Golub Capital BDC (GBDC) 10-K2020 FY Annual report

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, DC 20549

Form 10-K

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Commission file number: 814-00794

GOLUB CAPITAL BDC, INC.

(212) 750-6060

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files).

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of “large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

The aggregate market value of common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant on March 31, 2020 was approximately $1,597.2 million. For the purposes of calculating this amount only, all directors and executive officers of the registrant have been treated as affiliates. There were 167,259,511 shares of the registrant’s common stock outstanding as of November 30, 2020.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Regulation 14A in connection with the registrant’s 2021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which will be filed subsequent to the date hereof, are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K. Such proxy statement will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission not later than 120 days following the end of the registrant’s fiscal year ended September 30, 2020.

PART I

LIBOR plus 2.65%, $42.0 million of Class D 2018 Notes, which bear interest at a rate of three-month LIBOR plus 2.95%, and $113.4 million of Subordinated 2018 Notes that do not bear interest;

Fargo Bank, N.A., as lender, as most recently amended on May 29, 2019, that allowed for borrowing up to $300.0 million as of September 30, 2020 and that bears interest at a rate of one-month LIBOR plus 2.00% per annum through the maturity date, March 21, 2024;

Item 1. Business

GENERAL

We are an externally managed, closed-end, non-diversified management investment company that has elected to be regulated as a business development company under the 1940 Act. In addition, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we have elected to be treated as a regulated investment company, or RIC, under Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code. We were formed in November 2009 to continue and expand the business of our predecessor, Golub Capital Master Funding LLC, which commenced operations in July 2007. We make investments primarily in one stop (a loan that combines characteristics of traditional first lien senior secured loans and second lien or subordinated loans) and other senior secured loans of middle-market companies that are, in most cases, sponsored by private equity firms. GC Advisors structures our one stop loans as senior secured loans, and 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 may take the form of first-priority liens on the assets of the portfolio company. In many cases, we together with our affiliates are the sole lenders of one stop loans, which can afford us additional influence over the borrower in terms of monitoring and, if necessary, remediation in the event of underperformance.

In this annual report on Form 10-K, the term “middle-market” generally refers to companies having earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, or EBITDA, of less than $100.0 million annually.

Our investment objective is to generate current income and capital appreciation by investing primarily in one stop and other senior secured loans of U.S. middle-market companies. We may also selectively invest in second lien and subordinated loans of, and warrants and minority equity securities in, U.S. middle-market companies. We intend to achieve our investment objective by (1) accessing the established loan origination channels developed by Golub Capital, a leading lender to middle-market companies with over $30.0 billion in capital under management as of September 30, 2020, (2) selecting investments within our core middle-market company focus, (3) partnering with experienced private equity firms, or sponsors, in many cases with whom Golub Capital has invested alongside in the past, (4) implementing the disciplined underwriting standards of Golub Capital and (5) drawing upon the aggregate experience and resources of Golub Capital.

We seek to create a portfolio that includes primarily one stop and other senior secured loans by primarily investing approximately $10.0 million to $75.0 million of capital, on average, in the securities of U.S. middle-market companies. We expect to selectively invest more than $75.0 million in some of our portfolio companies and generally expect that the size of our individual investments will vary proportionately with the size of our capital base.

We generally invest in securities that have been rated below investment grade by independent rating agencies or that would be rated below investment grade if they were rated. These securities, which may be referred to as “junk,” have predominantly speculative characteristics with respect to the issuer’s capacity to pay interest and repay principal. In addition, many of our debt investments have floating interest rates that reset on a periodic basis and typically do not fully pay down principal prior to maturity, which may increase our risk of losing part or all of our investment.

On September 16, 2019, we completed our acquisition of GCIC, pursuant to the Merger Agreement. As a result of, and as of the effective time of, the Merger, GCIC’s separate existence ceased.

As a result of the Purchase Agreement, on January 1, 2020, SLF and GCIC SLF became our wholly-owned subsidiaries. In addition, our capital commitments and those of the Transferors were terminated. As wholly-owned subsidiaries, the assets, liabilities, income and expenses of the Senior Loan Funds were consolidated into our financial statements and notes thereto for periods ending on or after January 1, 2020, and are included for purposes of determining our asset coverage ratio.

common stock. We issued to stockholders of record on April 8, 2020 one transferable right for each four shares of our common stock held on the record date. Each holder of rights was entitled to subscribe for one share of common stock for every right held at a subscription price of $9.17 per share. Net proceeds after deducting the dealer manager fees and other offering expenses were approximately $300.4 million. 3,191,448 shares of common stock were purchased in the rights offering by affiliates of GC Advisors.

Information Available

Our Adviser

Our investment activities are managed by our investment adviser, GC Advisors. GC Advisors is responsible for sourcing potential investments, conducting research and due diligence on prospective investments and equity sponsors, analyzing investment opportunities, structuring our investments and monitoring our investments and portfolio companies on an ongoing basis. GC Advisors was organized in September 2008 and is a registered investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended, or the Advisers Act. Under our amended and restated investment advisory agreement, or the Investment Advisory Agreement, with GC Advisors, we pay GC Advisors a base management fee and an incentive fee for its services. See “Business — Management Agreements — Management Fee” for a discussion of the base management fee and incentive fee, including the cumulative income incentive fee and the income and capital gains incentive fee, payable by us to GC Advisors. Unlike most closed-end funds whose fees are based on assets net of leverage, our base management fee is based on our average-adjusted gross assets (including leverage but adjusted to exclude cash and cash equivalents so that investors do not pay the base management fee on such assets) and, therefore, GC Advisors benefits when we incur debt or use leverage. For purposes of the Investment Advisory Agreement, cash equivalents means U.S. government securities and commercial paper instruments maturing within 270 days of purchase. Additionally, under the

incentive fee structure, GC Advisors benefits when capital gains are recognized and, because it determines when a holding is sold, GC Advisors controls the timing of the recognition of capital gains. Our board of directors is charged with protecting our interests by monitoring how GC Advisors addresses these and other conflicts of interest associated with its management services and compensation. While not expected to review or approve each borrowing, our independent directors periodically review GC Advisors’ services and fees as well as its portfolio management decisions and portfolio performance. In connection with these reviews, our independent directors consider whether our fees and expenses (including those related to leverage) remain appropriate. See “Business — Management Agreements — Board Approval of the Investment Advisory Agreement.”

GC Advisors is an affiliate of Golub Capital and pursuant to a staffing agreement, or the Staffing Agreement, Golub Capital LLC makes experienced investment professionals available to GC Advisors and provides access to the senior investment personnel of Golub Capital LLC and its affiliates. The Staffing Agreement provides GC Advisors with access to investment opportunities, which we refer to in the aggregate as deal flow, generated by Golub Capital LLC and its affiliates in the ordinary course of their businesses and commits the members of GC Advisors’ investment committee to serve in that capacity. As our investment adviser, GC Advisors is obligated to allocate investment opportunities among us and its other clients fairly and equitably over time in accordance with its allocation policy. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Related Party Transactions.” However, there can be no assurance that such opportunities will be allocated to us fairly or equitably in the short-term or over time. GC Advisors seeks to capitalize on the significant deal origination, credit underwriting, due diligence, investment structuring, execution, portfolio management and monitoring experience of Golub Capital LLC’s investment professionals.

An affiliate of GC Advisors, the Administrator, provides the administrative services necessary for us to operate. See “Business — Management Agreements — Administration Agreement” for a discussion of the fees and expenses (subject to the review and approval of our independent directors) we are required to reimburse to the Administrator.

About Golub Capital

Golub Capital, founded in 1994, is a leading lender to middle-market companies, with a long track record of investing in senior secured, one stop, second lien and subordinated loans. As of September 30, 2020, Golub Capital had over $30.0 billion of capital under management. Since its inception, Golub Capital has closed deals with over 300 middle-market sponsors and repeat transactions with over 200 sponsors.

Golub Capital’s middle-market lending group is managed by a four-member senior management team consisting of Lawrence E. Golub, David B. Golub, Andrew H. Steuerman and Gregory W. Cashman. As of September 30, 2020, Golub Capital had more than 140 investment professionals supported by more than 350 administrative and back office personnel that focus on operations, finance, legal and compliance, accounting and reporting, marketing, information technology and office management.

Investment Criteria/Guidelines

Our investment objective is to generate current income and capital appreciation by investing primarily in one stop and other senior secured loans of U.S. middle market companies. 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.

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:

Golub Capital has principal lending offices in Chicago, New York, San Francisco and the Charlotte metropolitan area. 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.

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

ILLUSTRATIVE DEAL EVALUATION PROCESS

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:

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 will increase its monitoring intensity and prepare 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, 2020 and 2019:

Investment Committee

GC Advisors’ investment committee, which is comprised of officers of GC Advisors, evaluates and approves 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 and Gregory W. Cashman. 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. All of our new investments must be approved by a consensus 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 an investment. GC Advisors negotiates with these parties to agree on how our investment should be structured relative to the other capital in the portfolio company’s capital structure.

GC Advisors structures our investments, which typically have maturities of three to seven years as described below. Our loans typically provide for moderate loan amortization in the early years of the loan, with the majority of the amortization deferred until loan maturity, and there is a risk of loss if the borrower is unable to pay the lump sum or refinance the amount at maturity.

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 late stage lending loans. Other targeted characteristics of late stage lending 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 may adjust our characterization of the earnings of such borrowers for a reduction or elimination of such discretionary expenses, if appropriate.

Second lien loans and subordinated loans are generally more volatile than secured loans and may 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.

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:

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, 2020, as well as the top ten industries in which we were invested as of September 30, 2020, calculated as a percentage of our total investments at fair value as of such date.

Managerial Assistance

As a business development company, we offer, and must provide upon request, managerial assistance to our portfolio companies. This assistance would involve an arrangement to provide significant guidance and counsel concerning the management, operations or business objectives and policies of the portfolio company. The Administrator or an affiliate of the Administrator provides such managerial assistance on our behalf to portfolio companies that request this assistance. We could receive fees for these services and reimburse the Administrator or an affiliate of the Administrator, as applicable, for its allocated costs in providing such assistance, subject to the review and approval by our board of directors, including our independent directors.

Competition

Our primary competitors in providing financing to middle-market companies include public and private funds, other business development companies, 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 competitors have access to funding sources that are not available to us. In addition, some of our competitors 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 to the source-of-income, asset diversification and distribution requirements we must satisfy to maintain our qualification as a RIC.

We use the expertise of the investment professionals of Golub Capital and its affiliates to which we have access to assess investment risks and determine appropriate pricing for our investments in portfolio companies. In addition, the relationships of the senior members of Golub Capital and its affiliates enable us to learn about, and compete effectively for, financing opportunities with attractive middle-market companies in the industries in which we invest. See “Risk Factors — Risks Relating to our Business and Structure — We operate in a highly competitive market for investment opportunities, which could reduce returns and result in losses.”

Administration

We do not have any direct employees, and our day-to-day investment operations are managed by GC Advisors. Our business and affairs are managed under the direction of our board of directors. We have a chief executive officer, chief financial officer, chief compliance officer, managing director and director of corporate strategy, and to the extent necessary, our board of directors can elect to appoint additional officers going forward. Our officers are officers and/or employees of Golub Capital LLC, an affiliate of GC Advisors, and our allocable portion of the cost of our chief financial officer and chief compliance officer and their respective staffs is paid by us pursuant to the administration agreement, or the Administration Agreement, with the Administrator. See “Business - Management Agreements - Administration Agreement.”

SUMMARY RISK FACTORS

The risk factors described below are a summary of the principal risk factors associated with an investment in us. These are not the only risks we face. You should carefully consider these risk factors, together with the risk factors set forth in Item 1A. of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and the other reports and documents filed by us with the SEC.

MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS

GC Advisors is located at 200 Park Avenue, 25th Floor, New York, NY 10166. GC Advisors is registered as an investment adviser under the Advisers Act. The beneficial interests in GC Advisors are majority owned, indirectly, by two affiliated trusts. The trustees of those trusts are Stephen A. Kepniss and David L. Finegold. Subject to the overall supervision of our board of directors and in accordance with the 1940 Act, GC Advisors manages our day-to-day operations and provides investment advisory services to us. Under the terms of the Investment Advisory Agreement, GC Advisors:

GC Advisors’ services under the Investment Advisory Agreement are not exclusive. Subject to the requirements of the 1940 Act, GC Advisors can enter into one or more sub-advisory agreements under which GC Advisors would obtain assistance in fulfilling its responsibilities under the Investment Advisory Agreement.

Management Fee

Pursuant to the Investment Advisory Agreement, we pay GC Advisors a fee for investment advisory and management services consisting of two components — a base management fee and an incentive fee. The cost of both the base management fee and the incentive fee is ultimately borne by our stockholders.

Under each of the Investment Advisory Agreement and the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement, the base management fee is calculated at an annual rate equal to 1.375% of our average adjusted gross assets at the end of the two most recently completed calendar quarters (excluding cash and cash equivalents but including assets purchased with borrowed funds and securitization-related assets and cash collateral on deposit with custodian). Additionally, GC Advisors is voluntarily excluding assets funded with secured borrowing proceeds from the management fee. For services rendered under the Investment Advisory Agreement, or the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement, the base management fee is payable quarterly in arrears. The base management fee is calculated based on the average value of our gross assets at the end of the two most recently completed calendar quarters, and appropriately adjusted for any share issuances or repurchases during a current calendar quarter. Base management fees for any partial month or quarter are appropriately pro-rated. For purposes of the Investment Advisory Agreement, cash equivalents means U.S. government securities and commercial paper instruments maturing within 270 days of purchase. To the extent that GC Advisors or any of its affiliates provides investment advisory, collateral management or other similar services to a subsidiary of ours, the base management fee shall be reduced by an amount equal to the product of (1) the total fees paid to GC Advisors by such subsidiary for such services and (2) the percentage of such subsidiary’s total equity, including membership interests and any class of notes not exclusively held by one or more third parties, that is owned, directly or indirectly, by us.

Incentive Fee

We pay GC Advisors an incentive fee. Incentive fees are calculated as described below and payable quarterly in arrears or at the end of each calendar year (or, upon termination of the Investment Advisory Agreement, as of the termination date).

We accomplish this limitation by subjecting each quarterly incentive fee payable under the Income and Capital Gains Incentive Fee Calculation (as defined below) to a cap, or the Incentive Fee Cap. The Incentive Fee Cap in any quarter is equal to the difference between (a) 20.0% of Cumulative Pre-Incentive Fee Net Income Per Share (as defined below) and (b) Cumulative Incentive Fees Paid Per Share (as defined below). To the extent the Incentive Fee Cap is zero or a negative value in any quarter, no incentive fee would be payable in that quarter. “Cumulative Pre-Incentive Fee Net Income Per Share” under the Investment Advisory Agreement is equal to the sum of Pre-Incentive Fee Net Income Per Share (as defined below) for each quarter since April 13, 2010. “Pre-Incentive Fee Net Income Per Share” for any quarter is equal to (a) the sum of (i) Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income (as defined below) and (ii) Adjusted Capital Returns (as defined below) for the quarter divided by (b) the weighted average number of shares of our common stock outstanding during such quarter. “Adjusted Capital Returns” for any quarter shall be the sum of the realized aggregate capital gains, realized aggregate capital losses, aggregate unrealized capital depreciation and aggregate unrealized capital appreciation for such quarter; provided that the calculation of realized aggregate capital gains, realized aggregate capital losses, aggregate unrealized capital depreciation and aggregate unrealized capital appreciation shall not include any realized capital gains, realized capital losses or unrealized capital appreciation or depreciation resulting solely from the purchase accounting for any premium or discount paid for the acquisition of assets in a merger. “Cumulative Incentive Fees Paid Per Share” is equal to the sum of Incentive Fees Paid Per Share for each quarter (or portion thereof) since April 13, 2010. “Incentive Fees Paid Per Share” for any quarter is equal to the incentive fees accrued and/or payable by us for such period divided by the weighted average number of shares of our common stock outstanding during such period.

“Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income” means interest income, dividend income and any other income (including any other fees such as commitment, origination, structuring, diligence and consulting fees or other fees that we receive from portfolio companies but excluding fees for providing managerial assistance) accrued during the period, minus operating expenses for the calendar quarter (including the base management fee, taxes, any expenses payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement and the Administration Agreement, any expenses of securitizations and any interest expense and dividends paid on any outstanding preferred stock, but excluding the applicable incentive fees). Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income includes, in the case of investments with a deferred interest feature such as market discount, debt instruments with PIK interest, preferred stock with PIK dividends, and zero coupon securities, accrued income that we have not yet received in cash. GC Advisors does not return to us amounts paid to it on accrued income that we have not yet received in cash if such income is not ultimately received by us in cash. If we do not ultimately receive income, a loss would be recognized, reducing future fees. The Investment Advisory Agreement, as compared to the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement, excludes the impact of purchase accounting resulting from a merger, including the Merger, from the calculation of income subject to the income incentive fee payable and the calculation of the Incentive Fee Cap. As a result, under the Investment Advisory Agreement, Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income does not include any realized capital gains, realized capital losses or unrealized capital appreciation or depreciation or any amortization or accretion of any purchase premium or purchase discount to interest income resulting solely from the purchase accounting for any premium or discount paid for the acquisition of assets in a merger, such as the premium to net asset value paid for the shares of GCIC common stock in the Merger.

The Investment Advisory Agreement, as compared to the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement, converts the cumulative incentive fee cap from an aggregate basis calculation to a per share calculation. Under the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement, the Incentive Fee would not be paid at any time if, after such payment, the cumulative Incentive Fees paid to date would be greater than 20.0% of our Cumulative Pre-Incentive Fee Net Income, which was defined under the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement to equal the sum of Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income for each period since April 13, 2010. Under the Investment Advisory Agreement, the Incentive Fee will not be paid at any time if, after such payment, the Cumulative Incentive Fees Paid Per Share to date would be greater than 20.0% of Cumulative Pre-Incentive Fee Net Income Per Share.

If, for any relevant period, the Incentive Fee Cap calculation results in our paying less than the amount of the Incentive Fee calculated above, then the difference between (a) the Incentive Fees accrued and/or payable by us for such relevant period and (b) the Incentive Fee Cap multiplied by the weighted average number of shares of our common stock outstanding during such relevant period will not be paid by us, and will not be received by GC Advisors, as an incentive fee, either at the end of such relevant period or at the end of any future relevant period.

Income and Capital Gains Incentive Fee Calculation

The income and capital gains incentive fee calculation, or the Income and Capital Gains Incentive Fee Calculation, has two parts: the income component and the capital gains component. The income component is calculated quarterly in arrears based on our Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income for the immediately preceding calendar quarter. With the exception of the change to the calculation of “Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income” described above, the income component of the incentive fee is calculated the same under the Investment Advisory Agreement as under the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement.

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income, expressed as a rate of return on the value of our net assets (defined as total assets less indebtedness and before taking into account any incentive fees payable during the period) at the end of the immediately preceding calendar quarter, is compared to a fixed “hurdle rate” of 2.0% quarterly. If market interest rates rise, we could have the ability to invest funds in debt instruments that provide for a higher return, which would increase our Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income and make it easier for GC Advisors to surpass the fixed hurdle rate and receive an incentive fee based on such net investment income. Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income used to calculate this part of the incentive fee is also included in the amount of our total assets (excluding cash and cash equivalents but including assets purchased with borrowed funds and securitization-related assets and cash collateral on deposit with custodian) used to calculate the 1.375% base management fee, which fee is payable on all of our assets managed by GC Advisors.

We calculate the income component of the Income and Capital Gains Incentive Fee Calculation with respect to our Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income quarterly, in arrears, as follows:

The sum of these calculations yields the “Income Incentive Fee”. This amount is appropriately adjusted for any share issuances or repurchases during the quarter.

The following is a graphical representation of the Income Incentive Fee calculation:

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income

(Expressed as a Percentage of the Value of Net Assets)

Percentage of Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income Allocated to Income Component of Income and Capital Gains Incentive Fee Calculation

The second part of the Income and Capital Gains Incentive Fee Calculation, or the Capital Gain Incentive Fee, equals (a) 20.0% of our Capital Gain Incentive Fee Base (as defined below), if any, calculated in arrears as of the end of each calendar year (or upon termination of the Investment Advisory Agreement, as of the termination date), commencing with the calendar year ending December 31, 2010, less (b) the aggregate amount of any previously paid Capital Gain Incentive Fees. The Capital Gain Incentive Fee is calculated in the same manner under the Investment Advisory Agreement as under the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement. Our “Capital Gain Incentive

Fee Base” equals (1) the sum of (i) our realized capital gains, if any, on a cumulative positive basis from April 13, 2010 through the end of each calendar year, (ii) all realized capital losses on a cumulative basis and (iii) all unrealized capital depreciation on a cumulative basis less (2) all unamortized deferred financing costs, if and to the extent such costs exceed all unrealized capital appreciation on a cumulative basis.

The Capital Gain Incentive Fee payable as calculated under the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement or the Investment Advisory Agreement, as applicable (as described above) for each of the years ended September 30, 2020, 2019 and 2018 was $0, $0 and $2.3 million. However, in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, we are required to accrue for the Capital Gain Incentive Fee on a quarterly basis and are further required to include the aggregate unrealized capital appreciation on investments when calculating the capital gain incentive fee accrual, as if such unrealized capital appreciation were realized, even though such unrealized capital appreciation is not permitted to be considered in calculating the fee actually payable under either the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement or the Investment Advisory Agreement. If the Capital Gain Incentive Fee Base, adjusted as required by GAAP to include unrealized appreciation, is positive at the end of a period, then GAAP requires us to accrue a capital gain incentive fee equal to 20% of such amount, less the aggregate amount of the actual capital gain incentive fees paid or capital gain incentive fees accrued under GAAP in all prior periods. If such amount is negative, then there is no accrual for such period. The resulting accrual under GAAP for any capital gain incentive fee payable in a given period may result in additional expense if such cumulative amount is greater than in the prior period or a reversal of previously recorded expense if such cumulative amount is less than in the prior period. There can be no assurance that such unrealized capital appreciation will be realized in the future. Any payment due under the terms of the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement or the Investment Advisory Agreement is calculated in arrears at the end of each calendar year, and we paid a $1.2 million and $1.6 million Capital Gain Incentive Fee calculated in accordance with the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement as of December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, respectively. We did not pay any capital gain incentive fee under the Investment Advisory Agreement for the period ended December 31, 2019. For the years ended September 30, 2020, 2019 and 2018, we accrued (reversed) a Capital Gain Incentive Fee under GAAP of $0, $(5.6) million, and $1.5 million, respectively.

The sum of the Income Incentive Fee and the Capital Gain Incentive Fee is the “Incentive Fee”.

Examples of Quarterly Incentive Fee Calculation

Alternative 1

Investment income (including interest, dividends, fees, etc.) = 1.25%

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income (investment income adjusted to exclude amortization of purchase premium – (management fee + other expenses)) = 0.556%

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income does not exceed the hurdle rate, therefore there is no Incentive Fee.

Alternative 2

Investment income (including interest, dividends, fees, etc.) = 2.80%

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income (investment income adjusted to exclude amortization of purchase premium – (management fee + other expenses)) = 2.106%

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income exceeds hurdle rate, therefore there is an Incentive Fee.

Alternative 3

Investment income (including interest, dividends, fees, etc.) = 3.50%

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income (investment income – (management fee + other expenses)) = 2.806%

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income exceeds hurdle rate, therefore there is an Incentive Fee.

Example 2 — Capital Gain Incentive Fee:

Alternative 1

The Capital Gain Incentive Fee, if any, would be:

Each quarterly incentive fee payable on the Income and Capital Gains Incentive Fee Calculation is subject to the Incentive Fee Cap. Below are the necessary adjustments to the Incentive Fee payable to adhere to the Incentive Fee Cap.

Alternative 2

The Capital Gain Incentive Fee, if any, would be:

Each quarterly Incentive Fee payable on the Income and Capital Gains Incentive Fee Calculation is subject to the Incentive Fee Cap. Below are the necessary adjustments to the Incentive Fee payable to adhere to the Incentive Fee Cap.

Alternative 3

The Capital Gain Incentive Fee, if any, would be:

Each quarterly Incentive Fee payable on the Income and Capital Gains Incentive Fee Calculation is subject to the Incentive Fee Cap. Below are the necessary adjustments to the Incentive Fee payable to adhere to the Incentive Fee Cap

Payment of Our Expenses

All investment professionals of GC Advisors and/or its affiliates, when and to the extent engaged in providing investment advisory and management services to us, and the compensation and routine overhead expenses of personnel allocable to these services to us, are provided and paid for by GC Advisors and/or its affiliates and not by us. We bear all other out-of-pocket costs and expenses of our operations and transactions. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Overview — Expenses.”

Duration and Termination

Unless terminated earlier as described below, the Investment Advisory Agreement will continue in effect for an initial two-year term and thereafter shall continue in effect from year to year if approved annually by our board of directors or by the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of our outstanding voting securities, and, in either case, if also approved by a majority of our directors who are not “interested persons,” as that term is defined in the

1940 Act, of us or GC Advisors. The Investment Advisory Agreement automatically terminates in the event of its assignment, as defined in the 1940 Act, by GC Advisors and could be terminated by either party without penalty upon not less than 60 days’ written notice to the other. The holders of a majority of our outstanding voting securities, by vote, can also terminate the Investment Advisory Agreement without penalty. See “Risk Factors — Risks Relating to our Business and Structure — We are dependent upon GC Advisors for our future success and upon their access to the investment professionals and partners of Golub Capital and its affiliates.”

Indemnification

The Investment Advisory Agreement provides that, absent willful misfeasance, bad faith or gross negligence in the performance of its duties or by reason of the reckless disregard of its duties and obligations, GC Advisors and its officers, managers, partners, agents, employees, controlling persons, members and any other person or entity affiliated with it are entitled to indemnification from us for any damages, liabilities, costs and expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and amounts reasonably paid in settlement) arising from the rendering of GC Advisors’ services under the Investment Advisory Agreement or otherwise as our investment adviser.

At a meeting of our board of directors held on November 27, 2018, our board of directors, including all of the directors who are not “interested persons,” as that term is defined in the 1940 Act, of us or GC Advisors, or the independent directors, voted unanimously to approve a prior version of the Investment Advisory Agreement. The board of directors then approved the submission of the Investment Advisory Agreement to our stockholders for approval with the recommendation that the stockholders vote to approve the Investment Advisory Agreement. Following certain regulatory discussions, our board of directors considered a revised version of the Investment Advisory Agreement that did not include any changes to the calculation of the Capital Gain Incentive Fee as compared to the calculation under the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement. At a meeting of our board of directors held on May 7, 2019, our board of directors, including all of our independent directors, fully discussed and considered all material matters related to the approval of the Investment Advisory Agreement, and the board of directors, including all of our independent directors subsequently approved the Investment Advisory Agreement at a meeting on July 11, 2019 to take effect upon closing of the Merger. In addition, the board of directors, including all of our independent directors, unanimously recommended that the Investment Advisory Agreement be submitted to our stockholders for approval.

In reaching a decision to approve the Investment Advisory Agreement, our board of directors reviewed a significant amount of information and considered, among other things:

Our board of directors noted that the terms of the Investment Advisory Agreement did not change the calculation of the Capital Gain Incentive Fee, or the management or incentive fee rates and that the changes, as compared to the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement, consisted of revisions to (i) exclude the impact of purchase accounting resulting from a merger, including the Merger, from the calculation of income subject to the income incentive fee payable and the calculation of the cumulative incentive fee cap under the Investment Advisory Agreement and (ii) convert the cumulative incentive fee cap into a per share calculation.

At a meeting of our stockholders held on September 4, 2019, our stockholders voted to approve the Investment Advisory Agreement, which was entered into effective as of the closing of the Merger and will continue for an initial two-year term.

Administration Agreement

Pursuant to the Administration Agreement, the Administrator furnishes us with office facilities and equipment and provides clerical, bookkeeping, recordkeeping and other administrative services at such facilities. Under the Administration Agreement, the Administrator performs, or oversees the performance of, our required administrative services, which include being responsible for the financial records that we are required to maintain and preparing reports to our stockholders and reports filed with the SEC. In addition, the Administrator assists us in determining and publishing our net asset value, oversees the preparation and filing of our tax returns and the printing and dissemination of reports to our stockholders, and generally oversees the payment of our expenses and the performance of administrative and professional services rendered to us by others. The Administrator can retain third parties to assist in providing administrative services to us. To the extent that the Administrator outsources any of its functions, we pay the fees associated with such functions on a direct basis without profit to the Administrator. We reimburse the Administrator for the allocable portion (subject to review and approval of our board of directors) of the Administrator’s overhead and other expenses incurred by it in performing its obligations under the Administration Agreement, including rent, the fees and expenses associated with performing compliance functions and our allocable portion of the cost of our chief financial officer and chief compliance officer and their respective staffs. Our board of directors reviews the expenses reimbursed to the Administrator, including any allocation of expenses among us and other entities for which the Administrator provides similar services, to determine that these expenses are reasonable and comparable to administrative services charged by unaffiliated third-party asset managers. In addition, if requested to provide managerial assistance to our portfolio companies, the Administrator is paid an additional amount based on the cost of the services provided, which shall not exceed the amount we receive from such portfolio companies for providing this assistance. In May 2020, the Administration Agreement was renewed for a one-year term with the unanimous approval of our board of directors. The Administration Agreement could be terminated by either party without penalty upon 60 days’ written notice to the other party.

The Administration Agreement provides that, absent willful misfeasance, bad faith or negligence in the performance of its duties or by reason of the reckless disregard of its duties and obligations, the Administrator and its officers, managers, partners, agents, employees, controlling persons, members and any other person or entity affiliated with it are entitled to indemnification from us for any damages, liabilities, costs and expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and amounts reasonably paid in settlement) arising from the rendering of the Administrator’s services under the Administration Agreement or otherwise as our administrator.

License Agreement

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”. Under this agreement, we will have a right to use the “Golub Capital” name and the agreement will remain in effect for so long as GC Advisors or one of its affiliates remains our investment adviser. Other than with respect to this limited license, we will have no legal right to the “Golub Capital” name.

Staffing Agreement

We do not have any internal management capacity or employees. 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 is an affiliate of Golub Capital LLC and depends upon access to the investment professionals and other resources of Golub Capital LLC and its affiliates to fulfill its obligations to us under the Investment Advisory Agreement. GC Advisors also depends upon Golub Capital LLC to obtain access to deal flow generated by the professionals of Golub Capital LLC and its affiliates. Under the Staffing Agreement, Golub Capital LLC provides GC Advisors with the resources necessary to fulfill these obligations. The Staffing Agreement provides that Golub Capital LLC will make available to GC Advisors experienced investment professionals and access to the senior investment personnel of Golub Capital LLC for purposes of evaluating, negotiating, structuring, closing and monitoring our investments. The Staffing Agreement also includes a commitment that the members of GC Advisors’ investment committee serve in such capacity. The Staffing Agreement remains in effect until terminated and could be terminated by either party without penalty upon 60 days’ written notice to the other party. Services under the Staffing Agreement are provided to GC Advisors on a direct cost reimbursement basis, and such fees are not our obligation.

REGULATION

General

We are a business development company under the 1940 Act and have elected to be treated as a RIC under the Code. The 1940 Act contains prohibitions and restrictions relating to transactions between business development companies and their affiliates (including any investment advisers), principal underwriters and affiliates of those affiliates or underwriters and requires that a majority of the directors of a business development company be persons other than “interested persons,” as that term is defined in the 1940 Act. In addition, the 1940 Act provides that we cannot change the nature of our business so as to cease to be, or withdraw our election as, a business development company without the approval of a majority of our outstanding voting securities.

We can invest up to 100% of our assets in securities acquired directly from issuers in privately negotiated transactions. With respect to such securities, we could, for the purpose of public resale, be deemed an “underwriter,” as that term is defined in the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act. Our intention is to not write (sell) or buy put or call options to manage risks associated with the publicly traded securities of our portfolio companies, except that we could enter into hedging transactions to manage the risks associated with interest rate or foreign currency fluctuations. However, we could purchase or otherwise receive warrants to purchase the common stock of our portfolio companies in connection with acquisition financing or other investments. Similarly, in connection with an acquisition, we may acquire rights to require the issuers of acquired securities or their affiliates to repurchase them under certain circumstances. We also do not intend to acquire securities issued by any investment company in excess of the limits imposed by the 1940 Act. With regard to that portion of our portfolio invested in securities issued by investment companies, it should be noted that such investments may subject our stockholders to additional expenses. None of these policies, or any of our other policies, is fundamental and each could be changed without stockholder approval. To the extent we adopt any fundamental policies; no person from whom we borrow will have, in his or her capacity as lender or debt holder, either a veto power or a vote in approving or changing any of our fundamental policies.

Qualifying Assets

Under the 1940 Act, a business development company is restricted from acquiring any asset other than assets of the type listed in Section 55(a) of 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. The principal categories of qualifying assets relevant to our business are the following:

The regulations defining and interpreting qualifying assets can change over time. We could adjust our investment focus as needed to comply with and/or take advantage of any regulatory, legislative, administrative or judicial actions in this area.

We look through our consolidated subsidiaries to the underlying holdings (considered together with portfolio assets held outside of our consolidated subsidiaries) for purposes of determining compliance with the 70% qualifying assets requirement of the 1940 Act. At least 70% of our assets will be eligible assets.

Managerial Assistance to Portfolio Companies

A business development company must have been organized and have its principal place of business in the United States and must be operated for the purpose of making investments in the types of securities described in (1), (2) or (3) above. However, in order to count portfolio securities as qualifying assets for the purpose of the 70% test, the business development company must either control the issuer of the securities or must offer to make available to the issuer of the securities significant managerial assistance; except that, when the business development company purchases such securities in conjunction with one or more other persons acting together, one of the other persons in the group could make available such managerial assistance. Making available significant managerial assistance means any arrangement whereby the business development company, through its directors, officers or employees, offers to provide, and, if accepted, does so provide, significant guidance and counsel concerning the management, operations or business objectives and policies of a portfolio company. The Administrator or an affiliate of the Administrator provides such managerial assistance on our behalf to portfolio companies that request this assistance.

Temporary Investments

Pending investment in other types of qualifying assets, as described above, our investments could consist of cash, cash equivalents, U.S. government securities, repurchase agreements and high-quality debt investments that mature in one year or less from the date of investment, which we refer to, collectively, as temporary investments, so that 70% of our assets are qualifying assets or temporary investments. Typically, we will invest in U.S. Treasury bills or in repurchase agreements, so long as the agreements are fully collateralized by cash or securities issued by the U.S. government or its agencies. A repurchase agreement involves the purchase by an investor, such as us, of a specified security and the simultaneous agreement by the seller to repurchase it at an agreed-upon future date and at a price that is greater than the purchase price by an amount that reflects an agreed-upon interest rate. There is no percentage restriction on the proportion of our assets that could be invested in such repurchase agreements. However, if more than 25% of our total assets constitute repurchase agreements from a single counterparty, we would generally not meet the diversification tests described in section 851(b)(3) of the Code in order to qualify as a RIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Accordingly, we do not intend to enter into repurchase agreements with a single counterparty in excess of this limit. GC Advisors will monitor the creditworthiness of the counterparties with which we enter into repurchase agreement transactions.

Senior Securities

We are permitted, under specified conditions, to issue multiple classes of indebtedness and one class of stock senior to our common stock if our asset coverage, as that term is defined in the 1940 Act, immediately after each such issuance is at least equal to the percentage set forth in Section 61 of the 1940 Act that is applicable to us at such time. Prior to the enactment of the Small Business Credit Availability Act, or SBCAA, in March 2018, the asset

coverage requirement applicable to business development companies was 200%. The SBCAA permits a business development company to be subject to an asset coverage requirement of 150% so long as it meets certain disclosure requirements and obtains certain approvals. The reduced asset coverage requirement permits a business development company 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. On February 5, 2019, our stockholders voted to approve the application of the reduced asset coverage requirements in Section 61(a)(2) to us effective as of February 6, 2019. As a result of the stockholder approval, effective February 6, 2019, the asset coverage ratio under the 1940 Act applicable to us decreased to 150% from 200%. In other words, under the 1940 Act, we are now able to borrow $2 for investment purposes for every $1 of investor equity, as opposed to borrowing $1 for investment purposes for every $1 of investor equity. In addition, while any senior securities remain outstanding, we must make provisions to prohibit any distribution to our stockholders or the repurchase of such securities or shares unless we meet the applicable asset coverage ratios at the time of the distribution or repurchase. We can also borrow amounts up to 5% of the value of our total assets for temporary or emergency purposes without regard to asset coverage, provided that any such borrowings in excess of 5% of the value of our total assets would be subject to the asset coverage ratio requirements of the 1940 Act, even if for temporary or emergency purposes. We consolidate our financial results with all of our wholly-owned subsidiaries, including Holdings, GCIC Holdings, the 2014 Issuer, the 2018 Issuer, the GCIC 2018 Issuer, the 2020 Issuer, the 2018 CLO Depositor, the GCIC CLO Depositor, the 2020 CLO Depositor, Funding, Funding II, GCIC Funding, GCIC Funding II, the Senior Loan Funds and the SBIC Funds for financial reporting purposes and measure our compliance with the leverage test applicable to business development companies under the 1940 Act on a consolidated basis. On September 13, 2011, we received exemptive relief from the SEC to permit us to exclude the debt of our SBIC Funds from our asset coverage test under the 1940 Act. As such, our ratio of total consolidated assets to outstanding indebtedness can be less than 150%. This provides us with increased investment flexibility but also increases our risks related to leverage.

For a discussion of the risks associated with leverage, see “Risk Factors — Risks Relating to our Business and Structure — 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.”

Codes of Ethics

Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures

We have delegated our proxy voting responsibility to GC Advisors. The proxy voting policies and procedures of GC Advisors are set out below. The guidelines are reviewed periodically by GC Advisors and our directors who are not “interested persons” and, accordingly, are subject to change.

As an investment adviser registered under the Advisers Act, GC Advisors has a fiduciary duty to act solely in our best interests. As part of this duty, GC Advisors recognizes that it must vote our securities in a timely manner free of conflicts of interest and in our best interests.

GC Advisors’ policies and procedures for voting proxies for its investment advisory clients are intended to comply with Section 206 of, and Rule 206(4)-6 under, the Advisers Act.

GC Advisors votes proxies relating to our portfolio securities in what it perceives to be the best interest of our stockholders. GC Advisors reviews on a case-by-case basis each proposal submitted to a stockholder vote to determine its effect on the portfolio securities we hold. In most cases GC Advisors will vote in favor of proposals that GC Advisors believes are likely to increase the value of the portfolio securities we hold. Although GC Advisors

will generally vote against proposals that could have a negative effect on our portfolio securities, GC Advisors could vote for such a proposal if there exist compelling long-term reasons to do so.

Our proxy voting decisions are made by GC Advisors’ chief executive officer and president. To ensure that GC Advisors’ vote is not the product of a conflict of interest, GC Advisors requires that (1) anyone involved in the decision-making process disclose to its chief compliance officer any potential conflict that he or she is aware of and any contact that he or she has had with any interested party regarding a proxy vote and (2) employees involved in the decision-making process or vote administration are prohibited from revealing how GC Advisors intends to vote on a proposal in order to reduce any attempted influence from interested parties. Where conflicts of interest may be present, GC Advisors will disclose such conflicts to us, including our independent directors, and could request guidance from us on how to vote such proxies.

You can obtain information without charge about how GC Advisors voted proxies during the most recent 12-month period ended September 30, 2020 by making a written request for proxy voting information to: Golub Capital BDC, Inc., Attention: Investor Relations, 200 Park Avenue, 25th Floor, New York, NY 10166, or by calling Golub Capital BDC, Inc. collect at (212) 750-6060.

Privacy Principles

We are committed to maintaining the privacy of our stockholders and to safeguarding their nonpublic personal information.

We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about our stockholders to employees of GC Advisors and its affiliates with a legitimate business need for the information. We will maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards designed to protect the nonpublic personal information of our stockholders.

Other

Under the 1940 Act, we are required to provide and maintain a bond issued by a reputable fidelity insurance company to protect us against larceny and embezzlement. Furthermore, as a business development company, we are prohibited from protecting any director or officer against any liability to us or our stockholders arising from willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of such person’s office.

We and GC Advisors are required to adopt and implement written policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent violation of relevant federal securities laws, review these policies and procedures annually for their adequacy and the effectiveness of their implementation, and designate a chief compliance officer to be responsible for administering these policies and procedures.

We could also be prohibited under the 1940 Act from knowingly participating in certain transactions with our affiliates without the prior approval of our board of directors who are not interested persons and, in some cases, prior approval by the SEC. The SEC has interpreted the business development company prohibition on transactions with affiliates to prohibit “joint transactions” among entities that share a common investment adviser. The staff of the SEC has granted no-action relief pursuant to which purchases by us and other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates of a single class of privately placed securities are permitted provided that the adviser negotiates no term other than price and certain other conditions are met. Any co-investment would be made subject to compliance with existing regulatory guidance, applicable regulations and our allocation procedures. If opportunities arise that would otherwise be appropriate for us and for another account sponsored or managed by GC Advisors to make different investments in the same issuer, GC Advisors will need to decide which account will proceed with the investment. Moreover, in certain circumstances, we could be unable to invest in an issuer in which another account sponsored or managed by GC Advisors has previously invested.

On February 27, 2017, GC Advisors and certain other funds and accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates, received exemptive relief from the SEC that permits us 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. We believe that co-investment by us and accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates could afford us additional investment opportunities and the ability to achieve greater diversification. 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.

Sarbanes-Oxley Act

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as amended, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, imposes a variety of regulatory requirements on companies with a class of securities registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, and their insiders. Many of these requirements affect us. For example:

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires us to review our current policies and procedures to determine whether we comply with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the regulations promulgated under such act. We will continue to monitor our compliance with all regulations that are adopted under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and will take actions necessary to ensure that we comply with that act.

Small Business Investment Company Regulations

We operate the SBIC Funds as wholly-owned subsidiaries of the Company. The SBIC Funds each can rely on an exclusion from the definition of “investment company” under the 1940 Act. As such, none of these subsidiaries will elect to be regulated as a business development company under the 1940 Act.

The SBIC Funds each have investment objectives substantially similar to ours and make similar types of investments in accordance with SBIC regulations.

The licenses approved by the U.S. Small Business Administration, or SBA, for the SBIC Funds allow the SBIC Funds to incur leverage by issuing SBA-guaranteed debentures, subject to the issuance of a capital commitment and certain approvals by the SBA and customary procedures. SBA-guaranteed debentures carry long-term fixed rates that are generally lower than rates on comparable bank and other debt, have a maturity of ten years, require semi-annual payments of interest and do not require any principal prior to maturity. Under the regulations applicable to SBICs, an SBIC can have outstanding debentures guaranteed by the SBA generally in an amount of up to twice its regulatory capital, which generally equates to the amount of its equity capital. SBIC regulations currently limit the amount that a single SBIC subsidiary can borrow to a maximum of $175.0 million, assuming that it has at least $87.5 million of equity capital. The SBICs are subject to regulation and oversight by the SBA, including requirements with respect to maintaining certain minimum financial ratios and other covenants.

Under present SBIC regulations, the maximum amount of SBA-guaranteed debentures that can be issued by multiple licensees under common management is $350.0 million and the maximum amount that can be issued by a single SBIC licensee is $175.0 million. As of September 30, 2020, GC SBIC IV, L.P., or SBIC IV, GC SBIC V, L.P., or SBIC V, and GC SBIC VI, L.P., or SBIC VI, had $0.0 million, $151.7 million and $66.0 million of SBA guaranteed debenture commitments, respectively. The original amount committed to SBIC IV and SBIC V by the SBA was $150.0 million and $175.0 million, respectively. Through September 30, 2020, SBIC IV and SBIC V have repaid $150.0 million and $23.3 million of outstanding debentures, respectively, and these commitments have effectively been terminated. As of September 30, 2020, SBIC VI had $29.0 million of undrawn debenture commitments, of which $29.0 were available to be drawn, subject to SBA regulatory requirements.

SBICs are designed to stimulate the flow of private equity capital to eligible small businesses. Under SBIC regulations, SBICs can make loans to eligible small businesses, invest in the equity securities of such businesses and provide them with consulting and advisory services.

Under present SBIC regulations, eligible small businesses generally include businesses that (together with their affiliates) have a tangible net worth not exceeding $19.5 million and have average annual net income after U.S. federal income taxes not exceeding $6.5 million (average net income to be computed without benefit of any carryover loss) for the two most recent fiscal years. In addition, an SBIC must devote 25% of its investment activity to “smaller” concerns, as defined by the SBA. A smaller concern generally includes businesses that have a tangible net worth not exceeding $6.0 million and have average annual net income after U.S. federal income taxes not exceeding $2.0 million (average net income to be computed without benefit of any net carryover loss) for the two most recent fiscal years. SBIC regulations also provide alternative size standard criteria to determine eligibility for designation as an eligible small business or smaller concern, which criteria depend on the primary industry in which the business is engaged and are based on such factors as the number of employees and gross revenue. However, once an SBIC has invested in a company, it can continue to make follow on investments in the company, regardless of the size of the company at the time of the follow on investment, up to the time of the company’s initial public offering, if any.

The SBA prohibits an SBIC from providing funds to small businesses for certain purposes, such as relending or investing outside the United States, to businesses engaged in a few prohibited industries and to certain “passive” (i.e., non-operating) companies. In addition, without prior SBA approval, an SBIC cannot invest an amount equal to more than approximately 30% of the SBIC’s regulatory capital in any one company and its affiliates.

The SBA places certain limitations on the financing terms of investments by SBICs in portfolio companies (such as limiting the permissible interest rate on debt securities held by an SBIC in a portfolio company). An SBIC may exercise control over a small business for a period of up to seven years from the date on which the SBIC initially acquires its control position. This control period can be extended for an additional period of time with the SBA’s prior written approval.

The SBA restricts the ability of an SBIC to lend money to any of its officers, directors and employees or to invest in affiliates thereof. The SBA also prohibits, without prior SBA approval, a “change of control” of an SBIC or transfers that would result in any person (or a group of persons acting in concert) owning 10% or more of a class of capital stock of a licensed SBIC. A “change of control” is any event which would result in the transfer of the power, direct or indirect, to direct the management and policies of a SBIC, whether through ownership, contractual arrangements or otherwise.

SBICs must invest idle funds that are not being used to make loans in investments permitted under SBIC regulations in certain types of securities including direct obligations of, or obligations guaranteed as to principal and interest by, the U.S. government, which mature within 15 months from the date of the investment.

SBICs are periodically examined and audited by the SBA’s staff to determine their compliance with SBIC regulations and are periodically required to file certain forms with the SBA.

Neither the SBA nor the U.S. government or any of its agencies or officers has approved any ownership interest to be issued by us or any obligation that we or any of our subsidiaries can incur.

Election to Be Taxed as a RIC

As a business development company, we have elected to be treated as a RIC under Subchapter M of the Code. As a RIC, we generally will not be subject to corporate-level U.S. federal income taxes on any net ordinary income or capital gains that we timely distribute as dividends for U.S. federal income tax purposes to our stockholders. To qualify as a RIC, we must, among other things, meet certain source-of-income and asset diversification requirements (as described below). In addition, we must distribute to our stockholders, for each taxable year, dividends for U.S. federal income tax purposes of an amount at least equal to 90% of our “investment company taxable income,” which is generally our net ordinary income plus the excess of realized net short-term capital gains over realized net long-term capital losses and determined without regard to any deduction for dividends paid, or the Annual Distribution Requirement. Although not required for us to maintain our RIC tax status, in order to preclude the imposition of a 4% nondeductible federal excise tax imposed on RICs, we must distribute dividends for U.S. federal income tax purposes to our stockholders in respect of each calendar year of an amount at least equal to the sum of (1) 98% of

our net ordinary income (taking into account certain deferrals and elections) for the calendar year, (2) 98.2% of the excess (if any) of our realized capital gains over our realized capital losses, or capital gain net income (adjusted for certain ordinary losses), generally for the one-year period ending on October 31 of the calendar year and (3) the sum of any net ordinary income plus capital gains net income for preceding years that were not distributed during such years and on which we did not incur any liability to pay federal income tax, or the Excise Tax Avoidance Requirement.

Taxation as a RIC

If we:

then we will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax on the portion of our investment company taxable income and net capital gain, defined as net long-term capital gains in excess of net short-term capital losses, we distribute as dividends for U.S. federal income tax purposes to our stockholders. We will be subject to U.S. federal income tax at regular corporate rates on any net income or net capital gain not distributed as dividends to our stockholders.

In order to qualify as a RIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we must, among other things:

We can invest in partnerships, including qualified publicly traded partnerships, which could result in our being subject to state, local or foreign income, franchise or other tax liabilities.

In addition, we are subject to ordinary income and capital gain distribution requirements under U.S. federal excise tax rules for each calendar year. If we do not meet the required distributions we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible federal excise tax on the undistributed amount. The failure to meet U.S. federal excise tax distribution requirements will not cause us to lose our RIC status.

A RIC is limited in its ability to deduct expenses in excess of its investment company taxable income. If our deductible expenses in a given taxable year exceed our investment company taxable income, we may incur a net operating loss for that taxable year. However, a RIC is not permitted to carry forward net operating losses to subsequent taxable years and such net operating losses do not pass through to its stockholders. In addition, deductible expenses can be used only to offset investment company taxable income, not net capital gain. A RIC cannot use any net capital losses (that is, the excess of realized capital losses over realized capital gains) to offset its investment company taxable income, but may carry forward such net capital losses, and use them to offset future capital gains, indefinitely. Due to these limits on deductibility of expenses and net capital losses, we could for tax purposes have aggregate taxable income for several taxable years that we are required to distribute and that is taxable to our stockholders even if such taxable income is greater than the net income we actually earn during those

taxable years. Furthermore, a portfolio company in which we hold equity or debt instruments could face financial difficulty that requires us to work out, modify, or otherwise restructure such equity or debt instruments. Any such restructuring could, depending upon the terms of the restructuring, cause us to incur unusable or nondeductible losses or recognize future non-cash taxable income. Any underwriting fees paid by us are not deductible in computing our investment company taxable income. We could be required to recognize taxable income in circumstances in which we do not receive cash. For example, if we hold debt instruments that are treated under applicable tax rules as having original issue discount (such as debt instruments with PIK interest or, in certain cases, with increasing interest rates or issued with warrants), we must include in income each year a portion of the original issue discount that accrues over the life of the obligation, regardless of whether cash representing such income is received by us in the same taxable year. Because any original issue discount accrued will be included in our investment company taxable income for the taxable year of accrual, we may be required to make a distribution to our stockholders in order to satisfy the Annual Distribution Requirement, even though we will not have received any corresponding cash amount.

Certain of our investment practices could be subject to special and complex U.S. federal income tax provisions that could, among other things, (1) treat dividends that would otherwise constitute qualified dividend income as non-qualified dividend income, (2) treat dividends that would otherwise be eligible for the corporate dividends received deduction as ineligible for such treatment, (3) disallow, suspend or otherwise limit the allowance of certain losses or deductions, (4) convert lower-taxed long-term capital gain into higher-taxed short-term capital gain or ordinary income, (5) convert an ordinary loss or a deduction into a capital loss (the deductibility of which is more limited), (6) cause us to recognize income or gain without a corresponding receipt of cash, (7) adversely affect the time as to when a purchase or sale of stock or securities is deemed to occur, (8) adversely alter the characterization of certain complex financial transactions and (9) produce income that will not be qualifying income for purposes of the 90% Income Test. We intend to monitor our transactions and could make certain tax elections to mitigate the effect of these provisions and prevent our ability to be subject to tax as a RIC.

Gain or loss realized by us from warrants acquired by us as well as any loss attributable to the lapse of such warrants generally will be treated as capital gain or loss. Such gain or loss generally will be long term or short term, depending on how long we held a particular warrant.

Although we do not presently expect to do so, we are authorized to borrow funds and to sell assets in order to satisfy distribution requirements. However, under the 1940 Act, we are not permitted to make distributions to our stockholders while our debt obligations and other senior securities are outstanding unless certain “asset coverage” tests are met. See “Business — Regulation — Senior Securities.” Moreover, our ability to dispose of assets to meet our distribution requirements may be limited by (1) the illiquid nature of our portfolio and/or (2) other requirements relating to our qualification as a RIC, including the Diversification Tests. If we dispose of assets in order to meet the Annual Distribution Requirement or the Excise Tax Avoidance Requirement, we may make such dispositions at times that, from an investment standpoint, are not advantageous.

Some of the income and fees that we may recognize, such as fees for providing managerial assistance, certain fees earned with respect to our investments, income recognized in a work-out or restructuring of a portfolio investment, or income recognized from an equity investment in an operating partnership, will not satisfy the 90% Income Test. In order to manage the risk that such income and fees might disqualify us as a RIC for a failure to satisfy the 90% Income Test, we may be required to recognize such income and fees indirectly through one or more entities treated as corporations for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Such corporations will be subject to U.S. corporate income tax as well as state and local tax on their earnings, which ultimately will reduce our return on such income and fees.

Failure to Qualify as a RIC

If we were unable to qualify for treatment as a RIC and are unable to cure the failure, for example, by disposing of certain investments quickly or raising additional capital to prevent the loss of RIC status, we generally would be subject to tax on all of our taxable income at regular corporate rates. The Code provides some relief from RIC disqualification due to failures to comply with the 90% Income Test and the Diversification Tests, although there could be additional taxes due in such cases. We cannot assure you that we would qualify for any such relief should we fail the 90% Income Test or the Diversification Tests.

Should failure occur, not only would all our taxable income be subject to tax at regular corporate rates, we would not be able to deduct dividend distributions to stockholders, nor would they be required to be made. Distributions, including distributions of net long-term capital gain, would generally be taxable to our stockholders as ordinary dividend income to the extent of our current and accumulated earnings and profits. Subject to certain limitations under the Code, certain corporate stockholders would be eligible to claim dividends received deduction with respect to such dividends and non-corporate stockholders would generally be able to treat such dividends as “qualified dividend income,” which is subject to reduced rates of U.S. federal income tax. Distributions in excess of our current and accumulated earnings and profits would be treated first as a return of capital to the extent of the stockholder’s tax basis, and any remaining distributions would be treated as a capital gain. If we fail to qualify as a RIC, we could be subject to regular corporate tax on any net built-in gains with respect to certain of our assets (i.e., the excess of the aggregate gains, including items of income, over aggregate losses that would have been realized with respect to such assets if we had been liquidated) that we elect to recognize on requalification or when recognized over the next five taxable years.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

You should carefully consider these risk factors, together with all of the other information included in this annual report on Form 10-K and the other reports and documents filed by us with the SEC. The risks set out below are not the only risks we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or not presently deemed material by us may also impair our operations and performance. If any of the following events occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be materially and adversely affected. In such case, our net asset value and the trading price of our common stock could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment. The risk factors described below are the principal risk factors associated with an investment in us as well as those factors generally associated with an investment company with investment objectives, investment policies, capital structure or trading markets similar to ours.

Risks Relating to Our Business and Structure

On March 27, 2020, the U.S. government enacted the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (the “CARES Act”), which contains provisions intended to mitigate the adverse economic effects of the coronavirus pandemic, it is uncertain whether, or how much, our portfolio companies will be able to benefit from the CARES Act or any other subsequent legislation intended to provide financial relief or assistance. As a result of this disruption and the pressures on their liquidity, certain of our portfolio companies have been, or may continue to be, incentivized to draw on most, if not all, of the unfunded portion of any revolving or delayed draw term loans made by us, subject to availability under the terms of such loans.

Periods of market volatility could continue to 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 has continued to 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 have adversely affected workforces, customers, suppliers, economies and financial markets globally. The length of the resulting economic downturn and any additional waves of the disease that could exacerbate or further prolong the 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, 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. The outbreak has also led to significant interest rate reductions by the Federal Reserve, including dropping certain rates to near zero, and market uncertainty, which could also have a materially adverse effect on us.

Given the ongoing and dynamic nature of the circumstances, the extent of the impact of COVID-19 on GC Advisors and us will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted. For example, the COVID-19 pandemic has caused governments, including in the United States, to adopt massive stimulus programs and additional stimulus programs are likely to be adopted in the future. Even as the pandemic abates, the United States and other countries could have record levels of unemployment, and, as a result, the countries could face severe economic depressions. The effects that any of these events would have on the economy, the markets, and our investments or returns are uncertain. These potential impacts, while uncertain, could adversely affect our and our portfolio companies’ operating results.

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 particular with respect to increases from current levels to the level of the interest rate floors on certain investments. In periods of rising interest rates, our cost of funds will increase because the interest rates on the majority of amounts we have borrowed under our credit facilities or 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. In periods of decreasing interest rates, while our cost of funds will decrease because the interest rates on the majority of amounts we have borrowed are floating, because a significant portion of the loans in our portfolio also have floating interest rates, our net investment income may also decrease considering that the interest rate floors on our loans may not have been reached.

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.

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 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.

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 addition, one of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic has been a decrease in the number of new investment opportunities in U.S. middle market companies during 2020, and we can offer no assurance about when, or if, the number of U.S. middle market company investing opportunities will equal or exceed those available prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. 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 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 could 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.

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.

In July 2017, the Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”) announced its intention to cease sustaining LIBOR by the end of 2021. The FCA’s intention is that, after 2021, it will no longer be necessary for the FCA to persuade or compel banks to submit to LIBOR due to the development of alternative benchmark rates, which the FCA suggested should be based on transactions and not on reference rates that do not have active underlying markets to support them. In April 2018, the New York Federal Reserve Bank began publishing its alternative rate, the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”). In early 2019, the Alternative Reference Rates Committee of the New York Federal Reserve Bank proposed that SOFR be utilized as the replacement for LIBOR. However, there is still uncertainty as to whether and, if so, when, the loan market or the debt financing securitization (CLO) market will adopt SOFR or some other alternative rate as the replacement for LIBOR.

As such, if LIBOR in its current form does not survive and 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. Further, if LIBOR does not survive and a replacement rate is not widely agreed upon, the mismatch on the interest rates payable by any leverage incurred by us and the interest rate payable on the portfolio company investments could result in a decrease in our net investment income and distributions we are able to pay to our stockholders.

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.

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 would 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.

Past investment performance of us or of similar portfolios and other investment vehicles managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates is not indicative of how we will perform. 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. 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 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 and its affiliates. 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.

As a result of our arrangements with GC Advisors and its affiliates and GC Advisors’ investment committee, there could 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.

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 Golub Capital BDC 3, Inc., or GBDC 3, a closed-end, non-diversified management investment company that has elected to be regulated as a business development company under the 1940 Act. Similarly, GC Advisors or its affiliates currently 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. 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 could 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. For example, the economic disruption and uncertainty precipitated by the COVID-19 pandemic has required 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 these 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 could overlap with the investment objectives of such affiliated accounts. For example, GC Advisors and its affiliates currently manage GBDC 3 and several private funds that are pursuing an investment strategy similar to ours, some of which could seek additional capital from time to time, and we can 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 could 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 could 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.

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.

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. Under certain circumstances, 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 necessarily 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 and creates an incentive for GC Advisors to make investments on our behalf that are riskier or more speculative than would be the case in the absence of such compensation arrangement. This fee structure creates a conflict of interest for GC Advisors to the extent that it encourages GC Advisors to favor 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.

The majority of our portfolio investments are expected to be made in the form of securities that are not publicly traded. As a result, our board of directors will determine 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 incentive fees will be based, in part, on unrealized gains and losses.

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”. 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 expense and the enforcement of the respective agreements, that our board of directors must monitor.

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. We consider GC Advisors and its affiliates to be 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 and SEC staff, or Staff, interpretations, and the 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 separately 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 the desired position size of us and 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 entities can 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 GC Advisors clients, GC Advisors needs to decide whether we or such other entity or entities 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.

On February 27, 2017, GC Advisors and certain other funds and accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates, received exemptive relief from the SEC to permit us greater flexibility to negotiate the terms of co-investments if our Board 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 could afford us additional investment opportunities and the ability to achieve greater diversification.

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 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.

In connection with investments made by us, GC Advisors and its affiliates often receive origination, commitment, documentation, structuring, facility, monitoring, amendment, refinancing, agent and/or other transaction 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 may participate in the original or refinanced investment, or both. 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 entities advised by GC advisors and its affiliates are able to participate in the original or refinanced investment, or both.

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 such reductions, waivers or absorptions will occur in the future or at all, and any such reductions, waivers and absorptions are entirely at the discretion of GC Advisors or the Administrator, as applicable.

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 for the benefit of us and GC Advisors’ other clients.

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, but are not limited to, 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, but are not limited to, loss of reputation, loss of management time and focus, regulatory sanctions, and adverse impact to business relationships.

Golub Capital could engage in any number of strategic transactions, including, without limitation, 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. In August 2018, Golub Capital sold a passive, non-voting minority stake in its management companies to Dyal Capital Partners, a division of Neuberger Berman (“Dyal”). Dyal has also acquired investments in one or more of Golub Capital’s direct competitors and could continue to do so in the future. Dyal does not have any material control rights with respect to Golub Capital.

While Golub Capital does not presently anticipate engaging 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 GC Advisors management team will not be successful in developing and operating the underlying business involved in the strategic transaction.

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 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 misconduct, bad faith or gross negligence 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.

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 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 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.

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 contractual 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 could include 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. If a portfolio company defaults on a loan that is structured to provide accrued interest, it is possible that accrued interest previously used in the calculation of the incentive fee will become uncollectible, and GC Advisors will have 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.”

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.

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. 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 (other than the SBA debentures of a SBIC subsidiary, as permitted by exemptive relief we have been granted by the SEC) less all liabilities and indebtedness not represented by senior securities, after each issuance of senior securities (other than the SBA debentures of an SBIC subsidiary, as permitted by exemptive relief we have been granted by the SEC). 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 sales 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 are not available for distributions to our 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, 2020, we had $2.0 billion of outstanding borrowings, including $408.2 million, $546.5 million and $189.0 million outstanding under the 2018 Debt Securitization, the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization and the 2020 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 could 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 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 senior securities convertible into, or exchangeable for, our common stock, then the percentage ownership of our stockholders at that time will decrease, and holders of our common stock might experience dilution.

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.

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 could pledge up to 100% of our assets and could 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.

On September 13, 2011, we received exemptive relief from the SEC allowing us to modify the asset coverage requirement to exclude the SBA debentures from this calculation. As such, our ratio of total consolidated assets to outstanding indebtedness could be less than 150% minimum asset coverage requirement permitted by Section

61(a)(2) of the 1940 Act. This exemptive relief provides us with increased investment flexibility but also increases our risks related to leverage.

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, 2020, 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.

Based on our outstanding indebtedness of $2.0 billion as of September 30, 2020 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 3.40% as of that date, our investment portfolio would have been required to experience an annual return of at least 1.50% 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.

As a result of the 2018 Debt Securitization, the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization and the 2020 Debt Securitization (each a “Debt Securitization” and, collectively, the “Debt Securitizations”), 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 may 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, the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization and the 2020 Debt Securitization were the 2018 Issuer, the GCIC 2018 Issuer and the 2020 Issuer, respectively (each such special purpose entity, a “Securitization Issuer”). The 2018 Issuer, GCIC 2018 Issuer and 2020 Issuer are wholly-owned subsidiaries of 2018 CLO Depositor, GCIC CLO Depositor and 2020 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.

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, the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization and the 2020 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, 2020, 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, the Class C 2020 Notes (which were unfunded as of September 30, 2020), the Subordinated 2020 Notes and 100% of the membership interests in the 2020 Issuer. As a result, we consolidate the financial statements of the 2018 Issuer, the GCIC 2018 Issuer and the 2020 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 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 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 as long as the Class A 2018 Notes, the Class A GCIC 2018 Notes, the Class A-1 2020 Notes and the 2020 Loans remain outstanding, holders of such class of notes or loans comprise the Controlling Class under the 2018 Debt Securitization, the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization and the 2020 Debt Securitization, respectively. The Class A-1 Notes and 2020 Loans are both considered the most senior class of the 2020 Debt Securitization. If such notes or loans are paid in full, then the Class B 2018 Notes, the Class B GCIC 2018 Notes and the Class A-2 2020 Notes would comprise the Controlling Class under the 2018 Debt Securitization, the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization and the 2020 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 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 Class C 2020 Notes and Subordinated 2020 Notes to the extent the Class A-1 2020 Notes, the 2020 Loans, Class A-2 2020 Notes, Class B 2020 Notes, or Class C 2020 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.

Under the documents governing each Debt Securitization, 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; 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; and the Class A 2020 Notes, the 2020 Loans, the Class B 2020 Notes and the Class C Notes, with respect to the 2020 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; and, in the case of the 2020 Debt Securitization, interest received on the portfolio loans must equal at least 120% of the interest payable in respect of the Class A-1 2020 Notes, the 2020 Loans, the Class A-2 Notes, the Class B 2020 Notes, taken together, and at least 110% of the interest payable in respect of the Class C 2020 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, Subordinated GCIC 2018 Notes, Class C 2020 Notes or Subordinated 2020 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, the 2018 GCIC Debt Securitization and 2020 Debt Securitization could extend through as late as January 15, 2023, January 20, 2023 and November 5, 2022 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.

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.

Under the terms of the documents governing the 2018 Debt Securitization, the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization and the 2020 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, the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization and the 2020 Debt Securitization, the applicable CLO Depositor and a supermajority of the Subordinated 2018 Notes, Subordinated GCIC 2018 Notes or Subordinated 2020 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, the GCIC 2018 Issuer or the 2020 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.

As a result of our Revolving Credit Facilities, we are subject to a variety of risks, including those set forth below.

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 distributions on our equity interests in our Funding Subsidiaries only if such Funding Subsidiary has made all required cash interest payments to the respective lenders and no default exists under the respective Revolving Credit Facility. 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.

We receive cash from our Funding Subsidiaries 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.

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.

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.

As a result of our SBIC Funds, we are subject to a variety of risks, including those set forth below.

We own 100% of the equity interests in SBIC IV, SBIC V and SBIC VI. We consolidate the financial statements of each of the SBIC Funds in our consolidated financial statements. Our interests in the SBIC Funds are subordinated in priority of payment to the SBA-guaranteed debentures issued by the respective SBIC Fund. We receive cash from SBIC IV, SBIC V and SBIC VI only to the extent that we receive distributions on our equity interests in each such SBIC Fund. Our SBIC Funds could be limited by SBA regulations governing SBICs from making certain distributions to us unless we request a waiver of the SBA restrictions. We cannot assure you that the SBA would grant any such waiver. In the event that we fail to receive cash from our SBIC Funds, 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.

Our wholly-owned subsidiaries, SBIC IV, SBIC V and SBIC VI, received licenses to operate as SBICs under the Small Business Act of 1958, as amended, or the 1958 Act, and are regulated by the SBA. The SBA places certain limitations on the financing terms of investments by SBICs in portfolio companies and regulates the types of financings and prohibits investing in certain industries. Compliance with SBIC requirements could cause our SBIC Funds to invest at less competitive rates in order to qualify investments under the SBA regulations.

Further, SBA regulations require that a licensed SBIC be periodically examined and audited by the SBA to determine its compliance with the relevant regulations. If our SBIC Funds fail to comply with applicable regulations, the SBA could, depending on the severity of the violation, limit or prohibit their use of debentures, declare outstanding debentures immediately due and payable, and/or limit them from making new investments. In addition, the SBA could revoke or suspend our SBIC Funds’ licenses for willful or repeated violation of, or willful or repeated failure to observe, any provision of the 1958 Act or any rule or regulation promulgated thereunder. These actions by the SBA could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

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.

We can, 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 the benefit of us.

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.

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.

As a business development company, we are restricted from acquiring any assets other than “qualifying assets” unless, at the time of and after giving effect to such acquisition, at least 70% of our total assets are qualifying assets. See “Business — Regulation — Qualifying Assets.”

In the future, we believe that most of our investments will constitute qualifying assets. However, 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.

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 the board of directors may 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.

We could experience fluctuations in our quarterly operating results due to a number of factors, including the interest rate payable on borrowings, 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.

U.S. and non-U.S. markets could experience political uncertainty and/or change that subjects investments to heightened risks, including, for instance, the risks related to the elections in the U.S. or the effect on world leaders and governments of the COVID-19 pandemic. These heightened risks could also include, but are not limited to: 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; less governmental supervision and regulation of the securities markets and market participants; 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.

On January 31, 2020, the United Kingdom ended its membership in the EU (“Brexit”). Under the terms of the withdrawal agreement negotiated and agreed between the United Kingdom (the “UK”) and the EU (the “EU Withdrawal Agreement”), the UK’s departure from the EU is followed by a transition period (the “Transition Period”), which runs until December 31, 2020 and during which the UK shall continue to apply EU law and be treated for all material purposes as if it were still a member of the EU. The EU Withdrawal Agreement provides that the Transition Period could be extended by agreement between the UK and the EU for up to two years beyond December 31, 2020. However, the UK government has indicated that it will not seek such an extension. 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 United Kingdom and in wider European markets for some time. In particular, 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 United Kingdom’s sovereign credit rating, could also have an impact on the performance of certain investments made in the United Kingdom or Europe.

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. 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 may 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 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 (the “U.S. Risk Retention Rules”) were issued and became effective with respect to collateralized loan obligation (“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 (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.

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. 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.

There has been ongoing discussion and commentary regarding potential significant changes to U.S. trade policies, treaties and tariffs. The current U.S. presidential administration, along with the U.S. Congress, has created significant uncertainty about the future relationship between the United States and other countries with respect to trade policies, treaties and tariffs. These developments, or the perception that any of them could occur, could have a material adverse effect on global economic conditions and the stability of global financial markets, and could significantly reduce global trade and, in particular, trade between the impacted nations and the United States. Any of these factors could depress economic activity and restrict our portfolio companies' access to suppliers or customers and have a material adverse effect on their business, financial condition and results of operations, which in turn would negatively impact us.

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.

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 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, 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 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 could result in additional costs and time delays that could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

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.

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 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.

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.

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 European Union’s (the “EU”) 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.

Risks Relating to Our Investments

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. 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.

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.

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.

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. 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.

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 could lose money on our investments. Compared to larger companies, middle market companies typically have shorter operating histories, newer technologies and/or products, less experienced management teams and less predictable operating results, and often participate in quickly evolving markets, be more reliant on a small number of products, managers or clients, or be subject to other individual company risks. 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 portfolio 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 may 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 current COVID-19 pandemic. While GC Advisors intends to invest in portfolio companies in industries that it believes are insulated from the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, there can be no assurance that such portfolio companies will not be adversely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic or 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.

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 loan. 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 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.

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 Accounting Standards Codification Topic 820. The Board uses the services of one or more independent service providers to review the valuation of its 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:

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.

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 can increase the security’s price volatility.

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.

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 its 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.

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 illiquid securities or private middle-market companies require substantial due diligence and structuring, and we cannot assure you that we will achieve our anticipated investment pace. As a result, you will be unable 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. To the extent that we operate as a non-diversified investment company in the future, we could be subject to greater risk.

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 its 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 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.

Leveraged companies could experience bankruptcy or similar financial distress, and the risk of these events has been significantly increased by the COVID-19 pandemic. 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 raise conflicts of interest (including, for example, conflicts over proposed waivers and amendments to debt covenants), including between investors who hold different 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.

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

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.

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.

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:

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

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 distributions previously made to us.

Under the Investment Advisory Agreement, the Prior 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, 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, the Prior 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, the Prior 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, the Prior 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, the Prior 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, the Prior 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 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 by United States companies. The legal and regulatory environment 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, 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, 2020, we were invested in securities of eight 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 market issuers, to the limited extent such investments are permitted under the 1940 Act.

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 security holders. We could utilize 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 and borrow under a credit facility in currencies selected to seek to hedge against fluctuations in the relative values of our portfolio positions from changes in currency exchange rates and market interest rates. Use of these hedging instruments could include counter-party 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 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 could 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.

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. 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.

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 shareholders. 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 Bankruptcy Code are, in certain circumstances, subject to certain potential liabilities that would 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

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 lower risk tolerance.

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.

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. 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. 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. 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 of such stock or other disposition. 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.

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:

The 2024 Unsecured Notes are not secured by any of our assets or any of the assets of our subsidiaries. As a result, the 2024 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 2024 Unsecured Notes or that we or our subsidiaries may 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 may assert rights against the assets pledged to secure that indebtedness in order to receive full payment of their indebtedness before the assets may be used to pay other creditors, including the holders of the 2024 Unsecured Notes. As of September 30, 2020, we had an aggregate of approximately $2.0 billion of outstanding borrowings under the Debt Securitizations, the Revolving Credit Facilities and the SBA debentures, all of which are secured and thus effectively senior to the 2024 Unsecured Notes.

The 2024 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 2024 Unsecured Notes and the 2024 Unsecured Notes are not required to be guaranteed by any subsidiaries we may 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 2024 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 2024 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 2024 Unsecured Notes are structurally subordinated, or junior, to the Debt Securitizations, the Revolving Credit Facilities and the SBA Debentures 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 2024 Unsecured Notes.

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

indebtedness in the future, all of which would be structurally senior to the 2024 Unsecured Notes.

The indenture governing the 2024 Unsecured Notes offers limited protection to holders of the 2024 Unsecured

Notes. The terms of the indenture and the 2024 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 2024 Unsecured Notes. In particular, the terms of the indenture and the 2024 Unsecured Notes do not place any restrictions on our or our subsidiaries’ ability to:

Furthermore, the terms of the indenture and the 2024 Unsecured Notes do not protect holders of the 2024 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 2024 Unsecured Notes.

Our ability to recapitalize, incur additional debt and take a number of other actions are not limited by the terms of the 2024 Unsecured Notes and may have important consequences for holders of the 2024 Unsecured Notes, including making it more difficult for us to satisfy our obligations with respect to the 2024 Unsecured Notes or negatively affecting the trading value of the 2024 Unsecured Notes.

Certain of our current debt instruments include more protections for their holders than the indenture and the 2024

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 2024 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 2024 Unsecured Notes.

The 2024 Unsecured Notes are a new issue of debt securities and there currently is no trading market for the 2024 Unsecured Notes. We do not intend to apply for listing of the 2024 Unsecured Notes on any securities exchange or for quotation of the 2024 Unsecured Notes on any automated dealer quotation system. If no active trading market develops, holder may not be able to resell the 2024 Unsecured Notes at their fair market value or at all. If the 2024 Unsecured Notes are traded after their initial issuance, they may 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 2024 Unsecured Notes, that holders will be able to sell the 2024 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 2024 Unsecured Notes may be harmed. Accordingly, holders may be required to bear the financial risk of an investment in the 2024 Unsecured Notes for an indefinite period of time.

Any default under the agreements governing our indebtedness, including the Debt Securitizations, the Revolving Credit Facilities, the SBA Debentures, or other indebtedness to which we may be 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 2024 Unsecured Notes and substantially decrease the market value of the 2024 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 may 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 may 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, the SBA Debentures or other debt that we may incur in the future, to avoid being in default. If we breach our covenants under the Debt Securitizations, the Revolving Credit Facilities, the SBA Debentures or other debt and seek a waiver, we may 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, the Revolving Credit Facilities and the SBA Debentures, 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 may 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 may 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.

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 2024 Unsecured Notes or other debt securities we may issue. These credit ratings may not reflect the potential impact of risks relating to the structure or marketing of the 2024 Unsecured Notes. Credit ratings are not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security, and may 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 Notes of any changes in our credit ratings.

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 2024 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 Notes with fixed interest rates may decline. We cannot predict the future level of market interest rates.

The 2024 Unsecured Notes are redeemable in whole or in part upon certain conditions at any time or from time to time at our option. We may choose to redeem the 2024 Unsecured Notes at times when prevailing interest rates are lower than the interest rate paid on the 2024 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 2024 Unsecured Notes being redeemed.

We may not be able to repurchase the 2024 Unsecured Notes upon a Change of Control Repurchase Event (as defined in the indenture governing the 2024 Unsecured Notes) because we may not have sufficient funds. Upon a Change of Control Repurchase Event, holders of the 2024 Unsecured Notes may require us to repurchase for cash some or all of the 2024 Unsecured Notes at a repurchase price equal to 100% of the aggregate principal amount of the 2024 Unsecured Notes being repurchased, plus accrued and unpaid interest to, but not including, the repurchase date. Our failure to purchase such tendered 2024 Unsecured Notes upon the occurrence of such Change of Control Repurchase Event would cause an event of default under the indenture governing the 2024 Unsecured Notes and a cross-default under the agreements governing certain of our other indebtedness, which may result in the acceleration of such indebtedness requiring us to repay that indebtedness immediately.

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 may 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 may have different interests than holders of common stock and may at times have disproportionate influence over our affairs.

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 may 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 may 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 may issue, dividends or other distributions.

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.

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 may 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 may 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.

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.

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 (as defined above) 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, 2020 and at least 20% of the aggregate declared distribution for distributions declared on or after January 1, 2021. 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, 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.

Any publicly issued debt securities we issue may or may not 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 may 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:

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

If we issue debt securities that are redeemable at our option, we may 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 may 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.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

Item 2. Properties

Properties

We do not own any real estate or other physical properties materially important to our operation. Our headquarters are located at 200 Park Avenue, 25th Floor, New York, NY 10166 and are provided by Golub Capital LLC pursuant to the Administration Agreement. We believe that our office facilities are suitable and adequate to our business.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

We, GC Advisors and Golub Capital LLC could, from time to time, be involved in legal and regulatory proceedings arising out of their respective operations in the normal course of business or otherwise. While there can be no assurance of the ultimate disposition of any such proceedings, each of us, GC Advisors and Golub Capital LLC do not believe it is currently subject to any material legal proceedings.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosure

None.

PART II

Our common stock began trading on April 15, 2010 and is currently traded on The Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “GBDC”. 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.

The last reported price for our common stock on November 25, 2020 was $14.08 per share. As of November 25, 2020, we had 641 stockholders of record.

Distributions

Our distributions, if any, are determined by the board of directors. We elected to be treated as a RIC under Subchapter M of the Code. In order to be subject to tax as a RIC, we must distribute to our stockholders dividends for U.S. federal income tax purposes each tax year of an amount at least equal to 90% of our net ordinary income and net short-term capital gains in excess of our net long-term capital losses, or investment company taxable income, determined without regard to any deduction for dividends paid. In addition, we are subject to ordinary income and capital gain distribution requirements under U.S. federal excise tax rules for each calendar year. If we do not meet the required distributions we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible federal excise tax on the undistributed amount.

We have adopted a dividend reinvestment plan that provides for reinvestment of our dividends and other distributions on behalf of our stockholders. As a result, if our board of directors authorizes, and we declare, a cash dividend or other distribution, then our stockholders who participate in our dividend reinvestment plan will have their cash distribution reinvested in additional shares of our common stock, rather than receiving the cash distribution.

Stock Performance Graph

This graph compares the stockholder return on our common stock from September 30, 2012 to September 30, 2020 with that of the NASDAQ Financial 100 Stock Index and the Standard & Poor’s 500 Stock Index. This graph assumes that on September 30, 2012, $100 was invested in our common stock, the NASDAQ Financial 100 Stock Index, and the Standard & Poor’s 500 Stock Index. The graph also assumes the reinvestment of all cash distributions prior to any tax effect. The graph and other information furnished under this Part II Item 5 of this annual report on Form 10-K shall not be deemed to be “soliciting material” or to be “filed” with the SEC or subject to Regulation 14A or 14C under, or to the liabilities of Section 18 of, the Exchange Act. The stock price performance included in the below graph is not necessarily indicative of future stock performance.

Item 6. Selected Consolidated Financial Data

The following selected consolidated financial data of Golub Capital BDC, Inc. as of and for the years ended September 30, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017 and 2016 is derived from the consolidated financial statements that have been audited by Ernst & Young LLP, independent registered public accounting firm. The financial data should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto and “Management’s Discussion of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included elsewhere in this annual report on Form 10-K.

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The information contained in this section should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto appearing elsewhere in this annual report on Form 10-K. In this report, “we,” “us,” “our” and “Golub Capital BDC” refer to Golub Capital BDC, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries.

Forward-Looking Statements

Some of the statements in this annual report on Form 10-K constitute forward-looking statements, which relate to future events or our future performance or financial condition. The forward-looking statements contained in this annual report on Form 10-K involve risks and uncertainties, including statements as to:

Such forward-looking statements may include statements preceded by, followed by or that otherwise include the words “may,” “might,” “will,” “intend,” “should,” “could,” “can,” “would,” “expect,” “believe,” “estimate,” “anticipate,” “predict,” “potential,” “plan” or similar words. The forward looking statements contained in this annual report on Form 10-K involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from those implied or expressed in the forward-looking statements for any reason, including the factors set forth as “Risk Factors” in this annual report on Form 10-K.

We have based the forward-looking statements included in this report on information available to us on the date of this report. Actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in our forward-looking statements and future results could differ materially from historical performance. You are advised to consult any additional disclosures that we make directly to you or through reports that we have filed or in the future file with the SEC including annual reports on Form 10-K, registration statements on Form N-2, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current

reports on Form 8-K. This annual report on Form 10-K contains statistics and other data that have been obtained from or compiled from information made available by third-party service providers. We have not independently verified such statistics or data.

Overview

We are an externally managed, closed-end, non-diversified management investment company that has elected to be regulated as a business development company under the 1940 Act. In addition, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we have elected to be treated as a RIC under Subchapter M of the Code. As a business development company and a RIC, we are also subject to certain constraints, including limitations imposed by the 1940 Act and the Code.

Our shares are currently listed on The Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “GBDC”.

Our investment objective is to generate current income and capital appreciation by investing primarily in one stop (a loan that combines characteristics of traditional first lien senior secured loans and second lien or subordinated loans and that are often referred to by other middle-market lenders as unitranche loans) and other senior secured loans of U.S. middle-market companies. We also selectively invest in second lien and subordinated loans of, and warrants and minority equity securities in U.S. middle-market companies. We intend to achieve our investment objective by (1) accessing the established loan origination channels developed by Golub Capital, a leading lender to U.S. middle-market companies with over $30.0 billion in capital under management as of September 30, 2020, (2) selecting investments within our core middle-market company focus, (3) partnering with experienced private equity firms, or sponsors, in many cases with whom Golub Capital has invested alongside in the past, (4) implementing the disciplined underwriting standards of Golub Capital and (5) drawing upon the aggregate experience and resources of Golub Capital.

Our investment activities are managed by GC Advisors and supervised by our board of directors of which a majority of the members are independent of us, GC Advisors and its affiliates.

Under the Investment Advisory Agreement, we have agreed to pay GC Advisors an annual base management fee based on our average adjusted gross assets as well as an incentive fee based on our investment performance. The Investment Advisory Agreement was approved by our board of directors in July 2019 and by our stockholders in September 2019. The Investment Advisory Agreement was entered into effective as of September 16, 2019 and will continue for an initial two-year term. Prior to September 16, 2019, we were subject to the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement. The changes to the Investment Advisory Agreement, as compared to the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement, consisted of revisions to (i) exclude the impact of purchase accounting resulting from a merger or acquisition, including our acquisition of GCIC, from the calculation of income subject to the income incentive fee payable and the calculation of the cumulative incentive fee cap under the Investment Advisory Agreement and (ii) convert the cumulative incentive fee cap into a per share calculation. Under the Administration Agreement, we are provided with certain administrative services by the Administrator, which is currently Golub Capital LLC. Under the Administration Agreement, we have agreed to reimburse the Administrator for our allocable portion (subject to the review and approval of our independent directors) of overhead and other expenses incurred by the Administrator in performing its obligations under the Administration Agreement.

We seek to create a portfolio that includes primarily one stop and other senior secured loans by primarily investing approximately $10.0 million to $75.0 million of capital, on average, in the securities of U.S. middle-market companies. We also selectively invest more than $75.0 million in some of our portfolio companies and generally expect that the size of our individual investments will vary proportionately with the size of our capital base.

We generally invest in securities that have been rated below investment grade by independent rating agencies or that would be rated below investment grade if they were rated. These securities, which are often referred to as “junk,” have predominantly speculative characteristics with respect to the issuer’s capacity to pay interest and repay principal. In addition, many of our debt investments have floating interest rates that reset on a periodic basis and typically do not fully pay down principal prior to maturity, which may increase our risk of losing part or all of our investment.

As of September 30, 2020 and 2019, our portfolio at fair value was comprised of the following:

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 late stage lending loans or recurring revenue loans. Other targeted characteristics of late stage lending 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. As of September 30, 2020 and 2019, one stop loans included $430.2 million and $414.7 million, respectively, of late stage lending loans at fair value.

As of September 30, 2020 and 2019, we had debt and equity investments in 254 and 241 portfolio companies, respectively. In addition, as of September 30, 2019, we had investments in SLF and GCIC SLF.

The following table shows the weighted average income yield and weighted average investment income yield of our earning portfolio company investments, which represented nearly 100% of our debt investments, as well as the total return based on our average net asset value, and the total return based on the change in the quoted market price of our stock and assuming distributions were reinvested in accordance with our dividend reinvestment plan, or DRIP, in each case for the years ended September 30, 2020 and 2019:

We recognize realized gains or losses on investments based on the difference between the net proceeds from the disposition and the amortized cost basis of the investment or derivative instrument, without regard to unrealized gains or losses previously recognized. We record current period changes in fair value of investments and derivative instruments that are measured at fair value as a component of the net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investment transactions in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.

We expect our general and administrative expenses to be relatively stable or decline as a percentage of total assets during periods of asset growth and to increase during periods of asset declines.

Prior to the redemption of the 2014 Notes and termination of the documents governing the 2014 Debt Securitization on August 26, 2020, GC Advisors, served as collateral manager for the 2014 Issuer, our wholly-owned subsidiary, under the 2014 Collateral Management Agreement, was entitled to receive an annual fee in an amount equal to 0.25% of the principal balance of the portfolio loans held by the 2014 Issuer at the beginning of the collection period relating to each payment date, which was payable in arrears on each payment date. Under the 2014 Collateral Management Agreement, the term ‘‘collection period’’ referred to a quarterly period running from the day after the end of the prior collection period to the tenth business day prior to the payment date.

GC Advisors, as collateral manager for the 2018 Issuer under 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 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.

GC Advisors, as collateral manager for the 2020 Issuer under the 2020 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 2020 Issuer at the beginning of the collection period relating to each payment date, which is payable in arrears on each payment date. Under the 2020 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.

Collateral management fees were paid directly by the 2014 Issuer and are paid directly by the 2018 Issuer, GCIC 2018 Issuer and 2020 Issuer to GC Advisors and are offset against the management fees payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement. In addition, the 2014 Issuer paid Wells Fargo Securities, LLC structuring and placement fees for its services in connection with the initial structuring and subsequent amendments to the initial structuring of the 2014 Debt Securitization. The 2018 Issuer paid Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC structuring and placement fees for its services in connection with the structuring of the 2018 Debt Securitization. Before we acquired the GCIC 2018 Issuer as part of our acquisition of GCIC, the GCIC 2018 Issuer paid Wells Fargo Securities, LLC structuring and placement fees for its services in connection with the initial structuring of the GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization. The 2020 Issuer paid Wells Fargo Securities, LLC structuring and placement fees for its services in connection with the structuring of the 2020 Debt Securitization. Term debt securitizations are also known as CLOs and are a form of secured financing incurred by us, which are consolidated by us and subject to our overall asset coverage requirement. The 2018 Issuer, GCIC 2018 Issuer and 2020 Issuer also agreed to pay ongoing administrative expenses to the trustee, collateral manager, independent accountants, legal counsel, rating agencies and independent managers in connection with developing and maintaining reports, and providing required services in connection with the administration of the 2018 Debt Securitization, GCIC 2018 Debt Securitization and 2020 Debt Securitization, and collectively the Debt Securitizations, as applicable.

We believe that these administrative expenses approximate the amount of ongoing fees and expenses that we would be required to pay in connection with a traditional secured credit facility. Our common stockholders indirectly bear all of these expenses.

On September 16, 2019, we completed our acquisition of GCIC, pursuant to the Merger Agreement. Pursuant to the Merger Agreement, Merger Sub was first merged with and into GCIC, with GCIC as the surviving company, and, immediately following the Initial Merger, GCIC was then merged with and into us, with us as the surviving company.

In accordance with the terms of the Merger Agreement, at the effective time of the Merger, each outstanding share of GCIC’s common stock was converted into the right to receive 0.865 shares of our common stock (with GCIC’s stockholders receiving cash in lieu of fractional shares of our common stock). As a result of the Merger, we issued an aggregate of 71,779,964 shares of our common stock to former stockholders of GCIC.

Upon the consummation of the Merger, we entered into the Investment Advisory Agreement with GC Advisors which replaced the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement.

As a result of the Purchase Agreement, on January 1, 2020, SLF and GCIC SLF became our wholly-owned subsidiaries. In addition, our capital commitments and those of the Transferors were terminated. As wholly-owned subsidiaries, the assets, liabilities, income and expenses of the Senior Loan Funds were consolidated into our financial statements and notes thereto for periods ending on or after January 1, 2020, and are included for purposes of determining our asset coverage ratio.

Recent Developments

On October 2, 2020, in connection with a public offering announced on September 29, 2020, or the Offering, we issued the 2024 Unsecured Notes. As part of the Offering, an affiliate of GC Advisors, or the Affiliate, purchased $40.0 million of the 2024 Unsecured Notes. On October 9, 2020, the Affiliate sold $15.0 million of the 2024 Unsecured Notes to an unaffiliated party.

On October 9, 2020, all outstanding borrowings under the DB Credit Facility were repaid following which the DB Credit Facility was terminated.

On October 23, 2020, we delivered a notice to the lenders under the MS Credit Facility II to permanently decrease the borrowing capacity under the MS Credit Facility II by $75.0 million, resulting in total borrowing capacity of $325.0 million.

On November 20, 2020, our board of directors declared a quarterly distribution of $0.29 per share, which is payable on December 30, 2020 to holders of record as of December 11, 2020.

Market Trends

We have identified the following trends that may affect our business:

Consolidated Results of Operations

The comparison of the fiscal years ended September 30, 2019 and 2018 can be found in our Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2019 located within Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations.

Consolidated operating results for the years ended September 30, 2020 and 2019 are as follows:

Net income can vary substantially from period to period for various reasons, including the recognition of realized gains and losses and unrealized appreciation and depreciation and as a result of the acquisition of GCIC pursuant to the Merger. As a result, annual comparisons of net income may not be meaningful.

As a supplement to our GAAP financial measures, we have provided the following non-GAAP financial measures that we believe are useful for the reasons described below:

We believe that excluding the financial impact of the purchase premium in the above non-GAAP financial measures is useful for investors as this is a non-cash expense/loss and is one method we use to measure our financial condition

and results of operations. In addition, we believe excluding the accrual of the capital gain incentive fee in the above non-GAAP financial measures is useful as it includes the portion of such accrual that is not contractually payable under the terms of either the Investment Advisory Agreement or the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement.

Although these non-GAAP financial measures are intended to enhance investors’ understanding of our business and performance, these non-GAAP financial measures should not be considered an alternative to GAAP.

Investment income increased from the year ended September 30, 2019 to the year ended September 30, 2020 by $126.7 million primarily as a result of an increase in the average earning debt investments balance, which is the average balance of accruing loans in our investment portfolio, of $2.3 billion as a result of the acquisition of GCIC on September 16, 2019 and the consolidation of SLF and GCIC SLF on January 1, 2020. This increase in our investment income as a result of an increase in the average balance of our accruing loans was partially offset by amortization of the GCIC acquisition purchase premium.

The income yield by debt security type for the years ended September 30, 2020 and 2019 was as follows:

Income yields on one stop and senior secured loans decreased for the year ended September 30, 2020 as compared to the year ended September 30, 2019 primarily due to a decrease in the average LIBOR for the year ended September 30, 2020. As of September 30, 2020, we have three second lien investments and four subordinated debt investments as shown in the Consolidated Schedule of Investments. Due to the limited number of second lien and subordinated debt investments, income yields on second lien and subordinated debt investments can be significantly impacted by the addition, subtraction or refinancing of one investment.

The following table summarizes our expenses for the years ended September 30, 2020 and 2019:

Interest Expense

The effective annualized average interest rate, which includes amortization of debt financing costs, amortization of discounts on notes issued and non-usage facility fees, on our outstanding debt decreased to 3.4% for the year ended September 30, 2020 from 4.2% for the year ended September 30, 2019 primarily due to a lower average LIBOR.

Management Fee

The base management fee increased as a result of a sequential increase in average adjusted gross assets from 2019 to 2020.

Incentive Fees

For each of the years ended September 30, 2020 and 2019, there was no Capital Gain Incentive Fee payable as calculated under the Investment Advisory Agreement. In accordance with GAAP, we are required to include the aggregate unrealized capital appreciation on investments in the calculation and accrue a capital gain incentive fee as if such unrealized capital appreciation were realized, even though such unrealized capital appreciation is not permitted to be considered in calculating the fee actually payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement. There was no capital gain incentive fee accrual calculated in accordance with GAAP as of September 30, 2020 and 2019. Any payment due under the terms of the Investment Advisory Agreement or Prior Investment Advisory Agreement, as applicable, is calculated in arrears at the end of each calendar year. Through December 31, 2018, we paid $2.8 million of Capital Gain Incentive Fees calculated in accordance with the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement. No

Capital Gain Incentive Fees as calculated under the Investment Advisory Agreement or the Prior Investment Advisory Agreement, as applicable, have been payable since December 31, 2018.

There was a reversal in the accrual for the capital gain incentive fee under GAAP of $5.6 million for the year ended September 30, 2019. The reversal in the accrual for a capital gain incentive fee under GAAP for the year ended September 30, 2019 was primarily due to the GCIC purchase premium write-down as a result of the Merger.

Professional Fees, Administrative Service Fee, and General and Administrative Expenses

In total, professional fees, the administrative service fee, and general and administrative expenses increased by $6.0 million from the year ended September 30, 2019 to the year ended September 30, 2020. The increases were due to higher costs incurred to service a growing portfolio primarily as a result of the acquisition of GCIC. In general, we expect certain of our operating expenses, including professional fees, the administrative service fee, and other general and administrative expenses to decline as a percentage of our total assets during periods of growth other than as a result of a merger or other large acquisition and increase as a percentage of our total assets during periods of asset declines.

The Administrator pays for certain expenses incurred by us. These expenses are subsequently reimbursed in cash. Total expenses reimbursed by us to the Administrator for the years ended September 30, 2020 and 2019 were $6.4 million and $2.8 million, respectively.

As of September 30, 2020 and 2019, included in accounts payable and other liabilities were $1.6 million and $0.9 million, respectively, for expenses paid on behalf of us by the Administrator. As of September 30, 2019, also included in accounts payable and other liabilities was $0.8 million of expenses paid on behalf of GCIC by the Administrator, which were assumed in the Merger.

The following table summarizes our net realized and unrealized gains (losses) for the periods presented: