Sign in

You're signed outSign in or to get full access.

BS

Blackstone Secured Lending Fund (BXSL)·Q1 2025 Earnings Summary

Executive Summary

  • Q1 2025 delivered resilient earnings: Net investment income (NII) was $189M ($0.83 per share), covering the $0.77 dividend at 108% while NAV per share held flat at $27.39 .
  • Revenue was ~$357.8M*, essentially in line with consensus ($358.4M*), while EPS modestly beat ($0.83 actual vs $0.816 consensus*) — a slight revenue miss but an EPS beat due to fee and accelerated OID from elevated repayments (about $0.06/share) .
  • Credit quality remained strong with non‑accruals at 0.3% of cost (0.1% of fair value), and weighted average asset yield was 10.2%; liability costs improved to a 5.01% weighted average interest rate, reflecting continued funding advantages .
  • Catalyst: Funding cost wins and tight capital markets execution (issued $500M bonds at 5.3% coupon, 147 bps over Treasuries) plus defensive first‑lien mix (98.2%) should support spread capture and dividend coverage amid base‑rate headwinds .

Note: *Values retrieved from S&P Global.

What Went Well and What Went Wrong

What Went Well

  • Dividend coverage and quality of earnings: “net investment income per share of $0.83, covering our dividend at 108%,” driven overwhelmingly by cash interest rather than PIK/dividends .
  • Funding cost leadership and balance sheet strength: Weighted average interest rate on borrowings fell to 5.01%, supported by tight new issuance ($500M at 147 bps over Treasuries) and $3.4B of liquidity; BXSL retains investment‑grade ratings (Baa2/Moody’s; BBB‑/S&P positive outlook) .
  • Defensive portfolio and credit quality: First‑lien concentration ~98% and non‑accruals at 0.3% cost / 0.1% fair value, with average LTV 47.4% — management emphasized focus on larger, sponsor‑backed borrowers in resilient sectors .

What Went Wrong

  • Base‑rate headwinds pressuring run‑rate earnings: Management acknowledged rate cuts reduce earnings; without less predictable fee tailwinds, dividend coverage could tighten (“if earnings decline, then we’ll reflect that in the dividend going forward”) .
  • Elevated repayments created net negative deployment and reversed unrealized gains: Repayments of ~$978–$900M drove a 28% annualized repayment rate and ~$0.06/share of fee/OID accelerations, but NAV absorbed $0.17/share unrealized losses (concentrated in a few positions) .
  • Yield drift lower: Weighted average asset yield at 10.2% (from 10.4% in Q4 and 11.2% in Q3), reflecting lower base rates and mix shifts; management kept underwriting standards tight, passing on lower quality deals .

Financial Results

Actuals vs Consensus (S&P Global)

MetricQ3 2024Q4 2024Q1 2025
EPS Actual ($)$0.91 $0.84$0.83
EPS Consensus Mean ($)*$0.8949*$0.8526*$0.8160*
EPS Surprise ($ / %)+$0.0151 / +1.7%*-$0.0126 / -1.5%*+$0.0140 / +1.7%*
Revenue Actual ($USD Millions)*$343.218*$352.659*$357.764*
Revenue Consensus ($USD Millions)*$338.179*$346.522*$358.397*
Revenue Surprise ($ / %)+$5.039 / +1.5%*+$6.137 / +1.8%*-$0.633 / -0.2%*

Note: *Values retrieved from S&P Global.

Profitability, Yield, and Balance Sheet

MetricQ3 2024Q4 2024Q1 2025
Net Investment Income ($USD Millions)$186$183 $189
Net Investment Income per Share ($)$0.91$0.84$0.83
Total Investment Income ($USD Millions)$343$353 ~$357.8*
NII Margin (%)54.2%51.8% ~52.8%*
NAV per Share ($)$27.27 $27.39 $27.39
Weighted Avg Asset Yield (%)11.2% 10.4% 10.2%
Weighted Avg Interest Rate on Borrowings (%)5.45% 5.17% 5.01%
Ending Leverage (Debt-to-Equity, x)1.12x 1.17x 1.19x

Note: Q1 total investment income and Q1 NII margin derived from S&P Global revenue actual; Values retrieved from S&P Global.

Deployment and Portfolio KPIs

KPIQ3 2024Q4 2024Q1 2025
New Commitments ($USD Billions)$1.106 $1.241 >$0.75
Fundings ($USD Billions)$0.956 $1.377 ~$0.70
Repayments/Sales ($USD Billions)$0.292 $0.213 ~$0.90
Liquidity (Cash + Undrawn, $USD Billions)$1.1 $2.4 $3.4
Investments at Fair Value ($USD Billions)$12.0 $13.093 $12.8
First‑Lien Share (%)98.7% 98.0% 98.2%
Non‑Accruals (% of Cost / FV)0.2% / — 0.3% / 0.2% 0.3% / 0.1%
Average Loan‑to‑Value (%)46.5% 46.0% 47.4%

Guidance Changes

MetricPeriodPrevious GuidanceCurrent GuidanceChange
Regular Dividend per Share ($)Q2 2025$0.77 (Q1 2025 declared) $0.77 (declared) Maintained
Leverage Target (Debt/Equity, x)Ongoing1.0–1.25 target range (historical) 1.0–1.25 target range (reiterated; end Q1 at 1.19x) Maintained
Funding Cost StrategyOngoingDrive down cost via tight issuance and facility amendments Continued reductions; Q1 weighted avg interest 5.01% vs 5.17% in Q4 Lowered cost (execution win)
Dividend PolicyOngoingCover dividend with quality earnings; use spillover prudently If earnings decline with rates, dividend will reflect it; maintain quality over risk‑taking Policy reiterated/clarified

Earnings Call Themes & Trends

TopicPrevious Mentions (Q3 2024)Previous Mentions (Q4 2024)Current Period (Q1 2025)Trend
Tariffs/MacroOptimism for 2025 activity; rates/spreads normalizing Emphasis on defensive portfolio; low non‑accruals Tariff uncertainty; focus on resilient sectors; active value‑creation to mitigate impacts Heightened monitoring, defensive posture maintained
Deployment/RepaymentsStrong pipeline; BXCI lead/sole lender advantage Record total investment income; commitments/fundings ramped Elevated repayments (~$900M) and negative net deployment; pass rate high amid caution Near‑term muted net growth; building firepower
Liability ManagementTight revolver and bond pricing; IG ratings strengthen Weighted avg rate 5.17%; liquidity $2.4B Weighted avg rate down to 5.01%; $3.4B liquidity; $500M issued at tightest peer spread Continuing cost improvements
Credit QualityNon‑accruals ~0.2% cost; strong documentation Non‑accruals 0.3% cost; low assets <80 marked Non‑accruals 0.3% cost / 0.1% FV; 0.7% of debt <80; majority marks flat/up Stable/strong
Dividend Coverage & Spillover~$1.82/share spillover; supportive of outlook Coverage 109% in Q4 Coverage 108%; management will adjust dividend if earnings decline; spillover at ~4% cost of capital Coverage solid; policy clarity

Management Commentary

  • “Despite recent market volatility, BXSL reported another strong quarter with net investment income per share of $0.83, covering our dividend at 108%. Credit performance remained healthy with minimal non‑accruals, underpinned by a 98.2% first lien senior secured debt portfolio with a loan‑to‑value ratio of 47.4%.” — Co‑CEOs Brad Marshall & Jonathan Bock .
  • “Our liability stack continues to be diverse… total weighted average interest rate on drawn debt decreased to 5.01% in Q1.” — Brad Marshall .
  • “In the first quarter, BXSL’s net investment income was $189 million or $0.83 per share… Total investment income for the quarter, a record for the fund, was up $54 million or 18% year‑over‑year.” — CFO Teddy Desloge .
  • “Today, the dividend is 11.2% and if earnings decline, then we’ll reflect that in the dividend going forward as it relates to rates.” — Brad Marshall .
  • “BXSL maintained its dividend distribution of $0.77 per share… we realized our equity in frontline… realized a gain of over $7 million.” — President Carlos Whitaker .

Q&A Highlights

  • Dividend coverage policy: Management emphasized three levers (turnover/fees, lowering expenses/cost of capital, not increasing risk), and will adjust the dividend if earnings decline with rates; spillover has ~4% cost of capital and is used prudently to support earnings base .
  • Repayments and pipeline: Elevated repayments (including strategic sales and HBS securitizations) drove near‑term negative net deployment; Q2 expected muted repayments amid volatility; deal flow shifting from liquid to private markets with spreads wider for lower‑quality assets .
  • Leverage/dry powder: Net debt to equity near low end after cash timing; BXSL is well‑capitalized (5.01% financing costs; ample undrawn capacity) to lean into opportunities .
  • Tariffs: Early to assess full impacts; portfolio skewed toward U.S. software, services, healthcare (~90% less impacted areas); name‑by‑name analysis suggests relatively small group potentially affected, with Blackstone value creation resources deployed to mitigate .
  • Underwriting standards: Cautious stance, higher pass rate, bias up‑market in periods of uncertainty; avoid reaching for risk despite spread dynamics .

Estimates Context

  • EPS beat and revenue essentially in line: Q1 EPS $0.83 vs $0.816* (+1.7%), revenue $357.8M* vs $358.4M* (−0.2%). Prior periods: Q4 EPS missed (−1.5%) but revenue beat; Q3 EPS and revenue both beat*. Near‑term estimate adjustments should account for fully‑reflected base‑rate declines (per CFO) and less predictable fee/OID from repayments .
  • As rates drift lower, Street may trim forward NII assumptions; BXSL’s cost‑of‑capital leadership and first‑lien focus partially offset asset yield compression*.
    Note: *Values retrieved from S&P Global.

Key Takeaways for Investors

  • Quality over risk‑taking: BXSL reiterated its defensive first‑lien, larger‑company bias and will not reach for spread in lower‑quality sectors — supporting credit quality and minimizing loss severity .
  • Funding cost advantage: Continued liability optimization (5.01% weighted average rate; tight new issuance) is a durable differentiator that cushions asset yield compression .
  • Dividend sustainability: Coverage at 108% this quarter; policy indicates dividend will be aligned with earnings trajectory as rates decline — watch turnover/fee tailwinds and cost reductions .
  • Near‑term deployment muted: Elevated repayments produced negative net funding in Q1; expect modest activity until macro/policy clarity improves, then ramp as private markets absorb more volume .
  • Credit remains strong: Non‑accruals are low (0.3% cost / 0.1% FV); portfolio marks largely stable, with concentrated unrealized losses in a few names (e.g., Medallia at 89), offset by selective equity realizations .
  • Monitoring tariffs: Firm‑wide resources (procurement, e‑sourcing, consulting) actively support impacted companies — an underappreciated mitigant in today’s backdrop .
  • Trading setup: EPS beats vs consensus, cost of capital tailwinds, and defensive credit posture are supportive; sensitivity remains around base‑rate path and fee-driven income variability.