AI is a transformative technology with both near-term and long-term implications for the economy. For investors, while the debt-funded AI buildout has the potential to become a secular driver of risk premia, we believe any such shift would only play out through a multi-year adjustment and would not override the cyclical forces that affect markets.
Despite the move lower late last week, U.S. Treasury yields are still holding well above recent lows and close to highs not seen in more than a year. By contrast, risk assets are firmly bid: U.S. equities have been routinely touching new historical highs, and credit spreads over Treasuries remain tight.
Since the post-COVID recovery began, U.S. nonfinancial corporations have generally managed capital conservatively. They have kept credit metrics stable and, in many cases, actively improved them. That discipline was not entirely voluntary: The sharp adjustment in funding costs triggered by the Federal Reserve’s 2022–2023 rate hiking cycle raised the bar for incremental borrowing and pushed management teams toward balance sheet restraint.
For shareholders, the upside justifies the gamble. For bondholders, the downside is real and the upside belongs to someone else. That wedge – the classic asset substitution problem – is what credit investors are increasingly pricing, and until the re-leveraging impulse shows signs of reaching a plateau, the divergence across the capital structure is likely here to stay.
Within private credit, attempts to increase liquidity – the ability to buy or sell an asset quickly, in size, and at prices reflecting fundamental values – are welcome developments, in our view. Yet until these efforts address the market’s inherent structural constraints, including a lack of true price discovery, they will only increase the perception of liquidity without truly improving liquidity.
A persistent oil shock implies higher inflation and weaker growth, but risk assets appear unfazed, with equities and credit spread performance diverging from the caution implied by government bonds.
Sentiment toward BDCs – funds that invest in small and midsize private U.S. businesses – has improved since early March. BDC bond spreads have stabilized and outperformed the broader investment grade (IG) index, suggesting credit investors are increasingly comfortable with downside risk.
Despite compositional differences – public equities generally represent larger companies with more scale, liquidity, and financial flexibility than the typically smaller, private-equity-owned issuers that dominate the software loan market – the outcome is the same: Neither market has been able to fully retrace the year-to-date sell-off in a meaningful way.
The Middle East ceasefire sparked a relief rally last week as markets dialed back the risk of a deep, drawn‑out oil supply shock. Stocks have already erased much of the post-conflict drop. Bonds haven’t gotten the memo: Yields are still elevated, keeping a bit of extra term premium on the table.
Across corporate lending markets, some investments are easier to trade and exit than others – differences that deserve particular attention today.
Amid geopolitical uncertainty, dispersion across credit markets – rather than a broad risk-off move – has become the dominant investment signal.
Proposals to engineer secondary trading in private assets, often championed by vocal critics of public market liquidity, have gained renewed momentum. For some, enhanced tradability is viewed as a remedy to growing unease over the absence of transparent, real‑time valuation signals in private portfolios.
Concerns about private credit have intensified in recent months. Investors are grappling with questions about weakening credit quality, stale valuations, looser underwriting, redemption risk in certain types of funds, and the impact of AI‑driven disruption.
