If redemption requests outpace inflows, private credit funds are forced to sell assets. They will naturally sell their most liquid, highest-quality loans first. This creates a death spiral, leaving the remaining portfolio more leveraged and concentrated with lower-quality, harder-to-sell assets.
The shift to financing software-as-a-service (SaaS) companies fundamentally altered private credit's risk profile. It moved from lending against hard assets with recovery value (e.g., equipment) to lending against intangible assets, where the recovery value in a bankruptcy scenario could be virtually zero.
Private credit's roots predate the 2008 crisis, originating in the financing arms of industrial conglomerates like GE Capital. These divisions financed tangible assets like railcars and aircraft, creating a large body of experienced lenders who later splintered off to seed the broader middle-market lending space.
The traditional two-tier credit market (investment grade and high-yield) has evolved. A new four-tier hierarchy of credit quality now exists: Investment Grade, High Yield, Leveraged Loans, and finally, Private Credit, which has absorbed the riskiest deals that cannot find financing in the other markets.
Unlike institutional drawdown funds that call capital as needed, many retail private credit funds take investors' cash upfront. This creates immense pressure to deploy capital quickly to avoid performance drag, leading to weaker underwriting standards (e.g., weaker covenants, lower rates) in a hyper-competitive environment.
In 2022, as public bond funds declined due to rising rates, private credit funds appeared deceptively stable because they weren't marking assets to market. This perceived safety attracted massive capital inflows, which in turn forced managers into more aggressive underwriting to deploy the new cash quickly.
To justify high valuations for SaaS companies, private equity sponsors would contribute larger-than-usual equity checks (e.g., 40% vs. a typical 20%). This gave lenders a false sense of security, persuading them to extend significant leverage on businesses whose enterprise values were already inflated.
Redemption gates are critical for managing liability-side risks like investor runs, giving funds time to manage outflows. However, they are ineffective against asset-side problems. If underlying loan portfolios suffer high default rates, the fund's value will still deteriorate, and gates can't prevent those ultimate losses.