Michael Hart
Analyst · Wells Fargo Securities
Thank you, Dan. Good morning, everyone and thank you for joining us for our second quarter earnings call. I’m joined today by our management team, including our President, Jeff Levin; our CFO, Tom Hennigan; and our Head of Originations, Grishma Parekh. I'll begin this morning with a brief look at our financial results, and also revisit our discussion from last quarter regarding the adoption of certain provisions of the Small Business Credit Availability Act where is referred to at the BDC leverage bill. I’ll then provide an update on the implementation in the new leverage limitations, which became effective for us on June 7th of this year. As you know from our discussion last quarter, TCG BDC was the leader in seeking approval for the new guidelines from both our board and our shareholder base. I’ll share with you the results of that outreach and how we're thinking about utilization, and talk about an important change to our fee structure as we continue to look for ways to best align our interests with those of our shareholders. Turning to financial results, yesterday, we released our second quarter earnings for the year. All components of our business continue to deliver consistent results including our core portfolio, our joint venture and our strategic partnerships, all of which contributed to a solid quarter performance with net investment income of $0.45 per share an increase of 12.5% from the prior quarter and comfortably covering our second quarter dividend of $0.37 per share, which represented about 9% yield on a trailing 12-month basis. Net asset value per share decline modestly quarter-over-quarter from $18.09 per share to $17.93 driven primarily by some unrealized valuation changes that Tom provide more details on in a moment. Let me shift to our debt-to-equity ratio, as it provides a good segue into the broader comments that I want to make on the topic of the BDC leverage bill. Our debt-to-equity at the end of the second quarter was 0.76:1 up modestly from the 0.7:1 ratio at the end of the first quarter. We previously provided guidance the outer boundary for our owned businesses leverage would be in the area of 1.3:1 to 1.4:1. Obviously we're comfortably inside those levels currently, but we continue to believe that those are prudent out our boundaries given the overall risk in our portfolio today. Regarding some of the bill specifics, as you're well aware the bill permits BDC is to reduce the minimum asset coverage ratio from 200% to 150%, which translates into a potential increase in the debt-to-equity ratio from 1:1 to 2:1. When the passage of the bill was announced we carefully considered what the new law provided for both in terms of increased regulatory cushion and the potential for increased profitability for our company and so it’s adoption would be significantly positive for our shareholders. The bill provided two avenues for approval an adoption, either going the board route and receiving an affirmative vote by a majority of the independent directors in which case the new leverage parameters would go into effect one year from the date of approval or take into a shareholder vote and receive approval with an affirmative vote by majority of the shareholders in which case the new leverage limitation would go into effect one day after the shareholder meeting. In evaluating the provisions of the bill and potential impact, not only in our business, but also on the industry as a whole, we concluded that the best path forward was to seek the approval of both our board and shareholders, it's a decision that we felt was too important not to have those two constituencies weigh in regardless of the timing implications. In April, our Board of Directors unanimously approved the adoption of the new BDC leverage bill and our shareholders overwhelmingly approved its adoption through a proxy process that coincided with our year-end annual shareholder meeting, and resulted in the 150% asset coverage ratio becoming affective on June 7th this year. As we've mentioned previously we don't anticipate the adoption to the reduced asset coverage requirement to influence or change of the investment thesis that we've applied since our company's inception. We'll continue to invest where we see best relative value and our portfolio construct shouldn't change in any material way going forward. We obviously believe the adoption of the new leverage guidelines represent an opportunity to deliver increased returns to shareholders. However, even in the absence of the increased leverage the reduced asset coverage ratio provides immediate operational flexibility, and increased cushion to the regulatory leverage limit, which would be invaluable in the event of more volatile markets. Many aspects of the new builds impact will play out overtime and many of the decisions in the future will be market dependent. However, is the final point of emphasis as it relates to Carlyle out ongoing commitment to the alignment of interest with shareholders affected retroactively to July 1st of this year our investment advisor and has reduced the base management fee from 1.5% to 1% on all assets financed with greater than 1:1 leverage. This reduction in management fee, which as you know has been implemented post the shareholders approval of the new leverage guidelines is another good example of Carlyle's philosophy around shareholder alignment. With that I’ll turn it over to Jeff who will provide some additional color on the overall state of the market and how this is influencing our investment selection. Jeff?