Churchill's Ken Kencel on Private Credit's Second Act

Well, Ken, welcome to the show. I'm really glad that you're here. Private credit has become one of the most important forces in institutional investing, attracting enormous amounts of capital and raising new questions more recently, right, about risk, liquidity, competition, and market structure. And I have to say that private credit, the whole transformation of Wall Street Post GFC is one of the most intellectually interesting areas of finance and even at the center of it. So yes, you spent decades in leverage finance going all the way back to Drexel through today's private credit boom. What I wanted to understand is not just where private credit is headed, but whether its success is changing the market structure itself. Yeah, sure. Does that success create new risks? Because it's been a lot of time on changes, but does it create new risks? Give me your view. Well, it's interesting. We just celebrated our 20 year anniversary as a firm, rang the bell at the New York Stock Exchange, which was a lot of fun. We had our team there and it was a chance to really look back on where we've been and where the market has been and where we are today. And it's pretty breath-taking. When you think about 20 years ago, private credit was an area where the banks were still lending to mid-market companies. The finance companies like GE Capital were still roaming the earth, if you will. And the market has changed so significantly from then to today that it is an interesting question and we're thinking about, I mean, back then, even as we were developing private credit managers could invest maybe 25 to $50 million on an individual transaction. So, in many respects, we needed each other and we needed to work together to provide financing to larger transactions and larger investments. That has changed so significantly structurally today. Today, it's a private credit as a $2 trillion market and I'd say that one of the things that has changed so dramatically is just the tremendous growth of institutional occasions to private credit. And what that has done is that has enabled large-scale credit managers like ourselves to commit hundreds of millions of dollars to transaction, poor each transaction. And it's created, I think, a real requirement for scale. So, today, if you can't commit to the entire solution that a company needs, whether that's a $300 million credit facility or a billion dollar credit facility, you are at a distinct disadvantage. So, the largest scaled, institutionally, primarily institutionally-backed private credit managers are the ones that are really benefiting from those trends. If you think about BDCs and all they've been in the news a lot lately, people focusing on redemptions and liquidity and retail, the reality is retail represents only about 20% of that $2 trillion market. So, it is still an institutionally-dominated market and I would argue that managers that have significant institutional capital, draw-down capital, if you will, are at a distinct advantage. You know, retail, I think, is going to continue to grow. So, I don't think, you know, this wave of redemption spells the end of private credit and retail at all. I think it is definitely going to have seen some changes in the way that it is marketed to investors, but I think fundamentally, larger-scaled players are gaining share relative to smaller boutiques. It is becoming a prerequisite to have that scale to deliver those solutions. And so, I think, in many respects, while you hear a lot about new entrants and competition and capital being raised, you know, the vast majority of that capital is being raised by raised by a core group of larger scaled managers. And I think the numbers our team came back to me with more recently were something like 90%, 80%, 90% of the capital that's raised for private credit is being raised by managers that are on their third, fourth, fifth fund. So, it's the established players that are able to deliver full solutions that are really driving the market. And, you know, as a general matter, it's still institutional capital and that retail that's really impacting that. So, they have that long-term, they have the long-term committed capital and it's draw-down so that it can be deployed as you see investments that make sense. Right, right. Right. I mean, institutions have really increased their allocation. Right? It's distinct asset class for sure. But now that it's all, you know, that it is the structure of this lending world, are there risks to that? I mean, scale, and you're one of the top players. So, that definitely benefits you. Are there disadvantages or what do investors get wrong about that? About that ecosystem? Sure. Because I'm very light to call it. Sure. Yeah. Well, look, I think, you know, just to touch on, you know, I think something that obviously everyone has been focused on recently, I think that as the as private credit became a more accepted asset class in the private wealth phase, I think there, you know, I think that there's no question if you look back, there was, you know, these funds were being marketed as semi-liquid, for example. And I think the reality is very liquid. Right? They're not semi-liquid. The underlying loans, private credit is fundamentally a liquid. Now it drives a great risk of, risk of justice return. It's floating rates. So there are in a sense as a bit of a hedge against inflation. Manager selection is obviously critically important as you think about the space. But I do think that one of the things that is going to come out of this current noise, if you will, is a reassessment of, you know, how private credit is marketed to private wealth, meaning what is appropriate for an individual investor, what is appropriate and where is it appropriate in their portfolios? And how it's structured. So really important distinction, institutional capital pretty much across the board is draw down in structure. So you know, there's a discipline there that the capital is available. It's committed long term. It gets deployed as you see good investment opportunities. Retail and private wealth is not so much the case. I mean, if an individual decides to invest in a private BDC, the capital gets invested all up front. There's a pressure to deploy that capital. Put it to work right away. Right away because everybody's competing to drive a return. So if you take in the capital and you don't deploy it, it has a direct impact on your yield that you were offering to individual investors. So I think the structure is not optimal from the standpoint of allowing for discipline. Now one way that you can offset that is by being primarily institutional. Right. So if you're 80 90 we're 96% institutional on our capital. Right. So between our US and European businesses combined our overall company is called Naveen private capital. Churchill is the US business there. We're about 66 billion. Overall we're about 100 billion. And of that only 96% is institutional and only about 4% is is private wealth. Okay. So we're not dependent on those private wealth flows. Although you do want to go after that. You certainly want to grow. But I do think there's a limit. Yeah. I think that if you're 20% private wealth, maybe 15 to 25% let's call it, I think that's manageable. And the funds flows that come in with that are manageable. But if you're 80% retail, you've got this constant ebbing and flowing of redemptions and flows. I think it makes it very difficult to manage a private credit business if you're dominated by quarterly redemptions. Right. When you're trying to make long-term investment. So I think there's a place for wealth in our ecosystem if you will. And it's certainly a growing part of that ecosystem. But I think we need to focus on education. Meaning where is it appropriate? Education is to who it's appropriate for. Not just where it's held. And education around the underlying structures. And I think that is probably one of the good things that is going to come out of all this noise of late in redemptions. But I do think it's caused a reassessment of private wealth and the role of private wealth in this private credit ecosystem that we operate in. Yeah. I mean, it's interesting because it is obviously a very big market under penetrated right as they would say. But it does seem like there's a pause now. And that does give you time to think about the structure. I mean, I think education is great. But you know, it's not going to be the cure all, right? Because when people want their money, they want their money, right? Institutions are in a different, even though some of these they want their money too. So in getting this chance to kind of look at it, what are you thinking about structure? How could that be different? And I do, I think it makes a lot of sense of a smaller amount of your business proportionally should be in retail. So I say it has a place, but I think it has a place, but I would be wary of being dominated by that. Yeah, so so interestingly if you look at just as a comparison I'm not suggesting that this is necessarily the answer but if you compare an evergreen fund in retail with an evergreen fund in the Institutional side they're very different and an evergreen fund in retail you have a 5% per quarter redemption an evergreen fund in institutional an investor Lexed to go on to run off and They go in an off ramp and their capital is returned to them as the loans repay No, it's you don't make new loans with their capital. They get their capital back, right? So it is a natural runoff and an institutional evergreen fund Which actually if you think about it is a better structure, right? Institution you know they decide for various reasons they want to allocate in a different direction Maybe they want to make some changes in their allocation policy the capital comes back to them as the loans repay So, you know, I think there are structural dynamics that I think you know as we move forward are worth exploring to think about the right structure within private credit But look I think the reality today is that larger scale players that have demonstrated institutional track record You know that the consultancy have vetted and looked at their performance in track record over a long period of time That have differentiated sourcing that have a real differentiator in terms of how they drive their investment opportunities If you look for example at our business today We are an LP on the private equity side of our business in 400 US private equity funds. So that team separate team They vet the managers they look at performance they look at their track record They look at what industries they have expertise and they actually look at how they support their portfolio company Meaning did they fix problems? Did they have operating expertise to be you know to come to bear? So I think that our Differentiator if you will are those LP relationships and obviously a very long history of Financing transactions for those firms and in many respects what I like about the core metal market where we focus is it still Fundamentally very relationship driven. Yeah, it's not just like the liquid markets where you know the lowest price gets that gets the loan The highest leverage wins the loan or or gets gets awarded the mandate. Yeah in the in the core metal market It's much more like a partnership. You're partnering with a private equity firm The goal is to build value build a business Credit has a role private equity has a role. It's a partnership and so you know people ask me all the time How is it that you all do you know 400 deals a year and you're doing business with all the top private equity? Firms and they keep coming back to work with you. What do they get its relationships? It's course of dealing its trust It's a history that goes back in our case 20 years I mean there are firms today that in the US in the middle market that we've not only been working with for 20 years We've done 40 50 transactions with those firms. So there is a club deals way back good did club deals way back Now they're okay We're going to show them to the two folks that we're in a club together and see which one gives us the better proposal You know, so so it's evolved no question But the relationships are still there and so the core metal market which we define as companies with up to 500 million or so in financing is these are larger businesses than the lower end or the the lower metal market So I say less competitive than you know than the the lower middle market where every new entrant is showing up in that lower end of the market Because they can all do smaller solutions Yeah, they're kind of capital but not so large as to have graduated into the syndicated Loan market right where you know where you get lower pricing covenant light Higher leverage and I think that you know some of the private credit managers That have been involved in retail that heavily in retail right have moved into that market and I think what you saw was Deals that were done heavily in software deals that were done on you know very aggressive projections Deals that were done on high leverage and in many cases with no covenants we never Ventured into that world even though you have some software, but it was a different I mean our percentage of software overall is a firm is around 5% Oh, it's that low. Okay. Yeah. Yeah, but again, but that is not unusual for the core middle market right But if you went to the large cap world 30 35 40% with software. Yeah, so yeah, so I think by staying kind of true to our knitting in this core middle market We didn't you know we didn't experience and have an experience as some of the issues you're seeing so You know, I think you know, I think in that sense that you know staying focused on our knitting and served us pretty well Right, right. I mean it was obviously out there as an opportunity and you still think it's an opportunity We looked at those deals we looked at those deals, but what we saw was you know, a our launch which are you know Which were companies that maybe couldn't really handle the interest expense or had to do pick because They couldn't pay cash or we're doing deals that had significant leverage So we looked at those and they didn't fit our fundamental model Yeah, so we said look we have plenty of deal flow and our core middle market our companies are typically 50 to a hundred million in in EBITDA or cash flow Right and we stayed there. Yeah, and so I think now and hindsight that looks pretty good. Yeah looks pretty good So the market has stratified in many respects you have the lower end and you have a handful of firms that have you know Been there for a long time, but a lot of new entrance and a lot of competition in that space now Okay, in fact, I would argue that pricing in that world is you know Really not an advantage because there's so many firms that will do a 25 50 a hundred million dollar loan. I mean, it's that's interesting unexpected Yeah, a lot of competition. Yeah, and then in the large cap world you had a lot of the a lot of the The the private BDC's that that did those larger deals as they have pulled back It's actually widened the runway for core middle-middle market managers like ourselves So we see real opportunity, you know in the market environment today, which we can talk about yeah Yeah, I would love to get into that and I also want to go back just one second when you talk about There's 400 Private equity funds that you're an LP in yeah, obviously that kind of data that you're seeing can inform you Why do those private equity funds? You know, I mean how much Information do they share why do they let you in in a way because it's I can see the advantage obviously yeah, yeah well we we have a history a long history of managing Investments in private equity funds dates back to gosh TIA has been investor in private equity funds for you know 30 40 years Right, so so we manage that program for TIA now primarily and what that program has done is It gives us tremendous continuity and connectivity to those firms on top of our lending relationships, right? So not only have we've been lending to these firms But we also have the access and the consistency and the Visibility of all the performance data so we so that team, you know gets you know Corley reports on performance of their portfolio it attends their annual investor meetings, right? It is in constant dialogue with them about new investments and what's going well in the portfolio So every from everything from origination like knowing what you know the businesses in the portfolio that are performing really well Well, that's a great opportunity. We should go explore Refinancing or or other capital Opportunities with that business all the way to the actual analysis of the underlying Private equity firm from a performance perspective so we've weighed we've weighed heavily into AI To analyze that data which we have access to and we utilize all of that in Driving not just the sourcing but the investment decision making itself So it's an incredibly important part of our business and I would say in many respects we took over the management of that within Within our Churchill business in 2019 the team that had been doing that became You know part of our firm and what we saw immediately was the power of Those relationships coupled with the fact that we are a direct provider of capital in senior lending and junior capital and private equity and You know in secondaries and all of the benefits of those relationships on How we source and obviously the connectivity interesting example when you're an LP in a fund and you're a long-term investor with them You know there is a bit of a dynamic where even if a deal may not make sense for us for whatever reason You know we love you, but we don't do retail right? You know and so get us on the next one You know and or you know we have a great relationship with your firm and we have think you know Incredibly highly about your performance and your track record and I'm sure this oil and gas investment is going to be great for you But we don't do oil and gas right so so it doesn't I think what it does is it creates a dynamic where even though investment that may not necessarily be right for us at a given industry or a given time or a given structure. - Right. - We still have this ongoing connectivity where we're in LP. - Yeah. - And I think that really helps our business. - Yeah. Well, and it makes me think about the quality and the importance of data, right? I mean, obviously, this world is private. It's, you know, it's not a public company, it's not public debt. - Yes. - There's a lot of information held by different, whether it's investors or the GPs or what have you. But the more data that you have, that's a real advantage in like your whole due diligence. And perhaps I don't know how much you share, you probably share insights with your investors as well based on this. But it does make me think of just data overall. - So the goal of that team is obviously to invest with top quartile private equity managers in the middle market. - Right. - If you look at our universe today, 70% of those managers are top quartile. So if you think about our direct investment model, which is in an ideal world, you know, in the primary sense sourcing from that core pool of manager relationships, I like to think of it as, you know, I'm a fisherman too, I like to go fishing. So think of it as, you know, stocking the pond full of the best quality fish. Now you're going to go fishing. - Right. - The firms that have the best track record. - Yeah. - The best performance. No, it doesn't guarantee that, you know, that a lending investment is going to be, you know, but it does start with a pretty high quality pool, right? You know these firms have been around a long time, they delivered great performance for their investors, they've got professional expertise in terms of operating partners that can be brought into help situations. They're generally raising more and more capital so they have capital to support their companies. So in many, many respects, it's the information about them in the first instance, it's an, excuse me, it's an analysis of their performance and track record as we develop that relationship. - Right. - And ultimately, I think it leads to better outcomes for investors. So it's an important, a very important part of our business. - Yeah, and it really gets back to, you know, how you've expanded beyond direct lending, right? You have the second area, you have the co-investments, and that also gives you a lot of information. - Yes. - So you're not just, I have a credit. - So I'll give you a great example of where it comes into play. So we launched our equity secondaries effort five years ago. And I would say even, even I was quite surprised by this dynamic, but if you think about it, it makes sense. The primary source of deal flow in our equity secondary business is our CVs or GP lead secondaries. But again, if you're an LP in the fund, and you're tracking the performance of those companies and the private equity firm comes to you and says, "Hey, we've got a really attractive business. You know, we want to stay in the company, but we'd like to create some liquidity for investors. We're going to do a CV GP lead secondary. We're going to sell 50% of the business to a secondary investor. We got a front row seat. - Yeah, you've seen all those years. - You've seen the performance. You've seen the company. And by the way, if we want to do that deal, the odds that we will have access to it are very high. Because we're in the fund, because we're in LP, because we're not going investor. So I think there are benefits to our business in so many ways from this private equity and fund investment activity that, you know, I would say go even far beyond what I anticipated when we first combined it in order for-- - That were a real surprise. I mean, it's very interesting that you bring up continuation vehicles. Because I have heard that that is going to be, you know, a huge opportunity as well, right? That we fund investing, you know, in these. So just give me your take. I'm not an expert on that, but I know that there's a lot of interest. - Yeah. Well, look, for various reasons, you know, and I would say most of our private equity relationships have either done one or more CVs at this point. So it's become extremely popular as a way to create some liquidity. - Yeah. - But to stay in in these businesses, right? So investors, you know, are looking for liquidity, private equity firms, you know, have businesses have performed extremely well in the typical transaction, they will roll all or a significant portion of their incentives into that CV. So they're committing capital. They're rolling in with the new investors, what we love to see. - Yeah. - And it gives the ability to return capital. I mean, obviously there's been a huge issue more recently and you all have covered it regarding, you know, returning capital to investors and distribution. So it's a way to accelerate distributions without necessarily selling the company completely. Particularly if you're winners, right? So you create partial liquidity in a business or an opportunity, but you also given existing investors and ability to stay on and continue to benefit from it. So it's become a very important way that private equity is delivered, you know, liquidity in an environment where liquidity is at a premium now. Investors, you know, they've been a bit long in the tooth and some of these funds and-- - That's right, that's a bad door. - Yeah, and they're, you know, they're looking to get capital back. So in many, many ways it's been an important driver of our business, but look, I think when you think about private credit just to turn back, the ability to have differentiated sourcing and that connectivity and that continuity is incredibly important. I mean, I think one of the things that I speak to investors obviously all the time, pretty much every day, one of the things that I say to them, which I think has become so important is that our business, the, certainly in the core middle market where we operate has really consolidated. Even though people talk about, you know, private credit growing and so much money coming to space, the reality is in our world, call it companies with 10 to 100 million in EBITDA raising credit facilities of, you know, call it 50 to 500 million. The number of private credit managers that are, you know, dominant or prominent in that space is no more than five to 10 firms. - Which is really surprising. - Yes. - That's really surprising. - It is surprising. - Yeah. - So the market is segmented, right? So there are managers that pride themselves as being really good in these smaller deals. - Right, they still exist. - They still exist, but they focus on companies with five, 10, 15 million of EBITDA. You know, our view is, you know, that's a riskier part of the market. These are smaller businesses, one product, one market, one geography, limited management resources, maybe even a smaller sponsor. So. - Like a microcaps stock. - Almost a microcaps stock. And our experience in the GFC was that in a prolonged downturn, those businesses experience a lot more pressure. And what, in the added dynamic in that world today is, it's also an area where if you're a new manager, you pretty much have to go into that space, right? 'Cause the solution, if you will, is 50 million, right? - Yeah. - And if you're a manager that just raised a $500 million fund, you know, even 50 million is 10% of your fund. - Right. - And one deal. - Yeah, public pension funds are not gonna like that. - That's a very concentrated, right? - Not the building that's fun. - So, we don't like that space. I'd say the other end of the market is changing in the sense that if you look back over the last five years with the growth and retail, there were private credit managers that went into that space and said, we'll look bigger as better. We're gonna finance bigger companies, right? So, you know, bigger has to be better, right? - Right. - Well, bigger isn't necessarily better if you don't have covenants. - Right. - And your eight times levered. - Right. - And, you know, and you can't cover your interest expense, you know, bigger doesn't necessarily mean better. Now, in general, we like larger businesses, but we want to be able to do those deals with traditional structures, meaning covenants, leverages that make sense. - Right. - Yeah. - So, what we've seen is we believe there is an optimal point in the market where you're dealing with businesses that are, you know, scaled, have deep management teams, are market leaders, but are not so large as to have graduated into this market where you're competing with the investment banks. And once you compete with the investment banks, it gets a lot tougher. - Yeah. - Structurally. And so, the beauty of the current dynamic, not to get too technical, but it's interesting. - Not getting a million, so it's a million. - Is those firms that were up there doing that have been pulling back because of redemptions. - Yeah. - Right. - So. - They have to solve it. - They need to create liquidity. So what's happening is the runway for us for a traditional manager, which might have been 10 to 100 million of you, but DA is now 10, but 200 million of you, but DA. Because the syndicated markets don't really lean into transactions that much less than a billion dollars. - Right. - Right, right. So in a way, the pullback, if you will, from some of these large cap private credit, managers is actually widened the runway for firms like us. Yeah, I want to say that. So it's created a broader opportunity set to it. Right, right. Exactly. I want to talk about that because these aren't necessarily loans that are bad. Right. They might be facing some pressures, but it's one of those classic plays where someone is a forced seller. Yes. And then if you've got dry powder or that you can pound. So tell me kind of what's really, you know, out. I don't think, you know, it's interesting. We've never been large scale investors in, you know, that dynamic. Meaning what we generally find when we look at those situations is that they were underwritten with more leverage than we like. They were underwritten with tighter pricing than we would like. And in many cases, they're covenant light. So We look at them and we say, this is, well, first of all, our investors would look at that and say, well, that's not really what, you know, what we want to see from you guys is, you know, the fundamentals, right? And that's who we are. Right. So you can't change who you are and how you invest. In fact, if you put those deals in front of our investment team, in many cases, they would say, yeah, we looked at that. We turned it down. You know, we turned it down, but the first time because, you know, they were going to do it with too much leverage or now covenants or whatever. So I would say we're not big players in or look at portfolios. We've been offered them, but I would say in general, we have not been large scale players or investors in kind of credit secondaries on a direct basis. That being said, I do think the broader liquidity needs in private credit are definitely creating a larger opportunity in credit secondaries. And I think that opportunity is going to continue to grow. We are looking at it. And I think as you think about it, you also have to think about, you know, staying true to what you believe are the important fundamentals in terms of how you invest. And so we think there will be opportunities, but the opportunities that may fit for us may be more limited, just given how we think about credit and risk and underwriting. Right. Right. So it makes me think also of like, where are the concerns? What concerns do you think are legit about the private credit market? Right. I mean, you've been through the GFC. Yes. You know, risk, right? So what concerns are legit around here? Because you want to put money to work, but you want to do it wisely. Correct. Yeah. So, look, I think that, let me start from the, you know, the fundamental which I had mentioned to you earlier, I think if all you are doing is competing on price, if you've raised a new fund and you're running around just looking for deals, you know, that's not a good place to be. And I think firms that have been doing that basically without relationships and without a real edge from an investment standpoint, you know, I think are, you know, where you're, you may very well start seeing some cracks in the market. In fact, you're already seeing some of those. Yeah. You know, I think there are managers that, you know, didn't really have an edge that were out just trying to deploy capital very aggressively. And I think that's, you know, I think that's an area where, you know, I think you'll start to see some issues. I'm not a big fan of the, the smaller end of the market, you know, for all the reasons I've talked about. Yeah. I'm not a big fan of the, the very large transactions, at least as it relates to private credit. Now look, it's one thing. If you have no covenants and it's a liquid deal and it's tradable, okay, you can sell it, right? Your defense is you can sell it, right? But if, but if it's a private deal and you have no covenants, then what's your defense? What do you do? The company deteriorates and you have no covenant to say, whoa, whoa, time out, you've clipped the covenant. So that by the time you see that company as a lender, they're defaulting on their interest payment. They're not clipping a covenant, maintenance covenant, right? You know, a coverage covenant or whatever. They're actually, we can't pay you, right? Yeah. So I, we don't like larger deals without covenants and certainly if the deal doesn't have liquidity, you know, I'm not sure what the, the underlying model is. I think you have to be very careful there. Now, that being said, if you look at the fundamentals in the market today, if you look at interest coverage ratios, if you look at not a cruel rates to fall rates for the large, scaled high quality, institutionally backed managers, there is no evidence of widespread credit deterioration or even significant credit deterioration. Just fight all the uncertainty in the market. All the noise. I know we've had, you know, months of noise in the press. Now, in fairness, I do think there are concerns around AI and software. So I do think, you know, you need to look closely at these businesses. I do think there will be winners and losers. So there are, you know, firms that, you know, we'll see, we'll see AI as a tailwind. Obviously, there will be losers that, you know, find AI to be a massive headwind or maybe even a fatal headwind. But I do think that if you look more broadly at the market, and I think this is an important dynamic for, you know, our institutional clients and your readers and followers, that there is no evidence that we're seeing today. This, you know, this noise about GFC and I think even the media has gotten off that because they realize that the reports are coming in and we're just not seeing it. You know, today we have in our, just in our senior loan portfolio, 350 plus mid market companies. If you look at the fundamentals, the fundamentals are very good. In fact, they're as good as they've been in a long time. So that no evidence of that. But there are pockets of, you know, or examples of firms that were more aggressive. And I think you're seeing evidence of that in certain cases, but not overall and not with respect to, you know, what I would call the highest quality institutional grade managers. Right. And not just us. I'm saying, you know, there are, there are other ones. But there are absolutely, absolutely. And there are firms we are in deals with that we respect and we say, okay, firm X is in this deal. You know, we're being asked to partner with them that they're good firm. You know, we know the, we know the principles. We know that they do good work and fundamentally. So, but I will say that the process of the institutional fundraising, the consultants, the investment teams, whether they're insurance companies that work primarily directly or pension funds or endowments that utilize consultants in many cases. I don't think there's any question that institutionally validated managers that have, you know, 10, 15, 20 year track records. And they're only handful of us around. I think there's a firm that did a study of how many private credit managers have a 20 year history or were around 20 years ago that, you know, the number is like 5%. You know, it's not many of us, you know. Yeah. Only 5% have lived through those credit cycles. I mean, I think that part of the reason that there is so much, so many headlines around there's troubles because people don't fully understand why default rates are so low, right? There's a lot of things, you know, in the world that would, that seem like they're not so great for the economy, right? Yeah. And there's inflation and, you know, energy prices. I think sometimes there's this, you know, people don't fully understand it. I could be part of it. Yeah. I think that, but also let's not forget that if you look at our underwriting over the last several years, and again, I refer to us because I've got, you know, I've got the data in my fingertips, right? I can see real time. Yeah. So look, for example, last year, and we invested in overalls of firms, $16 billion, you know, in U.S. middle market companies, if you've been 400 some transactions, the average equity in our deals last year was in excess of 60%, it was about 63%, 64% equity, right? So these companies, these deals that were being done, certainly over the last several years, have been very well capitalized. You know, you can argue about valuations, right? You could say, well, do I agree with 15 times, 20 times, 12 times, whatever. Right. But I think from a lending perspective, you've got a lot of capital below you, right? And that's, by the way, true in even in the software area, right? Even though we're very limited exposure in software as a firm overall, even there, I hear a lot of discussion about private credit in software. I don't hear a lot of discussion about private equity in software. I mean, they are underneath, let's be clear, underneath the credit. So lots of equity in these deals, generally deals that went out with solid coverage statistics. You know, I think that the deals that were underwritten to withstand a downturn or a recession are performing as you would expect, which is, I mean, yes, the numbers may not have been, you know, exactly where they were when the deals were underwritten, but they're still good coverage and there's still plenty of cushion in those deals. So look, I think- You're still in credit. Right. And the only thing I would say is that for the best quality managers with lots of sourcing and deal flow, building a diversified portfolio is really critical. I think one of the mistakes that many managers make is they're in a rush to do deals and suddenly they're putting three, four percent, five percent of their portfolio in a single deal. The benefits of that diversification, even when you have a problem, it's very manageable. And I think that's an important point as well. So are you worried about private equity? Well, I certainly think that I think that distributions continue to remain under pressure. We keep hoping for a dynamic where that starts to shift back the other way. But overall, obviously private equity is very industrious and looking for ways to create liquidity. I think certainly as you look at our portfolio, overall, our private equity portfolio, because we have both fund commitments as well as co-investments alongside those firms. Right. It continues to perform quite well. So top quality managers helps, you know, staying away from the riskier sectors, which we do helps. So for example, we don't do oil and gas. We don't do retail. We don't do restaurants. We generally focus more on traditional software, maybe to the exclusion of maybe software businesses that would have been touching AI or been more exposed to AI. We've been thinking about that not for the last six months, but for the last two years. Yeah. So I would say our portfolio tends to be in private equity, tends to be both fund commitments and co-investments tends to be more conservative. Right. So we were not shooting for the ultra high returns and taking higher risk. We were going for the higher quality, you know, 25, 30% return opportunities that have maybe a little bit less risk and a higher quality kind of market leading business. So that's generally our philosophy across the firm, including credit. Well, when we get into the weeds a bit here, when we last talked, you used a great phrase, right? The sediment at the bottom of the barrel. Yes. You remember that one? That's a good-- I remember that conversation. I remember the quote. It's actually a really interesting dynamic even today. Yeah. Yeah. I want to talk about it because in private credit, it's not just the highest returning manager. That's necessarily the best. So talk about that from an investor perspective, what you look for. That is an incredibly important point, Julian. And I will tell you that if you look at the dynamics, and I think investors have gotten a lot more sophisticated on this. So early on, the consultants and investors say, well, I looked at your fund and your credit qualities unbelievably good. You have low losses, no losses, very low, not a crew. That's why you should be judged on. But OK. Right. That's what I think. Yeah. But we would have consultants and say, but your returns aren't as high as this other guy. And then we'd say, well, that's interesting. Let's go look at their BDC because that's publicly reported. Let's actually look at the deals that they've done. And in many cases, they were deals we turned out. So yes, they had maybe a slightly wider spread. Maybe they were-- we were underwriting more conservative deals that were being done at $4.50 or $500 over so far. And you look at their portfolio and it's $600 over so far. $700 over so far. Well, guess what? The market is pretty efficient. So if the company or private equity firm is paying two to 300 basis points more, the odds are pretty good. There's a reason. Yeah, it's a higher risk. Yeah. And maybe in some of those industries I refer to, maybe it's in retail, maybe it's in restaurants, that tend to be more volatile. So I think investors have very-- and certainly the consultants have helped with this. They have figured out now that you don't really know what your returns are until you have returned all the capital. And I was talking-- And I'm like-- until the end of light. So for example, I was talking to an investor of ours more recently. And he said, you know, we had this other fund we invested in. And we thought we were getting great returns. Like the yield looked great. We were yielding 12%. And the market-- and let's say we were yielding 9% or whatever. And or the market overall for better managers was 9%. And they went along and they said, we thought we were getting 12%. It looked great. And then they liquidated the fund at the end. And actually with the losses that were left in the portfolio, the sediment, if you will. Yeah. Suddenly the return was six. OK. Because they were carrying loans that ultimately they were either valuing or hopeful that they were going to get their money back. And they didn't. And suddenly it wasn't really a 12% return. It was more like an 8% or 7% or 6%. So I think you really have to-- until you've seen full realization of a fund, you don't really know what's buried in the portfolio-- that they're marking at par. And it may in fact be a much lower evaluation. Now part of what we have done to counteract that is that in our case we want to be very transparent. So we value third party, every single loan, every single quarter, every single loan in our portfolio. Also third party. All third party. So we use-- we have three or four valuation firms that we use, that outside firms that do this. Obviously these are large firms that do this across the industry. We get them to value every single loan in our portfolio. Because we want investors to know that we're making every effort to be as transparent as we can on our portfolio. So they can trust our evaluations. Now, and you've seen some firms that more recently have taken massive downmarks out of nowhere. Right. I mean, I don't even know what to say about that. I mean, when we go through our evaluation, we have a third party looking at every single loan. And if they think we should-- Great question. I don't know the answer to that. I will say from our perspective, we make every effort-- if a third party firm looks at our evaluation and suggests what we think this should be, 75 versus 85 for these reasons, or we've done an analysis. Here's where we think it should be. We respect that, and we listen to that. And we engage in a dialogue that if what they're suggesting or what they're recommending is the right answer, we go with it. We think that it's important to be on balance more conservative. And so when I see some of these situations where suddenly, 20 deals get marked out of the blue completely differently, that doesn't make any sense to me. I think if you're a high-quality institutional manager, you should be working to make sure that your investors feel very comfortable that you're being conservative. Is there a better way to do this like industry-wide? Obviously, there could be standards and all that kind of stuff. But it does seem like a big concern-- big question markover. Going with the best most respected firms is very important-- firms that have been doing this for a long time. The loan valuations that we get done-- I would argue in some respects-- having a fundamental valuation done by a third party is the best way at the end of the day versus, let's just say, a very lightly traded loan. A loan that maybe is traded by appointment every six months-- that mark may not even be indicative of what the real value is. Because it trades once in six months. That's not really a good indicator of value. Much rather look at it, do a deep dive on, OK, what's the cash flow, how much leverage-- is it six times leverage, is it 12 times leverage, OK, it's impaired. So I think that there will be an increasing focus. And I think it's justified on making sure that managers have third party firms looking at their marks. That they're not just having the manager report out that, hey, this is what we think it's worth. So I think things like that are important. And I think out of this current dynamic, we as managers need to be always looking at ways to make sure that we're improving our processes, improving our transparency, and making sure that investors feel comfortable with our reporting and our valuations. And frankly, the structures that they invest in. Yeah. What transparency is really important. I mean, there's so many allocators that are looking at that. Right, and that's not a new thing. Yes. And it seems like when you don't have enough information, that's where you can start-- rumor start, fair start, all the rest. I mean, that does seem like it could be a lot better. I think for the best managers, I would say we have all recognized that this is fundamental to being able to raise capital going forward. And by the way, they make us better. I will tell you that the best consultants, that the best managers are large-scale clients, are global clients, that-- They're always asking questions and making suggestions about various aspects that we very much listen to. And consultants in particular will ask for certain levels of transparency. And we think that's a good thing. We want investors to, we think when you look and do the deep dive on our firm and our track record over 20 years. Yeah. I mean, those numbers are really good. We're very proud of those. And we want, so our view is let's go deep here and make sure that you understand the portfolios and the performance. So I can see all the underlying detail. But you know what's interesting, people talk about transparency and I hear the banks talking about it. So bank CEOs talk about transparency. I would just say this, if you look at a bank's balance sheet or a bank's financial statements, you don't get alone by loan brand. They don't put every single loan. They don't even get every single loan valued by a third party. Yeah. Right? I mean, even the biggest banks, the best banks, I'm not suggesting. But if you look at their port, what they show is one line on loan book. Right. You know, $2 trillion. But you don't see the, you know, the 8,000 individual loans valued every single quarter by a third party. So I think, you know, I think the private credit industry deserves some credit here on this one. I think there's more transparency in private credit than in maybe the banking world where, you know, you're looking at large numbers where there isn't that detail. So I think in that sense, we provide pretty good visibility on our portfolio. I was thinking about that, right? Because a lot of, you know, books have come out like talking about that lack of transparency. We don't know who those loans are made to, et cetera, et cetera. And then I just started thinking about the banks. It wasn't so great then either. Right. So, yeah, it's an interesting topic. Just thinking about private credit and the history there and having watching things evolve. One of the things that's interesting is which we are not big fans of. I talked about, you know, I talked about some of the areas like smaller deals, smaller loans, getting too engaged in, you know, playing in the liquid loan market, which is really not our world. And look, they're, they're investors that want access to liquid loans. And there are firms that do that business really well. It's a trading business, right? At the end of the day. It's like, oh, we see this deteriorating. We sell it at 90 and we buy better value at 88. Yeah. Or, you know, so there is a absolute skill set. It's a trading skill set. But in my view, the fundamentals start to deteriorate as you get into a liquid context. The other area that I've seen activity and we certainly saw this in the GFC that we are not big fans of, are pools of assets structured structured. Well, so for example, you see some direct lenders buying, you know, pools of auto loans or pools of residential second mortgages, things like that. Like, as a big, big, a lot of things. Yeah. So, you know, we've never been big fans of buying pools of assets, right? And you saw some of the noise with the deals in the fall that came under question. Deals like, you know, that are pooling assets in a vehicle. You know, you're buying statistics then, right? You're buying, you know, this is the statistics of, you know, and so, you know, your expectations are based on, you know, not individual loan performance because it's got thousands of loans, but, you know, overall stats, you know, and you're analyzing, you know, at a very high level, we think that credit needs to be done at the micro level. And so we never each loan. And we've never been big fans of buying pools of assets. And some credit managers have done that. Yeah. But we're not big fans of that. I think, you know, I think asset based lending, if done well, can be a good asset class where you're, you know, you're lending against collateral. It's a different loan for sure, you know, and it's a loan based on an assessment, judgment, an analysis that you're going to get all your capital back from the asset that you're lending against. So it's different than a cash flow loan. But I think there's, there's opportunity asset based lending. There's opportunity in some of these, you know, areas within lending that are less populated where the banks are pulling back. But we think that the core middle market today still offers great value and is actually quite protected in the sense that you have to have scale and relationships and an ability to raise institutional capital that keeps out a lot of the competition. Yeah. So you're right. And a lot of managers have touted these other areas as being like the new, you know, whatever you want to call them, little niche opportunities. And you agree with that. But you're saying it's pretty good. I think you have to be. So when I think about our business, I think about it as evolutionary, not revolutionary, right? So what are we good at? What we are good at is providing capital to mid market businesses that are owned by private equity. That's all we've done in 20 year history. We, you know, I'd like to say that, you know, we're a one trick pony that has like five tricks that we do all within the same ring. You're lending junior capital, private equity, secondaries, but it's all in and around this private equity ecosystem, right? And it's all based on our connectivity and our knowledge and our relationships with these private equity firms. But there are some things that we don't do today that would be so easy to do based on the relationships and the ecosystem example. Capital solutions. Right. Today, we finance the original deal the private equity firm does. They come to us and say we're buying this company. We need financing. Maybe we need junior capital, senior debt, equity, etc. But we don't have a business today that does maybe a financing for a company that's been in a portfolio for three or four or five years and needs a more structured solution. Yes. It's fundamentally good business, but it's complex. And we can get a better return for engaging in that complexity, but it's not as simple as a new deal where you just come in and it's clean and it kind of fits the box. It actually needs a fair amount of complexity or a fair amount of work to kind of get comfortable with the structure. But it's private equity based. It's middle market. It's our core ecosystem. It's another capability that we could offer to our private equity relations. But you said no. You're not a fan of that complexity. No. Actually, I think that we are looking to move into that area. So we're looking at capital solutions as an area of opportunity. Okay. Right. We're looking at a capital system, but we don't do that specific thing right now, but I think it's an opportunity. And it's particularly an opportunity as private equity firms hold portfolio companies longer. Right. So now, there are in the deal for five years, company needs a longer term partner. It's a good business, complex structure, maybe a way to come in and solve a problem. So that's one example. Another example is I mentioned earlier, I think asset based lending to private equity owned, middle market companies, where it's not a cash flow alone, but it's a loan against a pool of collateral, right? It's a complete trust. Right. Traditional asset based lending, particularly as the banks have pulled away from that market. So I think, you know, I think there are areas, ABL's one, capital solutions is another credit second areas with a very focused lens is another, I think as long as it fits our DNA from an investment standpoint. So there are areas of growth, private credit is not just middle market lending. It's an area, it's a whole series of lending areas that are all growing. And I think it's going to continue to grow. I think a $2 trillion asset class will, if you look at the reports on how you define the space, I mean, if you include investment grade, private credit, as I know some of my peers do when they think about private credit. You know, it becomes a $40 trillion market. So I think we're still, you know, in the early innings for growth in private credit, I think the opportunity remains very, very significant. I don't think, you know, we are over, you know, over, you know, over run with, you know, with capital in the space. I know that was a question you alluded to earlier. Right. The drive powder in private equity versus private credit is something like private equity, five to one or four to one. So any of you think about a typical capital structure that's, you know, one to one or even, you know, or even less, you know, there is still a significant need for private credit. But again, you better have ways to differentiate yourself to drive activity. But I'll give you another example. In scale. Yeah. In scale. Think about this. Fourth quarter of 2025, first quarter of 2026 for us, record volume, record volume, up 40% Q1, 26 over Q1, 25. So so so in the core metal market for scaled for that group of five to 10 managers, you know, we're seeing very good activity, very good deployment and which enables us to be very selective about quality. So, you know, I think you hear a lot in the comments. about is M&A coming back or how much M&A years? A lot of that is the focus on the really large large buyouts. But the core metal market continues to churn away with good levels of activity and deal flow. We're seeing very good opportunity right now. In fact, as I said earlier, a somewhat wider runway, some larger deals with those large cap private credit managers have pulled back due to redemptions. So our runway has gotten wider. Pricing today is 50 to 75 basis points better than it was six months ago. Six months ago. Yes. So we're seeing deals now that we quoted at 450 in the fourth quarter that we're quoting at 5 to 5 in the quarter today. So better pricing, somewhat larger companies that are looking to private credit because you've kind of taken away this marginal dynamic of private credit playing in that this kind of large cap private credit managers playing. Thirdly, I would say base rates higher for longer. Whereas, you know, as recently as six months ago, we were for, you know, the forecast was maybe two or three rate cuts in 2026. Now we're talking about rates being maintained and some projections of maybe even a slight increase in rates. I don't believe that yet. I think we're probably in more of a static state for a period of time. Certainly, as this war plays out and given oil prices. But I think what that's done is, you know, a nine to nine and a half percent yield for a high quality middle market senior loan for maybe slightly larger companies with better covenant structures. I would argue very attractive relative value today. People forget that high rates, right? Are good for a senior lender. Right. Right. As long as you're underwriting to a conservative standard that, you know, that you know, that company can handle the higher rates, you know, for a period for longer, you know, for longer period of time. Right. So, I mean, I think about our portfolio that we underwrote in a lower rate environment. So, you know, in a higher rate environment, maybe it's two and a half times. Still fine. Yeah. Right. So, I think if you have stayed disciplined and focused and you underrated a very high quality level, the higher for longer is not necessarily, you know, it's not a bad thing. Right. It's generating a very attractive risk adjusted return. And I would argue today, in particular, that because you've pulled away some of this because of these redemption dynamics, and because really the highest quality credit managers are the ones raising the capital, I think the environment today is one where, you know, we're seeing very good relative value in private credit, very good. And I think that's a surprise to some people because all this noise in the first few months is like, redemption, etc. But if you look under the covers, what you see is the portfolios are in good shape. You know, the, you know, the underlying spreads have widened out a bit because of this disruption. And, and for managers like ourselves, we, we actually think that we're in for a period now of pretty attractive fundamentals. So, we have plenty of dry powder and, you know, we feel very good about the, the opportunities in that dynamics in the market, you know, notwithstanding, you know, redemption pressures on other managers that maybe heavily dependent on retail, which we're not, as I've said to you, notwithstanding, you know, some of the dynamics around AI and software, which if you, everything perhaps, I think that's absolutely right. In fact, I would completely agree with you. It's not just AI and software. It's AI and everything. Yeah. So, so, you know, working with an outside firm to help you analyze not just the impacts of AI today, but the impacts of AI, three, five, seven years from now, we make loans that are five to seven years in maturity. You're making a long-term commitment. Yeah. Let's make sure that this business, you know, isn't just getting, you know, doesn't just have tailwinds for the next year and headwinds for the following three years. Let's make sure this business is very insulated from the potential risks of AI and, and hopefully, benefiting from, you know, all the good things that can come of it, you know, look at our businesses, as I alleged, you know, as I said earlier, AI can be an incredible tailwind for us, right? Analyzing all those portfolio companies. It's easier to do that, right? I mean, who are the best performers? Where should we be, you know, looking for refinancing opportunities? So, AI, I think, I'm a, I'm, you know, I know there's a lot of, you know, mixed views on this, but I think AI will make us more productive. It'll make us more focused and for the managers that adopted and embrace it, make us more successful. So, you know, I just think that, you know, it's, it's an underwriting risk and an underwriting opportunity. And, you know, I think notwithstanding redemptions, some of the noise around, around AI more broadly, as you pointed out, some of the other dynamics that are playing out, some of the managers may be being more challenged. I do think that creates opportunity and I, and I do believe that we're in a position right now for managers like ourselves to take market share. And, and all of that, I think, comes down to a fundamental point, which you and I have not talked about, which I think is really critical. And it's something that is, you know, probably the most important thing on my mind pretty much all the time, which is the importance of attracting, retaining, mentoring, developing your people. It is so critical today. If you look at the most successful firms, firms that I look at and admire on the private equity side, the large institutional managers, folks that you've interviewed. Yeah, yeah. I think about why they have been so successful over a long period of time or why we've been very successful over the last 20 years. It is because we have leaned into attracting, developing the best people in the industry, low turnover, you know, a long-term commitment. People realizing this firm actually cares about me and my development and making sure that I'm advancing in my career and learning and growing professionally, giving our people opportunities to speak, you know, in conferences and in the medium or broadly. All of those things, you know, create an environment where people want to be part of you. They want to contribute. And that's probably the most important thing that I think about today is, it's all about talent. I mean, after all, capital is a commodity at the end of the day. Yeah. I mean, there's a lot of private credit floating around out there, right? There's a lot of capital. The banks, you know, the banks have a lot of capital. That's probably. So, yeah, I think, I think people make a huge difference. And I have this thesis regarding, even regarding AI, that you think about it. AI is many respects going to make information almost commoditized. In the words, knowledge will be universally commoditized. Right? You can't find out. You can't find out. By the way, any fact that you want to know, Claude will tell you that, you know, in 30 seconds, right? Or open AI or whoever. Right. So knowledge and information becomes incredibly accessible and almost commoditized in an odd way. So what becomes more valuable? Relationships and trust. Why do we do 30, 40, 50 deals with many private equity firms in the core metal market? And these are the crime to crime reforms that everybody would want to deal with. It's because we've been doing business together for 20 years because they know when we're in a deal with them, we're going to be a good partner. We're not going to, you know, if there's, you know, and the good times and bad, not every deal is going to be a home run, right? They'll be deals that, you know, haven't, don't go as well. But, you know, look, we're your partner. We're going to work through this. Let's work out a solution. In my experience, after 40 years in this world, we live in a private credit, this ecosystem, you know, certainly the last 20 years with Churchill. In our core metal market, the right answer is almost always to live to fight another day. In other words, if you've financed a business that's fundamentally a good business and a good management team and you're backing the right private equity firms, you know, they may stumble. There may be challenges or issues, but, you know, but filing that company or putting it into bankruptcy is opposed to working through a consensual solution where maybe the private equity firm puts up a little bit more capital. We, you know, we work with them to provide some flexibility on the financing. That is almost always a better solution than, you know, acting in maybe with the draconian dynamic. I'm not saying we're not prepared to do that because we are. But inevitably, the partnership aspect becomes really important as you try to fix problems. So when you look back, right? I mean, 40 years. Long time. 20 with Churchill. Yeah, what really has stayed the same? I mean, I think some of what you just said. Yeah, but what is just so different? So what stayed the same is the the people dynamics and the importance of, in fact, I would say it's even gotten even more important today. Even in the face of AI, which of course I love. Yeah, you know, obviously you get on your career and it's doing this a long time. I think the importance of relationships, I think when you're younger, you work alongside folks in the bullpen, you think, okay, well, you know, these are my colleagues, but then I'll work in another firm at a different firm, etc. But I think, you know, I'm struck as I look back, I have had an extraordinary opportunity to have worked with some of the most talented and capable people in our industry. You know, I feel a little bit like the Waldo of our industry. You know, I've worked with a lot of very talented folks, you know, you know, we're talking before I went on with Bennett Goodman, who's an investor in our firm and we're an investor in his firm. So it's kind of a mutual thing. But I think about those types of relationships, Bennett and Mike Arpeat at an aviate at Hunter Point, who, you know, we were one of their earliest and largest investors. They along with Somasik are investors in our firm. We did that transaction a year ago. And I think that increasingly relationships and the continuity of those relationships, whether they're private equity firms, whether they're lender relationship, lenders to us, in our banks that provide financing to us, whether those are relationships, you know, with your people and your organization. I just think the importance of the people side in a business that sometimes is looked upon as one big, you know, investment factory is sometimes even is sometimes underestimated. I think that that, you know, even more so today because of the internet, because of the ability to connect instantaneously with everybody in the industry, you know, I think that, you know, paying close attention to that, particularly as young people in their careers, you sometimes think, oh, you know, you know, this person I'm working with, you know, I'll be at a different firm, five years from now or 10 years from now. But paying attention and learning from your peers and from, you know, even folks in our industry, I look at, you know, even firms that might be viewed as competitors, I see what they're doing and say, well, that was really smart, like what they did or that was an interesting way. So always being open to learning and understanding that you can learn from competitors, you can learn from, you know, from your colleagues and the organization, reporters, exactly. Well, you know, you guys ask great questions and then sometimes I go back and say, you know what? She asked me a great question and I'd have the immediate answer to this one. Let's go back and dig this up. Yeah. So I think, I think that in today, I would say the importance of relationships in many respects has gotten even larger and more significant today than it even was 20 years ago, because of the connectivity. The other thing I will say that as you think about how our business has evolved, you know, when I started in the business, you know, there was no institutional investment in private credit. None. There were no institutions, the banks, banks were doing the lending, private credit. You had CLOs, you know, that were mid-market CLOs, that if you raised equity, you could do a CLO, but those were investment grade primarily investors. So I think that the institutionalization and now more recently, the democratization of private credit has, you know, has created both opportunities and requirements that, you know, I think you have to be responsive to, to be successful. You know, I think, you know, institutional access and requirements of transparency have become, you know, the bar keeps getting raised every year, you know, it just seems like every year there's more need to be more transparent and more granular with your information. So being responsive to that, I think continues to increase. On the wealth side, we've seen the need, you know, that's clearly there and structurally as well as, you know, informationally. So I think that has increased dramatically. But at the end of the day, you know, I look back on my career and I think about all the great people that I've had the opportunity to work for and with. You know, I interviewed David Rubenstein a couple weeks ago at kind of a kickoff event for for milk and and I was just so honored to do that and, you know, I look at his career and, you know, the number of awards and accolades and the amount that he's given back to, you know, to all the various organizations. I just saw he gave another, you know, major donation, university, Chicago law school. I mean, it's absolutely amazing to me. And so I take a lot of inspiration from folks in my industry that have, you know, that have, you know, that have accomplished a lot, but also have given back a lot. So, you know, you look back, it's been 40 years, right? So you look back and you think, okay, well, you know, what do I think about today? And, you know, I think it's the relationships that I look back on now and I'm just so grateful to, you know, obviously yesterday was a big day for our firm. Yeah, yeah. So yeah, I mean, I think, you know, I think that's an important part of certainly, you know, who we are as a firm and what we're very proud of. That's great. Well, thank you so much for doing that. Thank you. I would like to be one of those relationships. You are absolutely. So this is terrific. Thank you. And what you do and educating, you know, institutional investor community, super important. And I'm a big fan of, you know, of your podcasts and reporting and it's, it's, it's real pleasure to be spending time with you. Great. Thank you. Thanks very much.