As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 15, 2016

Securities Act File No. 333-193308

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

 

FORM N-2

 

 

GOLUB CAPITAL BDC, INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Charter)

 

150 South Wacker Drive, Suite 800
Chicago, Illinois 60606

(Address of Principal Executive Offices)

(312) 205-5050

(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

David B. Golub
Golub Capital BDC, Inc.
150 South Wacker Drive, Suite 800
Chicago, Illinois 60606

(Name and Address of Agent for Service)

 

Copies to:

Thomas J. Friedmann
David J. Harris
William J. Tuttle
Dechert LLP
One International Place, 40^th Floor
100 Oliver Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02110-2605
(617) 728-7100

 

Approximate date of proposed public offering: As soon as practicable after the effective date of this Registration Statement.

If any of the securities being registered on this form are offered on a delayed or continuous basis in reliance on Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, other than securities offered in connection with a dividend reinvestment plan, check the following box. x

It is proposed that this filing will become effective (check appropriate box):

x when declared effective pursuant to section 8(c).

The Registrant hereby amends this Registration Statement on such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective date until the Registrant shall file a further amendment which specifically states that this Registration Statement shall thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(c) of the Securities Act of 1933 or until the Registration Statement shall become effective on such date as the Securities and Exchange Commission, acting pursuant to said Section 8(c), may determine.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The information in this prospectus is not complete and may be changed. We may not sell these securities until the registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission is effective. This prospectus is not an offer to sell these securities and is not soliciting an offer to buy these securities in any state where the offer or sale is not permitted.

PRELIMINARY PROSPECTUS		SUBJECT TO COMPLETION            , 2016

$1,000,000,000

GOLUB CAPITAL BDC, INC.

Common Stock

Preferred Stock

Warrants

Subscription Rights

Debt Securities

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 Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended. Our investment objective is to generate current income and capital appreciation by investing primarily in senior secured and one stop 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.

GC Advisors LLC serves as our investment adviser. Golub Capital LLC serves as our administrator. GC Advisors LLC and Golub Capital LLC are affiliated with Golub Capital (as defined herein), a leading lender to middle-market companies that has over $15.0 billion of capital under management as of December 31, 2015.

We may offer, from time to time, in one or more offerings or series, together or separately, up to $1,000,000,000 of our common stock, preferred stock, warrants representing rights to purchase shares of our common stock, preferred stock or debt securities, subscription rights or debt securities, which we refer to, collectively, as the “securities.” We may sell our common stock through underwriters or dealers, “at-the-market” to or through a market maker into an existing trading market or otherwise directly to one or more purchasers or through agents or through a combination of methods of sale. The identities of such underwriters, dealers, market makers or agents, as the case may be, will be described in one or more supplements to this prospectus. The securities may be offered at prices and on terms to be described in one or more supplements to this prospectus. In the event we offer common stock, the offering price per share of our common stock exclusive of any underwriting commissions or discounts will not be less than the net asset value per share of our common stock at the time we make the offering except (1) in connection with a rights offering to our existing stockholders, (2) with the consent of the majority of our common stockholders and approval of our board of directors or (3) under such circumstances as the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC, may permit. See “Risk Factors” for more information.

Our common stock is traded on The NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol “GBDC”. The last reported closing price for our common stock on March 14, 2016 was $17.05 per share. The net asset value of our common stock on December 31, 2015 (the last date prior to the date of this prospectus on which we determined net asset value) was $15.89 per share.

Shares of closed-end investment companies, including business development companies, frequently trade at a discount to their net asset value. If our shares trade at a discount to our net asset value, it will likely increase the risk of loss for purchasers in this offering. Investing in our securities involves a high degree of risk. Before buying any securities, you should read the discussion of the material risks of investing in our securities, including the risk of leverage, in “Risk Factors” beginning on page 15 of this prospectus.

This prospectus contains important information you should know before investing in our securities. Please read it before you invest and keep it for future reference. We file annual, quarterly and current reports, proxy statements and other information about us with the SEC. We maintain a website at http://www.golubcapitalbdc.com and make all of our annual, quarterly and current reports, proxy statements and other publicly filed information available on or through our website. You may also obtain such information, free of charge, and make shareholder inquiries by contacting us at 150 South Wacker Drive, Suite 800, Chicago, Illinois 60606, Attention: Investor Relations, or by calling us collect at (312) 205-5050. The SEC also maintains a website at http://www.sec.gov that contains such information.

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.

Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of these securities or determined if this prospectus is truthful or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

This prospectus may not be used to consummate sales of securities unless accompanied by a prospectus supplement.

The date of this prospectus is            , 2016.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

You should rely only on the information contained in this prospectus. We have not, and the underwriters have not, authorized any other person to provide you with different information. If anyone provides you with different or inconsistent information, you should not rely on it. We are not, and the underwriters are not, making an offer to sell these securities in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not permitted. You should assume that the information appearing in this prospectus is accurate only as of the date on the front cover of this prospectus. Our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and prospects may have changed since that date. We will update these documents to reflect material changes only as required by law.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROSPECTUS SUMMARY			1
FEES AND EXPENSES			10
RISK FACTORS			15
SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS			45
USE OF PROCEEDS			46
DISTRIBUTIONS			47
SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA			48
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION, RESULTS OF OPERATIONS AND CASH FLOWS			50
PRICE RANGE OF COMMON STOCK			94
THE COMPANY			95
PORTFOLIO COMPANIES			105
MANAGEMENT			122
MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS			132
RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS AND CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS			141
CONTROL PERSONS AND PRINCIPAL STOCKHOLDERS			144
DETERMINATION OF NET ASSET VALUE			146
DIVIDEND REINVESTMENT PLAN			149
MATERIAL U.S. FEDERAL INCOME TAX CONSIDERATIONS			151
DESCRIPTION OF OUR CAPITAL STOCK			158
DESCRIPTION OF OUR PREFERRED STOCK			163
DESCRIPTION OF OUR SUBSCRIPTION RIGHTS			164
DESCRIPTION OF WARRANTS			166
DESCRIPTION OF OUR DEBT SECURITIES			168
REGULATION			179
CUSTODIAN, TRANSFER AND DIVIDEND PAYING AGENT AND REGISTRAR			185
BROKERAGE ALLOCATION AND OTHER PRACTICES			185
PLAN OF DISTRIBUTION			186
LEGAL MATTERS			188
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM			188
AVAILABLE INFORMATION			188
INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS			F-1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABOUT THIS PROSPECTUS

This prospectus is part of a registration statement that we have filed with the SEC using the “shelf” registration process. Under the shelf registration process, we may offer from time to time up to $1,000,000,000 of our common stock, preferred stock, warrants representing rights to purchase shares of our common stock, preferred stock or debt securities, subscription rights or debt securities on the terms to be determined at the time of the offering. We may sell our securities through underwriters or dealers, “at-the-market” to or through a market maker, into an existing trading market or otherwise directly to one or more purchasers or through agents or through a combination of methods of sale. The identities of such underwriters, dealers, market makers or agents, as the case may be, will be described in one or more supplements to this prospectus. The securities may be offered at prices and on terms described in one or more supplements to this prospectus. This prospectus provides you with a general description of the securities that we may offer. Each time we use this prospectus to offer securities, we will provide a prospectus supplement that will contain specific information about the terms of that offering. The prospectus supplement may also add, update or change information contained in this prospectus, and the prospectus and prospectus supplement will together serve as the prospectus. Please carefully read this prospectus and any prospectus supplement, together with any exhibits, before you make an investment decision. Any exhibits will nonetheless be summarized in the prospectus or applicable prospectus supplement.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROSPECTUS SUMMARY

This summary highlights some of the information in this prospectus. It is not complete and may not contain all of the information that you may want to consider. You should read the more detailed information set forth under “Risk Factors” and the other information included in this prospectus carefully.

Except as otherwise indicated, the terms:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Golub Capital BDC

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 Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, or 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, to make investments primarily in senior secured, one stop (a loan that combines characteristics of traditional first lien senior secured loans and second lien or subordinated loans), second lien and subordinated (a loan that ranks senior only to a borrower’s equity securities and ranks junior to all of such borrower’s other indebtedness in priority of payment) loans of, and warrants and minority equity securities in, U.S. middle-market companies that are, in most cases, sponsored by private equity firms. We structure 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 prospectus, the term “middle-market” generally refers to companies having earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, or EBITDA, of between $10.0 million and $50.0 million annually.

Our investment objective is to generate current income and capital appreciation by investing primarily in senior secured and one stop 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 $15.0 billion in capital under management as of December 31, 2015, (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 senior secured and one stop loans by primarily investing approximately $5.0 million to $30.0 million of capital, on average, in the securities of U.S. middle-market companies. We may also selectively invest more than $30.0 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.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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.

As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, our portfolio at fair value was comprised of the following:

		As of December 31, 2015								As of September 30, 2015								As of September 30, 2014
Investment Type		Investments at Fair Value (In thousands)				Percentage of Total Investments				Investments at Fair Value (In thousands)				Percentage of Total Investments				Investments at Fair Value (In thousands)				Percentage of Total Investments
Senior secured		$	178,284				11.7	%		$	197,329				12.9	%		$	262,859				19.5	%
One stop			1,135,424				74.3				1,134,222				74.1				940,729				69.8
Second lien			39,588				2.6				39,774				2.6				59,964				4.4
Subordinated debt			1,721				0.1				1,715				0.1				3,710				0.3
Subordinated notes in SLF(1)			82,730				5.4				76,563				5.0				25,589				1.9
LLC equity interests in SLF(1)			29,199				1.9				22,373				1.5				9,242				0.7
Equity			61,516				4.0				57,808				3.8				45,519				3.4
Total		$	1,528,462				100.0	%		$	1,529,784				100.0	%		$	1,347,612				100.0	%

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. As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015, one stop loans included $87.6 million and $88.2 million, respectively, of late stage lending loans at fair value. During the three months ended December 31, 2014, we recharacterized $47.1 million of late stage lending loans at fair value from senior secured loans to one stop loans. As of September 30, 2014, one stop loans included $83.3 million of late stage lending loans at fair value and senior secured loans included $47.1 million of late stage lending loans at fair value.

As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, we had debt and equity investments in 169, 164 and 145 portfolio companies, respectively, and investments in subordinated notes and LLC equity interests in SLF.

The weighted average annualized income yield and weighted average annualized investment income yield of our income producing debt investments, which represented nearly 100% of our debt investments, for the three months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 and the years ended September 30, 2015 and 2014 was as follows:

		For the three months ended December 31,								For the years ended September 30,
		2015				2014				2015				2014
Weighted average annualized income yield(1)			7.6	%			7.8	%			7.8	%			8.3	%
Weighted average annualized investment income yield(2)			8.2	%			8.3	%			8.4	%			9.0	%

TABLE OF CONTENTS

As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015, we and RGA owned 87.5% and 12.5%, respectively, of both the outstanding subordinated notes and LLC equity interests of SLF. Additionally, on January 17, 2014, Senior Loan Fund II, a wholly-owned subsidiary of SLF, or SLF II, entered into a senior secured revolving credit facility, or the SLF Credit Facility, with Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, as administrative agent, and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as lender, which, as amended, allows SLF II to borrow up to $300.0 million, subject to leverage and borrowing base restrictions. The reinvestment period of the SLF Credit Facility ends May 12, 2017, and the stated maturity date is May 13, 2020. As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015, SLF had subordinated note commitments from its members totaling $160.0 million of which approximately $94.5 million, $87.5 million and $29.2 million in aggregate principal amount was funded at December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, respectively. As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015, SLF had LLC equity interest subscriptions from its members totaling $40 million, of which approximately $37.2 million, $26.5 million and $9.3 million in aggregate was called and contributed as of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, respectively.

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 “Management Agreements — Investment Advisory Agreement —  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 “Management Agreements — Investment Advisory Agreement — 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 “— Conflicts of Interest” below and “Related Party Transactions and Certain Relationships.” 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 “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.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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 December 31, 2015, Golub Capital managed over $11.5 billion of invested or available capital for senior secured, one stop, second lien and subordinated loan investments in middle-market companies. Since its inception, Golub Capital has closed deals with over 225 middle-market sponsors and repeat transactions with over 130 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 December 31, 2015, Golub Capital’s more than 85 investment professionals had an average of over 12 years of investment experience and were supported by more than 165 administrative and back office personnel that focus on operations, finance, legal and compliance, accounting and reporting, marketing, information technology and office management.

Market Trends

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

Target Market.  We believe that small and middle-market companies in the United States with annual revenues between $10.0 million and $2.5 billion represent a significant growth segment of the U.S. economy and often require substantial capital investments to grow. Middle-market companies have generated a significant number of investment opportunities for investment funds managed or advised by Golub Capital, and we believe that this market segment will continue to produce significant investment opportunities for us.

Specialized Lending Requirements.  We believe that several factors render many U.S. financial institutions ill-suited to lend to U.S. middle-market companies. For example, based on the experience of our management team, lending to U.S. middle-market companies (1) is generally more labor intensive than lending to larger companies due to the smaller size of each investment and the fragmented nature of information for such companies, (2) requires due diligence and underwriting practices consistent with the demands and economic limitations of the middle market and (3) may also require more extensive ongoing monitoring by the lender.

Demand for Debt Capital.  We believe there is a large pool of uninvested private equity capital for middle-market companies. We expect private equity firms will seek to leverage their investments by combining equity capital with senior secured loans and subordinated debt from other sources, such as us.

Competition from Bank Lenders.  We believe that many commercial and investment banks have, in recent years, de-emphasized their service and product offerings to middle-market businesses in favor of lending to large corporate clients and managing capital markets transactions. In addition, these lenders may be constrained in their ability to underwrite and hold bank loans for middle-market issuers as they seek to meet existing and future regulatory capital requirements. We believe these factors may result in opportunities for alternative funding sources to middle-market companies and therefore more market opportunities for us.

Market Environment.  We believe that as part of the path of economic recovery following the credit crisis, there has been increased competition for new middle-market investments due to some new non-bank finance companies that have entered the market and due to improving financial performance of middle-market companies. However, we believe that our scale and strong market position will continue to allow us to find investment opportunities with attractive risk-adjusted returns.

Competitive Strengths

Deep, Experienced Management Team.  We are managed by GC Advisors, which, as of December 31, 2015, had access through the Staffing Agreement to the resources and expertise of Golub Capital’s more than 265 employees, led by our chairman, Lawrence E. Golub, and our chief executive officer, David B. Golub. As of December 31, 2015, the more than 90 investment professionals of Golub Capital had an average of over 12 years of investment experience and were supported by more than 175 administrative and back office personnel that focus on operations, finance, legal and compliance, accounting and reporting, marketing, information technology and office management. Golub Capital seeks to hire and retain high-quality investment professionals and reward those personnel based on investor returns.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Leading U.S. Debt Platform Provides Access to Proprietary Relationship-Based Deal Flow.  GC Advisors gives us access to the deal flow of Golub Capital, one of the leading middle-market lenders in the United States. Golub Capital has been ranked a top 3 Traditional Middle Market Bookrunner each year from 2008 through 2015 by Thomson Reuters LPC for senior secured loans of up to $500.0 million for leveraged buyouts (based on number of deals completed). Since its inception, Golub Capital has closed deals with over 225 middle-market sponsors and repeat transactions with over 130 sponsors. We believe that Golub Capital receives relationship-based “early looks” and “last looks” at many investment opportunities in the U.S. middle-market market, allowing it to be highly selective in the transactions it pursues.

Disciplined Investment and Underwriting Process.  GC Advisors utilizes the established investment process of Golub Capital for reviewing lending opportunities, structuring transactions and monitoring investments. Using its disciplined approach to lending, GC Advisors seeks to minimize credit losses through effective underwriting, comprehensive due diligence investigations, structuring and the implementation of restrictive debt covenants.

Regimented Credit Monitoring.  Following each investment, GC Advisors implements a regimented credit monitoring system. This careful approach, which involves ongoing review and analysis by teams of professionals, has enabled GC Advisors to identify problems early and to assist borrowers before they face difficult liquidity constraints.

Concentrated Middle-Market Focus.  Because of our focus on the middle-market, we understand the following general characteristics of middle-market lending:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Organizational Structure

The following shows a simplified organizational chart reflecting our relationship with our investment adviser and administrator and our direct and indirect ownership interests in certain of our subsidiaries, including the membership interests of the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer, as of the date of this prospectus:

Recent Developments

On February 2, 2016, our board of directors declared a quarterly distribution of $0.32 per share payable on March 30, 2016 to holders of record as of March 7, 2016.

On February 11, 2016, the U.S. Small Business Administration, or SBA, approved the application submitted by GC SBIC V, L.P., or SBIC V, for an additional commitment of $75.0 million of SBA-guaranteed debentures.

On March 1, 2016, we and Funding entered into an amendment to the Credit Facility to, among other things, make certain amendments to the computation of the borrowing base restrictions in the Credit Facility. Our maximum borrowing capacity under the Credit Facility, the expiration of the reinvestment period and the stated maturity date of the Credit Facility did not change in connection with this amendment.

Operating and Regulatory Structure

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

As a business development company, we are required to comply with certain regulatory requirements. For example, while we are permitted to finance investments using leverage, which may include the issuance of shares of preferred stock, or notes and other borrowings, our ability to use leverage is limited in significant respects. See “Regulation.” Any decision on our part to use leverage will depend upon our assessment of the attractiveness of available investment opportunities in relation to the costs and perceived risks of such leverage. GC Advisors makes recommendations to our board of directors with respect to leverage policies. Our board of directors determines our leverage policy, including approving in advance the incurrence of material indebtedness and the execution of material contracts, and directs GC Advisors to implement such policies. The use of leverage to finance investments creates certain risks and potential conflicts of interest. See “Risk Factors — Risks Relating to our Business and Structure — There are significant potential conflicts of interest that could affect our investment returns — Our management and incentive fee structure may create incentives for GC Advisors that are not fully aligned with the interests of our stockholders and may induce GC Advisors to make certain investments, including speculative investments,” “— 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” and “— Risks Relating to our Business and Structure — We intend to finance our investments with borrowed money, which will magnify the potential for gain or loss on amounts invested and may increase the risk of investing in us.”

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Also, as a business development company, we are generally prohibited from acquiring assets other than “qualifying assets” unless, after giving effect to any acquisition, at least 70% of our total assets are qualifying assets. Qualifying assets generally include securities of “eligible portfolio companies,” cash, cash equivalents, U.S. government securities and high-quality debt investments maturing in one year or less from the time of investment. Under the 1940 Act and the rules thereunder, “eligible portfolio companies” include (1) private domestic operating companies, (2) public domestic operating companies whose securities are not listed on a national securities exchange (e.g., the New York Stock Exchange, NYSE Amex Equities and The NASDAQ Stock Market) or registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, and (3) public domestic operating companies having a market capitalization of less than $250.0 million. Public domestic operating companies whose securities are quoted on the over-the-counter bulletin board and through Pink Sheets LLC are not listed on a national securities exchange and therefore are eligible portfolio companies. See “Regulation.”

Conflicts of Interest

Subject to certain 1940 Act restrictions on co-investments with affiliates, GC Advisors offers us the right to participate in all investment opportunities that it determines are appropriate for us in view of our investment objective, positions, policies, strategies and restrictions as well as regulatory requirements and other relevant factors. Such offers are subject to the exception that, in accordance with GC Advisors’ code of ethics and allocation policies, we might not participate in each individual opportunity but will, on an overall basis, be entitled to participate equitably with other entities sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates.

To the extent that we compete with entities sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates for a particular investment opportunity, GC Advisors will allocate investment opportunities across the entities for which such opportunities are appropriate, consistent with (1) its internal conflict of interest and allocation policies, (2) the requirements of the Advisers Act and (3) certain restrictions under the 1940 Act regarding co-investments with affiliates. GC Advisors’ allocation policies are intended to ensure that, over time, we may generally share equitably in investment opportunities with other investment funds, accounts or other investment vehicles, together referred to as accounts, sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates, particularly those involving a security with limited supply or involving differing classes of securities of the same issuer which may be suitable for us and such other accounts.

GC Advisors and its affiliates have other clients with similar or competing investment objectives, including several private funds that are pursuing an investment strategy similar to ours, some of which are continuing to seek new capital commitments. In serving these clients, GC Advisors may have obligations to other clients or investors in those entities. Our investment objective may overlap with such affiliated accounts. GC Advisors’ allocation procedures are designed to allocate investment opportunities among the accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates in a manner consistent with its obligations under the Advisers Act. If two or more accounts with similar investment strategies are actively investing, GC Advisors will seek to allocate investment opportunities among eligible accounts in a manner that is fair and equitable over time and consistent with its allocation policy. GC Advisors has put in place a conflict-resolution policy that addresses the co-investment restrictions set forth under the 1940 Act. See “Risk Factors — Risks Relating to our Business and Structure — There are significant potential conflicts of interest that could affect our investment returns — Conflicts related to obligations GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or its affiliates have to other clients.”

GC Advisors seeks to ensure the equitable allocation of investment opportunities when we are able to invest alongside other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates. When we invest alongside such other accounts, such investments are made consistent with GC Advisors’ allocation policy. Under this allocation policy, if an investment opportunity is appropriate for us and another similar eligible account, the opportunity will be allocated pro rata based on the relative total capital 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, such as when, in the absence of exemptive relief described below, we and such other entities would be making different investments in the same issuer, 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

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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. We and GC Advisors have submitted an exemptive application to the SEC to permit greater flexibility to negotiate the terms of co-investments if our board of directors determines that it would be advantageous for us to co-invest with other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates in a manner consistent with our investment objectives, positions, policies, strategies and restrictions as well as regulatory requirements and other pertinent factors. Our board of directors regularly reviews the allocation policy of Golub Capital and annually reviews the code of ethics of GC Advisors. See “Related Party Transactions and Certain Relationships.”

Additionally, under our incentive fee structure, GC Advisors benefits when we recognize capital gains and, because GC Advisors determines when a holding is sold, GC Advisors controls the timing of the recognition of such capital gains. See “Risk Factors — Risks Relating to our Business and Structure — There are significant potential conflicts of interest that could affect our investment returns — Our management and incentive fee structure may create incentives for GC Advisors that are not fully aligned with the interests of our stockholders and may induce GC Advisors to make certain investments, including speculative investments.” In addition, because the base management fee that we pay to GC Advisors is based on our average adjusted gross assets, including those assets acquired through the use of leverage, GC Advisors has a financial incentive to incur leverage.

Our principal executive offices are located at 150 South Wacker Drive, Suite 800, Chicago, Illinois 60606, and our telephone number is (312) 205-5050. Our corporate website is located at www.golubcapitalbdc.com. Information on our website is not incorporated into or a part of this prospectus.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FEES AND EXPENSES

The following table is intended to assist you in understanding the costs and expenses that an investor in shares of our common stock will bear directly or indirectly. However, we caution you that some of the percentages indicated in the table below are estimates and may vary. Actual costs and expenses incurred by investors in shares of our common stock may be greater than the percentage estimates in the table below. The following table excludes one-time fees payable to third parties not affiliated with GC Advisors that were incurred in connection with each of the 2010 Debt Securitization and the 2014 Debt Securitization, collectively the Debt Securitizations, but includes all of the applicable ongoing fees and expenses of the Debt Securitizations. Whenever this prospectus contains a reference to fees or expenses paid by “us” or “Golub Capital BDC,” or that “we” will pay fees or expenses, our common stockholders will indirectly bear such fees or expenses.

Stockholder transaction expenses:
Sales load (as a percentage of offering price)			—	(1)
Offering expenses (as a percentage of offering price)			—	(2)
Dividend reinvestment plan expenses			None	(3)
Total stockholder transaction expenses (as a percentage of offering price)			—
Annual expenses (as a percentage of net assets attributable to common stock):
Management fees			2.60	%(4)
Incentive fees payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement (20%)			0.20	%(5)
Interest payments on borrowed funds			3.30	%(6)
Other expenses			0.72	%(7)
Acquired fund fees and expenses			0.04	%(8)
Total annual expenses			6.86	%(9)

GC Advisors, as collateral manager for the 2010 Issuer under a collateral management agreement, or the 2010 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 2010 Issuer at the beginning of the collection period relating to each payment date, which is payable in arrears on each payment date. This fee, which is less than the management fee payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement, is paid directly by the 2010 Issuer to GC Advisors and offset against such management fee. Accordingly, the 1.375% management fee paid by us to GC Advisors under the Investment Advisory Agreement on all of our assets, including those indirectly held through the 2010 Issuer, is reduced, on a dollar-for-dollar basis, by an amount equal to such 0.35% fee paid to GC Advisors by the 2010 Issuer. Under the 2010 Collateral Management Agreement, the term “collection period” refers to a quarterly period running from the day

TABLE OF CONTENTS

after the end of the prior collection period to the fifth business day of the calendar month in which a payment date occurs. This fee may be waived by the collateral manager. The 2010 Collateral Management Agreement does not include any incentive fee payable to GC Advisors.

GC Advisors, as collateral manager for the 2014 Issuer, under a collateral management agreement, or the 2014 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 2014 Issuer at the beginning of the collection period relating to each payment date, which is payable in arrears on each payment date. This fee, which is less than the management fee payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement, is paid directly by the 2014 Issuer to GC Advisors and offset against such management fee. Accordingly, the 1.375% management fee paid by us to GC Advisors under the Investment Advisory Agreement on all of our assets, including those indirectly held through the 2014 Issuer, is reduced, on a dollar-for-dollar basis, by an amount equal to such 0.25% fee paid to GC Advisors by the 2014 Issuer. Under the 2014 Collateral Management Agreement, the term “collection period” refers 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. This fee may be waived by the collateral manager. The 2014 Collateral Management Agreement does not include any incentive fee payable to GC Advisors.

For purposes of this table, the SEC requires that the “Management fees” percentage be calculated as a percentage of net assets attributable to common stock, rather than total assets, including assets that have been funded with borrowed monies because common stockholders bear all of this cost. If the base management fee portion of the “Management fees” percentage were calculated instead as a percentage of our total assets, our base management fee portion of the “Management fees” percentage would be approximately 1.30% of total assets. The base management fee in the table above is based on net assets of $816.4 million and leverage of $802.9 million as of December 31, 2015.

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 and (b) cumulative incentive fees of any kind paid to GC Advisors by Golub Capital BDC since April 13, 2010, the effective date of our election to become a business development company. 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” is equal to the sum of (a) Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income (as defined below) for each period since April 13, 2010 and (b) cumulative aggregate realized capital gains, cumulative aggregate realized capital losses, cumulative aggregate unrealized capital depreciation and cumulative aggregate unrealized capital appreciation since April 13, 2010.

“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 calendar quarter, minus operating expenses for the calendar quarter (including the base management fee, taxes, any expenses payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement and an administration agreement, or the Administration Agreement, with the Administrator, any expenses of securitizations and any interest expense and dividends paid on any outstanding preferred stock, but excluding the incentive fee). Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income includes, in the case of investments with a deferred interest feature such as market discount, debt instruments with payment-in-kind, or PIK, interest, preferred stock with PIK dividends and zero coupon securities, accrued income that we have not yet received in cash.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The income and capital gains incentive fee calculation, or the Income and Capital Gains Incentive Fee Calculation, has two parts. The income component is calculated quarterly in arrears based on our Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income for the immediately preceding calendar quarter.

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income does not include any realized capital gains, realized capital losses or unrealized capital appreciation or depreciation. Because of the structure of the income component, it is possible that an incentive fee may be calculated under this formula with respect to a period in which we have incurred a loss. For example, if we receive Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income in excess of the hurdle rate (as defined below) for a calendar quarter, the income component will result in a positive value and an incentive fee will be paid unless the payment of such incentive fee would cause us to pay incentive fees on a cumulative basis that exceed 20.0% of our Cumulative Pre-Incentive Fee Net Income.

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 may be able to invest our 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. Our 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.

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, or the Income Incentive Fee. This amount is appropriately adjusted for any share issuances or repurchases during the quarter.

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. 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.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

As described above, the incentive fee will not be paid at any time where after such payment the cumulative incentive fees paid to date would be greater than 20.0% of the Cumulative Pre-Incentive Net Income since April 13, 2010. In accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, we will accrue a capital gain incentive fee on a quarterly basis as if aggregate unrealized capital appreciation on investments 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. We will accrue a capital gain incentive fee under GAAP if the Capital Gain Incentive Fee Base, adjusted as required by GAAP to include unrealized appreciation, is positive. The Capital Gain Incentive Fee is calculated on a cumulative basis from the date we elected to become a business development company through the end of each calendar year. Since inception through December 31, 2015, we have not made any Capital Gain Incentive Fee payments. For the three months ended December 31, 2015, we accrued a capital gain incentive fee under GAAP of $1.4 million. For a more detailed discussion of the calculation of the incentive fee, see “Management Agreements — Investment Advisory Agreement — Management Fee.”

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Example

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

You would pay the following expenses on a $1,000 investment		1 year				3 years				5 years				10 years
Assuming a 5% return (assumes no return from net realized capital gains or net unrealized capital appreciation)		$	67			$	197			$	322			$	618
Assuming a 5% return (assumes return entirely from realized capital gains and thus subject to the capital gain incentive fee)			77				224				363				681

The foregoing table is to assist you in understanding the various costs and expenses that an investor in our common stock will bear directly or indirectly. While the example assumes, as required by the SEC, a 5% annual return, our performance will vary and may result in a return greater or less than 5%. The incentive fee under the Investment Advisory Agreement, which, assuming a 5% annual return, would either not be payable or have an immaterial impact on the expense amounts shown above, is not included in the example. Under our Investment Advisory Agreement, no incentive fee would be payable if we have a 5% annual return. If we achieve sufficient returns on our investments, including through the realization of capital gains, to trigger an incentive fee of a material amount, our expenses, and returns to our investors, would be higher. The example assumes that all dividends and other distributions are reinvested at net asset value. Under certain circumstances, reinvestment of dividends and other distributions under our dividend reinvestment plan may occur at a price per share that differs from net asset value. See “Dividend Reinvestment Plan” for more information.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

RISK FACTORS

Investing in our securities involves a number of significant risks. Before you invest in our securities, you should be aware of various risks, including those described below. You should carefully consider these risk factors, together with all of the other information included in this prospectus and the applicable prospectus supplement, before you decide whether to make an investment in our securities. 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

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

Since the economic downturn that began in mid-2007, interest rates have remained low. Because longer-term inflationary pressure is likely to result from the U.S. government’s fiscal policies and challenges during this time, we will likely experience rising interest rates, rather than falling rates, at some point in the future.

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 significant change in market interest rates could have a material adverse effect on our net investment income. In periods of rising interest rates, our cost of funds will increase because the interest rates on the majority of amounts we have borrowed are 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 will not increase until interest rates exceed the applicable floor. We may use interest rate risk management techniques in an effort to limit our exposure to interest rate fluctuations. Such techniques may include various interest rate hedging activities to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act and applicable commodities laws. These activities may 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 may result in an increase of the amount of incentive fees payable to GC Advisors. 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.

Global capital markets could enter a period of severe disruption and instability. These conditions have historically affected and could again materially and adversely affect debt and equity capital markets in the United States and around the world and our business.

The U.S. and global capital markets experienced extreme volatility and disruption during the economic downturn that began in mid-2007, and the U.S. economy was in a recession for several consecutive calendar quarters during the same period. In 2010, a financial crisis emerged in Europe, triggered by high budget deficits and rising direct and contingent sovereign debt, which created concerns about the ability of certain nations to continue to service their sovereign debt obligations. Risks resulting from such debt crisis and any future debt crisis in Europe or any similar crisis elsewhere could have a detrimental impact on the global economic recovery, sovereign and non-sovereign debt in certain countries and the financial condition of

TABLE OF CONTENTS

financial institutions generally. In July and August 2015, Greece reached agreements with its creditors for bailouts that provide aid in exchange for certain austerity measures. These and similar austerity measures may adversely affect world economic conditions and have an adverse impact on our business and that of our portfolio companies. In the second quarter of 2015, stock prices in China experienced a significant drop, resulting primarily from continued sell-off of shares trading in Chinese markets. In August 2015, Chinese authorities sharply devalued China’s currency. These market and economic disruptions adversely affected, and these and other similar market and economic disruptions may in the future affect, the U.S. capital markets, which could adversely affect our business and that of our portfolio companies. These market disruptions materially and adversely affected, and may in the future affect, the broader financial and credit markets and has reduced the availability of debt and equity capital for the market as a whole and to financial firms, in particular. At various times, these disruptions resulted in, and may in the future result, a lack of liquidity in parts of the debt capital markets, significant write-offs in the financial services sector and the repricing of credit risk. These conditions may reoccur for a prolonged period of time again or materially worsen in the future, including as a result of further downgrades to the U.S. government’s sovereign credit rating or the perceived credit worthiness of the United States or other large global economies. Unfavorable economic conditions, including future recessions, 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. We may in the future have difficulty accessing debt and equity capital on attractive terms, or at all, and a severe disruption and instability in the global financial markets or deteriorations in credit and financing conditions may cause us to reduce the volume of loans we originate and/or fund, adversely affect the value of our portfolio investments or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

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

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’ investment committee, which consists of two members of our board of directors and two additional employees of Golub Capital LLC, provides oversight over our investment activities. We also cannot assure you that we will replicate the historical results achieved by members of the investment committee, and we caution you that our investment returns could be substantially lower than the returns achieved by them in prior periods. We expect that GC Advisors will evaluate, negotiate, structure, close and monitor our investments in accordance with the terms of the Investment Advisory Agreement. We can offer no assurance, however, that the senior investment professionals of GC Advisors will continue to provide investment advice to us. If these individuals do not maintain their existing relationships with Golub Capital LLC and its affiliates and do not develop new relationships with other sources of investment opportunities, we may not be able to identify appropriate replacements or grow our investment portfolio. The loss of any member of GC Advisors’ investment committee or of other senior investment professionals of GC Advisors and its affiliates would limit our ability to achieve our investment objective and operate as we anticipate. This could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

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

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

We depend upon Golub Capital LLC’s relationships with sponsors, and we intend to rely to a significant extent upon these relationships to provide us with potential investment opportunities. If Golub Capital LLC fails to maintain such relationships, or to develop new relationships with other sponsors or sources of

TABLE OF CONTENTS

investment opportunities, we will not be able to grow our investment portfolio. In addition, individuals with whom the principals of Golub Capital LLC have relationships are not obligated to provide us with investment opportunities, and, therefore, we can offer no assurance that these relationships will generate investment opportunities for us in the future.

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

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

There are significant potential conflicts of interest that could affect our investment returns.

As a result of our arrangements with GC Advisors and its affiliates and GC Advisors’ investment committee, there may be times when GC Advisors or such persons have interests that differ from those of our securityholders, giving rise to a conflict of interest.

Conflicts related to obligations GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or its affiliates have to other clients.

The members of GC Advisors’ investment committee serve or may 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 officers and directors also serve as officers and directors of Golub Capital Investment Corporation, or GCIC, a closed-end, non-diversified management investment company that has also elected to be regulated as a business development company under the 1940 Act. Similarly, GC Advisors or its affiliates currently manage and may have other clients with similar or competing investment objectives. In serving in these multiple capacities, they may have obligations to other clients or investors in those entities, the fulfillment of which may not be in the best interests of us or our stockholders. For example, Lawrence E. Golub and David B. Golub have management responsibilities for other accounts managed or sponsored by GC Advisors or its affiliates, including GCIC. Our investment objective may overlap with the investment objectives of such affiliated accounts. For example, GC Advisors currently manages GCIC and several private funds that are pursuing an investment strategy similar to ours, some of which may seek additional capital from time to time, and we may compete with these and other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates for capital and investment opportunities. As a result, those individuals may face conflicts in the allocation of investment opportunities among us and other accounts advised by or affiliated with GC Advisors. 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.

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

Principals of GC Advisors and its affiliates and members of GC Advisors’ investment committee may 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 nonpublic information is obtained with respect to such companies, or we become subject to trading restrictions under the internal trading policies of those

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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 may have an adverse effect on us.

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

In the course of our investing activities, we pay management and incentive fees to GC Advisors. The management fee is based on our average adjusted gross assets and the incentive fee is computed and paid on income, 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 might achieve through direct investments. Because these fees are based on our average adjusted gross assets, GC Advisors benefits when we incur debt or use leverage. Under certain circumstances, the use of leverage may increase the likelihood of default on our debt or other leverage, which would disfavor or our securityholders.

Additionally, the incentive fee payable by us to GC Advisors may create an incentive for GC Advisors to cause us to realize capital gains or losses that may not be 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 way in which these fees payable to GC Advisors are determined may encourage GC Advisors to use leverage to increase the return on our investments. Under certain circumstances, the use of leverage may increase the likelihood of default, which would disfavor our securityholders.

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 may include 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 may create 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 may be considered to involve a conflict of interest for GC Advisors to the extent that it may encourage 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 may have 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 valuation process for certain of our portfolio holdings creates a conflict of interest.

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. In connection with that determination, investment professionals from GC Advisors may 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. In addition, Lawrence E. Golub and David B. Golub have an indirect pecuniary interest in GC Advisors. 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, could result 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.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

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

The Investment Advisory Agreement and the Administration Agreement were not negotiated on an arm’s-length basis and may not be as favorable to us as if they had been negotiated with an unaffiliated third party.

The Investment Advisory Agreement and the Administration Agreement were negotiated between related parties. Consequently, their terms, including fees payable to GC Advisors, may not be as favorable to us as if they had been negotiated with an unaffiliated third party. In addition, we may choose not to enforce, or to enforce less vigorously, our rights and remedies under these agreements because of our desire to maintain our ongoing relationship with GC Advisors, the Administrator and their respective affiliates. Any such decision, however, would breach our fiduciary obligations to our stockholders.

Our ability to enter into transactions with our affiliates will be restricted, which may limit the scope of investments available to us.

We are prohibited under the 1940 Act from participating in certain transactions with our affiliates without the prior approval of our independent directors and, in some cases, the SEC. Any person that owns, directly or indirectly, five percent or more of our outstanding voting securities is our affiliate for purposes of the 1940 Act, and we are generally prohibited from buying or selling any security from or to such affiliate, absent the prior approval of our independent directors. 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 may, however, invest alongside GC Advisors’ and its affiliates’ other clients in certain circumstances where doing so is consistent with applicable law and SEC staff interpretations. For example, we may invest alongside such accounts consistent with guidance promulgated by the SEC 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 may also invest alongside GC Advisors’ other clients as otherwise permissible under regulatory guidance, applicable regulations and GC Advisors’ allocation policy. Under this allocation policy, if an investment opportunity is appropriate for us and another similar eligible account, the opportunity will be allocated pro rata based on relative total capital of each of us and such other eligible accounts, subject to minimum and maximum investment size limits. However, we can offer no assurance that investment opportunities will be allocated to us fairly or equitably in the short-term or over time.

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 exemptive relief described below, we and such other entities may make investments in the same issuer or where the different investments could be expected to result in a conflict between our interests 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, in certain circumstances, we may be unable to invest in an issuer in which an account sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates has previously

TABLE OF CONTENTS

invested. Similar restrictions limit our ability to transact business with our officers or directors or their affiliates. These restrictions may limit the scope of investment opportunities that would otherwise be available to us.

We and GC Advisors have submitted an application for exemptive relief from the SEC to permit greater flexibility to negotiate the terms of co-investments if our board of directors determines that it would be advantageous for us to co-invest with other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates in a manner consistent with our investment objectives, positions, policies, strategies and restrictions as well as regulatory requirements and other pertinent factors. We believe that co-investments by us and other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates may afford us additional investment opportunities and an ability to achieve greater diversification. Accordingly, our application for exemptive relief seeks an exemptive order that would permit us to invest with accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates in the same portfolio companies under circumstances in which such investments would otherwise not be permitted under the 1940 Act. We expect that such exemptive relief permitting co-investments, if granted, would apply only if our independent directors review and approve each co-investment.

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

A number of entities compete with us to make the types of investments that we plan to make. 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 may have access to funding sources that are not available to us. In addition, some of our competitors may 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 may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. As a result of this competition, we may not be able to take advantage of attractive investment opportunities from time to time, and we may not be able to identify and make investments that are consistent with our investment objective.

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 may 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 may 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 may experience decreased net interest income, lower yields and increased risk of credit loss. We may 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 may not be in the best interests of us and our securityholders. Moreover, the performance of investments will not be known at the time of allocation.

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

In order to be subject to tax 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 dividends 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 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 on an annual basis. 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 may fail to qualify as a RIC and, thus, may be subject to corporate-level

TABLE OF CONTENTS

income tax. 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 may 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 may 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 “Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations — Taxation as a RIC.”

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

We may 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, we are required to distribute at least 90% of our net ordinary income and net short-term capital gains in excess of net long-term capital losses, if any, to our stockholders to maintain our qualification as a RIC. 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 may have an adverse effect on the value of our securities.

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

For U.S. federal income tax purposes, we include in income certain amounts that we have not yet received in cash, such as the accretion of original issue discount. This may arise if we receive warrants in connection with the making of a loan and in other circumstances, or through contracted PIK interest, which represents contractual interest added to the loan balance and due at the end of the loan term. Such original issue discount, which could be significant relative to our overall investment activities, or increases in loan balances as a result of contracted PIK arrangements, is included in income before we receive any corresponding cash payments. We also may 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 may 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 may recognize income before or without receiving cash representing such income, we may have difficulty meeting the requirement to distribute dividends of an amount at least equal to 90% of our investment company taxable income, determined without regard to any deduction for dividends paid, to our stockholders to maintain our ability to be subject to tax as a RIC. In such a case, we may 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 may fail to qualify as a RIC and thus be subject to corporate-level income tax. See “Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations — Taxation as a RIC.”

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

We may issue debt securities or preferred stock and/or borrow money from banks or other financial institutions, which we refer to collectively as “senior securities,” up to the maximum amount permitted by the 1940 Act. Under the provisions of the 1940 Act, we are permitted as a business development company to

TABLE OF CONTENTS

issue senior securities in amounts such that our asset coverage, as defined in the 1940 Act, equals at least 200% of gross assets (other than the U.S. Small Business Administration, or SBA, debentures of a small business investment company, or 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 may be unable to satisfy this ratio. If that happens, we may 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 may be disadvantageous. Also, any amounts that we use to service our indebtedness would not be available for distributions to our common stockholders. If we issue senior securities, we will be exposed to typical risks associated with leverage, including an increased risk of loss. As of December 31, 2015, we had $802.9 million of outstanding borrowings, including $215.0 million outstanding under the 2010 Debt Securitization and $246.0 million outstanding under the 2014 Debt Securitization.

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 might 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 might involve a premium price for holders of our common stock or otherwise be in your best interest. 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 may not necessarily align with the interests of holders of our common stock and the rights of holders of shares of preferred stock to receive dividends 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 may, 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 may not 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 you might experience dilution.

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

The use of leverage magnifies 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 cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain credit at all or on terms acceptable to us. We may 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 may pledge up to 100% of our assets and may grant a security interest in all of our assets under the terms of any debt instruments we may 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

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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 leveraged, 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 may be less than 200%. This 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 December 31, 2015, assuming various annual returns, net of expenses. The calculations in the table below are hypothetical and actual returns may be higher or lower than those appearing in the table below.

		Assumed Return on Our Portfolio (Net of Expenses)
		-10%				-5%				0%				5%				10%
Corresponding return to common stockholder(1)			-22.78	%			-12.73	%			-2.68	%			7.37	%			17.42	%

Based on our outstanding indebtedness of $809.4 million as of December 31, 2015 and the effective annual interest rate of 2.70% as of that date, our investment portfolio would have been required to experience an annual return of at least 1.33% to cover annual interest payments on the outstanding debt.

We are subject to risks associated with the 2010 Debt Securitization and the 2014 Debt Securitization.

As a result of the 2010 Debt Securitization and the 2014 Debt Securitization, we are subject to a variety of risks, including those set forth below. We use the term “debt securitization” in this prospectus 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. In each of the 2010 Debt Securitization and the 2014 Debt Securitization, institutional investors purchased the notes issued by the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer, respectively, in a private placement.

We are subject to certain risks as a result of our indirect interests in the junior notes and membership interests of the 2010 Issuer and our direct interests in the junior notes and membership interests of the 2014 Issuer.

Under the terms of the master loan sale agreement governing the 2010 Debt Securitization, (1) we sold and/or contributed to Holdings all of our ownership interest in our portfolio loans and participations for the purchase price and other consideration set forth in such master loan sale agreement and (2) Holdings, in turn, sold and/or contributed to the 2010 Issuer all of its ownership interest in such portfolio loans and participations for the purchase price and other consideration set forth in such master loan sale agreement.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Following these transfers, the 2010 Issuer, and not Holdings or us, held all of the ownership interest in such portfolio loans and participations. As a result of the 2010 Debt Securitization and as of December 31, 2015, we held indirectly through Holdings the Subordinated 2010 Notes as well as membership interests, which comprise 100% of the equity interests, in the 2010 Issuer. Under the terms of the loan sale agreement governing the 2014 Debt Securitization, we sold and/or contributed to the 2014 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 2014 Issuer held all of the ownership interest in such portfolio loans and participations. As a result of the 2014 Debt Securitization and as of December 31, 2015, we held the Class C 2014 Notes as well as all of the membership interests of the 2014 Issuer. As a result, we consolidate the financial statements of Holdings, the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer, as well as our other subsidiaries, in our consolidated financial statements. Because each of Holdings, the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer is disregarded as an entity separate from its owner for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the sale or contribution by us to Holdings and by Holdings to the 2010 Issuer and the sale or contribution by us to the 2014 Issuer 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 may, 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 Subordinated 2010 Notes and membership interests in the 2010 Issuer are subordinated obligations of the 2010 Issuer and the Class C 2014 Notes are subordinated obligations of the 2014 Issuer and we may not receive cash from the 2010 Issuer or the 2014 Issuer.

The Subordinated 2010 Notes are the most junior class of notes issued by the 2010 Issuer, are subordinated in priority of payment to every other class of notes issued by the 2010 Issuer and are subject to certain payment restrictions set forth in the indenture governing the 2010 Notes. Therefore, Holdings only receives cash distributions on the Subordinated 2010 Notes if the 2010 Issuer has made all cash interest payments to all other notes it has issued, and we only receive cash distributions in respect of our indirect ownership of the 2010 Issuer to the extent that Holdings receives any cash distributions in respect of its direct ownership of the 2010 Issuer. The Subordinated 2010 Notes are also unsecured and rank behind all of the secured creditors, known or unknown, of the 2010 Issuer, including the holders of the senior notes it has issued. Consequently, to the extent that the value of the 2010 Issuer’s portfolio of loan investments 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 the Subordinated 2010 Notes at their redemption could be reduced. In addition, if the 2010 Issuer does not meet the asset coverage tests or the interest coverage test set forth in the documents governing the 2010 Debt Securitization, cash would be diverted from the Subordinated 2010 Notes to first pay the Class A 2010 Notes and Class B 2010 Notes in amounts sufficient to cause such tests to be satisfied.

The membership interests in the 2010 Issuer represent all of the equity interest in the 2010 Issuer. As such, the holder of the membership interests is the residual claimant on distributions, if any, made by the 2010 Issuer after holders of all 2010 Notes have been paid in full on each payment date or upon maturity of such notes under the 2010 Debt Securitization documents. Such payments may be made by the 2010 Issuer only to the extent permitted under the 2010 Debt Securitization documents on any payment date or upon payment in full of the notes issued by the 2010 Issuer.

The Class C 2014 Notes are the most junior class of notes issued by the 2014 Issuer, are subordinated in priority of payment to the Class A 2014 Notes and the Class B 2014 Notes and are subject to certain payment restrictions set forth in the indenture governing the 2014 Notes. Therefore, we only receive cash distributions on the Class C 2014 Notes if the 2014 Issuer has made all cash interest payments to all other notes it has issued. Consequently, to the extent that the value of the 2014 Issuer’s portfolio of loan investments 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 the Class C 2014 Notes at their redemption could be reduced. If the 2014 Issuer does not meet the asset coverage tests or the interest coverage test set forth in the documents governing the 2014 Debt Securitization, cash would be diverted from the Class C 2014 Notes to first pay the Class A 2014 Notes and Class B 2014 Notes in amounts sufficient to cause such tests to be satisfied.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The 2014 Issuer is the residual claimant on funds, if any, remaining after holders of all classes of 2014 Notes have been paid in full on each payment date or upon maturity of such notes under the 2014 Debt Securitization documents. The membership interests in the 2014 Issuer represent all of the equity interest in the 2014 Issuer, and, as the holder of the membership interests, we may receive distributions, if any, only to the extent that the 2014 Issuer makes distributions out of funds remaining after holders of all classes of 2014 Notes have been paid in full on each payment date any amounts due and owing on such payment date or upon maturity of such 2014 Notes. In the event that we fail to receive cash indirectly from the 2010 Issuer or directly from the 2014 Issuer, we could be unable to make such distributions in amounts sufficient to maintain our status as a RIC, or at all.

The interests of holders of the senior classes of securities issued by the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer may not be aligned with our interests.

The Class A 2010 Notes are the debt obligations ranking senior in right of payment to other securities issued by the 2010 Issuer in the 2010 Debt Securitization. As such, there are circumstances in which the interests of holders of the Class A 2010 Notes may not be aligned with the interests of holders of the other classes of notes issued by, and membership interests of, the 2010 Issuer. For example, under the terms of the Class A 2010 Notes, holders of the Class A 2010 Notes have the right to receive payments of principal and interest prior to holders of the Class B 2010 Notes, the Subordinated 2010 Notes and the membership interests of the 2010 Issuer.

The Class A 2014 Notes are the debt obligations ranking senior in right of payment to other securities issued by the 2014 Issuer in the 2014 Debt Securitization. As such, there are circumstances in which the interests of holders of the Class A 2014 Notes may not be aligned with the interests of holders of the other classes of notes issued by, and membership interests of, the 2014 Issuer. For example, under the terms of the Class A 2014 Notes, holders of the Class A 2014 Notes have the right to receive payments of principal and interest prior to holders of the Class B 2014 Notes, the Class C 2014 Notes and the 2014 Issuer.

For as long as the Class A 2010 Notes remain outstanding, holders of the Class A 2010 Notes comprise the most senior class of notes then outstanding, or the Controlling Class, under the 2010 Debt Securitization. If the Class A 2010 Notes are paid in full, the Class B 2010 Notes would comprise the Controlling Class under the 2010 Debt Securitization. For as long as the Class A 2014 Notes remain outstanding, holders of the Class A 2014 Notes comprise the Controlling Class under the 2014 Debt Securitization. If the Class A 2014 Notes are paid in full, the Class B 2014 Notes would comprise the Controlling Class under the 2014 Debt Securitization. Holders of the Controlling Class under the 2010 Debt Securitization and 2014 Debt Securitization have the right to act in certain circumstances with respect to the portfolio loans in ways that may 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 2010 Debt Securitization and the 2014 Debt Securitization, as applicable.

If an event of default has occurred and acceleration occurs in accordance with the terms of the indenture for either the 2010 Debt Securitization or the 2014 Debt Securitization, the Controlling Class of such debt securitization, as the most senior class of notes 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 the 2010 Debt Securitization or 2014 Debt Securitization, as applicable, occurs, holders of a majority of the Controlling Class of the applicable debt securitization may 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 2010 Issuer, the trustee or holders of a majority of the Controlling Class may 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 2010 Issuer. If at such time the portfolio loans were not performing well, the 2010 Issuer may not have sufficient proceeds available to enable the trustee under the indenture to repay the obligations of holders of the Subordinated 2010 Notes, or to pay a dividend to holders of the membership interests.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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 Subordinated 2010 Notes and the Class C 2014 Notes to the extent the Class A 2010 Notes, Class B 2010 Notes, Class A 2014 Notes or Class B 2014 Notes constitute the Controlling Class, as applicable), 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 Holdings or us or that Holdings or we will receive any payments or distributions from the 2010 Issuer or the 2014 Issuer, as applicable upon an acceleration of the notes if there are not sufficient proceeds to pay the holders of more senior notes. In a liquidation under the 2010 Debt Securitization, the Subordinated 2010 Notes will be deemed to be paid in full once the Class A 2010 Notes and Class B 2010 Notes are paid in full. In addition, under the 2010 Debt Securitization, after the Class A 2010 Notes and Class B 2010 Notes are paid in full, the holder of the Subordinated 2010 Notes will be the only remaining noteholder and may amend the 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. In a liquidation under the 2014 Debt Securitization, the Class C 2014 Notes will be subordinated to payment of the Class A 2014 Notes and Class B 2014 Notes and may not be paid in full to the extent funds remaining after payment of the Class A 2014 Notes and Class B 2014 Notes are insufficient. In addition, under the 2014 Debt Securitization, after the Class A 2014 Notes and Class B 2014 Notes are paid in full, the holder of the Class C 2014 Notes will be the only remaining noteholder and may 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 the 2010 Issuer or the 2014 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 may result in an inability of us to make distributions sufficient to maintain our status as a RIC.

The 2010 Issuer or the 2014 Issuer may fail to meet certain asset coverage tests.

Under the documents governing the 2010 Debt Securitization, there are two asset coverage tests applicable to the Class A 2010 Notes and Class B 2010 Notes, and the documents governing the 2014 Debt Securitization provide for the same two asset coverage tests applicable to the Class A 2014 Notes, the Class B 2014 Notes and the Class C 2014 Notes. The first such test compares the amount of interest received on the portfolio loans held by the 2010 Issuer or the 2014 Issuer, as applicable, to the amount of interest payable in respect of the Class A 2010 Notes and Class B 2010 Notes, with respect to the 2010 Issuer and the Class A 2014 Notes, the Class B 2014 Notes and the Class C 2014 Notes, with respect to the 2014 Issuer. To meet this first test, in the case of the 2010 Debt Securitization, interest received on the portfolio loans must equal at least 115% of the interest payable in respect of the notes issued by the 2010 Issuer; and, in the case of the 2014 Debt Securitization, interest received on the portfolio loans must equal at least 120% of the interest payable in respect of the Class A 2014 Notes and Class B 2014 Notes, taken together, and at least 110% of the interest payable in respect of the Class C 2014 Notes. The second such test compares the principal amount of the portfolio loans of the applicable debt securitization to the aggregate outstanding principal amount of the Class A 2010 Notes and Class B 2010 Notes, with respect to the 2010 Debt Securitization, and the Class A 2014 Notes, the Class B 2014 Notes and the Class C 2014 Notes, with respect to the 2014 Debt Securitization. To meet this second test at any time in the case of the 2010 Debt Securitization, the aggregate principal amount of the portfolio loans must equal at least 158% of the outstanding principal amount of the applicable 2010 Notes, taken together. To meet this second test at any time in the case of the 2014 Debt Securitization, the aggregate principal amount of the portfolio loans must equal at least 153.6% of the Class A 2014 Notes and the Class B 2014 Notes, taken together, and 136.1% of the Class C 2014 Notes. If any asset coverage test with respect to the Class A 2010 Notes or Class B 2010 Notes is not met, proceeds from the portfolio of loan investments that otherwise would have been distributed to the holders of the Subordinated 2010 Notes and Holdings will instead be used to redeem first the Class A 2010 Notes and then the Class B 2010 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. If any asset coverage test with respect to the Class A 2014 Notes,

TABLE OF CONTENTS

the Class B 2014 Notes or Class C 2014 Notes is not met, proceeds from the portfolio of loan investments that otherwise would have been distributed to the holders of the Class C 2014 Notes and the 2014 Issuer will instead be used to redeem first the Class A 2014 Notes and then the Class B 2014 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 B 2010 Notes, the Class B 2014 Notes or the Class C 2014 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 may be difficult or expensive to acquire. A mandatory redemption could also result in a shorter investment duration than a holder of such notes may 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 2010 Debt Securitization may extend through as late as July 20, 2017, which could affect the value of the collateral securing the Class B 2010 Notes, and the reinvestment period under the 2014 Debt Securitization may extend through as late as April 28, 2018, which could affect the value of the collateral securing the Class C 2014 Notes.

We may be required to assume liabilities of the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer and are indirectly liable for certain representations and warranties in connection with the 2010 Debt Securitization and 2014 Debt Securitization.

As part of the 2010 Debt Securitization, we entered into a master loan sale agreement under which we would be required to repurchase any loan (or participation interest therein) which was sold to the 2010 Issuer in breach of any representation or warranty made by us with respect to such loan on the date such loan was sold. To the extent we fail to satisfy any such repurchase obligation, the trustee of the 2010 Debt Securitization may, on behalf of the 2010 Issuer, bring an action against us to enforce these repurchase obligations.

The structure of the 2010 Debt Securitization is intended to prevent, in the event of our bankruptcy or the bankruptcy of Holdings, the consolidation of the 2010 Issuer with our operations or those of Holdings. The structure of the 2014 Debt Securitization is intended to prevent, in the event of our bankruptcy, the consolidation of the 2014 Issuer with our operations. If the true sale of the assets in the 2010 Debt Securitization or 2014 Debt Securitization, as applicable, were not respected in the event of our insolvency, a trustee or debtor-in-possession might reclaim the assets of the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer for our estate. However, in doing so, we would become directly liable for all of the indebtedness then outstanding under the 2010 Debt Securitization and the 2014 Debt Securitization, which would equal the full amount of debt of the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer reflected on our consolidated balance sheet. In addition, we cannot assure you that the recovery in the event we were consolidated with the 2010 Issuer or 2014 Issuer for purposes of any bankruptcy proceeding would exceed the amount to which we would otherwise be entitled as an indirect holder of the Subordinated 2010 Notes and the holder of the Class C 2014 Notes had we not been consolidated with the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer.

In addition, in connection with each of the 2010 Debt Securitization and the 2014 Debt Securitization, we indirectly gave the lenders certain customary representations with respect to the legal structure of the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer, respectively, 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 2010 Debt Securitization and the 2014 Debt Securitization, respectively.

The 2010 Issuer may issue additional Subordinated 2010 Notes and the 2014 Issuer may issue additional 2014 Notes.

Under the terms of the 2010 Debt Securitization documents, the 2010 Issuer could issue additional Subordinated 2010 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 2010 Debt Securitization and the approval of a majority of the Subordinated 2010 Notes. Among the other conditions that must be satisfied in connection with an additional issuance of Subordinated 2010 Notes, the aggregate

TABLE OF CONTENTS

principal amount of all additional issuances of Subordinated 2010 Notes may not exceed $97 million; the 2010 Issuer must notify each rating agency of such issuance prior to the issuance date; and the terms of the Subordinated 2010 Notes to be issued must be identical to the terms of previously issued Subordinated 2010 Notes (except that all monies due on such additional Subordinated 2010 Notes will accrue from the issue date of such notes and that the prices of such Subordinated 2010 Notes do not have to be identical to those of the initial Subordinated 2010 Notes). We do not expect to cause the 2010 Issuer to issue any additional Subordinated 2010 Notes at this time, and the terms of the 2010 Debt Securitization documents do not provide for additional issuances of Class A 2010 Notes or Class B 2010 Notes without amendment of the 2010 Debt Securitization documents. The total purchase price for any additional Subordinated 2010 Notes that may be issued may not always equal 100% of the par value of such 2010 Notes, depending on several factors, including fees and closing expenses.

Under the terms of the 2014 Debt Securitization documents, the 2014 Issuer could issue additional 2014 Notes in any class at any time during the reinvestment period on a pro rata basis for each class of notes or, if additional Class A 2014 Notes are not being issued, on a pro rata basis for all classes that are subordinate to the Class A 2014 Notes and use the net proceeds of such issuance to purchase additional portfolio loans or for another permitted use as provided in the 2014 Debt Securitization documents. Any such additional issuance, however, would require the consent of the collateral manager to the 2014 Debt Securitization and either the holders of a majority the Class A 2014 Notes or, in the case of an additional issuance of Class A 2014 Notes, the holders of a supermajority of the Class A 2014 Notes. Among the other conditions that must be satisfied in connection with an additional issuance of 2014 Notes, the aggregate principal amount of all additional issuances of any class of 2014 Notes may not exceed 100% of the outstanding principal amount of such class of 2014 Notes; the 2014 Issuer must notify each rating agency of such issuance prior to the issuance date and such rating agency, if it then rates any class of 2014 Notes, must confirm in writing that no immediate withdrawal or reduction with respect to its then-current rating of any such class of 2014 Notes will occur as a result of such issuance; and the terms of the 2014 Notes to be issued must be identical to the terms of previously issued 2014 Notes of the same class (except that all monies due on such additional 2014 Notes will accrue from the issue date of such notes and that the prices of such 2014 Notes do not have to be identical to those of the initial 2014 Notes). We do not expect to cause the 2014 Issuer to issue any additional 2014 Notes at this time. The total purchase price for any additional 2014 Notes that may be issued may not always equal 100% of the par value of such 2014 Notes, depending on several factors, including fees and closing expenses.

We are subject to risks associated with the Credit Facility.

On July 21, 2011, Funding, our wholly-owned subsidiary, entered into the Credit Facility, a senior secured revolving credit facility. As a result of the Credit Facility, we are subject to a variety of risks, including those set forth below.

Our interests in Funding are subordinated and we may not receive cash on our equity interests from Funding.

We own 100% of the equity interests in Funding. We consolidate the financial statements of Funding in our consolidated financial statements and treat the indebtedness of Funding as our leverage. Our interests in Funding are subordinated in priority of payment to every other obligation of Funding and are subject to certain payment restrictions set forth in the Credit Facility. We receive cash from Funding only to the extent that we receive distributions on our equity interests in Funding. Funding may make payments on such interests only to the extent permitted by the payment priority provisions of the Credit Facility. The Credit Facility generally provides that payments on such interests may 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 Funding does not meet the asset coverage tests or the interest coverage test set forth in the Credit Facility documents, cash would be diverted from us to first pay the Lender in amounts sufficient to cause such tests to be satisfied. In the event that we fail to receive cash from Funding, 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 Funding rank behind all of the secured and unsecured creditors, known or unknown, of Funding, including the lenders in the Credit Facility. Consequently, to the extent that the value of

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Funding’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 return on our investment in Funding could be reduced. Accordingly, our investment in Funding may be subject to up to 100% loss.

The ability to sell investments held by Funding is limited.

The Credit Facility places significant restrictions on our ability, as servicer, to sell investments. As a result, there may be times or circumstances during which we are unable to sell investments or take other actions that might be in our best interests.

We are subject to risks associated with our SBIC Funds.

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

Our interests in the SBIC Funds are subordinated and we may not receive cash on our equity interests from either of the SBIC Funds.

We own 100% of the equity interests in GC SBIC IV, L.P., or SBIC IV, and GC SBIC V, L.P., or SBIC V. We consolidate the financial statements 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 and SBIC V only to the extent that we receive distributions on our equity interests in each such SBIC Fund. Our SBIC Funds may 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 SBIC Funds are licensed by the SBA and are subject to SBA regulations which limit the scope of investments available to the SBIC Funds.

Our wholly-owned subsidiaries, SBIC IV and SBIC V, 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 may 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.

Our ability to invest in public companies may be limited in certain circumstances.

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 may 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.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

We may enter into reverse repurchase agreements as part of our management of our temporary investment portfolio. Under a reverse repurchase agreement, we will effectively pledge our assets as collateral to secure a short-term loan. 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 reverse 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 reverse repurchase agreements, if any, involves many of the same risks involved in our use of leverage, as the proceeds from reverse repurchase agreements generally will be invested in additional securities. There is a risk that the market value of the securities acquired in the reverse repurchase agreement may 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 may decline. If a buyer of securities under a reverse repurchase agreement were to file for bankruptcy or experience insolvency, we may be adversely affected. Also, in entering into reverse 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 reverse repurchase agreements, our net asset value would decline, and, in some cases, we may be worse off than if we had not used such agreements.

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

During the economic downturn in the United States that began in mid-2007, many commercial banks and other financial institutions stopped lending or significantly curtailed their lending activity. In addition, in an effort to stem losses and reduce their exposure to segments of the economy deemed to be high risk, some financial institutions limited routine refinancing and loan modification transactions and even reviewed the terms of existing facilities to identify bases for accelerating the maturity of existing lending facilities. To the extent these circumstances arise again in the future, it may 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.

If we do not invest a sufficient portion of our assets in qualifying assets, we could fail to qualify as a business development company or be precluded from investing according to our current business strategy.

As a business development company, we may not acquire 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 “Regulation — Qualifying Assets.”

In the future, we believe that most of our investments will constitute qualifying assets. However, we may 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 may not be able to find a buyer for such investments and, even if we do find a buyer, we may have 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.

Failure to qualify as a business development company will decrease our operating flexibility.

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.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The majority of our portfolio investments are recorded at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors and, as a result, there may be uncertainty as to the value of our portfolio investments.

The majority of our portfolio investments take the form of securities that are not publicly traded. The fair value of securities and other investments that are not publicly traded may not be readily determinable, and we value these securities at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors, including to reflect significant events affecting the value of our securities. As discussed in more detail under “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition, Results of Operations and Cash Flows — Critical Accounting Policies,” most, if not all, of our investments (other than cash and cash equivalents) are classified as Level 3 under Accounting Standards Codification, or ASC, Topic 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, as amended, or ASC Topic 820. This means that our portfolio valuations are based on unobservable inputs and our own assumptions about how market participants would price the asset or liability in question. Inputs into the determination of fair value of our portfolio investments require significant management judgment or estimation. Even if observable market data are available, such information may be the result of consensus pricing information or broker quotes, which may include a disclaimer that the broker would not be held to such a price in an actual transaction. The non-binding nature of consensus pricing and/or quotes accompanied by disclaimers materially reduces the reliability of such information.

We have retained the services of several independent service providers to review the valuation of these securities. At least once annually, the valuation for each portfolio investment for which a market quote is not readily available is reviewed by an independent valuation firm. The types of factors that 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, may fluctuate over short periods of time and may be based on estimates, our determinations of fair value may 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 may experience fluctuations in our quarterly operating results.

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

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

We and our portfolio companies are subject to regulation by laws at the U.S. federal, state and local levels. These laws and regulations, as well as their interpretation, may change from time to time, and new laws, regulations and interpretations may also come into effect. Any such new or changed laws or regulations could have a material adverse effect on our business. In particular, on July 21, 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or Dodd-Frank, became law. The scope of Dodd-Frank impacts many aspects of the financial services industry, and it requires the development and adoption of many implementing regulations over the next several years. The effects of Dodd-Frank on the financial services industry will depend, in large part, upon the extent to which regulators exercise the authority granted to them and the approaches taken in implementing regulations. While the impact of Dodd-Frank on us and our portfolio companies may not be known for an extended period of time, Dodd-Frank, including future rules

TABLE OF CONTENTS

implementing its provisions and the interpretation of those rules, along with other legislative and regulatory proposals directed at the financial services industry or affecting taxation that are proposed or pending in the U.S. Congress, may 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 may be subject to civil fines and criminal penalties.

Additionally, changes to the laws and regulations governing our operations, including those associated with RICs, may 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 may 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 may determine not to use investment strategies that trigger additional regulation by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, or CFTC, or may determine to operate subject to CFTC regulation, if applicable. If we or GC Advisors were to operate subject to CFTC regulation, we may incur additional expenses and would be subject to additional regulation.

In addition, certain regulations applicable to debt securitizations implementing credit risk retention requirements that have taken effect or will take effect in both the U.S. and in Europe may adversely affect certain amendments to or new issuances by the 2010 Debt Securitization or the 2014 Debt Securitization and may adversely affect or prevent us from entering into any future securitization transaction. The impact of these risk retention rules on the loan securitization market are uncertain, and such rules may cause an increase in our cost of funds under or may prevent us from completing any future securitization transactions or certain amendments to or new issuances by our existing debt securitizations.

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.

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

Our board of directors has the authority, except as otherwise provided in the 1940 Act, to modify or waive our investment objective and certain of our operating policies and strategies without prior notice and without stockholder approval. However, absent stockholder approval, we may not 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 value of our common stock. Nevertheless, any such changes could adversely affect our business and impair our ability to make distributions.

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

The General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, or the DGCL, contains provisions that may 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 may 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

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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 may 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 may 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, to increase or decrease the number of shares of stock that we have authority to issue. These provisions, as well as other provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws, may delay, defer or prevent a transaction or a change in control that might otherwise be in the best interests of our securityholders.

GC Advisors can resign on 60 days’ notice, and we may not be able to find a suitable replacement within that time, resulting in a disruption in our operations that could adversely affect our financial condition, business and results of operations.

GC Advisors has the right to resign under the Investment Advisory Agreement at any time upon not less than 60 days’ written notice, whether we have found a replacement or not. If GC Advisors resigns, we may not 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 shares may 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 may result in additional costs and time delays that may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

The Administrator can resign on 60 days’ notice, and we may not be able to find a suitable replacement, resulting in a disruption in our operations that could adversely affect our financial condition, business and results of operations.

The Administrator has the right to resign under the Administration Agreement at any time upon not less than 60 days’ written notice, whether we have found a replacement or not. If the Administrator resigns, we may not 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 shares may 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 may result in additional costs and time delays that may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

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

As a publicly traded company, we incur legal, accounting and other expenses, including costs associated with the periodic reporting requirements applicable to a company whose securities are registered under the Exchange Act, as well as additional corporate governance requirements, including requirements under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and other rules implemented by the SEC.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

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 may 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.

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

Our business depends on the communications and information systems of GC Advisors and its affiliates. These systems are subject to potential attacks, including through adverse events that threaten the confidentiality, integrity or availability of our information resources (i.e., cyber incidents). These attacks could involve gaining unauthorized access to our information systems for purposes of misappropriating assets, stealing confidential information, corrupting data or causing operational disruption and result in disrupted operations, misstated or unreliable financial data, liability for stolen assets or information, increased cybersecurity protection and insurance costs, litigation and damage to our business relationships, any of which could, in turn, have a material adverse effect on our operating results and negatively affect the market price of our securities and our ability to pay dividends and other distributions to our securityholders. As our reliance on technology has increased, so have the risks posed to our information systems, both internal and those provided by GC Advisors and third-party service providers.

Risks Relating to Our Investments

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

Many of our portfolio companies are susceptible to economic slowdowns or recessions and may 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 may decrease the value of collateral securing some of our loans and the value of our 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.

A portfolio company’s failure to satisfy financial or operating covenants imposed by us or other lenders could lead to defaults and, potentially, termination of its loans and foreclosure on its assets, which could trigger cross-defaults under other agreements and jeopardize our portfolio company’s ability to meet its obligations under the debt securities that we hold. We may incur expenses to the extent necessary to seek recovery upon default or to negotiate new terms with a defaulting portfolio company. In addition, lenders in certain cases can be subject to lender liability claims for actions taken by them when they become too involved in the borrower’s business or exercise control over a borrower. It is possible that we could become subject to a lender’s liability claim, including as a result of actions taken if we render managerial assistance to the borrower. Furthermore, if one of our portfolio companies were to file for bankruptcy protection, even though we may have structured our investment as senior secured debt, depending on the facts and circumstances, including the extent to which we provided managerial assistance to that portfolio company, a bankruptcy court might re-characterize our debt holding and subordinate all or a portion of our claim to claims of other creditors.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

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

Our investments in leveraged portfolio companies may be risky, and you could lose all or part of your investment.

Investment in leveraged companies involves a number of significant risks. Leveraged companies in which we invest may have limited financial resources and may be unable to meet their obligations under their debt securities that we hold. Such developments may be accompanied by a deterioration in the value of any collateral and a reduction in the likelihood of our realizing any guarantees that we may have obtained in connection with our investment. Smaller leveraged companies also may have less predictable operating results and may require substantial additional capital to support their operations, finance their expansion or maintain their competitive position.

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

Investment in private and middle-market companies involves a number of significant risks. Generally, little public information exists about these companies, and we rely on the ability of GC Advisors’ investment professionals to obtain adequate information to evaluate the potential returns from investing in these companies. If GC Advisors is unable to uncover all material information about these companies, it may not make a fully informed investment decision, and we may lose money on our investments. Middle-market companies generally have less predictable operating results and may require substantial additional capital to support their operations, finance expansion or maintain their competitive position. Middle-market companies may have limited financial resources, may have difficulty accessing the capital markets to meet future capital needs and may be unable to meet their obligations under their debt securities that we hold, which may be accompanied by a deterioration in the value of any collateral and a reduction in the likelihood of our realizing any guarantees we may have obtained in connection with our investment. In addition, such companies typically have shorter operating histories, narrower product lines and smaller market shares than larger businesses, which tend to render them more vulnerable to competitors’ actions and market conditions, as well as general economic downturns. Additionally, middle-market companies are more likely to depend on the management talents and efforts of a small group of persons. Therefore, the death, disability, resignation or termination of one or more of these persons could have a material adverse impact on our portfolio company and, in turn, on us. Middle-market companies also may be parties to litigation and may be engaged in rapidly changing businesses with products subject to a substantial risk of obsolescence. In addition, our executive officers, directors and GC Advisors may, in the ordinary course of business, be named as defendants in litigation arising from our investments in the portfolio companies.

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

We may invest all of our assets in illiquid securities, and a substantial portion of our investments in leveraged companies are and will be subject to legal and other restrictions on resale or will otherwise be less liquid than more broadly traded public securities. The illiquidity of these investments may make it difficult for us to sell such investments if the need arises. In addition, if we are required to liquidate all or a portion of our portfolio quickly, we may realize significantly less than the value at which we have previously recorded our investments. We may 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 nonpublic information regarding such portfolio company.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

As a business development company, we are required to carry our investments at market value or, if no market value is ascertainable, at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors. As part of the valuation process, we may take into account the following types of factors, if relevant, in determining the fair value of our investments:

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 may result in significant net unrealized depreciation in our portfolio. The effect of all of these factors on our portfolio may reduce our net asset value by increasing net unrealized depreciation in our portfolio. Depending on market conditions, we could incur substantial realized losses and may 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.

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

The loans in our investment portfolio may 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 may be possible for each portfolio company. In some cases, the prepayment of a loan may reduce our achievable yield if the capital returned cannot be invested in transactions with equal or greater expected yields, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our portfolio companies may be unable to repay or refinance outstanding principal on their loans at or prior to maturity, and rising interests rates may make it more difficult for portfolio companies to make periodic payments on their loans.

Our portfolio companies may be unable to repay or refinance outstanding principal on their loans at or prior to maturity. 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. In addition, if general interest rates rise, there is a risk that our portfolio companies will be unable to pay escalating interest amounts, which could result in a default under their loan documents with us. Rising interests rates could also cause portfolio companies to shift cash from other productive uses to the payment of interest, which may have a material adverse effect on their business and operations and could, over time, lead to increased 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.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

We have not yet identified the portfolio company investments we will acquire.

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 pursuant to this prospectus 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 shares of common stock. 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 offering of our securities within approximately six months following the completion of any offering 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 will invest the net proceeds primarily 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 investments in senior secured, one stop, second lien and subordinated loans and equity securities. As a result, any distributions we make during this period may be substantially smaller than the distributions that we expect to pay when our portfolio is fully invested.

We are a non-diversified investment company within the meaning of the 1940 Act, and therefore we are not limited with respect to the proportion of our assets that may be invested in securities of a single issuer.

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 may 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 may 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 may 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.

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

Our portfolio may be concentrated in a limited number of portfolio companies and industries. As a result, the aggregate returns we realize may be significantly and adversely affected if a small number of investments perform poorly or if we need to write down the value of any one investment. Additionally, while we are not targeting any specific industries, our investments may be concentrated in relatively few industries. As a result, a downturn in any particular industry in which we are invested could also significantly impact the aggregate returns we realize.

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

Leveraged companies may experience bankruptcy or similar financial distress. The bankruptcy process has a number of significant inherent risks. Many events in a bankruptcy proceeding are the product of contested matters and adversary proceedings and are beyond the control of the creditors. A bankruptcy filing by an issuer may adversely and permanently affect the issuer. If the proceeding is converted to a liquidation, the value of the issuer may not equal the liquidation value that was believed to exist at the time of the investment. 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 would be paid

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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 we own may be lost by increases in the number and amount 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) may 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 may 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 may have structured our investment as senior debt.

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

Following an initial investment in a portfolio company, we may 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 may, in some circumstances, jeopardize the continued viability of a portfolio company and our initial investment, or may 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 may elect not to make a follow-on investment because we may 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 may also be limited by GC Advisors’ allocation policy.

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

To the extent we do not hold controlling equity positions in our portfolio companies, we are subject to the risk that a portfolio company may make business decisions with which we disagree, and that the management and/or stockholders of a portfolio company may 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 may not be able to dispose of our investments in the event we disagree with the actions of a portfolio company and may therefore suffer a decrease in the value of our investments.

Our portfolio companies may incur debt that ranks equally with, or senior to, our investments in such companies and such portfolio companies may not generate sufficient cash flow to service their debt obligations to us.

We have invested a portion of our capital in second lien and subordinated loans issued by our portfolio companies and intend to continue to do so in the future. The portfolio companies usually have, or may be permitted to incur, other debt that ranks equally with, or senior to, the debt securities in which we invest. Such subordinated investments are subject to greater risk of default than senior obligations as a result of adverse changes in the financial condition of the obligor or in general economic conditions. If we make a subordinated investment in a portfolio company, the portfolio company may be highly leveraged, and its relatively high debt-to-equity ratio may create increased risks that its operations might not generate sufficient cash flow to service all of its debt obligations. By their terms, such debt instruments may provide that the holders are entitled to receive payment of interest or principal on or before the dates on which we are entitled to receive payments in respect of the debt securities in which we invest. Also, in the event of insolvency,

TABLE OF CONTENTS

liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or bankruptcy of a portfolio company, holders of debt instruments ranking senior to our investment in that portfolio company would typically be entitled to receive payment in full before we receive any distribution in respect of our investment. After repaying senior creditors, the portfolio company may not have any remaining assets to use for repaying its obligation to us where we are junior creditor. In the case of debt ranking equally with debt securities in which we invest, we would have to share any distributions on an equal and ratable basis with other creditors holding such debt in the event of an insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or bankruptcy of the relevant portfolio company.

Additionally, certain loans that we make to portfolio companies may be secured on a second priority basis by the same collateral securing senior secured debt of such companies. The first priority liens on the collateral will secure the portfolio company’s obligations under any outstanding senior debt and may secure certain other future debt that may be permitted to be incurred by the portfolio company under the agreements governing the loans. The holders of obligations secured by first priority liens on the collateral will generally control the liquidation of, and be entitled to receive proceeds from, any realization of the collateral to repay their obligations in full before us. In addition, the value of the 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 all of the collateral would be sufficient to satisfy the loan obligations secured by the second priority liens after payment in full of all obligations secured by the first priority liens on the collateral. If such proceeds were not sufficient to repay amounts outstanding under the loan obligations secured by the second priority liens, then we, to the extent not repaid from the proceeds of the sale of the collateral, will only have an unsecured claim against the portfolio company’s remaining assets, if any.

We have made in the past, and may 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 may 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 may have with respect to the collateral securing the loans we make to our portfolio companies with senior debt outstanding may also be limited pursuant to the terms of one or more intercreditor agreements that we enter into with the holders of such 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 may 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 may not have the ability to control or direct such actions, even if our rights are adversely affected.

The disposition of our investments may result in contingent liabilities.

A significant portion of our investments involve private securities. In connection with the disposition of an investment in private securities, we may 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

TABLE OF CONTENTS

may 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 may result in contingent liabilities that ultimately result in funding obligations that we must satisfy through our return of distributions previously made to us.

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

Under the Investment Advisory Agreement and the collateral management agreements for each of the 2010 Debt Securitization and the 2014 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 and each of the collateral management agreements, GC Advisors, its officers, members, personnel, and any person controlling or controlled by GC Advisors are not liable to us, any subsidiary of ours, our directors, our stockholders or any subsidiary’s stockholders or partners for acts or omissions performed in accordance with and pursuant to the Investment Advisory Agreement and the collateral management agreements, except those resulting from acts constituting gross negligence, willful misconduct, bad faith or reckless disregard of GC Advisors’ duties under the Investment Advisory Agreement and the collateral management agreements. In addition, we have agreed to indemnify GC Advisors and each of its officers, directors, members, managers and employees from and against any claims or liabilities, including reasonable legal fees and other expenses reasonably incurred, arising out of or in connection with our business and operations or any action taken or omitted on our behalf pursuant to authority granted by the Investment Advisory Agreement and the collateral management agreements, except where attributable to gross negligence, willful misconduct, bad faith or reckless disregard of such person’s duties under the Investment Advisory Agreement and the collateral management agreements. These protections may lead GC Advisors to act in a riskier manner when acting on our behalf than it would when acting for its own account.

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

As of December 31, 2015, we were invested in the securities of one non-U.S. company. Securities issued by non-U.S. companies are not “qualifying assets” under the 1940 Act, and we may 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.

We have engaged in and, in the future, may engage in hedging transactions to the limited extent such transactions are permitted under the 1940 Act and applicable commodities laws. Engaging in hedging transactions or investing in foreign securities would entail additional risks to our stockholders. We could, for example, use instruments such as interest rate swaps, caps, collars and floors and, if we were to invest in foreign securities, we could use instruments such as forward contracts or currency options and borrow under a credit facility in currencies selected to minimize our foreign currency exposure. 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. Hedging against a decline in the values of our portfolio positions would not eliminate the possibility of fluctuations in the values of such positions or prevent losses if the values of the positions declined. However, such hedging could establish other positions designed

TABLE OF CONTENTS

to gain from those same developments, thereby offsetting the decline in the value of such portfolio positions. Such hedging transactions could also limit the opportunity for gain if the values of the underlying portfolio positions increased. Moreover, it might not be possible to hedge against an exchange rate or interest rate fluctuation that was so generally anticipated that we would not be able to enter into a hedging transaction at an acceptable price. Use of a hedging transaction could involve counterparty credit risk.

While we may 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 might not seek 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 might not be 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 may also be adversely affected by rules adopted by the CFTC.

We may not realize gains from our equity investments.

When we invest in one stop, second lien and subordinated loans, we may acquire warrants or other equity securities of portfolio companies as well. We may also invest in equity securities directly. To the extent we hold equity investments, we will attempt to dispose of them and realize gains upon our disposition of them. However, the equity interests we receive may not appreciate in value and may decline in value. As a result, we may not be able to realize gains from our equity interests, and any gains that we do realize on the disposition of any equity interests may not be sufficient to offset any other losses we experience.

Risks Relating to Offerings Pursuant to this Prospectus

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

The investments we make in accordance with our investment objective may 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, often trade at a discount to their net asset value.

Shares of closed-end investment companies, including business development companies, may 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 may decline. We cannot predict whether our common stock will trade at, above or below net asset value.

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

We intend to make distributions on a quarterly basis to our stockholders out of assets legally available for distribution. We cannot assure you that we will achieve investment results that will allow us to make a specified level of cash distributions or year-to-year increases in cash distributions. Our ability to pay distributions might be adversely affected by the impact of one or more of the risk factors described in this prospectus. Due to the asset coverage test applicable to us under the 1940 Act as a business development company, we may be limited in our ability to make distributions. If we declare a dividend and if more stockholders opt to receive cash distributions rather than participate in our dividend reinvestment plan, we may be forced to sell some of our investments in order to make cash dividend 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 may not be taxable, such distributions may increase an investor’s tax liability for capital gains upon the future sale of our common stock. Although such return of capital may not be taxable, such distributions would generally decrease a

TABLE OF CONTENTS

stockholder’s basis in our common stock and may therefore increase such stockholder’s tax liability for capital gains upon the future sale of such stock. A return of capital distribution may 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 of our securities may fluctuate significantly.

The market price and liquidity of the market for our securities may 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:

If we issue preferred stock, debt securities or convertible debt securities, the net asset value and market value of our common stock may become more volatile.

We cannot assure you that the issuance of preferred stock and/or debt securities would result in a higher yield or return to the holders of our common stock. The issuance of preferred stock, debt securities or convertible debt would likely cause the net asset value and market value of our common stock to become more volatile. If the dividend rate on the preferred stock, or the interest rate on the debt securities, were to approach the net rate of return on our investment portfolio, the benefit of leverage to the holders of our common stock would be reduced. If the dividend rate on the preferred stock, or the interest rate on the debt securities, were to exceed the net rate of return on our portfolio, the use of leverage would result in a lower rate of return to the holders of 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

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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 depend on payments from our subsidiaries in order to make payments on any debt securities that we may issue as well as to pay dividends on our common stock. Any debt securities that we issue will be structurally subordinated to the obligations of our subsidiaries.

We are a holding company and fund a majority of our investments through wholly-owned subsidiaries, and a majority of the assets that we hold directly are the equity interests in such subsidiaries, including the Subordinated Notes. We depend upon the cash flow from our subsidiaries and the receipt of funds from them in the form of payments on the 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.

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

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

Your interest in us may be diluted if you do not fully exercise your subscription rights in any rights offering. In addition, if the subscription price is less than our net asset value per share, then you will experience an immediate dilution of the aggregate net asset value of your shares.

In the event we issue subscription rights, stockholders who do not fully exercise their subscription rights should expect that they will, at the completion of a rights offering pursuant to this prospectus, 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 will 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 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

TABLE OF CONTENTS

secondary market price of our common stock due to the potential for the issuance of shares at a price below our net asset value, without a corresponding change to our net asset value.

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

All dividends 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.

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

Our publicly issued debt securities 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:

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

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

If your debt securities are redeemable at our option, we may choose to redeem your debt securities at times when prevailing interest rates are lower than the interest rate paid on your debt securities. In addition, if your debt securities are subject to mandatory redemption, we may be required to redeem your debt securities also at times when prevailing interest rates are lower than the interest rate paid on your debt securities. In this circumstance, you may not be able to reinvest the redemption proceeds in a comparable security at an effective interest rate as high as your debt securities being redeemed.

Our credit ratings may not reflect all risks of an investment in our debt securities.

Our credit ratings are an assessment by third parties of our ability to pay our obligations. Consequently, real or anticipated changes in our credit ratings will generally affect the market value of our debt securities. Our credit ratings, however, may not reflect the potential impact of risks related to market conditions generally or other factors discussed above on the market value of or trading market for the publicly issued debt securities.

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

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

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Some of the statements in this prospectus constitute forward-looking statements, which relate to future events or our future performance or financial condition. The forward-looking statements contained in this prospectus 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 prospectus 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” and elsewhere in this prospectus.

We have based the forward-looking statements included in this prospectus on information available to us on the date of this prospectus. 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 may make directly to you or through reports that we have filed or in the future may file with the SEC, including annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K. This prospectus 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.

You should understand that, under Sections 27A(b)(2)(B) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, and Section 21E(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act, the “safe harbor” provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 do not apply to statements made in connection with any offering of securities pursuant to this prospectus, any prospectus supplement or in periodic reports we file under the Exchange Act.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

USE OF PROCEEDS

Unless otherwise specified in a prospectus supplement, we intend to use all or substantially all of the net proceeds from the sale of our securities to invest in portfolio companies in accordance with our investment objective and strategies and for general corporate purposes. We expect that our new investments will consist primarily of senior secured and one stop loans. We will also pay operating expenses, including management and administrative fees, and may pay other expenses such as due diligence expenses relating to potential new investments, from the net proceeds of any offering of our securities. We may also use a portion of the net proceeds from the sale of our securities to repay amounts outstanding under our Credit Facility, which bore an annual interest rate of 2.68% (i.e., one-month LIBOR plus 2.25% per annum) on the outstanding balance of $123.1 million as of December 31, 2015 and matures on July 30, 2020.

We anticipate that we will use substantially all of the net proceeds of an offering for the above purposes within approximately six months after the completion of any offering of our securities, depending on the availability of appropriate investment opportunities consistent with our investment objective and market conditions. We cannot assure you that we will achieve our targeted investment pace.

Until appropriate investment opportunities can be found, we may also invest the net proceeds of any offering of our securities primarily 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. These temporary investments may have lower yields than our other investments and, accordingly, may result in lower distributions, if any, during such period. Our ability to achieve our investment objective may be limited to the extent that the net proceeds from an offering, pending full investment, are held in lower yielding interest-bearing deposits or other short-term instruments. See “Regulation — Temporary Investments” for additional information about temporary investments we may make while waiting to make longer-term investments in pursuit of our investment objective.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DISTRIBUTIONS

To the extent that we have income available, we intend to make quarterly distributions to our stockholders. Our quarterly distributions, if any, are determined by our board of directors. Any distributions to our stockholders will be declared out of assets legally available for distribution.

We have elected to be treated, and intend to qualify annually, as a RIC under Subchapter M of the Code. To maintain RIC qualification, we must distribute dividends to our stockholders in respect of each tax year of an amount generally at least equal to 90% of our investment company taxable, 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.

The following table reflects the cash distributions, including dividends and returns of capital per share that we have paid on our common stock since October 1, 2013.

		Payment Dates				Distributions Declared
Record Dates						Per Share				Dollar amount
						(in thousands except per share data)
Fiscal year ended September 30, 2014
December 17, 2013			December 27, 2013			$	0.32			$	13,850
March 17, 2014			March 28, 2014				0.32				13,865
June 16, 2014			June 27, 2014				0.32				15,048
September 16, 2014			September 26, 2014				0.32				15,060
Fiscal year ended September 30, 2015
December 18, 2014			December 29, 2014				0.32				15,078
March 20, 2015			March 27, 2015				0.32				15,095
June 18, 2015			June 29, 2015				0.32				16,393
September 7, 2015			September 29, 2015				0.32				16,403
Fiscal year ending September 30, 2016
December 11, 2015			December 29, 2015				0.32				16,416
March 7, 2016			March 30, 2016				0.32				16,442
Total						$	3.20			$	153,650

We currently intend to distribute net capital gains (i.e., net long-term capital gains in excess of net short-term capital losses), if any, at least annually out of the assets legally available for such distributions. However, we may decide in the future to retain such capital gains for investment and elect to treat such gains as deemed distributions to you. If this happens, you will be treated for U.S. federal income tax purposes as if you had received an actual distribution of the capital gains that we retain and reinvested the net after tax proceeds in us. In this situation, you would be eligible to claim a tax credit (or, in certain circumstances, a tax refund) equal to your allocable share of the tax we paid on the capital gains deemed distributed to you. See “Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations — Taxation of U.S. Stockholders.” We cannot assure you that we will achieve results that will permit us to pay any cash distributions, and if we issue senior securities, we will be prohibited from making distributions if doing so would cause us to fail to maintain the asset coverage ratios stipulated by the 1940 Act or if such distributions are limited by the terms of any of our borrowings.

Unless you elect to receive your distributions in cash, we intend to make such distributions in additional shares of our common stock under our dividend reinvestment plan. Although distributions paid in the form of additional shares of our common stock will generally be subject to U.S. federal, state and local taxes in the same manner as cash distributions, investors participating in our dividend reinvestment plan will not receive any corresponding cash distributions with which to pay any such applicable taxes. If you hold shares of our common stock in the name of a broker or financial intermediary, you should contact such broker or financial intermediary regarding your election to receive distributions in cash in lieu of shares of our common stock. Any distributions reinvested through the issuance of shares through our dividend reinvestment plan will increase our gross assets on which the base management fee and the incentive fee are determined and paid to GC Advisors. See “Dividend Reinvestment Plan.”

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA

The following selected consolidated financial data of Golub Capital BDC as of and for the years ended September 30, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012 and 2011 is derived from the consolidated financial statements that have been audited by RSM US LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm. Golub Capital BDC’s consolidated financial statements for the three-month periods ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 are unaudited. However, in our opinion, all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation have been made. Interim results may be subject to significant quarterly variations and may not be indicative of the results of operations to be expected for a full fiscal year. The financial data should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition, Results of Operations and Cash Flows” included elsewhere in this prospectus.

		Golub Capital BDC
		As of and for the three months ended								As of and for the years ended
		December 31, 2015				December 31, 2014				September 30, 2015				September 30, 2014				September 30, 2013				September 30, 2012				September 30, 2011
		(unaudited)				(unaudited)				(In thousands, except per share data)
Statement of Operations Data:
Total investment income		$	30,500			$	26,995			$	119,968			$	109,526			$	83,774			$	57,859			$	39,150
Base management fee			5,314				4,821				20,330				17,053				11,749				8,495				5,789
Incentive fee			1,771				1,071				10,226				10,128				9,844				6,228				348
Interest and other debt financing expenses			6,731				5,694				24,510				20,227				12,427				10,781				6,550
All other expenses			1,383				1,402				5,905				5,583				5,359				4,479				3,647
Net investment income			14,999	(1)			14,557				58,997				56,535				44,395				27,876				22,816
Net realized gain (loss) on investments and derivative instruments			4,978				1,726				9,354				5,384				(1,363	)			(3,372	)			2,037
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments, derivative instruments and secured borrowings			662				(1,111	)			2,440				3,469				3,488				7,256				(3,514	)
Net increase/(decrease) in net assets resulting from operations			20,639				15,172				70,791				65,388				46,520				31,760				21,339
Per share data:
Net asset value		$	15.89			$	15.55			$	15.80			$	15.55			$	15.21			$	14.60			$	14.56
Net investment income			0.29				0.31				1.20				1.26				1.29				1.15				1.16
Net realized (loss) gain on investments and derivative instruments			0.10				0.04				0.19				0.11				(0.04	)			(0.14	)			0.11
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments, derivative instruments and secured borrowings			0.01				(0.03	)			0.05				0.07				0.10				0.30				(0.17	)
Net increase/(decrease) in net assets resulting from operations			0.40				0.32				1.44				1.44				1.35				1.31				1.09
Per share dividends declared			0.32				0.32				1.28				1.28				1.28				1.28				1.27
From net investment income			N/A				N/A				1.18				1.22				1.15				1.24				1.18
From capital gains			N/A				N/A				0.10				0.06				—				—				0.09
From return of capital			N/A				N/A				—				—				0.13				0.04				—
Dollar amount of dividends declared			16,416				15,078				62,969				57,823				45,394				31,556				25,069
From net investment income			N/A				N/A				58,152				54,531				40,605				30,484				23,254
From capital gains			N/A				N/A				4,817				3,292				—				—				1,815
From return of capital			N/A				N/A				—				—				4,789				1,072				—
Balance Sheet data at period end:
Investments, at fair value		$	1,528,462			$	1,400,726			$	1,529,784			$	1,347,612			$	1,024,645			$	672,910			$	459,827
Cash and cash equivalents			101,070				41,426				97,484				79,943				54,717				50,927				69,766
Other assets			11,315				18,431				13,782				15,833				12,294				10,259				30,051
Total assets			1,640,847				1,451,147	(2)			1,633,426	(2)			1,433,873	(2)			1,083,914	(2)			728,198	(2)			554,299	(2)
Total debt			809,396				715,030				813,605				697,539				420,909				352,300				237,683
Total liabilities			824,487				717,429	(2)			822,556	(2)			701,134	(2)			425,678	(2)			353,069	(2)			237,750	(2)
Total net assets			816,360				733,718				810,870				732,739				658,236				375,129				316,549

TABLE OF CONTENTS

		Golub Capital BDC
		As of and for the three months ended								As of and for the years ended
		December 31, 2015				December 31, 2014				September 30, 2015				September 30, 2014				September 30, 2013				September 30, 2012				September 30, 2011
		(unaudited)				(unaudited)				(In thousands, except per share data)
Other data:
Weighted average annualized yield on income producing investments at fair value(3)			7.6	%			7.8	%			7.8	%			8.3	%			9.1	%			9.3	%			8.6	%
Number of portfolio companies at period end			169				147				164				145				135				121				103

TABLE OF CONTENTS

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF
FINANCIAL CONDITION, RESULTS OF OPERATIONS AND CASH FLOWS

The following discussion and analysis of our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows should be read in conjunction with “Selected Consolidated Financial Data” and the financial statements and the related notes thereto of us appearing elsewhere in this prospectus. The information in this section contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Please see “Risk Factors” and “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” for a discussion of the uncertainties, risks and assumptions associated with these statements.

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 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 senior secured and one stop 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 $15.0 billion in capital under management as of December 31, 2015, (2) selecting investments within our core middle-market company focus, (3) partnering with experienced 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, which was most recently reapproved by our board of directors in May 2015, 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. 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 senior secured and one stop loans by primarily investing approximately $5.0 million to $30.0 million of capital, on average, in the securities of U.S. middle-market companies. We may also selectively invest more than $30.0 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.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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. As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, our portfolio at fair value was comprised of the following:

		As of December 31, 2015								As of September 30, 2015								As of September 30, 2014
Investment Type		Investments at Fair Value (In thousands)				Percentage of Total Investments				Investments at Fair Value (In thousands)				Percentage of Total Investments				Investments at Fair Value (In thousands)				Percentage of Total Investments
		(unaudited)
Senior secured		$	178,284				11.7	%		$	197,329				12.9	%		$	262,859				19.5	%
One stop			1,135,424				74.3				1,134,222				74.1				940,729				69.8
Second lien			39,588				2.6				39,774				2.6				59,964				4.4
Subordinated debt			1,721				0.1				1,715				0.1				3,710				0.3
Subordinated notes in SLF(1)			82,730				5.4				76,563				5.0				25,589				1.9
LLC equity interests in SLF(1)			29,199				1.9				22,373				1.5				9,242				0.7
Equity			61,516				4.0				57,808				3.8				45,519				3.4
Total		$	1,528,462				100.0	%		$	1,529,784				100.0	%		$	1,347,612				100.0	%

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. As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015, one stop loans included $87.6 million and $88.2 million, respectively, of late stage lending loans at fair value. During the three months ended December 31, 2014, we recharacterized $47.1 million of late stage lending loans at fair value from senior secured loans to one stop loans. As of September 30, 2014, one stop loans included $83.3 million of late stage lending loans at fair value and senior secured loans included $47.1 million of late stage lending loans at fair value.

As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015, 2014 and 2013, we had debt and equity investments in 169, 164, 145 and 135 portfolio companies, respectively, and investments in subordinated notes and LLC equity interests in SLF.

The weighted average annualized income yield and weighted average annualized investment income yield of our income producing debt investments, which represented nearly 100% of our debt investments, for the three months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 and the years ended September 30, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was as follows:

		For the three months ended December 31,								For the years ended September 30,
		2015				2014				2015				2014				2013
Weighted average annualized income yield(1)			7.6	%			7.8	%			7.8	%			8.3	%			9.1	%
Weighted average annualized investment income yield(2)			8.2	%			8.3	%			8.4	%			9.0	%			10.1	%

TABLE OF CONTENTS

As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015, we and RGA owned 87.5% and 12.5%, respectively, of both the outstanding subordinated notes and LLC equity interests of SLF. On January 17, 2014, SLF II, a wholly-owned subsidiary of SLF, entered into the SLF Credit Facility, which, as amended, allows SLF II to borrow up to $300.0 million, subject to leverage and borrowing base restrictions. The reinvestment period of the SLF Credit Facility ends May 13, 2017, and the stated maturity date is May 13, 2020. As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015, SLF had subordinated note commitments from its members totaling $160.0 million, of which approximately $94.5 million, $87.5 million and $29.2 million in aggregate principal amount was funded at December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, respectively. As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015, SLF had LLC equity interest subscriptions from its members totaling $40.0 million, of which approximately $37.2 million, $26.5 million and $9.3 million in aggregate was called and contributed as of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, respectively.

Revenues:  We generate revenue in the form of interest and fee income on debt investments and capital gains and distributions, if any, on portfolio company investments that we originate or acquire. Our debt investments, whether in the form of senior secured, one stop, second lien or subordinated loans, typically have a term of three to seven years and bear interest at a fixed or floating rate. In some instances, we receive payments on our debt investments based on scheduled amortization of the outstanding balances. In addition, we receive repayments of some of our debt investments prior to their scheduled maturity date. The frequency or volume of these repayments fluctuates significantly from period to period. Our portfolio activity also reflects the proceeds of sales of securities. In some cases, our investments provide for deferred interest payments or PIK interest. The principal amount of loans and any accrued but unpaid interest generally become due at the maturity date. In addition, we may generate revenue in the form of commitment, origination, amendment, structuring or due diligence fees, fees for providing managerial assistance and consulting fees.

We recognize realized gains or losses on investments based on the difference between the net proceeds from the disposition and the 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 investments in the consolidated statements of operations.

Expenses:  Our primary operating expenses include the payment of fees to GC Advisors under the Investment Advisory Agreement and interest expense on our outstanding debt. We bear all other out-of-pocket costs and expenses of our operations and transactions, including:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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.

GC Advisors, as collateral manager for the 2010 Issuer under the 2010 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 2010 Issuer at the beginning of the collection period relating to each payment date, which is payable in arrears on each payment date. Under the 2010 Collateral Management Agreement, the term “collection period” refers to a quarterly period running from the day after the end of the prior collection period to the fifth business day of the calendar month in which a payment date occurs.

GC Advisors, as collateral manager for the 2014 Issuer under the 2014 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 2014 Issuer at the beginning of the collection period relating to each payment date, which is payable in arrears on each payment date. Under the 2014 Collateral Management Agreement, the term “collection period” refers 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.

Collateral management fees are paid directly by the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer to GC Advisors and offset against the management fees payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement. In addition, the 2010 Issuer and 2014 Issuer paid Wells Fargo Securities, LLC structuring and placement fees for its services in connection with the initial structuring of the 2010 Debt Securitization, the 2014 Debt Securitization and the amendment of the 2010 Debt Securitization. The 2010 Issuer and 2014 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 2010 Debt Securitization and the 2014 Debt Securitization, 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.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Recent Developments

On February 2, 2016, our board of directors declared a quarterly distribution of $0.32 per share payable on March 30, 2016 to holders of record as of March 7, 2016.

On February 11, 2016, the U.S. Small Business Administration, or SBA, approved the application submitted by GC SBIC V, L.P., or SBIC V, for an additional commitment of $75.0 million of SBA-guaranteed debentures.

On March 1, 2016, we and Funding entered into an amendment to the Credit Facility to, among other things, make certain amendments to the computation of the borrowing base restrictions in the Credit Facility. Our maximum borrowing capacity under the Credit Facility, the expiration of the reinvestment period and the stated maturity date of the Credit Facility did not change in connection with this amendment.

Consolidated Results of Operations

Consolidated operating results for the three months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 are as follows:

		For the three months ended December 31,								Variances
		2015				2014				2015 vs. 2014
		(In thousands)
Interest income		$	25,675			$	25,099			$	576
Income from accretion of discounts and origination fees			1,892				1,670				222
Interest income from subordinated notes of SLF			1,626				550				1,076
Dividend income			1,007				18				989
Fee income			300				208				92
Total investment income			30,500				27,545				2,955
Total expenses			15,199				12,988				2,211
Net investment income – before excise tax			15,301				14,557				744
Excise tax			302				—				302
Net investment income – after excise tax			14,999				14,557				442
Net realized (losses) gains on investments			4,978				1,726				3,252
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments, and secured borrowings			662				(1,111	)			1,773
Net income		$	20,639			$	15,172			$	5,467
Average earning portfolio company investments, at fair value		$	1,438,097			$	1,372,572			$	65,525
Average debt outstanding(1)		$	805,789			$	692,809			$	112,980

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. As a result, quarterly comparisons of net income may not be meaningful.

Investment Income

Investment income increased from the three months ended December 31, 2014 to the three months ended December 31, 2015 by $3.0 million primarily as a result of an increase in interest income from subordinated notes of SLF of $1.1 million and an increase in dividend income of $1.0 million. The increase in dividend income was primarily a result of an increase of $0.8 million in dividend distributions received from our investment in SLF LLC equity interests.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The annualized income yield by security type for the three months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 was as follows:

		For the three months ended December 31,
		2015				2014
Senior secured			6.2	%			6.3	%
One stop			7.7	%			8.0	%
Second lien			9.6	%			9.5	%
Subordinated debt			5.1	%			8.4	%
Subordinated notes in SLF(1)			8.2	%			8.3	%

Annualized income yields on senior secured and one stop loans have declined for the three months ended December 31, 2015 compared to the three months ended December 31, 2014 primarily due to a continued general trend of interest rate compression on new investments. As of December 31, 2015, we have one remaining subordinated debt investment shown in the Consolidated Schedule of Investments.

For additional details on investment yields and asset mix, refer to the “Liquidity and Capital Resources —  Portfolio Composition, Investment Activity and Yield” section below.

Expenses

The following table summarizes our expenses:

		For the three months ended December 31,								Variances
		2015				2014				2015 vs. 2014
		(In thousands)
Interest and other debt financing expenses		$	5,482			$	4,647			$	835
Amortization of debt issuance costs			1,249				1,047				202
Base management fee			5,314				4,821				493
Income Incentive Fee			407				932				(525	)
Capital gain incentive fee accrued under GAAP			1,364				139				1,225
Professional fees			731				629				102
Administrative service fee			503				607				(104	)
General and administrative expenses			149				166				(17	)
Total expenses		$	15,199			$	12,988			$	2,211

Interest expense and debt facility fees increased by $0.8 million from the three months ended December 31, 2014 to the three months ended December 31, 2015 primarily due to an increase in the weighted average of outstanding borrowings from $692.8 million for the three months ended December 31, 2014 to $805.8 million for the three months ended December 31, 2015. The increase in our debt was primarily driven by an increase in our use of debt under the Credit Facility, to $123.1 million as of December 31, 2015 from an outstanding balance of $44.9 million as of December 31, 2014.

Amortization of debt issuance costs increased slightly by $0.2 million from the three months ended December 31, 2014 to $1.2 million for the three months ended December 31, 2015. The effective annualized average interest rate on our outstanding debt remained stable at 3.3% for the three months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014.

The base management fee increased as a result of a sequential increase in average assets from December 31, 2014 to December 31, 2015. The administrative service fee declined from the three months ended December 31, 2014 to the three months ended December 31, 2015 due to efficiencies gained by the Administrator in servicing a growing portfolio.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The incentive fee payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement consists of two parts: (1) the Income Incentive Fee and (2) the Capital Gain Incentive Fee. The Income Incentive Fee decreased $0.5 million from the three months ended December 31, 2014 to the three months ended December 31, 2015 as the interest rate compression on new investments and the change in asset mix of our portfolio caused a decline in our Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income (as defined below), expressed as a rate of return on the value of our net assets. Due to this decline, we were not fully through the catch-up provision of the incentive fee calculation. For the three months ended December 31, 2015, the Income Incentive Fee expense as a percentage of Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income was 2.4% compared to 6.0% for the three months ended December 31, 2014. “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 calendar quarter, 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 incentive fee). 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.

The Capital Gain Incentive Fee payable as calculated under the Investment Advisory Agreement for the three months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 was $0. However, 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. The accrual for capital gain incentive fee under GAAP was $1.4 million, or $0.03 per share, for the three months ended December 31, 2015 and $139,000, or $0.00 per share, for the three months ended December 31, 2014. The increase in accrual for a capital gain incentive fee under GAAP for the three months ended December 31, 2015 from the three months ended December 31, 2014 was primarily the result of realized gains on the liquidation of equity investments and unrealized appreciation of debt and equity investments.

For additional details on the liquidation of equity investments, refer to the “Net Realized and Unrealized Gains and Losses” section below.

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 three months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 were $0.6 million and $0.2 million, respectively.

As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015, included in accounts payable and accrued expenses were $1.1 million and $0.6 million, respectively, for accrued expenses paid on behalf of us by the Administrator.

Excise Tax Expense

We have elected to be treated as a RIC under Subchapter M of the Code and operate in a manner so as to qualify for the tax treatment applicable to RICs. In order to be subject to tax as a RIC, we are required to meet certain source of income and asset diversification requirements, as well as timely distribute to our stockholders at least 90% of investment company taxable income, as defined by the Code, and determined without regard to any deduction for dividends paid for each tax year. We have made and intend to continue to make the requisite distributions to our stockholders, which will generally relieve us from U.S. federal income taxes.

Depending on the level of taxable income earned in a tax year, we may choose to retain taxable income in excess of current year distributions into the next tax year in an amount less than what would trigger payments of federal income tax under Subchapter M of the Code. We would then pay a 4% excise tax on such income, as required. To the extent that we determine that our estimated current year annual taxable income may exceed estimated current year distributions, we accrue excise tax, if any, on estimated excess

TABLE OF CONTENTS

taxable income as taxable income is earned. For the three months ended December 31, 2015, we recorded a net expense of $302,000 for U.S. federal excise tax. For the three months ended December 31, 2014, we had no U.S. federal excise tax expense.

Net Realized and Unrealized Gains and Losses

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

		For the three months ended December 31,								Variances
		2015				2014				2015 vs. 2014
		(In thousands)
Net realized gain (loss) on investments		$	4,978			$	1,727			$	3,251
Net realized gain (loss)			4,978				1,727				3,251
Unrealized appreciation on investments			16,839				6,896				9,943
Unrealized (depreciation) on investments			(13,665	)			(7,981	)			(5,684	)
Unrealized appreciation on investments in SLF(1)			—				—				—
Unrealized (depreciation) on investments in SLF(1)			(2,512	)			(26	)			(2,486	)
Unrealized appreciation on secured borrowings			—				—				—
Unrealized (depreciation) on secured borrowings			—				—				—
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments, investments in SLF, and secured borrowings		$	662			$	(1,111	)		$	1,773

For the three months ended December 31, 2015, we had a net realized gain of $5.0 million primarily due to the sale of, or capital gain distributions received from, three equity investments that were partially offset by the realized loss on the write off of one non-accrual portfolio company investment.

During the three months ended December 31, 2015, we had $16.8 million in unrealized appreciation on 102 portfolio company investments, which was offset by $13.7 million in unrealized depreciation on 131 portfolio company investments. Unrealized appreciation during the three months ended December 31, 2015 resulted from an increase in fair value primarily due to the rise in market prices of portfolio company investments and the reversal of prior period unrealized depreciation associated with the portfolio company investment write-off. Unrealized depreciation primarily resulted from the amortization of discounts, negative credit related adjustments that caused a reduction in fair value and the reversal of the net unrealized appreciation associated with the sales of portfolio company investments during the three months ended December 31, 2015.

For the three months ended December 31, 2015, we had $2.5 million in unrealized depreciation on our investment in SLF LLC equity interests, respectively. The unrealized depreciation on the SLF LLC equity interests was driven by negative credit-related adjustments associated with SLF’s investment portfolio. For the three months ended December 31, 2015, we had no unrealized appreciation or depreciation on our investment in SLF subordinated notes.

For the three months ended December 31, 2014, we had a net realized gain of $1.7 million primarily due to the sale of two equity investments.

During the three months ended December 31, 2014, we had $6.9 million in unrealized appreciation on 73 portfolio company investments, which was offset by $8.0 million in unrealized depreciation on 120 portfolio company investments. Unrealized appreciation during the three months ended December 31, 2014 resulted from an increase in fair value primarily due to the rise in market prices with portfolio company investments. Unrealized depreciation primarily resulted from the amortization of discounts, negative credit related adjustments that caused a reduction in fair value and the reversal of the net unrealized appreciation on the equity investments sold during the three months ended December 31, 2014.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

For the three months ended December 31, 2014, we had $26,000 in unrealized depreciation on our investment in SLF LLC equity interests. The unrealized depreciation on the SLF LLC equity interests was primarily driven by negative market yield adjustments associated with broadly syndicated loans in SLF’s investment portfolio. For the three months ended December 31, 2014, we had no unrealized appreciation or depreciation on our investment in SLF subordinated notes.

Comparison of the Years Ended September 30, 2015, 2014 and 2013

Consolidated operating results for the years ended September 30, 2015, 2014 and 2013 are as follows:

		For the years ended September 30,												Variances
		2015				2014				2013				2015 vs. 2014				2014 vs. 2013
		(In thousands)
Interest income		$	103,404			$	93,225			$	71,202			$	10,179			$	22,023
Income from accretion of discounts and origination fees			9,002				9,158				7,594				(156	)			1,564
Interest income from subordinated notes of SLF			3,735				1,947				23				1,788				1,924
Dividend income			1,562				1,766				2,197				(204	)			(431	)
Fee income			2,265				3,430				2,758				(1,165	)			672
Total investment income			119,968				109,526				83,774				10,442				25,752
Total expenses			60,971				52,991				39,379				7,980				13,612
Net investment income			58,997				56,535				44,395				2,462				12,140
Net realized (losses) gains on investments			9,354				5,384				(1,363	)			3,970				6,747
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments, and secured borrowings			2,440				3,469				3,488				(1,029	)			(19	)
Net income		$	70,791			$	65,388			$	46,520			$	5,403			$	18,868
Average earning portfolio company investments, at fair value		$	1,404,556			$	1,195,099			$	810,880			$	209,457			$	384,219
Average debt outstanding(1)		$	752,567			$	587,624			$	378,843			$	164,943			$	208,781

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. As a result, annual comparisons of net income may not be meaningful.

Investment Income

Investment income increased from 2014 to 2015 by $10.4 million as a result of an increase in the average earning investment balance, which is the annual average balance of accruing loans in our investment portfolio, of $209.5 million and an increase in interest income from subordinated notes of SLF of $1.8 million. These increases were partially offset by a decline in the weighted average investment income yield of 0.6% and a decline in fee income of $1.2 million that was primarily driven by a decrease in prepayment fees. Investment income increased from 2013 to 2014 by $25.8 million as a result of an increase in the average earning investment balance of $384.2 million and an increase in fee income of $0.6 million that was primarily driven by an increase in prepayment fees. These increases were partially offset by a decline in the weighted average investment income yield of 1.1% and a decline in dividend income of $0.4 million.

The decrease in the yield from 2014 to 2015 was driven primarily by interest rate compression on new investments. The decrease in the yield from 2013 to 2014 was driven primarily by interest rate compression on new investments and the change in asset mix of our portfolio. Lower yielding one stop investments

TABLE OF CONTENTS

increased from 54.1% of the portfolio as of September 30, 2013 to 69.8% of the portfolio as of September 30, 2014 and to 74.1% of the portfolio as of September 30, 2015.

The income yield by security type for the years ended September 30, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was as follows:

		For the years ended September 30,
		2015				2014				2013
Senior secured			6.5	%			7.1	%			7.4	%
One stop			7.9	%			8.3	%			8.8	%
Second lien			9.5	%			11.7	%			11.7	%
Subordinated debt			8.1	%			10.1	%			16.8	%
Subordinated notes in SLF(1)			8.3	%			7.3	%			4.3

Income yields on senior secured and one stop investments declined, for each of the years ended September 30, 2015 and 2014 due to a continued general trend of interest rate compression on new investments. As of September 30, 2015, we have one remaining subordinated debt investment as shown in the Consolidated Schedule of Investments. The increase in the income yield on subordinated notes of SLF for the year ended September 30, 2015 as compared to the year ended September 30, 2014 is a result of the subordinated notes accruing interest at the rate of LIBOR plus 8.0% for the full year ended September 30, 2015 as compared to a partial year for the year ended September 30, 2014. The income yield on subordinated notes of SLF increased for the year ended September 30, 2014 as compared to the year ended September 30, 2013 as the spread on the subordinated notes was increased to LIBOR plus 8.0% from LIBOR plus 4.0% in January 2014 subsequent to the closing of the senior secured revolving credit facility, or the SLF Credit Facility, with Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, as administrative agent, and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as lender, entered into by Senior Loan Fund II LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of SLF, or SLF II, which, as amended, allows SLF II to borrow up to $300.0 million, subject to leverage and borrowing base restrictions.

For additional details on investment yields and asset mix, refer to “Portfolio Composition, Investment Activity and Yield.”

Expenses

The following table summarizes our expenses:

		For the years ended September 30,												Variances
		2015				2014				2013				2015 vs. 2014				2014 vs. 2013
		(In thousands)
Interest and other debt financing expenses		$	20,004			$	17,197			$	10,602			$	2,807			$	6,595
Amortization of debt issuance cost			4,506				3,030				1,825				1,476				1,205
Base management fee			20,330				17,053				11,749				3,277				5,304
Income Incentive Fee			7,489				10,032				9,844				(2,543	)			188
Capital gain incentive fee accrued under GAAP			2,737				96				—				2,641				96
Professional fees			2,942				2,451				2,200				491				251
Administrative service fee			2,372				2,527				2,625				(155	)			(98	)
General and administrative expenses			591				605				534				(14	)			71
Total expenses		$	60,971			$	52,991			$	39,379			$	7,980			$	13,612

Interest and other debt financing expenses increased from the year ended September 30, 2014 to the year ended September 30, 2015 primarily due to an increase in the weighted average of outstanding borrowings from $587.6 million for the year ended September 30, 2014 to $752.6 million for the year ended September 30, 2015. The increase in our debt was driven by an increase in our use of debt under the Credit Facility Funding, a wholly-owned subsidiary of ours, to $127.3 million as of September 30, 2015 from an outstanding balance of $27.4 million as of September 30, 2014 as well as the increase in our use of debt

TABLE OF CONTENTS

under our SBA debentures through the SBICs; which had outstanding balances of $225.0 million outstanding as of September 30, 2015 and $208.8 million as of September 30, 2014.

Amortization of debt issuance costs increased by $1.5 million from the year ended September 30, 2014 to the year ended September 30, 2015 primarily due to a full year of amortization of the additional capitalized debt issuance costs associated with the 2014 Debt Securitization. The increase in amortization of debt issuance costs resulted in an increase in our effective annual average interest rate on our outstanding debt from 3.2% for the year ended September 30, 2014 to 3.3% for the year ended September 30, 2015.

Interest and other debt financing expenses increased from the year ended September 30, 2013 to the year ended September 30, 2014 primarily due to an increase in the weighted average of outstanding borrowings from $378.8 million for the year ended September 30, 2013 to $587.6 million for the year ended September 30, 2014. The increase in our debt was driven by the issuance of $246.0 million of notes pursuant to the 2014 Debt Securitization as well as the increase in our use of debt under our SBA debentures through the SBICs which had outstanding balances of $208.8 million outstanding as of September 30, 2014 and $169.5 million as of September 30, 2013. The increase in interest and debt financing expenses was partially offset by a decrease in the effective average annual interest rate on our outstanding debt from 3.3% for the year ended September 30, 2013 to 3.2% for the year ended September 30, 2014.

The base management fee increased as a result of a sequential increase in average adjusted gross assets from 2013 to 2015. The administrative service fee decreased from the year ended September 30, 2014 to the year ended September 30, 2015 and from the year ended September 30, 2013 to the year ended September 30, 2014 due to efficiencies gained by the Administrator in servicing a growing portfolio.

The incentive fee payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement consists of two parts: (1) the Income Incentive Fee and (2) the Capital Gain Incentive Fee. The Income Incentive Fee remained relatively stable from the year ended September 30, 2013 to the year ended September 30, 2014 and decreased by $2.5 million from the year ended September 30, 2014 to the year ended September 30, 2015 as the interest rate compression on new investments and the change in asset mix of our portfolio caused a decline in our Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income, expressed as a rate of return on the value of our net assets. Due to this decline, we were not fully through the catch-up provision of the incentive fee calculation. For the year ended September 30, 2015, the Income Incentive Fee expense as a percentage of Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income was 10.8% compared to 15.2% for the year ended September 30, 2014 and 18.1% for the year ended September 30, 2013.

The Capital Gain Incentive Fee payable as calculated under the Investment Advisory Agreement for the years ended September 30, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was $0. However, 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. The accrual for capital gain incentive fee under GAAP was $2.7 million, or $0.06 per share, for the year ended September 30, 2015 and $96,000, or $0.00 per share, for the year ended September 30, 2014. We did not accrue a capital gain incentive fee under GAAP for the year ended September 30, 2013. The increase in accruals for a capital gain incentive fee under GAAP for the year ended September 30, 2015 from the year ended September 30, 2014 and for the year ended September 30, 2014 from the year ended September 30, 2013 was primarily the result of realized gains on the sale of equity investments and unrealized appreciation of debt and equity investments.

For additional details on the sale of equity investments, refer to the “Net Realized and Unrealized Gains and Losses” section below.

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, 2015, 2014 and 2013 were $1.0 million, $1.4 million and $1.0 million, respectively.

As of September 30, 2015 and 2014, included in accounts payable and accrued expenses were $0.6 million and $0.2 million, respectively, for accrued expenses paid on behalf of us by the Administrator.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Net Realized and Unrealized Gains and Losses

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

		For the years ended September 30,												Variances
		2015				2014				2013				2015 vs. 2014				2014 vs. 2013
		(In thousands)
Net realized gain (loss) on investments		$	9,354			$	5,384			$	(1,363	)		$	3,970			$	6,747
Net realized gain (loss)			9,354				5,384				(1,363	)			3,970				6,747
Unrealized appreciation on investments			26,469				24,748				17,956				1,721				6,792
Unrealized (depreciation) on investments			(23,258	)			(21,221	)			(14,445	)			(2,037	)			(6,776	)
Unrealized appreciation on investments in SLF(1)			—				75				177				(75	)			(102	)
Unrealized (depreciation) on investments in SLF(1)			(773	)			(254	)			(74	)			(519	)			(180	)
Unrealized appreciation on secured borrowings			2				126				—				(124	)			126
Unrealized (depreciation) on secured borrowings			—				(5	)			(126	)			5				121
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments, investments in SLF, and secured borrowings		$	2,440			$	3,469			$	3,488			$	(1,029	)		$	(19	)

For the year ended September 30, 2015, we had $26.5 million in unrealized appreciation on 130 portfolio company investments, which was partially offset by $23.3 million in unrealized depreciation on 133 portfolio company investments. Unrealized depreciation primarily resulted from the amortization of discounts and negative credit related adjustments that caused a reduction in fair value. Unrealized appreciation during the year ended September 30, 2015 resulted from an increase in fair value primarily due to the rise in market prices and a reversal of prior period unrealized depreciation.

For the year ended September 30, 2015, we had $0.8 million in unrealized depreciation on our investment in SLF LLC equity interests. Unrealized depreciation on the SLF LLC equity interests was driven by negative credit-related adjustments associated with SLF’s investment portfolio.

We also had $9.4 million in net realized gains on investments during the year ended September 30, 2015, primarily as a result of the sale of several equity investments which were partially offset by realized losses on two non-accrual portfolio companies.

For the year ended September 30, 2014, we had $24.7 million in unrealized appreciation on 119 portfolio company investments, which was partially offset by $21.2 million in unrealized depreciation on 125 portfolio company investments. Unrealized depreciation primarily resulted from the amortization of discounts and negative credit related adjustments that caused a reduction in fair value. Unrealized appreciation during the year ended September 30, 2014 resulted from an increase in fair value primarily due to the rise in market prices and a reversal of prior period unrealized depreciation.

For the year ended September 30, 2014, we had $75,000 in unrealized appreciation on our investment in SLF subordinated notes, which was offset by $0.3 million in unrealized depreciation on our investment in SLF LLC equity interests. The unrealized appreciation was the reversal of the prior period unrealized depreciation following the increase in the contractual rate on the subordinated notes to one-month LIBOR plus 8.0% subsequent to the closing of the SLF Credit Facility. Unrealized depreciation on the SLF LLC interests was driven by negative credit-related adjustments associated with SLF’s investment portfolio as well the offsetting impact of the pricing on the subordinated notes.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

We also had $5.4 million in net realized gains on investments during the year ended September 30, 2014, primarily as a result of the sale of several equity investments which were partially offset by realized losses on the sale of one underperforming portfolio company and the write off of two non-accrual portfolio companies.

For the year ended September 30, 2013, we had $18.0 million in unrealized appreciation on 101 portfolio company investments, which was partially offset by $14.4 million in unrealized depreciation on 108 portfolio company investments. Unrealized depreciation primarily resulted from the amortization of discounts and negative credit related adjustments that caused a reduction in fair value. Unrealized appreciation during the year ended September 30, 2013 resulted from an increase in fair value primarily due to the rise in market prices and a reversal of prior period unrealized depreciation.

For the year ended September 30, 2013, we had $0.2 million in unrealized appreciation on our investment in SLF LLC interests, which was partially offset by $0.1 million in unrealized depreciation on our investment in SLF subordinated notes. The unrealized depreciation was the result of the lower yielding contractual rate compared to comparable market pricing of subordinated notes. Unrealized appreciation on the SLF LLC interests was driven by positive credit related adjustments associated with SLF’s investment portfolio as well the offsetting impact of the pricing on the subordinated notes.

We also had $1.4 million in net realized losses on investments during the year ended September 30, 2013 primarily as a result of the sale of a non-accrual investment and the payoff of an under-performing loan.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

For the three months ended December 31, 2015, we experienced a net increase in cash and cash equivalents of $1.4 million. During the period, cash provided by operating activities was $23.0 million primarily as a result of proceeds from principal payments and sales of portfolio investments of $171.4 million. This was partially offset by the funding of investments of $162.8 million and net investment income of $15.0 million. During the same period, cash used in investment activities of $2.2 million was driven by the increase in restricted cash and cash equivalents. Lastly, cash used in financing activities was $19.4 million, primarily driven by repayments of debt of $60.8 million and distributions paid of $15.1 million that were partially offset by borrowings on debt of $56.6 million.

For the three months ended December 31, 2014, we experienced a net increase in cash and cash equivalents of $0.6 million. During the period, we used $40.8 million in operating activities primarily as a result of funding portfolio investments of $131.5 million. This was partially offset by proceeds from principal payments and sales of portfolio investments of $80.9 million and net investment income of $14.6 million. During the same period, cash provided by investment activities of $39.1 million was driven by the decrease in restricted cash and cash equivalents. Lastly, cash provided by financing activities was $2.3 million, primarily driven by borrowings on debt of $33.6 million that were partially offset by repayments of debt of $16.1 million and distributions paid of $14.2 million.

For the year ended September 30, 2015, we experienced a net increase in cash and cash equivalents of $0.3 million. During the period we used $103.3 million in operating activities, primarily as a result of fundings of portfolio investments of $858.1 million. This was partially offset by proceeds from principal payments and sales of portfolio investments of $699.1 million and net investment income of $59.0 million. During the same period, cash used in investment activities of $17.2 million was driven by the increase in restricted cash and cash equivalents. Lastly, cash provided by financing activities was $120.8 million, primarily due to net proceeds from one equity offering of an aggregate of $67.6 million and borrowings on debt of $503.2 million, partially offset by repayments of debt of $387.1 million and distributions paid of $60.0 million.

For the year ended September 30, 2014, we experienced a net decrease in cash and cash equivalents of $11.2 million. During the period we used $255.6 million in operating activities, primarily as a result of fundings of portfolio investments of $878.6 million. This was partially offset by proceeds from principal payments and sales of portfolio investments of $573.2 million and net investment income of $56.5 million. During the same period, cash used in investment activities of $36.4 million was driven by the increase in restricted cash and cash equivalents. Lastly, cash provided by financing activities was $280.8 million,

TABLE OF CONTENTS

primarily due to net proceeds from one equity offering of an aggregate of $64.2 million and borrowings on debt of $826.0 million, partially offset by repayments of debt of $540.9 million and distributions paid of $55.0 million.

For the year ended September 30, 2013, we experienced a net increase in cash and cash equivalents of $2.4 million. During the period we used $297.6 million in operating activities, primarily as a result of fundings of portfolio investments of $669.2 million. This was partially offset by proceeds from principal payments and sales of portfolio investments of $336.2 million and net investment income of $44.4 million. During the same period, cash used in investment activities of $1.4 million was driven by the increase in restricted cash and cash equivalents. Lastly, cash provided by financing activities was $301.4 million, primarily due to net proceeds from four equity offerings of an aggregate of $280.9 million and borrowings on debt of $376.4 million, partially offset by repayments of debt of $316.6 million and distributions paid of $43.3 million.

As of December 31, 2015, we had cash and cash equivalents of $6.9 million. In addition, we had restricted cash and cash equivalents of $94.2 million as of December 31, 2015. Cash and cash equivalents are available to fund new investments, pay operating expenses and pay distributions. As of December 31, 2015, $82.6 million of our restricted cash and cash equivalents could be used to fund new investments that meet the investment guidelines established in the Debt Securitizations, which are described in further detail in Note 7 to our consolidated financial statements, and for the payment of interest expense on the notes issued in the Debt Securitizations. $6.8 million of such restricted cash and cash equivalents could be used to fund investments that meet the guidelines under the Credit Facility as well as for the payment of interest expense and revolving debt of the Credit Facility. As of December 31, 2015, $4.8 million of restricted cash and cash equivalents can be used to fund new investments that meet the regulatory and investment guidelines established by the Small Business Administration, or SBA, for our small business investment companies, or SBICs, which are described in further detail in Note 7 to our consolidated financial statements, and for interest expense and fees on our outstanding SBA debentures.

As of September 30, 2015 and 2014, we had cash and cash equivalents of $5.5 million and $5.1 million, respectively. In addition, we had restricted cash and cash equivalents of $92.0 million and $74.8 million as of September 30, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Cash and cash equivalents are available to fund new investments, pay operating expenses and pay distributions. As of September 30, 2015, $73.6 million of our restricted cash and cash equivalents could be used to fund new investments that meet the investment guidelines established in the Debt Securitizations, which are described in further detail in Note 7 to our consolidated financial statements, and for the payment of interest expense on the notes issued in the Debt Securitizations. $5.1 million of such restricted cash and cash equivalents could be used to fund investments that meet the guidelines under the Credit Facility as well as for the payment of interest expense and revolving debt of the Credit Facility. $2.3 million of such restricted cash and cash equivalents could be used to fund investments that meet the guidelines under the Revolver as well as for the payment of interest expense and revolving debt of the Revolver. The remaining $11.0 million of restricted cash and cash equivalents could be used to fund new investments that meet the regulatory and investment guidelines established by the SBA for our SBICs, which are described in further detail in Note 7 to our consolidated financial statements, and for interest expense and fees on our outstanding SBA debentures.

As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, we had outstanding commitments to fund investments totaling $116.2 million, $121.5 million and $124.5 million, respectively. These amounts may or may not be funded to the borrowing party now or in the future. The unfunded commitments relate to loans with various maturity dates, but the entire amount was eligible for funding to the borrowers as of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, respectively, subject to the terms of each loan’s respective credit agreement. As of December 31, 2015, we believe that we had sufficient assets to adequately cover any obligations under our unfunded commitments.

As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015, the Credit Facility allows Funding to borrow up to $200.0 million at any one time outstanding, subject to leverage and borrowing base restrictions. As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, subject to leverage and borrowing base restrictions, we had approximately $76.9 million, $72.7 million and $122.6 million, respectively, of remaining commitments

TABLE OF CONTENTS

and $25.1 million, $40.1 million and $70.0 million, respectively, of availability on the Credit Facility. As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, we had $123.1 million, $127.3 million and $27.4 million outstanding under the Credit Facility, respectively. On October 21, 2015, we terminated the Revolver. As of September 30, 2015, the Revolver allowed Revolver Funding to borrow up to $15.0 million at any one time outstanding, subject to leverage and borrowing base restrictions. As of September 30, 2015, subject to leverage and borrowing base restrictions, we had approximately $15.0 million of remaining commitments and $2.9 million of availability on the Revolver. As of September 30, 2014, subject to leverage and borrowing base restrictions, we had approximately $15.0 million of remaining commitments and $1.2 million of availability on the Revolver.

On July 16, 2010, we completed the 2010 Debt Securitization, as amended on February 15, 2013, in which the 2010 Issuer issued an aggregate of $350.0 million of notes including $203.0 million of Class A 2010 Notes, which bear interest at a rate of three-month LIBOR plus 1.74%, $12.0 million of Class B 2010 Notes, which bear interest at a rate of three-month LIBOR plus 2.40%, and $135.0 million face amount of Subordinated 2010 Notes that do not bear interest. The Class A and Class B 2010 Notes are included in the December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014 consolidated statements of financial condition as our debt. The Subordinated 2010 Notes were eliminated in consolidation as of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014. As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, we had outstanding debt under the 2010 Debt Securitization of $215.0 million, $215.0 million and $215.0 million, respectively.

On June 25, 2015, the 2010 Issuer amended the 2010 Debt Securitization to, among other things, (a) extend the reinvestment period two years to July 20, 2017, (b) make certain modifications for purposes of compliance with the loan securitization exclusion of the Volcker Rule and (c) modify the computation of the weighted average life test which relates to the loans securing the 2010 Debt Securitization.

On June 5, 2014, we completed the 2014 Debt Securitization, in which the 2014 Issuer issued an aggregate of $402.6 million of securities including $191.0 million of Class A-1 2014 Notes, which bear interest at a rate of three-month LIBOR plus 1.75%, $20.0 million of Class A-2 2014 Notes, which bear interest at a rate of three-month LIBOR plus 1.45% through December 4, 2015 and three-month LIBOR plus 1.95% thereafter, $35.0 million of Class B 2014 Notes, which bear interest at a rate of three-month LIBOR plus 2.50%, $37.5 million of Class C 2014 Notes, which bear interest at a rate of three-month LIBOR plus 3.50%, and $119.1 million of LLC equity interests that do not bear interest. We retained all of the Class C 2014 Notes and LLC equity interests. The Class A-1, Class A-2 and Class B 2014 Notes are included in the December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014 consolidated statements of financial condition as our debt, and the Class C 2014 Notes and LLC equity interests were eliminated in consolidation. As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, we had outstanding debt under the 2014 Debt Securitization of $246.0 million, $246.0 million and $246.0 million, respectively.

As of December 2015, the maximum amount of SBA-guaranteed debentures that may be issued by multiple licensees under common management is $350.0 million and the maximum amount that a single SBIC licensee may issue is $150.0 million. SBIC IV and SBIC V may each borrow up to two times the amount of its regulatory capital, subject to customary regulatory requirements. As of December 31, 2015, SBIC IV and SBIC V had $150.0 million and $75.0 million of outstanding SBA-guaranteed debentures, respectively, that mature between March 2021 and September 2025. As of September 30, 2015, SBIC IV and SBIC V had $150.0 million and $75.0 million of outstanding SBA-guaranteed debentures, respectively that mature between March 2021 and September 2015. As of September 30, 2014, SBIC IV and SBIC V had $150.0 million and $58.8 million of outstanding SBA-guaranteed debentures, respectively, leaving incremental borrowing capacity of $16.2 million for SBIC V under present SBIC regulations. SBIC V has submitted an application for an additional commitment of $75.0 million of SBA-guaranteed debentures.

In accordance with the 1940 Act, with certain limited exceptions, we are only allowed to borrow amounts such that our asset coverage, as defined in the 1940 Act, is at least 200% after such borrowing. 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 may be less than 200%. This provides us with increased investment

TABLE OF CONTENTS

flexibility but also increases our risks related to leverage. As of December 31, 2015, our asset coverage for borrowed amounts was 239.2% (excluding the SBA debentures).

On August 4, 2015, our board of directors reapproved a share repurchase program, or the Program, which allows us to repurchase up to $75.0 million of our outstanding common stock on the open market at prices below the net asset value as reported in our then most recently published consolidated financial statements. The Program may be implemented at the discretion of management. The shares may be purchased from time to time at prevailing market prices, through open market transactions, including block transactions. We did not make any repurchases of our common stock during the three months ended December 31, 2015 or the years ended September 30, 2015 and 2014.

On April 10, 2015, we priced a public offering of 3,500,000 shares of our common stock at a public offering price of $17.42 per share, raising approximately $60.1 million in gross proceeds. On April 15, 2015, the transaction closed, the shares were issued, and proceeds, net of underwriting discounts and commissions but before expenses, of $59.1 million were received. On May 7, 2015, we sold an additional 502,292 shares of our common stock at a public offering price of $17.42 per share pursuant to the underwriters’ partial exercise of the option granted in connection with the public offering in April 2015.

Although we expect to fund the growth of our investment portfolio through the net proceeds from future securities offerings and through our dividend reinvestment plan as well as future borrowings, to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act, we cannot assure you that our efforts to raise capital will be successful. In addition to capital not being available, it also may not be available on favorable terms. To the extent we are not able to raise capital on what we believe are favorable terms, we will focus on optimizing returns by investing capital generated from repayments into new investments we believe are attractive from a risk/reward perspective.

As of December 31, 2015, we believe that we had sufficient assets to adequately cover any obligations under our unfunded commitments.

Debt Securitizations

In the 2010 Debt Securitization, completed on July 16, 2010 and amended on February 15, 2013, the 2010 Issuer issued an aggregate of $350.0 million of 2010 Notes, and the aggregate $203.0 million of Class A 2010 Notes and the aggregate of $12.0 million of Class B 2010 Notes are secured by the assets of the 2010 Issuer. We structured the initial transactions and the subsequent amendment of the 2010 Debt Securitization with the assistance of Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, for which Wells Fargo Securities, LLC received structuring and placement fees. The transactions were executed through a private placement of an aggregate of $203.0 million of Aaa/AAA Class A 2010 Notes. The Class A 2010 Notes bear interest at a rate of three-month LIBOR plus 1.74%. The aggregate of $12.0 million face amount of Class B 2010 Notes bear interest at a rate of three-month LIBOR plus 2.40%, and the aggregate of $135.0 million face amount of Subordinated 2010 Notes do not bear interest. In partial consideration for the loans transferred to the 2010 Issuer as part of the 2010 Debt Securitization, Holdings retained all of the Class B and Subordinated 2010 Notes, which totaled $147.0 million, and it retained all of the membership interests in the 2010 Issuer, which Holdings initially purchased for $250. All of the notes are scheduled to mature on July 20, 2023. On November 15, 2013, Holdings sold the $12.0 million of Class B 2010 Notes of the 2010 Debt Securitization and on November 20, 2013, the transaction closed and proceeds of $12.0 million were received. As discussed below, in accordance with ASC Topic 860, we consolidate the 2010 Issuer in our financial statements and treat the 2010 Debt Securitization as a secured borrowing. The Class A and Class B 2010 Notes are included in our December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014 consolidated statements of financial condition as our debt.

On June 5, 2014, we completed the 2014 Debt Securitization. As part of the 2014 Debt Securitization, we issued an aggregate of $402.6 million of notes that are secured by a diversified portfolio of senior secured and second lien loans held by the 2014 Issuer. The 2014 Debt Securitization was executed through a private placement of $191.0 million of Class A-1 2014 Notes which bear interest at three-month LIBOR plus 1.75%, $20.0 million of Class A-2 2014 Notes which bear interest at a rate of three-month LIBOR plus 1.45% through December 4, 2015 and three-month LIBOR plus 1.95% thereafter and $35.0 million of Class B 2014 Notes which bear interest at a rate of three-month LIBOR plus 2.50%. The $37.5 million face amount of Class C 2014 Notes bear interest at a rate of three-month LIBOR plus 3.50%, and the LLC equity interests do

TABLE OF CONTENTS

not bear interest. In partial consideration for the loans transferred to the 2014 Issuer as part of the 2014 Debt Securitization, we received $119.1 million of LLC equity interests in the 2014 Issuer. We retained all of the Class C 2014 Notes and LLC equity interests totaling $37.5 million and $119.1 million, respectively. As discussed below, in accordance with ASC Topic 860, we consolidate the 2014 Issuer in our financial statements and treat the 2014 Debt Securitization as a secured borrowing. The Class A-1, Class A-2 and Class B 2014 Notes are included in the December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014 consolidated statements of financial condition as our debt.

In accordance with ASC Topic 860, we are required to consolidate the special purpose vehicle used in an asset-backed securitization and treat the transaction as a secured borrowing. GC Advisors is our investment adviser and also the collateral manager for each of the Securitization Issuers, which results in the “continued involvement” of us in the business of the Securitization Issuers. In addition, the investments of each of the Securitization Issuers constitute a substantial percentage of our total assets. As a result of this continued involvement and the fact that the respective investments of the Securitization Issuers constitute a substantial percentage of our assets, we consolidate the financial statements of the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer.

An important aspect of a debt securitization transaction is that the purchaser of the notes must become comfortable through their due diligence investigation that the sale and/or contribution of income producing assets into a special purpose entity would be considered a true sale and/or contribution or, in other words, that as a result of such sale and/or contribution, the originator no longer owns the income producing assets. This structure seeks to reduce risk to noteholders by insulating them from the credit and bankruptcy risks faced by the originator. The structure of any debt securitization is in large part intended to prevent, in the event of a bankruptcy, the consolidation in the originator’s bankruptcy case of the special purpose entity with the operations of the originator, based on equitable principles, and the noteholders must become comfortable with this analysis. As a result of this structure, debt securitization transactions frequently achieve lower overall borrowing costs than would be achieved if the borrowing had been structured as a traditional secured lending transaction.

In a typical sale transaction, the purchaser exchanges an asset for cash or some other asset, whereas in a contribution transaction, the contributor typically exchanges an asset for securities issued by the purchaser. For example, in the 2010 Debt Securitization, we transferred the portfolio loans that comprise the collateral to Holdings in a transaction that was a partial sale and a partial capital contribution. Holdings then transferred these same portfolio loans to the 2010 Issuer in a transfer that was also a partial sale and a partial capital contribution. To the extent that we received cash proceeds from Holdings in consideration for the portfolio loans transferred to Holdings, such portion of the transfer constituted a sale. To the extent that Holdings received cash proceeds, Class B 2010 Notes and Subordinated 2010 Notes from the 2010 Issuer in consideration for the portfolio loans transferred by it to the 2010 Issuer, such portion of the transfer also constituted a sale. By contrast, to the extent that we received cash proceeds from Holdings equal to or less than the fair value of the portfolio loans transferred by us to Holdings, the difference between the fair value of such portfolio loans and the cash we received from Holdings was deemed to be a contribution to the capital of Holdings pursuant to the terms of the master loan sale agreement. Likewise, to the extent that the cash proceeds, Class B 2010 Notes and Subordinated 2010 Notes received by Holdings from the 2010 Issuer was less than the fair value of the portfolio loans transferred from Holdings to the 2010 Issuer, such portion of the transfer was deemed to be a contribution to the capital of the 2010 Issuer by Holdings pursuant to the terms of such master loan sale agreement. In these transactions, there were no material differences between selling and/or contributing loans or participations, viewed from the perspective of the 2010 Issuer’s ownership interests therein, as all of the ownership interests in such loans and participations were transferred to, and are now owned by, the 2010 Issuer under the terms of the master loan sale agreement, irrespective of whether such loans or participations were sold or contributed from us to Holdings and from Holdings to the 2010 Issuer.

GC Advisors, as collateral manager for the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer, selected the senior secured and second lien loans (or participations therein) that were transferred to the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer, respectively. The senior secured and second lien loans (or participations therein) were selected in accordance with the criteria set forth in the documents governing the Debt Securitizations, which are primarily objective

TABLE OF CONTENTS

requirements determined by the constraints of the market for collateralized debt obligations, and are generally designed to comply with regulations governing commercial lending and similar financing activities in the United States and, in the case of the 2010 Debt Securitization, the requirements of Rule 3a-7 under the 1940 Act.

The Subordinated 2010 Notes are limited recourse, unsecured obligations of the 2010 Issuer payable solely from payments made under the portfolio loans and other assets held by the 2010 Issuer and, in the event of a portfolio loan event of default, from the proceeds of any liquidation of the collateral underlying such portfolio loans. Additionally, for as long as the Class A 2010 Notes and Class B 2010 Notes remain outstanding, holders of the Subordinated 2010 Notes will not generally be entitled to exercise remedies under the indenture. As an unsecured class of notes, the interests and rights of holders of the Subordinated 2010 Notes in and to the portfolio loans and other assets owned by the 2010 Issuer are subject to the prior claims of secured creditors of the 2010 Issuer and are potentially subject to or will rank equally with the claims of other unsecured creditors of the 2010 Issuer.

The Class B 2010 Notes are subordinated in right of payment on each payment date to prior payments on the Class A 2010 Notes and to certain amounts payable by the 2010 Issuer as administrative expenses. The Subordinated 2010 Notes are subordinated in right of payment on each payment date to payments on the Class A 2010 Notes and the Class B 2010 Notes as well as to certain amounts payable by the 2010 Issuer as administrative expenses and to the claims of other unsecured creditors of the 2010 Issuer.

The 2010 Issuer may only make payments on such securities to the extent permitted by the payment priority provisions of the indenture governing the notes, which generally provides that principal payments on the Class B 2010 Notes and the Subordinated 2010 Notes may not be made on any payment date unless all amounts owing under the Class A 2010 Notes are paid in full. In addition, if the 2010 Issuer does not meet the asset coverage tests or the interest coverage test set forth in the documents governing the 2010 Debt Securitization, cash would be diverted from the Class B 2010 Notes and the Subordinated 2010 Notes to first pay the Class A Notes in amounts sufficient to cause such tests to be satisfied. In addition, no payments may be made on the membership interests in any period until all required payments in respect of the Class A 2010 Notes, the Class B 2010 Notes and Subordinated 2010 Notes have been paid in full. Therefore, to the extent that any losses are suffered by noteholders as a result of losses on the portfolio loans and other assets owned by the 2010 Issuer, such losses will be borne in the first instance by the holders of the membership interests, then by the Subordinated 2010 Notes, then by the holders of the Class B 2010 Notes and lastly by the holders of the Class A 2010 Notes.

We believe that the Debt Securitizations benefit from “internal” credit enhancement, meaning that holders of more senior classes of notes issued by the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer benefit from the terms of subordination applicable to the more junior classes of notes issued by the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer, respectively. Thus, in the case of the 2010 Debt Securitization, the Class A 2010 Notes enjoy the benefit of credit enhancement effectively provided by the subordination provisions of the Class B 2010 Notes and the Subordinated 2010 Notes. Likewise, the Class B 2010 Notes enjoy the benefit of credit enhancement effectively provided by the subordination provisions of the Subordinated 2010 Notes.

The documents governing the Debt Securitization expressly provide that we and our subsidiaries (other than the 2010 Issuer or the 2014 Issuer, as applicable) are not, and cannot be held, liable for any shortfall in payments or any defaults on any of the classes of notes issued by the 2010 Issuer or the 2014 Issuer in connection with the Debt Securitizations because such obligations are the obligations of the 2010 Issuer or the 2014 Issuer only, and the sole recourse for such obligations is to the collateral owned by the 2010 Issuer or the 2014 Issuer rather than our assets or the assets of Holdings.

Under the terms of the documents related to the Debt Securitizations, recourse to us and to Holdings (in the case of the 2010 Debt Securitization) is limited and generally consistent with the terms of other similarly structured finance transactions. For example, under the master loan sale agreement with respect to the 2010 Debt Securitization, (1) we sold and/or contributed to Holdings all of our ownership interest in certain of our portfolio loans and participations for the purchase price and other consideration set forth in the master loan sale agreement, and (2) Holdings, in turn, sold and/or contributed to the 2010 Issuer all of its ownership interest in such portfolio loans and participations for the purchase price and other consideration set forth in the

TABLE OF CONTENTS

master loan sale agreement. These transfers were structured by their terms to provide limited recourse to us by the 2010 Issuer relating to certain representations and warranties with respect to certain characteristics including title and quality of the portfolio loans that were transferred to the 2010 Issuer. If we breached these representations and warranties and such breach materially and adversely affected the value of the portfolio loans or the interests of holders of notes issued by the 2010 Issuer, then we could be required, within 30 days of notice or our knowledge of such breach, to (a) cure such breach in all material respects, (b) repurchase the portfolio loan or loans subject to such breach or (c) remove the portfolio loan or loans subject to such breach from the pool of loans and other assets held by the 2010 Issuer and substitute a portfolio loan or loans that meet the requirements of the 2010 Debt Securitization documents. This repurchase and substitution obligation of us constitutes the sole remedy available against us for any breach of a representation or warranty related to the portfolio loans transferred to the 2010 Issuer.

A collateral management agreement is an agreement entered into between an adviser and a debt securitization vehicle or similar issuer and sets forth the terms and conditions pursuant to which the adviser will provide advisory and/or management services with respect to the client’s securities portfolio. Under the collateral management agreements between GC Advisors and the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer, GC Advisors’ duties include (1) selecting portfolio loans to be acquired and selecting the portfolio loans to be sold or otherwise disposed of by the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer, (2) reinvesting in other portfolio loans, where appropriate, (3) instructing the trustee with respect to any acquisition, disposition or tender of, or offer with respect to, a portfolio loan or other assets received in the open market or otherwise by the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer and (4) performing all other tasks, and taking all other actions, that are specified in, or not inconsistent with, the duties of the collateral manager. GC Advisors, in its role as collateral manager, is the party responsible for enforcing payment obligations on portfolio loans of the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer as well as exercising rights to vote on amendments to and waivers of provisions in the credit agreements of portfolio companies.

The Debt Securitizations provide a number of benefits to us, most notably an ability on our part to finance new portfolio loans acquired by the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer at an attractive cost.

We have no direct ability to enforce the payment obligations on portfolio loans held by the 2010 Issuer and the 2014 Issuer as part of the Debt Securitizations. The contribution of loans and participations did not constitute a realization event under the Investment Advisory Agreement, and no incentive fee was earned as a result of the Debt Securitizations.

A portion of the proceeds from the Debt Securitizations were used to originate and acquire additional portfolio loans. Such additional portfolio loans are held by us directly or sold and/or contributed into one of our subsidiaries, which enabled us to borrow additional amounts in securitization or other structures using such portfolio loans as collateral. We believe that the Debt Securitizations enable us to deploy our capital efficiently and to increase our capacity to provide financing for small to medium-sized businesses in our target market.

The Subordinated 2010 Notes may be transferred only to persons or entities that are either (x) qualified institutional buyers or (y) institutional accredited investors and, in either case, are qualified purchasers. By their terms, the Subordinated 2010 Notes may only be owned by U.S. persons. No Subordinated 2010 Note (or interests in such notes) may be acquired or owned by any person that is classified for U.S. federal income tax purposes as a disregarded entity (unless the beneficial owner of such person is a corporation that is not a subchapter S corporation or otherwise taxable as a corporation), partnership, subchapter S corporation or grantor trust unless such person obtains a legal opinion to the effect that such acquisition or ownership will not cause the 2010 Issuer to be treated as a publicly traded partnership taxable as a corporation.

Membership interests in the 2010 Issuer may be transferred only with the written consent of the designated manager of the 2010 Issuer, which is us. Even with such consent, such membership interests may not be transferred unless, simultaneously with the transfer of such membership interests: (1) a proportionate amount of the Subordinated 2010 Notes are transferred so that the ratio of the percentage interest of the Subordinated 2010 Notes so transferred to all Subordinated 2010 Notes and the ratio of the percentage interest of the membership interests so transferred to all membership interests are equal, (2) the transfers of membership interests and the Subordinated 2010 Notes referred to in this paragraph are made to the same

TABLE OF CONTENTS

person or entity, and (3) the percentage interest of the membership interests and the Subordinated 2010 Notes, respectively, so transferred is no less than ten percent. The membership interests and the Subordinated 2010 Notes must at all times be held in such proportion that the ratio set forth in clause (1) is always met.

As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, the 2010 Issuer held investments in 80, 78 and 85 portfolio companies with a total fair value of $321.7 million, $310.6 million and $337.8 million, respectively. The pool of loans in the 2010 Debt Securitization must meet certain requirements, including asset mix and concentration, collateral coverage, term, agency rating, minimum coupon, minimum spread and sector diversity requirements.

As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, the 2014 Issuer held investments in 68, 71 and 69 portfolio companies with a total fair value of $357.9 million, $382.1 million and $371.8 million, respectively. The pool of loans in the 2014 Debt Securitization must meet certain requirements, including asset mix and concentration, collateral coverage, term, agency rating, minimum coupon, minimum spread and sector diversity requirements.

SBIC Licenses

On August 24, 2010, SBIC IV received approval for a license from the SBA to operate as an SBIC. On December 5, 2012, SBIC V received a license from the SBA to operate as an SBIC. As our wholly-owned subsidiaries, SBIC IV and SBIC V may rely on an exclusion from the definition of “investment company” under the 1940 Act and do not elect to be regulated as business development companies under the 1940 Act. SBIC IV and SBIC V have an investment objective substantially similar to ours and make similar types of investments in accordance with SBIC regulations. As SBICs, SBIC IV and SBIC V are subject to a variety of regulations and oversight by the SBA concerning the size and nature of the companies in which they may invest as well as the structures of those investments.

Prior to SBIC IV and SBIC V obtaining approval from the SBA, Golub Capital managed two SBICs licensed by the SBA for more than 14 years. The SBIC licenses allow our SBICs 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. These debentures are non-recourse to us, have interest payable semi-annually and a ten-year maturity. The interest rate is fixed at the time of issuance at a market-driven spread over U.S. Treasury Notes with ten-year maturities and is generally lower than rates on comparable bank and other debt. Under the regulations applicable to SBICs, an SBIC may 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 IV and SBIC V are subject to regulation and oversight by the SBA, including requirements with respect to maintaining certain minimum financial ratios and other covenants.

As of December 2015, the maximum amount of SBA-guaranteed debentures that may be issued by multiple licensees under common management is $350.0 million, and the maximum amount that may be issued by a single SBIC licensee is $150.0 million. SBIC IV and SBIC V may each borrow up to two times the amount of its regulatory capital, subject to customary regulatory requirements. As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015, SBIC IV and SBIC V had $150.0 million and $75.0 million of outstanding SBA-guaranteed debentures, respectively that mature between March 2021 and September 2025. SBIC V has submitted an application for an additional commitment of $75.0 million of SBA-guaranteed debentures.

On September 13, 2011, we received exemptive relief from the SEC allowing us to modify the asset coverage requirement under the 1940 Act to exclude SBA debentures from this calculation. As such, our ratio of total consolidated assets to outstanding indebtedness may be less than 200%. This provides us with increased investment flexibility, but also increases our risks related to leverage.

Revolving Credit Facility

As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015, the Credit Facility allowed Funding to borrow up to $200.0 million at any one time outstanding.

The period through July 29, 2017 is referred to as the reinvestment period. All amounts outstanding under the Credit Facility are required to be repaid by July 30, 2020. Through the reinvestment period, the Credit Facility bears interest at one-month LIBOR plus 2.25% per annum. After the reinvestment period, the

TABLE OF CONTENTS

rate will reset to LIBOR plus 2.75% per annum for the remaining term of the Credit Facility. In addition to the stated interest expense on the Credit Facility, we are required to pay a fee of 0.50% per annum on any unused portion of the Credit Facility up to $80.0 million and 2.00% on any unused portion in excess of $80.0 million. The Credit Facility is secured by all of the assets held by Funding, and we have pledged our interests in Funding as collateral to Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as the collateral agent, under an ancillary agreement to secure our obligations as the transferor and servicer under the Credit Facility. Both we and Funding have made customary representations and warranties and are required to comply with various covenants, reporting requirements and other customary requirements for similar credit facilities. Borrowing under the Credit Facility is subject to the leverage restrictions contained in the 1940 Act.

As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, we had outstanding debt under the Credit Facility of $123.1 million, $127.3 million and $27.4 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, subject to leverage and borrowing base restrictions, we had approximately $76.9 million, $72.7 million and $122.6 million, respectively, of remaining commitments and $25.1 million, $40.1 million and $70.0 million, respectively, of availability on the Credit Facility.

We plan to transfer certain loans and debt securities we have originated or acquired from time to time to Funding through a purchase and sale agreement and may cause Funding to originate or acquire loans in the future, consistent with our investment objectives.

Portfolio Composition, Investment Activity and Yield

As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, we had investments in 169, 164 and 145 portfolio companies, respectively, with a total value of $1,416.5 million, $1,430.9 million and $1,312.8 million, respectively, and had investments in subordinated notes and LLC equity interests in SLF with a total value of $111.9 million, $98.9 million and $34.8 million, respectively.

The following table shows the asset mix of our new origination commitments for the three months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014:

		For the three months ended December 31,
		2015								2014
		(In thousands)				Percentage of Commitments				(In thousands)				Percentage of Commitments
Senior secured		$	35,136				21.2	%		$	77,297				52.8	%
One stop			113,464				68.6				62,747				42.9
Subordinated notes in SLF(1)			6,168				3.7				3,281				2.2
LLC equity interests in SLF(1)			9,337				5.7				1,619				1.1
Equity securities			1,340				0.8				1,516				1.0
Total new investment commitments		$	165,445				100.0	%		$	146,460				100.0	%

For the three months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, we had approximately $90.8 million and $60.2 million, respectively, in proceeds from principal payments and return of capital distribution from portfolio companies. For the three months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, we had sales of securities in 12 and seven portfolio companies, respectively, aggregating approximately $80.4 million and $20.7 million, respectively, in net proceeds.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The following table shows the asset mix of our new origination commitments for the years ended September 30, 2015, 2014 and 2013:

		Years ended September 30,
		2015								2014								2013
		(In thousands)				Percentage of Commitments				(In thousands)				Percentage of Commitments				(In thousands)				Percentage of Commitments
Senior secured		$	225,442				24.4	%		$	125,564				13.0	%		$	161,849				22.0	%
One stop			626,459				67.6				743,174				76.9				420,235				57.1
Second lien			—				—				39,413				4.1				137,109				18.7
Subordinated notes of SLF(1)			50,974				5.5				34,658				3.6				4,140				0.6
LLC equity interests of SLF(1)			13,904				1.5				10,039				1.0				591				0.1
Equity securities			9,494				1.0				13,631				1.4				10,891				1.5
Total new investment commitments		$	926,273				100.0	%		$	966,479				100.0	%		$	734,815				100.0	%

The following table summarizes portfolio composition and investment activity as of and for the three months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 and the years ended September 30, 2015, 2014 and 2013:

		As of and for the three months ended December 31,								As of and for the years ended September 30,
		2015				2014				2015				2014				2013
		(In thousands)
Investments, at fair value		$	1,416,533			$	1,361,021			$	1,430,848			$	1,312,781			$	1,019,811
Investment in SLF, at fair value(1)			111,929				39,705			$	98,936			$	34,831			$	4,834
Number of portfolio companies (at period end)			169				147				164				145				135
New investment fundings		$	162,820			$	131,470			$	858,147			$	878,635			$	669,252
Principal payments and sales of portfolio investments		$	171,356			$	80,941			$	699,075			$	573,201			$	336,154

The following table shows the par, amortized cost and fair value of our portfolio of investments by asset class:

		As of December 31, 2015(1)												As of September 30, 2015(1)												As of September 30, 2014(1)
		Par				Amortized Cost				Fair Value				Par				Amortized Cost				Fair Value				Par				Amortized Cost				Fair Value
		(In thousands)
Senior secured:
Performing		$	180,198			$	178,128			$	178,284			$	199,573			$	197,189			$	197,329			$	265,103			$	262,021			$	262,854
Non-accrual(2)			—				—				—				—				—				—				3,033				3,021				5
One stop:
Performing			1,139,471				1,124,341				1,128,596				1,135,805				1,120,576				1,127,735				952,359				939,765				940,729
Non-accrual(2)			13,188				13,104				6,828				17,645				17,078				6,487				—				—				—
Second lien:
Performing			39,924				39,495				39,588				39,924				39,464				39,774				59,902				59,086				59,964
Non-accrual(2)			—				—				—				—				—				—				—				—				—
Subordinated debt:
Performing			1,707				1,707				1,721				1,707				1,707				1,715				3,584				3,564				3,710
Non-accrual(2)			—				—				—				—				—				—				—				—				—

TABLE OF CONTENTS

		As of December 31, 2015(1)												As of September 30, 2015(1)												As of September 30, 2014(1)
		Par				Amortized Cost				Fair Value				Par				Amortized Cost				Fair Value				Par				Amortized Cost				Fair Value
		(In thousands)
Subordinated notes of SLF(3)
Performing			82,730				82,730				82,730				76,563				76,563				76,563				25,589				25,589				25,589
Non-accrual(2)			—				—				—				—				—				—				—				—				—
LLC equity interests of SLF(3)			N/A				32,560				29,199				N/A				23,222				22,373				N/A				9,318				9,242
Equity			N/A				43,265				61,516				N/A				41,515				57,808				N/A				35,216				45,519
Total		$	1,457,218			$	1,515,330			$	1,528,462			$	1,471,217			$	1,517,314			$	1,529,784			$	1,309,570			$	1,337,580			$	1,347,612

The following table shows the weighted average rate, spread over LIBOR of floating rate, fixed rate and fees of investments originated and the weighted average rate of sales and payoffs of portfolio investments during the three months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 and the years ended September 30, 2015, 2014 and 2013:

		For the three months ended December 31,								For the years ended September 30,
		2015				2014				2015				2014				2013
Weighted average rate of new investment fundings(1)			6.7	%			6.8	%			6.7	%			7.1	%			8.2	%
Weighted average spread over LIBOR of new floating rate investment fundings(1)			5.7	%			5.8	%			5.7	%			6.0	%			6.7	%
Weighted average rate of new fixed rate investment fundings											10.8	%			N/A				15.6	%
Weighted average fees of new investment fundings			1.5	%			1.8	%			1.5	%			1.2	%			1.3	%
Weighted average rate of sales and payoffs of portfolio investments			7.3	%			6.5	%			6.8	%			7.9	%			8.9	%
Weighted average income yield(2)			7.6	%			7.8	%			7.8	%			8.3	%			9.1	%

As of December 31, 2015, 93.9% and 93.9% of our debt portfolio at fair value and at cost, respectively, had interest rate floors that limit the minimum applicable interest rates on such loans. As of September 30, 2015, 94.2% and 94.1% of our debt portfolio at fair value and at cost, respectively, had interest rate floors that limit the minimum applicable interest rates on such loans. As of September 30, 2014, 97.6% and 97.2% of our debt portfolio at fair value and at cost, respectively, had interest rate floors that limit the minimum applicable interest rates on such loans.

As of December 31, 2015, the portfolio median EBITDA for the underlying portfolio companies (excluding SLF) is $22.7 million. As of September 30, 2015, the portfolio median EBITDA for the underlying portfolio companies (excluding SLF) is $22.7 million. The portfolio median EBITDA data is based on the most recently reported trailing twelve month EBITDA received from the portfolio company.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Senior Loan Fund LLC

We co-invest with RGA in senior secured loans through SLF, an unconsolidated Delaware LLC. SLF is capitalized as transactions are completed and all portfolio and investment decisions in respect to SLF must be approved by the SLF investment committee consisting of two representatives of each of us and RGA (with unanimous approval required from (i) one representative of each of us and RGA or (ii) both representatives of each of us and RGA). SLF may cease making new investments upon notification of either of us or RGA but operations will continue until all investments have been sold or paid-off in the normal course of business.

SLF is capitalized with subordinated notes and LLC equity interest subscriptions from its members. As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015, we and RGA owned 87.5% and 12.5%, respectively, of both the outstanding subordinated notes and LLC equity interests.

As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, SLF had the following commitments from its members:

		As of December 31, 2015								As of September 30, 2015								As of September 30, 2014
		Committed				Funded				Committed				Funded				Committed				Funded
		(Dollars in thousands)
Subordinated note commitments(1)		$	160,000			$	94,549			$	160,000			$	87,500			$	100,000			$	29,245
LLC equity commitments(1)			40,000				37,211				40,000				26,540				25,000				9,318
Total		$	200,000			$	131,760			$	200,000			$	114,040			$	125,000			$	38,563

As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015, the SLF Credit Facility allows SLF II to borrow up to $300.0 million subject to leverage and borrowing base restrictions. The reinvestment period of the SLF Credit Facility ends May 13, 2017, and the stated maturity date is May 13, 2020. As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, SLF II had outstanding debt under the SLF Credit Facility of $241.1 million, $212.3 million and $66.6 million, respectively.

Through the reinvestment period, the SLF Credit Facility bears interest at one-month LIBOR plus a rate between 1.75% and 2.25%, depending on the composition of the collateral asset portfolio, per annum. After the reinvestment period, the rate will reset to one-month LIBOR plus 2.75% per annum for the remaining term of the SLF Credit Facility.

As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, SLF had total assets at fair value of $372.6 million, $325.9 million and $107.2 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, SLF’s portfolio was comprised of first lien senior secured loans to 65, 62 and 31 different borrowers, respectively. As of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, SLF did not have any investments on non-accrual status. The portfolio companies in SLF are in industries similar to those in which we may invest directly. Additionally, as of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014, SLF had commitments to fund various undrawn revolving credit and delayed draw loans to its portfolio companies totaling $28.8 million, $30.8 million and $10.1 million, respectively.

Below is a summary of SLF’s portfolio, followed by a listing of the individual loans in SLF’s portfolio as of December 31, 2015 and September 30, 2015 and 2014:

		As of December 31, 2015				As of September 30,
						2015				2014
		(Dollars in thousands)
Senior secured loans(1)		$	361,119			$	320,583			$	103,695
Weighted average current interest rate on senior secured loans(2)			5.8	%			5.8	%			5.2	%
Number of borrowers in SLF			65				62				31
Largest loan to a single borrower(1)		$	13,155			$	12,734			$	8,229
Total of five largest loans to borrowers(1)		$	61,483			$	59,917			$	31,132