Contact us
Contact Nuveen
Thank you for your message. We will contact you shortly.
The financial professional take on “The Lead” newsletter series is dedicated to help financial professionals stay informed about developments, and movements in private capital investing.
Bottom-line upfront
- Manager experience matters more than borrower size when credit problems emerge, because workout outcomes are shaped by the composition and motivations of the lender group long before a loan sours.
- Core middle market lenders, hand-picked by sponsors and holding loans to maturity, tend to share aligned workout playbooks that emphasize early engagement, tighter covenants, and collateral protection.
- Historical direct lending recoveries have generally exceeded those of the broadly syndicated loan market, a pattern that supports evaluating manager track records through full credit cycles when considering private credit allocations for clients.
The following analysis helps to frame conversations with clients about manager selection in private credit, particularly around how experience and lender group composition shape outcomes when loans go bad.
Why manager experience matters more than borrower size
Even the best credit managers have loans that go bad. What separates them from everyone else is the history and experience they bring to working these problems out.
A lot comes down to the size of the borrower. Recently we wrote about how the upper middle market and the core middle market approach underwriting new deals differently. In workouts, those same differences surface.
A tale of two troubled borrowers
Imagine two troubled companies. One is an enterprise software borrower with $2 billion in revenue and more than 20 lenders spread across collateralized loan obligations (CLOs), banks, and distressed funds. The other is a $200 million commercial landscaper with a club of relationship lenders who have worked together for years.
Common sense suggests bigger companies are less risky. After all, they have broader access to capital sources, more asset sale options, and can syndicate loans across dozens of lenders to diversify credit risk.
How lender group composition changes workout dynamics
But CLOs, retail funds, and banks that comprise the original lender groups have different strategies than distressed investors who purchase the loan at a discount in the secondary market. Those funds are happy to sell anywhere above their purchase price, even if it's well below the original issue price. In a workout, this motivation puts them at odds with other lenders who are trying to maximize recoveries through patience and borrower support.
Secondary trading compounds the problem, with new lenders showing up at different cost bases, each with their own agenda. These tactics include layering in credit agreements with weak financial covenants, allowing factoring outside the collateral package, and including first-out provisions that position some lenders ahead of others.
Why the core middle market playbook differs
In the core middle market, lenders are hand-picked by sponsors, based on their relationships in prior club deals. As buy-and-hold capital providers, they also share similar workout playbooks: engage the sponsor early, protect the collateral, and use covenant trips to compel negotiations before problems compound. Credit agreements carry real covenants and tighter provisions. That leaves less room for uptiering, where lenders cut ahead of the rest, or drop-down financings, a liability management transaction moving collateral beyond lenders' reach.
What recovery data shows
Recovery data supports this approach. Direct lending recoveries have generally performed better than those in the broadly syndicated market.1 Experienced lenders anticipate problems upfront and build covenants that catch them early. Broadly syndicated loans (BSLs) typically lack that feature, so a borrower can slide much further downhill before the credit agreement forces a conversation.
What this means for conversations with clients
Losses eat returns for breakfast. Investors understand that workouts are part of the credit cycle, and that manager track records demonstrate the ability to operate successfully through downturns. With the right workout playbook, success in the core middle market is largely determined well before the workout ever starts. This reinforces the importance of evaluating private credit managers on the depth of their workout experience, the structure of their credit agreements, and the composition of their typical lender groups, alongside standard suitability considerations for illiquid allocations.
Related articles
The business of private credit: Quality matters in core middle market credit
Podcast: Credit discipline through the cycle-lessons from a pension fund
Consistency is key: Private credit manager selection
1Source: Direct Lending—KBRA DLD Default Research; Syndicated Loans—Solve
Private credit investments are illiquid. Investors should expect limited or no ability to access capital during the investment period, which may span multiple years. These investments carry credit risk, default risk, and the potential for loss of principal. They are not appropriate for investors who may require near-term liquidity. Private credit investments are suitable only for investors with long investment horizons, high risk tolerance, and the financial capacity to bear illiquidity and potential loss of principal. Advisors should evaluate suitability on an individual client basis. The illiquidity of private credit investments is a defining and non-negotiable characteristic of the asset class. Lock-up periods, limited redemption windows, and the absence of a secondary market for most private credit instruments mean that investors may have no ability to access capital for the duration of the investment period. Advisors should ensure clients fully understand these terms before any allocation is made. Private credit investments are not appropriate for investors who may require near-term liquidity. Past performance of private credit strategies is not indicative of future results. The risks associated with private credit include, but are not limited to, credit risk, default risk, concentration risk, interest rate risk, geopolitical risk, sector-specific disruption risk (including technology and AI-driven disruption), and the risk of loss of principal. Experienced managers actively manage these risks, but management experience does not eliminate the possibility of investment loss.
The views and opinions expressed are for informational and educational purposes only as of the date of production/writing and may change without notice at any time based on numerous factors, such as market or other conditions, legal and regulatory developments, additional risks and uncertainties and may not come to pass. This material may contain “forward-looking” information that is not purely historical in nature. Such information may include, among other things, projections, forecasts, estimates of market returns, and proposed or expected portfolio composition. Any changes to assumptions that may have been made in preparing this material could have a material impact on the information presented herein by way of example. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Investing involves risk; principal loss is possible.
Contact us
You are on the site for: Financial Professionals and Individual Investors. You can switch to the site for: Institutional Investors or Global Investors
Not registered yet? Register