Senior Secured Loans. With respect to the Company’s investments in senior secured loans (including first lien loans), the Company will generally have a security interest in assets of the company, which should mitigate the risk that the Company will not be repaid. However, the collateral securing the Company’s loans may decrease in value over time, may be difficult to sell in a timely manner, may be difficult to appraise, and may fluctuate in value based upon the success of the business and market conditions, including as a result of the inability of the company to raise additional capital. In some circumstances, the Company’s lien could be subordinated to claims of other creditors. In addition, deterioration in a company’s financial condition and prospects, including its inability to raise additional capital, may be accompanied by deterioration in the value of the collateral for the loan. Consequently, the fact that a loan is secured does not guarantee that the Company will receive principal and interest payments according to the loan’s terms, or at all, or that the Company will be able to collect on the loan should it be forced to enforce its remedies. Furthermore, if a secured loan is foreclosed, the Company could own the underlying collateral (e.g., real estate), and would be subject to the risks, costs and liabilities associated with owning and disposing of the collateral.

Subordinated Loans. The Company may invest in subordinated loans. In the event of a loss of value of the underlying assets that collateralize the loans, the subordinate portions of the loans may suffer a loss prior to the more senior portions suffering a loss. If a borrower defaults and lacks sufficient assets to satisfy the Company’s loan, the Company may suffer a loss of principal or interest. If a borrower declares bankruptcy, the Company may not have full recourse to the assets of the borrower, or the assets of the borrower may not be sufficient to satisfy the loan. In addition, certain of the Company’s loans may be subordinate to other debt of the borrower. As a result, if a borrower defaults on the Company’s loan or on debt senior to the Company’s loan, or in the event of the bankruptcy of a borrower, the Company’s loan will be satisfied only after all senior debt is paid in full. The Company’s ability to amend the terms of the Company’s loans, assign the Company’s loans, accept prepayments, exercise the Company’s remedies (through “standstill periods”) and control decisions made in bankruptcy proceedings relating to borrowers may be limited by intercreditor arrangements if debt senior to the Company’s loans exists. In addition, the Company will be subject to the potential risks of foreclosure and ownership of underlying collateral described in “— Senior Secured Loans” above.

Mezzanine Securities. The Company may invest in unsecured securities that are senior to common stock or other equity securities (“Mezzanine Securities”). Mezzanine Securities are subordinated to substantial amounts of senior debt, all or a portion of which may be secured. As a result, holders of Mezzanine Securities are generally not entitled to receive any payments in bankruptcy or liquidation until senior creditors are paid in full. In addition, the legal remedies available to holders of Mezzanine Securities are normally limited by restrictions benefiting senior creditors. In the event a company in which the Company holds Mezzanine Securities cannot generate adequate cash flow to meet senior debt service, the Company may suffer a partial or total loss of capital invested. Because issuers of Mezzanine Securities are often highly leveraged, their relatively high debt-to-equity ratios create increased risks that their operations will not be able to generate adequate cash flow to meet senior debt service.

Unsecured Loans or Debt. The Company may invest in unsecured loans which are not secured by collateral. In the event of default on an unsecured loan, the first priority lien holder has first claim to the underlying collateral of the loan. It is possible that no collateral value would remain for an unsecured holder and therefore result in a loss of investment to the Company. Because unsecured loans are lower in priority of payment to secured loans, they are subject to the additional risk that the cash flow of the borrower may be insufficient to meet scheduled payments after giving effect to the secured obligations of the borrower. Unsecured loans generally have greater price volatility than secured loans and may be less liquid.

Prepayment Risk. The terms of loans in which the Company invests may permit borrowers to voluntarily prepay loans at any time, either with no or a nominal prepayment premium. This prepayment right could result in the borrower repaying the principal on an obligation held by the Company earlier than expected. This may happen when there is a decline in interest rates or when the borrower’s improved credit or operating or financial performance allows the refinancing of certain classes of debt with lower cost debt. The yield of the Company’s investment assets may be affected by the rate of prepayments differing from the Adviser’s expectations.

Investment Modification Risk. The terms and conditions of loan agreements and related assignments may be amended, modified or waived only by the agreement of the lenders. Generally, any such agreement must include a majority or a super majority (measured by outstanding loans or commitments) or, in certain circumstances, a unanimous vote of the lenders. Consequently, the terms and conditions of the payment obligation arising from Portfolio Investments could be modified, amended or waived in a manner contrary to the preferences of the Company if a sufficient number of the other lenders concurred with such modification, amendment or waiver. There can be no assurance that any obligations arising from a Portfolio Investment will maintain the terms and conditions to which the Company originally agreed.

Collateral Risk. The collateral and security arrangements in relation to such secured obligations as the Company may invest in will be subject to such security or collateral having been correctly created and perfected and any applicable legal or regulatory requirements which may restrict the giving of collateral or security by an obligor, such as, for example, thin capitalization, over-indebtedness, financial assistance and corporate benefit requirements. If one or more Portfolio Investments do not benefit from the expected collateral or security arrangements, this may adversely affect the value of or, in the event of default, the recovery of principal or interest from such Portfolio Investments made by the Company. Accordingly, any such failure to properly create or perfect collateral and security interests attaching to the Portfolio Investments could have a material adverse effect on the performance of the Company, and, by extension, the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations and the value of the Units. A component of the Adviser’s analysis of the desirability of making a given investment relates to the estimated residual or recovery value of such Portfolio Investments in the event of the insolvency of the obligor. This residual or recovery value will be driven primarily by the value of the anticipated future cash flows of the obligor’s business and by the value of any underlying assets constituting the collateral for such Portfolio Investment. The anticipated future cash flows of the obligor’s business and the value of collateral can, however, be extremely difficult to predict as in certain circumstances market quotations and third-party pricing information may not be available. If the recovery value of the collateral associated with the Portfolio Investments in which the Company invests decreases or is materially worse than expected by the Company, such a decrease or deficiency may affect the value of the Portfolio Investments made by the Company. Accordingly, there may be a material adverse effect on the performance of the Company, and, by extension, the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations and the value of the Units.

Defaults. The Company may make investments in loans, or securities backed by loans, that may be at the time of their acquisition, or may become after acquisition, non-performing loans.

In the event of any default under a loan directly held by the Company or a loan underlying a security held by the Company, the Company will bear a risk of loss of principal to the extent of any deficiency between the value of the collateral and the principal and accrued interest of the loan, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s cash flow from operations. Other non-performing loans may require workout negotiations and/or restructuring, which may entail, among other things, a substantial reduction in the interest rate and/or a substantial write-down of the original principal amount of such loans. Further, even if a restructuring were successfully accomplished, unless the restructuring provided for full amortization on or prior to maturity and the borrower strictly complied with that restructuring, a risk exists that upon maturity of such loans, replacement financing will not be available and such loans may not be repaid. In the event of the bankruptcy of a borrower, the loan to that borrower will be deemed to be secured only to the extent of the value of the underlying collateral at the time of bankruptcy (as determined by the bankruptcy court), the lien securing the loan will be subject to the avoidance powers of the

bankruptcy trustee or debtor-in-possession to the extent the lien is unenforceable under state law, and realizing any value under such circumstances can be an expensive and lengthy process that could have a substantial negative effect on the anticipated return on the loan and on the security backed by such loan. Other risks attendant to a bankruptcy filing are described below. The foregoing statement does not apply in the context of a borrower insolvency case commenced under chapter 13 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code where the underlying collateral is used as the principal residence of the borrower, but in such instances, the lender will nonetheless be stayed from the collection of its claim, taking possession of the collateral, and enforcing its lien unless and until the lender obtains relief from the automatic stay under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.

Litigation and Related Risks Associated with Origination and Servicing. Loan origination and servicing companies are routinely involved in legal proceedings concerning matters that arise in the ordinary course of their business. These legal proceedings range from actions involving a single plaintiff to class action lawsuits with potentially tens of thousands of class members. In addition, a number of participants in the loan origination and servicing industry (including control persons of industry participants) have been the subject of regulatory actions by state regulators, including state Attorneys General, and by the federal government. Governmental investigations, examinations or regulatory actions, or private lawsuits, including purported class action lawsuits, may adversely affect such companies’ financial results. To the extent the Company seeks to engage in origination and/or servicing directly, or has a financial interest in, or is otherwise affiliated with, an origination or servicing company, the Company will be subject to enhanced risks of litigation, regulatory actions and other proceedings. As a result, the Company may be required to pay legal fees, settlement costs, damages, penalties or other charges, any or all of which could materially adversely affect the Company and its investments.

Ability to Originate Loans on Advantageous Terms; Competition and Supply. The Company’s success depends, in part, on the ability of the Company or its affiliates to originate loans on advantageous terms. In originating and purchasing loans, the Company or its affiliates will compete with a broad spectrum of lenders. Increased competition for, or a diminishment in the available supply of, qualifying loans could result in lower yields on such loans, which could reduce returns (if any) to investors. The Company intends to originate certain investments and later offer to syndicate all or a portion of one or more investments to certain other funds or accounts managed by the Adviser and its affiliates, in each case subject to their own investment-review process, and to co-investors and/or third parties. Prior to such syndication, or if such syndication is not successful, the Company’s exposure to the originated investment may exceed the exposure that the Company intends to have over the long-term or would have had if it had purchased such investment in the secondary market rather than originating it. Where syndication is not successful, the Company may elect to sell all or a portion of an originated investment at a loss in order to rebalance the Company’s portfolio. The level of analytical sophistication, both financial and legal, necessary for successful financing to companies, particularly companies experiencing significant business and financial difficulties is unusually high. There is no assurance that the Adviser will correctly evaluate the value of the assets collateralizing the Company loans, the prospects for successful repayment or a successful reorganization or similar action.

Risks Relating to Bank Loans and Corporate Loans. Bank loans and corporate loans (which the Company will originate, invest in or otherwise gain exposure to) may not be readily marketable and may be subject to restrictions on resale. In some cases, negotiations involved in disposing of indebtedness may require weeks to complete. Consequently, some indebtedness may be difficult or impossible to dispose of readily at what the Adviser believes to be a fair price. In addition, bank loans and corporate loans are often less liquid than other types of debt securities, particularly in times of significant market dislocation. Loans to small and middle market entities (“SMEs”) may involve certain heightened risks. See “— Investments in Smaller and Middle Market Companies” below.

Holders of bank loans, corporate loans and other forms of direct indebtedness depend primarily upon the creditworthiness of the corporate or other borrower for payment of principal and interest. If the Company does not receive scheduled interest or principal payments on such indebtedness, the value of the Company’s investments could be adversely affected. The Company may invest in secured and unsecured bank loans and corporate loans. Bank loans and corporate loans that are fully secured may offer the Company more protection than an unsecured loan in the event of non-payment of scheduled interest or principal. However, there is no assurance that the liquidation of any collateral from a secured bank loan or corporate loan would satisfy the borrower’s obligation, or that such collateral could be liquidated. In the event of the bankruptcy of a borrower, the Company could experience delays or limitations in its ability to realize the benefits of any collateral securing a loan and could be compelled to accept new instruments or interests in respect of its claims under the bank loan in a plan of reorganization. These new instruments or interests may be on terms different from prevailing market terms for similar instruments and interests.

Bank loans usually require, in addition to scheduled payments of interest and principal, the prepayment of the bank loan from free cash flow. The degree to which borrowers prepay bank loans, whether as a contractual requirement or at their election, may be affected by general business conditions, the financial condition of the borrower and competitive conditions among lenders, among others. As such, prepayments cannot be predicted with accuracy. Upon a prepayment, either in part or in full, the actual outstanding debt on which the Company derives interest income will be reduced. The effect of prepayments on the Company’s performance may or may not be mitigated by the receipt of prepayment fees and/or the Company’s reinvestment of prepayments in other bank loans that have similar or identical yields.

The Company may purchase “assignments” of bank loans from lenders. The purchaser of an assignment typically succeeds to all the rights and obligations under the loan agreement with the same rights and obligations as the assigning lender. Assignments may, however, be arranged through private negotiations between potential assignees and potential assignors, and the rights and obligations acquired by the purchaser of an assignment may differ from, and be more limited than, those held by the assigning lender.

The Company may also invest in “participations” in bank loans. Participations by the Company in a lender’s portion of a bank loan typically will result in the Company having a contractual relationship only with such lender, not with the borrower. As a result, the Company may have the right to receive payments of principal, interest and any fees to which it is entitled only from the lender selling the participation and only upon receipt by such lender of such payments from the borrower. In connection with purchasing participations, the Company generally will have no right to enforce compliance by the borrower with the terms of the loan agreement, nor any rights with respect to any funds acquired by other lenders through set-off against the borrower, and the Company may not directly benefit from any collateral supporting the bank loan in which it has purchased the participation. As a result, the Company assumes the credit risk of both the borrower and the lender selling the participation.

In many cases bank loans and loan participations would not be deemed to be securities for purposes of U.S. federal and/or state securities laws. As a result, an investment in bank loans would not be afforded the same protections as an investment in securities, such as the extensive disclosure requirements under U.S. federal and/or state securities laws, which may adversely impact the Company’s ability to seek recourse in respect of such investments. Similarly, the documentation evidencing bank loans and loan participations will not necessarily be maintained with the Company’s custodian.

Investments in Life Science Industry. Various segments of the life science industry are (or may become) (i) highly regulated at both the federal and state levels in the U.S. and internationally, (ii) subject to frequent regulatory change and (iii) dependent upon various government or private insurance reimbursement programs. While the Company may make investments in companies that comply with relevant laws and regulations, certain aspects of their operations may not have been subject to judicial or regulatory interpretation. An adverse review or determination by any one of such authorities, or an adverse change in the regulatory requirements or reimbursement programs, could have a material adverse effect on the operations of the companies in which the Company invests. Recent legislative changes have had, and will likely continue to have, a significant impact on the life science industry. In addition, various legislative proposals related to the life science industry are introduced from time to time at the U.S. federal and state level, and any such proposals, if adopted, could have a significant impact on the life science industry.

The life science industry spends heavily on research and development and in relatively new technologies. Research findings and technological innovation (together with patent expirations) may make any particular treatment, service or product less attractive if previously unknown or underappreciated risks are revealed, or if a more effective, less costly or less risky solution is or becomes available. Certain new technologies are more costly and time-consuming to reach viability and such companies may have difficulty establishing a market presence. Developing technologies are also more likely to have undeveloped regulatory frameworks and therefore there is a greater risk that regulatory developments may adversely affect the industry. Any such development could have a material adverse effect on the companies in which the Company invests.

General Economic and Market Risk. The value of the Company’s investments could be affected by factors affecting the economy and securities markets generally, such as real or perceived adverse economic conditions, supply and demand for particular instruments, changes in the general outlook for certain markets or corporate earnings, interest rates, announcements of political information or adverse investor sentiment generally. The market values of the Company’s investments may decline for a number of reasons, including increases in defaults resulting from changes in overall economic conditions and widening of credit spreads. Unfavorable market conditions may also increase funding costs, limit access to the capital markets or result in credit terms changing or credit becoming unavailable. These events could have an adverse effect on the Company’s investments and the Company’s overall performance.

Various social and political circumstances in the U.S. and around the world (including wars and other forms of conflict, terrorist acts, security operations and catastrophic events such as fires, floods, earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes and global health epidemics) may also contribute to increased market volatility and economic uncertainties or deterioration in the U.S. and worldwide. Such events, including rising trade tensions between the United States and China, other uncertainties regarding actual and potential shifts in U.S. and foreign, trade, economic and other policies with other countries, the large-scale invasion of Ukraine by Russia that began in February 2022 and resulting sanctions or other restrictive actions that the United States and other countries have imposed against Russia, the COVID-19 pandemic, certain regional bank failures, an inflationary environment and the ongoing war in the Middle East, could adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition or results of operations. These market and economic disruptions could negatively impact the operating results of the Company’s Portfolio Investments.

Additionally, the Federal Reserve raised the Federal Funds Rate in 2022 and in 2023. Although the Federal Reserve left its benchmark

rates steady in the fourth quarter of 2023, it has indicated that additional rate increases in the future may be necessary to mitigate inflationary pressures and there can be no assurance that the Federal Reserve will not make upward adjustments to the federal funds rate in 2024 the future. However, there are reports that the Federal Reserve may begin to cut the benchmark rates in 2024. These developments, along with the United States government’s credit and deficit concerns, global economic uncertainties and market volatility and the impacts of COVID-19, could cause interest rates to be volatile, which may negatively impact the Company’s ability to access the debt markets and capital markets on favorable terms.

Continuing market uncertainty may have a significant impact on the business of the Company. Among other things, the level of investment opportunities may decline from the Adviser’s current expectations. One possible consequence is that the Company may take a longer than anticipated period to invest capital and/or the Company may be relatively concentrated in a limited number of investments. Consequently, during this period, the returns (if any) realized by Unitholders may be substantially adversely affected by the unfavorable performance of a small number of these investments. Furthermore, market conditions may unfavorably impact the Company’s ability to secure leverage on terms as favorable as more established borrowers in the market, or to obtain any leverage on commercially favorable terms. To the extent the Company is able to secure financing for investments, increases in interest rates or in the risk spread demanded by financing sources would make the use of leverage more expensive and could limit the Company’s ability to structure and consummate its investments. Although the Adviser believes that recent market dislocations will result in attractive investment opportunities, the Company may not be able to time the acquisition or disposition of its investments correctly, which could result in further depreciation in values.

Public Health Crises Risk. Periods of market volatility have occurred and could continue to occur in response to pandemics or other events outside of the Company’s control. These types of events have adversely affected and could continue to adversely affect operating results for the Company and for its Portfolio Investments. For example, the COVID-19 pandemic has adversely impacted global commercial activity and contributed to significant volatility in the equity and debt markets. The COVID-19 pandemic and restrictive measures taken to contain or mitigate its spread have caused, and are continuing to cause, business shutdowns, or the re-introduction of business shutdowns, cancellations of events and restrictions on travel, significant reductions in demand for certain goods and services, reductions in business activity and financial transactions, supply chain interruptions, labor shortages, increased inflationary pressure and overall economic and financial market instability both globally and in the United States. Many states, including those in which the Company and Portfolio Investments may operate, have issued orders requiring the closure of, or certain restrictions on the operation of, certain businesses. Such actions and effects remain ongoing and the ultimate duration and severity of the COVID-19 pandemic, including COVID-19 variants, remain uncertain.

Despite actions of the U.S. federal government and foreign governments, the uncertainty surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, including uncertainty regarding existing or future variants and other factors, has contributed to significant volatility in the global public equity markets and global debt capital markets.

General Credit Risk. The Company is subject to significant credit risk (i.e., the risk that an issuer or borrower will default in the payment of principal and/or interest on an instrument) in light of its investment strategy. Credit risk also includes the risk that a counterparty to a derivatives transaction (e.g., a swap counterparty) will be unwilling or unable to meet its obligations. Financial strength and solvency of an issuer or borrower are the primary factors influencing credit risk. In addition, degree of subordination, lack or inadequacy of collateral or credit enhancement for a debt instrument may affect its credit risk. The degree of credit risk associated with any particular Portfolio Investment or any collateral relating thereto may be difficult or impossible for the Adviser to determine within reasonable standards of predictability. The Adviser utilizes various third parties that hold Company assets (such as the Custodian and prime brokers) in implementing the Company’s investment strategy, and the Company will therefore also be subject to credit risk with respect to such entities.

Although most of the Company’s investments will not be rated by any credit rating agency, in some cases, the credit risk of some of the Company’s Portfolio Investments may be broadly gauged by the credit ratings of such Portfolio Investments. However, ratings are only the opinions of the agencies issuing them, may change less quickly than relevant circumstances, are not absolute guarantees of the quality of the rated securities and are subject to downgrade. Credit ratings and ratings agencies have recently been criticized for ratings which did not fully reflect the risks of certain securities or which did not reflect such risks in a timely manner. For most investments, however, the Adviser will rely on its own independent analysis of the credit quality and risks associated with individual securities considered for the Company, rather than relying on ratings agencies or third-party research. Therefore, the Adviser’s capabilities in analyzing credit quality and associated risks will be particularly important (especially since it is currently anticipated that most of the Company’s assets will not be rated by a ratings agency or will be rated below investment grade), and there can be no assurance that the Adviser will be successful in this regard. See also “— High Yield Debt and Unrated Securities” below.

General Leverage Risks. The Company employs leverage and otherwise incurs indebtedness with respect to the portfolio both on a recourse or non-recourse basis (including through guarantees, derivatives, forward commitments and reverse repurchase agreements). The Company is not required to take any action (including unwinding or liquidating any position) in the event that such guideline is exceeded subsequent to the borrowing date, whether in the event of changes in the market value of the Company’s portfolio or otherwise. Prospective investors in

the Company should expect that the effective leverage utilized by the Company may exceed such guideline, which only applies to direct borrowings; for instance, economic leverage inherent in the Company’s derivatives transactions and other investments will not be counted for purposes of such guideline, notwithstanding that such investments will be subject to many of the leverage-related risks described herein. In addition, determinations relating to leverage are inherently subjective and will involve the exercise of discretion by the Adviser (for instance, the Adviser may deem the amount of the Company’s direct borrowings to be reduced by cash and cash equivalents held by the Company or by a counterparty). See “— Leveraged Companies” below.

The use of leverage has the potential to magnify the gains or the losses on investments and to make the Company’s returns more volatile. Moreover, if the Company is required to de-lever as a result of changing market conditions or otherwise, it may be forced to sell Portfolio Investments at inopportune times or at disadvantageous prices. On the other hand, while the Company will have the flexibility to use leverage, there can be no guarantee that leverage can be obtained, or obtained on terms and pricing the Adviser finds attractive, especially in the current market environment. As a result, prospective investors in the Company should recognize that Portfolio Investments may not be leveraged, or may be leveraged at an amount below any leverage level otherwise expected by the Adviser. Moreover, even if leverage can be arranged, the Company is not obligated to utilize such leverage and may do so at the sole discretion of the Adviser. Should leverage not be obtained or utilized by the Company, the returns for the Company may be lower than they would have been had such leverage been obtained and utilized.

In connection with any leverage utilized by the Company, the Company may secure its obligations with respect thereto with any and all of its assets, including its right to receive capital contributions from the Unitholders, pursuant to a pledge or other security agreement on terms that the Company determines are fair and reasonable to the Company. If the Company were to default on its obligations under such transactions, the counterparty could foreclose on the collateral and take possession of the Company’s assets and/or call capital from the Unitholders for purposes of repaying debt.

The terms of any leverage utilized by the Company are likely to impose significant restrictions on the Company’s operations and investment program, including as to the Company’s ability to pay distributions, incur additional leverage and engage in certain transactions.

Investments in Smaller and Middle Market Companies. The Company generally invests in smaller and middle market companies. While smaller and middle market companies generally have potential for rapid growth, they often involve higher risks because they may lack the management experience, financial resources, product diversification, competitive strength and access to capital of larger companies. In addition, in many instances, the frequency and volume of the trading of securities for such companies may be substantially less than is typical of larger companies. As a result, the securities of smaller and middle market companies may be subject to wider price fluctuations. When liquidating positions in smaller and middle market companies, the Company may have to sell portfolio holdings at discounts from quoted prices or may have to make a series of small transactions over an extended period of time. Investments in such companies may also be particularly difficult to analyze due to (among other factors) limited attention from analysts and large institutional investors, limited access to liquidity sources and, in certain cases, limited publicly available financial information. With respect to the Company’s investments in SMEs and similar loans, the Company may receive less borrower information, receive less collateral and be subject to heightened default risk as compared to loans made to other types of entities.

Hedging Transactions and Related Risks. The Company may, but is not required to, engage in hedging transactions. In particular, as many of the Company’s Portfolio Investments are expected to consist of relatively illiquid securities whose price behavior is not particularly correlated to general fixed income or equity index returns, such Portfolio Investments are expected to be difficult or expensive to hedge, and as such the Company may not employ any hedging strategy in respect of such Portfolio Investments (including with respect to their credit risk). To the extent the Adviser employs a hedging strategy for the Company, the success of any such hedging strategy will depend, in part, upon the Adviser’s ability to correctly assess the degree of correlation between the performance of the instruments used in the hedging strategy and the performance of the investments being hedged. Since the characteristics of many securities change as markets change or time passes, the success of the Company’s hedging strategy will also be subject to the Adviser’s ability to continually recalculate, readjust and execute hedges in an efficient and timely manner. While the Company may enter into hedging transactions to seek to reduce risk, such transactions may result in a poorer overall performance for the Company than if it had not engaged in such hedging transactions. For a variety of reasons, the Adviser may not seek to establish a precise correlation between the hedging instruments utilized and the portfolio holdings being hedged. Such an imprecise correlation may prevent the Company from achieving the intended hedge or expose the Company to risk of loss. Additionally, the Adviser may not hedge against a particular risk because it does not regard the probability of the risk occurring to be sufficiently high as to justify the cost of the hedge, or because it does not foresee the occurrence of the risk. Moreover, there is no guarantee that the Company’s intended hedging strategy will be successful in hedging out the subject risks.

Due Diligence Risk. When conducting due diligence and making an assessment regarding a Portfolio Investment, the Adviser relies on the resources available to it, including internal sources of information as well as information provided by third parties. The due diligence process may at times be required to rely on limited or incomplete information. The Adviser selects Portfolio Investments in part on the basis of information and data filed with various government regulators and publicly available or made directly available by prospective portfolio

companies or third parties. The Adviser expects that it will not be in a position to confirm the completeness, genuineness or accuracy of such information and data, and will therefore be dependent upon the integrity of the management of the entities filing such information and of such portfolio companies and third parties providing such information. In addition, there can be no assurance that any consultants or experts engaged by the Adviser will accurately evaluate such Portfolio Investments. Investment analyses and decisions by the Adviser may be undertaken on an expedited basis to enable the Company to take advantage of investment opportunities with accelerated timelines. In such cases, the available information at the time of an investment decision may be limited, inaccurate and/or incomplete. Accordingly, the Adviser cannot guarantee that its due diligence investigations will reveal or highlight all relevant facts that may be necessary or helpful in evaluating investment opportunities. Furthermore, the Company bears its proportionate share of all due diligence-related fees, costs, expenses and liabilities (including in respect of investments that are not ultimately consummated); such fees, costs, expenses and liabilities may be significant and could reduce Company returns.

Interest Rate Risk. Interest rate risk refers to the risks associated with market changes in interest rates. In general, rising interest rates, such as the recent economic period, will negatively impact the price of fixed rate debt instruments and falling interest rates will have a positive effect on the price of such debt instruments. Many of the Company’s investments are expected to be variable rate loans with interest that adjusts with market rates. These loans will generally also react to interest rate changes in a similar manner although generally to a lesser degree (depending, however, on the characteristics of the reset terms, including the index chosen, frequency of reset and reset caps or floors, among other factors). The Company’s other investments and transactions may also be affected by changes in interest rates. Declines in market value, if not offset by any corresponding gains on hedging instruments, may ultimately reduce earnings or result in losses to the Company.

The prices of long-term debt obligations generally fluctuate more than prices of short-term debt obligations as interest rates change. To the extent the Company invests in longer-term Portfolio Investments, it will be impacted to a greater degree by changes in market interest rates than if the Company invested primarily in short-term debt securities.

To the extent the Company borrows money or issues preferred Units to make investments, its net investment income will depend, in part, upon the difference between the rate at which it borrows funds or pays distributions on preferred Units and the rate at which the Company invests those funds. As a result, the Company can offer no assurance that a significant change in market interest rates will not have a material adverse effect on its net investment income in the event the Company uses debt to finance investments. In periods of rising interest rates, such as the recent economic period, the Company’s cost of funds will increase because the interest rates on the amounts borrowed under the Company’s credit facilities or certain other financing arrangements will typically be floating, which could reduce the Company’s net investment income to the extent any Portfolio Investments have fixed interest rates, and the interest rate on Portfolio Investments with an interest rate floor (such as a SOFR (as defined below) floor) above then-current levels will not increase until interest rates exceed the applicable minimum interest rate floor. Rising interest rates may also increase the cost of debt for the Portfolio Investments, which could adversely impact the Portfolio Investment’s financial performance and ability to meet ongoing obligations to the Company.

The Company expects that its long-term fixed-rate investments will be financed primarily with equity and long-term debt. The Company may use interest rate risk management techniques in an effort to limit its exposure to interest rate fluctuations. Such techniques may include various interest rate hedging activities to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act. These activities could limit the Company’s 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 the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Also, an increase in interest rates available to investors could make an investment in the Company’s Units less attractive if the Company is not able to increase its distribution rate, which could reduce the value of the Company’s Units.

Liquidity Risk. Most of the Company’s Portfolio Investments at any given time are expected to be illiquid, such that either no market exists for them or they are restricted as to their transferability under federal, state or foreign securities laws. Similarly, the Adviser may from time to time possess material, non-public information about an issuer, which could limit the ability of the Company to buy and sell Portfolio Investments. The illiquid nature of the Company’s positions may make it difficult, if not impossible, for the Company to (i) close out unprofitable positions and redeploy capital, except when a viable exit strategy can be developed (which may require a much longer commitment than the Adviser had anticipated), and (ii) meet margin calls or similar requirements of Company transaction counterparties to furnish additional liquid collateral. In addition, the sale of the Company’s investments may be made at substantial discounts and/or otherwise disadvantageous terms.

Inflation/Deflation Risk. Inflation risk results from the variation in the value of cash flows from a security due to inflation, as measured in terms of purchasing power. The Company is exposed to inflation risk with respect to any fixed rate investments that it makes, if any, because the interest rate the issuer has to pay the Company is fixed for the life of the security. To the extent that interest rates reflect the expected inflation rate, floating rate loans have a lower level of inflation risk.

Any disruptions in the capital markets, as a result of inflation and a rising interest environment or otherwise, may increase the spread between the yields realized on risk-free and higher risk securities and can result in illiquidity in parts of the capital markets, significant write-offs in the financial sector and re-pricing of credit risk in the broadly syndicated market. These and any other unfavorable economic conditions could increase the Company’s funding costs, limit the Company’s access to the capital markets or result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit to the Company. In addition, market conditions (including inflation, supply chain issues and decreased consumer demand) could impact the operations of certain of the Company’s Portfolio Investments. If the financial results of middle-market companies, like those in which the Company intends to invest, experience deterioration, it could ultimately lead to difficulty in meeting debt service requirements and an increase in defaults, and further deterioration in market conditions will further depress the outlook for those companies. Further, adverse economic conditions may decrease the value of collateral securing some of the Company’s loans and the value of the Company’s equity investments. Such may require the Company to modify the payment terms of its investments, including changes in PIK interest provisions and/or cash interest rates. The performance of certain of the Company’s Portfolio Investments may be negatively impacted by these economic or other conditions, which can result in the Company’s receipt of reduced interest income from its Portfolio Investments and/or realized and unrealized losses related to its Portfolio Investments, and, in turn, may adversely affect distributable income and have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations.

Financial Fraud. Instances of fraud and other deceptive practices committed by management, employees or Service Providers of the Company’s Portfolio Investments or by other financial institutions may undermine the Adviser’s due diligence efforts with respect to, and/or negatively affect the valuation of, the Company’s Portfolio Investments. In addition, financial fraud may contribute to overall market volatility, which can negatively impact the Company’s investment program.

OFAC, FCPA and Related Considerations. Economic sanction laws in the U.S. and other jurisdictions may prohibit the Adviser, its personnel and the Company from transacting with or in certain countries and with certain individuals and companies. In the U.S., the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control administers and enforces laws, Executive Orders and regulations establishing U.S. economic and trade sanctions.

Such sanctions prohibit, among other things, transactions with, and the provision of services to, certain foreign countries, territories, entities and individuals. These types of sanctions may restrict the Company’s investment activities.

In some countries, there is a greater acceptance than in the U.S. of government involvement in commercial activities, and of corruption. The Company may be adversely affected because of its unwillingness to participate in transactions that violate such laws or regulations. Such laws and regulations may make it difficult in certain circumstances for the Company to act successfully on investment opportunities and for Portfolio Investments to obtain or retain business. In recent years, the U.S. Department of Justice and the SEC have devoted greater resources to enforcement of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (the “FCPA”). In addition, the United Kingdom has recently significantly expanded the reach of its anti-bribery laws. Violations of the FCPA or other applicable anti-corruption laws or anti-bribery laws could result in, among other things, civil and criminal penalties, material fines, profit disgorgement, injunctions on future conduct, securities litigation and a general loss of investor confidence, any one of which could adversely affect the Company’s ability to achieve its investment objective and/or conduct its operations.

Risks Relating to Waivers or Deferrals of Covenants and Covenant-Lite Loans. The Company structures the debt in its Portfolio Investments to include business and financial covenants placing affirmative and negative obligations on the operation of the company’s business and its financial condition. However, from time to time the Company may elect to waive breaches of these covenants, including its right to payment, or waive or defer enforcement of remedies, such as acceleration of obligations or foreclosure on collateral, depending upon the financial condition and prospects of the particular Portfolio Investment. These actions may reduce the likelihood of the Company receiving the full amount of future payments of interest or principal and be accompanied by a deterioration in the value of the underlying collateral as many of these companies may have limited financial resources, may be unable to meet future obligations and may go bankrupt. This could negatively impact the Company’s ability to pay distributions, could adversely affect its results of operation and financial condition and cause the loss of all or part of your investment.

In addition, some of the loans in which the Company may invest may be “covenant-lite” loans. The Company uses the term “covenant-lite” loans to refer generally to loans that do not have a complete set of financial maintenance covenants. Generally, “covenant-lite” loans provide borrower companies more freedom to negatively impact lenders because their covenants are incurrence-based, which means they are only tested and can only be breached following an affirmative action of the borrower, rather than by a deterioration in the borrower’s financial condition. Accordingly, to the extent the Company invests in “covenant-lite” loans, the Company may have fewer rights against a borrower and may have a greater risk of loss on such investments as compared to investments in or exposure to loans with financial maintenance covenants.

Risk of Loss. An investment in the Company is highly risky. There can be no assurance that the Company will achieve its investment objective or any particular level of returns. An investor may lose all of its money by investing in the Company. Among other things, the Company may invest in assets that are underperforming or non-performing and/or in securities of issuers who are under financial stress. By their nature, such investments are considered speculative and entail substantial risks that are generally higher than the risks of investments in performing assets and securities of issuers that are not under financial stress. Any losses in the Company will be borne solely by investors in the Company and not by the Adviser or any of its respective affiliates (except to the extent they invest capital in the Company, in which case they, with respect to such capital invested, will bear their pro rata portion of such loss).

No Market for Units. Pursuant to the LLC Agreement, Units are not generally transferable and voluntary withdrawal of Units is not allowed. A Unitholder is not expected to be able to sell, assign or transfer its Units. In addition, transfers of Units may be affected by restrictions on resales imposed by federal and state securities laws. The Units are not registered under the Securities Act or any state securities laws and may not be transferred unless registered under applicable federal and state securities laws or unless an exemption from such laws is available. The Company has no plans, and is under no obligation, to register the Units under the Securities Act or any state securities laws. No market exists for the Units, and none is expected to develop. Therefore, an investment in the Company must be considered illiquid and must only be made by persons that are able to bear the risk of their investment in the Company for an indefinite period of time.

Management Risk and Reliance on Management . The Company is subject to management risk because the Adviser actively manages its investment portfolio. The Adviser will apply investment and disposition techniques and risk analyses in making investment and disposition decisions for the Company, but there can be no guarantee that these will produce the desired results. In addition, as Unitholders may not participate in the management of the Company, only investors who are willing to entrust all aspects of the management of the Company to the Adviser should subscribe for Units.

The success of the Company is highly dependent upon the financial and managerial experience of the Adviser and any consultants or other Service Providers retained by the Company. The success of the Adviser is highly dependent on the financial and managerial experience of the investment professionals, who may not continue to be employed by or associated with the Adviser during the entire term of the Company. In addition, a number of members of the professional staff of the Adviser are investors in other investment vehicles advised by SLR and are actively involved in managing the investment decisions of these investment vehicles, as well as investment decisions of other clients of SLR. Accordingly, the members of the professional staff of the Adviser have demands on their time for the investment, monitoring and other functions of other funds and other clients advised by SLR. In addition, competition in the financial services, private equity and alternative asset management industries for qualified investment professionals is intense. The Adviser’s continued ability to effectively manage the Company’s investments depends on its ability to attract new investment professionals and to retain and motivate its existing investment professionals.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, at any time during the Company’s term, the Adviser may assign the full and exclusive authority and responsibility granted to it under the Investment Management Agreement to an investment adviser under common control with the Adviser, subject to applicable law. The Adviser may take any actions that are necessary or incidental to any such assignment, including assigning the Investment Management Agreement or causing the Company to enter into a new Investment Management Agreement. Although it is expected that (x) any new investment adviser would be a registered investment adviser under the Advisers Act, (y) the management fee and incentive fee payable by the Company to such entities would be identical to that payable to the Adviser and (z) certain investment professionals would continue to be responsible for managing the Company’s assets, there is no guarantee that any or all of such characteristics will apply to any such new investment adviser.

The Investment Committee may delegate non-investment decisions (including decisions relating to cash management and similar non-material transactions (which shall not be considered “investments” for these purposes), diligence decisions, decisions relating to transactions involving material non-public information and decisions relating to the engagement of consultants, law firms and other Service Providers) to other investment professionals in their sole discretion. Any decisions made by such subset or other investment professionals may be materially different and/or less optimal than decisions that would have been made by the Investment Committee.

Referral Relationships with Financial Sponsors. The Adviser expects that the professional staff of the Adviser will maintain and develop their relationships with financial sponsors, including venture capital sponsors, and the Company will rely to a significant extent upon these relationships to provide the Company with potential investment opportunities. If the professional staff of the Adviser fail to maintain their existing relationships or develop new relationships with other sponsors or sources of investment opportunities, the Company will not be able to grow its investment portfolio. In addition, individuals with whom the professional staff of the Adviser have relationships are not obligated to provide the Company with investment opportunities, and, therefore, there is no assurance that such relationships will generate investment

opportunities for the Company. If the Adviser is unable to source investment opportunities, the Company may hold a greater percentage of its assets in cash and cash equivalents than anticipated, which could impact potential returns on the Company’s portfolio.

Recourse to the Company’s Assets. The Company’s assets, including any Portfolio Investments made by the Company and any capital held by the Company, are available to satisfy all liabilities and other obligations of the Company. In addition, the Company may pledge its right to call capital from Unitholders. If the Company becomes subject to a liability, parties seeking to have the liability satisfied may have recourse to the Company’s assets generally and may not be limited to any particular asset, such as the Portfolio Investment giving rise to the liability. To the extent the Company chooses to use special-purpose entities for individual transactions to reduce recourse risk (and it may, but will be under no obligation to do so), the bona fides of such entities may be subject to later challenge based on a number of theories, including veil piercing or substantive consolidation.

Unspecified Use of Proceeds. The proceeds from the issuance of the Units are intended to be invested in Portfolio Investments. Unitholders will not have an opportunity to evaluate for themselves the relevant economic, financial and other information regarding the investments in which the proceeds from the issuance of the Units will be invested and, accordingly, are dependent upon the judgment and ability of the Adviser in investing and managing the capital of the Company.

Identification of Potential Investment Opportunities. There is no assurance that the Adviser’s analysis in this regard, as implemented, will take into consideration all appropriate factors or appropriately weigh the factors that are considered in its analysis, especially given the heightened difficulty of the analysis required to evaluate certain Portfolio Investments. In particular, catalysts and/or exit strategies that initially appear to be viable may be precluded over time due to economic, legal, political or other factors. In addition, because the successful implementation of the Company’s investment strategy depends, in part, on its ability to successfully predict and take advantage of changing market conditions, to the extent it is unable to do so, returns may be adversely affected. These considerations are particularly relevant in light of the current uncertain economic and regulatory environment. See “— Regulatory Risks Relating to the Company” below.

Competition; Potential for Insufficient Investment Opportunities. The business of identifying and effecting investments of the types contemplated by the Adviser is competitive and there can be no assurance that the Adviser will be able to identify and obtain a sufficient number of investment opportunities to invest the full amount of capital that may be committed to the Company. Increased competition for, or a diminishment in the available supply of, potential Portfolio Investments could result in lower returns on such Portfolio Investments. The Company may engage in auction or similar bidding processes with respect to certain Portfolio Investments, which processes are often highly competitive and may involve numerous other bidders about which the Company possesses limited or no information; as a result, the foregoing considerations will be applicable with respect to any such processes.

Insufficient Capital for Follow-On Investments. Following its initial investment in a Portfolio Investment, the Company may have the opportunity to increase its investment in such Portfolio Investment. There is no assurance that the Company will make follow-on investments or that the Company will have sufficient resources to, or be permitted to, make such investments. Any decision not to make follow-on investments or the Company’s inability to make them may have a substantial negative impact on the company in need of such an investment, may result in missed opportunities for the Company or may result in dilution of the Company’s investment.

Concentration of Portfolio Investments. The Company may participate in a limited number of Portfolio Investments and, as a consequence, the aggregate return of the Company may be substantially adversely affected by the unfavorable performance of any single investment. The Company has a broad and flexible investment mandate, and, beyond the asset diversification requirements associated with the Company’s intention to comply with the requirements to qualify as a RIC for U.S. tax purposes, and except as noted above, the Company is not subject to any limits or proportions with respect to the mix of permitted Portfolio Investments. As a result, the Company’s Portfolio Investments could potentially be concentrated in relatively few strategies, issuers, industries, markets, geographies or investment types. Such non-diversification would make the Company more susceptible to risks associated with a single economic, political or regulatory occurrence than a more diversified portfolio might be. The Company could be subject to significant losses if it holds a relatively large position in a single strategy, issuer, industry, market, geographic region or a particular type of Portfolio Investment that declines in value, and the losses could increase even further if the Portfolio Investments cannot be liquidated without adverse market reaction or are otherwise adversely affected by changes in market conditions or circumstances.

Third-Party Involvement. The Company may hold a portion of its investments through partnerships, joint ventures, securitization vehicles or other entities with third-party investors (collectively, “joint ventures”). Joint venture investments involve various risks, including the risk that the Company will not be able to implement investment decisions or exit strategies because of limitations on the Company’s control under applicable agreements with joint venture partners, the risk that a joint venture partner may become bankrupt or may at any time have economic or business interests or goals that are inconsistent with those of the Company, the risk that a joint venture partner may be in a position to take action contrary to the Company’s objectives, the risk of liability based upon the actions of a joint venture partner and the risk of disputes or litigation with such partner and the inability to enforce fully all rights (or the incurrence of additional risk in connection with

enforcement of rights) one partner may have against the other, including in connection with foreclosure on partner loans, because of risks arising under state law. In addition, the Company may be liable for actions of its joint venture partners.

Leveraged Companies. The Company will invest in Portfolio Investments whose capital structures have significant leverage. Such Portfolio Investments are inherently more sensitive to declines in revenues and asset values and to increases in expenses and interest rates. The leveraged capital structure of such Portfolio Investments will increase the exposure of the Portfolio Investments to adverse economic factors such as downturns in the economy or deterioration in the condition of the Portfolio Investment, its underlying assets or its industry. Additionally, the securities acquired by the Company may be the most junior securities in what may be a complex capital structure, and thus subject to the greatest risk of loss.

Portfolio Turnover. The Company will not place any limit on the rate of portfolio turnover, and Portfolio Investments may be sold or otherwise disposed of without regard to the time they have been held when, in the judgment of the Adviser, investment considerations warrant such action. A high rate of portfolio turnover involves correspondingly greater expenses than a lower rate, may act to reduce the Company’s investment gains or create a loss for investors and may result in significant tax costs for investors depending on the tax provisions applicable to such investors.

No Assurance of Cash Distributions. Subject to the Board’s discretion and applicable legal restrictions, the Company expects to declare and pay distributions quarterly. The Company expects to pay these distributions out of assets legally available for distribution. However, there are no assurances that the Company will achieve investment results that will allow a targeted level of cash distributions or year-to-year increases in cash distributions. All distributions that are made will be at the discretion of the Board and will depend on earnings, financial condition, maintenance of RIC status and other factors as the Board may deem to be relevant. The Company’s ability to pay distributions might be adversely affected by the impact of one or more of the risk factors described in this annual report on Form 10-K. If the Company violates certain covenants under its existing or future credit facilities or other leverage, the Company may be limited in its ability to make distributions. To the extent the Company makes distributions to Unitholders that include a return of capital, such portion of the distribution essentially constitutes a return of the Unitholder’s investment. In addition, the inability to satisfy the asset coverage test applicable to a BDC may limit the Company’s ability to pay distributions. There can be no assurances that the Company will pay distributions to Unitholders in the future.

In certain cases, the Company may recognize income before or without receiving the accompanying cash. Depending on the amount of noncash income, this could result in difficulty satisfying the annual distribution requirement applicable to RICs. Accordingly, the Company may have to sell some Portfolio Investments at times it would not consider advantageous, raise additional debt or equity capital or reduce new investments to meet these distribution requirements.

U.S. Dollar Denomination of Units. Units are denominated in U.S. Dollars. Investors subscribing for Units in any country in which U.S. Dollars are not the local currency should note that changes in the rate of exchange between U.S. Dollars and such currency may have an adverse effect on the value, price or income of the investment to such investor. There may be foreign exchange regulations applicable to investments in non-U.S. currencies in certain jurisdictions. Each prospective investor should consult with its own counsel and advisors as to all legal, tax, financial and related matters concerning an investment in the Units.

Forward-Looking Statements. This annual report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements, including observations about market and industry and regulatory trends as of the original date of this annual report on Form 10-K. Those forward-looking statements reflect the Adviser’s current view in respect of future events. Actual events could differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements as a result of factors beyond the Adviser’s or the Company’s control. Investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such statements. No party has an obligation to update any of the forward-looking statements in this annual report on Form 10-K.

Projections. The Company may rely upon projections, forecasts or estimates developed by the Adviser, the Company or an issuer in which the Company is invested concerning the issuer’s future performance and cash flow. Projections, forecasts and estimates are forward-looking statements, are inherently uncertain and are based upon certain assumptions. Actual events are difficult to predict and beyond the Company’s control. Actual events may differ from those assumed. Some important factors which could cause actual results to differ materially from those in any forward-looking statements include changes in interest rates; domestic and foreign business, market, financial or legal conditions; leverage amounts and costs; and the degree to which the Portfolio Investments are hedged and the effectiveness of such hedges. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that estimated returns or projections can be realized or that actual returns or results will not be materially lower than those estimated therein.

Valuation of Illiquid Assets. It is expected that the majority of the Company’s investments will be in securities or other financial instruments for which market quotations are not available. The process of valuing securities for which reliable market quotations are not available is based on inherent uncertainties, and the resulting values may differ from values that would have been determined had a ready market existed for such securities, from values placed on such securities by other investors and from prices at which such securities may ultimately be

sold. In addition, third-party pricing information may at times not be available regarding certain of the Company’s assets or, if available, may not be considered reliable. In particular, recent disruptions in the credit markets have resulted in a severe lack of liquidity for many securities, making them more difficult to value and, in many cases, putting significant downward pressure on prices. Subject to approval by the Board, the Adviser will determine the fair value of securities, loans or other instruments for which market quotes are not readily available (or if extraordinary events occur after the last readily available quotation). The Board will (1) periodically assess and manage valuation risks; (2) establish and apply fair value methodologies; (3) test fair value methodologies; (4) oversee and evaluate third-party pricing services, as applicable; (5) oversee the reporting required by Rule 2a-5 under the 1940 Act; and (6) maintain recordkeeping requirements under Rule 2a-5.

There can be no assurance that such valuations will be reliable, accurate or reflective of the prices at which such investments are ultimately realized. In addition, certain of the securities or other assets that the Company seeks to sell or acquire via cross trade may be illiquid and difficult to value, therefore there can be no assurance that such valuation will be accurate.

Assets Believed to Be Undervalued or Incorrectly Valued. Securities that the Adviser believes are fundamentally undervalued or incorrectly valued may not ultimately be valued in the capital markets at prices and/or within the timeframe the Adviser anticipates. As a result, the Company may lose all or substantially all of its investment in any particular instance.

Model Risks. The Adviser may employ financial/analytical models to aid in the selection of the Portfolio Investments, to allocate investments across various strategies and risks and to determine the risk profile of the Company. If any such models are employed, the success of the Company’s investment activities will depend, in large part, upon the viability of these models. There can be no assurance that the models are currently viable, or will remain viable during the term of the Company, due to various factors, including the quality of the data input into the models and the assumptions underlying such models, which to varying degrees involve the exercise of judgment, as well as the possibility of errors in constructing or of using the model. Even if the models function as anticipated, they cannot account for all factors that may influence the returns on the Portfolio Investments. Also, there can be no assurance that the investment professionals utilizing the models will be able to (i) determine that any model is or will become not viable or not completely viable or (ii) notice, predict or adequately react to any change in the viability of a model. The use of a model that is not viable or not materially viable could, at any time, have a material adverse effect on the performance of the Company.

Regulatory Investigations or Third-Party Litigation. The Company as well as the Adviser and its affiliates participate in a highly regulated industry and are each subject to regulatory examinations in the ordinary course of business. There can be no assurance that the Company and the Adviser and/or any of its affiliates will avoid regulatory investigation and possible enforcement actions stemming therefrom. The Adviser is a registered investment adviser and, as such, is subject to the provisions of the Advisers Act. The Company and the Adviser are each, from time to time, subject to formal and informal examinations, investigations, inquiries, audits and reviews from numerous regulatory authorities both in response to issues and questions raised in such examinations or investigations and in connection with the changing priorities of the applicable regulatory authorities across the market in general.

The Company’s investment activities may subject it to the risks and costs of becoming involved in litigation with third parties due to, among other reasons, the fact that different investor groups may have qualitatively different, and frequently conflicting, interests with respect to certain Portfolio Investments. The risk of litigation with third parties will be elevated in situations where an issuer is stressed or distressed. See “— Litigation and Related Risks Associated with Origination and Servicing” above. The expense of defending against claims by third parties and paying any amounts pursuant to settlements or judgments, or bringing claims against third parties, would generally be borne by the Company and would reduce net assets. In addition, the Company’s investment activities may subject it to certain risks inherent in restructuring, bankruptcy and similar proceedings. See “—Risks Associated with Bankruptcy and Insolvency Cases” below.

Broad Indemnification. The Company and/or the Adviser on behalf of the Company may enter into various agreements or arrangements which limit the liability of its Service Providers, including the Adviser and its affiliates, the Administrative Coordinator, the Custodian, and their affiliates, employees, officers and directors, and require the Company to indemnify and/or provide broad representations, warranties and covenants in favor of such persons. U.S. federal and state securities laws impose liabilities under certain circumstances on persons that cannot be waived by contract, other agreements or documents. Therefore, nothing in those agreements should be deemed or construed in a manner that purports to waive or limit any right to the extent prohibited by law.

The Company is required to indemnify the Adviser and its respective affiliates, each of the former, current and future shareholders, partners, members, other equity holders, officers, directors, employees, managers, trustees, agents and other representatives of the Adviser and its respective affiliates, and other persons set forth in the LLC Agreement as an “Indemnitee” for Claims (as defined in the LLC Agreement) that may accrue to or be incurred by an Indemnitee, in connection with any claim, demand, investigation, suit, proceeding or action in which an Indemnitee may become involved, as a party or otherwise, or with which an Indemnitee may be threatened, relating to or arising out of the investments or other activities of the Company, activities undertaken in connection with the Company, or otherwise relating to or arising out of the LLC Agreement or the Subscription Agreement, and otherwise as provided in the LLC Agreement or the Subscription

Agreement. Such Claims may be material and have an adverse effect on the returns to the Unitholders. The Company may also provide broad indemnities, representations, warranties and covenants in connection with the acquisition, management and disposition of Portfolio Investments or otherwise in connection with the Company’s investment program.

Any indemnification obligations of the Company would be payable from the assets of the Company, including the unfunded Commitments of the Unitholders, and would adversely affect the Company’s returns.

Adverse Consequences of Default. A Unitholder in default with respect to its unfunded Commitment may experience material adverse effects on its investment. When a Unitholder defaults, the Board, in its discretion, may cause the defaulting Unitholder to forfeit a portion of the distributions to which the defaulting Unitholder may otherwise have been entitled. The Board may also require a forced sale of the defaulting Unitholder’s Interest. In addition, the Board may pursue any available legal or equitable remedies, with the expenses of collection of the unpaid amount, including attorneys’ fees, to be paid by the defaulting Unitholder.

Upon the default of a Unitholder, the Company may deliver an amended funding notice to the non-defaulting Unitholders increasing their capital contributions by up to an aggregate amount equal to the capital contribution that the defaulting Unitholder failed to make, not in excess of a Unitholder’s unfunded Commitment. The Board may require a defaulting Unitholder to contribute the entirety of its remaining Commitment to the Company. For any such Unitholder, the return on its Company investment may be materially lower than returns to Unitholders who do not pre-fund their Commitments.

Distributions in Kind. If distributions are made of assets held by the Company in lieu of cash, the amount of any such distribution will be accounted for at the fair market value of such assets as determined in accordance with procedures set forth in the LLC Agreement. An independent appraisal generally will not be required and is not expected to be obtained. Assets distributed in kind may not be readily marketable or disposable, and Unitholders therefore must be prepared to bear the risks of owning such assets for an indefinite period of time (and to incur costs and expenses in connection with any disposition thereof). In addition, there can be no assurance that the value of such assets as determined in accordance with procedures set forth in the LLC Agreement will ultimately be realized.

Risks Related to the Russian Invasion of Ukraine. On February 24, 2022, the Russian military commenced a full-scale invasion of Russia’s pre-positioned forces into Ukraine, which could have a negative impact on the economy and business activity globally (including in the countries in which the Company invests), and therefore could adversely affect the performance of the Company’s Portfolio Investments. Following such invasion, the United States and several European nations announced sanctions against Russia. Furthermore, the conflict between the two nations and the varying involvement of the United States and other NATO countries could preclude prediction as to their ultimate adverse impact on global economic and market conditions, and, as a result, presents material uncertainty and risk with respect to the Company and the performance of its investments or operations, and the ability of the Company to achieve its investment objectives. Additionally, to the extent that third parties, investors, or related customer bases have material operations or assets in Russia or Ukraine, they may have adverse consequences related to the ongoing conflict.

Risks Related to Electronic Communications/Cybersecurity Risk. The Company provides to Unitholders statements, reports and other communications relating to the Company and/or the Unitholder’s Interest in electronic form, such as e-mail or via a password protected website (“Electronic Communications”). There are certain costs and possible risks associated with the use of Electronic Communications. Electronic Communications may be modified, corrupted, or contain viruses or malicious code, and may not be compatible with a Unitholder’s electronic system. The Company cannot provide any assurance that Electronic Communications are secure and will not be responsible for any computer viruses, problems or malfunctions resulting from the use of Electronic Communications. In addition, reliance on Electronic Communications involves the risk of inaccessibility, power outages or slowdowns for a variety of reasons. These periods of inaccessibility may delay or prevent receipt of reports or other information by the Unitholders.

The Company relies on the Adviser’s enterprise-wide cybersecurity program, to protect its information, including due oversight of the cybersecurity programs of the Company’s key Service Providers and processes for the assessment, identification, and management of material risks from cybersecurity threats, including those associated with the use of third-party Service Providers. While the Adviser employs various measures to address cybersecurity-related issues, the Adviser, the Administrative Coordinator, the Company and their respective Service Providers may nevertheless be subject to operational and information security risks resulting from cybersecurity incidents. A cybersecurity incident refers to both intentional and unintentional events that may cause the Adviser, the Company or their respective Service Providers to lose or compromise confidential information, suffer data corruption or lose operational capacity. Cybersecurity incidents include stealing or corrupting data maintained online or digitally, denial of service attacks on websites, the unauthorized release of confidential information or various other operational disruptions. If unauthorized parties gain access to such information and technology systems, they may be able to steal, publish, delete or modify private and sensitive information, including nonpublic personal information related to Unitholders (and their beneficial owners) and material nonpublic information. The systems the Adviser has implemented to manage risks relating to these types of events could prove to be inadequate and, if compromised, could become inoperable for extended periods of time, cease to function properly or fail to adequately secure private information. Breaches such as those

involving covertly introduced malware, impersonation of authorized users and industrial or other espionage may not be identified even with sophisticated prevention and detection systems, potentially resulting in further harm and preventing them from being addressed appropriately. The failure of these systems or of disaster recovery plans for any reason could cause significant interruptions in the Company’s and the Adviser’s operations and result in a failure to maintain the security, confidentiality or privacy of sensitive data, including personal information relating to Unitholders, material nonpublic information and other sensitive information in the Adviser’s possession. A disaster or a disruption in the infrastructure that supports the Adviser’s business, including a disruption involving Electronic Communications or other services used by the Adviser or third parties with whom the Adviser conducts business, or directly affecting the Adviser’s headquarters, could have a material adverse impact on the Adviser’s ability to continue to operate its business without interruption and to protect the Company, insofar as is practicable, from the hazards of cybersecurity threats and vulnerabilities in accordance with applicable legal requirements and guidance. The Adviser’s disaster recovery programs may not be sufficient to mitigate the harm that may result from such a disaster or disruption. In addition, insurance and other safeguards might only partially reimburse the Adviser for its losses, if at all.

Although the Company is not currently aware of any cyber-attacks or other incidents that, individually or in the aggregate, have materially affected, or would reasonably be expected to materially affect, its operations or financial condition, there has been an increase in the frequency and sophistication of the cyber and security threats faced in the marketplace. Cyber-attacks and other security threats could originate from a wide variety of sources, including cyber criminals, nation state hackers, hacktivists and other outside or inside parties. The Company may be a target for attacks because, as a specialty finance company, it holds confidential and other sensitive information, including price information, about existing and potential investments. Further, the Company is dependent on third-party vendors for hosting hardware, software and data processing systems that it does not control. The Company also relies on third-party Service Providers for certain aspects of its business, including for certain information systems, technology and administration of its Portfolio Investments and compliance matters. While the Company relies on the cybersecurity strategy and policies implemented by the Adviser, its reliance on the Adviser and third-party Service Providers removes certain cybersecurity functions from outside of the Company’s immediate control, and cyber-attacks on the Adviser, on the Company or on third-party Service Providers could adversely affect the Company, its business, and its reputation. The costs related to cyber-attacks or other security threats or disruptions may not be fully insured or indemnified by others, including by the Company’s third-party providers.

As the Company’s reliance on computer hardware and software systems, data processing systems, and other technology has increased, so have the risks posed to such systems, both those the Adviser controls and those provided by third-party vendors. Cyber-attacks may originate from a wide variety of sources, and while the Adviser has implemented processes, procedures, and internal controls designed to mitigate cybersecurity risks and cyber-attacks, these measures do not guarantee that a cyber-attack will not occur or that the Company’s financial results, operations, or confidential information, personal, or other sensitive information will not be negatively impacted by such an incident, especially because the techniques of threat actors change frequently and are often not recognized until launched. The Adviser relies on industry accepted security measures and technology to securely maintain confidential and proprietary information maintained on its information systems, as well as on policies and procedures to protect against the unauthorized or unlawful disclosure of confidential, personal, or other sensitive information. Although the Adviser takes protective measures and endeavors to strengthen its computer systems, software, technology assets, and networks to prevent and address potential cyber-attacks, there can be no assurance that any of these measures prove effective. The Adviser expects to be required to devote increasing levels of funding and resources, which may in part be allocated to the Company, to comply with evolving cybersecurity and privacy laws and regulations and to continually monitor and enhance its cybersecurity procedures and controls. In addition, the Company, the Adviser, the Administrative Coordinator, or their employees, if any, may also be the target of fraudulent emails or other targeted attempts to gain unauthorized access to confidential, personal, or other sensitive information. The result of any cyber-attack or other security incidents may include disrupted operations, misstated or unreliable financial data, fraudulent transfers or requests for transfers of money, liability for stolen information (including personal information), investigations, misappropriation of assets, increased cybersecurity protection and insurance costs, litigation and damage to the Company’s business relationships, regulatory fines or penalties, or other adverse effects on its business, financial condition or results of operations. The Adviser may be required to expend significant additional resources to modify its protective measures and to investigate and remediate vulnerabilities or other exposures arising from operational and security risks related to cyber-attacks. The rapid evolution and increasing prevalence of artificial intelligence technologies may also increase cybersecurity risks.

In addition, cybersecurity has become a top priority for global lawmakers and regulators around the world, and some jurisdictions have proposed or enacted laws requiring companies to notify regulators and individuals of data security breaches involving certain types of personal data. In particular, state and federal laws and regulations related to cybersecurity compliance continue to evolve and change, which may require substantial investments in new technology, software and personnel, which could affect the Company’s profitability. These changes may also result in enhanced and unforeseen consequences for cyber-related breaches and incidents, which may further adversely affect the Company’s profitability. If the Adviser fails to comply with the relevant and increasing laws and regulations, the Adviser could suffer financial losses, a disruption of its businesses, liability to investors, regulatory intervention or reputational damage. Policies of remote working, whether by the Adviser, the Administrative Coordinator, the Company or by their respective Service Providers, could strain

technology resources, introduce operational risks and otherwise heighten the risks described above. Remote working environments may be less secure and more susceptible to hacking attacks, including phishing and social engineering attempts.

Cybersecurity risks are exacerbated by the rapidly increasing volume of highly sensitive data, including the Company’s proprietary business information, personal information of the Adviser’s employees, the Company’s investors and others, and other sensitive information that the Adviser collects, processes, and stores in its data centers and on its networks or those of third-party Service Providers. The secure processing, maintenance, and transmission of this information are critical to the Company’s operations. There is a risk that encryption and other protective measures against cyber-attacks may be circumvented, particularly to the extent that new computing technologies increase the speed and computing power available. Even the most well-protected information, networks, systems and facilities remain potentially vulnerable because the techniques used in such attempted security breaches evolve and generally are not recognized until launched against a target, and in some cases are designed not to be detected and, in fact, may not be detected. A significant actual or potential theft, loss, corruption, exposure, fraudulent use or misuse of investor or other personal information, proprietary business data or other sensitive information, whether by third parties or as a result of malfeasance by the Adviser’s employees or otherwise, non-compliance with applicable contractual or other legal obligations regarding such data or intellectual property or a violation of applicable privacy and security policies with respect to such data could result in significant investigation, remediation and other costs, fines, penalties, litigation or regulatory actions against the Company and significant reputational harm, any of which could harm the Company’s business and results of operations. Cybersecurity risks require continuous and increasing attention and other resources from the Adviser to, among other actions, identify and quantify these risks and upgrade and expand its technologies systems and processes to adequately address such risks. Such attention diverts time and other resources from other activities and there is no assurance that the Adviser’s efforts will be effective.

Cybersecurity incidents may adversely impact the Company and its Unitholders. There is no guarantee that the Company, the Adviser, and/or their respective Service Providers will be successful in protecting against cybersecurity incidents.

Financial Services Industry Risks. Cash not held in custody accounts and held by the Company, the Adviser and the Portfolio Investments in non-interest-bearing and interest-bearing operating accounts could, at times, exceed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) insurance limits. If such banking institutions were to fail, the Company, the Adviser, or the Portfolio Investments could lose all or a portion of those amounts held in excess of such insurance limits. In addition, actual events involving limited liquidity, defaults, non-performance or other adverse developments that affect financial institutions, transactional counterparties or other companies in the financial services industry or the financial services industry generally, or concerns or rumors about any events of these kinds or other similar risks, have in the past and may in the future lead to market-wide liquidity problems, which could adversely affect the Company, the Adviser’s and the Portfolio Investments’ business, financial condition, results of operations, or prospects.

Although the Company and the Adviser assess its and the Portfolio Investments’ banking and financing relationships as the Company believes necessary or appropriate, the Company and the Portfolio Investments’ access to funding sources and other credit arrangements in amounts adequate to finance or capitalize current and projected future business operations could be significantly impaired by factors that affect the financial institutions with which the Company, the Adviser or the Portfolio Investments have arrangements directly or the financial services industry or economy in general. These factors could include, among others, events such as liquidity constraints or failures, the ability to perform obligations under various types of financial, credit or liquidity agreements or arrangements, disruptions or instability in the financial services industry or financial markets, or concerns or negative expectations about the prospects for companies in the financial services industry. These factors could involve financial institutions or financial services industry companies with which the Company, the Adviser or the Portfolio Investments have financial or business relationships, but could also include factors involving financial markets or the financial services industry generally.

In addition, investor concerns regarding the U.S. or international financial systems could result in less favorable commercial financing terms, including higher interest rates or costs and tighter financial and operating covenants, or systemic limitations on access to credit and liquidity sources, thereby making it more difficult for the Company, the Adviser, or the Portfolio Investments to acquire financing on acceptable terms or at all.

Technological Innovation Risks. Technological innovations have disrupted traditional approaches in multiple industries and can permit younger companies to achieve success and in the process disrupt markets and market practices. The Company can provide no assurance that new businesses and approaches will not be created that would compete with the Company and/or its Portfolio Investments or alter the market practices in which the Adviser and its affiliates and the Company have been designed to function within and on which the Company depends on for its investment return. New approaches could damage the Company’s investments, disrupt the market in which it operates and subject it to increased competition, which could materially and adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition and results of investments.

Machine Learning Technology Risks. Recent technological advances in artificial intelligence and machine learning technology (“Machine Learning Technology”) pose risks to the Company and its Portfolio Investments. The Company and its Portfolio Investments could be

exposed to the risks of Machine Learning Technology if third-party service providers or any counterparties use Machine Learning Technology in their business activities. The Company and the Adviser are not in a position to control the use of Machine Learning Technology in third-party products or services. Use of Machine Learning Technology could include the input of confidential information in contravention of applicable policies, contractual or other obligations or restrictions, resulting in such confidential information becoming part accessible by other third-party Machine Learning Technology applications and users. Machine Learning Technology and its applications continue to develop rapidly, and the Company cannot predict the risks that may arise from such developments.

Machine Learning Technology is generally highly reliant on the collection and analysis of large amounts of data, and it is not possible or practicable to incorporate all relevant data into the model that Machine Learning Technology utilizes to operate. Certain data in such models will inevitably contain a degree of inaccuracy and error and could otherwise be inadequate or flawed, which would be likely to degrade the effectiveness of Machine Learning Technology. To the extent the Company or its Portfolio Investments are exposed to the risks of Machine Learning Technology use, any such inaccuracies or errors could adversely impact the Company or its Portfolio Investments.

Corporate Social Responsibility Risks. The Company’s business (including that of its Portfolio Investments) faces increasing public scrutiny related to environmental, social and governance (“ESG”) activities, which are increasingly considered to contribute to reducing a company’s operational risk, market risk and reputational risk, which may in turn impact the long-term sustainability of a company’s performance. A variety of organizations measure the performance of companies on ESG topics, and the results of these assessments are widely publicized. In addition, investment in funds that specialize in companies that perform well in such assessments are increasingly popular, and major institutional investors have publicly emphasized the importance of such ESG ratings and measures to their investment decisions.

The Company risks damage to its brand and reputation if it fails to act responsibly in a number of areas, including, but not limited to, diversity, equity and inclusion, human rights, climate change, environmental stewardship, support for local communities, corporate governance, transparency and consideration of ESG factors in the Company’s investment processes. Adverse incidents with respect to ESG activities could impact the value of the Company’s brand, its relationship with existing and future Portfolio Investments, the cost of the Company’s operations and relationships with investors, all of which could adversely affect its business and results of operations.

However, regional and investor specific sentiment may differ in what constitutes a material positive or negative ESG corporate practice. There is no guarantee that the Company’s ESG and sustainability practices will uniformly fit every investor’s definition of best practices for all environmental, social and governance considerations across geographies and investor types. If we do not successfully manage expectations across varied stakeholder interests, it could erode stakeholder trust, impact our reputation and constrain our investment opportunities.

There is also a growing regulatory interest across jurisdictions in improving transparency regarding the definition, measurement and disclosure of ESG factors in order to allow investors to validate and better understand sustainability claims. For example, the SEC has proposed, or has announced that it is working on proposals for, rules that, among other matters, would establish a framework for reporting of climate-related risks, corporate and fund carbon emissions, broad diversity and capital management. At this time, there is uncertainty regarding the scope of such proposals or when they would become effective (if at all). In 2021, the SEC established an enforcement task force to look into ESG practices and disclosures by public companies and investment managers and has started to bring enforcement actions based on ESG disclosures not matching actual investment processes. Further, in 2022 the SEC issued a proposed rule regarding the enhancement and standardization of mandatory climate-related disclosures for investors that would mandate extensive disclosure of climate-related data, risks and opportunities for certain public companies.

The Company and its Portfolio Investments are subject to the risk that similar measures might be introduced in other jurisdictions in the future. Additionally, compliance with any new laws or regulations increases the Company’s regulatory burden and could make compliance more difficult and expensive, affect the manner in which the Company or its Portfolio Investments conduct its businesses and adversely affect the Company’s profitability.

Climate Change Risks. There may be evidence of global climate change. Climate change creates physical and financial risk and some of the Company’s Portfolio Investments may be adversely affected by climate change. For example, the needs of customers of energy companies vary with weather conditions, primarily temperature and humidity. To the extent weather conditions are affected by climate change, energy use could increase or decrease depending on the duration and magnitude of any changes. Increases in the cost of energy could adversely affect the cost of operations of the Company’s Portfolio Investments if the use of energy products or services is material to their business. A decrease in energy use due to weather changes may affect some of the Company’s Portfolio Investments’ financial condition, through decreased revenues. Extreme weather conditions in general require more system backup, adding to costs, and can contribute to increased system stresses, including service interruptions. Energy companies could also be affected by the potential for lawsuits against or taxes or other regulatory costs imposed on greenhouse gas emitters, based on links drawn between greenhouse gas emissions and climate change.

In December 2015 the United Nations, of which the U.S. is a member, adopted a climate accord with the long-term goal of limiting global warming and the short-term goal of significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions. As a result, some of the Company’s Portfolio

Investments may become subject to new or strengthened regulations or legislation, which could increase their operating costs and/or decrease their revenues.

Failure to Qualify as a RIC. Although the Company has obtained qualification as a RIC, no assurance can be given that it will be able to maintain qualification as a RIC. To maintain qualification as a RIC, the Company must meet source-of-income, asset diversification, and distribution requirements on an ongoing basis.

The income source requirement will be satisfied if the Company obtains at least 90% of gross income for each year from dividends, interest, foreign currency, payments with respect to loans of certain securities, gains from the sale of Units or other securities, net income from certain “qualified publicly traded partnerships,” or similar sources.

The asset diversification requirement will be satisfied if the Company meets certain asset diversification requirements at the end of each quarter of the taxable year. Failure to meet those requirements may result in the Company having to dispose of certain investments quickly in order to prevent the loss of qualification as a RIC. Because most of the Company’s investments will be relatively illiquid, any such dispositions could be made at disadvantageous prices and could result in substantial losses.

The annual distribution requirement will be satisfied if the Company distributes to its Unitholders on an annual basis at least 90% of net ordinary income and realized net short-term capital gains in excess of realized net long-term capital losses, if any. Because the Company may use debt financing, it is subject to certain asset coverage ratio requirements under the 1940 Act and financial covenants under loan and credit agreements that could, under certain circumstances, restrict the Company from making distributions necessary to satisfy the distribution requirement. If the Company is unable to obtain cash from other sources, it could fail to qualify as a RIC.

If the Company fails to qualify as a RIC for any reason and therefore becomes subject to corporate income tax, the resulting corporate taxes could substantially reduce net assets, the amount of income available for distribution and the amount of distributions.

Recognizing Income Before or Without Receiving Cash. For U.S. federal income tax purposes, the Company will include in income certain amounts that the Company has not yet received in cash, such as the accrual of original issue discount (“OID”). This may arise if the Company receives warrants in connection with the making of a loan and in other circumstances, or through contracted payment-in-kind (“PIK”) interest, which represents contractual interest added to the loan balance and due at the end of the loan term. Such OID, which could be significant relative to the Company’s overall investment activities, and increases in loan balances as a result of contracted PIK arrangements will be included in income before the Company receives any corresponding cash payments. The Company also may be required to include in income certain other amounts that the Company will not currently receive in cash.

Since in certain cases the Company may recognize income before or without receiving cash representing such income, the Company may have difficulty meeting the requirement to timely distribute at least 90% of its net ordinary income and net short-term capital gains in excess of net long-term capital losses, if any, to maintain its qualification as a RIC. In such a case, the Company may have to sell some of its Portfolio Investments at times the Company would not consider advantageous or raise additional debt or equity capital or reduce new investment originations to meet these distribution requirements. If the Company is not able to obtain cash from other sources and is otherwise unable to satisfy such distribution requirement, the Company may fail to maintain its qualification as a RIC and become subject to corporate-level U.S. federal income tax.

Tax Considerations Regarding Dividends for Private BDCs. The Company does not currently qualify as a “publicly offered regulated investment company,” as defined in the Code. Accordingly, U.S. individual and other noncorporate Unitholders will be taxed as though they received a distribution of some of the Company’s expenses. A “publicly offered regulated investment company” is a RIC whose Units are either (i) continuously offered pursuant to a public offering, (ii) regularly traded on an established securities market, or (iii) held by at least 500 persons at all times during the taxable year. The Company anticipates that it will not qualify as a publicly offered RIC for the 2023 tax year, and cannot determine when it will qualify as a publicly offered RIC. Since the Company is not a publicly offered RIC, a non-corporate Unitholder’s allocable portion of the Company’s affected expenses, including a portion of its management fees, will be treated as an additional distribution to the Unitholders. A non-corporate Unitholder’s allocable portion of these expenses are treated as miscellaneous itemized deductions that are not currently deductible by such Unitholder (and beginning in 2026, will be deductible by such Unitholder for regular U.S. federal income tax purposes but not for alternative minimum tax purposes only to the extent they exceed 2% of such Unitholder’s adjusted gross income).

Potential Dividend Deferrals. In order to maintain its tax status as a RIC, the Company must distribute to Unitholders for each taxable year at least 90% of its investment company taxable income (i.e., net ordinary income plus realized net short-term capital gains in excess of realized net long-term capital losses). If the Company qualifies for taxation as a RIC, it generally will not be subject to corporate-level U.S. federal

income tax on its investment company taxable income and net capital gains (i.e., realized net long-term capital gains in excess of realized net short-term capital losses) that it timely distributes to Unitholders. The Company will be subject to a 4% U.S. federal excise tax on undistributed earnings of a RIC unless it distributes each calendar year at least the sum of (i) 98.0% of its ordinary income for the calendar year, (ii) 98.2% of its capital gains in excess of capital losses for the one-year period ending on October 31 of the calendar year, and (iii) any ordinary income and net capital gains for preceding years that were not distributed during such years and on which it paid no U.S. federal income tax.

Under the Code, the Company may pay certain RIC dividends after the end of the current year. In particular, if the Company pays a distribution in January of the following year that was declared in October, November, or December of the current year and is payable to Unitholders of record in the current year, the dividend will be treated for all U.S. federal income tax purposes as if it were paid on December 31 of the current year. In addition, under the Code, the Company may pay dividends, referred to as “spillover dividends,” that are paid during the following taxable year that will allow the Company to maintain its qualification for taxation as a RIC and eliminate its liability for corporate-level U.S. federal income tax. Under these spillover dividend procedures, the Company may defer distributions of income earned during the current year until December of the following year. For example, the Company may defer distributions of income earned during 2024 until as late as December 31, 2025. If the Company chooses to pay a spillover dividend, it will incur the 4% U.S. federal excise tax on some or all of the distribution.

Due to events such as the COVID-19 pandemic, certain regional bank failures, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the ongoing war in the Middle East or other disruptions in the economy, such as the recent inflationary environment, the Company may take certain actions with respect to the timing and amounts of its distributions in order to preserve cash and maintain flexibility. For example, the Company may reduce and/or defer dividends to the following year as discussed above. To further preserve cash, the Company may combine these deferrals of dividends with one or more distributions that are payable partially in Units as discussed below under “In-Kind Dividend Considerations.”

Changes in Tax Law. Legislative or other actions relating to taxes could have a negative effect on the Company. The rules dealing with U.S. federal income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the IRS and the U.S. Treasury Department. New legislation and any other tax law developments including new or revised U.S. Treasury regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions, could negatively and perhaps retroactively affect the U.S. federal income tax consequences to the Company and its Unitholders, or could have other adverse consequences. Investors are urged to consult with their tax advisor regarding tax legislative, regulatory, or administrative developments and proposals and their potential effect on an investment in the Company.

Permissible Incurred Leverage. Leverage magnifies the potential for loss on investments and on invested equity capital. As the Company uses leverage to partially finance its investments, Unitholders will experience increased risks of investing in the Company’s securities. If the value of the Company’s assets increases, then leveraging would cause the NAV attributable to the Company’s Units to increase more sharply than it would have had the Company not leveraged. Conversely, if the value of the Company’s assets decreases, leveraging would cause NAV to decline more sharply than it otherwise would have had the Company not leveraged its business. Similarly, any increase in the Company’s income in excess of interest payable on the borrowed funds would cause net investment income to increase more than it would without the leverage, while any decrease in the Company’s income would cause net investment income to decline more sharply than it would have had the Company not borrowed. Such a decline could negatively affect the Company’s ability to pay dividends on Units, scheduled debt payments or other payments related to securities. Leverage is generally considered a speculative investment technique.

Distribution and Asset Coverage Ratio Requirements. In order to satisfy the requirements applicable to RICs and to avoid payment of excise taxes, the Company intends to distribute to Unitholders substantially all of its ordinary income and capital gain net income except for certain net capital gains, which it intends to retain and to elect to treat as deemed distributions to Unitholders. The Company may issue debt

securities, other evidences of indebtedness or preferred Units, and may borrow money from banks or other financial institutions, which are referred to collectively herein as “senior securities,” up to the maximum amount permitted by the 1940 Act. The 1940 Act permits the Company to issue senior securities in amounts such that its asset coverage, as defined in the 1940 Act, equals at least 150% after each issuance of senior securities. The Company’s ability to pay dividends or issue additional senior securities would be restricted if the asset coverage ratio were not at least 150%. If the value of the Company’s assets declines, the Company may be unable to satisfy this test. If that happens, the Company may be required to liquidate a portion of its investments and repay a portion of its indebtedness at a time when such sales or repayment may be disadvantageous. As a result of issuing senior securities, the Company will also be exposed to typical risks associated with leverage, including an increased risk of loss. If the Company issues preferred Units, such preferred Units will rank “senior” to common Units in the Company’s capital structure, preferred Unitholders will have separate voting rights for certain purposes and may have rights, preferences or privileges more favorable than those of the Company’s common Units and the issuance of preferred Units could have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a transaction or a change of control that might involve a premium price for Unitholders or otherwise be in the best interest of Unitholders.

To the extent the Company is constrained in its ability to issue debt or other senior securities, it will depend on issuances of capital interests to finance operations. As a BDC, the Company is generally not able to issue Units at a price below NAV without first obtaining required approvals of Unitholders and independent directors in accordance with the conditions set forth in Section 63(2) of the 1940 Act. If the Company raises additional funds by issuing more common Units or senior securities convertible into, or exchangeable for, common Units, the percentage ownership of Unitholders at that time would decrease and Unitholders may experience dilution. In addition to issuing securities to raise capital as described above, the Company could, in the future, securitize loans to generate cash for funding new investments. An inability to successfully securitize its loan portfolio could limit the Company’s ability to grow its business, fully execute its business strategy and improve profitability.

Unrealized Depreciation. As a BDC, the Company is required to carry investments at market value or, if no market value is ascertainable, at fair value as determined in good faith by the Board. Decreases in the market values or fair values of investments will be recorded as unrealized depreciation. Any unrealized depreciation in the Company’s loan portfolio could be an indication of a Portfolio Investment’s inability to meet its repayment obligations with respect to the loans whose market values or fair values decreased. This could result in realized losses in the future and ultimately in reductions of income available for distribution in future periods.

Qualifying Asset Requirements. As a BDC, the Company may not acquire any assets other than “qualifying assets” unless, at the time of such acquisition, at least 70% of its total assets are qualifying assets. Therefore, the Company may be precluded from investing in what it believes are attractive investments if such investments are not qualifying assets. Similarly, these rules could prevent the Company from making additional investments in existing Portfolio Investments, which could result in the dilution of its position, or could require disposal of investments at an inopportune time to comply with the 1940 Act. If the Company were forced to sell non-qualifying investments for compliance purposes, the proceeds from such sale could be significantly less than the current value of such investments. Conversely, if the Company failed to invest a sufficient portion of assets in qualifying assets, it could lose status as a BDC, which would subject the Company to substantially more regulatory restrictions and significantly decrease operating flexibility.

Exemptive Relief. The Company and the other BDCs for which SLR is the investment adviser (SLR Investment Corp. (Nasdaq: SLRC) (“SLRC”), SLR HC BDC LLC (“HC BDC”) and SLR Private Credit BDC II LLC (“PC BDC,” and, together with SLRC, HC BDC, the “SLR BDCs”) are substantially limited in their ability to co-invest in privately negotiated transactions with affiliated funds other than as permitted by the Order. While the Order permits the Company to participate in negotiated co-investment transactions with the SLR BDCs and other affiliated funds, such participation is subject to numerous conditions. If the Company and the SLR BDCs are unable to comply with these conditions or are otherwise unable to rely on the Order for a particular opportunity, such opportunity will be allocated first to the entity whose investment strategy is the most consistent with the opportunity being allocated, and second, if the terms of the opportunity are consistent with more than one entity’s investment strategy, on an alternating basis. Although SLR will endeavor to allocate investment opportunities in a fair and equitable manner, the Company could be adversely affected to the extent investment opportunities are allocated among the Company and other investment vehicles managed or sponsored by, or affiliated with SLR and its affiliates, including the SLR BDCs, pursuant to the conditions of the Order.

Regulatory Risks Relating to the Company. Legal and regulatory changes could occur during the term of the Company that may adversely affect the Company. The Company may be subject to, and adversely affected by, new federal, state or non-U.S. laws or new regulation by the SEC, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the “CFTC”), the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve Board”), the FDIC, the European Commission and other federal, state and non-U.S. securities or banking regulators, and other governmental regulatory authorities or self-regulatory organizations that supervise the financial markets. The Company may also be adversely affected by changes in the enforcement or interpretation of existing statutes and rules by courts and/or these governmental regulatory authorities or self-regulatory organizations. For example, a recent court decision casts doubt on whether federal or state usury

laws apply with respect to loans originated by national banks and then sold to non-bank investors such as the Company; this decision could significantly disrupt the bank loan secondary market and adversely impact the Company’s investment program. In addition, the approach taken by a federal court in the “Sun Capital” decision may significantly expand the scope of potential joint and several liability for pension obligations of portfolio companies commonly held by affiliated funds; this decision could create significant uncertainty with respect to such investments and adversely impact the Company. Moreover, legal and regulatory changes may adversely affect the Company’s ability to obtain financing by (among other things) reducing the availability of financing and/or adversely impacting financing costs and other terms.

The financial services industry is subject to extensive regulation. Banking regulators have broad and largely discretionary powers, which include prohibiting “unsafe or unsound” practices; requiring affirmative actions to correct any violation or practice; issuing administrative orders that can be judicially enforced; directing increases in capital; directing the sale of subsidiaries or other assets; limiting dividends and distributions; restricting growth; assessing civil monetary penalties; removing officers and directors; and terminating deposit insurance. These actions and other regulatory requirements could have a material adverse effect on an investment in the Company. The financial institutions in which the Company will invest and with which the Company will transact are subject to laws, regulations, administrative actions and policies in each location in which they operate. The regulatory environment for private investment funds is evolving, and changes in the regulation or taxation of private investment funds may adversely affect the value of the investments held by the Company and the ability of the Company to execute its investment strategy.

In addition, the securities and futures markets are subject to comprehensive statutes, regulations and margin requirements. The SEC and other U.S. and non-U.S. regulators, self-regulatory organizations and exchanges are authorized to take extraordinary actions in the event of market emergencies. The regulation of derivatives transactions and funds that engage in such transactions is an evolving area of law and is subject to modification by government and judicial action. The effect of any future regulatory change on the Company could be substantial and adverse.

Risks Related to Changes in Regulatory Policy. The U.S. government has recently called for significant changes to U.S. trade, healthcare, immigration, foreign and government regulatory policy. In this regard, there is significant uncertainty with respect to legislation, regulation and government policy at the federal level, as well as the state and local levels. Recent events have created a climate of heightened uncertainty and introduced new and difficult-to-quantify macroeconomic and political risks with potentially far-reaching implications. There has been a corresponding meaningful increase in the uncertainty surrounding interest rates, inflation, foreign exchange rates, trade volumes and fiscal and monetary policy. To the extent the U.S. Congress or the current administration implements changes to U.S. policy, those changes may impact, among other things, the U.S. and global economy, international trade and relations, unemployment, immigration, corporate taxes, healthcare, the U.S. regulatory environment, inflation and other areas.

Financial Services and Government Intervention. From time to time, certain governments and regulatory authorities, such as the U.S. federal government, the U.S. Federal Reserve and the governments and regulatory authorities of certain member countries of the EU, have taken actions to provide or arrange credit support to financial institutions whose operations have been compromised by credit market dislocations and to restore liquidity and stability to the financial system in such jurisdictions. The implementation of any current or future governmental interventions (which may be significantly altered or terminated prior to implementation or during their terms), and their impact on both the credit markets generally and the Company’s investment program in particular, are uncertain.

U.S. Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. In response to the recent disruption in the credit markets and the global economic downturn, various agencies and regulatory bodies of the U.S. federal government have taken or are considering taking various actions. These actions include, but are not limited to, the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”), which was signed into law on July 21, 2010, and which imposes a new regulatory framework over the U.S. financial services industry, non-U.S. financial entities that are regulated by or affiliated with entities regulated by U.S. financial regulators, and the consumer credit markets in general, and proposed and final regulations adopted thereunder, as well as proposed and final regulations to implement the Basel III regulatory capital accords. Given the broad scope and sweeping nature of these changes and the fact that certain final implementing rules and regulations have not yet been adopted or implemented, the potential impact of these actions on the Adviser and the Company is unknown, and no assurance can be made that the impact of such changes would not have a material adverse effect on the Adviser or the Company. For example, the U.S. Financial Stability Oversight Council (“FSOC”) created by the Dodd-Frank Act has the authority to designate asset management firms as a “systemically important financial institution” (“SIFI”). If the Adviser, or one of its affiliates, were designated as a SIFI, it would be subject to a variety of regulations, including capital requirements and limitations on leverage, which could have a material adverse effect on the ability of the Company to pursue its investment strategy. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act created a new regulator for the credit industry in the U.S. known as the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”). The CFPB may, among other things, regulate interest rates and other charges, require certain disclosures and regulate foreclosure practices. Future regulatory actions authorized by the Dodd-Frank Act (including any regulatory actions or other measures taken by the FSOC and/or the CFPB) may significantly reduce the profitability of the Company and its Portfolio Investments.

Changes to Derivatives Regulation. Through comprehensive new global regulatory regimes impacting derivatives (e.g., the Dodd-Frank Act, European Market Infrastructure Regulation (“EMIR”), Markets in Financial Investments Regulation (“MIFIR”)/Markets in Financial

Instruments Directive (“MIFID II”)), certain over-the-counter derivatives transactions in which the Company may engage are either now or will soon be subject to various requirements, such as mandatory central clearing of transactions which include additional margin requirements and in certain cases trading on electronic platforms, pre-and post-trade transparency reporting requirements and mandatory bi-lateral exchange of initial margin for non-cleared swaps.

The Dodd-Frank Act also created new categories of regulated market participants, such as “swap dealers,” “security-based swap dealers,” “major swap participants,” and “major security-based swap participants” who are subject to significant new capital, registration, recordkeeping, reporting, disclosure, business conduct and other regulatory requirements. The EU and some other jurisdictions are implementing similar requirements. Because these requirements are new and evolving (and some of the rules are not yet final), their ultimate impact remains unclear. However, even if the Company itself is not located in a particular jurisdiction or directly subject to the jurisdiction’s derivatives regulations, the Company may still be impacted to the extent the Company enters into a derivatives transaction with a regulated market participant or counterparty that is organized in that jurisdiction or otherwise subject to that jurisdiction’s derivatives regulations.

Based on information available as of the date of this annual report on Form 10-K, the effect of such requirements will be likely to (directly or indirectly) increase the Company’s overall costs of entering into derivatives transactions. In particular, new margin requirements, position limits and significantly higher capital charges resulting from new global capital regulations, even if not directly applicable to the Company, may cause an increase in the pricing of derivatives transactions entered into by market participants to whom such requirements apply or affect the overall ability of the Company to enter into derivatives transactions with certain counterparties. Such new global capital regulations and the need to satisfy the various requirements by counterparties are resulting in increased funding costs and increased overall transaction costs and are significantly affecting balance sheets, thereby resulting in changes to financing terms and potentially impacting the Company’s ability to obtain financing. Administrative costs, due to new requirements such as registration, recordkeeping, reporting, and compliance, even if not directly applicable to the Company, may also be reflected in the Company’s derivatives transactions. New requirements to trade certain derivatives transactions on electronic trading platforms and trade reporting requirements may lead to (among other things) fragmentation of the markets, higher transaction costs or reduced availability of derivatives, and/or a reduced ability to hedge, all of which could adversely affect the performance of certain of the Company’s investing strategies. In addition, changes to derivatives regulations may impact the tax and/or accounting treatment of certain derivatives, which could adversely impact the Company.

In November 2020, the SEC adopted new rules regarding the ability of a BDC (or a registered investment company) to use derivatives and other transactions that create future payment or delivery obligations. BDCs that use derivatives will be subject to a value-at-risk leverage limit, certain other derivatives risk management program and testing requirements and requirements related to board reporting. These new requirements would apply unless the BDC qualified as a “limited derivatives user,” as defined in the adopted rules. A BDC that enters into reverse repurchase agreements or similar financing transactions would need to aggregate the amount of indebtedness associated with the reverse repurchase agreements or similar financing transactions and could either (i) comply with the asset coverage requirements of Section 18 of the 1940 Act when engaging in reverse repurchase agreements or (ii) choose to treat such agreements as derivative transactions under the adopted rules. Under the adopted rules, a BDC may enter into an unfunded commitment agreement that is not a derivatives transaction, such as an agreement to provide financing to a Portfolio Investment, if the BDC has a reasonable belief, at the time it enters into such an agreement, that it will have sufficient cash and cash equivalents to meet its obligations with respect to all of its unfunded commitment agreements, in each case as it becomes due. If the BDC cannot meet this test, it is required to treat unfunded commitments as a derivatives transaction subject to the requirements of the rule. Collectively, these requirements may limit the Company’s ability to use derivatives and/or enter into certain other financial contracts.

Uncertainty of the U.S. Political Climate. The current administration has called for significant changes to U.S. trade, healthcare, immigration, foreign and government regulatory policy. In this regard, there is significant uncertainty with respect to legislation, regulation and government policy at the federal level, as well as the state and local levels. Recent events have created a climate of heightened uncertainty and introduced new and difficult-to-quantify macroeconomic and political risks with potentially far-reaching implications. There has been a corresponding meaningful increase in the uncertainty surrounding interest rates, inflation, foreign exchange rates, trade volumes and fiscal and monetary policy. To the extent the U.S. Congress or the current administration implements changes to U.S. policy, those changes may impact, among other things, the U.S. and global economy, international trade and relations, unemployment, immigration, corporate taxes, healthcare, the U.S. regulatory environment, inflation and other areas. Although the Company cannot predict the impact, if any, of these changes to its business, they could adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition, operating results and cash flows. Until the Company knows what policy changes are made and how those changes impact its business and the business of the Company’s competitors over the long term, the Company will not know if, overall, it will benefit from them or be negatively affected by them.

“Bad Actor” Restrictions for Private Placements Conducted Under Rule 506 of Regulation D. An issuer is precluded from conducting offerings that rely on the exemption from registration under the Securities Act provided by Rule 506 of Regulation D (“Rule 506 Offerings”) if a “covered person” of the issuer has been the subject of a “disqualifying event” (each as defined below). “Covered persons” include,

among others, the issuer, affiliated issuers, any investment manager or solicitor of the issuer, any director, executive officer or other officer participating in the offering of the issuer, any general partner or managing member of the foregoing entities, any promoter of the issuer and any beneficial owner of 20% or more of the issuer’s outstanding voting equity securities, calculated on the basis of voting power. A “disqualifying event” includes, among other things, certain (a) criminal convictions and court injunctions and restraining orders issued in connection with the purchase or sale of a security or false filings with the SEC, (b) final orders from the CFTC, U.S. Federal banking agencies and certain other regulators that bar a person from associating with a regulated entity or engaging in the business of securities, insurance or banking or that are based on certain fraudulent conduct, (c) SEC disciplinary orders relating to investment advisers, brokers, dealers and their associated persons, (d) SEC cease-and-desist orders relating to violations of certain anti-fraud provisions and registration requirements of the U.S. federal securities laws, (e) suspensions or expulsions from membership in a self-regulatory organization (“SRO”) or from association with an SRO member, and (f) U.S. Postal Service false representation orders.

A disqualification will occur only in the case of a disqualifying event of a covered person that occurs on or after September 23, 2013, although issuers must disclose to potential investors in a Rule 506 Offering disqualifying events of covered persons that occurred before September 23, 2013. The rule provides an exception from disqualification if the issuer can show that it did not know and, in the exercise of reasonable care could not have known, that the issuer or any other covered person had a disqualifying event, although an issuer will not be able to establish that it has exercised reasonable care unless it has made, in light of the circumstances, factual inquiry into whether any disqualifications exist.

The Adviser has made, and on a periodic basis will continue to make, inquiries into whether any persons that the Adviser has determined to be affiliated issuers have been subject to any disqualifying events; however, in some circumstances the Adviser’s ability to determine whether the Company would be disqualified from relying on Rule 506 may depend on cooperation of third parties over whom the Company may have limited control and influence.

If any of the Adviser’s covered persons, including any affiliated issuer of the Company, is subject to a disqualifying event, the Company could lose the ability to raise capital in a future Rule 506 offering for a significant period of time and the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

Changes to Accounting Standards. The Financial Accounting Standards Board’s Accounting Codification Standards and updates, and additional provisions of U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) (or to the extent applicable, International Financial Reporting Standards or other applicable accounting or financial reporting standards), that may be adopted in the future may impose additional, or different, specific requirements as to the valuation of assets and liabilities for purposes of U.S. GAAP-compliant financial reporting.

Licensing Requirements. Various licensing requirements could apply to the Company or the Adviser with respect to investments in, or the origination, holding, servicing and disposing of, loans and similar assets. The licensing requirements could apply depending on the location of the borrower, the location of the collateral securing the loan, or the location where the Company or the Adviser operates or has offices. Moreover, the Company’s ability to invest in certain properties, participate in the secondary mortgage market, obtain financing for investments, lease properties to tenants and/or engage in lending, advisory, servicing and/or broker activities may be subject to the issuance of permits or licenses. If the Company applies for such licenses, this process may be costly and take several months. There is no assurance that the Company will obtain all of the licenses that it desires or that the Company would not experience significant delays in seeking these licenses. In states and other jurisdictions in which it is licensed, the Company or the Adviser is required to comply with applicable laws and regulations, including possible information requirements and consumer protection and anti-fraud laws, which could impose restrictions on the Company’s or the Adviser’s ability to take certain actions to protect the value of its investments in such assets and impose compliance costs. Failure to comply with such laws and regulations could lead to, among other penalties, a loss of the Company’s or the Adviser’s license, which in turn could restrict the Company’s investment options or require the Company to divest assets located in or secured by real property located in that jurisdiction. These risks also apply to issuers and entities in which the Company invests that hold similar assets, as well as any origination company or servicer in which the Company owns an interest.

Reporting Company Filing Requirements. As a BDC, the Company is subject to the reporting requirements of the 1934 Act and requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. These requirements may place a strain on systems and resources. The 1934 Act requires that the Company file annual, quarterly and current reports with respect to business and financial condition. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires that the Company maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls over financial reporting, which are discussed below. In order to maintain and improve the effectiveness of disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls, significant resources and management oversight are required. The Company has implemented procedures, processes, policies and practices for the purpose of addressing the standards and requirements applicable to reporting companies. These activities may divert management’s attention from other business concerns, which could have a material adverse effect on business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. The Company incurs significant additional annual expenses related to these steps and, among other things, directors’ and officers’ liability insurance, director fees, reporting requirements of the SEC, transfer agent fees, additional administrative expenses payable to the

Administrative Coordinator to compensate them for hiring additional accounting, legal and administrative personnel, increased auditing and legal fees and similar expenses.

The systems and resources necessary to comply with public company reporting requirements will increase further once the Company ceases to be an “emerging growth company” under the JOBS Act. As long as the Company remains an emerging growth company, it intends to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies, including, but not limited to, not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The Company will remain an emerging growth company for up to five years following any future IPO (however, the Company does not anticipate engaging in an IPO of its Units), although if the market value of the Units that are held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of any June 30 before that time, the Company would cease to be an emerging growth company as of the following December 31.

Additionally, because the Units are registered under the 1934 Act, ownership information for any person who beneficially owns 5% or more of the Units will have to be disclosed in a Schedule 13G or other filings with the SEC. Beneficial ownership for these purposes is determined in accordance with the rules of the SEC, and includes having voting or investment power over the securities. In some circumstances, Unitholders who choose to reinvest their dividends may see their percentage stake in the Company increased to more than 5%, thus triggering this filing requirement. Each Unitholder is responsible for determining their filing obligations and preparing the filings. In addition, Unitholders who hold more than 10% of a class of Units may be subject to Section 16(b) of the 1934 Act, which recaptures for the benefit of the Company profits from the purchase and sale of registered Units within a six-month period.

Documentation of Internal Controls. The Company is obligated to maintain proper and effective internal control over financial reporting, including the internal control evaluation and certification requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (“Section 404”). The Company is not required to comply with all of the requirements under Section 404 until the date it is no longer an emerging growth company under the JOBS Act. Accordingly, the Company’s internal controls over financial reporting do not currently meet all of the standards contemplated by Section 404 that they will eventually be required to meet. Specifically, the Company is required to conduct annual management assessments of the effectiveness of its internal controls over financial reporting. However, the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm is not required to formally attest to the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting until the date it is no longer an emerging growth company under the JOBS Act.

The Company’s internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements because of its inherent limitations, including the possibility of human error, the circumvention or overriding of controls, or fraud. Even effective internal controls can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements. If the Company fails to maintain the adequacy of its internal controls, including any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or if the Company experiences difficulties in their implementation, the Company’s business and operating results could be harmed and it could fail to meet its financial reporting obligations.

High Yield Debt and Unrated Securities. High yield securities are typically junior to the obligations of companies to senior creditors, trade creditors and employees. High yield securities and unrated securities (which are not rated by a rating agency) may be more susceptible to real or perceived adverse economic and competitive industry conditions than investment-grade securities. A projection of an economic downturn or of a period of rising interest rates, such as the recent economic period, for example, could cause a decline in the prices of high yield securities and unrated securities, because the advent of a recession could lessen the ability of an issuer to make principal and interest payments on its debt obligations. In addition, such securities have historically experienced greater default rates than investment grade securities. The ability of holders of high yield debt to influence a company’s affairs will be substantially less than that of senior creditors, especially during periods of financial distress or following insolvency.

As with other Portfolio Investments, there may not be a liquid market for certain high yield debt which is held by the Company, which could result in the Company being unable to sell such securities for an extended period of time, if at all. In addition, as with other types of Portfolio Investments, the market for high yield debt has historically been subject to disruptions that have caused substantial volatility in the prices of such securities. Consolidation in the financial services industry has resulted in there being fewer market makers for high yield debt, which may result in further risk of illiquidity and volatility with respect to high yield debt held by the Company, and this trend may continue in the future. Furthermore, high yield debt which is held by the Company may not be registered under the Securities Act, and, unless so registered, the Company is not able to sell such high yield debt except pursuant to an exemption from registration under the Securities Act. Unrated securities may be less liquid than comparable rated securities and may also involve the risk that the Adviser may not accurately evaluate the security’s comparative credit rating.

Analysis of creditworthiness of issuers of high yield and unrated securities may be more complex than for issuers of higher-quality fixed income securities. Since it is expected that most of the Company’s assets will not be rated by any rating agency or will be rated below

investment grade, the Company is more dependent on the Adviser’s creditworthiness analysis than if the Company invested exclusively in higher-quality and rated securities. Securities rated below investment grade are often referred to as “leveraged loans,” “high yield” or “junk” securities, and may be considered “high risk” compared to debt instruments that are rated investment grade. See “— General Credit Risk” above.

Equity-Related Securities. As with other Portfolio Investments, the value of equity or equity-related securities held by the Company may be adversely affected by actual or perceived negative events relating to the issuer of such securities, the industry or geographic areas in which such issuer operates or the financial markets generally. However, equity securities may be even more susceptible to such events given their subordinate position in the issuer’s capital structure. As such, equity securities generally have greater price volatility than fixed income securities, and the market price of equity securities owned by the Company is more susceptible to moving up or down in a rapid or unpredictable manner. In addition, equity securities often lose a significant amount of their value and may become worthless as a result of a bankruptcy proceeding or reorganization.

Convertible Securities Risk. Convertible securities generally offer lower interest or dividend yields than non-convertible debt securities of similar quality. The market values of convertible securities tend to decline as interest rates increase and, conversely, to increase as interest rates decline. However, a convertible security’s market value tends to reflect the market price of the common stock of the issuing company when that stock price approaches or is greater than the convertible security’s “conversion price.” The conversion price is defined as the predetermined price at which the convertible security could be exchanged for the associated stock. As the market price of the underlying common stock declines, the price of the convertible security tends to be influenced more by the yield of the convertible security. Thus, it may not decline in price to the same extent as the underlying common stock. Generally, in the event of a liquidation of the issuing company, holders of convertible securities would be paid before the company’s common stockholders but after holders of any senior debt obligations of the company. Consequently, the issuer’s convertible securities generally entail less risk than its common stock but more risk than its debt obligations. There is also a risk that, under certain circumstances, a bankruptcy court may order that convertible securities are treated as equity.

The Company may invest in synthetic convertible securities, which are created through a combination of separate securities that possess the two principal characteristics of a traditional convertible security, i.e., an income-producing security (“income-producing component”) and the right to acquire an equity security (“convertible component”). The income-producing component is achieved by investing in non-convertible, income-producing securities such as bonds, preferred stocks and money market instruments. The convertible component is achieved by purchasing warrants or options to buy common stock at a certain exercise price, or options on a stock index. The values of synthetic convertible securities will respond differently to market fluctuations than a traditional convertible security because a synthetic convertible is composed of two or more separate securities or instruments, each with its own market value. Synthetic convertible securities are also subject to the risks associated with derivatives. In addition, if the value of the underlying common stock or the level of the index involved in the convertible element falls below the strike price of the warrant or option, the warrant or option may lose all value.

Preferred Securities Risk. In addition to credit risk, investment in preferred stocks involves certain other risks. Certain preferred stocks contain provisions that allow an issuer under certain conditions to skip or defer distributions. If the Company owns preferred stock that is deferring its distribution, the Company may be required to report income for U.S. federal income tax purposes despite the fact that it is not receiving current income on this position. Preferred stock often is subject to legal provisions that allow for redemption in the event of certain tax or legal changes or at the issuer’s call. In the event of redemption, the Company may not be able to reinvest the proceeds at comparable rates of return. Preferred stock is subordinated to bonds and other debt securities in an issuer’s capital structure in terms of priority for corporate income and liquidation payments and, therefore, will be subject to greater credit risk than those debt securities. Preferred stock may trade less frequently and in a more limited volume and may be subject to more abrupt or erratic price movements than many other securities, such as common stocks, corporate debt securities and U.S. government securities.

Forwards and Derivatives Transactions. The Company may engage in a variety of derivatives transactions. A derivative is a financial contract the value of which depends upon, or is derived from, the value of underlying assets, reference rates or indices. Derivatives may relate to securities, interest rates, currencies or currency exchange rates, inflation rates, commodities and related indices, and include foreign currency contracts, swap contracts, options, forward and futures contracts (including options thereon), repurchase or reverse repurchase agreements or other over-the-counter contracts. The Company may use derivatives for many purposes, including as a substitute for direct investment, as a way to adjust its exposure to various securities, markets and currencies without actually having to sell existing investments and/or make new investments, and as a means to hedge other investments and to manage liquidity and excess cash. The Company’s use of derivatives may result in losses, reduce the Company’s return, and/or increase the volatility of the Company (particularly since many derivatives are inherently leveraged), especially in unusual or extreme market conditions.

All derivatives transactions involve risks different from, and potentially greater than, the risks associated with investing directly in securities and other more traditional assets, including:

Market Risk. This is the general risk that the value of a particular investment or transaction will change in a way detrimental to the Company’s interests.

Management Risk. Derivatives contracts are specialized contracts that require investment techniques and risk analyses with additional levels of complexity associated with the underlying investments. In addition to risks associated with the underlying instruments, counterparty and unsecured risk (among others) need to be computed and tracked in relation to the Company’s overall risk profile.

Documentation Risk. Many derivatives transactions also have documentation risk. Because contracts for over-the-counter derivatives transactions are individually negotiated with specific counterparties, there exists the risk that the parties may interpret contractual terms (e.g., the definition of default) differently than the Company. If that occurs, the cost and unpredictability of the legal proceedings required for the Company to enforce its contractual rights may lead the Company to decide not to pursue its claims against the counterparty. The Company, therefore, assumes the risk that it may be unable to obtain payments the Adviser believes are owed to it under derivatives transactions, or those payments may be delayed or made only after the Company has incurred the costs of litigation. Also, payment amounts calculated in connection with standard industry conventions for resolving contractual issues (e.g., ISDA Protocols and auction processes) may be different than would be realized if a counterparty were required to comply with the literal terms of the derivatives transaction (e.g., physical delivery). There is little case law interpreting the terms of most derivatives or characterizing their tax treatment.

Regulatory Risk. The derivatives market is subject to various risks related to existing as well as new and evolving regulation both within and outside the U.S. Additional regulation of the derivatives markets may make derivatives more costly, may limit the availability of derivatives, or may otherwise adversely affect the value or performance of derivatives. Any such adverse future developments could impair the effectiveness of a Company’s derivatives transactions and cause the Company to lose value. They may also render certain strategies in which the Company might otherwise engage impossible or so costly that they will no longer be economical to implement. See “— Changes to Derivatives Regulation” above.

Other Risks. Derivatives also involve the risk that changes in their value may not correlate perfectly with the assets, rates or indices they are designed to track. Suitable derivatives may not be available in all circumstances. Under the terms of certain contracts governing derivatives transactions, the occurrence of certain events with respect to the Company (such as a decline in the Company’s NAV) may cause the Company’s derivatives transactions to be terminated early, including at an inopportune time or at an unfavorable price.

Warrants and Rights. The Company may purchase or otherwise receive warrants or rights. Warrants and rights generally give the holder the right to receive, upon exercise, a security of the issuer at a stated price. Risks associated with the use of warrants and rights are generally similar to risks associated with the use of options. Unlike most options, however, warrants and rights are issued in specific amounts, and warrants generally have longer terms than options. Warrants and rights are not likely to be as liquid as exchange-traded options backed by a recognized clearing agency. In addition, the terms of warrants or rights may limit the Company’s ability to exercise the warrants or rights at such time, or in such quantities, as the Company would otherwise wish.

Risks Relating to Reference Rates. The London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) is an index rate that historically was widely used in lending transactions and was a common reference rate for setting the floating interest rate on private loans. LIBOR was typically the reference rate used in floating-rate loans extended to the Company’s Portfolio Investments.

The ICE Benchmark Administration (“IBA”) (the entity that is responsible for calculating LIBOR) ceased providing overnight, one, three, six and twelve months USD LIBOR tenors on June 30, 2023. In addition, the United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”), which oversees the IBA, now prohibits entities supervised by the FCA from using LIBORs, including USD LIBOR, except in very limited circumstances.

In the United States, SOFR is the preferred alternative rate for LIBOR. SOFR is a measure of the cost of borrowing cash overnight, collateralized by U.S. Treasury securities, and is based on directly observable U.S. Treasury-backed repurchase transactions. SOFR is published by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York each U.S. Government Securities Business Day, for transactions made on the immediately preceding U.S. Government Securities Business Day. Alternative reference rates that may replace LIBOR, including SOFR for USD transactions, may not yield the same or similar economic results as LIBOR over the lives of such transactions.

As of the filing date of this annual report on Form 10-K, many of the Company’s loans that referenced LIBOR have been amended to reference the forward-looking term rate published by CME Group Benchmark Administration Limited based on SOFR (“CME Term SOFR”) or CME Term SOFR plus a fixed spread adjustment. CME Term SOFR rates are forward-looking rates that are derived by compounding projected overnight SOFR rates over one, three, and six months taking into account the values of multiple consecutive, executed, one-month and three-month CME Group traded SOFR futures contracts and, in some cases, over-the-counter SOFR Overnight Indexed Swaps as an indicator of CME Term SOFR reference rate values. CME Term SOFR and the inputs on which it is based are derived from SOFR. Since CME Term SOFR is a relatively new market rate, there will likely be no established trading market for credit agreements

or other financial instruments when they are issued, and an established market may never develop or may not be liquid. Market terms for instruments referencing CME Term SOFR rates may be lower than those of later-issued CME Term SOFR indexed instruments. Similarly, if CME Term SOFR does not prove to be widely used, the trading price of instruments referencing CME Term SOFR may be lower than those of instruments indexed to indices that are more widely used. Further, the composition and characteristics of SOFR and CME Term SOFR are not the same as those of LIBOR. Even with the application of a fixed spread adjustment, LIBOR and CME Term SOFR will not have the same composition and characteristics, and there can be no assurance that the replacement rate, as so adjusted, will be a direct substitute for LIBOR.

There can be no guarantee that SOFR will not be discontinued or fundamentally altered in a manner that is materially adverse to the interests of investors in loans referencing SOFR. If the manner in which SOFR or CME Term SOFR is calculated is changed, that change may result in a reduction of the amount of interest payable on such loans and the trading prices of the SOFR Loans. In addition, there can be no guarantee that loans referencing SOFR or CME Term SOFR will continue to reference those rates until maturity or that, in the future, the Company’s loans will reference benchmark rates other than CME Term SOFR. Should any of these events occur, the Company’s loans, and the yield generated thereby, could be affected. Specifically, the anticipated yield on the Company’s loans may not be fully realized and the Company’s loans may be subject to increased pricing volatility and market risk.

Risks Related to Economic Recessions. The recent macroeconomic environment is characterized by record-high inflation, supply chain challenges, labor shortages, high interest rates, foreign currency exchange volatility, volatility in global capital markets and growing recession risk. The risks associated with the Company’s and the Portfolio Investments’ businesses are more severe during periods of economic slowdown or recession.

Many of the Company’s Portfolio Investments may be susceptible to economic slowdowns or recessions and may be unable to repay its loans during these periods. The global outbreak of COVID-19 has disrupted economic markets, and the prolonged economic impact is uncertain. Many manufacturers of goods have seen a downturn in production due to the suspension of business and temporary closure of factories globally in an attempt to curb the continued spread of the virus. As a result of these disruptions, the Company’s non-performing assets may increase and the value of its portfolio may decrease during these periods as the Company is required to record the values of its investments. Adverse economic conditions also may decrease the value of collateral securing some of the Company’s loans and the value of its equity investments at fair value. Economic slowdowns or recessions could lead to financial losses in the Company’s portfolio and a decrease in revenues, net income and assets. Unfavorable economic conditions also could increase the Company’s funding costs, limit its access to the capital markets or result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit to the Company. These events could prevent the Company from increasing investments and result in its receipt of a reduced level of interest income from the Company’s Portfolio Investments and/or losses or charge offs related to its investments, and, in turn, may adversely affect distributable income and have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations.

A Portfolio Investment’s failure to satisfy financial or operating covenants imposed by the Company or other lenders could lead to defaults and, potentially, acceleration of the time when the loans are due and foreclosure on its secured assets, which could trigger cross-defaults under other agreements and jeopardize the Portfolio Investment’s ability to meet its obligations under the debt that the Company holds. The Company may incur additional expenses to the extent necessary to seek recovery upon default or to negotiate new terms with a defaulting Portfolio Investment. In addition, if one of the Company’s Portfolio Investments were to go bankrupt, depending on the facts and circumstances, including the extent to which the Company actually provided significant managerial assistance to that Portfolio Investment, a bankruptcy court might re-characterize its debt holdings and subordinate all or a portion of the Company’s claim to that of other creditors.

These Portfolio Investments may face intense competition, including competition from companies with greater financial resources, more extensive research and development, manufacturing, marketing and service capabilities and greater number of qualified and experienced managerial and technical personnel. They may need additional financing that they are unable to secure and that the Company is unable or unwilling to provide, or they may be subject to adverse developments unrelated to the technologies they acquire.

The Company’s business is directly influenced by the economic cycle and could be negatively impacted by a downturn in economic activity in the U.S. as well as globally. Fiscal and monetary actions taken by U.S. and non-U.S. government and regulatory authorities could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s business. To the extent uncertainty regarding the U.S. or global economy, including as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, certain regional bank failures, the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the ongoing war in the Middle East, negatively impacts consumer confidence and consumer credit factors, the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected. Moreover, Federal Reserve policy, including with respect to certain interest rates and the decision to end its quantitative easing policy, along with the general policies of the current Presidential administration, may also adversely affect the value, volatility and liquidity of dividend- and interest-paying securities. Market volatility, periods of rising interest rates, such as the recent economic period, and/or a return to unfavorable economic conditions could adversely affect its business.

Risks Related to Portfolio Investment Monitoring and Involvement. The Company’s Portfolio Investments will require active monitoring and may, at times, involve participation in business strategy or reorganization proceedings. See “— Control Positions” below. The Company’s investment program may from time to time enable it to place representatives on the creditors’ or steering committees and/or the boards of directors of certain companies in which it has invested. While such involvement may enable the Adviser to enhance the value of the Company’s Portfolio Investments, it may also prevent the Company from freely disposing of such Portfolio Investments, while also exposing it to legal claims and adverse publicity (including claims of breach of duty of loyalty, securities claims and other management-related claims). In addition, if the Adviser’s representatives are serving as directors of companies which are in the “zone of insolvency,” such persons may have a fiduciary obligation to the creditors of such entity as well as the shareholders of such entity. The interests of such parties may be adverse to the interests of the Company. These fiduciary obligations may conflict with the Adviser’s obligation to the Company, and the Adviser may cause its representatives to resign from such positions in order to reduce such conflicts. Any involvement by the Adviser’s representatives (including through serving on a board of directors, or permanent or ad hoc creditors’ or steering committees) may also entail a substantial time commitment, which may limit such representatives’ ability to participate in other Company matters and investments.

Risks Associated with Bankruptcy and Insolvency Cases. If any issuers of securities held by the Company or any counterparties to the derivatives transactions and other transactions entered into by the Company, or any custodians of the Company’s assets or any obligors in connection with Portfolio Investments are involved in bankruptcy proceedings, the Company will be subject to certain risks inherent in bankruptcy proceedings, including the duration, administrative costs and impact of a bankruptcy case on the value of assets administered in bankruptcy or on a company’s value (including that a bankruptcy case may damage or diminish a company’s relationship with its employees, customers and/or suppliers). Many of the events within a bankruptcy or insolvency case are adversarial and often beyond the control of the creditors. While creditors generally are afforded an opportunity to object to significant actions, or to demand that certain actions take place, there can be no assurance that a court would not approve actions or inaction which may be contrary to the interests of the Company.

Generally, the duration of a bankruptcy or insolvency case can only be roughly estimated. The reorganization of a company usually involves the design of a business plan, the development and negotiation of a plan of reorganization, plan approval by creditors and confirmation by the court. This process can involve substantial legal, professional and administrative costs to the company and to the Company; is subject to unpredictable and lengthy delays; and during the process the company’s competitive position may erode, key management may depart and the company may not be able to invest adequately. In some cases, the company may not be able to reorganize and may be required to liquidate assets. In addition, the debt of companies in financial reorganization may, in some cases, not pay current interest and other charges, may not even accrue interest and other charges during reorganization, may be relieved of paying pre-payment premiums and may be adversely affected by an erosion of the issuer’s fundamental value. Further, a debtor seeking to reorganize under U.S. federal bankruptcy law will frequently obtain a “first day” order from the bankruptcy court limiting trading in claims against, and shares of, the debtor in order to maximize the debtor’s ability to utilize net operating losses following a successful reorganization.

During the pendency of a bankruptcy case, an automatic stay will prevent all creditors from taking action against the debtor to foreclose on collateral or otherwise to collect on amounts owed to such creditors. Unless a creditor’s claim in such case is secured by assets having a value in excess of such claim, or the bankruptcy estate is determined to be solvent, no interest will be permitted to accrue and, therefore, a creditor’s return on investment can be adversely affected by the passage of time during which the plan of reorganization of the debtor is being negotiated, approved by the creditors and confirmed by the bankruptcy court.

The priority of perfected liens held by secured creditors as of the commencement of the bankruptcy case is typically recognized in a bankruptcy case, unless avoided. Occasionally, however, a court will allow a debtor-in-possession financing to receive liens that prime pre-existing, valid liens.

The administrative costs in connection with a bankruptcy case are frequently high and will generally be paid out of the debtor’s estate prior to any return to creditors (other than out of assets or proceeds thereof which are subject to valid and enforceable liens and other security

interests) and equity holders. In addition, certain unsecured claims that have priority by law over the claims of certain creditors (for example, claims arising post-petition and certain claims for taxes) may be quite high.

U.S. bankruptcy law permits the classification of “substantially similar” claims in determining the classification of claims in a reorganization for the purpose of voting on a plan of reorganization. Because the standard for classification is vague, there exists a significant risk that the Company’s influence with respect to a class of securities can be lost by the inflation of the number and the amount of claims in, or other gerrymandering of, the class.

Although a creditor is not typically compelled to release direct claims it may have against non-debtor third parties, in certain circumstances a court may compel such release in the context of a plan of reorganization.

Claims in bankruptcy cases are often paid at less than par and, depending on the debtor’s assets and liabilities, there may be no recovery at all for some classes of creditors. The claims of even over-secured secured creditors are often paid out over time, and may receive debt securities that will trade below par. Initially, only the debtor may file a proposed plan of reorganization. While the U.S. Bankruptcy Code permits other parties-in-interest to file proposed plans of reorganization after the debtors’ “exclusive period” to do so ends, bankruptcy courts often extend the debtor’s exclusive period, which effectively permits only the debtor to file a proposed reorganization plan. While creditors can vote on the plan of reorganization, the unanimous consent of all creditor classes is not necessarily required for the bankruptcy court to confirm the plan. Therefore, a plan can, subject to the provisions of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, be “crammed down” on dissenting classes of creditors. Moreover, minority members of a class may be deemed to be members of an accepting class if the requisite majority vote is acquired.

Even if a class of claims is entitled to a recovery in a reorganization or liquidation proceeding, such recovery could be in the form of instruments or interests different from the form of instrument or interest which formed the basis for the claim, including debt securities, equity securities, convertible securities, warrants, options, cash, interests in litigation claims or trusts formed to pursue such litigation claims, interests in liquidation trusts, or other property or interests, any of which could be illiquid and/or difficult to value. Furthermore, the terms of instruments or interests distributed in a bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding may differ from prevailing market terms for similar instruments or interests, and may have a market value of less than par.

The Company may be presented with the opportunity to make new investments in connection with the reorganization or liquidation of an issuer of Portfolio Investments, including, without limitation, through a rights offering, litigation financing, bridge financing or other exit financing. The Company may make such investments as part of an in-court or out-of-court restructuring of an issuer of Portfolio Investments, and any such investment will be subject to the same risks as other Portfolio Investments of the Company.

Contractual subordination provisions are enforceable when a borrower is in bankruptcy, as are most inter-creditor agreement terms. Furthermore, there are instances where creditors and equity holders may lose their ranking and priority when they take over management and functional operating control of a debtor. In those cases where the Company, by virtue of such action, is found to exercise “domination and control” of a debtor, the Company may lose its priority if the debtor or other creditors can demonstrate that the debtor’s business was adversely impacted or other creditors and/or equity holders were harmed by improper or unfair actions of the Company, whether or not the Company is found to be a controlling party of the debtor. In addition, loans extended to a financially distressed borrower by an entity that owns an equity interest in the borrower may be reclassified as having been an equity capital contribution, rather than a debt obligation.

Notwithstanding the corporate structure of various debtor entities, such as special purpose entities created to hold assets and to structure for bankruptcy remoteness, such entities may, in certain cases, be consolidated in bankruptcy proceedings, which can affect the outcome of such proceedings and the amounts ultimately received by creditors. In addition, if a claim can be asserted against only a parent holding entity, such claim may be structurally subordinated to claims against a subsidiary entity that owns assets.

The U.S. Bankruptcy Code and other laws and regulations affecting debtors’ and creditors’ rights are subject to change, including by way of legislative action or judicial interpretation. In addition, governmental actors have recently shown a willingness to intervene in bankruptcy-related matters (for example, the U.S. government’s bailouts of General Motors and Chrysler), which may increase uncertainty regarding the enforcement of creditors’ rights and the bankruptcy process generally. Any such actions could alter the expected outcome or introduce greater uncertainty regarding the expected outcome of an investment situation of the Company, which may adversely affect such investment or the Company’s investment program.

Lack of Control over Investments. The Company invests in debt securities, but may hold a non-controlling interest in one or more Portfolio Investments. Such investments may not give the Company the ability to influence the management of the company or to elect a representative to the Board. In addition, the management of the company or its shareholders may have economic or business interests which are inconsistent with those of the Company, and they may be in a position to take action contrary to the Company’s objectives. A

non-controlling interest may be especially adverse to the Company in circumstances, such as certain stressed or distressed situations, where an element of control or influence might be beneficial to the subject investment.

Control Positions. The Company does not expect to, but may have a controlling interest in a Portfolio Investment (because of its equity ownership, representation on the board of directors and/or contractual rights) either on its own or, in certain cases, with another financial partner or investment fund (e.g., in accordance with the Company’s receipt of equity in connection with a restructuring). The exercise of control over a company may impose additional risks of liability for environmental damage, product defects, failure to supervise management, pension and other fringe benefits, violation of governmental regulations (including securities laws) or other types of related liability. If these liabilities were to arise, the Company might suffer a significant loss in such investment. In addition, if employees of the Adviser serve as directors of certain of the Portfolio Investments, including public companies, they will have duties to persons other than the Company.

To the extent that the Company owns a controlling stake in or is deemed an affiliate of a particular company, it may also be subject to certain additional bankruptcy or securities laws restrictions that could affect both the liquidity of the Company’s interest and the Company’s ability to liquidate its interest without adversely impacting the price thereof, including insider trading restrictions, the affiliate sale restrictions of Rule 144 of the Securities Act and the disclosure requirements of Sections 13 and 16 of the 1934 Act. Further, to the extent that affiliates of the Company or the Adviser are subject to such restrictions, the Company, by virtue of its affiliation with such entities, may be similarly restricted, regardless of whether the Company stands to benefit from such affiliate’s ownership.

If the Company, alone or as part of a group acting together for certain purposes, becomes the beneficial owner of more than 10% of certain classes of securities of a U.S. public company or places a director on the board of directors of such a company, the Company may be subject to certain additional reporting requirements and to liability for short-swing profits under Section 16 of the 1934 Act. Furthermore, the Company may also be subject to similar reporting requirements and other limitations in non-U.S. jurisdictions where it holds significant positions in companies in such jurisdictions.

The exercise of control over a company, depending upon the amount and type of securities owned by the Company, contractual arrangements between the company and the Company, and other relevant factual circumstances, could result in an extension to one year of the 90-day bankruptcy preference period with respect to payments made to the Company. See “— Fraudulent Conveyance and Preference Considerations” below. The exercise of control over a company may also provide grounds for challenges to the priority and enforceability of Portfolio Investments or other claims the Company may have against the company if it is subject to a bankruptcy case or other insolvency proceeding. See “— Lender Liability Considerations and Equitable Subordination” below.

Lender Liability Considerations and Equitable Subordination. In recent years, a number of judicial decisions in the U.S. have upheld the right of borrowers to sue lending institutions on the basis of various evolving legal theories (collectively termed “lender liability”). Generally, lender liability is founded upon the premise that an institutional lender has violated a duty (whether implied or contractual) of good faith and fair dealing owed to the borrower or has assumed a degree of control over the borrower resulting in creation of a fiduciary duty owed to the borrower or its other creditors or shareholders. In addition, courts have in some cases applied the doctrine of equitable subordination to subordinate the claim against a borrower of a creditor, including a lending institution, to claims of other creditors of the borrower when the creditor is found to have engaged in unfair, inequitable or fraudulent conduct. There can be no assurance as to whether any fund, lending institution or other party from which the Company may directly or indirectly acquire such claims engaged in any such conduct and, if it did, as to whether the Company would be subject to claims that the Company’s Portfolio Investments should be equitably subordinated based on such conduct. Because of the nature of certain of the Company’s Portfolio Investments, the Company could be subject to allegations of lender liability or to claims that the Company’s Portfolio Investments should be equitably subordinated.

Fraudulent Conveyance and Preference Considerations. Various federal and state laws enacted for the protection of creditors may apply to the purchase of the Company’s Portfolio Investments, or payments or liens related thereto, by virtue of the Company’s role as a creditor with respect to the borrowers under such Portfolio Investments. If a court, in a lawsuit brought by an unpaid creditor, a debtor-in-possession, a trustee in bankruptcy, or their respective representatives, were to find that the borrower took any action to intentionally delay or frustrate recoveries by creditors, or did not receive fair consideration or reasonably equivalent value for incurring indebtedness evidenced by an investment and the grant of any security interest or other lien securing such investment, and, after giving effect to such indebtedness and/or grant of any security interest or other lien, the issuer or obligor (i) was insolvent, (ii) was engaged in a business for which the remaining assets of such issuer constituted unreasonably small capital or (iii) intended to incur, or believed that it would incur, debts beyond its ability to pay such debts as they mature, such court could, under certain circumstances, invalidate, in whole or in part, such indebtedness and such security interest or other lien as fraudulent conveyances, could subordinate such indebtedness to existing or future creditors of the borrower and could allow the borrower to recover amounts previously paid by the borrower to the creditor (including to the Company) in satisfaction of such indebtedness or proceeds of such security interest or other lien previously applied in satisfaction of such indebtedness.

The measure of insolvency for purposes of the foregoing will vary. Generally, an issuer or obligor would be considered insolvent at a particular time if the sum of its debts were then greater than all of its property at a fair valuation, or if the present fair saleable value of its

assets were less than the amount that would be required to pay its probable liabilities on its existing debts as they became absolute and matured. There can be no assurance as to what standard a court would apply in order to determine whether the issuer or obligor was “insolvent” after giving effect to the incurrence of the indebtedness and/or the granting of any security interest or other lien or that, regardless of the method of valuation, a court would not determine that the issuer was “insolvent” upon giving effect to such incurrence of indebtedness and/or grant of security interests or other lien.

The Company may invest in bank debt or other indebtedness issued by a borrower which is guaranteed by other entities within the borrower’s corporate family. In such circumstances, the borrower often has little or no assets other than the stock of its subsidiaries and, as a result, any recovery is often available only, if at all, from the entities that guaranteed the indebtedness. There is a risk, however, that the obligations of such guarantors and any security interests or other liens issued by the guarantors to secure such obligations may be avoided as fraudulent conveyances in the event that a court were to determine that such guarantors did not receive reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the issuance of the guarantees and for the security interests or other liens. A court could determine that the guarantors did not receive reasonably equivalent value or fair consideration in incurring the obligations and granting the security interests or other liens despite the existence of “indirect” benefits to the guarantors, such as the strengthening of the corporate enterprise in the transaction. Additionally, provisions in guarantees and other similar documents governing similar obligations by which fraudulent conveyance exposure is sought to be reduced or eliminated, such as so-called “savings clauses,” may not be enforceable. As a result, the Company’s Portfolio Investment in corporate bank debt or other indebtedness could be subject to avoidance as a fraudulent conveyance.

If a transaction is found to have been a fraudulent conveyance, the transferee may be compelled to return the value of the assets transferred as of the time of the transfer, even if the then current value is substantially less. In addition, unless the transferee is deemed to be a “good faith” transferee, the return of the asset may not even provide for the compensation back to the transferee of the value paid to the transferor.

In addition, in the event of the insolvency (as determined by a court based on the law of the jurisdiction which is being applied) of an issuer of a Portfolio Investment, payments made on the Company’s Portfolio Investment, or new liens granted, could be subject to avoidance as a “preference” if made within a certain period of time (which may be as long as one year) before insolvency, depending on a number of factors.

In general, if payments on a Company’s Portfolio Investment are avoidable, whether as a fraudulent conveyance or preference, such payments can be recaptured either from the initial recipient (such as the Company) or from subsequent transferees of such payments, including Unitholders. Additionally, if the grant of a security interest or other lien is avoidable, whether as a fraudulent conveyance or preference, the value of the security interest or other lien can be recovered from the initial transferee or the entity for whose benefit such transfer was made (such as the Company), and such recovery could include the diminution in value of the property which was subject to the security interest or other lien from the date of transfer.

There can be no assurance that a successful cause of action for fraudulent conveyance or preference will not occur, or as to whether any fund, lending institution or other party from which the Company may directly or indirectly acquire a Portfolio Investment engaged in any conduct to give rise to such causes of action, and if it did, as to whether such causes of action could be asserted against the Company and/or the Unitholders.

Portfolio Investment Risk. The Company’s Portfolio Investments may involve a high degree of business and financial risk. Portfolio Investments may be in early stages of development, may have operating losses or significant variations in operating results and may be engaged in rapidly changing businesses with products subject to a substantial risk of obsolescence. Portfolio Investments will also include companies that are experiencing or are expected to experience financial difficulties, which may never be overcome. In addition, many of them will have weak financial conditions and may require substantial additional capital to support their operations, to finance expansion or to maintain their competitive positions. Portfolio Investments may face intense competition, including competition from companies with greater financial resources, more extensive development, manufacturing, marketing, and other capabilities and a larger number of qualified managerial and technical personnel. In addition, Portfolio Investments in which the Company invests may be required to comply with numerous U.S. and non-U.S. statutory and regulatory standards. A Portfolio Investment could be materially and adversely affected as a result of statutory or regulatory changes or changes in judicial or administrative interpretations of existing laws and regulations that impose more comprehensive or stringent requirements on such Portfolio Investment, the markets in which such Portfolio Investment operates or such Portfolio Investment’s industry generally.

There can be no assurance that a Portfolio Investment’s management team will be able to operate such Portfolio Investment successfully. In addition, instances of fraud or other illegal practices committed by the management team of a Portfolio Investment may undermine the Company’s investment in such Portfolio Investment and the Company may suffer losses. Additionally, Portfolio Investments need to attract, retain and develop executives and members of their management teams. There can be no assurance that a Portfolio Investment will be able to attract and develop suitable members of its management team, which may adversely affect the Company.

Zero-Coupon Bonds, Deferred Interest Rate Bonds and Payment-In-Kind Securities. Zero-coupon bonds pay interest only at maturity rather than at intervals during the life of the security. Deferred interest rate bonds generally provide for a period of delay before the regular payment of interest begins. PIK securities are debt obligations that pay “interest” in the form of other debt obligations, instead of in cash. Each of these instruments is normally issued and traded at a deep discount from face value. Zero-coupon bonds, deferred interest rate bonds and PIKs allow an issuer to avoid or delay the need to generate cash to meet current interest payments and, as a result, may involve greater credit risk than bonds that pay interest currently or in cash. In addition, such investments experience greater volatility in market value due to changes in interest rates than debt obligations that provide for regular payments of interest.

To the extent the Company invests in OID instruments, including PIK, zero coupon bonds, and debt securities with attached warrants, investors will be exposed to the risks associated with the inclusion of such non-cash income in taxable and accounting income prior to receipt of cash, including the following:

Money Market and Other Liquid Instruments. The Company may invest its assets in such liquid securities as the Adviser may deem to be advisable, including fixed income securities, money market instruments, money market mutual funds, and debt securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S., certain U.S. government agencies or instrumentalities. Money market instruments are short-term fixed income obligations, which generally have remaining maturities of one year or less, and may include commercial paper, certificates of deposit, and bankers’ acceptances issued by domestic branches of U.S. banks that are members of the FDIC. The Company may be prevented from achieving its investment objective during any period in which its assets are not substantially invested in accordance with its investment strategy. Notwithstanding their general high-quality nature, money market funds and liquid securities are subject to the risk of loss.

Among other liquid investments, the Company may invest cash, pending investment, reinvestment or distribution thereof or in connection with the maintenance of reserves, in money fund products offered from time to time by its Custodian, including the use of bank “sweep” short-term offerings.

Pooled Investment Vehicles and Pass-through Entities. The Company may invest or take short positions in pooled investment vehicle and pass-through entities, including affiliated or third-party unregistered investment vehicles, investment companies registered under the 1940 Act (including exchange-traded funds and closed-end companies) and master limited partnerships (“Pooled Investment Vehicles”). To the extent the Company invests directly in Pooled Investment Vehicles and other “pass-through” entities which are treated as partnerships for U.S. federal income taxation purposes, the Company must rely on such vehicles to deliver to it certain tax information that is necessary to complete the Company’s own tax returns. If this information is not delivered to the Company in a timely fashion, the Company will be delayed in providing tax information to the investors.

U.S. Government and Agency Securities. The Company may invest in debt securities issued or guaranteed by certain U.S. government agencies, instrumentalities and sponsored enterprises. Some U.S. government securities, such as Treasury bills, notes and bonds and MBS guaranteed by Ginnie Mae, are supported by the full faith and credit of the U.S.; others are supported by the right of the issuer to borrow from the U.S. Treasury; others are supported by the discretionary authority of the U.S. government to purchase the agency’s obligations; and still others are supported only by the credit of the instrumentality. Although U.S. government-sponsored enterprises, such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, may be chartered or sponsored by Congress, they are not funded by Congressional appropriations, and their securities are not issued by the U.S. Treasury or supported by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government and involve increased credit risks. In addition, certain governmental entities have been subject to regulatory scrutiny regarding their accounting policies and practices and other concerns that may result in legislation, changes in regulatory oversight and/or other consequences that could adversely affect the credit quality, availability or investment character of securities issued by these entities.

Restricted Securities. It is expected that a significant portion of the Company’s Portfolio Investments will be securities (“restricted securities”) that have not been registered for sale to the public under the Securities Act pursuant to an exemption from registration (including Section 4(a)(2) of, or Rule 144A under, the Securities Act). Restricted securities are generally only sold to institutional investors in private sales from the issuer or from an affiliate of the issuer. These securities may be less liquid than securities registered for sale to the general public. The liquidity of a restricted security may be affected by a number of factors, including: (i) the credit quality of the issuer; (ii) the frequency of trades and quotes for the security; (iii) the number of dealers willing to purchase or sell the security and the number of other potential purchasers; (iv) dealer undertakings to make a market in the security; and (v) the nature of the security and the nature of marketplace trades. Also, restricted securities may be difficult to value because market quotations may not be readily available.

In addition, a debtor in a reorganization case may be granted a trading restriction order by a bankruptcy court in order to protect such debtor’s net operating losses (a “NOL Order”). Such an order may prohibit or severely restrict the ability of some creditors to sell their claims and interests in the debtor. The Company’s ability to transfer its interests in such a debtor may be impaired, delayed or prohibited as a consequence of a NOL Order. The Company may also incur added expenses if it attempts to challenge or limit the scope of a NOL Order, and such an attempt may not be successful. Similarly, issuers with net operating losses sometimes adopt Unitholder rights plans or similar arrangements in order to preserve the ability to utilize such net operating losses in the future; any such actions could also limit or otherwise adversely impact the Company’s ability to transfer or dispose of its interests in any such issuer.

Risks Related to Disposition of Investments. The Company may dispose of its investments through whatever manner it deems to be advisable, including through asset sales, repackaging transactions, securitizations, IPOs, strategic transactions and other mergers and acquisitions activity, and/or any combination thereof. Therefore, the disposition of Company investments will be subject to the risks associated with the particular exit strategy utilized. See, for example, “— Risks Relating to Bank Loans and Corporate Loans” above. In particular, certain disposition techniques and structures may expose the Company to liability for (among other things) securities laws violations, breaches of representations and warranties, and repurchase or “putback” obligations with respect to securitizations or similar structures.