage of offering price)	0	%	(2)
Dividend reinvestment plan expenses	None		(3)
Total stockholder transaction expenses (as a percentage of offering price)	0	%


Annual expenses (as a percentage of net assets attributable to common stock):
Management fees	2.90	%	(4)
Incentive fees payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement	0.70	%	(5)
Interest payments on borrowed funds	3.51	%	(6)
Other expenses	0.49	%	(7)
Acquired fund fees and expenses	0	%
Total annual expenses	7.60	%	(8)

(3)The expenses associated with the dividend reinvestment plan are included in “Other expenses.” See “Dividend Reinvestment Plan.”

Management Fees [Percent]

2.90%

Interest Expenses on Borrowings [Percent]

3.51%

Incentive Fees [Percent]

0.70%

Acquired Fund Fees and Expenses [Percent]

0.00%

Other Annual Expenses [Abstract]

Other Annual Expenses [Percent]

0.49%

Total Annual Expenses [Percent]

7.60%

Expense Example [Table Text Block]

The following example demonstrates the projected dollar amount of total cumulative expenses that would be incurred over various periods with respect to a hypothetical investment in our common stock. This example and the expenses in the table above should not be considered a representation of our future expenses, and actual expenses (including the cost of debt, if any, and other expenses) may be greater or less than those shown.


You would pay the following expenses on a $1,000 investment	1 year	3 Years	5 years	10 years
Assuming a 5% annual return (assumes no return from net realized capital gains or net unrealized capital appreciation)	$69	$203	$332	$634
Assuming a 5% annual return (assumes return entirely from realized capital gains and thus subject to the capital gain incentive fee)	$79	$230	$373	$694

Expense Example, Year 01

$ 69

Expense Example, Years 1 to 3

203

Expense Example, Years 1 to 5

332

Expense Example, Years 1 to 10

$ 634

Purpose of Fee Table , Note [Text Block]

The following table is being provided to update, as of September 30, 2022, certain information in our registration statement on Form N-2 (File No. 333-265509). The following table is intended to assist you in understanding the costs and expenses that an investor in shares of our common stock will bear directly or indirectly. However, we caution you that some of the percentages indicated in the table below are estimates and may vary. Actual costs and expenses incurred by investors in shares of our common stock may be greater than the percentage estimates in the table below. The following table excludes one-time fees payable to third parties not affiliated with GC Advisors that were incurred in connection with the Debt Securitizations, but includes all of the applicable ongoing fees and expenses of the Debt Securitizations. Whenever reference to fees or expenses paid by “us” or “Golub Capital BDC,” or that “we” will pay fees or expenses, our common stockholders will indirectly bear such fees or expenses.

Other Transaction Fees, Note [Text Block]

In the event that we conduct an offering of our securities, the related prospectus supplement will disclose the estimated amount of total offering expenses (which may include offering expenses borne by third parties on our behalf), the offering price and the offering expenses borne by us as a percentage of the offering price.

Other Expenses, Note [Text Block]

Includes our overhead expenses, including payments under the Administration Agreement based on our allocable portion of overhead and other expenses incurred by the Administrator, and any acquired fund fees and expenses that are not required to be disclosed separately. See “Item 1. Business — Management Agreements — Administration Agreement”, as well as any amendments reflected in subsequent filings with the SEC. “Other expenses” are estimated based on the annualized amounts incurred for the year ended September 30, 2022.

Management Fee not based on Net Assets, Note [Text Block]

Our management fee is calculated at an annual rate equal to 1.375% and is based on the average adjusted gross assets (including assets purchased with borrowed funds and securitization-related assets, leverage, unrealized depreciation or appreciation on derivative instruments and cash collateral on deposit with custodian but adjusted to exclude cash and cash equivalents so that investors do not pay the base management fee on such assets) at the end of the two most recently completed calendar quarters and is payable quarterly in arrears. See “Item 1. Business — Management Agreements — Investment Advisory Agreement — Management Fee”, as well as any amendments reflected in subsequent filings with the SEC. The management fee referenced in the table above is annualized and based on actual amounts incurred by us during the year ended September 30, 2022, excluding the one-time waiver recognized during the three months ended March 31, 2022 of $1.9 million. The estimate of our annualized base management fees based on actual expenses for the year ended September 30, 2022 assumes net assets of $2,545 million and leverage of $3,094 million, which reflects our net assets and leverage as of September 30, 2022.

General Description of Registrant [Abstract]

Investment Objectives and Practices [Text Block]

Our investment objective is to generate current income and capital appreciation by investing primarily in senior secured and one stop loans to U.S. middle market companies in industries we believe are resistant to recessions. We seek to generate strong risk-adjusted net returns by assembling a portfolio of investments across a broad range of industries and private equity investors.

We primarily target U.S. middle-market companies controlled by private equity investors that require capital for growth, acquisitions, recapitalizations, refinancings and leveraged buyouts. We seek to have a portfolio of first-lien, senior secured loans to borrowers believed to be insulated from the effects of the novel coronavirus, or COVID-19, pandemic in recession-resistant industries. We also make opportunistic loans to independently owned and publicly held middle-market companies. We seek to partner with strong management teams executing long-term growth strategies. Target businesses will typically exhibit some or all of the following characteristics:

•annual EBITDA of less than $100.0 million;

•sustainable leading positions in their respective markets;

•scalable revenues and operating cash flow;

•experienced management teams with successful track records;

•insulation from the effects of economic disruptions, such as the COVID-19 pandemic;

•stable, predictable cash flows with low technology and market risks;

•a substantial equity cushion in the form of capital ranking junior to our investment provided by a middle market private equity sponsor;

•low capital expenditures requirements;

•a North American base of operations;

•strong customer relationships;

•products, services or distribution channels having distinctive competitive advantages;

•defensible niche strategy or other barriers to entry; and

•demonstrated growth strategies.

While we believe that the criteria listed above are important in identifying and investing in prospective portfolio companies, not all of these criteria will be met by each prospective portfolio company.

Investment Process Overview

We view our investment process as consisting of four distinct phases described below:

Origination. GC Advisors sources investment opportunities through access to a network of over 10,000 individual contacts developed in the financial services and related industries by Golub Capital and managed through a proprietary customer relationship database. Among these contacts is an extensive network of private equity firms and relationships with leading middle-market senior lenders. The senior deal professionals of Golub Capital supplement these leads through personal visits and marketing campaigns. It is their responsibility to identify specific opportunities, to refine opportunities through candid exploration of the underlying facts and circumstances and to apply creative and flexible thinking to solve clients’ financing needs. The investment professionals of Golub Capital have a long and successful track record investing in companies across many industry sectors. Collectively, these investment professionals have completed investments in over 2,200 companies at Golub Capital. Golub Capital’s investments have been made in the following industries, among others: healthcare, restaurant and retail, software, digital and technology services, specialty manufacturing, business services, consumer products and services, food and beverages, aerospace and defense and value-added distribution.

Golub Capital has principal lending offices in Chicago, New York, London and San Francisco. Each of Golub Capital's originators maintains long-standing customer relationships and is responsible for covering a specified target market. We believe those originators’ strength and breadth of relationships across a wide range of markets generate numerous financing opportunities, which we believe enables GC Advisors to be highly selective in recommending investments to us.

Underwriting. We utilize the systematic, consistent approach to underwriting developed by Golub Capital, with a particular focus on determining the value of a business in a downside scenario. The key criteria that we consider include (1) strong and resilient underlying business fundamentals, (2) a substantial equity cushion in the form of capital ranking junior in right of payment to our investment and (3) a conclusion that overall “downside” risk is manageable. While the size of this equity cushion will vary over time and across industries, the equity cushion generally sought by GC Advisors today is between 35% and 45% of total portfolio capitalization. We generally focus on the criteria developed by Golub Capital for evaluating prospective portfolio companies, which uses a combination of analyses, including (1) fundamental analysis of a business’s financial statements, health, management, competitive advantages, competitors and markets; (2) analysis of opportunities in a given market based upon fluctuations due to seasonal, financial and economic factors; (3) quantitative analysis of the relative risk-return characteristics of investments and a comparison of yields between asset classes and other indicators; and (4) analysis of proprietary and secondary models. In evaluating a particular company, we put more emphasis on credit considerations (such as (1) loan-to-value ratio (which is the amount of our loan divided by the enterprise value of the company in which we are investing), (2) the ability of the company to maintain a liquidity cushion through economic cycles and in downside scenarios, (3) the ability of the company to service its fixed charge obligations under a variety of scenarios and (4) its anticipated strategic value in a downturn) than on profit potential and loan pricing. Based upon a combination of bottom-up analysis of the individual investment and GC Advisors’ expectations of future market conditions, GC Advisors seeks to assess the relative risk and reward for each investment. GC Advisors seeks to mitigate the risks of a single company or single industry through portfolio diversification. GC Advisors also considers environmental, social and governance considerations in the investment decision-making process, in accordance with its ESG policy, including analysis of the likelihood of material ESG-related risk based on the industry and industry subsector of the potential portfolio company, with further diligence and analysis based on this categorization as well as other factors identified during diligence. Golub Capital’s due diligence process for middle market credits will typically entail:

•a thorough review of historical and pro forma financial information;

•on-site visits;

•interviews with management and employees;

•a review of loan documents and material contracts;

•third-party “quality of earnings” accounting due diligence;

•when appropriate, background checks on key managers and research relating to the company’s business, industry, markets, customers, suppliers, products and services and competitors; and

•the commission of third-party market studies when appropriate.

The following chart illustrates the stages of Golub Capital’s evaluation and underwriting process:

ILLUSTRATIVE DEAL EVALUATION PROCESS

Execution. In executing transactions for us, GC Advisors utilizes the due diligence process developed by Golub Capital. Through a consistent approach to underwriting and careful attention to the details of execution, Golub Capital seeks to maintain discipline with respect to credit, pricing, and structure to ensure the ultimate success of the financing. Upon completion of due diligence, the investment team working on an investment delivers a final memorandum to GC Advisors’ investment committee. Once an investment has been approved by the investment committee, it moves through a series of steps generally, including initial documentation using standard document templates, final documentation, including resolution of business points and the execution of original documents held in escrow. Upon completion of final documentation, a loan is funded upon the execution of an investment committee memorandum by members of GC Advisors’ investment committee.

Monitoring. We view active portfolio monitoring as a vital part of our investment process. We consider board observation rights, where appropriate, regular dialogue with company management and sponsors and detailed, internally generated monitoring reports to be critical to our performance. Golub Capital has developed a monitoring template that is designed to reasonably ensure compliance with these standards. This template is used by GC Advisors as a tool to assess investment performance relative to our plan. In addition, our portfolio companies often rely on GC Advisors to provide them with financial and capital markets expertise.

As part of the monitoring process, GC Advisors regularly assesses the risk profile of each of our investments and rates each of them based on an internal system developed by Golub Capital and its affiliates. This system is not generally accepted in our industry or used by our competitors. It is based on the following categories, which we refer to as GC Advisors’ internal performance ratings:


Internal Performance Ratings
Rating						Definition
5						Involves the least amount of risk in our portfolio. The borrower is performing above expectations, and the trends and risk factors are generally favorable.
4						Involves an acceptable level of risk that is similar to the risk at the time of origination. The borrower is generally performing as expected, and the risk factors are neutral to favorable.
3						Involves a borrower performing below expectations and indicates that the loan’s risk has increased somewhat since origination. The borrower could be out of compliance with debt covenants; however, loan payments are generally not past due.
2						Involves a borrower performing materially below expectations and indicates that the loan’s risk has increased materially since origination. In addition to the borrower being generally out of compliance with debt covenants, loan payments could be past due (but generally not more than 180 days past due).
1						Involves a borrower performing substantially below expectations and indicates that the loan’s risk has substantially increased since origination. Most or all of the debt covenants are out of compliance and payments are substantially delinquent. Loans rated 1 are not anticipated to be repaid in full and we will reduce the fair market value of the loan to the amount we anticipate will be recovered.

Our internal performance ratings do not constitute any rating of investments by a nationally recognized statistical rating organization or represent or reflect any third-party assessment of any of our investments.

For any investment rated 1, 2 or 3, GC Advisors increases its monitoring intensity and prepares regular updates for the investment committee, summarizing current operating results and material impending events and suggesting recommended actions.

GC Advisors monitors and, when appropriate, changes the internal performance ratings assigned to each investment in our portfolio. In connection with our valuation process, GC Advisors and our board of directors review these internal performance ratings on a quarterly basis.

The following table shows the distribution of our investments on the 1 to 5 internal performance rating scale at fair value as of September 30, 2022 and 2021:


	September 30, 2022			September 30, 2021
Internal Performance Rating	Investments at Fair Value (In thousands)		Percentage of Total Investments	Investments at Fair Value (In thousands)		Percentage of Total Investments
5	$	252,572	4.6	$	499,241	10.2
4	4,725,988		86.8	3,951,870		80.7
3	398,625		7.3	395,208		8.1
2	69,171		1.3	47,836		1.0
1	—		—	731		0.0*
Total	$	5,446,356	100.0	$	4,894,886	100.0


*			Represents an amount less than 0.1%.

Investment Committee

The purpose of GC Advisors’ investment committee, which is comprised of officers of GC Advisors, is to evaluate and approve all of our investments, subject to the oversight of our board of directors. The investment committee process is intended to bring the diverse experience and perspectives of the committee’s members to the analysis and consideration of each investment. The investment committee currently consists of Lawrence E. Golub, David B. Golub, Andrew H. Steuerman, Gregory W. Cashman, Spyro G. Alexopoulos, Marc C. Robinson, Robert G. Tuchscherer and Jason J. Van Dussen. The investment committee serves to provide investment consistency and adherence to our core investment philosophy and policies. The investment committee also determines appropriate investment sizing and suggests ongoing monitoring requirements.

In addition to reviewing investments, investment committee meetings serve as a forum to discuss credit views and outlooks. Potential transactions and deal flow are reviewed on a regular basis. Members of the investment team are encouraged to share information and credit views with the investment committee early in their analysis. We believe this process improves the quality of the analysis and assists the deal team members to work more efficiently.

Each transaction is presented to the investment committee in a formal written report. Each investment opportunity generally receives the unanimous approval of the investment committee. Each member of the investment committee performs a similar role for other investment funds, accounts or other investment vehicles, collectively referred to as accounts, sponsored or managed by Golub Capital and its affiliates.

Investment Structure

Once GC Advisors determines that a prospective portfolio company is suitable for investment, GC Advisors typically works with the private equity sponsor, if applicable, the management of that company and its other capital providers to structure our investment. GC Advisors negotiates with these parties to agree on how our investment should be structured relative to other capital in the portfolio company’s capital structure.

GC Advisors structures our investments, which typically have maturities of three to seven years, as follows:

Senior Secured Loans. GC Advisors structures investments in senior secured loans, where we obtain security interests in the assets of the portfolio company that serve as collateral in support of the repayment of such loans. This collateral often takes the form of first-priority liens on the assets of the portfolio company. Our senior secured

loans often provide for moderate loan amortization in the early years of the loan, with the majority of the amortization deferred until loan maturity. Our senior secured loans may include a payment in kind, or PIK, feature.

One Stop Loans. GC Advisors structures our one stop loans as senior secured loans. A one stop loan is a single loan that blends the characteristics of traditional senior debt and traditional junior debt. The structure generally combines the stronger lender protections associated with first lien senior secured debt with the superior economics of junior capital. We obtain security interests in the assets of the portfolio company that serve as collateral in support of the repayment of these loans. This collateral often takes the form of first-priority liens on the assets of the portfolio company. In some cases, one stop loans are provided to borrowers experiencing high revenue growth supported by a high level of discretionary expenditures. As part of the underwriting of such loans and consistent with industry practice, we adjust our characterization of the earnings of such borrowers for a reduction or elimination of such discretionary expenses if appropriate. One stop loans typically provide for moderate loan amortization in the initial years of the facility, with the majority of the amortization deferred until loan maturity. Our one stop loans may include a PIK feature. One stop loans generally allow the borrower to make a large lump sum payment of principal at the end of the loan term and there is a risk of loss if the borrower is unable to pay the lump sum or refinance the amount owed at maturity. In many cases, we are the sole lender or we, together with our affiliates, are the sole lenders of a one stop loan, which can afford us additional influence over the borrower in terms of monitoring and, if necessary, remediating any underperformance.

One stop loans include loans to technology companies undergoing strong growth due to new services, increased adoption and/or entry into new markets. We refer to loans to these companies as recurring revenue loans.1 Other targeted characteristics of recurring revenue businesses include strong customer revenue retention rates, a diversified customer base and backing from growth equity or venture capital firms. In some cases, the borrower’s high revenue growth is supported by a high level of discretionary spending. As part of the underwriting of such loans and consistent with industry practice, we adjust our characterization of the earnings of such borrowers for a reduction or elimination of such discretionary expenses, if appropriate.

Second Lien Loans. GC Advisors structures these investments as subordinated, secured loans for which our claims on the related collateral are subordinated. We obtain security interests in the assets of the portfolio company that serve as collateral in support of the repayment of such loans. This collateral typically takes the form of second priority liens on the assets of a portfolio company. Second lien loans typically provide for minimal loan amortization in the initial years of the facility, with the majority of the amortization deferred until loan maturity.

Subordinated Loans. GC Advisors structures these investments as unsecured, subordinated loans that provide for relatively high, fixed interest rates and provide us with significant current interest income. These loans typically have interest-only payments (often representing a combination of cash pay and PIK interest) in the early years, with all or the majority of amortization of principal deferred until loan maturity. Subordinated loans generally allow the borrower to make a large lump sum payment of principal at the end of the loan term, and there is a risk of loss if the borrower is unable to pay the lump sum or refinance the amount owed at maturity.

Second lien loans and subordinated loans are generally more volatile than first lien, senior secured loans and involve a greater risk of loss of principal. In addition, the PIK feature of many subordinated loans, which effectively operates as negative amortization of loan principal, increases credit risk exposure over the life of the loan. Subordinated loans are more likely to include a PIK feature.

Equity Investments. GC Advisors structures these investments as direct or indirect minority equity co-investments in a portfolio company, usually on terms similar to the controlling private equity sponsor and in connection with our loan to such portfolio company. As a result, if a portfolio company appreciates in value, we can achieve additional investment return from these equity co-investments. GC Advisors can structure these equity co-investments to include provisions protecting our rights as a minority-interest holder, which could include a “put,” or right to sell such securities back to the issuer, upon the occurrence of specified events or demand and “piggyback” registration rights. However, because these equity co-investments will typically be in private companies, there is no guarantee that we, as a minority-interest holder, will control the timing or value of our realization of any gains on such investments.

1 As of November 10, 2022, we have updated terminology from “late stage lending” to “recurring revenue” to better reflect the commercial activity of our business.

Our equity co-investments will typically include customary “tag-along” and/or “drag-along” rights that will permit or require us to participate in a sale of such equity co-investments at such time as the majority owners, not GC Advisors, determine.

GC Advisors tailors the terms of each investment to the facts and circumstances of the transaction and the prospective portfolio company, negotiating a structure that protects our rights and manages our risk while creating incentives for the portfolio company to achieve its business plan and improve its operating results. GC Advisors seeks to limit the downside potential of our investments by:

•selecting investments that we believe have a very low probability of loss;

•requiring a total return on our investments that we believe will compensate us appropriately for credit risk; and

•negotiating covenants in connection with our investments that afford our portfolio companies as much flexibility in managing their businesses as possible, consistent with the preservation of our capital. Such restrictions could include affirmative and negative covenants, default penalties, lien protection, change of control provisions and board rights.

We expect to hold most of our investments to maturity or repayment, but we may sell some of our investments earlier if a liquidity event occurs, such as a sale, recapitalization or worsening of the credit quality of the portfolio company.

Investments

We seek to create a portfolio that includes primarily one stop and other senior secured loans by investing approximately $10.0 million to $75.0 million of capital, on average, in the securities of middle-market companies. Set forth below is a list of our ten largest portfolio company investments as of September 30, 2022, as well as the top ten industries in which we were invested as of September 30, 2022, calculated as a percentage of our total investments at fair value as of such date.


Portfolio Company	Investments at Fair Value (In thousands)		Percentage of Total Investments
GS Acquisitionco, Inc.	$	112,510	2.1	%
Diligent Corporation	111,803		2.0
Electrical Source Holdings, LLC	101,091		1.8
Inhabit IQ Inc.	82,274		1.5
Bullhorn, Inc.	81,359		1.5
Imperial Optical Midco Inc.	80,432		1.5
TWAS Holdings, LLC	79,956		1.5
GTIV, LLC	72,726		1.3
Bayshore Intermediate #2, L.P.	68,898		1.3
Transaction Data Systems, Inc.	64,949		1.2
	$	855,998	15.7	%


Industry	Investments at Fair Value (In thousands)		Percentage of Total Investments
Software	$	1,401,424	25.7	%
Healthcare Providers and Services	444,736		8.2
Specialty Retail	367,521		6.7
Automobiles	260,506		4.8
IT Services	249,240		4.6
Diversified Consumer Services	236,896		4.3
Insurance	226,158		4.2
Health Care Technology	200,658		3.7
Pharmaceuticals	150,263		2.8
Electronic Equipment, Instruments and Components	138,011		2.5
	$	3,675,413	67.5	%

Risk Factors [Table Text Block]

Risks Relating to Our Business and Structure

We are subject to risks associated with the current interest rate environment and to the extent we use debt to finance our investments, changes in interest rates will affect our cost of capital and net investment income.

To the extent we borrow money or issue debt securities or preferred stock to make investments, our net investment income will depend, in part, upon the difference between the rate at which we borrow funds or pay interest or dividends on such debt securities or preferred stock and the rate at which we invest these funds. In addition, many of our debt investments and borrowings have floating interest rates that reset on a periodic basis, and many of our investments are subject to interest rate floors. As a result, a change in market interest rates could have a material adverse effect on our net investment income. In periods of rising interest rates, our cost of funds will increase because the interest rates on the amounts borrowed under our credit facilities or certain other financing arrangements are typically floating, which could reduce our net investment income to the extent any debt investments have fixed interest rates, and the interest rate on investments with an interest rate floor above current levels will not increase until interest rates exceed the applicable floor.

We can use interest rate risk management techniques in an effort to limit our exposure to interest rate fluctuations. Such techniques could include various interest rate hedging activities to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act and applicable commodities laws. These activities could limit our ability to participate in the benefits of lower interest rates with respect to the hedged borrowings. Adverse developments resulting from changes in interest rates or hedging transactions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

You should also be aware that a rise in the general level of interest rates typically will lead to higher interest rates applicable to our debt investments, which could result in an increase of the amount of incentive fees payable to GC Advisors. In addition, a decline in the prices of the debt we own could adversely affect our net asset value. Also, an increase in interest rates available to investors could make an investment in our common stock less attractive if we are not able to increase our distribution rate, which could reduce the value of our common stock.

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

A number of entities compete with us to make the types of investments that we plan to make, and we believe that recent market trends, including sustained periods of low interest rates, have increased the number of competitors seeking to invest in loans to private, middle-market companies in the United States. We compete with public and private funds, commercial and investment banks, commercial financing companies and, to the extent they provide an alternative form of financing, private equity and hedge funds. Many of our competitors are substantially larger and have considerably greater financial, technical and marketing resources than we do. For example, we believe some of our competitors could have access to funding sources that are not available to us. In addition, some of our competitors could have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments, which could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments and establish more relationships than us. Furthermore, many of our competitors are not subject to the regulatory restrictions that the 1940 Act imposes on us as a business development company or the source of income, asset diversification and distribution requirements we must satisfy to maintain our qualification as a RIC. The competitive pressures we face could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. As a result of this competition, we can provide no assurance that we will be able to take advantage of attractive investment opportunities that arise from time to time, and we can provide no assurance that we will be able to identify and make investments that are consistent with our investment objective.

An excess of the amount of capital in the private debt markets and overall competition for loans could result in short term returns for us that are lower than our long-term targets. In the event these conditions continue for an extended amount of time, they could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Identifying, structuring and consummating investments involves competition among capital providers and market and transaction uncertainty. GC Advisors can provide no assurance that it will be able to identify a sufficient number of suitable investment opportunities or to avoid prepayment of existing investments to satisfy our investment objectives, including as necessary to effectively structure credit facilities or other forms of leverage.

The loan origination market is very competitive, which can result in loan terms that are more favorable to borrowers, and conversely less favorable to lenders, such as lower interest rates and fees, weaker borrower financial and other covenants, borrower rights to cure defaults, and other terms more favorable to borrowers than current or historical norms. Increased competition could cause us to make more loans that are “cov-lite” in nature and, in a distressed scenario, there can be no assurance that these loans will retain the same value as loans with a full package of covenants. As a result of these conditions, the market for leveraged loans could become less advantageous than expected for us, and this could increase default rates, decrease recovery rates or otherwise harm our returns. The risk of prepayment is also higher in the current competitive environment if borrowers are offered more favorable terms by other lenders. The financial markets have experienced substantial fluctuations in prices and liquidity for leveraged loans. Any further disruption in the credit and other financial markets could have substantial negative effects on general economic conditions, the availability of required capital for companies and the operating performance of such companies. These conditions also could result in increased default rates and credit downgrades, and affect the liquidity and pricing of the investments made by us. Conversely, periods of economic stability and increased competition among capital providers could increase the difficulty of locating investments that are desirable for us.

With respect to the investments we make, we do not seek to compete based primarily on the interest rates we offer, and we believe that some of our competitors could make loans with interest rates that will be lower than the rates we offer. In the secondary market for acquiring existing loans, we compete generally on the basis of pricing terms. With respect to all investments, we could lose some investment opportunities if we do not match our competitors’ pricing, terms and structure. However, if we match our competitors’ pricing, terms and structure, we could experience decreased net interest income, lower yields and increased risk of credit loss. We will also compete for investment opportunities with accounts managed or sponsored by GC Advisors or its affiliates. Although GC Advisors allocates opportunities in accordance with its allocation policy, allocations to such other accounts will reduce the amount and frequency of opportunities available to us and thus not necessarily be in the best interests of us and our securityholders. Moreover, the performance of investments will not be known at the time of allocation.

Rising interest rates could affect the value of our investments and make it more difficult for portfolio companies to make periodic payments on their loans.

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

We are subject to risks associated with the discontinuation of LIBOR, which will affect our cost of capital and net investment income.

In July 2017, the Financial Conduct Authority, or the FCA, announced its intention to cease sustaining the London Inter-Bank Offered Rate, or LIBOR, by the end of 2021.

As of January 1, 2022, USD LIBOR is available in five settings (overnight, one-month, three-month, six-month and 12-month). The ICE Benchmark Administration (“IBA”) has stated that it will cease to publish all remaining USD LIBOR settings immediately following their publication on June 30, 2023. As of January 1, 2022, all non-USD LIBOR reference rates in all settings ceased to be published.

In April 2018, the New York Federal Reserve Bank began publishing its alternative rate, the Secured Overnight Financing Rate, or SOFR. The Bank of England followed suit in April 2018 by publishing its proposed alternative rate, the Sterling Overnight Index Average, or SONIA. Each of SOFR and SONIA significantly differ from LIBOR, both in the actual rate and how it is calculated, and therefore it is unclear whether and when markets will adopt either of these rates as a widely accepted replacement for LIBOR.

As such, when LIBOR is discontinued, if a replacement rate is not widely agreed upon or if a replacement rate is significantly different from LIBOR, it could cause a disruption in the credit markets generally. Such a disruption could also negatively impact the market value and/or transferability of our portfolio company investments. Furthermore, disruptions related to loans and/or other debt financing securitizations (CLOs) in the marketplace could have a material adverse effect on the ability of GC Advisors or its affiliates to enter into loans in the future in accordance with our investment strategy and have a material adverse effect on us. We could also be materially and adversely impacted to the extent GC Advisors or its affiliates are unable to successfully implement an acceptable replacement rate in leverage utilized by us or if there is a prolonged period of mismatch on the interest rates payable on our leverage and our portfolio investments as a result of the discontinued publication of LIBOR results in a decrease in our net investment income and distributions we are able to pay to our stockholders.

We are dependent upon GC Advisors for our success and upon its access to the investment professionals and partners of Golub Capital and its affiliates.

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

The Staffing Agreement provides that Golub Capital LLC makes available to GC Advisors experienced investment professionals and provides access to the senior investment personnel of Golub Capital LLC for purposes of evaluating, negotiating, structuring, closing and monitoring our investments. We are not a party to the Staffing Agreement and cannot assure you that Golub Capital LLC will fulfill its obligations under the agreement. If Golub Capital LLC fails to perform, we cannot assure you that GC Advisors will enforce the Staffing Agreement, that such agreement will not be terminated by either party or that we will continue to have access to the investment professionals of Golub Capital LLC and its affiliates or their information and deal flow.

Our business model depends to a significant extent upon strong referral relationships with sponsors and investing in companies backed by private equity sponsors. Any inability of GC Advisors to maintain or develop these relationships, or the failure of these relationships to generate investment opportunities, could adversely affect our business.

GC Advisors is highly dependent on relationships with private equity sponsors in connection with the sourcing of investments. If private equity sponsors find new sources of debt capital that are more advantageous to them, or if GC Advisors suffers reputational harm such that it becomes a less attractive source of capital for private equity sponsors, GC Advisors could have difficulty finding and sourcing new middle-market debt investments. Private equity sponsors could experience financial distress, which could be related or unrelated to the portfolio companies to which we have exposure. Once in financial distress, such sponsors likely would be unable to provide the same level of

managerial, operating or financial support to such portfolio companies, resulting in an increased risk of default or inability to repay remaining principal at maturity.

From time to time, we expect to have direct or indirect exposure to companies controlled by private equity sponsors in which the sponsors have completed one or more dividend recapitalizations, thereby allowing the private equity sponsor to substantially reduce or eliminate its net investment in an underlying portfolio company. These investments generally present different investment characteristics to us than investments where a private equity sponsor retains a significant net contributed capital position in the company. These investments could experience a higher rate of default. Even when a default does not occur, private equity sponsors could be less willing to provide ongoing financial, managerial or operating support to a portfolio company after it has received one or more capital distributions on its investment.

We believe that purchase price multiples of companies (as measured by the price paid by a private equity sponsor to purchase a company divided by the company’s trailing twelve-month earnings) to which we have direct or indirect exposure are close to all-time highs. When considering the appropriate amount of financing to provide a prospective borrower, GC Advisors considers the value cushion as measured by the difference between the enterprise value of the company and the total amount of financing. If market purchase price multiples decline or if a portfolio company experiences financial distress, the value cushion supporting our investment could deteriorate and the investment could become impaired, resulting in losses for us. The risk of such losses for us are greater during periods when purchase price multiples are close to all-time highs.

We can provide no assurance that we will be able to replicate the historical results achieved by other entities managed or sponsored by members of GC Advisors’ investment committee, or by GC Advisors or its affiliates.

Investors are cautioned that past investment performance of similar portfolios and other investment vehicles managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates is not indicative of how we will perform. Our investments could differ from some existing accounts and funds that are or have been sponsored or managed by members of GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or affiliates of GC Advisors. Investors in our securities are not acquiring an interest in any accounts that are or have been sponsored or managed by members of GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or affiliates of GC Advisors. We often co-invest in portfolio investments with other accounts sponsored or managed by members of GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or its affiliates. Such investments are subject to regulatory limitations and approvals by directors who are not “interested persons,” as defined in the 1940 Act. We can offer no assurance, however, that we will obtain such approvals or develop opportunities that comply with such limitations. We also cannot assure you that we will replicate the historical results achieved by us or by members of the investment committee, and we caution you that our investment returns could be substantially lower than the returns achieved in prior periods. Additionally, all or a portion of the prior results were achieved in particular market conditions that might never be repeated. Moreover, current or future market volatility and regulatory uncertainty can have an adverse impact on our future performance.

Our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows depend on our ability to manage our business effectively.

Our ability to achieve our investment objective depends on our ability to manage our business and to grow. This depends, in turn, on GC Advisors’ ability to identify, invest in and monitor companies that meet our investment criteria. The achievement of our investment objectives on a cost-effective basis depends upon GC Advisors’ execution of our investment process, its ability to provide competent, attentive and efficient services to us and, to a lesser extent, our access to financing on acceptable terms. GC Advisors has substantial responsibilities under the Investment Advisory Agreement, as well as responsibilities in connection with the management of other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors, members of GC Advisors’ investment committee or Golub Capital LLC. The personnel of the Administrator and its affiliates could be called upon to provide managerial assistance to our portfolio companies. These activities could distract them or slow our rate of investment. Any failure to manage our business and our future growth effectively could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

There are significant potential conflicts of interest as a result of our arrangements with GC Advisors and its affiliates and GC Advisors’ investment committee that could affect our investment returns.

As a result of our arrangements with GC Advisors and its affiliates and GC Advisors’ investment committee, there will be times when GC Advisors or such persons have interests that differ from those of our security holders, giving rise to a conflict of interest, many of which are described in the following risk factors. GC Advisors attempts to

identify, monitor and mitigate conflicts of interest. Further, GC Advisors has implemented policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure its clients are treated fairly and equitably over time. GC Advisors believes that these factors, together with Golub Capital’s commitment to put investors first, effectively mitigate the risks associated with such conflicts of interest. However, it can be difficult to ensure that conflicts of interest do not adversely affect us.

There are conflicts related to the obligations of GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or its affiliates have to other clients and conflicts related to fees and expenses of such other clients.

The members of GC Advisors’ investment committee serve as officers, directors or principals of entities that operate in the same or a related line of business as we do or of accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates. Currently, our directors and certain of our officers also serve as directors and officers of GBDC 3, GDLC, GBDC 4 and GDLCU, each a closed-end, non-diversified management investment company that has also elected to be regulated as a business development company under the 1940 Act. Similarly, GC Advisors and its affiliates manage other clients with similar or competing investment objectives.

GC Advisors’ management team will share its time and attention between us and other investment vehicles and accounts. Neither we nor any investor in us unaffiliated with GC Advisors will have any rights in or to independent ventures of GC Advisors or its affiliates or in the income or profits derived therefrom. GC Advisors does not expect to have any dedicated personnel who spend all or substantially all of their time managing our investing activities.

In serving in these multiple capacities, GC Advisors and its personnel have obligations to other clients or investors in those entities, the fulfillment of which could conflict with the best interests of us or our stockholders. Economic disruption and uncertainty precipitated by certain events, including for example the COVID-19 pandemic, could require GC Advisors and its affiliates to devote additional time and focus to existing portfolio companies in which other funds and accounts managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates hold investments. The allocation of time and focus by personnel of GC Advisors and its affiliates to existing portfolio company investments held by other funds and accounts could reduce the time that such individuals have to spend on our investing activities.

Our investment objective overlaps with the investment objectives of other affiliated accounts. For example, GC Advisors and its affiliates currently manage GBDC 3, GDLC, GBDC 4, GDLCU and multiple private funds and separate accounts that pursue an investment strategy similar to ours, some of which will seek additional capital from time to time. We compete with these and other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates for capital and investment opportunities. As a result, GC Advisors and its affiliates face conflicts in the allocation of investment opportunities among us and other accounts advised by or affiliated with GC Advisors and, in certain circumstances, in the timing of the sale of an investment. Certain of these accounts provide for higher management or incentive fees, allow GC Advisors to recover greater expense reimbursements or overhead allocations, and/or permit GC Advisors and its affiliates to receive higher origination and other transaction fees, all of which could contribute to this conflict of interest and create an incentive for GC Advisors to favor such other accounts. For example, the 1940 Act restricts GC Advisors from receiving more than a 1% fee in connection with loans that we acquire, or originate, a limitation that does not exist for certain other accounts. GC Advisors seeks to allocate investment opportunities among eligible accounts in a manner that is fair and equitable over time and consistent with its allocation policy. However, we can offer no assurance that such opportunities will be allocated to us fairly or equitably in the short-term or over time, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to participate in all investment opportunities that are suitable to us. Furthermore, because allocations under GC Advisors’ allocation policy are based on total capital of the relevant investing funds, including us, we expect to receive smaller allocations relative to larger accounts, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows during such ramp-up period. With respect to the sale of investments, the sale of an investment by one account advised by GC Advisors or its affiliates could potentially adversely affect the market value of the interests in such investment that continue to be held by other accounts, including us.

GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or its affiliates could, from time to time, possess material non-public information, limiting our investment discretion.

Principals of GC Advisors and its affiliates and members of GC Advisors’ investment committee could serve as directors of, or in a similar capacity with, companies in which we invest, the securities of which are purchased or sold on our behalf. 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 could have an adverse effect on us.

Our management and incentive fee structure creates incentives for GC Advisors that are not fully aligned with the interests of our stockholders and could induce GC Advisors to make certain investments, including speculative investments.

In the course of our investing activities, we pay management and incentive fees to GC Advisors. The management fee is based on our average adjusted gross assets and the incentive fee is computed and paid on income and capital gains, both of which include leverage. As a result, investors in our common stock will invest on a “gross” basis and receive distributions on a “net” basis after expenses, resulting in a lower rate of return than one could achieve through direct investments. Because these fees are based on the fair value of our average adjusted gross assets, GC Advisors benefits when we incur debt or use leverage. The use of leverage increases the likelihood of default on our debt or other leverage, which would disfavor our securityholders.

Additionally, the incentive fee payable by us to GC Advisors could create an incentive for GC Advisors to cause us to realize capital gains or losses that are not in the best interests of us or our stockholders. Under the incentive fee structure, GC Advisors benefits when we recognize capital gains and, because GC Advisors determines when an investment is sold, GC Advisors controls the timing of the recognition of such capital gains. Our board of directors is charged with protecting our stockholders’ interests by monitoring how GC Advisors addresses these and other conflicts of interest associated with its management services and compensation.

The part of the management and incentive fees payable to GC Advisors that relates to our net investment income is computed and paid on income that includes 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, zero coupon securities, and other deferred interest instruments. This compensation arrangement creates an incentive for GC Advisors to make investments on our behalf that are riskier or more speculative, including debt financings that provide for deferred interest, rather than current cash payments of interest. Under these investments, we accrue the interest over the life of the investment but do not receive the cash income from the investment until the end of the term. Our net investment income used to calculate the income portion of our investment fee, however, includes accrued interest. GC Advisors has an incentive to invest in deferred interest securities in circumstances where it would not have done so but for the opportunity to continue to earn the fees even when the issuers of the deferred interest securities would not be able to make actual cash payments to us on such securities. This risk could be increased because GC Advisors is not obligated to reimburse us for any fees received even if we subsequently incur losses or never receive in cash the deferred income that was previously accrued.

Our securities could be purchased by GC Advisors or its affiliates.

Affiliates of GC Advisors have purchased, and GC Advisors and its affiliates in the future expect to purchase, certain of our securities. The purchase of our securities, including shares of our common stock, by GC Advisors and its affiliates could create certain risks. For example, GC Advisors and its affiliates could have an interest in disposing of our securities at a date that differs from that of our other investors so as to recover their investment in such securities.

The valuation process for certain of our portfolio holdings creates a conflict of interest.

The majority of our portfolio investments are in the form of securities that are not publicly traded. As a result, our board of directors determines the fair value of these securities in good faith. Valuations of private investments and private companies require judgment, are inherently uncertain, often fluctuate and are frequently based on estimates. It is possible that determinations of fair value will differ materially from the values that would have been used if an active market for these investments existed. If determinations regarding the fair value of investments were materially higher than the values that were ultimately realized upon the sale of such investments, the returns to our investors would be adversely affected.

In connection with that determination, investment professionals from GC Advisors will provide our board of directors with portfolio company valuations based upon the most recent portfolio company financial statements available and projected financial results of each portfolio company. The participation of GC Advisors’ investment professionals in our valuation process, and the indirect pecuniary interest in GC Advisors by Lawrence E. Golub and David B. Golub, results in a conflict of interest as GC Advisors’ management fee is based, in part, on our average adjusted gross assets and our capital gain and subordinated liquidation incentive fees are based, in part, on unrealized gains and losses.

Conflicts related to other arrangements with GC Advisors or its affiliates.

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

Our ability to enter into transactions with our affiliates will be restricted, which could limit the scope of investments 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, five percent or more of our outstanding voting securities is our affiliate for purposes of the 1940 Act, and we are generally prohibited from buying or selling any security from or to such affiliate, absent the prior approval of our independent directors. GC Advisors and its affiliates are considered our affiliates for such purposes. The 1940 Act also prohibits certain “joint” transactions with certain of our affiliates, which could include investments in the same portfolio company, without prior approval of our independent directors and, in some cases, the SEC. We are prohibited from buying or selling any security from or to, among others, any person who owns more than 25% of our voting securities or certain of that person’s affiliates, or entering into prohibited joint transactions with such persons, absent the prior approval of the SEC.

We can, however, invest alongside GC Advisors’ and its affiliates’ other clients in certain circumstances where doing so is consistent with applicable law, SEC staff, or Staff, interpretations and any co-investment exemptive relief order from the SEC. For example, we can invest alongside such accounts consistent with guidance promulgated by the Staff permitting us and such other accounts to purchase interests in a single class of privately placed securities so long as certain conditions are met, including that GC Advisors, acting on our behalf and on behalf of its other clients, negotiates no term other than price. We can also invest alongside GC Advisors’ other clients as otherwise permissible under regulatory guidance, applicable regulations and GC Advisors’ allocation policy. Under this allocation policy, GC Advisors will determine the amount of any proposed investment to be made by us and similar eligible accounts. We expect that these determinations will be made similarly for other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates. If sufficient securities or loan amounts are available to satisfy our and each such account’s proposed investment, the opportunity will be allocated in accordance with GC Advisors’ pre-transaction determination. Where there is an insufficient amount of an investment opportunity to fully satisfy us and other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates, the allocation policy further provides that allocations among us and other accounts will generally be made pro rata based on the relative capital available for investment of each of us and such other eligible accounts, subject to minimum and maximum investment size limits. In situations in which co-investment with other entities sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates is not permitted or appropriate, GC Advisors will need to decide whether we or such other entity or entities will proceed with the investment. GC Advisors will make these determinations based on its policies and procedures, which generally require that such opportunities be offered to eligible accounts on a basis that will be fair and equitable over time, including, for example, through random or rotational methods. However, we can offer no assurance that investment opportunities will be allocated to us fairly or equitably in the short-term or over time.

On occasion, an investment opportunity will be too large to satisfy our desired position size and that of other investment funds and accounts managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates. GC Advisors can provide no assurance that it will be able to identify counterparties to participate in such investment opportunities, and could be required to decline to make investments where it does not believe that it can successfully sell some of the investment opportunity to another market participant.

In situations in which co-investment with other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates is not permitted or appropriate, such as when, in the absence of the exemptive relief described below, we and such other accounts cannot make investments in the same issuer or where the different investments could be expected to result in a conflict between our interest and those of other accounts, GC Advisors needs to decide whether we or such other accounts will proceed with such investments. GC Advisors makes these determinations based on its policies and procedures, which generally require that such investment opportunities be offered to eligible accounts on a basis that is fair and equitable over time, including, for example, through random or rotational methods.

Moreover, we generally will be unable to invest in an issuer in which an account sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates has previously invested. Similar restrictions limit our ability to transact business with our officers or directors or their affiliates. These restrictions limit the scope of investment opportunities that would otherwise be available to us.

We, GC Advisors and certain other funds and accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates, have received exemptive relief from the SEC to permit greater flexibility to negotiate the terms of co-investments if our board of directors determines that it would be advantageous for us to co-invest with other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates in a manner consistent with our investment objectives, positions, policies, strategies and restrictions as well as regulatory requirements and other pertinent factors. Under the terms of this exemptive relief, a “required majority” (as defined in Section 57(o) of the 1940 Act) of our independent directors is required to make certain conclusions in connection with a co-investment transaction, including that (1) the terms of the proposed transaction are reasonable and fair to us and our stockholders and do not involve overreaching of us or our stockholders on the part of any person concerned and (2) the transaction is consistent with the interests of our stockholders and is consistent with our investment strategies and policies. We believe that co-investment by us and accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates will afford us additional investment opportunities and the ability to achieve greater diversification. There could be many follow-on opportunities available to other entities advised by GC Advisors and its affiliates that are unavailable to us due to the limitations of the exemptive relief granted to GC Advisors and its affiliates.

Although the terms of the exemptive relief require that GC Advisors will be given the opportunity to cause us to participate in certain transactions originated by affiliates of GC Advisors, GC Advisors could determine that we not participate in those transactions and for certain other transactions (as set forth in certain criteria approved by our board of directors) GC Advisors may not have the opportunity to cause us to participate. In addition, even if we and any such other entities sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates invest in the same securities or loans, conflicts of interest could still arise. For example, it is possible that, as a result of legal, tax, regulatory, accounting, political or other considerations, the terms of such investment (and divestment thereof) (including with respect to price and timing) for us and such other entities advised by GC Advisors and its affiliates could differ. Additionally, we and such other entities advised by GC Advisors and its affiliates will generally have different investment periods and/or investment objectives (including return profiles) and, as a result, have conflicting goals with respect to the price and timing of disposition opportunities. As such, to the extent permissible under applicable law and any applicable order issued by the SEC, we and such other entities could dispose of co-investments at different times and on different terms.

We have entered into the Adviser Revolver resulting in a conflict of interest between GC Advisors’ obligation to act in its own best interest and in our best interest.

We have entered into the Adviser Revolver, an unsecured revolving loan agreement with GC Advisors. GC Advisors has a conflict of interest between its obligation to act in our best interest and its own best interest. Any such loans or advances made to us under the Adviser Revolver will be consistent with applicable law, GC Advisors’ fiduciary obligations to act in our best interests, our investment objectives, and the asset coverage ratio requirements under the 1940 Act. The terms associated with any such loans from GC Advisors or its affiliates, including the interest charged, shall, in the aggregate, be no more favorable to GC Advisors or its affiliates than could be obtained in an arm’s length transaction but will not necessarily be on the same terms or at the same interest rate charged by GC Advisors to other funds that it manages. Neither GC Advisors nor any of its affiliates is obligated to extend any such loans to us and such loans will not necessarily be made available to us in the same amounts or on the same economic terms as are made available to other funds advised by GC Advisors or its affiliates, or at all. In the event that we are required to find third-party financing in place of or in addition to loans from GC Advisors and its affiliates, such third-party financing could be at less favorable economic terms than the loans from GC Advisors and its affiliates, which could reduce our returns.

GC Advisors could make certain investment decisions for the purpose of receiving transaction fees.

In connection with investments made by us, GC Advisors and its affiliates often receive origination, commitment, documentation, structuring, facility, monitoring, amendment, refinancing, administrative agent and/or other fees from portfolio investments in which we invest or propose to invest. The potential for GC Advisors and its affiliates to receive such economic benefits creates conflicts of interest as GC Advisors and its affiliates have an incentive to invest in portfolio investments that provide such benefits. Similarly, GC Advisors and its affiliates could be

incentivized to waive certain fees in connection with a refinancing in order to receive certain fees in the new transaction, including when we and/or other accounts advised by GC Advisors and its affiliates can participate in the original or refinanced investment, or both.

Reductions, waivers or absorptions of fees and costs can temporarily result in higher returns to investors than they would otherwise receive if full fees and costs were charged.

GC Advisors and its affiliates are permitted to reduce, waive or absorb some of the fees or costs otherwise due by us. While this activity can be seen as friendly to investors, reductions, waivers and absorptions of fees and costs result in higher returns to investors than such investors would receive if full fees and costs were charged. There is no guarantee that any reductions, waivers or absorptions will occur in the future, and any reductions, waivers and absorptions are entirely at the discretion of GC Advisors or the Administrator, as applicable.

GC Advisors could prioritize its relationship with a borrower or private equity sponsor instead of seeking the most advantageous terms for our investments.

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

GC Advisors operates in multiple business lines and could pursue additional business lines, which could create a conflict of interest in the allocation of its time and focus.

While Golub Capital maintains two major business lines, it has explored and will continue to explore opportunities outside these business lines. Such activity could adversely affect us. These risks include reputational damage, loss of management attention and time due to multiple constraints, regulatory sanctions, adverse impact to business relationships, increased competition of capital allocations, and expansion of potential risks to GC Advisors’ business as a whole outside those previously disclosed. New business lines could also exacerbate existing conflicts of interest and raise new conflicts.

Investors should be aware that other lines of business at Golub Capital could indirectly affect their investment in us, even if we are not directly exposed to those lines of business. While GC Advisors and its affiliates keep each investment client as a legally distinct entity or account, there are risks that a separate business line suffering a material adverse condition could affect other business lines to which we have direct exposure, and consequently, our performance. These risks could materially affect GC Advisors’ business as a whole, and include loss of reputation, loss of management time and focus, regulatory sanctions, and adverse impact to business relationships.

Golub Capital could pursue strategic transactions, which could create a conflict of interest in the allocation of

GC Advisors’ time and focus.

Golub Capital could engage in any number of strategic transactions, including acquisitions, divestitures, joint ventures, new business formations, restructurings, launches of new investment fund strategies and structures or even a fund that pursues a strategy that is different than what Golub Capital has historically focused on, such as a private equity fund of funds. Additionally, Golub Capital could sell stakes in itself or in its affiliates or acquire stakes in other asset managers, service providers or investment vehicles, including to or from investors in the Company. In August 2018, Golub Capital sold a passive, non-voting minority stake in its management companies. While Golub Capital has not subsequently engaged in any material strategic transactions, it could do so in the future.

Strategic transactions are subject to many risks, such as the risk that the transaction might not be successful in meeting its strategic goals, or the risk that the transaction might divert the attention of GC Advisors from our core

investment activities, or the risk that the management team will not be successful in developing and operating the underlying business involved in the strategic transaction.

We and GC Advisors could be the target of litigation or regulatory investigations.

We as well as GC Advisors and its affiliates participate in a highly regulated industry and are each subject to regulatory examinations in the ordinary course of business. There can be no assurance that we and GC Advisors and/or any of its affiliates will avoid regulatory investigation and possible enforcement actions stemming therefrom. GC Advisors is a registered investment adviser and, as such, is subject to the provisions of the Investment Advisers Act. We and GC Advisors are each, from time to time, subject to formal and informal examinations, investigations, inquiries, audits and reviews from numerous regulatory authorities both in response to issues and questions raised in such examinations or investigations and in connection with the changing priorities of the applicable regulatory authorities across the market in general.

There is also a material risk that applicable governmental authorities and regulators in the United States and other jurisdictions will continue to adopt new laws or regulations (such as tax, privacy and anti-money laundering laws or regulations), or change existing laws or regulations, or enhance the interpretation or enforcement of existing laws and regulations, in each case in a manner that is burdensome for GC Advisors and for us. Any such events or changes could occur during the term of the Company and could adversely affect us or GC Advisors and GC Advisors’ ability to operate and/or pursue its management strategies on behalf of us. Further, any such events or changes could adversely affect obligors’ ability to make payments on loans to which we are directly or indirectly exposed or otherwise adversely affect the value of such investments. Such risks are often difficult or impossible to predict, avoid or mitigate in advance. As a result, there can be no assurance that any of the foregoing will not have an adverse impact on the business of GC Advisors and/or any of its affiliates or our performance. From time to time, GC Advisors and its affiliates could take certain actions that they determine are necessary, appropriate or in the best interests of us and our stockholders, taken as a whole, to mitigate the application or impact of certain laws or regulations.

GC Advisors, its affiliates and/or any of their respective principals and employees could also be named as defendants in, or otherwise become involved in, litigation. Litigation and regulatory actions can be time-consuming and expensive and can lead to unexpected losses, which expenses and losses are often subject to indemnification by us. Legal proceedings could continue without resolution for long periods of time and their outcomes, which could materially and adversely affect the value of us or the ability of GC Advisors to manage us, are often impossible to anticipate. GC Advisors would likely be required to expend significant resources responding to any litigation or regulatory action related to it, and these actions could be a distraction to the activities of GC Advisors.

Our investment activities are subject to the normal risks of becoming involved in litigation by third parties. This risk would be somewhat greater if we were to exercise control or significant influence over a portfolio company’s direction. The expense of defending against claims by third parties and paying any amounts pursuant to settlements or judgments would, absent willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of the duties involved by GC Advisors, the Administrator, or any of our officers, be borne by us and would reduce our net assets. GC Advisors and others are indemnified by us in connection with such litigation, subject to certain conditions.

We will be subject to corporate-level income tax if we are unable to qualify as a RIC.

In order to qualify as a RIC under the Code, we must meet certain source-of-income, asset diversification and distribution requirements. The distribution requirement for a RIC is satisfied if we distribute to our stockholders dividends for U.S. federal income tax purposes of an amount generally at least equal to 90% of our investment company taxable income, which is generally our net ordinary income plus the excess of our net short-term capital gains in excess of our net long-term capital losses, determined without regard to any deduction for dividends paid, to our stockholders each taxable year. We are subject, to the extent we use debt financing, to certain asset coverage ratio requirements under the 1940 Act and financial covenants under loan and credit agreements that could, under certain circumstances, restrict us from making distributions necessary to qualify as a RIC. If we are unable to obtain cash from other sources, we could fail to qualify as a RIC and, thus, could be subject to corporate-level income tax irrespective of the level of distributions paid to our stockholders. To qualify as a RIC, we must also meet certain asset diversification requirements at the end of each quarter of our taxable year. Failure to meet these requirements could result in our having to dispose of certain investments quickly in order to prevent the loss of our qualification as a RIC. Because most of our investments are in private or thinly traded public companies, any such dispositions could be made at disadvantageous prices and could result in substantial losses. If we fail to qualify as a RIC for any

reason and become subject to corporate-level income tax, the resulting corporate taxes could substantially reduce our net assets, the amount of income available for distributions to stockholders and the amount of our distributions and the amount of funds available for new investments. Such a failure would have a material adverse effect on us and our securityholders. See “Business — Taxation as a RIC.”

We could need to raise additional capital to grow because we must distribute most of our income.

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

We could have difficulty paying our required distributions if we recognize income before, or without, receiving cash representing such income.

For U.S. federal income tax purposes, we include in income certain amounts that we have not yet received in cash, such as the accretion of original issue discount. This could arise if we receive warrants in connection with the making of a loan and in other circumstances, or through contracted PIK interest, which represents contractual interest added to the loan balance and due at the end of the loan term. Such original issue discount, which could be significant relative to our overall investment activities, or increases in loan balances as a result of contractual PIK arrangements, is included in income before we receive any corresponding cash payments. We also could be required to include in income certain other amounts that we do not receive in cash.

That part of the incentive fee payable by us that relates to our net investment income is computed and paid on income that includes interest that has been accrued but not yet received in cash, such as market discount, debt instruments with PIK interest, preferred stock with PIK dividends and zero coupon securities. It is possible that accrued interest or other income previously used in the calculation of the incentive fee will become uncollectible, and GC Advisors has no obligation to refund any fees it received in respect of such accrued income.

Since in certain cases we could recognize income before or without receiving cash representing such income, we could have difficulty meeting the requirement to distribute dividends for U.S. federal income tax purposes of an amount generally at least equal to 90% of our investment company taxable income, determined without regard to any deduction for dividends paid, to our stockholders in order to maintain our qualification as a RIC. In such a case, we could have to sell some of our investments at times we would not consider advantageous, raise additional debt or equity capital or reduce new investment originations to meet these distribution requirements. If we are not able to obtain such cash from other sources, we could fail to qualify as a RIC and thus be subject to corporate-level income tax. See “Business — Taxation as a RIC.”

The tax treatment of a non-U.S. stockholder in its jurisdiction of tax residence will depend entirely on the laws of such jurisdiction and could vary considerably from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

Depending on (1) the laws of such non-U.S. stockholder’s jurisdiction of tax residence, (2) how we are treated in such jurisdiction, and (3) our activities, an investment in us could result in such non-U.S. stockholder recognizing adverse tax consequences in its jurisdiction of tax residence, including with respect to any generally required or additional tax filings and/or additional disclosure required in such filings in relation to the treatment for tax purposes in the relevant jurisdiction of an interest in us and/or of distributions from us and any uncertainties arising in that respect (the Company not being established under the laws of the relevant jurisdiction), the possibility of taxable income significantly in excess of cash distributed to a non-U.S. stockholder, and possibly in excess of our actual economic income, the possibilities of losing deductions or the ability to utilize tax basis and of sums invested being returned in the form of taxable income or gains, and the possibility of being subject to tax at unfavorable tax rates. A

non-U.S. stockholder could also be subject to restrictions on the use of its share of our deductions and losses in its jurisdiction of tax residence. Each stockholder is urged to consult its own tax advisers with respect to the tax and tax filing consequences, if any, in its jurisdiction of tax residence of an investment in us, as well as any other jurisdiction in which such prospective investor is subject to taxation.

Regulations governing our operation as a business development company affect our ability to, and the way in which we, raise additional capital. As a business development company, the necessity of raising additional capital exposes us to risks, including the typical risks associated with leverage.

We could 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 current provisions of the 1940 Act, we are permitted as a business development company to issue senior securities in amounts such that our asset coverage, as defined in the 1940 Act, equals the percentage of gross assets less all liabilities and indebtedness not represented by senior securities after each issuance of senior securities that is applicable to us under Section 61 of the 1940 Act. Following the approval of our stockholders of the reduced asset coverage requirements in Section 61(a)(2) of the 1940 Act and subject to our compliance with certain disclosure requirements, effective as of February 6, 2019, under the provisions of the 1940 Act, we are permitted as a business development company to issue senior securities in amounts such that its asset coverage, as defined in the 1940 Act, equals at least 150% of gross assets less all liabilities and indebtedness not represented by senior securities, after each issuance of senior securities. Under the reduced 150% asset coverage requirement, we are permitted under the 1940 Act to have a ratio of total consolidated assets to outstanding indebtedness of 2:1 as compared to a maximum of 1:1 under the 200% asset coverage requirement that would otherwise apply to a business development company. If the value of our assets declines, we could be unable to satisfy this ratio. If that happens, we could 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 activities could be disadvantageous. This could have a material adverse effect on our operations, and we may not be able to make distributions in an amount sufficient to be subject to tax as a RIC, or at all. Also, any amounts that we use to service our indebtedness would not be available for distributions to our common stockholders. If we issue senior securities, we will be exposed to typical risks associated with leverage, including an increased risk of loss. As of September 30, 2022, we had $3.1 billion of outstanding borrowings, including $408.2 million and $546.0 million outstanding under the 2018 Debt Securitization and the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization, respectively.

In the absence of an event of default, no person or entity from which we borrow money has a veto right or voting power over our ability to set policy, make investment decisions or adopt investment strategies. If we issue preferred stock, which is another form of leverage, the preferred stock would rank “senior” to common stock in our capital structure, preferred stockholders would have separate voting rights on certain matters and could 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 could involve a premium price for holders of our common stock or otherwise be in the best interest of our common stockholders. Holders of our common stock will directly or indirectly bear all of the costs associated with offering and servicing any preferred stock that we issue. In addition, any interests of preferred stockholders would not necessarily align with the interests of holders of our common stock and the rights of holders of shares of preferred stock to receive distributions would be senior to those of holders of shares of our common stock. We do not, however, anticipate issuing preferred stock in the next 12 months.

We are not generally able to issue and sell our common stock at a price below net asset value per share. We could, 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 of directors determines that such sale is in the best interests of us and our stockholders, and, in certain cases, if our stockholders approve such sale. In any such case, the price at which our securities are to be issued and sold cannot be less than a price that, in the determination of our board of directors, closely approximates the market value of such securities (less any distributing commission or discount). If we raise additional funds by issuing common stock or securities convertible into, or exchangeable for, our common stock, then the percentage ownership of our stockholders at that time would decrease, and holders of our common stock could experience dilution.

We finance our investments with borrowed money, which will accelerate and increase the potential for gain or loss on amounts invested and could increase the risk of investing in us.

The use of leverage accelerates and increases the potential for gain or loss on amounts invested. The use of leverage is generally considered a speculative investment technique and increases the risks associated with investing in our securities. The amount of leverage that we employ will depend on GC Advisors’ and our board of directors’ assessment of market and other factors at the time of any proposed borrowing. While we intend to target a leverage ratio of 0.85x to 1.25x debt-to-equity, this limitation will not prevent us from incurring additional leverage or otherwise exceeding such leverage ratio to the full extent permissible under the 1940 Act, including during periods when we are experiencing unusual market volatility or other unexpected conditions.

We cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain credit at all or on terms acceptable to us. While leverage presents opportunities for increasing our total return, it also has the potential to increase losses. Accordingly, any event that adversely affects the value of an investment would be magnified to the extent we use leverage. Such events could result in a substantial loss to us, which would be greater than if leverage had not been used. In addition, our investment objectives are dependent on the continued availability of leverage at attractive relative interest rates.

We could issue senior debt securities to banks, insurance companies and other lenders. Lenders of these senior securities will have fixed dollar claims on our assets that are superior to the claims of our common stockholders, and we would expect such lenders to seek recovery against our assets in the event of a default. We have the ability to pledge up to 100% of our assets and can grant a security interest in all of our assets under the terms of any debt instruments we could enter into with lenders. The terms of our existing indebtedness require us to comply with certain financial and operational covenants, and we expect similar covenants in future debt instruments. Failure to comply with such covenants could result in a default under the applicable credit facility or debt instrument if we are unable to obtain a waiver from the applicable lender or holder, and such lender or holder could accelerate repayment under such indebtedness and negatively affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. In addition, under the terms of any credit facility or other debt instrument we enter into, we are likely to be required by its terms to use the net proceeds of any investments that we sell to repay a portion of the amount borrowed under such facility or instrument before applying such net proceeds to any other uses. If the value of our assets decreases, leveraging would cause our net asset value to decline more sharply than it otherwise would have had we not used leverage, thereby magnifying losses or eliminating our equity stake in a leveraged investment. Similarly, any decrease in our net investment income will cause our net income to decline more sharply than it would have had we not borrowed. Such a decline would also negatively affect our ability to make distributions on our common stock or any outstanding preferred stock. Our ability to service our debt depends largely on our financial performance and is subject to prevailing economic conditions and competitive pressures. Our common stockholders bear the burden of any increase in our expenses as a result of our use of leverage, including interest expenses and any increase in the base management fee payable to GC Advisors.

Following the approval of our stockholders of the reduced asset coverage requirements in Section 61(a)(2) of the 1940 Act and subject to our compliance with certain disclosure requirements, effective as of February 6, 2019, the reduced asset coverage requirement permits us to double the maximum amount of leverage that we are permitted to incur, which provides us with increased investment flexibility, but also increases our risks related to leverage.

The following table illustrates the effect of leverage on returns from an investment in our common stock as of September 30, 2022, assuming various annual returns, net of expenses. The calculations in the table below are hypothetical and actual returns could be higher or lower than those appearing in the table below.


	Assumed Return on Our Portfolio (Net of Expenses)
	-10%	-5%	0%	5%	10%
Corresponding return to common stockholder(1)	-26.03%	-14.87%	-3.70%	7.46%	18.63%

(1)Assumes $5.7 billion in total assets, $3.1 billion in debt and secured borrowings outstanding and $2.5 billion in net assets as of September 30, 2022 and an effective annual interest rate of 3.04% as of September 30, 2022.

Based on our outstanding indebtedness of $3.1 billion as of September 30, 2022 and the effective annual interest rate, which includes amortization of debt financing costs, amortization of discounts on notes issued and non-usage facility fees, of 3.04% as of that date, our investment portfolio would have been required to experience an annual return of at least 3.02% to cover annual interest payments on the outstanding debt.

If we are unable to obtain leverage or if the interest rates of such leverage are not attractive, we could experience diminished returns. The number of leverage providers and the total amount of financing available could decrease or remain static. We could, directly or through subsidiaries, have concentrated exposure to a small number of commercial lenders or other financing providers, which could result in us being dependent on the continued availability of capital from such financing providers. Consequently, available financing could be more expensive or on terms that are less desirable than in an environment with a larger number of leverage providers.

We are subject to risks associated with the Debt Securitizations.

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

We are subject to certain risks as a result of our direct or indirect interests in the junior notes and membership interests of each Securitization Issuer.

Under the terms of the respective loan sale agreement or loan sale agreements governing each Debt Securitization, we sold and/or contributed to the applicable Securitization Issuer all of our ownership interest in our portfolio loans and participations for the purchase price and other consideration set forth in such loan sale agreement. Following this transfer, the applicable Securitization Issuer held all of the ownership interest in such portfolio loans and participations.

Under the terms of the respective loan sale agreements entered into upon closing of each of the 2018 Debt Securitization and the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization (each a “Closing Date Loan Sale Agreement”), which provided for the sale of assets on the applicable closing date to satisfy risk retention requirements, (1) we transferred to GC Advisors a portion of our ownership interest in the portfolio company investments securing such Debt Securitization for the purchase price and other consideration set forth in the applicable Closing Date Loan Sale Agreement and (2) immediately thereafter, GC Advisors sold to the respective Securitization Issuer all of its ownership interest in such portfolio loans for the purchase price and other consideration set forth in the applicable Closing Date Loan Sale Agreement. Under the terms of the other loan sale agreement governing each such Debt Securitization (each, a “Depositor Loan Sale Agreement”), which provides for the sale of assets on the applicable closing date as well as future sales from us to the applicable Securitization Issuer through the applicable CLO Depositor, (1) we sold and/or contributed to the applicable CLO Depositor the remainder of our ownership interest in the portfolio company investments securing the applicable Debt Securitization and participations for the purchase price and other consideration set forth in the applicable Depositor Loan Sale Agreement and (2) the applicable CLO Depositor, in turn, sold to the applicable Securitization Issuer all of its ownership interest in such portfolio loans and participations for the purchase price and other consideration set forth in one of the loan sale agreements. Following these transfers, the applicable Securitization Issuer, and not GC Advisors, the applicable CLO Depositor or us, held all of the ownership interest in such portfolio company investments and participations.

As of September 30, 2022, we held indirectly through the applicable CLO Depositor, the Class C-2 2018 Notes, the Class D 2018 Notes, the Subordinated 2018 Notes, and 100% of the membership interests in the 2018 Issuer, the Class C GCIC 2018 Notes, the Class D GCIC 2018 Notes, the Subordinated GCIC 2018 Notes and 100% of the membership interests in the GCIC 2018 Issuer. As a result, we consolidate the financial statements of the 2018 Issuer and the GCIC 2018 Issuer, as well as our other subsidiaries, in our consolidated financial statements.

Because each of the Securitization Issuers and CLO Depositors is disregarded as an entity separate from its owner for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the sale or contribution by us or a CLO Depositor to a Securitization Issuer or by us to a CLO Depositor did not constitute a taxable event for U.S. federal income tax purposes. If the U.S. Internal Revenue Service were to take a contrary position, there could be a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. We could, from time to time, hold asset-backed securities, or the economic equivalent thereof, issued by a securitization vehicle sponsored by another business development company to the extent permitted under the 1940 Act.

The notes and membership interests that we hold that are issued by the Securitization Issuers are subordinated obligations of the applicable Securitization Issuer and we could be prevented from receiving cash from such Securitization Issuer.

The notes issued by the Securitization Issuers and retained by us are the most junior class of notes issued by the applicable Securitization Issuer, are subordinated in priority of payment to the other notes issued by such Securitization Issuer and are subject to certain payment restrictions set forth in the indenture governing the notes issued by such Securitization Issuer. Therefore, we only receive cash distributions on such Notes if the applicable Securitization Issuer has made all cash interest payments to all other notes it has issued. Consequently, to the extent that the value of the portfolio of loan investments held by a Securitization Issuer has been reduced as a result of conditions in the credit markets, or as a result of defaulted loans or individual fund assets, the value of any notes that we have retained at their redemption could be reduced. If a Securitization Issuer does not meet the asset coverage tests or the interest coverage test set forth in the documents governing the applicable Debt Securitization, cash would be diverted from the notes that we hold to first pay the more senior notes issued by such Securitization Issuer in amounts sufficient to cause such tests to be satisfied.

Each Securitization Issuer is the residual claimant on funds, if any, remaining after holders of all classes of notes issued by such Securitization Issuer have been paid in full on each payment date or upon maturity of such notes under the applicable Debt Securitization documents. As the holder of the membership interests in each Securitization Issuer, we could receive distributions, if any, only to the extent that the applicable Securitization Issuer makes distributions out of funds remaining after holders of all classes of notes issued by such Securitization Issuer have been paid in full on each payment date any amounts due and owing on such payment date or upon maturity of such notes. In the event that we fail to receive cash directly from a Securitization Issuer, we could be unable to make distributions in amounts sufficient to maintain our ability to be subject to tax as a RIC, or at all.

The interests of holders of the senior classes of securities issued by the Securitization Issuers could not be aligned with our interests.

The notes issued by each Securitization Issuer that are held by third parties (the “Senior Securitization Notes”) are debt obligations ranking senior in right of payment to other securities issued by the respective Securitization Issuer in the applicable Debt Securitization. As such, there are circumstances in which the interests of holders of the Senior Securitization Notes may not be aligned with the interests of holders of the other classes of notes issued by, and membership interests of, the applicable Securitization Issuer. For example, under the terms of the Class A 2018 Notes, holders of the Class A 2018 Notes have the right to receive payments of principal and interest prior to holders of the Class B 2018 Notes, the Class C-1 2018 Notes and the 2018 Issuer.

As used herein, “Controlling Class” refers to the most senior class of notes then outstanding with respect to a Securitization Issuer. If the most senior class of outstanding notes are paid in full, then the next most senior class of notes would comprise the Controlling Class under the documents governing the applicable Debt Securitization. For example, as long as the Class A 2018 Notes and the Class A GCIC 2018 Notes are outstanding, holders of such class of notes comprise the Controlling Class under the 2018 Debt Securitization and the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization, respectively. If such notes or loans are paid in full, then the Class B 2018 Notes and the Class B GCIC 2018 Notes would comprise the Controlling Class under the 2018 Debt Securitization and the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization, respectively. Holders of the Controlling Class under the applicable Debt Securitization have the right to act in certain circumstances with respect to the portfolio loans in ways that could benefit their interests but not the interests of holders of more junior classes of notes and membership interests, including by exercising remedies under the indenture in the applicable Debt Securitization.

If an event of default has occurred and acceleration occurs in accordance with the terms of the indenture for a Debt Securitization, the Controlling Class of such Debt Securitization, as the most senior class of notes or loans then outstanding in such Debt Securitization will be paid in full before any further payment or distribution on the more

junior classes of notes and membership interests. In addition, if an event of default under a Debt Securitization, holders of a majority of the Controlling Class of the applicable Debt Securitization could be entitled to determine the remedies to be exercised under the applicable indenture, subject to the terms of such indenture. For example, upon the occurrence of an event of default with respect to the notes issued by the 2018 Issuer, the trustee or holders of a majority of the Controlling Class could declare the principal, together with any accrued interest, of all the notes of such class and any junior classes to be immediately due and payable. This would have the effect of accelerating the principal on such notes, triggering a repayment obligation on the part of the 2018 Issuer. If at such time the portfolio loans were not performing well, the Securitization Issuer could not have sufficient proceeds available to enable the trustee under the indenture to repay the obligations of holders of the notes we hold, or to pay a dividend to holders of the membership interests.

Remedies pursued by the Controlling Class could be adverse to the interests of the holders of the notes that are subordinated to the Controlling Class (which would include, for example, the Class C‑2 2018 Notes, Class D 2018 Notes and Subordinated 2018 Notes to the extent the Class A 2018 Notes, Class B 2018 Notes, Class C-1 2018 Notes and Class C-2 2018 Notes, or Class D 2018 Notes constitute the Controlling Class, the Class B‑2 GCIC 2018 Notes, Class C GCIC 2018 Notes, Class D GCIC 2018 Notes and Subordinated GCIC 2018 Notes to the extent the Class A-1 GCIC 2018 Notes, Class A-2 GCIC 2018 Notes, Class B GCIC 2018 Notes, Class C GCIC 2018 Notes or Class D GCIC 2018 Notes constitute the Controlling Class) and the Controlling Class will have no obligation to consider any possible adverse effect on such other interests. Thus, we cannot assure you that any remedies pursued by the Controlling Class will be in the best interests of the applicable CLO Depositor or us or that the applicable CLO Depositor or we will receive any payments or distributions upon an acceleration of the notes. In a liquidation under any of the Debt Securitizations, the notes that we have directly or indirectly retained will be subordinated to payment of the other classes notes issued by the applicable Securitization Issuer and could not be paid in full to the extent funds remaining after payment of more senior notes not held by us are insufficient. In addition, after certain senior classes of notes are paid in full, the remaining noteholder could amend the applicable indenture to, among other things, direct the assignment of any remaining assets to other wholly-owned subsidiaries for a price less than the fair market value of such assets with the difference in price to be considered an equity contribution to such subsidiaries. Any failure of a Securitization Issuer to make distributions on the notes we indirectly or directly hold, whether as a result of an event of default, liquidation or otherwise, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows and could result in an inability of us to make distributions sufficient to maintain our ability to be subject to tax as a RIC, or at all.

A Securitization Issuer could fail to meet certain asset coverage tests.

Under the documents governing each of the Debt Securitizations, there are two asset coverage tests applicable to the Class A 2018 Notes, the Class B 2018 Notes, the Class C-1 2018 Notes, the Class C-2 2018 Notes and the Class D 2018 Notes, with respect to the 2018 Issuer; and the Class A GCIC 2018 Notes, Class B GCIC 2018 Notes, Class C GCIC 2018 Notes and Class D GCIC 2018, with respect to the GCIC 2018 Issuer.

The first such test compares the amount of interest received on the portfolio loans held by the applicable Securitization Issuer to the amount of interest payable in respect of the applicable class of notes. To meet this first test, in the case of the 2018 Debt Securitization, interest received on the portfolio loans must equal at least 120% of the interest payable in respect of the Class A 2018 Notes and Class B 2018 Notes, taken together, at least 110% of the interest payable in respect of the Class C-1 2018 Notes and the Class C-2 2018 Notes, taken together, and at least 105% of the interest payable in respect of the Class D 2018 Notes; and, in the case of the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization, interest received on the portfolio loans must equal at least 120% of the interest payable in respect of the Class A GCIC 2018 Notes and Class B GCIC 2018 Notes, taken together, and at least 110% of the interest payable in respect of the Class C GCIC 2018 Notes and at least 105% of the interest payable in respect of the Class D GCIC 2018 Notes.

The second such test compares the principal amount of the portfolio loans of the applicable Debt Securitization to the aggregate outstanding principal amount of the applicable class of notes. To meet this second test at any time in the case of the 2018 Debt Securitization, the aggregate principal amount of the portfolio loans must equal at least 145.6% of the Class A 2018 Notes and Class B 2018 Notes, taken together, at least 126.7% of the Class C-1 2018 Notes and Class C-2 2018 Notes, taken together, and at least 116.7% of the Class D 2018 Notes. To meet this second test at any time in the case of the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization, the aggregate principal amount of the portfolio loans must equal at least 147.9% of the Class A GCIC 2018 Notes and Class B GCIC 2018 Notes, taken together, at least 127.1% of the Class C GCIC 2018 Notes and at least 117.5% of the Class D GCIC 2018 Notes.

If any asset coverage test with respect to a class of notes is not met, proceeds from the portfolio of loan investments that otherwise would have been distributed to the holders of the notes and membership interests that we hold will instead be used to redeem first the most senior class of notes in such Debt Securitization and then each next most senior class of notes, to the extent necessary to satisfy the applicable asset coverage tests on a pro forma basis after giving effect to all payments made in respect of the notes, which we refer to as a mandatory redemption, or to obtain the necessary ratings confirmation.

The value of the Class C-2 2018 Notes, Class D 2018 Notes, Subordinated 2018 Notes, Class B-2 GCIC 2018 Notes, Class C GCIC 2018 Notes, Class D GCIC 2018 Notes or the Subordinated GCIC 2018 Notes could be adversely affected by a mandatory redemption because such redemption could result in the applicable notes being redeemed at par at a time when they are trading in the secondary market at a premium to their stated principal amount and when other investments bearing the same rate of interest could be difficult or expensive to acquire. A mandatory redemption could also result in a shorter investment duration than a holder of such notes could have wanted or anticipated, which could, in turn, result in such a holder incurring breakage costs on related hedging transactions. In addition, the reinvestment period under the 2018 Debt Securitization and the 2018 GCIC Debt Securitization could extend through as late as January 15, 2023 and January 20, 2023, respectively. During the respective reinvestment period, market conditions and restrictions on investment under the indenture governing the applicable Debt Securitization could result in periods of time in which the applicable Securitization Issuer is not able to fully invest its available collateral or during which collateral available is not of comparable quality or yield, which could affect the value of the collateral securing the notes issued by such Securitization Issuer that we hold.

We could be required to assume liabilities of a Securitization Issuer and are indirectly liable for certain representations and warranties in connection with each Debt Securitization.

The structure of each Debt Securitization is intended to prevent, in the event of our bankruptcy or the bankruptcy of a CLO Depositor, if applicable, the consolidation of the applicable Securitization Issuer with our operations or with the applicable CLO Depositor. If the true sale of the assets in each Debt Securitization were not respected in the event of our insolvency, a trustee or debtor-in-possession might reclaim the assets of the applicable Securitization Issuer for our estate. However, in doing so, we would become directly liable for all of the indebtedness then outstanding under the applicable Debt Securitization, which would equal the full amount of debt of the applicable Securitization Issuer reflected on our consolidated balance sheet. In addition, we cannot assure you that the recovery in the event we were consolidated with a Securitization Issuer for purposes of any bankruptcy proceeding would exceed the amount to which we would otherwise be entitled as the holder of the notes issued by such Securitization Issuer and retained by us had we not been consolidated with the applicable Securitization Issuer.

In addition, in connection with each of the Debt Securitizations, we indirectly gave the lenders certain customary representations with respect to the legal structure of the respective Securitization Issuer, and the quality of the assets transferred to each entity. We remain indirectly liable for any breach of such representations for the life of the applicable Debt Securitization.

Certain Securitization Issuers could issue additional Notes.

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

additional notes that could be issued may not always equal 100% of the par value of such notes, depending on several factors, including fees and closing expenses.

We are subject to risks associated with any Revolving Credit Facility that utilizes a Funding Subsidiary as our interests in any Funding Subsidiary are subordinated and we could be prevented from receiving cash on our equity interests from a Funding Subsidiary.

We own directly or indirectly 100% of the equity interests in each of our Funding Subsidiaries. We consolidate the financial statements of our Funding Subsidiaries in our consolidated financial statements and treat the indebtedness under the Revolving Credit Facilities as our leverage. Our interests in our Funding Subsidiaries are subordinated in priority of payment to every other obligation of such Funding Subsidiary and are subject to certain payment restrictions set forth in each Revolving Credit Facility.

We receive cash from a Funding Subsidiary only to the extent that we receive distributions on our equity interests in such Funding Subsidiary. Each Funding Subsidiary could make distributions on its equity interests only to the extent permitted by the payment priority provisions of the applicable Revolving Credit Facility. Each of the Revolving Credit Facilities generally provides that payments on the respective interests could not be made on any payment date unless all amounts owing to the lenders and other secured parties are paid in full. In addition, if a Funding Subsidiary does not meet the asset coverage tests or the interest coverage test set forth in the documents of the applicable Revolving Credit Facility, a default would occur. In the event of a default under a Revolving Credit Facility document, cash would be diverted from us to pay the applicable lender and other secured parties in amounts sufficient to cause such tests to be satisfied. In the event that we fail to receive cash from our Funding Subsidiaries, we could be unable to make distributions to our stockholders in amounts sufficient to maintain our status as a RIC, or at all. We also could be forced to sell investments in portfolio companies at less than their fair value in order to continue making such distributions. We cannot assure you that distributions on the assets held by our Funding Subsidiaries will be sufficient to make any distributions to us or that such distributions will meet our expectations.

Our equity interests in each Funding Subsidiary rank behind all of the secured and unsecured creditors, known or unknown, of such Funding Subsidiary, including the lenders in the respective Revolving Credit Facility. Consequently, to the extent that the value of a Funding Subsidiary’s portfolio of loan investments has been reduced as a result of conditions in the credit markets, defaulted loans, capital gains and losses on the underlying assets, prepayment or changes in interest rates, the returns on our investments in such Funding Subsidiary could be reduced. Accordingly, our investments in each of our Funding Subsidiaries could be subject to up to 100% loss.

The ability to sell investments held by our Funding Subsidiaries is limited.

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

We can enter into repurchase agreements, which are another form of leverage.

We can enter, and have in the past entered, into repurchase agreements as part of our management of our investment portfolio. Under a repurchase agreement, we will effectively pledge our assets as collateral to secure a short-term loan where the counterparty acquires securities we hold as collateral subject to our obligation to repurchase and its obligation to resell the securities at an agreed upon time and price. Generally, the other party to the agreement makes the loan in an amount equal to a percentage of the fair value of the pledged collateral. At the maturity of the repurchase agreement, we will be required to repay the loan and correspondingly receive back our collateral. While used as collateral, the assets continue to pay principal and interest which are for our benefit.

Our use of repurchase agreements, if any, involves many of the same risks involved in our use of leverage, as the proceeds from repurchase agreements generally will be invested in additional securities. There is a risk that the market value of the securities acquired in the repurchase agreement could decline below the price of the securities that we have sold but remain obligated to purchase. In addition, there is a risk that the market value of the securities retained by us could decline. If a buyer of securities under a repurchase agreement were to file for bankruptcy or experience insolvency, we could be adversely affected. Also, in entering into repurchase agreements, we would bear the risk of loss to the extent that the proceeds of such agreements at settlement are less than the fair value of the underlying securities being pledged. In addition, due to the interest costs associated with repurchase agreements, our net asset value would decline, and, in some cases, we could be worse off than if we had not used such agreements.

Adverse developments in the credit markets can impair our ability to enter into new debt financing arrangements.

During the economic downturn in the United States that began in mid-2007, many commercial banks and other

financial institutions stopped lending or significantly curtailed their lending activity. In addition, in an effort to stem

losses and reduce their exposure to segments of the economy deemed to be high risk, some financial institutions

limited routine refinancing and loan modification transactions and even reviewed the terms of existing facilities to

identify bases for accelerating the maturity of existing lending facilities. To the extent these circumstances arise

again in the future, it could be difficult for us to finance the growth of our investments on acceptable economic terms, or at all and one or more of our leverage facilities could be accelerated by the lenders.

Our ability to invest in public companies is limited in certain circumstances. If we do not invest a sufficient portion of our assets in qualifying assets, we could fail to qualify as a business development company or be precluded from investing according to our current business strategy and decrease our operating flexibility.

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

See “Business — Regulation — Qualifying Assets.”

We could be precluded from investing in what we believe are attractive investments if such investments are not qualifying assets for purposes of the 1940 Act. If we do not invest a sufficient portion of our assets in qualifying assets, we could violate the 1940 Act provisions applicable to business development companies. As a result of such violation, specific rules under the 1940 Act could prevent us, for example, from making follow-on investments in existing portfolio companies (which could result in the dilution of our position) or could require us to dispose of investments at inappropriate times in order to come into compliance with the 1940 Act. If we need to dispose of such investments quickly, it could be difficult to dispose of such investments on favorable terms. We can provide no assurance that we will be able to find a buyer for such investments and, even if we do find a buyer, we could be forced to sell the investments at a substantial loss. Any such outcomes would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

If we do not maintain our status as a business development company, we would be subject to regulation as a registered closed-end investment company under the 1940 Act. As a registered closed-end investment company, we would be subject to substantially more regulatory restrictions under the 1940 Act, which would significantly decrease our operating flexibility.

The majority of our portfolio investments are recorded at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors and, as a result, there could 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 pursuant to policies adopted by, and subject to the oversight of, our board of directors. The majority of our portfolio investments take the form of securities that are not publicly traded. The fair value of securities and other investments that are not publicly traded is often not readily determinable, and we value these securities at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors, including to reflect significant events affecting the value of our securities. As discussed in more detail under “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Critical Accounting Policies,” most, if not all, of our investments (other than cash and cash equivalents) are classified as Level 3 under Accounting Standards Codification, or ASC, Topic 820, Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure, as amended, or ASC Topic 820. This means that our portfolio valuations are based on unobservable inputs and our own assumptions about how market participants would price the asset or liability in question. Inputs into the determination of fair value of our portfolio investments require significant management judgment or estimation, the level of which could increase or decrease during periods of volatility or uncertainty. See “—Risks Relating to Our Business and Structure – We are currently in a period of capital markets disruption and economic uncertainty.” Even if observable market data are available, such information could be the result of consensus pricing information or broker quotes, which could include a disclaimer that the broker would not be held to such a price in an actual transaction. The non-binding nature of consensus pricing and/or quotes accompanied by disclaimers materially reduces the reliability of such information.

We have retained the services of several independent service providers to review the valuation of these securities. At least once annually, the valuation for each portfolio investment for which a market quote is not readily available is reviewed by an independent valuation firm. The types of factors that our board of directors could take into account in determining the fair value of our investments generally include, as appropriate, comparison to publicly traded securities, including such factors as yield, maturity and measures of credit quality, the enterprise value of a portfolio company, the nature and realizable value of any collateral, the portfolio company’s ability to make payments and its earnings and discounted cash flow, the markets in which the portfolio company does business and other relevant factors. Because such valuations, and particularly valuations of private securities and private companies, are inherently uncertain, could fluctuate over short periods of time and could be based on estimates, our determinations of fair value could differ materially from the values that would have been used if a ready market for these securities existed. Our net asset value could be adversely affected if our determinations regarding the fair value of our investments were materially higher than the values that we ultimately realize upon the disposal of such securities.

We adjust quarterly the valuation of our portfolio to reflect our board of directors’ determination of the fair value of each investment in our portfolio. Any changes in fair value are recorded in our consolidated statement of operations as net change in unrealized appreciation or depreciation.

Government intervention in the credit markets could adversely affect our business.

The central banks and, in particular, the U.S. Federal Reserve, have taken unprecedented steps since the financial crises of 2008-2009 and the COVID-19 global pandemic and in response to inflationary pressures. It is impossible to predict if, how, and to what extent the United States and other governments would further intervene in the credit markets. Such intervention is often prompted by politically sensitive issues involving family homes, student loans, real estate speculation, credit card receivables, pandemics, etc., and could, as a result, be contrary to what we would predict from an “economically rational” perspective.

On the other hand, recent governmental intervention could mean that the willingness of governmental bodies to take additional extraordinary action is diminished. As a result, in the event of near-term major market disruptions, like those caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, there might be only limited additional government intervention, resulting in correspondingly greater market dislocation and materially greater market risk.

Our board of directors could change our investment objective, operating policies and strategies without prior notice or stockholder approval.

Our board of directors has the authority, except as otherwise provided in the 1940 Act, to modify or waive our investment objective and certain of our operating policies and strategies without prior notice and without stockholder approval. However, absent stockholder approval, we cannot change the nature of our business so as to cease to be, or withdraw our election as, a business development company. Under Delaware law, we also cannot be dissolved without prior stockholder approval. We cannot predict the effect any changes to our current investment objective, operating policies and strategies would have on our business, operating results and the price of our common stock. Nevertheless, any such changes could adversely affect our business and impair our ability to make distributions.

Provisions of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware and our certificate of incorporation and bylaws could deter takeover attempts, which could have an adverse effect on the price of our common stock.

The General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, or the DGCL, contains provisions that are intended to discourage, delay or make more difficult a change in control of us or the removal of our directors. Our certificate of incorporation and bylaws contain provisions that limit liability and provide for indemnification of our directors and officers. These provisions and others also could have the effect of deterring hostile takeovers or delaying changes in control or management. We are subject to Section 203 of the DGCL, the application of which is subject to any applicable requirements of the 1940 Act. This section generally prohibits us from engaging in mergers and other business combinations with stockholders that beneficially own 15% or more of our voting stock, or with their affiliates, unless our directors or stockholders approve the business combination in the prescribed manner. If our board of directors does not approve a business combination, Section 203 of the DGCL could discourage third parties from trying to acquire control of us and increase the difficulty of consummating such an offer.

We have also adopted measures that could make it difficult for a third party to obtain control of us, including provisions of our certificate of incorporation classifying our board of directors in three classes serving staggered three-year terms, and provisions of our certificate of incorporation authorizing our board of directors to classify or reclassify shares of our preferred stock in one or more classes or series, to cause the issuance of additional shares of

our stock, and to amend our certificate of incorporation, without stockholder approval, in certain instances. These provisions, as well as other provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws, could delay, defer or prevent a transaction or a change in control that might otherwise be in the best interests of our securityholders.

GC Advisors can resign on 60 days’ notice, and we can provide no assurance that we would be able to find a suitable replacement within that time, resulting in a disruption in our operations that could adversely affect our financial condition, business and results of operations.

GC Advisors has the right to resign under the Investment Advisory Agreement at any time upon not less than 60 days’ written notice, whether we have found a replacement or not. If GC Advisors resigns, we can provide no assurance that we would 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 business, financial condition and results of operations and cash flows as well as our ability to pay distributions are likely to be adversely affected and the market price of our common stock could 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 GC Advisors 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 and portfolio could result in additional costs and time delays that could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

The Administrator can resign on 60 days’ notice, and we can provide no assurance that we would be able to find a suitable replacement, resulting in a disruption in our operations that could adversely affect our financial condition, business and results of operations.

The Administrator has the right to resign under the Administration Agreement at any time upon not less than 60 days’ written notice, whether we have found a replacement or not. If the Administrator resigns, we can provide no assurance that we would be able to find a new administrator or hire internal management with similar expertise and ability to provide the same or equivalent services on acceptable terms, 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 common stock could decline. In addition, the coordination of our internal management and administrative activities is likely to suffer if we are unable to identify and reach an agreement with a service provider or individuals with the expertise possessed by the Administrator. Even if we are able to retain a comparable service provider or individuals to perform such services, whether internal or external, their integration into our business and lack of familiarity with our investment objective and portfolio could result in additional costs and time delays that could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Risks Relating to Our Investments

Economic recessions or downturns could impair our portfolio companies and defaults by our portfolio companies will harm our operating results.

Many of our portfolio companies are susceptible to economic slowdowns or recessions and could be unable to repay our loans during these periods. Therefore, our non-performing assets are likely to increase and the value of our portfolio is likely to decrease during these periods. Adverse economic conditions could decrease the value of collateral securing any of our loans and the value of any equity investments. A severe recession could further decrease the value of such collateral and result in losses of value in our portfolio and a decrease in our revenues, net income, assets and net worth. Economic slowdowns or recessions could lead to financial losses in our portfolio and a decrease in revenues, net income and assets. Unfavorable economic conditions also could increase our funding costs, limit our access to the capital markets or result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit to us. These events could prevent us from increasing our investments and harm our operating results.

Any deterioration of general economic conditions could lead to significant declines in corporate earnings or loan performance, and the ability of corporate borrowers to service their debt, any of which could trigger a period of global economic slowdown, and have an adverse impact on our performance and financial results, and the value and the liquidity of our investments. In an economic downturn, we could have non-performing assets or an increase in non-performing assets, and we would anticipate that the value of our portfolio would decrease during these periods. Failure to satisfy financial or operating covenants imposed by lenders to a portfolio company, including us, could lead to defaults and, potentially, acceleration of payments on such loans and foreclosure on the assets representing

collateral for the portfolio company’s obligations. Cross default provisions under other agreements could be triggered and thus limit the portfolio company’s ability to satisfy its obligations under any debt that we hold and affect the value of any equity securities we own. We would expect to incur expenses to the extent necessary to seek recovery upon default or to negotiate new terms with a portfolio company following or in anticipation of a default.

Inflation could adversely affect the business, results of operations and financial condition of our portfolio companies.

Certain of our portfolio companies are in industries that could be impacted by inflation. If such portfolio companies are unable to pass any increases in their costs of operations along to their customers, it could adversely affect their operating results and impact their ability to pay interest and principal on our loans, particularly if interest rates rise in response to inflation. In addition, any projected future decreases in our portfolio companies’ operating results due to inflation could adversely impact the fair value of those investments. Any decreases in the fair value of our investments could result in future realized or unrealized losses and therefore reduce our net increase (decrease) in net assets resulting from operations.

Our debt investments are risky and we could lose all or part of our investments.

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

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

Our investments in private and middle-market portfolio companies are risky, and we could lose all or part of our investment.

Investment in private and middle-market companies involves a number of significant risks. Generally, little public information exists about these companies, and we rely on the ability of GC Advisors’ investment professionals to obtain adequate information to evaluate the potential returns from investing in these companies. If GC Advisors is unable to uncover all material information about these companies, it would not be able to make a fully informed investment decision and we could lose money on our investments. Compared to larger companies, middle-market companies typically have shorter operating histories, more limited financial resources, newer technologies and/or products, smaller market shares, less experienced management teams and less predictable operating results, and often participate in quickly evolving markets, and are more reliant on a small number of products, managers or clients. Middle-market companies could also require substantial additional capital to support their operations, finance expansion or maintain their competitive position and could have difficulty accessing the capital markets to meet future capital needs, which could limit their ability to grow or to repay their outstanding indebtedness upon maturity. In addition, the middle-market companies in which we invest could be subject to governmental and non-governmental regulations, including by federal and state regulators and various self-regulatory organizations and the costs of complying with these laws and regulations could be more material to the company as compared to a larger company. If a company in which we directly or indirectly invest fails to comply with an applicable regulatory regime, it could be subject to fines, injunctions, operating restrictions or criminal prosecution, any of which could materially and adversely affect the value of our investment. We will not control a portfolio company’s management or the manner in which a company’s management addresses the company’s risks except in the event that a portfolio company defaults on its loan from us and we seek to enforce our security interest. In addition, middle-market companies often require additional financing to expand or maintain their competitive position, and they could have a more difficult time obtaining additional capital than larger companies.

An important concern in making investments is the possibility of material misrepresentation or omission on the part of the portfolio company. Such inaccuracy or incompleteness can adversely affect, among other things, the valuation of collateral, other debt obligations, our ability to perfect or effectuate a lien on the collateral securing a loan or other debt obligation, the financial condition of the issuer, or the business prospects of the issuer. We will rely upon the accuracy and completeness of representations made by portfolio companies to the extent reasonable. However, there can be no guarantee that such representations are accurate or complete.

If the issuer of securities purchased by us does not perform to GC Advisors’ expectations, the value of its equity and debt securities would likely decline and the issuer could default on its obligations. Poor performance can be caused by a number of factors, including failures of management, competitive pressures, pressure by customers and suppliers, labor unrest, or force majeure events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. While GC Advisors intends to invest in portfolio companies in industries that it believes are resistant to recessions, there can be no assurance that such portfolio companies will not be adversely affected by other market or economic conditions.

The value of our investments in loans will likely be detrimentally affected to the extent a borrower defaults on its obligations, there is insufficient collateral, and/or there are extensive legal and other costs incurred in collecting on a defaulted loan. GC Advisors will attempt to minimize this risk, for example, by maintaining low loan-to-liquidation values with each loan and the collateral underlying the loan. However, there can be no assurance that the liquidation value assigned by GC Advisors would be realized by the portfolio company upon liquidation, nor can there be any assurance that such collateral will retain its value. In addition, certain of our loans will be supported, in whole or in part, by personal guarantees made by the borrower or an affiliate of the borrower. If such guarantee is called and the guarantor fails to meet its obligations under the guarantee, the amount realizable with respect to a loan will generally be detrimentally affected. There could be a monetary as well as a time cost involved in collecting on defaulted loans and, if applicable, taking possession of various types of collateral. In addition, any activity deemed to be active lending/origination by us could subject it to additional regulation.

An investment strategy focused primarily on privately held companies presents certain challenges, including, but not limited to, the lack of available information about these companies.

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

We would be subject to risks if we are required to assume operation of portfolio companies upon default.

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

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

The debt to which we are primarily exposed is expected to consist predominantly of loans and notes that are obligations of corporations, partnerships or other entities. This debt often has no, or only a limited, trading market. The investment in illiquid debt will often restrict our ability to dispose of investments in a timely fashion, for a fair price, or at all. If an underlying issuer of debt experiences an adverse event, this illiquidity would make it more difficult for us to sell such debt, and we could instead be required to pursue a workout or alternate way out of the

position. To the extent debt in a portfolio company is also held by other third-party investors, we would generally have limited control over a workout or alternate means of disposition and the person(s) having such control could have interests that are not aligned with ours. We would likely also face other restrictions on our ability to liquidate an investment in a portfolio company to the extent that we, GC Advisors, Golub Capital or any of its affiliates have material non-public information regarding such portfolio company.

Price declines and illiquidity in the corporate debt markets could adversely affect the fair value of our portfolio investments, reducing our net asset value through increased net unrealized depreciation.

As a business development company, we are required to carry our investments at market value or, if no market value is ascertainable, at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors. The fair value methodology utilized is in accordance with the fair value principles established by the ASC Topic 820. Our board of directors uses the services of one or more independent service providers to review the valuation of our illiquid investments. Valuations reflect significant events that affect the value of the instruments. As part of the valuation process, we could take into account the following types of factors, if relevant, in determining the fair value of our investments:

•a comparison of the portfolio company’s securities to publicly traded securities;

•the enterprise value of the portfolio company;

•the nature and realizable value of any collateral;

•the portfolio company’s ability to make payments and its earnings and discounted cash flow;

•the markets in which the portfolio company does business; and

•changes in the interest rate environment and the credit markets generally that could affect the price at which similar investments could be made in the future and other relevant factors.

The fair value measurement seeks to approximate the price that would be received for an investment on a current sale and assumes that the transaction to sell an asset occurs in the principal market for such asset or, in the absence of a principal market, the most advantageous market for such asset, which could be a hypothetical market, and excludes transaction costs. When an external event such as a purchase transaction, public offering or subsequent equity sale occurs, we use the pricing indicated by the external event to corroborate our valuation. We record decreases in the market values or fair values of our investments as unrealized depreciation. Declines in prices and liquidity in the corporate debt markets could result in significant net unrealized depreciation in our portfolio. The effect of all of these factors on our portfolio could reduce our net asset value by increasing net unrealized depreciation in our portfolio. Depending on market conditions, we could incur substantial realized losses and could suffer additional unrealized losses in future periods, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Because orderly markets currently do not exist for some investments, and because valuations, and particularly valuations of private investments and private companies, require judgment, are inherently uncertain, could fluctuate over short periods and are often based on estimates, our determinations of the fair value of investments could differ materially from the values that would have been used had a ready market existed for such investments.

Our portfolio companies could prepay loans, which could reduce our yields if capital returned cannot be invested in transactions with equal or greater expected yields.

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

We are subject to credit and default risk and our portfolio companies could be unable to repay or refinance outstanding principal on their loans at or prior to maturity.

Credit risk refers to the likelihood that a borrower will default in the payment of principal and/or interest. Financial strength and solvency of a borrower are the primary factors influencing credit risk. Lack or inadequacy of collateral or credit enhancement for a debt instrument could also affect its credit risk. Credit risk can change over the life of a loan, and securities and other debt instruments that are rated by rating agencies can be downgraded. This risk and the risk of default is increased to the extent that the loan documents do not require the portfolio companies to pay down the outstanding principal of such debt prior to maturity, which is expected to be a common feature among many of our loan investments. Investments with a deferred interest feature, such as original issue discount income and payment-in-kind interest, could represent a higher credit risk than investments that must pay interest in full in cash on a regular basis.

A significant downturn in the economy or a particular economic sector could have a significant impact on the business prospects of the portfolio companies to which we are exposed, whether directly or indirectly. Such developments could adversely affect the ability of such companies to comply with their loan repayment obligations. It is possible that the issuer of a note or other instrument in which we invest could default on its debts, in which case we could lose most or all of our investment in that instrument, subjecting us to significant loss. The risk and magnitude of losses associated with defaults could be increased where the instrument is leveraged.

We have not yet identified the portfolio company investments we will acquire and we could have difficulty sourcing investment opportunities.

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

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 could invest in securities of a single issuer. To the extent that we assume large positions in the securities of a small number of issuers, our net asset value could 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. We could also be more susceptible to any single economic or regulatory occurrence than a diversified investment company. Beyond our asset diversification requirements as a RIC under the Code, we do not have fixed guidelines for diversification, and our investments could be concentrated in relatively few portfolio companies. Although we are classified as a non-diversified investment company within the meaning of the 1940 Act, we maintain the flexibility to operate as a diversified investment company and have done so for an extended period of time.

Our portfolio could be concentrated in a limited number of portfolio companies and industries, which will subject us to a risk of significant loss if any of these companies defaults on its obligations under any of its debt instruments or if there is a downturn in a particular industry.

It is possible that our portfolio could be concentrated in a limited number of portfolio companies and industries. As a result, our interests could be impaired by the concentration of our investments in any one obligor or obligors in a particular industry or geographic location in the event that such obligor, industry or geographic location were to experience adverse business conditions or other adverse events, including the effects of a global health pandemic such as the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, defaults could be highly correlated with particular obligors, industries

or geographic locations. If loans involving a particular obligor, industry or geographic location represent more than a small proportion of our portfolio, and that obligor, industry or geographic location were to experience difficulties that would affect payments on the loans, the overall timing and amount of collections on the loans held by us could differ from what was expected.

We could hold the debt securities of leveraged companies that could, due to the significant volatility of such companies, enter into bankruptcy proceedings.

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

Depending on the facts and circumstances of our investments and the extent of our involvement in the management of a portfolio company, upon the bankruptcy of a portfolio company, a bankruptcy court could recharacterize our debt investments as equity interests and subordinate all or a portion of our claim to that of other creditors. This could occur even though we have structured our investment as senior debt.

Our failure to make follow-on investments in our portfolio companies could impair the value of our portfolio.

Following an initial investment in a portfolio company, we could make additional investments in that portfolio company as “follow-on” investments, in seeking to:

•increase or maintain in whole or in part our position as a creditor or equity ownership percentage in a portfolio company;

•exercise warrants, options or convertible securities that were acquired in the original or subsequent financing; or

•preserve or enhance the value of our investment.

We have discretion to make follow-on investments, subject to the availability of capital resources. Failure on our part to make follow-on investments could, in some circumstances, jeopardize the continued viability of a portfolio company and our initial investment, or could result in a missed opportunity for us to increase our participation in a successful portfolio company. Even if we have sufficient capital to make a desired follow-on investment, we could elect not to make a follow-on investment because we do not want to increase our level of risk, because we prefer other opportunities or because of regulatory or other considerations. Our ability to make follow-on investments could also be limited by GC Advisors’ allocation policy.

Because we generally do not hold controlling equity interests in our portfolio companies, we generally will not be able to exercise control over our portfolio companies or to prevent decisions by management of our portfolio companies that could decrease the value of our investments.

To the extent we do not hold controlling equity positions in our portfolio companies, we are subject to the risk that a portfolio company makes business decisions with which we disagree, and that the management and/or stockholders of a portfolio company could 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 can provide no assurance that we will be able to dispose of our investments in the event we disagree with the actions of a portfolio company and could therefore suffer a decrease in the value of our investments.

Our portfolio companies could incur debt that ranks equally with, or senior to, our investments in such companies and such portfolio companies could fail to generate sufficient cash flow to service their debt obligations to us.

We have invested and intend to invest a portion of our capital in second lien and subordinated loans issued by our portfolio companies, and we could have exposure to a variety of debt that captures particular layers of a borrower’s credit structure, such as “last out” or “second lien” debt, or other subordinated investments that rank below other obligations of the borrower in right of payment. Subordinated investments are subject to greater risk of loss than senior obligations where there are adverse changes to the financial condition of the borrower or a decline in general economic conditions. Subordinated investments could expose us to particular risks in a distress scenario, such as the risk that creditors are not aligned. Holders of subordinated investments generally have less ability to affect the results of a distressed scenario than holders of more senior investments. Additionally, lenders to companies operating in workout modes are, in certain circumstances, subject to potential liabilities that could exceed the amount of such loan purchased by us.

We have made in the past, and could make in the future, unsecured loans to portfolio companies, meaning that such loans will not benefit from any interest in collateral of such companies. Liens on a portfolio company’s collateral, if any, will secure the portfolio company’s obligations under its outstanding secured debt and could secure certain future debt that is permitted to be incurred by the portfolio company under its secured loan agreements. The holders of obligations secured by such liens will generally control the liquidation of, and be entitled to receive proceeds from, any realization of such collateral to repay their obligations in full before us. In addition, the value of such collateral in the event of liquidation will depend on market and economic conditions, the availability of buyers and other factors. There can be no assurance that the proceeds, if any, from sales of such collateral would be sufficient to satisfy our unsecured loan obligations after payment in full of all loans secured by collateral. If such proceeds were not sufficient to repay the outstanding secured loan obligations, then our unsecured claims would rank equally with the unpaid portion of such secured creditors’ claims against the portfolio company’s remaining assets, if any.

The rights we could have with respect to the collateral securing any junior priority loans we make to our portfolio companies could also be limited pursuant to the terms of one or more intercreditor agreements that we enter into with the holders of senior debt. Under a typical intercreditor agreement, at any time that obligations that have the benefit of the first priority liens are outstanding, any of the following actions that could be taken in respect of the collateral will be at the direction of the holders of the obligations secured by the first priority liens:

•the ability to cause the commencement of enforcement proceedings against the collateral;

•the ability to control the conduct of such proceedings;

•the approval of amendments to collateral documents;

•releases of liens on the collateral; and

•waivers of past defaults under collateral documents.

We will not always have the ability to control or direct such actions, even if our rights as junior lenders are adversely affected.

The disposition of our investments could result in contingent liabilities.

A significant portion of our investments involve private securities. In connection with the disposition of an investment in private securities, we could be required to make representations about the business and financial affairs of the portfolio company typical of those made in connection with the sale of a business. We could also be

required to indemnify the purchasers of such investment to the extent that any such representations turn out to be inaccurate or with respect to potential liabilities. These arrangements could result in contingent liabilities that ultimately result in funding obligations that we must satisfy through our return of payments previously received by us.

GC Advisors’ liability is limited, and we have agreed to indemnify GC Advisors against certain liabilities, which could lead GC Advisors to act in a riskier manner on our behalf than it would when acting for its own account.

Under the Investment Advisory Agreement, and the collateral management agreements for each of the 2014 Debt Securitization (prior to the 2014 Notes redemption), 2018 Debt Securitization, GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization and 2020 Debt Securitization (prior to the 2020 Notes redemption), GC Advisors does not assume any responsibility to us other than to render the services called for under those agreements, and it is not responsible for any action of our board of directors in following or declining to follow GC Advisors’ advice or recommendations. Under the terms of the Investment Advisory Agreement, and each of the collateral management agreements GC Advisors, its officers, members, personnel and any person controlling or controlled by GC Advisors 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, and the collateral management agreements, except those resulting from acts constituting gross negligence, willful misconduct, bad faith or reckless disregard of GC Advisors’ duties under the Investment Advisory Agreement, and the collateral management agreements. In addition, we have agreed to indemnify GC Advisors 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, and the collateral management agreements, except where attributable to gross negligence, willful misconduct, bad faith or reckless disregard of such person’s duties under the Investment Advisory Agreement, and the collateral management agreements. These protections could lead GC Advisors to act in a riskier manner when acting on our behalf than it would when acting for its own account.

We could be subject to risks related to investments in non-U.S. companies.

We have invested and continue to make investments in issuers located outside the United States. Investments in issuers located outside the United States that are generally denominated in non-U.S. currencies involve both risks and opportunities not typically associated with investing in securities of United States companies. The legal and regulatory environments often have material differences, particularly as to bankruptcy and reorganization. Other considerations include changes in exchange rates and exchange control regulations, political and social instability, general economic conditions, expropriation, imposition of non-U.S. taxes, less liquid markets and less available information than is generally the case in the United States, higher transaction costs, foreign government restrictions, less government supervision of exchanges, brokers and issuers, greater risks associated with counterparties and settlement, less developed bankruptcy laws, difficulty in enforcing contractual obligations, lack of uniform accounting and auditing standards and greater price volatility. Among the factors that could affect currency values are trade balances, the level of short-term interest rates, differences in relative values of similar assets in different currencies, long-term opportunities for investment and capital appreciation and political developments. We could employ hedging techniques to minimize these risks, but we cannot assure you that such strategies will be effective or without risk to us. As of September 30, 2022, we were invested in securities of thirty-four non-U.S. companies. Securities issued by non-U.S. companies are not “qualifying assets” under the 1940 Act, and we could invest in non-U.S. companies, including emerging markets issuers, to the limited extent such investments are permitted under the 1940 Act.

We could be subject to risks if we engage in hedging transactions and could become subject to risks if we invest in foreign securities.

Under the 1940 Act, a business development company is restricted from acquiring any asset other than assets of the type listed in the 1940 Act, which are referred to as “qualifying assets,” unless, at the time the acquisition is made, qualifying assets represent at least 70% of the company’s total assets. In order for our investments to be classified as “qualifying assets,” among other requirements, such investments must be in issuers organized under the laws of, and which have their principal place of business in, any state of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands or any other possession of the United States.

We can invest in non-U.S. companies, including emerging market issuers, to the limited extent such investments are permitted under the 1940 Act. We expect that these investments would focus on the same types of investments that we make in U.S. middle-market companies and accordingly would be complementary to our overall strategy and enhance the diversity of our holdings. Investing in securities of emerging market issuers involves many risks including economic, social, political, financial, tax and security conditions in the emerging market, potential inflationary economic environments, regulation by foreign governments, different accounting standards and political uncertainties. Economic, social, political, financial, tax and security conditions also could negatively affect the value of emerging market companies. These factors could include changes in the emerging market government’s economic and fiscal policies, the possible imposition of, or changes in, currency exchange laws or other laws or restrictions applicable to the emerging market companies or investments in their securities and the possibility of fluctuations in the rate of exchange between currencies. Any of our portfolio company investments that are denominated in foreign currencies will be subject to the risks associated with fluctuations in currency exchange rates, which fluctuations could adversely affect our performance.

We have and could in the future enter into hedging transactions to the limited extent such transactions are permitted under the 1940 Act and applicable commodities laws. Engaging in hedging transactions or investing in foreign securities would entail additional risks to our stockholders. We could, for example, use instruments such as interest rate swaps, caps, collars and floors and, if we were to invest in foreign securities, we could use instruments such as forward contracts or currency options in currencies selected to hedge against fluctuations in the relative values of our portfolio positions from changes in currency exchange rates and market interest rates. We could also, for example, borrow under a credit facility in currencies selected to minimize our foreign currency exposure. Use of these hedging instruments could include counterparty credit risk. In each such case, we generally would seek to hedge against fluctuations of the relative values of our portfolio positions from changes in market interest rates or currency exchange rates. While hedging transactions can reduce such risks, they generally will not be designed to prevent all loss from our position. There also could be barriers that prevent us from entering into certain hedging transactions. These barriers will not necessarily impact other investment funds managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates. Hedging transactions could result in a lower overall performance for us than if it had not entered into hedging transactions and generally introduces new risks, such as counterparty risk and greater illiquidity. In addition, we are permitted to borrow funds in one or more foreign currencies as a form of protection against currency risk. The use of such financing could create new risks not traditionally associated with credit facilities or other forms of leverage. Conversely, to the extent that we do not enter into hedging transactions, borrower defaults and fluctuations in currency exchange rates or interest rates could result in poorer overall performance for us than if it had entered into such hedging transactions.

The success of any hedging transactions that we enter into will depend on our ability to correctly predict movements in currency and interest rates. Therefore, while we could enter into hedging transactions to seek to reduce currency exchange rate and interest rate risks, unanticipated changes in currency exchange rates or interest rates could result in poorer overall investment performance than if we had not engaged in any such hedging transactions. In addition, the degree of correlation between price movements of the instruments used in a hedging strategy and price movements in the portfolio positions being hedged could vary. Moreover, for a variety of reasons, we would not necessarily seek to (or be able to) establish a perfect correlation between the hedging instruments and the portfolio holdings being hedged. Any such imperfect correlation could prevent us from achieving the intended hedge and expose us to risk of loss. In addition, it is often not possible to hedge fully or perfectly against currency fluctuations affecting the value of securities denominated in non-U.S. currencies because the value of those securities would likely fluctuate as a result of factors not related to currency fluctuations. Our ability to engage in hedging transactions could also be limited under the Code as well as adversely affected by rules adopted by the CFTC.

We could suffer losses from our equity investments.

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

We could be subject to lender liability claims with respect to our portfolio company investments.

A number of judicial decisions have upheld judgments for borrowers against lending institutions on the basis of various legal theories, collectively termed “lender liability.” Generally, lender liability is founded on the premise that a lender has violated a duty (whether implied or contractual) of good faith, commercial reasonableness and fair dealing or a similar duty owed to the borrower, or has assumed an excessive degree of control over the borrower resulting in the creation of a fiduciary duty owed to the borrower or its other creditors or stockholders. We could be required to defend allegations of lender liability from time to time.

Loans to companies operating in workout modes or under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code are, in certain circumstances, subject to certain potential liabilities that could exceed the amount of such loan purchased by us. Under common law principles that in some cases form the basis for lender liability claims, if a lender or bondholder (i) intentionally takes an action that results in the undercapitalization of a borrower to the detriment of other creditors of such borrower, (ii) engages in other inequitable conduct to the detriment of such other creditors, (iii) engages in fraud with respect to, or makes misrepresentations to, such other creditors or (iv) uses its influence as a stockholder to dominate or control a borrower to the detriment of other creditors of such borrower, a court could elect to subordinate the claim of the offending lender or bondholder to the claims of the disadvantaged creditor or creditors, a remedy called “equitable subordination.” Because of the nature of the loans, the loans could be subject to claims of subordination.

Risks Relating to Investors in Our Securities

Investing in our securities could involve an above average degree of risk.

The investments we make in accordance with our investment objective could result in a higher amount of risk than alternative investment options and a higher risk of volatility or loss of principal. Our investments in portfolio companies involve higher levels of risk, and therefore, an investment in our securities may not be suitable for someone with a lower risk tolerance.

Shares of closed-end investment companies, including business development companies, often trade at a discount to their net asset value.

Shares of closed-end investment companies, including business development companies, could trade at a discount from net asset value. This characteristic of closed-end investment companies and business development companies is separate and distinct from the risk that our net asset value per share could decline. We cannot predict whether our common stock will trade at, above or below net asset value.

There is a risk that investors in our equity securities will not receive distributions or that our distributions will not grow over time and a portion of our distributions could be a return of capital.

We intend to make distributions on a quarterly basis to our stockholders out of assets legally available for distribution. We cannot assure you that we will achieve investment results that will allow us to make a specified level of cash distributions or year-to-year increases in cash distributions. Our ability to pay distributions could be adversely affected by the impact of one or more of the risk factors described in this Annual Report on Form 10-K as well as any amendments reflected in subsequent filings with the SEC. Due to the asset coverage test applicable to us

under the 1940 Act as a business development company, we could be limited in our ability to make distributions. In addition, all distributions are and will be paid at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on our earnings, financial condition, maintenance of our RIC status, compliance with applicable business development company regulations and such other factors as our board of directors could deem relevant from time to time. If we declare a distribution and if more stockholders opt to receive cash distributions rather than participate in our dividend reinvestment plan, we could be forced to sell some of our investments in order to make cash distribution payments. In the event that we encounter delays in locating suitable investment opportunities, we could also pay all or a substantial portion of our distributions from the proceeds of private placements of our common stock or from borrowings in anticipation of future cash flow, which could constitute a return of stockholders’ capital. 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 is generally not currently taxable, such distributions would generally decrease a stockholder’s basis in our common stock and could therefore increase such stockholder’s tax liability for capital gains upon the future sale or other disposition of such common stock. A return of capital distribution could 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. Distributions from borrowings could also reduce the amount of capital we ultimately invest in our portfolio companies.

We have not established any limit on the amount of funds we can use from available sources, such as borrowings, if any, or proceeds from private placements of our common stock, to fund distributions (which could reduce the amount of capital we ultimately invest in assets).

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

The market price of our securities could fluctuate significantly.

The market price and liquidity of the market for our securities could be significantly affected by numerous factors, some of which are beyond our control and may not be directly related to our operating performance. These factors include:

•significant volatility in the market price and trading volume of securities of business development companies or other companies in our sector, which are not necessarily related to the operating performance of the companies;

•changes in regulatory policies, accounting pronouncements or tax guidelines, particularly with respect to RICs and business development companies;

•loss of our qualification as a RIC or business development company;

•changes in market interest rates and decline in the prices of debt,

•changes in earnings or variations in operating results;

•changes in the value of our portfolio investments;

•changes in accounting guidelines governing valuation of our investments;

•any shortfall in revenue or net income or any increase in losses from levels expected by investors or securities analysts;

•departure of GC Advisors’ or any of its affiliates’ key personnel;

•operating performance of companies comparable to us;

•general economic trends and other external factors; and

•loss of a major funding source.

The Unsecured Notes are unsecured and therefore are effectively subordinated to any secured indebtedness we have incurred or could incur in the future.

The Unsecured Notes are not secured by any of our assets or any of the assets of our subsidiaries. As a result, the Unsecured Notes are effectively subordinated, or junior, to any secured indebtedness or other obligations we or our subsidiaries have outstanding as of the date of issuance of the Unsecured Notes or that we or our subsidiaries could incur in the future (or any indebtedness that is initially unsecured in respect of which we subsequently grant security) to the extent of the value of the assets securing such indebtedness. A substantial portion of our assets are currently pledged as collateral under the Debt Securitizations and Revolving Credit Facilities. In any liquidation, dissolution, bankruptcy or other similar proceeding, the holders of any of our existing or future secured indebtedness and the secured indebtedness of our subsidiaries could assert rights against the assets pledged to secure that indebtedness in order to receive full payment of their indebtedness before the assets could be used to pay other creditors, including the holders of the Unsecured Notes. As of September 30, 2022, we had an aggregate of approximately $1.6 billion of outstanding borrowings under the Debt Securitizations and the Revolving Credit Facilities, all of which are secured and thus effectively senior to the Unsecured Notes.

The Unsecured Notes are structurally subordinated to the indebtedness and other liabilities of our

subsidiaries.

The Unsecured Notes are obligations exclusively of Golub Capital BDC, Inc. and not of any of our subsidiaries. None of our subsidiaries is a guarantor of the Unsecured Notes and the Unsecured Notes are not required to be guaranteed by any subsidiaries we could acquire or create in the future. The assets of such subsidiaries are not directly available to satisfy the claims of our creditors, including holders of the Unsecured Notes.

Except to the extent we are a creditor with recognized claims against our subsidiaries, all claims of creditors (including trade creditors) and holders of preferred stock, if any, of our subsidiaries will have priority over our equity interests in such subsidiaries (and therefore the claims of our creditors, including holders of the Unsecured Notes) with respect to the assets of such subsidiaries. Even if we are recognized as a creditor of one or more of our subsidiaries, our claims would still be effectively subordinated to any security interests in the assets of any such subsidiary and to any indebtedness or other liabilities of any such subsidiary senior to our claims. Consequently, the Unsecured Notes are structurally subordinated, or junior, to the Debt Securitizations, the Revolving Credit Facilities and other liabilities (including trade payables) incurred by any of our existing or future subsidiaries, financing vehicles or similar facilities. All of the existing indebtedness of our subsidiaries is structurally senior to the Unsecured Notes.

In addition, our subsidiaries and any additional subsidiaries that we could form could incur substantial additional

indebtedness in the future, all of which would be structurally senior to the Unsecured Notes.

The indenture governing the Unsecured Notes contains limited protection for holders of the Unsecured Notes.

The indenture governing the Unsecured Notes offers limited protection to holders of the Unsecured

Notes. The terms of the indenture and the Unsecured Notes do not restrict our or any of our subsidiaries’ ability to engage in, or otherwise be a party to, a variety of corporate transactions, circumstances or events that could have a material adverse impact on an investment in the Unsecured Notes. In particular, the terms of the indenture and the Unsecured Notes do not place any restrictions on our or our subsidiaries’ ability to:

•issue securities or otherwise incur additional indebtedness or other obligations, including (1) any indebtedness or other obligations that would be pari passu, or equal, in right of payment to the Unsecured Notes, (2) any indebtedness or other obligations that would be secured and therefore rank effectively senior in right of payment to the Unsecured Notes to the extent of the value of the assets securing such indebtedness, (3) indebtedness or other obligations of ours that are guaranteed by one or more of our subsidiaries and which therefore are structurally senior to the Unsecured Notes and (4) securities, indebtedness or other obligations issued or incurred by our subsidiaries that would be senior to our equity interests in our subsidiaries and therefore rank structurally senior to the Unsecured Notes with respect to the assets of our subsidiaries, in each case other than an incurrence of indebtedness or other obligations that would cause a violation of Section 18(a)(1)(A) of the 1940 Act as modified by Section 61(a)(1) and (2) of the 1940 Act or any successor provisions, as such obligations could be amended or superseded, giving effect to any exemptive relief granted to us by the SEC. Currently, these provisions generally prohibit us from incurring additional borrowings, including through the issuance of additional debt securities, unless our asset coverage, as defined in the 1940 Act, equals at least 150% after such borrowings;

•pay dividends on, or purchase or redeem or make any payments in respect of, capital stock or other securities ranking junior in right of payment to the Unsecured Notes;

•sell assets (other than certain limited restrictions on our ability to consolidate, merge or sell all or substantially all of our assets);

•enter into transactions with affiliates;

•create liens (including liens on the shares of our subsidiaries) or enter into sale and leaseback transactions;

•make investments; or

•create restrictions on the payment of dividends or other amounts to us from our subsidiaries.

Furthermore, the terms of the indenture and the Unsecured Notes do not protect holders of the Unsecured Notes in the event that we experience changes (including significant adverse changes) in our financial condition, results of operations or credit ratings, as they do not require that we or our subsidiaries adhere to any financial tests or ratios or specified levels of net worth, revenues, income, cash flow or liquidity other than certain events of default under the indenture governing the Unsecured Notes.

Our ability to recapitalize, incur additional debt and take a number of other actions are not limited by the terms of the Unsecured Notes and could have important consequences for holders of the Unsecured Notes, including making it more difficult for us to satisfy our obligations with respect to the Unsecured Notes or negatively affecting the trading value of the Unsecured Notes.

Certain of our current debt instruments include more protections for their holders than the indenture and the

Unsecured Notes. In addition, other debt we issue or incur in the future could contain more protections for its

holders than the indenture and the Unsecured Notes, including additional covenants and events of default. The

issuance or incurrence of any such debt with incremental protections could affect the market for and trading levels

and prices of the Unsecured Notes.

If an active trading market for the Unsecured Notes does not develop, holders may not be able to resell them.

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

If we default on our obligations to pay our other indebtedness, we could not be able to make payments on the Unsecured Notes.

Any default under the agreements governing our indebtedness, including the Debt Securitizations, the Revolving Credit Facilities or other indebtedness to which we are a party that is not waived by the required lenders or holders, and the remedies sought by the holders of such indebtedness could make us unable to pay principal, premium, if any, and interest on the Unsecured Notes and substantially decrease the market value of the Unsecured Notes.

If we are unable to generate sufficient cash flow and are otherwise unable to obtain funds necessary to meet required

payments of principal, premium, if any, and interest on our indebtedness, or if we otherwise fail to comply with the various covenants, including financial and operating covenants, in the instruments governing our indebtedness, we could be in default under the terms of the agreements governing such indebtedness. In the event of such default, the holders of such indebtedness could elect to declare all the funds borrowed thereunder to be due and payable, together with accrued and unpaid interest, the lenders under the Revolving Credit Facilities or other debt we could incur in the future could elect to terminate their commitments, cease making further loans and institute foreclosure proceedings against our assets, and we could be forced into bankruptcy or liquidation.

If our operating performance declines, we could in the future need to seek to obtain waivers from the required lenders under the Revolving Credit Facilities or the required holders of the Debt Securitizations or other debt that we could incur in the future, to avoid being in default. If we breach our covenants under the Debt Securitizations, the Revolving Credit Facilities or other debt and seek a waiver, we could not be able to obtain a waiver from the required lenders or holders. If this occurs, we would be in default and our lenders or debt holders could exercise their rights as described above, and we could be forced into bankruptcy or liquidation.

If we are unable to repay debt, lenders or holders having secured obligations, including the lenders and holders under the Debt Securitizations and the Revolving Credit Facilities could proceed against the collateral securing the debt. Because the Revolving Credit Facilities have, and any future credit facilities will likely have, customary cross-default provisions, if the indebtedness thereunder or under any future credit facility is accelerated, we could be unable to repay or finance the amounts due. In the event holders of any debt securities we have outstanding exercise their rights to accelerate following a cross-default, those holders would be entitled to receive the principal amount of their investment, subject to any subordination arrangements that could be in place. We cannot assure you that we will have sufficient liquidity to be able to repay such amounts, in which case we would be in default under the accelerated debt and holders would have the ability to sue us to recover amounts then owing.

A downgrade, suspension or withdrawal of the credit rating assigned by a rating agency to us or the Unsecured Notes, if any, or change in the debt markets, could cause the liquidity or market value of the Unsecured Notes to decline significantly.

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

An increase in market interest rates could result in a decrease in the market value of the Unsecured Notes.

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

The optional redemption provision could materially adversely affect the return on the Unsecured Notes.

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

We could be unable to repurchase the Unsecured Notes upon a Change of Control Repurchase Event.

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

We are a holding company and depend on payments from our subsidiaries in order to make payments on any debt securities that we could issue as well as to pay distributions on our common stock. Any debt securities that we issue will be structurally subordinated to the obligations of our subsidiaries.

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

Holders of any preferred stock that we could issue will have the right to elect members of the board of directors and have class voting rights on certain matters.

The 1940 Act requires that holders of shares of preferred stock must be entitled as a class to elect two directors at all times and to elect a majority of the directors if dividends on such preferred stock are in arrears by two years or more, until such arrearage is eliminated. In addition, certain matters under the 1940 Act require the separate vote of the holders of any issued and outstanding preferred stock, including changes in fundamental investment restrictions and conversion to open-end status and, accordingly, preferred stockholders could veto any such changes. Restrictions imposed on the declarations and payment of dividends or other distributions to the holders of our common stock and preferred stock, both by the 1940 Act and by requirements imposed by rating agencies, might impair our ability to maintain our qualification as a RIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

Our common stockholders’ interest in us could be diluted if they do not fully exercise subscription rights in any rights offering. In addition, if the subscription price is less than our net asset value per share, then common stockholders will experience an immediate dilution of the aggregate net asset value of their shares.

In the event we issue subscription rights, stockholders who do not fully exercise their subscription rights should expect that they will, at the completion of a rights offering, own a smaller proportional interest in us than would otherwise be the case if they fully exercised their rights. We cannot state precisely the amount of any such dilution in share ownership because we do not know at this time what proportion of the shares would be purchased as a result of such rights offering.

In addition, if the subscription price is less than the net asset value per share of our common stock, then our common stockholders would experience an immediate dilution of the aggregate net asset value of their shares as a result of the offering. The amount of any decrease in net asset value is not predictable because it is not known at this time what the subscription price and net asset value per share will be on the expiration date of a rights offering or what proportion of the shares will be purchased as a result of such rights offering. Such dilution could be substantial.

These dilutive effects could be exacerbated if we were to conduct multiple subscription rights offerings, particularly if such offerings were to occur over a short period of time. In addition, subscription rights offerings and the prospect of future subscription rights offerings could create downward pressure on the secondary market price of our common stock due to the potential for the issuance of shares at a price below our net asset value, without a corresponding change to our net asset value.

Our stockholders will experience dilution in their ownership percentage if they do not participate in our dividend reinvestment plan.

All distributions declared in cash payable to stockholders that are participants in our dividend reinvestment plan are automatically reinvested in shares of our common stock. As a result, our stockholders that do not participate in our dividend reinvestment plan will experience dilution in their ownership percentage of our common stock over time.

Our stockholders could receive shares of our common stock as dividends, which could result in adverse tax consequences to them.

Although we currently do not intend to do so, we are permitted to declare a large portion of a dividend in shares of common stock instead of cash at the election of each stockholder. Revenue Procedures issued by the IRS allow a publicly offered regulated investment company (such as us) to distribute its own stock as a dividend for the purpose of fulfilling its distribution requirements, if certain conditions are satisfied. Among other things, the aggregate amount of cash available to be distributed to all stockholders is required to be at least 10% of the total distribution, for distributions declared on or before December 31, 2022 and at least 20% of the aggregate declared distribution for distributions declared on or after January 1, 2023. The Internal Revenue Service has also issued private letter rulings on cash/stock dividends paid by RICs and real estate investment trusts where the cash component is limited to 20% of the total distribution if certain requirements are satisfied. Stockholders receiving such dividends will be required to include the full amount of the dividend (including the portion payable in stock) as ordinary income (or, in certain circumstances, long-term capital gain) to the extent of our current and accumulated earnings and profits for federal income tax purposes. As a result, stockholders could be required to pay income taxes with respect to such dividends in excess of the cash dividends received. It is unclear to what extent we will be able to pay taxable dividends in cash and common stock (whether pursuant to IRS Revenue Procedures, a private letter ruling or otherwise).

Sales of substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market could have an adverse effect on the market price of our common stock.

Sales of substantial amounts of our common stock, or the availability of such common stock for sale, could adversely affect the prevailing market prices for our common stock. If this occurs and continues, it could impair our ability to raise additional capital through the sale of securities should we desire to do so.

The trading market or market value of our publicly issued debt securities could fluctuate.

Any publicly issued debt securities we issue will not necessarily have an established trading market. We cannot assure you that a trading market for our publicly issued debt securities will ever develop or be maintained if developed. In addition to our creditworthiness, many factors could materially adversely affect the trading market for, and market value of, our publicly issued debt securities. These factors include, but are not limited to, the following:

•the time remaining to the maturity of these debt securities;

•the outstanding principal amount of debt securities with terms identical to these debt securities;

•the ratings assigned by national statistical ratings agencies;

•the general economic environment;

•the supply of debt securities trading in the secondary market, if any;

•the redemption or repayment features, if any, of these debt securities;

•the level, direction and volatility of market interest rates generally; and

•market rates of interest higher or lower than rates borne by the debt securities.

Investors should also be aware that there could be a limited number of buyers when they decide to sell our debt securities. This too could materially adversely affect the market value of the debt securities or the trading market for the debt securities.

Terms relating to redemption could materially adversely affect the return on any debt securities that we could issue.

If we issue debt securities that are redeemable at our option, we could choose to redeem such debt securities at times when prevailing interest rates are lower than the interest rate paid on the debt securities. In addition, if our debt securities are subject to mandatory redemption, we could be required to redeem such debt securities also at times

when prevailing interest rates are lower than the interest rate paid on the debt securities. In this circumstance, investors in our debt securities may not be able to reinvest the redemption proceeds in a comparable security at an effective interest rate as high as the debt securities being redeemed.

If we issue preferred stock, debt securities or convertible debt securities, the net asset value and market value of

our common stock could become more volatile.

We cannot assure you that the issuance of preferred stock and/or debt securities would result in a higher yield or return to the holders of our common stock. The issuance of preferred stock, debt securities or convertible debt would likely cause the net asset value and market value of our common stock to become more volatile. If the dividend rate on the preferred stock, or the interest rate on the debt securities, were to approach the net rate of return on our investment portfolio, the benefit of leverage to the holders of our common stock would be reduced. If the dividend rate on the preferred stock, or the interest rate on the debt securities, were to exceed the net rate of return on our portfolio, the use of leverage would result in a lower rate of return to the holders of our common stock than if we had not issued the preferred stock or debt securities. Any decline in the net asset value of our investment would be borne entirely by the holders of our common stock. Therefore, if the market value of our portfolio were to decline, the leverage would result in a greater decrease in net asset value to the holders of our common stock than if we were not leveraged through the issuance of preferred stock. This decline in net asset value would also tend to cause a greater decline in the market price for our common stock.

There is also a risk that, in the event of a sharp decline in the value of our net assets, we would be in danger of failing to maintain required asset coverage ratios which could be required by the preferred stock, debt securities, convertible debt or units or of a downgrade in the ratings of the preferred stock, debt securities, convertible debt or units or our current investment income might not be sufficient to meet the dividend requirements on the preferred stock or the interest payments on the debt securities. In order to counteract such an event, we might need to liquidate investments in order to fund redemption of some or all of the preferred stock, debt securities or convertible debt. In addition, we would pay (and the holders of our common stock would bear) all costs and expenses relating to the issuance and ongoing maintenance of the preferred stock, debt securities, convertible debt or any combination of these securities. Holders of preferred stock, debt securities or convertible debt could have different interests than holders of common stock and could at times have disproportionate influence over our affairs.

General Risk Factors

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

The success of our activities is affected by general economic and market conditions, including, among others, interest rates, availability of credit, inflation rates, economic uncertainty, changes in laws, and trade barriers. These factors could affect the level and volatility of securities prices and the liquidity of our investments. Volatility or illiquidity could impair our profitability or result in losses. These factors also could adversely affect the availability or cost of our leverage, which would result in lower returns.

In 2020, the U.S. capital markets experienced extreme volatility and disruption following the global outbreak of COVID-19 (also known as the “coronavirus”). Some economists and major investment banks have expressed concern that the continued spread of the virus globally could lead to a prolonged period of world-wide economic downturn. These disruptions in the capital markets have increased the spread between the yields realized on risk-free and higher risk securities, resulting in illiquidity in parts of the capital markets. Such disruptions could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows, and future market disruptions and/or illiquidity could negatively impact us. These unfavorable economic conditions could increase our funding costs and limit our access to the capital markets, and could result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit to us in the future. These events could limit our investments, our ability to grow and could negatively impact our operating results and the fair values of our debt and equity investments.

Events outside of our control, including public health crises, could negatively affect our portfolio companies, our investment adviser and the results of our operations.

Periods of market volatility could occur in response to pandemics or other events outside of our control. We, GC Advisors, and the portfolio companies in which we invest in could be affected by force majeure events (i.e., events beyond the control of the party claiming that the event has occurred, such as acts of God, fire, flood, earthquakes, outbreaks of an infectious disease, pandemic or any other serious public health concern, war, terrorism, labor strikes,

major plant breakdowns, pipeline or electricity line ruptures, failure of technology, defective design and construction, accidents, demographic changes, government macroeconomic policies, social instability, etc.). Some force majeure events could adversely affect the ability of a party (including us, GC Advisors, a portfolio company or a counterparty to us, GC Advisors, or a portfolio company) to perform its obligations until it is able to remedy the force majeure event. In addition, force majeure events, such as the cessation of the operation of equipment for repair or upgrade, could similarly lead to the unavailability of essential equipment and technologies. These risks could, among other effects, adversely impact the cash flows available from a portfolio company, cause personal injury or loss of life, including to a senior manager of GC Advisors or its affiliates, damage property, or instigate disruptions of service. In addition, the cost to a portfolio company or us of repairing or replacing damaged assets resulting from such force majeure event could be considerable. It will not be possible to insure against all such events, and insurance proceeds received, if any, could be inadequate to completely or even partially cover any loss of revenues or investments, any increases in operating and maintenance expenses, or any replacements or rehabilitation of property. Certain events causing catastrophic loss could be either uninsurable, or insurable at such high rates as to adversely impact us, GC Advisors, or portfolio companies, as applicable. Force majeure events that are incapable of or are too costly to cure could have permanent adverse effects. Certain force majeure events (such as war or an outbreak of an infectious disease) could have a broader negative impact on the world economy and international business activity generally, or in any of the countries in which we invest or our portfolio companies operate specifically. Such force majeure events could result in or coincide with: increased volatility in the global securities, derivatives and currency markets; a decrease in the reliability of market prices and difficulty in valuing assets; greater fluctuations in currency exchange rates; increased risk of default (by both government and private issuers); further social, economic, and political instability; nationalization of private enterprise; greater governmental involvement in the economy or in social factors that impact the economy; less governmental regulation and supervision of the securities markets and market participants and decreased monitoring of the markets by governments or self-regulatory organizations and reduced enforcement of regulations; limited, or limitations on, the activities of investors in such markets; controls or restrictions on foreign investment, capital controls and limitations on repatriation of invested capital; inability to purchase and sell investments or otherwise settle security or derivative transactions (i.e., a market freeze); unavailability of currency hedging techniques; substantial, and in some periods extremely high, rates of inflation, which can last many years and have substantial negative effects on credit and securities markets as well as the economy as a whole; recessions; and difficulties in obtaining and/or enforcing legal judgments.

Additionally, a major governmental intervention into industry, including the nationalization of an industry or the assertion of control over one or more portfolio companies or its assets, could result in a loss to us, including if the investment in such portfolio companies is canceled, unwound or acquired (which could result in inadequate compensation). Any of the foregoing could therefore adversely affect the performance of us and our investments.

In December 2019, a novel strain of coronavirus, COVID-19, was identified in Wuhan, China, and spread to additional countries. On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization declared a global emergency. At various times during the course of the pandemic, orders have been issued and lifted restricting movement within a number of large metropolitan areas, including in some instances, orders to shelter in place. The outbreak of COVID-19 and its related negative public health developments adversely affected workforces, customers, suppliers, economies and financial markets globally. The length of any resulting economic downturn and any additional waves of the disease that could exacerbate or further prolong any downturn are impossible to predict and could affect operations of GC Advisors’ business, including by harming GC Advisors’ ability to manage our investments. In addition, portfolio companies and our investments in such companies could be adversely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic or any other pandemic, including by supply disruptions, decreases in consumer demand, loss of personnel either to sickness or movement restrictions, and the resulting global market and economic disruptions. These adverse effects could cause losses in value of our investments, adversely affecting investors.

We could experience fluctuations in our quarterly operating results.

We could experience fluctuations in our quarterly operating results due to a number of factors, including the interest rate payable on any borrowings and the interest rate payable on the debt securities we acquire, the default rate on such securities, the number and size of investments we originate or acquire, 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. In light of these factors, results for any period should not be relied upon as being indicative of our performance in future periods.

Political uncertainty could adversely affect our business.

U.S. and non-U.S. markets could experience political uncertainty and/or change that subjects investments to heightened risks, including, for instance, risks related to elections in the U.S., the large-scale invasion of Ukraine by Russia that began in February 2022, or the effect on world leaders and governments of global health pandemics, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. These heightened risks could also include: increased risk of default (by both government and private issuers); greater social, trade, economic and political instability (including the risk of war or terrorist activity); greater governmental involvement in the economy; greater governmental supervision and regulation of the securities markets and market participants resulting in increased expenses related to compliance; greater fluctuations in currency exchange rates; controls or restrictions on foreign investment and/or trade, capital controls and limitations on repatriation of invested capital and on the ability to exchange currencies; inability to purchase and sell investments or otherwise settle security or derivative transactions (i.e., a market freeze); unavailability of currency hedging techniques; and slower clearance. During times of political uncertainty and/or change, global markets often become more volatile. There could also be a lower level of monitoring and regulation of markets while a country is experiencing political uncertainty and/or change, and the activities of investors in such markets and enforcement of existing regulations could become more limited. Markets experiencing political uncertainty and/or change could have substantial, and in some periods extremely high, rates of inflation for many years. Inflation and rapid fluctuations in inflation rates typically have negative effects on such countries’ economies and markets. Tax laws could change materially, and any changes in tax laws could have an unpredictable effect on us, our investments and our investors. There can be no assurance that political changes will not cause us or our investors to suffer losses.

The impact of Brexit on our investments is uncertain and could adversely affect our business.

On January 31, 2020, the United Kingdom, or the UK, ended its membership in the European Union, or the EU, referred to as Brexit. Following the termination of a transition period, the UK and the EU entered into a trade and cooperation agreement to govern the future relationship between the parties, which was provisionally applied as of January 1, 2021 and entered into force on May 1, 2021 following ratification by the EU. With respect to financial services, the agreement leaves decisions on equivalence and adequacy to be determined by each of the U.K. and E.U. unilaterally in due course. As a result, certain UK licensed entities are unable to provide regulated services in a number of EU jurisdictions from the end of December 2020, absent regulatory relief or other measures implemented by individual countries. Such agreement is untested and could lead to ongoing political and economic uncertainty and periods of exacerbated volatility in both the United Kingdom and in wider European and global markets for some time. The longer term economic, legal, political and social implications of Brexit are unclear at this stage. Brexit has led to ongoing political and economic uncertainty and periods of increased volatility in both the UK and in wider European markets for some time. Brexit could lead to calls for similar referendums in other European jurisdictions, which could cause increased economic volatility in the European and global markets. This mid- to long-term uncertainty could have adverse effects on the economy generally and on our ability to earn attractive returns. In particular, currency volatility could mean that our returns are adversely affected by market movements and could make it more difficult, or more expensive, for us to execute prudent currency hedging policies. Potential decline in the value of the British Pound and/or the Euro against other currencies, along with the potential further downgrading of the UK’s sovereign credit rating, could also have an impact on the performance of certain investments made in the UK or Europe.

New or modified laws or regulations governing our operations could adversely affect our business.

We and our portfolio companies are subject to regulation by laws at the U.S. federal, state and local levels. These laws and regulations, as well as their interpretation, could change from time to time, including as the result of interpretive guidance or other directives from the U.S. President and others in the executive branch, and new laws, regulations and interpretations could also come into effect. For example, the current U.S. presidential administration could support an enhanced regulatory agenda that imposes greater costs on all sectors and on financial services companies in particular. Any such new or changed laws or regulations could have a material adverse effect on our business, and political uncertainty could increase regulatory uncertainty in the near term.

The effects of legislative and regulatory proposals directed at the financial services industry or affecting taxation, could negatively impact the operations, cash flows or financial condition of us or our portfolio companies, impose additional costs on us or our portfolio companies, intensify the regulatory supervision of us or our portfolio companies or otherwise adversely affect our business or the business of our portfolio companies. In addition, if we

do not comply with applicable laws and regulations, we could lose any licenses that we then hold for the conduct of our business and could be subject to civil fines and criminal penalties.

We invest in securities of issuers that are subject to governmental and non-governmental regulations, including by federal and state regulators and various self-regulatory organizations. Companies participating in regulated activities could incur significant costs to comply with these laws and regulations. If a company in which we invest fails to comply with an applicable regulatory regime, it could be subject to fines, injunctions, operating restrictions or criminal prosecution, any of which could materially and adversely affect the value of our investment.

Additionally, changes to the laws and regulations governing our operations, including those associated with RICs, could cause us to alter our investment strategy in order to avail ourselves of new or different opportunities or result in the imposition of corporate-level taxes on us. Such changes could result in material differences to our strategies and plans and could shift our investment focus from the areas of expertise of GC Advisors to other types of investments in which GC Advisors could have little or no expertise or experience. Any such changes, if they occur, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and the value of your investment. If we invest in commodity interests in the future, GC Advisors could determine not to use investment strategies that trigger additional regulation by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, or the CFTC, or could determine to operate subject to CFTC regulation, if applicable. If we or GC Advisors were to operate subject to CFTC regulation, we could incur additional expenses and would be subject to additional regulation.

On October 21, 2014, U.S. risk retention rules adopted pursuant to Section 941 of Dodd-Frank, or the U.S. Risk Retention Rules, were issued and became effective with respect to collateralized loan obligation, or CLOs, on December 24, 2016. The U.S. Risk Retention Rules require the sponsor (directly or through a majority-owned affiliate) of a debt securitization subject to such rules, such as CLOs, in the absence of an exemption, to retain an economic interest, or the Retention Interest, in the credit risk of the assets being securitized in the form of an eligible horizontal residual interest, an eligible vertical interest, or a combination thereof, in accordance with the requirements of the U.S. Risk Retention Rules. Due to the interplay of the 1940 Act restrictions on principal and joint transactions and the U.S. Risk Retention Rules, we sought no-action relief to ensure that we could engage in CLO financing under the 1940 Act and the risk retention rules mandated by Section 941 of Dodd-Frank. On September 7, 2018 we received a no-action letter from the staff, or the Staff, of the Division of Investment Management of the SEC that states that the Staff would not recommend that the SEC take any enforcement action under Section 57(a) of the1940 Act, or Rule 17d-1 under the 1940 Act against us or GC Advisors if we were to acquire CLO equity as a Retention Interest in the manner described in a letter submitted to the Staff on behalf of us.

However, the no-action relief we received did not address whether or not the CLO transactions described therein would satisfy the requirements of the U.S. Risk Retention Rules. As a general matter, available interpretive authority to date addressing the U.S. Risk Retention Rules applicable to CLOs is limited, and there is limited judicial decisional authority or applicable agency interpretation that has directly addressed any of the risk retention approaches taken with respect to CLOs. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that the applicable federal agencies will agree that any CLO transaction we undertake, or the manner in which we hold any retention interests, complies with the U.S. Risk Retention Rules. If we ever determined that undertaking CLO transactions would subject us or any of our affiliates to unacceptable regulatory risk, our ability to execute CLOs could be limited or otherwise curtailed. Given the more attractive financing costs associated with these types of debt securitization as opposed to other types of financing available (such as traditional senior secured facilities), this would, in turn, increase our financing costs. Any associated increase in financing costs would ultimately be borne by our common stockholders.

Over the last several years, there also has been an increase in 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 will 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 credit extension could negatively impact our operations, cash flows or financial condition, impose additional costs on us, intensify the regulatory supervision of us or otherwise adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We incur significant costs as a result of being a publicly traded company.

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 Exchange Act, as well as additional corporate governance requirements, including requirements under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and other rules implemented by the SEC.

Our compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act involves significant expenditures, and non-compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act would adversely affect us and the market price of our common stock.

Under current SEC rules, we are required to report on our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and related rules and regulations of the SEC. As such, we are required to review on an annual basis our internal control over financial reporting, and on a quarterly and annual basis to evaluate and disclose changes in our internal control over financial reporting. As a result, we incur expenses that could negatively impact our financial performance and our ability to make distributions. This process also results in a diversion of management’s time and attention. We cannot ensure that our evaluation, testing and remediation process is effective or that our internal control over financial reporting will be effective. In the event that we are unable to maintain compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and related rules, we and the market price of our securities would be adversely affected.

Technological innovations and industry disruptions could negatively impact us.

Technological innovations have disrupted traditional approaches in multiple industries and can permit younger companies to achieve success and in the process disrupt markets and market practices. We can provide no assurance that new businesses and approaches will not be created that would compete with us and/or our portfolio companies or alter the market practices in which GC Advisors and its affiliates and us have been designed to function within and on which we depend on for our investment return. New approaches could damage our investments, disrupt the market in which we operate and subject us to increased competition, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of investments.

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

Our business depends on the communications and information systems of GC Advisors and its affiliates. GC Advisors and the Administrator are heavily reliant on the information technology infrastructure, processes and procedures of Golub Capital, which has devoted significant resources to developing effective and reliable information technology systems. Information technology changes rapidly, however, and Golub Capital could fail to stay ahead of such advances. Moreover, Golub Capital could find itself a target of cyberattacks, including cyber espionage, malware, ransomware, and other types of hacking. If any of the Golub Capital information technology systems do not operate properly or are disabled, whether as a result of tampering or a breach of network security systems or otherwise, we and Golub Capital could suffer, among other consequences, financial loss, disruption of businesses and reputational damage and, in the case of Golub Capital, liability to clients. While steps have been taken to mitigate the risk and impact of such attacks, no system is fully attack-proof, and a cyberattack could have an adverse impact on us.

In addition, Golub Capital’s operations rely on the secure processing, storage and transmission of confidential and other information in its computer systems and networks. Although Golub Capital takes protective measures, its computer systems, software and networks could be vulnerable to unauthorized access, theft, misuse, computer viruses or other malicious code and other events that could have an impact on security. We, GC Advisors and the Administrator rely on third-party service providers for certain aspects of their business. Any interruption or deterioration in the performance of these third parties or failures of their information systems and technology could impair the quality of the operations and could affect their reputation, which could have an adverse effect on us.

A data breach could negatively impact our business and result in significant penalties.

GC Advisors is subject to numerous laws in various jurisdictions relating to privacy and the storage, sharing, use, processing, disclosure and protection of information that we and our affiliates hold. The EU’s General Data Protection Regulation, the Cayman Islands Data Protection Law, 2017, and the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 are recent examples of such laws, and GC Advisors anticipates new privacy and data protection laws will be passed in other jurisdictions in the future. In general, these laws introduce many new obligations on GC Advisors and its affiliates and service providers and create new rights for parties who have given us their personal information, such as investors and others.

Breach of these laws could result in significant financial penalties for GC Advisors and/or us. As interpretation of these laws evolves and new laws are passed, GC Advisors could be required to make changes to its business practices, which could result in additional risks, costs and liabilities to us and adversely affect investment returns.

While GC Advisors intends to comply with its privacy and data protection obligations under the privacy and data protection laws that are applicable to it, it is possible that GC Advisors will not be able to accurately anticipate the ways in which regulators and courts will apply or interpret these laws. A violation of applicable privacy and data protection law could result in negative publicity and/or subject GC Advisors or us, to significant costs associated with litigation, settlements, regulatory action, judgments, liabilities and/or penalties.

Cybersecurity risks and cyber incidents may adversely affect our business or the business of our portfolio companies.

The operations of us, Golub Capital, any third-party service provider to us or Golub Capital and our portfolio companies are susceptible to risks from cybersecurity attacks and incidents due to reliance on the secure processing, storage and transmission of confidential and other information in relevant computer systems and networks. An adverse event that threatens the confidentiality, integrity or availability of the information resources of us or our portfolio companies, or a cyber incident, may be an intentional attack or an unintentional event and could involve gaining unauthorized access to the information systems of us, Golub Capital or our portfolio companies for purposes of misappropriating assets, stealing confidential 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). 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. The result of these incidents may include disrupted operations, misstated or unreliable financial data, liability for stolen assets or information, increased cybersecurity protection and insurance costs, litigation and damage to business relationships.

The costs related to cyber or other security threats or disruptions may not be fully insured or indemnified by other means. As our and our portfolio companies’ reliance on technology has increased, so have the risks posed to information systems of ours, Golub Capital and our portfolio companies. Although Golub Capital takes protective measures, these measures, as well as an increased awareness of the nature and extent of a risk of a cyber incident, do not guarantee that a cyber incident will not occur and/or that the financial results, operations or confidential information of ours or our portfolio companies will not be negatively impacted by any such incident. Cybersecurity risks require continuous and increasing attention and other resources, which attention diverts time and other resources from other activities of ours, Golub Capital and our portfolio companies. There is no assurance that any efforts to mitigate cybersecurity risks undertaken by us, Golub Capital or our portfolio companies will be effective. Network, system, application and data breaches as a result of cybersecurity risks or cyber incidents could result in operational disruptions or information misappropriation that could have a material adverse effect on the business, results of operations and financial condition of us and of our portfolio companies.

Our business and operations could be negatively affected if we become subject to stockholder activism, which could cause us to incur significant expense, hinder the execution of our investment strategy or impact our stock price.

Stockholder activism, which could take many forms, including making public demands that we consider certain strategic alternatives, engaging in public campaigns to attempt to influence our corporate governance and/or our management, and commencing proxy contests to attempt to elect the activists’ representatives or others to our board of directors, or arise in a variety of situations, has been increasing in the business development company space recently. While we are currently not subject to any stockholder activism, due to the potential volatility of our stock price and for a variety of other reasons, we could in the future become the target of stockholder activism. Stockholder activism could result in substantial costs and divert management’s and our board of directors’ attention and resources from our business. Additionally, such stockholder activism could give rise to perceived uncertainties as to our future and adversely affect our relationships with service providers and our portfolio companies. Also, we could be required to incur significant legal and other expenses related to any activist stockholder matters. Further, our stock price could be subject to significant fluctuation or otherwise be adversely affected by the events, risks and uncertainties of any stockholder activism.

Annual Interest Rate [Percent]

3.04%

Effects of Leverage [Table Text Block]


	Assumed Return on Our Portfolio (Net of Expenses)
	-10%	-5%	0%	5%	10%
Corresponding return to common stockholder(1)	-26.03%	-14.87%	-3.70%	7.46%	18.63%

Return at Minus Ten [Percent]

(26.03%)

Return at Minus Five [Percent]

(14.87%)

Return at Zero [Percent]

(3.70%)

Return at Plus Five [Percent]

7.46%

Return at Plus Ten [Percent]

18.63%

Effects of Leverage, Purpose [Text Block]

Share Price [Table Text Block]

The following table lists the high and low closing sale price for our common stock, the closing sale price as a percentage of net asset value, or NAV, and quarterly distributions per share.


Period	NAV(1)		Closing Sales Price				Premium (Discount) of High Sales Price to NAV(2)		Premium (Discount) of Low Sales Price to NAV(2)		Distributions Declared
			High		Low
Fiscal year ended September 30, 2022
Fourth quarter	$	14.89	$	14.35	$	12.21	(3.6)	%	(18.0)	%	$	0.30
Third quarter	15.14		15.48		12.67		2.2		(16.3)		0.30
Second quarter	15.35		16.10		14.70		4.9		(4.2)		0.30
First quarter	15.26		15.99		14.86		4.8		(2.6)		0.30
Fiscal year ended September 30, 2021
Fourth quarter	$	15.19	$	16.01	$	15.17	5.4	%	(0.1)	%	$	0.29
Third quarter	15.06		16.10		14.72		6.9		(2.3)		0.29
Second quarter	14.86		15.36		14.08		3.4		(5.2)		0.29
First quarter	14.60		14.15		12.66		(3.1)		(13.3)		0.29

(1)NAV per share is determined as of the last day in the relevant quarter and therefore may not reflect the NAV per share on the date of the high and low closing sales prices. The NAVs shown are based on outstanding shares at the end of the each period.

(2)Calculated as of the respective high or low closing sales price divided by the quarter-end NAV.

Lowest Price or Bid

$ 12.21

$ 12.67

$ 14.70

$ 14.86

$ 15.17

$ 14.72

$ 14.08

$ 12.66

Highest Price or Bid

$ 14.35

$ 15.48

$ 16.10

$ 15.99

$ 16.01

$ 16.10

$ 15.36

$ 14.15

Highest Price or Bid, Premium (Discount) to NAV [Percent]

(3.60%)

2.20%

4.90%

4.80%

5.40%

6.90%

3.40%

(3.10%)

Lowest Price or Bid, Premium (Discount) to NAV [Percent]

(18.00%)

(16.30%)

(4.20%)

(2.60%)

(0.10%)

(2.30%)

(5.20%)

(13.30%)