Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Does Size Matter for BDCs?

By Jordan Wathen - Jan 5, 2015 at 6:07AM

You’re reading a free article with opinions that may differ from The Motley Fool’s Premium Investing Services. Become a Motley Fool member today to get instant access to our top analyst recommendations, in-depth research, investing resources, and more. Learn More

Do larger business development companies have an advantage on smaller BDCs? Let's look at how scale can impact an important line-item -- expenses.

Economies of scale can be a source of a massive competitive advantage. Think Costco (COST -0.48%), which has more buying power per product than any retailer on Earth. Similarly, GEICO uses its second-largest position in car insurance to spread risk and dilute its fixed costs.

Today I'll consider scale as it relates to fast-growing business development companies, which make their money lending to private companies. Many of the industry's players cite scale as an advantage to their rapid balance sheet growth, but the benefits might not be as clear as they appear.

Where scale helps
Let's start by identifying sources of potential economies of scale. I can think of a handful of areas where size might create an advantage for BDCs:

  1. Operating costs -- A floor in an office building costs the same amount, whether it is filled with 10 or 50 employees. Likewise, as a company grows, it might seek in-house support services (for example, legal departments versus hired guns from outside firms). There is a clear advantage here.
  2. Financing costs -- Debt largely comes from banks (credit facilities) and the debt markets (institutional and retail bond issues). Bigger is better, as it opens up the ability to conduct investment-grade bond issues. Main Street Capital (MAIN 2.03%) recently issued its first bond, though it came five years after its IPO, and only after crossing $1.3 billion in assets. This is difficult to quantify, in part because financing costs are a function of very different balance sheet construction from company to company, and cost is often dictated by a company's underwriting quality -- a variable not directly correlated to size.
  3. Deal flow -- A BDC with $5 billion in assets can obviously participate in larger transactions than could a $200 million BDC. On the other hand, a small transaction will move the needle at a small BDC, while a bigger BDC would simply have to pass it up. Call it a wash -- it's practically impossible to quantify.

Looking at the cost side of the equation
The biggest costs for a BDC can't be ground away with size alone. For externally managed BDCs, the top expenses are management and incentive fees paid to the external advisor. Scale does nothing here, since fees are assessed as a percentage of assets and earnings -- fees grow directly with the balance sheet.

Other costs, however, could be reduced with scale -- legal fees, valuation services, audit and tax, and general overhead expenses shouldn't necessarily grow in tandem with growth in a company's balance sheet.

Wall Street analysts have often pointed to BDCs achieving scale with a balance sheet in the $1 billion to $1.5 billion range. With that in mind, I went back through financial filings for some of the largest BDCs and calculated their expenses, excluding interest and management fees, and then divided the sum of these expenses by balance sheet assets.






Prospect Capital (PSEC 1.29%)





Ares Capital (ARCC 1.06%)





Fifth Street Finance (NASDAQ: FSC)





Source: Annual reports filed with the SEC.

When comparing year-end assets to full-year expenses, extra costs such as legal, audit, and general and administrative expenses effectively clustered around 0.5%-0.6% of assets in every year for three of the largest BDCs. Of course, costs weren't without their ups and downs, but a truly meaningful change in expenses as a percentage of assets isn't clear.

The reason, of course, is that these BDCs had largely achieved "scale" well before three years ago. Going back even further, I find that costs started to really break at $1 billion to $1.5 billion in assets for each BDC listed in the above table.

Fifth Street Finance provides an excellent example of this phenomenon since, unlike Ares or Prospect Capital, it didn't have merger-related expenses from the acquisition of a rival during the relevant periods.

Fifth Street Finance broke $1 billion in assets during its 2011 fiscal year, a year with robust improvement in nonmanagement or incentive fee expenses as a percentage of assets.

A fast-growing new entrant, Medley Capital (MCC 1.44%), provides a more recent testing ground for a generally accepted reality that costs tend to start getting scaled out in the range of $1 billion to $1.5 billion in assets.

Noninterest, nonmanagement fee expenses have come down dramatically in the previous three years, from 1.1% of total assets to 0.62% as of the company's latest annual report. During that time, Medley's balance sheet tripled in size, from $416 million to $1.32 billion.

Medley Capital is roughly as efficient as Fifth Street Finance was at its size, and they are fairly comparable, as neither company had any significant one-time expenses, such as mergers or acquisitions of rivals, during their histories.

A final word on the advantages of size
Balance sheet size can clearly help chisel away some of the fixed costs of keeping a BDCs doors open, but only to a point. Beyond $1 billion in assets, the rate of change in expenses as a percentage of assets slows.

It's also important to recognize that scale has no impact on the largest cost -- management and incentive fees -- for externally managed BDCs. I think that will change over time, however, as the chase for equity capital becomes more competitive. 

If there's an important takeaway here, it's this: growth has little impact on costs for the largest BDCs. For the smallest, it can offer some cost savings as fixed costs are whittled down. All else being equal, though, the management fee line remains the single largest opportunity to improve shareholder results. 


Jordan Wathen has no position in any stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool recommends Costco Wholesale. The Motley Fool owns shares of Costco Wholesale. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Invest Smarter with The Motley Fool

Join Over 1 Million Premium Members Receiving…

  • New Stock Picks Each Month
  • Detailed Analysis of Companies
  • Model Portfolios
  • Live Streaming During Market Hours
  • And Much More
Get Started Now

Stocks Mentioned

Prospect Capital Corporation Stock Quote
Prospect Capital Corporation
$7.85 (1.29%) $0.10
Ares Capital Corporation Stock Quote
Ares Capital Corporation
$19.94 (1.06%) $0.21
Main Street Capital Corporation Stock Quote
Main Street Capital Corporation
$45.28 (2.03%) $0.90
Medley Capital Corporation Stock Quote
Medley Capital Corporation
$36.52 (1.44%) $0.52
Costco Wholesale Corporation Stock Quote
Costco Wholesale Corporation
$540.67 (-0.48%) $-2.61

*Average returns of all recommendations since inception. Cost basis and return based on previous market day close.

Related Articles

Motley Fool Returns

Motley Fool Stock Advisor

Market-beating stocks from our award-winning analyst team.

Stock Advisor Returns
S&P 500 Returns

Calculated by average return of all stock recommendations since inception of the Stock Advisor service in February of 2002. Returns as of 08/08/2022.

Discounted offers are only available to new members. Stock Advisor list price is $199 per year.

Premium Investing Services

Invest better with The Motley Fool. Get stock recommendations, portfolio guidance, and more from The Motley Fool's premium services.