Sohn Conference Foundation · · 18 min
Scott Goodwin presents at Sohn 2026
TL;DR
- Diameter's Scott Goodwin frames the private-credit scare as a $2 trillion leveraged-finance direct-lending slice inside a $40 trillion market — “the sky isn't falling,” but the stress is real and marks are mispriced. Post-GFC rules (Volcker, Dodd-Frank, Basel III, plus Fed/OCC guidelines barring banks from LBOs above 6x leverage) handed the asset class its growth: $200B pre-GFC to $2T today. Semiliquid private BDCs raised $300B in the last five or six years; non-traded structures later saw "$8 billion of unmet redemptions in Q1."
- The fee machine drove the concentration: a unitranche in a CLO earns ~40bps, in a private BDC six-to-seven times that — “FRE, FRE, FRE” — culminating in BlackRock buying HPS last year at 30x forward FRE. Deploying at scale meant billion-plus deals in sectors and deals banks could no longer lend to: SaaS, healthcare IT, and business services — asset-light and AI-exposed — with leverage up, interest coverage down, maintenance covenants disappearing, and PIK toggles increasing. COVID-era loans were written against ARR rather than cash flow.
- Goodwin's four LPs who founded major Silicon Valley firms told him the quiet part in late 2022: “We're building AI companies to break the SaaS companies we built 15 years ago. So be careful.” Diameter warned in letters from May 2023 (“material disintermediation”), Q3 2023 (“some companies would be ruthlessly eliminated by AI”), and Q2 2024 (“secular change was coming”); by late 2024, managers were still lending to SaaS, and bankruptcies began appearing in 2025. After “cloud code” came along during the 2025 holiday season, its Q1 2026 letter said “AI is coming for SaaS.” Diameter limited SaaS to 5% when it started, de-risked its SaaS exposure, and shorted SaaS-heavy BDCs last year.
- Goodwin says private-credit managers report 30-40% SaaS exposure but understate it: Diameter's AI-tool scan of public BDC portfolios found true exposure far above disclosed figures, and 40-50% of the average portfolio carries an AI risk factor once healthcare IT, business services, and other adjacent sectors are included. His verdict — “almost criminal portfolio construction” — traces to bankers hired to originate who were never taught to build par-credit portfolios: “you're buying at 99, your upside is 100.”
- Goodwin says marks are wrong in many cases: the average difference between one BDC and another was 6% over the past six years, with cases 40 points apart encountered while considering BDC shorts — “that created some easy trades, obviously” — and “the regulators are going to come for this.” The acute pain is the 2021-22 vintage of ARR-based SaaS loans hitting maturities now; asset-light recoveries can be very low once subscribers are lost, and if sponsors believe a business is disrupted by AI, their incentive may be “to take dividends and turn you into an IO.”
- The trade: buy select public BDCs at 0.85x GAV (not NAV) at low-teens yields — smaller, non-SaaS-heavy names hit that level a month ago and Diameter started buying. Ahead: $150-200B of expected secondary selling driven by retail redemptions, bank margin calls, and prudent LP risk management (15 cherry-picked trades done in two months), plus new loans pricing 50-75bps wider as capital-constrained majors stop re-upping. Goodwin says the issue is 5% of private credit, broadly distributed, and SaaS is only one-third of “that market.”
Digest · the substance, structured for research
1. Regulation built the $2T machine; fees supercharged it
- Goodwin's origin story: post-GFC leveraged-lending guidelines said "banks cannot lend to LBOs that are more than six times levered" — so private credit filled the void, growing from $200B pre-GFC (conservative $25M-EBITDA loans, tight docs) to $2T of multibillion-dollar deals within a $40T private-credit market.
- The economics of the semiliquid private-BDC boom: 40bps for a loan in a CLO versus six-to-seven times that in a private BDC. "Why? FRE, FRE, FRE." Multiples expanded, M&A followed — "if you don't own a private credit business, you have to buy one" — capped by BlackRock buying HPS last year for 30x forward FRE.
2. Industrial-scale deployment meant SaaS at scale, lent against ARR
- The $300B raised over the last five or six years encouraged industrial-scale deployment, moving managers past "the widget maker in Sheboygan, Wisconsin" into billion-plus deals in sectors and deals banks could no longer lend to: SaaS, healthcare IT, and business services — asset-light and AI-exposed. Meanwhile leverage rose, interest coverage fell, maintenance covenants went away, and PIK toggles increased.
- The COVID-era twist he flags as the acute vintage: 10 to 40 $1B-plus financings a year written against recurring revenue, not EBITDA — "people started lending against revenues, not against cash flow" — while PE bought lower-growth SaaS at 10-14x.
3. Diameter saw AI coming — and says the BDCs are still understating exposure
- The warning came from four Diameter LPs who founded major Silicon Valley firms when ChatGPT landed in late 2022: "We're building AI companies to break the SaaS companies we built 15 years ago. So, be careful." Diameter's letters moved from May 2023's "material disintermediation" to Q3 2023's warning that some companies would be "ruthlessly eliminated by AI" and Q2 2024's warning that secular change was coming. By late 2024, private-credit managers were still lending to SaaS; bankruptcies began appearing in 2025. After "cloud code" came along three years later during the 2025 holiday season, Q1 2026 said "AI is coming for SaaS."
- Diameter reduced its SaaS exposure, including security-based software bought during COVID that was subsequently disrupted by cloud-security players, with many companies already bankrupt. It limited SaaS to 5% when it started and shorted SaaS-heavy BDCs. Its AI-tool portfolio scan shows true SaaS exposure well above self-reported figures — 40-50% of average portfolios carry an AI risk factor including adjacent sectors.
4. Par credit punishes concentration — and the marks don't reflect it yet
- The deck's "most important slide": in par credit "you're buying at 99, your upside is 100" — a carry asset class with no equity convexity, so 30-50% in one sector is "almost criminal portfolio construction." The culprit: ex-bankers trained to originate-to-distribute whom "nobody taught portfolio construction."
- Technology change, not macro, caused the major non-macro credit cycles — telecom/internet in the 2000s and fracking/energy in the 2010s — and AI is "the largest technological change we're going to see in our investing lifetimes," faster than 5-7-year private-credit loans can adapt. The loans are not meant to be sold.
- Goodwin points to BSL/public credit as a read-through for private credit: recoveries are falling, especially in tech. Marks diverge 6% on average between BDCs over six years, with situations 40 points apart encountered while considering BDC shorts; he says that "created some easy trades, obviously." Manager defenses range from "LTM EBITDA is fine" to "it's the equity's problem — I think that's the worst one."
- A 2018-19 mistake taught him that asset-light recoveries can be very low, especially with long maturities, once subscribers are lost; if sponsors believe a business is disrupted by AI, their incentive may be to "take dividends and turn you into an IO."
5. Not systemic — three ways to attack the unwind
- Sizing the problem down: Goodwin says it is 5% of private credit, broadly distributed, and SaaS only one-third of "that market." But the mechanics rhyme: "marks, leverage, margin calls, selling," with banks reducing borrowing bases, changing how they lend to SaaS, and in some cases walking away or capping exposure. Managers also juiced returns through second-out structures, bank JVs, and CLO equity.
- The buys: public BDCs were down ~30% from last year's highs, screened on GAV not NAV (per $100 of loans, 50c debt/50c equity) — smaller, non-hypergrowth names at 0.85x GAV and low-teens yields hit that level a month ago, and Diameter started buying. Secondaries: the $300B retail-fund complex has material outflows, and Goodwin expects $150-200B of selling driven by redemptions, bank margin calls, and prudent LP risk management. The approach is "knowing your credits and cherry-picking," not bidding whole portfolios — 15 trades in two months across those categories.
- New loans are 50-75bps wider as capital-constrained majors stop re-upping; the shrinking market could improve the opportunity set. Closing rule: "portfolio construction first above everything in par credit, whether it's public or private… and know the names."