This article is sponsored by Haynes BooneAlbert Tan
As an asset class, private capital has experienced exponential growth in the past few decades, more than doubling its assets under management from less than $10 trillion globally in 2012 to more than $24 trillion in 2022. The fund finance industry has grown alongside it, starting from a nascent product in the late 1980s to an almost universal part in every fund’s capital structure today.
Fund sponsors now routinely include ‘bankable provisions’ for subscription line facility lenders in fund documents as anticipation for the use of this product by each of their funds, and are increasingly adding flexibility to expressly pledge their assets for use in net asset value (NAV) facilities.
Latest estimates put the global fund finance industry at more than $1 trillion. Many leading lenders in the space are operating at their maximum internal capital allocation. Nevertheless, they want to continue to maintain and expand their relationships with key sponsors. To that end, these institutions are turning to structured finance tools to reduce their capital reserve requirements, including credit facility ratings, conduit lending structures, securitizations, silent participations and capital relief trades.
Several leading rating agencies have expanded the scope of finance products they rate to include subscription line facilities, collateralized fund obligations and NAV financings. Once a predominantly European concept, ratings have been gaining ground in North America, with public and private ratings being requested by both borrowers and lenders. This trend is an attempt to attract different lenders, allow for higher holds from syndicate members due to enhanced capital treatment and offer more competitive pricing and terms.
Aleksandra Kopec
Securitizations, capital relief trades and other capital market solutions are being explored by banks to help alleviate capital reserve requirement constraints. Early users of these tools are facing difficulties securitizing portfolios of facilities in an industry with private and bespoke terms, but as the pressure for solutions offering capital relief increases, the industry may begin to coalesce around a set of standardized terms that allows these capital market solutions to flourish.
Finally, a somewhat recent development in the industry has been the introduction of various non-bank lenders, primarily insurance companies. This has come with its own set of challenges, including the need to structure some deals with term and revolver components or include USD and alternative currency tranche lenders. But it has also come with opportunities to syndicate deals to a much broader pool of institutions.
Advertisement
NAV financings
The growth in NAV financings reminds market participants of the early stages of subscription line facilities. Many of the same criticisms once levied against subscription line facilities (which are now an industry-wide accepted and beneficial leverage and cash management tool) are being raised with respect to NAV financings. Despite all the criticisms, there has been growth on both the supply and demand side for NAV financings, with lenders and borrowers highlighting the legitimate uses and trying to educate LPs, rating agencies, regulators and others on the benefits of this form of leverage.
More than 70 percent of sponsors and lenders at NAVember (an annual NAV-focused event hosted by Haynes Boone) expected growth in their NAV financings portfolio in 2024. Lenders that offer this product include traditional subscription line lenders expanding into NAV financings, but also specialized non-bank lenders, offering flexible and tailored terms and structures.
Interest rate environment
Rising interest rates and higher pricing has been one of the most significant changes in the fund finance market in recent years. Our data shows that pricing has largely stabilized over the last two quarters, after adjusting for the anticipated regulations surrounding the capital reserve requirements that banks must hold for these products and some of the supply side issues caused by regional bank failures in 2023. While rates and pricing have increased at a much faster rate than prior business cycles, it’s important to note that current rates are not unprecedented, and markets have weathered high rates in the past and continue to do so.
Brent Shultz
Funds are still actively utilizing the product, with industry surveys from H1 2024 indicating that 81 percent of PE funds are maintaining the use of their subscription line facilities notwithstanding the higher interest rate environment and, as of September 2023, more than 95 percent of private capital funds have access to subscription credit facilities. A survey by Haynes Boone of 120 sponsors, lenders and other fund finance market participants found that 74 percent of institutions are expecting some level of growth in their fund finance exposure in 2024, with 63 percent expecting an overall increase in the fund finance market in 2024.
And even if pricing does not return to the lower levels seen in the past decade, subscription line financings still provide certainty and flexibility of funding, quick access to liquidity and reduce the administrative burden. With higher rates, funds are more judicious on the sizes of their facilities and increasing/decreasing the size to better match their predicted needs, and also on the tenor of outstanding borrowings.
Geographic expansion
The fund finance industry is well established in North America and Europe, with the Fund Finance Association hosting its 13th and eighth annual symposium in these respective geographies. Additionally, the Asia-Pacific region has been an area of recent growth, both domestically in APAC, but also with regional lenders entering the European and North American markets. This year, there was enough interest and participation in the Japanese market for FFA to launch a separate fund finance conference focused on Japanese sponsors, lenders and investors, and a discussion on some of the nuances and market practices in Japan – in addition to FFA hosting its sixth annual Asia-Pacific symposium in Singapore.
Advertisement
With the continued expansion of private capital and renewed fundraising efforts on specific types of investors and new geographies, fund finance lenders are adapting to the regional needs of private capital firms and the shifting supply and demand of financing in different regions, while law firms are expanding and gaining expertise across various jurisdictions as a response to the increased diversification of investor jurisdictions that funds are exploring.
Artificial intelligence
Artificial intelligence is poised to disrupt almost all industries and markets, and the private capital, banking and legal industries are no exception.
In the coming years, funds will develop AI tools to analyze potential deals and suggest optimal leverage levels/techniques and employ AI strategies to add value to existing portfolio companies. Lenders will utilize AI to assist with diligence and underwriting, monitor portfolio exposure and run risk assessments. Lawyers and law firms will use AI to assist with due diligence, drafting and negotiating documents, reviewing large volumes of data, and more readily identify market trends. Although AI cannot replace the judgment, experience, common sense and analytical capabilities of our industry’s experts, it will continue to be a tool to enhance those capabilities and become more accurate, efficient and productive.
Albert Tan is a partner and co-head of fund finance, and Aleksandra Kopec and Brent Shultz are partners in fund finance, at Haynes Boone
Cornell University administrator Warren Petrofsky will serve as the Faculty of Arts and Sciences’ new dean of administration and finance, charged with spearheading efforts to shore up the school’s finances as it faces a hefty budget deficit.
Petrofsky’s appointment, announced in a Friday email from FAS Dean Hopi E. Hoekstra to FAS affiliates, will begin April 20 — nearly a year after former FAS dean of administration and finance Scott A. Jordan stepped down. Petrofsky will replace interim dean Mary Ann Bradley, who helped shape the early stages of FAS cost-cutting initiatives.
Petrofsky currently serves as associate dean of administration at Cornell University’s College of Arts and Sciences.
As dean, he oversaw a budget cut of nearly $11 million to the institution’s College of Arts and Sciences after the federal government slashed at least $250 million in stop-work orders and frozen grants, according to the Cornell Daily Sun.
He also serves on a work group established in November 2025 to streamline the school’s administrative systems.
Advertisement
Earlier, at the University of Pennsylvania, Petrofsky managed capital initiatives and organizational redesigns in a number of administrative roles.
Petrofsky is poised to lead similar efforts at the FAS, which relaunched its Resources Committee in spring 2025 and created a committee to consolidate staff positions amid massive federal funding cuts.
As part of its planning process, the committee has quietly brought on external help. Over several months, consultants from McKinsey & Company have been interviewing dozens of administrators and staff across the FAS.
Petrofsky will also likely have a hand in other cost-cutting measures across the FAS, which is facing a $365 million budget deficit. The school has already announced it will keep spending flat for the 2026 fiscal year, and it has dramatically reduced Ph.D. admissions.
In her email, Hoekstra praised Petrofsky’s performance across his career.
Advertisement
“Warren has emphasized transparency, clarity in communication, and investment in staff development,” she wrote. “He approaches change with steadiness and purpose, and with deep respect for the mission that unites our faculty, researchers, staff, and students. I am confident that he will be a strong partner to me and to our community.”
—Staff writer Amann S. Mahajan can be reached at [email protected] and on Signal at amannsm.38. Follow her on X @amannmahajan.
My spreadsheet reviewed a WalletHub ranking of financial distress for the residents of 100 U.S. cities, including 17 in California. The analysis compared local credit scores, late bill payments, bankruptcy filings and online searches for debt or loans to quantify where individuals had the largest money challenges.
When California cities were divided into three geographic regions – Southern California, the Bay Area, and anything inland – the most challenges were often found far from the coast.
The average national ranking of the six inland cities was 39th worst for distress, the most troubled grade among the state’s slices.
Bakersfield received the inland region’s worst score, ranking No. 24 highest nationally for financial distress. That was followed by Sacramento (30th), San Bernardino (39th), Stockton (43rd), Fresno (45th), and Riverside (52nd).
Advertisement
Southern California’s seven cities overall fared better, with an average national ranking of 56th largest financial problems.
However, Los Angeles had the state’s ugliest grade, ranking fifth-worst nationally for monetary distress. Then came San Diego at 22nd-worst, then Long Beach (48th), Irvine (70th), Anaheim (71st), Santa Ana (85th), and Chula Vista (89th).
Monetary challenges were limited in the Bay Area. Its four cities average rank was 69th worst nationally.
San Jose had the region’s most distressed finances, with a No. 50 worst ranking. That was followed by Oakland (69th), San Francisco (72nd), and Fremont (83rd).
The results remind us that inland California’s affordability – it’s home to the state’s cheapest housing, for example – doesn’t fully compensate for wages that typically decline the farther one works from the Pacific Ocean.
Advertisement
A peek inside the scorecard’s grades shows where trouble exists within California.
Credit scores were the lowest inland, with little difference elsewhere. Late payments were also more common inland. Tardy bills were most difficult to find in Northern California.
Bankruptcy problems also were bubbling inland, but grew the slowest in Southern California. And worrisome online searches were more frequent inland, while varying only slightly closer to the Pacific.
Note: Across the state’s 17 cities in the study, the No. 53 average rank is a middle-of-the-pack grade on the 100-city national scale for monetary woes.
Jonathan Lansner is the business columnist for the Southern California News Group. He can be reached at jlansner@scng.com
The up-and-coming fintech scored a pair of fourth-quarter beats.
Diversified fintech Chime Financial(CHYM +12.88%) was playing a satisfying tune to investors on Thursday. The company’s stock flew almost 14% higher that trading session, thanks mostly to a fourth quarter that featured notably higher-than-expected revenue guidance.
Sweet music
Chime published its fourth-quarter and full-year 2025 results just after market close on Wednesday. For the former period, the company’s revenue was $596 million, bettering the same quarter of 2024 by 25%. The company’s strongest revenue stream, payments, rose 17% to $396 million. Its take from platform-related activity rose more precipitously, advancing 47% to $200 million.
Image source: Getty Images.
Meanwhile, Chime’s net loss under generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) more than doubled. It was $45 million, or $0.12 per share, compared with a fourth-quarter 2024 deficit of $19.6 million.
Advertisement
On average, analysts tracking the stock were modeling revenue below $578 million and a deeper bottom-line loss of $0.20 per share.
In its earnings release, Chime pointed to the take-up of its Chime Card as a particular catalyst for growth. Regarding the product, the company said, “Among new member cohorts, over half are adopting Chime Card, and those members are putting over 70% of their Chime spend on the product, which earns materially higher take rates compared to debit.”
Today’s Change
(12.88%) $2.72
Current Price
$23.83
Advertisement
Key Data Points
Market Cap
$7.9B
Day’s Range
$22.30 – $24.63
52wk Range
Advertisement
$16.17 – $44.94
Volume
562K
Avg Vol
3.3M
Advertisement
Gross Margin
86.34%
Double-digit growth expected
Chime management proffered revenue and non-GAAP (adjusted) earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) guidance for full-year 2026. The company expects to post a top line of $627 million to $637 million, which would represent at least 21% growth over the 2024 result. Adjusted EBITDA should be $380 million to $400 million. No net income forecasts were provided in the earnings release.
It isn’t easy to find a niche in the financial industry, which is crowded with companies offering every imaginable type of service to clients. Yet Chime seems to be achieving that, as the Chime Card is clearly a hit among the company’s target demographic of clientele underserved by mainstream banks. This growth stock is definitely worth considering as a buy.