Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for standing by. Welcome to Saratoga Investment Corp.'s 2025 Fiscal Third Quarter Financial Results Conference Call. Please note that today's call is being recorded. [Operator Instructions] At this time, I would like to turn the call over to Saratoga Investment Corp.'s Chief Financial and Chief Compliance Officer, Mr. Henri Steenkamp. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you. I would like to welcome everyone to Saratoga Investment Corp.'s 2025 Fiscal Third Quarter Earnings Conference Call. Today's conference call includes forward-looking statements and projections. We ask you to refer to our most recent filings with the SEC for important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from these forward-looking statements and projections. We do not undertake to update our forward-looking statements unless required to do so by law. Today, we will be referencing a presentation during our call. You can find our fiscal third quarter 2025 shareholder presentation in the Events and Presentations section of our Investor Relations website. A link to our IR page is in the earnings press release distributed last night. A replay of this conference call will also be available. Please refer to our earnings press release for details. I would now like to turn the call over to our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Christian Oberbeck, who will be making a few introductory remarks.

Thank you, Henri, and welcome, everyone. Saratoga Investment Corp. highlights this quarter include sequential quarterly increase of adjusted NII, excluding the effect of onetime Knowland interest reserve reversal, improved latest 12 months return on equity of 9.2%, reflecting the solid high-quality nature of our existing portfolio. Another increase in total NAV and steady NAV per share, healthy originations in both new and existing portfolio companies, while also experiencing outsized redemptions of successful investments and continued over-earning of our dividends. The substantial over-earning of the dividend this quarter continues to support the current level of dividends, increases NAV, supports increased portfolio growth and provides a cushion against adverse events. This quarter's earnings reflects the impact of the past 6-month trend of decreasing levels of interest rates and spreads on Saratoga Investment's largely floating rate assets, while not yet recognizing the full-time impact of the recent outsized repayments seen this quarter. The cost of most long-term balance sheet liabilities are largely fixed though callable either now or in the near future, in the context of the significant level of available cash currently creating a negative arbitrage, management is evaluating the use of such calls prospectively to reduce current debt. From an overall investment value and current yield perspective, our annualized third quarter dividend of $0.74 per share implies a 12.2% dividend yield based on the stock price of $24.21 per share on January 7, 2025, or 90% of our third quarter's NAV. During the quarter, we began to see the early stages of a potential increase in M&A in the lower middle market, reflecting in multiple repayments during the quarter in addition to significant new originations. As was the case in previous quarters, our strong reputation and differentiated market positioning, combined with our ongoing development of sponsor relationships, continues to create attractive…

Thank you, Chris. Slide 5 highlights our key performance metrics for the fiscal third quarter ended November 30, 2024, most of which Chris already highlighted. Of note, the weighted average common shares outstanding in Q3 of this year was 13.8 million shares, increasing from 13.7 million and 13.1 million as compared to last quarter and last year's third quarter, respectively. Adjusted NII decreased this quarter, down 5.3% from last year and 51.7% from last quarter. This quarter's investment income decreases as compared to last quarter were primarily due to the impact of the nonrecurring Knowland interest reserve reversal of $7.9 million last quarter, following the investments full repayment, including accrued interest, offset by higher prepayment and structuring and advisory fees this quarter, reflective of the high level of both originations and repayments in Q3. Excluding the Knowland interest reserve reversal, adjusted NII per share increased $0.01 per share to $0.90 per share as compared to the previous quarter. Investment income reflects a weighted average interest rate of 11.8% as compared to 12.5% as of the previous year and 12.6% last quarter. Approximately 2/3 of the interest rate reduction is due to SOFR base rate decreases and 1/3 due to the higher yields of the recent repayments. The impact of this quarter's outsized repayments is not yet fully reflected in this quarter's results as most repayments occurred in the last month of the quarter. Total expenses for this year's third quarter, excluding interest and debt financing expenses, base management fees and incentive fees and income and excise taxes increased to $2.8 million as compared to $2.3 million last year and $2.2 million last quarter. This represented 0.9% of average total assets on an annualized basis, up from 0.8% last year and 0.7% last quarter. Also, we have again added the KPI…

Thank you, Henri. Today, I will focus on our perspective on the changes in the market since we last spoke with everyone and then comment on our current portfolio performance and investment strategy. While broader middle market deal volumes are showing signs of improvement, deal activity in the lower middle market where we operate has yet to pick up. Year-to-date deal volumes through calendar Q4 for transactions below $150 million are down significantly over prior year by more than 34% and down further still as compared to 2021 and 2022. We believe a number of factors are influencing the decline in the lower middle market deal activity, including a disconnect between where buyers and sellers are willing to transact, elevated interest rates making debt financing more expensive and a trend toward PE firms holding on to assets longer in order to meet their return expectations. The combination of historically low M&A volume and an abundant supply of capital is causing spreads to tighten and leverage to remain full as lenders compete to win deals, especially premium ones. This was evidenced this past quarter, with outsized repayments being experienced in some cases, due to lenders offering extremely aggressive pricing on some of our low-leverage assets. The historically low deal volume we're experiencing currently has made it more difficult to find quality new platform investments than in prior periods. Now that said, the relationships and overall presence we've built in the marketplace, combined with our ongoing business development initiatives, give us confidence in our ability to achieve healthy portfolio growth in a manner that we expect to be accretive to our shareholders in the long run. This quarter, we closed two new platform investments and our investment pipeline is solid. I'll also point out that we continue to believe that the lower…

Thank you, Mike. As outlined on Slide 18, our latest dividend of $0.74 per share for the quarter ended November 30, 2024, was paid on December 19, 2024. Though unchanged from last quarter, this reflects a 3% and a 9% increase over the past 1 and 2 years, respectively. Additionally, we paid a special dividend of $0.35 per share concurrently with $1.09 per share of total distribution fulfilling our fiscal 2024 requirements. Board of Directors will continue to evaluate the dividend level on at least a quarterly basis, considering both company and general economic factors, including the current interest rate environment's impact on our earnings. Moving to Slide 19. Our total return for the last 12 months, which includes both capital appreciation and dividends, has generated total returns of 4% which is uncharacteristically low and underperforms the BDC index of 13% for the same period. Our longer-term performance is outlined on our next Slide 20. Our 5-year return places us in line with the BDC index while our 3-year performance is slightly below the index, reflecting the impact of the recent latest 12 months' performance and discrete credit issues. Since Saratoga took over management of the BDC in 2010, our total return has been 740% versus the industry's 284%. On Slide 21, you can further see our differentiated performance placed in the context of the broader industry and specific to certain key performance metrics. We continue to focus on our long-term metrics such as return on equity, NAV per share, NII yield and dividend growth and coverage, all five of which are above industry averages, reflecting the growing value our shareholders are receiving. The negative NAV per share metric this past year is primarily due to the two discrete nonaccruals, Zollege and Pepper Palace previously discussed. Yet we continue to…

[Operator Instructions] Our first question will come from Eric Zwick of Lucid Capital Markets.

So I wanted to start first and just looking at Slide 23, since we kind of just wrapped up there. You remain committed to expanding the asset base and growing the investment portfolio. You made comments during the call that the pipeline remains solid and then you had a pretty good quarter. Here the one that just wrapped up. So I guess maybe the harder part for me and maybe for you guys as well to have a longer-term view, and it's just the pace of repayments, which was obviously strong in the most recent quarter. So to the degree that you have some sort of sightline, at least over the next maybe 3 to 6 months. What are your expectations there, just given that some of it seemed to be the repayments in this most recent quarter were driven by the pickup in the M&A market and you expect that to continue as well. So just just trying to kind of balance the outlook for new growth versus repayments as well.

I guess I'll start and then Mike can follow up. I think if you look at the last quarter, we had $85 million of originations, which is a pretty robust origination amount. And then we also -- our Invita investment, a 5-year investment, essentially was about half of the $160 million of redemption. So -- if you just take that one out, basically, we were kind of neutral on that. And these things happen. I mean, you have different cycles of investment redemption and investments made. And it's hard to predict exactly when over that 5-year period of time that investment would come home. I mean, I think, Mike, what that investment started out is, what, $6 million investment?

Yes. It's actually a hallmark investment for us in a lot of ways just in terms of what we do and where we play in the marketplace. So that was initially a $6 million debt deal, accompanied with $2 million of equity. We were in it for roughly 5 years and we're able to support the company's growth, and I think the debt position got well into the high 60s as the company successfully grew. And then, of course, we realized a $4.8 million gain on our equity investment. So the gross return that our shareholders received on that deal was quite substantial over that 5-year time. One of the challenges that we get when you deploy this model, but it's -- we think in the long run, the best way to deploy capital in our market and a really healthy thing is that when you add new portfolio companies, they tend to be on the smaller side, a little bit more granular. And then the really successful ones, and you've seen this in our portfolio for some of our larger positions, we have an opportunity to support them with growth over time. Now ultimately, when they pay off, they can be pretty lumpy. And it takes more platform companies to replace those lumpy payoffs. And in this particular quarter, as Chris was pointing out, we happened to have a couple of pretty sizable lumpy payoffs that were out of the ordinary, if you will, in general.

Yes. And so it's just -- it's hard to predict precisely what our origination will be. And we have a pretty robust portfolio, a pretty large portfolio. And we get we get calls from our portfolio, they want to do a large acquisition, and we have a big follow-on investment. So it's not really something we're able to predict. I mean, I think if you look forward, you say, yes, we've got a lot of cash on hand. And yes, we've got sort of what we've done historically on our pipeline. But what the redemptions and what the origination is going to be, it's not really something that is -- something that's really able to be predicted, and it's probably not prudent for us to try and predict that. .

And Eric, we often talk about how quarters can be lumpy, right, either that you have a lot of originations and repayments in one quarter or even none. And Slide 4 is the best slide to sort of illustrate how we think of things, which is long term and being able to grow on a long-term basis rather than quarterly that could be a lot more volatile.

I'd add to and just to chime in because it is obviously, something that we as a management team are very focused on. The market, in general, is characterized by lots of add-on activity. And that's particularly true at the lower end of the middle market where new M&A activity is way down. And it continues to be down. We're hopeful that some of the things that have been driving the decline in M&A volume will reverse themselves as interest rates potentially come down and some other things sort of work in our favor. We're confident that, that will reach a new equilibrium, and that there'll be an uptick in M&A activity, and we'll capitalize on that. To date, most recently, if you looked at our portfolio, we certainly were not on an origination pace that was as healthy as it was, let's say, a couple of years ago. But interestingly enough, because M&A activity was down, our repayments were down as well. And we, in most of the last several quarters, many quarters, we actually grew through that. So we didn't have as high of origination activity, but we didn't have much repayments, so we were able to grow our portfolio through that. In this most recent quarter, despite pretty healthy production, we happen to have some pretty lumpy repayments. And I think in the long run -- in the intermediate to long run, we have a great degree of confidence that with our origination efforts, with the relationships that we have in the market, with those relationships continuing to grow and we're doubling down on all our business development activity that our pace of deployment will outpace any repayments that we have over time.

That's helpful. I appreciate all the color there. And you're right, looking at some of the slides you've put in there you've demonstrated your ability to do just what you guys have have mentioned there. Second line of questioning, looking at Slide 8, and I think, Henri, you addressed that the opportunities to potentially with the publicly traded notes, I think SAT is at like 6%, JY are all above 8%, so there's opportunity to realize some savings there if you were to pay those down or refinance. Looking at the SBIC ventures, I've seen the call period calm, as now for those -- but I'm curious how the mechanics of potentially calling those or trying to reprice those would -- how that would play out given that those are kind of tied to specific assets? Or maybe I should have started maybe remind me what the current average cost of those debentures are now and maybe that's not even a topic for us.

Yes. No, I think the most important thing when you're in a license is whether you're still in the reinvestment period, Eric. So SBIC III, for example, it's a newer license. If we get a repayment, we obviously get cash, but we can -- we would use that cash and redeploy it in new assets. We wouldn't repay debentures. Once you get outside of your reinvestment period, which we are in SBIC II, you can only use cash for -- when you get a repayment, you can only use cash for follow-ons of existing investments to continue to support them. So you then have a decision to make when you have cash in a license that is outside of its reinvestment period, whether you feel like you're going to hold the cash and then because you believe that you know the companies and you think they might have some follow-on needs or whether you repay existing SBIC debentures. And the mechanics, how it works is pretty straightforward. You have two opportunities in a year, at the end of August and at the end of February to make a decision whether you want to repay the debentures. If you decide not to, let's say, at the end of August, then you're holding those debentures until the next 6-month period comes around. But -- that's why I say they're callable because for us, for example, now in February, we'll have a decision to make whether we want to use some of the cash in SBIC II to repay some of the existing debenture. SBIC II though was -- a lot of those debentures were issued when rates were pretty low. And so there is an arbitrage there to think through on whether we want to just continue earning for example, cash and keep it for potential follow-on opportunities or whether we want to repay it, and we'll assess that again come mid-February.

Got it. And then last one for me. You noted your success in the past with realizing some equity gains with your investments there. Remind me just how you think about the potential to realize future gains? Is it really just tied to if the company sells in those transactions? Or do you typically sometimes proactively go out and seek to commoditize where a fair value might be well above kind of your holding.

On the equity side, typically, we're a minority investor in the equity. And we think it's a really kind of key element of our investment strategy to augment our returns on the debt with co-investments in the equity. And most of the relationships that we have, whether they be PE sponsors or management teams, et cetera, kind of value that alignment of interest that we can achieve by co-investing in the equity. What happens, though, as a minority investor is you're not typically controlling the exit. Instead, you have the right to exit when the company is sold or there's some realization along those lines. And that's generally when we realize a return on equity. From a strategy standpoint, the way we think about it is that we do such thorough work on these businesses that we feel like as part of that work we're pretty well equipped to feel like we can make an assessment as to whether the co-investment opportunity and the equity makes sense. And it's also been our experience that there's -- if you were to draw a Venn diagram in the overlap between what you would like for a really solid credit and what you'd like for a business that likely a very good equity investment, massive overlap. There are businesses that generally distinguish themselves in markets that have really strong dynamics, really good management teams, producing really high free cash flow characteristics. A lot of the things that we look for in businesses are the very same things that make them good equity investments. And that's the reason why we've been able to get 15% unlevered returns on our portfolio over time. It's -- the majority of that is coming from the debt return, but certainly getting to 15%, that's been as a result of successful equity co-investments. And we continue to think that's a kind of cornerstone of our strategy.

And our next question will be coming from the line of Casey Alexander of Compass Point Research & Trading.

I do find it interesting when we all sound sort of disappointed when you get large repayments because that's kind of the goal, right? And I get you're a platform that originates small and repays big. I get that. But one question I would ask is that you discussed kind of the reduction in weighted average yields as being 2/3 rate and 1/3 higher-yielding loans paying off. Looking at the quarter-over-quarter, it looks like your portfolio yields declined by about 80 basis points. So would it be fair to say that you're only about halfway through the resetting function of the 100 rates that base rates have gone down, you still have about half way to go. I mean, that seems like the reasonable math to me.

Okay. So it's a little more than half. I'd say we're more about 2/3 of it being reflected in the way our loans reset, and when they reset, I'd say about 2/3 of the decrease has been reflected. We definitely haven't -- because there's been a sort of a reset in -- for us, September already. And so I'd say about 2/3. And then there's obviously, since quarter end, there has been still a slight decline in SOFR since then as well.

So right. Well, that's what I mean. I mean, when I look at it across the entire 100 basis points of what the Fed has done, it would seem to me that you've reflected about 50 basis points in your results as of the end of November and maybe there's another 50 bps to go counting what the Fed has done subsequent to the end of your quarter.

Yes. I haven't done like the exact count, but I would guess it's again, slightly more than that, probably in the like low 60s.

Okay. When I think in terms of decline in rates, higher yielding loans paying off, clearly a reduced portfolio balance that's going to take some time to build up. Do you still feel comfortable? Or is there maybe a quarter or two here where maybe it might seem reasonable to actually under-earn the dividend a little bit until you can build the portfolio back up? .

Well, Casey, as you can appreciate, I don't think we've really ever under-earned our dividend, and that's certainly not something that we would welcome doing. Obviously, some things are not in our control, like rate of repayments and deployments. But we do have a -- we have a solid pipeline, and we also as Mike was discussing earlier, there's been a real holdback in M&A activity. A lot of times, a lot of private equity firms are holding on to assets that aren't meeting their goals, but there's a tremendous pressure in the system. And it may well be with the new administration, et cetera, that sort of a new era, different antitrust approaches, different types of things like that, that there may be a real resurgence in deal activity coming up and people have been waiting. I mean there was -- some deals which have been turned down by the Justice department that you sort of really shake your head at why they would turn down some of these $8 billion deals being projected as antitrust type things. And so I think the -- I think not to overplay that. But I think on a macro level, I think there's a lot of people on the sidelines that are ready to do more business going forward. And so the timing and the pace of that is not something that we are in a position to predict, but we certainly feel that there is going to be a fair amount of activity going forward. And exactly how that shapes up for us on a quarter-on-quarter basis, we don't know. But we don't -- we aren't anticipating under-earning our dividend, but that's not something we can control.

Okay. Looking at Slide 17, with $77 million of cash in SBIC II and as Henri said, you're no longer in the reinvestment period there. Is it reasonable to think that there could be that much follow-on activity? Or does it make sense to at least start paying down some of those? And when do you start dusting off the paperwork on SBIC IV.

Well, first of all, Casey, I mean -- I think, Henri, it's fair to say that I think the current rate on cash is higher than the cost of the debentures in SBIC II. And so there's a positive arbitrage in not paying off the debt inside of that equation. And so that -- if it was the reverse, we probably would decrease it. And so we're watching that very carefully. To the extent it goes to a negative arbitrage, it makes sense to pay it off. And then obviously, we have to look carefully on what type of acquisition activity we're anticipating from those companies. With regard to SBIC IV, you should have seen Henri roll his eyes, that is a major paperwork exercise, but we still have a long way to go on SBIC III. And we've had a very successful program down there. We don't anticipate having problems with getting the next license, it's more of a timing issue. I think there's also some metrics, right, in terms of investment levels before you start that. .

But definitely, there's a new process in licensing with like a repeat -- when your repeat issuer effectively. That has definitely streamlined the process of which is wonderful. I know Casey, you're very familiar with it, too, which has been great. But but we do still have $136 million of debentures, and we haven't had much realizations in SBIC III yet, and actual realizations in the fund is one of the things I look at very closely as part of that sort of assessment.

All right. My last question here is you knew at the end of the quarter that you were going to have very high repayments. I'm not sure using -- selling equity into the market when you have $250 million in cash seems to be rational, and that was done right at the end of the quarter and at the beginning of the succeeding quarter. Can you explain the rationale for that? Because it doesn't seem rational when compared against the cash balance of $250 million where you're talking about a negative arbitrage and paying down some of your debt?

Sure. Casey, I think that's a good question. That's something that we discussed substantially internally. But I think if you look at the history of BDCs in general and certainly our BDC, the ability to raise equity, really, which has to do with whether you're able to sell stock at NAV. And in this instance, we were very close, and the manager subsidized the sales to get us to NAV. Those are not -- those moments to sell in size do not come that often. And this adage on Wall Street that I'm sure everyone on this call is familiar with, which is you don't -- it's hard to -- sometimes it's hard to raise money when you need it and it's easier to raise money when you don't need it. And equity is permanent capital. And when you have the opportunity to raise it, I think one needs to take advantage of it. And I think in other calls, we've been -- it's been discussed like our leverage levels. And there's several ways to address leverage. And one is to repay debt and the others to build up your equity. Obviously, our most desired way to build up equity is through capital gains, and we've done that successfully throughout our time period here, but also selling new equity we have done periodically. And so we view the sale of equity as more of a long-term strategic decision, and not necessarily colored by what our cash balance is at this moment in time. We have $250 million of cash right now, but there have been times where we sort of didn't have much cash at all, and we are struggling to find liquidity to invest in our pipeline. And so we view the cash as kind of a short-term issue and the equity as really kind of a long-term issue and really the cornerstone for long-term growth of our BDC. And we see -- we don't see -- I mean, other than sort of deal volumes, but the opportunity set for the type of investment we make is vast. And so we don't see a slowdown on that on a long-term basis, and we see a lot of growth in our future. And so all of that went into the decision.

And our next question will come from the line of Mickey Schleien of Ladenburg.

First question I'd like to ask is, could you give us a sense of how much more refinancing risk you believe exists in the portfolio given the current terms available in the market? .

That's a good question, Mickey, just in terms of what we could see in terms of pace of repayments. Hard to answer it candidly. You could see for several quarters, we were getting almost no repayments, and a lot of that was just due to the fact that there wasn't much M&A activity. We have seen some deals that have exited our portfolio because somebody approached the owner with terms that were just way below kind of the rates that we play in, in the marketplace. But we don't see generally when we look at our portfolio now, a lot of exposure to that dynamic. It doesn't mean it doesn't exist, but I don't think we're highly vulnerable to that. Our expectation is that when M&A activity picks up, our origination pipeline will pick up in earnest, and that will probably be the same time that we'll start to see payoffs kind of resume to their normal pace. And we think that this last quarter was a bit of an anomaly, just having some pretty chunky payoffs all at once.

Okay. That's helpful. And a question for Henri. Could you give us a sense of where your spillover taxable income stands net of the special, and are you envisioning more special dividends to get that number down a little bit and reduce some of the drag from the excise tax?

Sure, Mickey. So the most recent dividend that included the special dividend covered our fiscal 2024. So February '24 tax year, and so it's cleaned out our spillover fully. We're now in our February '25, fiscal '25 tax year. And so we're effectively about 3 quarters in, which means it's just over the $3 in spillover at the moment, reflecting the taxable income of the last 3 quarters.

And that's still relatively high, Henri, and there is an excise tax that you pay on that. Is the Board thinking about distributing some more of that to shareholders?

Well, I think, Mickey, on the excise tax, as interest rates have changed and the excise tax is 4%, and it's among the cheapest sources of financing out there right now. So if we were to repay -- want to reduce our liabilities, it would make more sense from a pure economic basis to call some of our higher-priced bonds were at 8.7%, for example, is more than twice -- the marginal cost of doing baby bonds today is somewhere in the 7% to 8%. So the marginal cost of financing is substantially higher than the excise tax. And so the excise tax is a positive -- very -- a good source of financing, if you will.

And in addition, Mickey, excise tax is a point in time tax, it's not an accrual. So in other words, you get no credit for, for example, distributing something today versus like December 30.

Yes, I agree. I understand. I'm just curious how the Board is thinking about it. And Chris, I completely agree with you on the debt. I mean, to me, it seems like at least some of your debt, it's a no-brainer to call that given where you could probably deploy that capital. But those are all my questions this morning. Thank you for your time.

Well, Mick, I'd take a slight issue with your no-brainer. If you look at the yield curve, the increase at the 10-year is sort of the same -- it's gone up as much as the short end has gone down. And the cost of selling 5-year debentures may even go up in the coming years. So I think there's just a lot of considerations on the absolute cost of debt. And then as you point out, relative to what our origination pace is. And again, that -- it's a new year, it's a new administration. It's a new outlook on many things. And so we're going to just be cautious on making too many dramatic moves until we get a little more information about this next environment we're moving into.

Yes. I understand your point, Chris, but you're also -- you have the highest leverage amongst all listed BDCs. So I was also taking that into consideration. But I appreciate your time this morning.

And our next question will be coming from the line of Bryce Rowe of B. Riley.

Most of my questions have been asked and answered. I didn't want to kind of get a feel for -- some of the marks we saw or movement in marks we saw quarter-over-quarter. The debt portfolio continues to be marked at very high levels, only a handful that are even below cost. But from an equity perspective, I think we did see a few consumer -- more consumer-facing investments get marked lower. And obviously, you had some offsets with some other businesses getting marked higher. But just wanted to get a feel for just the overall health of some of the more-consumer-related businesses that you have within the portfolio.

That's a good question. I think the marks that you saw go down in a handful of our portfolio investments were reflective of a bit softer performance generally. And of course, equity is going to be more whippy as a result of an underperformance than debt will be. I don't know that I would tie that to some broader perspective we have on the consumer, while it's a good question, we wouldn't necessarily draw that conclusion to the extent that there's a handful of modest write-downs in some of our portfolio companies, little bit more specific to just the dynamics of those particular businesses and less, in our view, less a result of macro trends that we're seeing, at least from what -- from our vantage point.

Okay. Okay. That's helpful, Mike. And then maybe a different topic. You all are talking about a solid pipeline. From an origination perspective, did that refer to pipeline of new opportunities for both new and existing?

Yes, that's a really good question. And we have certainly enjoyed the ability to continue to grow at a pretty healthy pace by supporting our existing portfolio companies. We expect to be able to continue to do that at a pace that's consistent with what we've done in the past generally. We're not seeing as many new platforms. It is interesting, though, because we always -- at a time like this, you always kind of pause and try to look back or look across your portfolio and what your pipeline consists of. Right now, if you looked at our pipeline, even some of the new opportunities that we're chasing are actually not new opportunities for the sponsor, their upsizing that we're getting an opportunity to look at where the sponsors either outgrown their existing lender or something else is happening in the capital structure where we have a chance to come in and replace the existing lender. So that would be a further sign of owners holding on their businesses longer, looking to drive value in their existing portfolio, not as much uptick in M&A activity. So I'd say more than half of what we're looking at right now, where we have term sheets out and we're chasing things that we're really excited about are not actually new M&A deals. They're upsizing of some sort.

Okay. Okay. One more for me and kind of on the topic of leverage, certainly, it's come up on on past calls. But we've seen just net -- overall net debt to equity come down pretty substantially, especially this quarter with the healthy repayment activity. Any thought -- and if we think about maybe 2 or 3 years ago, it's certainly a little bit higher than it might have been in '22, but lower than what we saw in '23 and '24. Any kind of further thought around how you expect to manage balance sheet leverage going forward, especially given that you do or you have historically carried over the last couple of years, more leverage than almost all BDCs that are out there?

Sure. A couple of thoughts on that, and that is definitely something we spend a lot of time thinking about. I think there's some I'm not going to say unique, but some particular aspects of Saratoga that aren't necessarily shared with the whole BDC universe, and that is our large SBIC portfolio and investments. And the leverage in those is not counted the same as baby bond leverage, for example, in terms of the regulatory leverage. And so I think where regulatory leverage, it's one thing, from a total leverage, it's something else. And the character of the debt, and we've talked about this many times in our quarterly calls, it's really -- leverage -- if you have short-term leverage that's asset based and you're up to the limits of what the asset base formulas are and something goes against you, you can get foreclosed on by your banks, you can have a big accident. And it may be something temporary in nature like when COVID hit and things like that, but if you have leverage like, for example, the SBIC debt leverage, which those are 10-year instruments, interest only with no covenants. And so a lot of things can happen in 10 years, but if your only requirement is to repay the interest, the nature of that debt in terms of being something that's dangerous, if you will, to your -- to the health of the overall company is very, very low. And so -- and then the baby bonds are also very similar in that they are long-term instruments, bullet maturities, interest only, no covenants. So we've got very little -- almost all our debt has no covenants to speak of. Interest -- basically have to cover our interest. The interest is very small relative to our liquidity, relative to our earnings, relative to everything else. And so our overall debt structure is incredibly safe relative to the amount that it is. And so that's the liability side. Then the assets...

Even our asset-based loan that we have, although they're lowly drawn, so they also have no recourse to the BDC and no BDC covenants in them either which is different than the BDC...

And they're all in special-purpose vehicles. So that our leverage is compartmentalized and structured in a very sort of low-impact way. Now our cost of capital as a result of that is slightly higher perhaps than some other BDCs, but it's a whole lot safer. So we've got a very solid, safe long-term debt structure with maturities coming out anywhere from a small amount in the next year, but largely, it's a 2- to 10-year maturities out there. And so -- and that -- and we've been very -- it's been a a lot of work on our part to get that debt structure and have it out there in place. And so you want to be very careful changing that. And then -- so that's the liability side. Now the asset side is something else. And I think as you look at our portfolio, we have talked at length about these discrete portfolio issues, two of which were losses and then the other two, we kind of got back home on in the last year. So -- but if you look past those and you look at what our portfolio is right now in terms of largely 85% plus type of senior debt, senior secured, we are in the most senior lender, and we're involved in all decision-making close to the company, et cetera. And then you look at the credit quality and the performance of that portfolio. We have a very solid performing asset base. So -- we don't -- we think that equation is a sound one, not -- and so I think talking about leverage in isolation or in comparison with other BDCs without talking about these character elements of both the asset side and the liability side doesn't paint -- it's having like a 2-dimensional…

Thank you. That does conclude today's Q&A session. I would now like to turn the call back over to Christian for closing remarks. Please go ahead.

Okay. We'd like to thank everyone for joining us today, and we look forward to speaking with you next quarter. Thank you.

Thank you all for joining today's conference call. You may now disconnect.