All investments involve risk, including possible loss of principal. Carefully consider key risk factors prior to investing.
The private credit market has grown significantly in recent years as investors search for higher income. Direct lending, through which companies borrow from a smaller group of lenders without a bank intermediary, now represents the largest portion (46%) of the $1.7 trillion private credit market.1
Not all direct lending is created equal, however. The size of the borrower may significantly impact the potential risk and ultimate returns for end investors, with smaller borrowers more vulnerable to default in economic slowdowns. By contrast, larger corporate borrowers—often defined as those with earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) in excess of $50 million—have advantageous features that better position them to retain their value for lenders in challenging environments.
Larger borrowers have also benefited in recent years from the growth of private markets, which are now robust enough to provide complete, scaled solutions to larger borrowers. These solutions may offer borrowers several benefits, including greater customization of loan structure, certainty of execution and terms, direct partnership with lenders, and access to financing through volatile markets.
Explore OHA's insight on large borrowers in private credit and why company size matters in direct lending.
Typical features of larger borrowers
Several features may better position larger companies to service debt obligations through challenging market environments. These advantages include:
Scale/breadth
Larger borrowers typically have greater market share and more diversified revenue streams, which may enhance their resilience to economic slowdowns, high inflation, and external shocks such as the onset of the COVID‑19 pandemic.
Pricing power
Through their size, larger borrowers may be better positioned to negotiate with customers and suppliers to implement price increases and otherwise manage costs through various economic cycles.
Experienced management
Larger borrowers typically have more experienced management teams that are better positioned to execute on strategic and financial objectives and manage through operating and market challenges.
Economies of scale
As borrowers grow in size, they often benefit from economies of scale that may boost operating margins and enhance cash flows and profits. These efficiencies may enhance the credit worthiness of a larger borrower.
Operational flexibility
Larger borrowers may have a greater ability to adapt and manage their supply chains to enhance and sustain operations through potential disruptions along with typically greater resources for research and development.
Financial resources
Larger companies are more likely to have access to deeper and more diversified financial resources that better position them to operate as market conditions evolve.
We believe these advantages better position larger companies to service debt and enhance their value for lenders in the event of a restructuring. Over the next few pages, we review several metrics—including higher EBITDA margins, stronger EBITDA resilience, and lower default histories—that evidence the relative strength of larger companies.
Higher EBITDA margins
Recent data for private debt issuances show that larger companies consistently have higher EBITDA margins compared with smaller companies.2 As demonstrated in Figure 1, EBITDA margins for larger companies have been 1.2 to 1.4x higher than smaller companies that generate less than $50 million in EBITDA annually. Businesses with higher EBITDA margins generally have more efficient cost structures and are more cash generative. As a result, we believe these companies are better able to service debt and may benefit from greater financial stability and the ability to withstand potential economic headwinds.
For a longer historical perspective across a broader range of companies, the financial performance of equity index constituents is helpful. In the following analysis, Larger Public Companies reflects constituents of the Russell Midcap Index which have a median EBITDA of approximately $150 million.4 Smaller Public Companies reflects companies in the Russell Microcap Index which have a median EBITDA of approximately $25 million per year.5 Figure 2 shows that larger companies have generated consistently higher margins compared with smaller companies. These stronger margins may evidence superior market shares, more control over supply chains, better pricing power, and economies of scale for larger companies. Larger company margins have also been more stable over time, including through periods of market turbulence.
Stronger EBITDA resilience
Larger companies are typically better positioned to withstand challenging economic and market conditions. In each of the four key periods of economic dislocation over the past 15 years, the EBITDA declines of smaller companies have significantly exceeded those of larger companies (Figure 3) in the same equity indices referenced above. The cash flows of smaller companies were hit particularly hard during the energy dislocation in 2014 to 2015 and the COVID‑19 pandemic. With quarterly EBITDA declines greater than 100% during these two economic shocks, smaller companies went cash flow negative compared with larger companies which remained cash flow positive across dislocations, illustrated by an EBITDA decline of less than 100%. This suggests there is generally lower potential downside from lending to larger companies.
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Please refer to the Appendix for additional endnotes.
Lower traditional loan default rates
Lower default rates for larger companies historically evidence their stronger credit profiles. Figure 4 shows that larger borrowers had a 30% lower default rate compared with smaller borrowers between 1995 and 2023. We believe these long‑term results demonstrate that larger companies have better navigated through market cycles than smaller companies.
Lower private loan default rates
As private credit has matured as an asset class, default data for private financings is now available. In private credit, larger borrowers also consistently demonstrated lower default rates post‑pandemic as interest rates and inflation rose (Figure 5).
Overall, investing in direct lending that focuses on larger companies could be a relative source of stability compared with smaller companies. Historical performance suggests that larger companies would be less susceptible to default on their debt through challenging market environments due to the characteristics discussed above. These may include, but are not limited to, diverse revenue streams, better pricing power, and better economies of scale that drive more resilient cash flows at larger companies.
Latest insights
Fall 2024
The “Magnificent Seven” Lender Protections
Learn more about the key lender protections OHA negotiates in its credit agreements to enhance protection for investors.
Summer 2024
Software Credit
Read more to learn why OHA believes software companies can offer attractive all-weather investment profiles and inherent diversification as an “industry of industries”.
Spring 2024
Credit Market Observations
Delve into OHA's analysis of credit markets, covering a wide range of assets including private, liquid, and structured credit.