Third Ave’s liquidating debt fund holds concentrated, inactive paper

The leveraged finance marketplace is abuzz this morning ahead of a conference call to address to a plan of liquidation for the Third Avenue Focused Credit mutual fund following big losses this year, mild losses last year, heavy redemptions, and now a freeze on withdrawals. The news was publicly announced last night by the fund, and there will be a call at 11 a.m. EST for shareholders with lead portfolio manager Thomas Lapointe, according to the company.

Market sources yesterday relayed rumors of a near-$2 billion redemption from the asset class, and as one sources put forth, “the odd thing was it was difficult to trace the money that left, what was sold, and where it went.”

That was followed up by last night’s whopping, $3.5 billion retail cash withdrawal from mutual funds (72%) and ETFs (18%) in the week ended Dec. 9, according to Lipper, although it’s not entirely clear if that figure—the largest one-week redemption in 70 weeks—can be linked to Third Avenue. (LCD subscribes to weekly fund flow data from Lipper, but cannot see inside the aggregate observation.)

Nonetheless, it’s worthy of a dive into the open-ended fund, which trades under the symbol TFVCX. The fund shows a decline of 24.5% this year, versus the index at negative 2.94%, after a 6.3% loss last year, versus the index at positive 2.65%, according to Bloomberg data and the S&P U.S. Issued High Yield Corporate Bond Index.

It’s an alternative fixed-income fund that’s “extremely concentrated,” and “hardly representative of a ‘high yield’ or ‘junk bond’ fund,” outlined Brean Capital’s macro strategist Peter Tchir in a note to clients this morning. He highlighted that Bloomberg analytics show a portfolio that’s almost 50% unrated, nearly 45% tiered at CCC or lower, and just 6% of holdings rated BB or B.

The holdings are all fairly to extremely off-the-run, hence the trouble selling assets to meet redemption, and thus, the liquidation. The remaining assets have been placed into a liquidating trust, and interests in that trust will be distributed to shareholders on or about Dec. 16, 2015, according to the company.

Top holdings follow, and none have traded actively or very much in size of late, trade data show:

  • Energy Future Intermediate Holdings 11.25% senior PIK toggle notes due 2018; recent trades in the Ch. 11 paper were at 107.5.
  • Sun Products 7.75% senior notes due 2021; recent trades were at 87.5, versus 90 a month ago and the low 70s a year ago.
  • iHeartCommunications 14% partial-PIK exchange notes due 2021; block trades today were at 30 and 32, from 27 last month.
  • New Enterprise Stone & Lime 11% senior notes due 2018; odd lots traded recently in the low 80s, versus mid-80s last month.
  • Liberty Tire Recycling 11% second-lien PIK notes due 2021 privately issued in an out-of-court restructuring; trades reported in the mid-60s.

Amid those any many others of a similar ilk, the fund also reports a holding in Vertellus B term debt due 2019 (L+950, 1% LIBOR floor). The chemicals credits put the $455 million facility in place in October 2014 as part of a refinancing effort, pricing was at 96.5, and it’s now at 78/82, sources said.

“Investor requests for redemption … in addition to the general reduction of liquidity in the fixed income markets, have made it impracticable for FCF going forward to create sufficient cash to pay anticipated redemptions without resorting to sales at prices that would unfairly disadvantage the remaining shareholders,” according to the company statement.

“In line with its investment approach, FCF has some investments in companies that have undergone restructurings in the last eighteen months, and while we believe that these investments are likely to generate positive returns for shareholders over time, if FCF were forced to sell those investments immediately, it would only realize a portion of those investments’ fair value given current market conditions,” the statement outlined.

Further details are available online at the Third Avenue Management website. — Matt Fuller

Follow Matthew on Twitter @mfuller2009 for leveraged debt deal-flow, fund-flow, trading news, and more.


High yield bond prices fall further as some constituents notch large declines

The average bid of LCD’s flow-name high-yield bonds fell 132 bps in today’s reading, to 89.03% of par, yielding 10.58%, from 90.35% of par, yielding 10.05%, on Nov. 19. Performance within the 15-bond sample was deeply negative, with 12 decliners against two gainers and a lone constituent unchanged.

Today’s decline is a seventh-consecutive observation in the red, and it pushes the average deeper below the previous four-year low of 91.98 recorded on Sept. 29. As such, the current reading that has finally pierced the 90 threshold is now a fresh 49-month low, or a level not seen since 87.93 on Oct. 4, 2011.

The decrease in the average bid price builds on the negative 58 bps reading on Thursday for a net decline of 190 bps for the week. Last week’s losses were also heavy, so the average is negative 369 bps dating back two weeks, and the trailing-four-week measure is much worse, at negative 545 bps.

Certainly there has been red across the board, but several big movers of late continue to greatly influence the small sample. For example, in today’s reading, Intelsat Jackson 7.75% notes were off six full points—the largest downside mover today, to 44, and now 20.5 points lower on the month—while Hexion 6.625% paper was off five points, at 73.5, and Sprint 7.875% notes fell 5.5 points, to 77.

The market has been crumbling especially hard this week, with energy and TMT credits leading the charge, amid a lack of participation, the influence of speculative short-sellers, and despite signs that retail cash has been flowing into the asset class. There was a similar dynamic after Thanksgiving last year, sending the average to the year-end low of 93.33 on Dec. 16, 2014.

As for yield in the flow-name sample, the plunge in the average price—with many names falling into the 80s and a couple of others more deeply distressed—has prompted a surge in the average yield to worst. Today’s gain is 53 bps, to 10.58%, for a 2.92% ballooning over the trailing four week. This is a 13-month high and level not visited since 10.70% recorded on June 10, 2010.

The average option-adjusted spread to worst pushed outward by 47 bps in today’s reading, to T+791, for a net widening of 167 bps dating back four weeks. That level represents a wide not seen since the reading at T+804 on Sept. 23, 2010.

Both the spread and yield in today’s reading remain much wider than the broad index. The S&P U.S. Issued High Yield Corporate Bond Index closed its last reading on Monday, Nov. 23, with a yield to worst of 7.88% and an option-adjusted spread to worst of T+652.

Bonds vs. loans
The average bid of LCD’s flow-name loans fell nine bps, to 96.31% of par, for a discounted loan yield of 4.42%. The gap between the bond yield and discounted loan yield to maturity is 616 bps. — Staff reports

The data

Bids fall: The average bid of the 15 flow names dropped 132 bps, to 89.03.
Yields rise: The average yield to worst jumped 53 bps, to 10.58%.
Spreads widen: The average spread to U.S. Treasuries pushed outward by 47 bps, to T+791.
Gainers: The larger of the two gainers was Valeant Pharmaceuticals International 5.875% notes due 2023, which rebounded 3.25 points from the recent slump, to 85.25.
Decliners: The largest of the 12 decliners was Intelsat Jackson 7.75% notes due 2021, which dropped six full points, to 44, amid this fall’s ongoing deterioration of the credit.
Unchanged: One of the 15 constituents was unchanged in today’s reading.


Ares Corp. details 3Q15 portfolio stats, books $1.5B in new deals

Ares Corp. (NASDAQ: ARCC) booked $1.52 billion in new business during the third quarter, at an average interest rate of 7.8%, the lender detailed in its 10-Q filing yesterday alongside earnings. Exits totaled $1.34 billion, for net new investments of $183 million.

The 7.8% is 20 bps inside second-quarter investments, reflecting the better market conditions that borrowers enjoyed prior to the post-Labor Day correction. Spreads have since widened and should build up the average for fourth-quarter deals. In October, management said it funded $305 million in new investments for the fourth quarter at an average yield of 11.4%, while exiting $152 million at 8%.

First-lien commitments took a 75% share of third-quarter transactions, up from 37%, as ARCC shifted bookings away from the SSLP fund as that joint-venture with GE Capital winds down. Second-liens accounted for 21% of investments, down from 28% in the second quarter.

As of Oct. 29, the lender said it has $630 million in its backlog, which includes transactions that are approved, mandated or have a signed commitment that has been issued and that ARCC believes likely to close. There is an additional $425 million in the pipeline, which includes transactions that are in process, but have no formal mandate or signed commitment.

Portfolio stats
ARCC’s overall portfolio grew to $8.7 billion in assets, from $8.6 billion. The number of investments increased by nine, to 216. Average EBITDA per company is $58.8 million. As of June 30, 66% of the borrowers in ARCC’s portfolio generated less than $55 million of EBITDA.

Petroflow lifted ARCC’s loans on non-accrual status to 2.3% ($195 million) of the portfolio at cost, from 1.7%. Petroflow is one of three companies that ARCC considers true oil-and-gas-related investments, which account for roughly 3% of the portfolio. ARCC’s Petroflow investment is a first-lien position that was originated in July last year prior to the dramatic decline in oil prices. ARCC said it is working with the company and lender group to restructure Petroflow’s balance sheet. The principal investment totals $53.2 million. ARCC booked the 12% paper at a cost of $49.7 million, and the deal is now marked at a fair value of $37.9 million.

BDCs were not excluded from stock market volatility in the third quarter. ARCC’s stock slid to a 14% discount to NAV, from a 2% gap in the previous quarter. The stock closed the third quarter at $14.48, versus a book value of $16.79. The stock has since rebounded, to $15.49, to narrow the discount to 8%. By comparison, the BDC sector as a whole is trading at a roughly 15% discount. — Kelly Thompson


RAAM Global files Ch. 11, negotiating credit bid with term lenders

RAAM Global Energy filed for Chapter 11 today in Houston, court filings show.

According to court documents, the company is in the process of negotiating a stalking-horse credit bid purchase agreement with its term loan lenders that it hopes to unveil next week.

According to an affidavit in the case filed by the company’s chief restructuring officer, James Latimer, “a confluence of factors in 2014 and 2015 led to the [company’s] need to pursue a financial restructuring,” citing the “historic decline of crude oil and natural gas since the summer of 2014.”

In addition, Latimer pointed to the company’s September 2013 determination that it would be unable to meet financial certifications required to obtain permits to develop its offshore Ewing Banks 920 project in the Gulf of Mexico—as a result of which the project no longer met the requirements of reasonable certainty to remain booked as proved reserves—and the “catastrophic collapse” at the company’s Flipper Field in Texas in May 2013 that damaged four wells and cut the field’s production by 92%, to 166 BOEPD from 1,960 BOEPD, as “impairing” the company’s liquidity and “compelling” the company to restructure.

In explaining the decision to file for Chapter 11, Latimer said that the company’s proposed out-of-court exchange offer for its $238.4 million of 12.5% senior secured notes due 2019, launched in June and terminated on Aug. 20, failed to attract the requisite 99% participation, reaching only 94.77% participation (see “RAAM Global Energy cancels refi exchange as bond maturity looms,” LCD News, Aug. 24, 2015).

Further, Latimer said, the company has been unable to raise cash or identify other capital resources such as bank funding, private investments, or public debt and equity markets, “due to the current economic environment.”

As a result of the elimination of these restructuring alternatives, Latimer said, the company was “compelled … to negotiate with their creditors regarding Chapter 11 proceedings in order to address liquidity concerns and maximize the value of their assets for the benefit of their creditors and other constituencies.”

Latimer said the company was currently negotiating a stalking-horse credit bid purchase agreement with holders of about 99% of the $63.8 million of outstanding debt under the company’s term loan facility, adding that it was “seeking” to present the proposed purchase agreement and bidding procedures to the bankruptcy court by Nov. 6.

The company did not disclose any terms of the proposal, but said it would “create a defined sale process,” and that it “hoped that that interested parties will bid on its assets in such process.” — Alan Zimmerman


Ares Management, Kayne Anderson drop merger plan

Ares Management and Kayne Anderson Capital Advisors have scrapped their plan to merge, according to a statement released today. The firms note that the decision was mutual, and Ares reiterated its conviction in energy sector opportunities with an investment commitment in Kayne.

“While we continue to strongly believe in Kayne and the long-term energy investment opportunity, it became clear this was not the right time to bring together our cultures and business models into a merged public company,” Ares Chairman and CEO Tony Ressler said in the statement.

Ares and certain principals will invest $150 million in Kayne for energy investments, including private equity, private energy income, and energy infrastructure marketable securities funds managed by Kayne. The two firms may also team up on other opportunities, such as jointly managing separately managed accounts and other products, management said.

Recall that under the proposed transaction that was unveiled in July, alternative asset manager Ares would have acquired the energy specialist for total consideration of $2.55 billion. Combined the firms would have $113 billion of assets under management as of March 31. That’s across five groups: tradable credit, direct lending, energy, private equity, and real estate. — Jon Hemingway


LINN Energy reduces RC borrowing base to $3.6B

LINN Energy disclosed yesterday that the borrowing base under its revolving credit facility due April 2019 was reduced to $3.6 billion and netted an amendment that, among other things, relaxes its interest coverage covenant. It was previously $4.05 billion, an SEC filing shows.

LINN’s undrawn capacity was $790 million, based on outstanding borrowings as of Sept. 30.

Subsidiary Berry Petroleum’s borrowing base was reduced to $900 million, including $250 million of restricted cash previously posted as collateral with lenders, the company notes. It was previously $1.2 billion. Lenders also approved a potential combination of LINN and Berry’s facilities, subject to a combined borrowing base of $4.05 billion.

Pricing on both facilities is in a range of L+150–250. Commitment fees are 37.5–50 bps.

With the amendment, LINN and Berry reduced minimum interest coverage to 2x, from 2.5x, through Dec. 31, 2016, with steps to 2.25x through June 30, 2017, and back to 2.5x on July 1, 2017. The amendment also allows LINN and Berry to incur junior-lien debt of up to $4 billion and $500 million, respectively, subject to borrowing base reductions. LINN also gained flexibility to divest assets that do not contribute to its borrowing base, the company said.

Houston-based Linn Energy is an independent oil and natural gas company that trades on the Nasdaq under the ticker LINE. LINN acquired Berry Petroleum in 2013. Corporate ratings are B+/B2. — Jon Hemingway



HudsonField, AllianceBernstein team up on middle market E&P loans

A new lender to middle market exploration and production companies has ramped up just as loans to this sector may be harder to come by than ever before.

This week, HudsonField and AllianceBernstein’s private middle market lending platform unveiled a new asset-based loan program for oil and gas companies at a critical time for financing to the troubled sector.

AB Private Credit Investors has allotted an undisclosed portion of $2 billion of capital for directly originated loans through the venture structured as senior loans, unitranche debt, and second-lien loans, from short-term working capital to longer-term development capital. The first loan could be funded as soon as the fourth quarter of this year.

Although the collaboration with AB launched this week, HudsonField has been in the works for about two years. It was already clear when the project was in a nascent stage that tighter banking regulation in the wake of the credit crisis meant that middle market exploration and production companies faced a more challenging borrowing climate.

The small and midcap public and private North American E&P companies are defined as those operators producing less than 50,000 barrels of oil per day.

The portfolio manager is Brent Humphries, president of AB Private Credit Investors. His team includes two new hires from this year, Patrick Gimlett from GE Energy Financial Services and Kevin Alexander from ORIX USA.

HudsonField continues to build out its team, including with active recruitment of loan originators on the platform’s lending and banking side, as well as professionals in fundamental research and other parts of the business. Scott Edwards and Sebastian Douieb will lead HudsonField’s origination and structuring team. Offices are in Houston and New York.

“We see a $75 billion funding shortfall for small- to midsized E&P companies over the next 12 months,” said Seth Kammerman, CFO of HudsonField, formerly of Goldman Sachs. “There is no shortage of opportunities in the current market.”

What’s unique about HudsonField’s business model is its presence in the physical commodity market. In addition to the financing, it offers logistics and transport, marketing, and supply and pricing hedging services.

As an energy merchant, the company will be able to take payment in physical products, such as oil, oil products, or natural gas.

HudsonField will use SEC data and proprietary fundamental analysis of oil prices, as opposed to an explicit “pricing deck” to evaluate credits in the sector.

Many banks no longer offer commodities-risk intermediation business, and bank lines are drying up.

“New regulations have limited the availability of financing for middle-market E&P producers, and many banks have exited the commodities risk intermediation and financing business,” said Ben Freeman, CEO of HudsonField. The founder of HudsonField, Freeman was previously global head of oil derivatives trading at Goldman Sachs.

“We are in a good position to evaluate the underlying risk of a given producer.” — Abby Latour

Follow Abby on Twitter @abbynyhk for middle-market deals, leveraged M&A, distressed debt, private equity, and more


LCD’s High Yield Market Primer/Almanac Updated with 3Q Charts

LCD’s online High Yield Bond Market Primer has been updated to include third-quarter 2015 and historical volume and trend charts.

The Primer can be found at, LCD’s free website promoting the asset class. features select stories from LCD news, weekly trends, stats, and analysis, along with recent job postings.

We’ll update the U.S. Primer charts regularly, and add more as the market dictates (new this time around: an historical look at Fallen Angels, courtesy S&P).

Charts included with this release of the Primer:

  • US High Yield Issuance – Historical
  • 2015 High Yield Issuance, by Purpose
  • High Yield LBO Issuance
  • Fallen Angels – Historical
  • Cash Flows to High Yield Funds, ETFs
  • PIK Toggle Issuance (or lack thereof)
  • Yield to Maturity: Historical, Recent

LCD’s Loan Market Primer and High Yield Bond Market Primer are some of the most popular pieces LCD has published. Updated annually (print) and quarterly (online) to include emerging trends, they are widely used by originating banks, institutional investors, private equity shops, law firms and business schools worldwide.

Check them out, and please share them with anyone wanting an excellent round-up of or introduction to the leveraged finance market.


Bond prices surge again, reach 2.5-week high with broad gains

The average bid of LCD’s flow-name high-yield bonds surged 154 bps in today’s reading, to 95.10% of par, yielding 7.62%, from 93.56% of par, yielding 8.05%, on Oct. 6. Performance within the 15-bond sample was broadly positive, with nine of the 14 gainers up more than a point, and a single constituent unchanged.

Today’s gain follows a 146 bps boost on Tuesday, for an overall rally of 300 bps this week. The advance puts the average at a 2.5-week high and 312 bps above the recent low of 91.98 recorded on Sept. 29, which itself was not just a 2015 trough, but also a four-year low, or the deepest average bid price since 91.25 on Oct. 6, 2011.

Dating back two weeks, however, includes some of the September slump, so the average is up just 66 bps over that span. And for the trailing four-week observation, the average is negative 334 bps.

As for the year to date, the average is down 60 bps, which is much moderated from the deeper negative year-to-date reading of 372 bps at the end of September. Recall that the 2014 decline was 536 bps, which followed a loss of 463 bps in 2014.

Today’s gain was driven by ongoing strength in heavily shorted names in sectors that have recently been under pressure, like Energy and Telecom. Today’s lead gainer was the Dish Network 5.875% notes due 2022, which jumped 6.5 points, to 95, after selling off heavily in recent weeks. Moreover, buying interest has been buoyed by heavy cash inflows to the asset class this week, with $1.1 billion plowed into the exchanged-traded fund JNK over the past three days alone.

With the solid rebound in the average bid price, the average yield to worst fell 43 bps, to 7.62%, and the average option-adjusted spread to worst cinched inward by 47 bps to 617 bps. Both are roughly 100 bps inside the observations at the recent trough, which were 8.62% and T+708, respectively.

The yield and spread in today’s reading are now back in line with the broad index. The S&P U.S. Issued High Yield Corporate Bond Index closed the last reading, Wednesday, Oct. 7, with a yield to worst of 7.61%, and an option-adjusted spread to worst of T+628.

Bonds vs. loans
The average bid of LCD’s flow-name loans was unchanged in today’s reading, at 97.20% of par, for a discounted loan yield of 4.35%. The gap between the bond yield and discounted loan yield to maturity is 327 bps. — Staff reports

The data:

  • Bids rise: The average bid of the 15 flow names jumped 154 bps, to 95.10.
  • Yields fall: The average yield to worst dropped 43 bps, to 7.62%.
  • Spreads tighten: The average spread to U.S. Treasuries pulled inward by 47 bps, to T+617.
  • Gainers: The largest of the 14 gainers was the Dish Network 5.875% notes due 2022, which surged 6.5 points, to 95.
  • Decliners: None.
  • Unchanged: The Fiat Chrysler 8.25% notes due 2021 were steady, at 106.5.

Like smaller peers, larger companies’ earnings likely slowed in 3Q

An index tracking private middle market companies has foreshadowed a slowdown in revenue and earnings of larger public companies in the third quarter of 2015.

“We expect to see the theme of slower growth play out this earnings season,” said Edward Altman, the Max L. Heine Professor of Finance, Emeritus at the NYU Stern School of Business.

“Middle market companies have historically outperformed their larger public peers, so we anticipate relatively low year-over-year revenue and especially EBITDA growth from S&P component companies in the third quarter,” said Altman.

Altman collaborated with Golub Capital on the Golub Capital Altman Index, which was featured today in the second edition of the quarterly Golub Capital Middle Market Report, which includes an analysis of the index. The index is based on the sales and earnings data of roughly 150 private U.S. companies in Golub Capital’s loan portfolio.

The index showed revenue of privately held middle market companies increased 7.95% year-over-year in the first two months of the third quarter of 2015, compared to 9.26% in the first two months of the second quarter of 2015.

EBITDA rose by 3.95% in the third quarter, compared to an increase of 6.93% year-over-year during the first two months of the second quarter of 2015.

Still, the index shows that private middle market companies remain a resilient driver of economic growth, said Lawrence Golub, Golub Capital’s CEO.

“While revenues and earnings in the period grew at a healthy pace, margins continued to be pressured by such factors as rising labor costs and the strength of the U.S. dollar, which is impacting the pricing power of U.S. firms with international competitors,” Golub said.

The index showed an 8.84% increase in revenue and a 9.88% increase in earnings for the healthcare sector. This was probably due to the Affordable Care Act, which increased access to health care services, the report said.

Revenue of private middle market industrial companies fell 0.68% year-on-year in the third quarter, and earnings of industrial companies fell 1.62%.

Revenue of private middle market information technology companies rose 6.65%, but earnings slumped 3.62%.

“The information technology sector saw negative profit growth, reflecting, we believe, greater investment in product development,” said Golub.

The index contains limited exposure to the financials, utilities, energy, and materials sectors. Thus, calculations are made for the public indexes both including and excluding these sectors.

The index “is the first and only index based on actual sales and earnings data for middle market companies,” the report said.

“The index has served as a reliable indicator of the overall growth rates in revenue and earnings of public companies in market indexes such as the S&P 500 and S&P SmallCap 600, as well as quarterly GDP, according to statistical backtesting dating back to 2012, when data began to be tracked,” the report said. — Abby Latour

Follow Abby on Twitter @abbynyhk for middle-market deals, leveraged M&A, BDCs, distressed debt, private equity, and more.