Good day, and welcome to the Blackstone Mortgage Trust third quarter 2023 investor call. Today's call is being recorded. At this time, all participants are in a listening mode. If you require operator assistance at any time, please press star zero. If you would like to ask a question, please signal by pressing star one on your telephone keypad. If you're using a speakerphone, please make sure your mute function is turned off to allow your signal to reach our equipment. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Tim Hayes, Vice President, Shareholder Relations. Please go ahead. Good morning, and welcome everyone to Blackstone Mortgage Trust's third quarter 2023 conference call. I am joined today by Katie Keenan, Chief Executive Officer, Tony Marone, Chief Financial Officer, and Austin Peña, Executive Vice President of Investments. This morning, we filed our 10-Q and issued a press release of the presentation of our results, which are available on our website and have been filed with the SEC. I'd like to remind everyone that today's call may include forward-looking statements which are subject to risks, uncertainties, and other factors outside of the company's control. Actual results may differ materially. For a discussion of some of the risks that could affect results, please see the Risk Factors section of our most recent 10-K. We do not undertake any duty to update forward-looking statements. We will also refer to certain non-GAAP measures on this call, and for reconciliations, you should refer to the press release and our 10-Q. This audiocast is copyrighted material of Blackstone Mortgage Trust and may not be duplicated without our consent. For the third quarter, we reported GAAP net income of $0.17 per share, while distributable earnings were $0.78 per share. A few weeks ago, we paid a dividend of $0.62 per share with respect to the third quarter. Please let me know if you have any questions following today's call. With that, I'll now turn things over to Katie. Thanks, Tim. Since our last earnings call, geopolitical risk is more acute and interest rates have continued their march higher. The ten-year is 4.9%, up 100 basis points in the last three months, and SOFR is at 5.3%. We believe that higher rates are having the Fed's desired impact, with inflation decelerating and economic growth slowing. But we take the Fed at their word and expect rates to persist at these levels and are managing the business accordingly. Rates impact our lending business in two critical and correlated ways. First, as a floating rate lender, we continue to recognize the pronounced benefit in our income from higher base rates, yielding yet another quarter of strong distributable earnings. At the same time, the sustained pressure of high rates and the attendant capital markets illiquidity is weighing on the overall credit environment. Even so, BXMT remains well-positioned for a higher for longer period. With our distributable earnings exceeding our dividend, we are able to bolster our book value and significantly offset increasing reserves. The steps we've taken on both sides of our balance sheet, including proactive asset management, a conservative liquidity posture, and a patient approach to new investments, leave us on strong footing to navigate this environment. This positioning is evident in our third quarter results, with DE of $0.78 per share covering our dividend by 126%. Liquidity is still at record levels and a continued reduction in our leverage. On the credit side, our portfolio remains resilient, 95% performing, notwithstanding some negative credit migration and a continued healthy pace of repayments. Over the first three quarters of the year, we contributed over $80 million of distributable earnings in excess of our dividend to book value, cushioning much of the impact of incremental reserves. Delving deeper on credit, our challenged assets remain a small part of the overall portfolio, with just 5% on cost recovery. Our watch list represents an additional 13% of the portfolio, loans which are a focus of our asset management efforts but remain current and performing. We collected $1 billion of repayments this quarter, demonstrating liquidity and investor demand for the high-quality collateral backing our loans. We recognized partial paydowns on several large office loans, and we strategically sold a subordinate interest in a U.K. office loan, reducing our basis by 18%, generating $50 million of proceeds, and retaining a lower LTV senior loan still earning a double-digit ROI. A separate U.K. office loan repaid post-quarter end, selling to an institutional fund at 50% above our basis. While the office headwinds are well established, high-quality assets continue to outperform. In addition to physical quality, amenities, and location, tenants are increasingly focused on the capitalization of office assets when making leasing decisions, a clear advantage for our collateral. Notably, we saw several significant leases signed in our portfolio this quarter, including flagship deals in Chicago, West L.A., Miami, and New York. With the slow but steady march of RTO, tenants are transacting, and we expect the demand that exists in the market will continue to concentrate in the best assets. Our portfolio is far more weighted toward collateral built or substantially renovated since 2015 than the market, and is therefore well positioned to capture an outsized share of demand today and in the future, with very little new office development on the horizon. Despite these bright spots, office overall remains challenging. We downgraded and recorded impairments on three of our previously watchlisted loans this quarter, office assets in the Bay Area and Chicago. While these loans were current on interest through the quarter, we are taking a forward-looking approach as we anticipate potential deterioration ahead of maturity dates or other decision points. We continue to run a robust quarterly process around our risk ratings and reserve levels.... We've increased our office reserve by more than 10x in the past year, with marks on our 5 rated loans implying an average decline in asset value of over 50%. Collectively, we have now either impaired or watchlisted nearly 40% of our U.S. office loans as we continue to transparently identify risk within our portfolio. Away from our watchlisted assets, our 1-3 risk-rated office portfolio is generally stable. Nearly 60% is backed by new or substantially renovated assets, where we are seeing stronger leasing momentum, like The Spiral in Hudson Yards or 545 Wyn in Miami. Another 16% benefits from substantial recent equity investments, driven by our active asset management approach. On the asset management side, we continue to leverage the resources of the Blackstone Real Estate platform to pursue the best outcomes for our shareholders across the portfolio. Last quarter, we highlighted the substantial progress we've made on this front, securing additional capital and improving our credit position. Over the past year, we have secured a total of $1.5 billion of additional equity commitments subordinate to our loans, of which over $750 million relates to three and four-rated office loans. As we continue to pursue proactive modifications to place deals on more stable footing in the current environment, these modifications typically exchange substantial additional borrower capital investment for time, and in some cases, rate relief. Prioritizing credit protection over marginal return is a rational trade in the current environment for our borrowers and for us, especially given our substantial dividend coverage. In more challenging situations, we have focused on ensuring we have maximum optionality to pursue recovery outcomes. With our robust liquidity and long duration balance sheet, we are never a forced seller. As the largest owner of real estate in the world, we have a deep well of expertise to take ownership and drive value when appropriate. At the same time, we will actively pursue sales of challenged assets when the opportunity cost of holding exceeds the return potential. We expect to execute on at least one such sale next quarter on a small multifamily loan where we are appropriately reserved. In multifamily, more generally, our second largest sector, fundamentals continue to support loan performance with all other multi loans current on interest. In the near term, a pocket of new supply is tempering rent growth. Looking past this year, the supply-demand dynamics are favorable. Multifamily housing starts are down 42% year-over-year, and home mortgage rates are at a 23-year high, significantly impacting affordability for potential homebuyers and supporting rental demand. Further, our loans are typically set up with value-add business plans, allowing for rent and NOI growth beyond market trends. For example, our largest multifamily asset, a newly constructed trophy building in Brooklyn, is nearing completion of its lease-up at rents well above our initial underwriting, resulting in a projected debt yield nearly 100 basis points higher than our base case. This quarter, we upgraded six multifamily loans, seeing strong cash flow growth through successful execution of such value-add strategies. The financing market for multifamily also remains liquid, albeit impacted by rates pressuring DSCRs and loan sizing. With a shrinking universe of targeted asset classes, the sector remains squarely in the strike zone. We see this in our multifamily repayments so far this year, $550 million through bank and agency refis, as well as sales well above our base. We expect 2024 may bring further pressure across the sector as many 2021 originations face maturity. But the combination of robust long-term fundamentals and continued institutional liquidity incentivizes sponsors who have the wherewithal to bridge near-term NOI pressures and protect the substantial equity in their deals. As such, we believe our multifamily portfolio, 68% origination LTV on average, remains well-positioned to perform. In closing, there is no question that we are in a challenging period for the real estate market. Rising rates continue to weigh on credit performance, but as a floating rate lender, our earnings and dividend coverage also benefit. In this environment, current income is a critical component of investor returns. Since the beginning of the year, we have paid out $1.86 per share in dividends, while our book value has declined just $0.36. Our dividend, which we've paid for 33 consecutive quarters and covered 130% for the past four, currently produces a 12.3% annualized yield on our share price. We've intentionally constructed our business for resilience and performance over the long term, and our approach has supported distributable earnings stability since the onset of the rate cycle. We continue to maintain a high bar for new investments, but we expect sustained rate pressure will spur the need for capital solutions for both borrowers and banks as we move into next year. With a well-structured balance sheet and $1.8 billion of liquidity, we are well positioned to capitalize as this opportunity unfolds. With that, I'll turn it over to Tony. Thank you, Katie, and good morning, everyone. In the third quarter, BXMT reported distributable earnings, or DE, of $0.78 per share, our fourth consecutive quarter of exceptionally strong earnings as the tailwind of rising rates has continued to benefit our floating rate business model. Our 3Q earnings included a one-time $0.02 gain on the extinguishment of debt, reflecting our repurchase of $33 million of our senior secured notes at 85% of face, which helped offset the impact from 2Q loan modifications, loans placed on cost recovery accounting, and net portfolio contraction. This quarter, we again posted net portfolio contraction and moved an additional 3 loans to cost recovery status as of 9/30, which we collectively expect will impact our go-forward quarterly earnings by $0.03-$0.05 per share. Our debt repurchase this quarter allowed us to opportunistically deploy capital at an attractive yield while also taking an additional step as part of our broader strategy to focus on the strength of our balance sheet, maintain a stable, yet dynamic posture as this credit cycle evolves. To that end, we reported our second consecutive quarterly reduction in our debt-to-equity ratio, which is down to 3.6x as of 9/30, from 3.8x at the start of the year. At the same time, we've maintained our record liquidity of $1.8 billion, up from $1.6 billion at the start of the year, despite a net repayment of $1.1 billion of debt so far in 2023. As we have highlighted on prior calls, our balance sheet continues to benefit from our stable capital structure, with no corporate debt maturities until 2026, no capital markets margin call provisions across our term matched credit facilities, and fully non-mark-to-market provisions on the majority of our liabilities. Our loan portfolio decreased to $22.1 billion as of 9/30, with $1 billion of repayments outpacing $440 million of loan fundings. These incremental investments represent fundings under existing loans, and our credit facility lenders continue to advance their share of these ordinary course loan fundings, indicative of the strength of our banking relationships and the quality of our overall portfolio. Our 185 loans are diversified across geographies and property types, and only 5% of our total portfolio is characterized as non-performing, which indicates a five risk-rated loan with an asset-specific CECL reserve. Our total asset-specific CECL reserve increased $108 million to $323 million at quarter end, a reserve equivalent to 23% of the related loan's cost basis and implying a decline of over 50% in the underlying real estate collateral value. These incremental asset-specific reserves were offset by a $12 million decline in our general CECL reserve, for a net reserve increase of $97 million during the quarter. These reserves do not impact DE until they are realized, but do impact GAAP net income, which declined $0.42 this quarter to $0.17 per share as a result. In addition, our aggregate CECL reserve of $477 million does impact our book value. However, our ability to retain earnings in excess of our dividends has limited our book value decline to about 1% since January first of this year, despite a 39% increase in our total CECL reserve over the past three quarters. Looking at our risk rating, as noted, we downgraded three office loans to a five risk rating this quarter. All of these loans are on cost recovery status as of 9/30, which means that any cash interest received is applied as a reduction to our loan basis rather than recognized as income. Year to date, we have recorded $41 million of such cost recovery proceeds, representing about $0.19 per share of unrecognized net income. As I've highlighted in prior calls, this income will eventually be recognized if these loans recover, or will otherwise reduce future realized losses should credit continue to deteriorate. Outside of our impaired loans, we only had two downgrades and reported seven upgrades, as the majority of our portfolio continues to perform well and generate compelling returns with comparatively lower levels of risk. Overall, our portfolio average risk rating remains at 2.9, the same level we have maintained for the past four quarters. In closing, we remain steadfast in our focus on maintaining a strong balance sheet, finding opportunities to reduce risk in our portfolio, and managing our more challenged credits to maximize long-term shareholder value. Our $0.62 dividend is well covered by our distributable earnings and provides a highly attractive, reliable income stream for our stockholders, generating a 12% yield on yesterday's close. As a final note, we view our recent addition to the S&P Small Cap 600 as an endorsement of BXMT as a valuable long-term investment for our stockholders. The resulting incremental demand creates additional liquidity for our stock, which we believe will benefit our investors across market cycles. Thank you for joining the call, and I will now ask the operator to open the call to questions. Thank you. As a reminder, please press star one to ask a question. We ask you limit yourself to one question and a follow-up question so we may take as many questions as possible. We'll go first to Stephen Laws with Raymond James. Hi, good morning. You know, Katie, I guess to start you know can you maybe talk a little bit about where you think you are kind of, you know, evaluating the one to threes? I know you talked about some performance metrics in your comments, kind of, but what is the risk of kind of additional negative ratings migration? Kind of how do you feel about the lead time into some of the loans, you know, that maybe have original maturity dates later next year, that you'll start getting more color on in the coming quarters? Yeah. Thanks, Steven. Thanks for joining us. It's a great question, and I think that we go through our one to threes and really the entire portfolio in a lot of depth every quarter. I think you can see the proactive approach we're taking, both in terms of how we have treated the fours and fives, which really are, you know, in many cases, are really in almost all cases, downgrades in anticipation of challenge, and then also the proactive modifications that we have taken on, you know, across our office portfolio and anywhere where we see that there may potentially be stress ahead. When we look at our threes and fours in our office, we've really done proactive mods on many of those loans over the last year. As a result, we've put those loans in much better position. So we're not waiting around to sort of deal with a 2024 maturity, you know, and, and see what happens then. We've been having conversations with our sponsors about those loans for many months, and that is sort of the result is the $750 million of equity on our three- and four-rated office loans that we've brought in over the last year. So you know, I think when we look at the overall credit environment, we have 200 loans across the portfolio. There's obviously gonna be, you know, movement in both directions, you know, on the margin. Y ou know, we are very in-depth in how we look at these deals, and we're running out, you know, multiple year projections in terms of looking at decision points and risk areas. And so our risk ratings really reflect what we see, you know, over the future, in addition to what we're seeing today. Great. Thanks, Katie. And then as a quick follow-up, you know, can you talk about the repayment outlook? You know, not doing any new originations, similar to most peers. You know, where do you think leverage trends or maybe troughs? How do you see that? And then, you know, appetite for more loan sales, not a lot in Q3, I don't think, but maybe could you touch on that, please? Thank you. Yeah. So, you know, I think that we're really proud of, you know, the reduction in leverage that we've had. That's really been a factor of the overall conservative approach we've taken with the business. We've had a very healthy pace of repayments so far this year, $1 billion in the quarter. I think that's really a result of the quality of the portfolio and the institutional liquidity of the assets that underlie our loans. And we've seen that continue, you know, even this quarter, obviously, when rates, you know, ticked up. You know, I think the pace of repayments could possibly slow down, you know, as rates are higher. But, you know, as I mentioned in the call script, we literally just had an office loan repay this week. So you know, the factor with these loans, as they reach the end of their business plans, our sponsors are ready to sell, they're ready to refi. And because our portfolio as a whole is low leverage, and we're lending on high-quality assets that have business plans that are generally working, we do see that continued liquidity. S we expect repayments to continue, and I think that as far as looking at, you know, and the leverage will sort of continue in the range it is as a result of that. Looking at new investments, you know, we are actively looking at new investments. We have plenty of liquidity. Our balance sheet is in great shape, and it's really a factor of overall transaction volume and making sure the investment opportunities clear the high bar that we've set for ourselves, both from a return perspective and from a credit perspective. So with overall transaction volumes down, you know, 40%-60% across the market, the addressable universe is smaller, but we're very actively out there with our big origination team, looking for deals. I think that, you know, as the market continues to persist through this period and, you know, reaches more potential decision points coming into next year, I think there will be more opportunities, and we'll certainly be looking for them. Great. Thanks for your comments this morning, Katie. We'll go next to Steve Delaney with JMP Securities. Thanks. Good morning, everyone. So I know a lot of focus probably today on the three new office downgrades. I'd like to flip it over, though, and ask a question about the seven upgrades. Were they mostly loans that were moved from a four to a three? Are there any large loans in there? And is there a common theme in those seven situations? I know every loan is unique, but what is improving generally on those seven loans that is causing you to upgrade them? Thank you. Yeah. Thanks, Steve. Great question. So those loans really primarily fall into the category of multifamily, and they're primarily- Okay. Three Risk Rating to two Risk Rating loans. And I would say, you know, generally, our Risk Ratings have been pretty sticky over time. We have a lot of loans in the three category that continue to perform on their business plans. But, you know, with some situations where we just see really continued outperformance, strong debt yields, you know, getting into the zone where, you know, we feel very, very good about the execution on the credit, we move those types of loans to twos, and in some cases, ones, if, if it's sort of another leg up from that. So these are multifamily assets, business plans completed, strong rent growth, strong debt yields, and, you know, really just working in terms of their business plans and benefiting from the leverage level that we have on them. There's also one select service hotel, which I think would. I didn't talk as much about hotels this quarter, but we have seen, you know, continued strength on the hotel side, especially in the sectors that we're focused on. You know, I think that like everything, we'll see some deceleration over time, but select service in good markets, resorts in good markets, those assets are performing as well. And so one of our upgrades was, you know, was a select service hotel as well. Got it. So on the multifamily, really just strong leasing, solid year-over-year rent increases, and basically just achieving at plan or even better than plan expectations. So leads you to think that at the basis you're in, the owner will probably comfortably be able to refinance. Is that the right way to think about that? And that loan is probably gonna be off your books in a year or so. Yeah, it's a good question. I, I would say our twos and ones are easily refinanceable in this market. I think the question for our borrowers and what we've seen over, you know, the course of the last year, it's really comes down to their business plan. So if they've reached the end of their business plan and their next capital markets activity is selling, it's likely that they're just gonna keep our loan in place for longer. It's unusual for someone to go out and refi if they think they're gonna sell in a year or 18 months. The costs just don't really make sense. So we have a lot of borrowers that are sort of just waiting for a window in terms of sale. In the meantime, we have these very high-quality, you know, stabilized assets sticking around in our portfolio because, you know, people, people aren't gonna try. If they have a good quality deal they've done a good job on, they're not gonna sell into a more challenging market. They'll just wait. You know, these assets have, you know, decent cash on cash. The spreads on, you know, the loans in the portfolio generally are probably lower than where they could achieve elsewhere in the market. But, you know, the capital structures are set up the right way because they've created value. And so I think these loans will stick around for longer, and that's certainly what we've seen so far. Thanks for the color, Katie. We'll go next to Sarah Barcomb with BTIG. Hey, everyone. Thanks for taking the question. So I would just like to talk about office color generally. So from where we sit post Labor Day 2023, do you think the weakness in office fundamentals and refinanceability are more entrenched in work-from-home policy or overall economic weakness at this point? And if the latter worsens next year as more pre-COVID office leases expire at the same time, should we expect to see additional reserves taken on that asset class, and at what point do you think we would start to see REO come onto the books, or would we see more modifications like we saw this quarter? Can you talk about that balance as we head further into next year? Sure. That's a lot of questions. I'll try and hit all of them and let me know if I miss anything. I think as far as the broader outlook on office, it's pretty interesting because there are two sort of counterbalancing effects. There's certainly the risk of cyclical downturn, although, you know, the economy has been remarkably resilient to date. And if you look at the main users for the types of office buildings that we, you know, make loans on, whether it's the FIRE tenants, you know, sort of creative marketing, content creation, even the tech industry, which is obviously pulling back from office a lot right now, but the business itself actually, you know, in recent earnings looks to be, you know, doing pretty well. Those industries seem to be pretty resilient in the face of, you know, the overall macro. And, you know, we've seen job growth there as well, which historically has been an indicator, a leading indicator of demand growth. Now, of course, there's also the countervailing factor of, you know, return to office, which has marched along sort of slow and steady, positively, but of course, is still below pre-COVID levels and overall sort of space rationalization. I would say when we look at the statistics, and, you know, there have been a number of third-party market reports out there this quarter, you know, you can see that tenants are making space decisions, return to office continues. You know, there's a lot of tenants out there that have instituted new return to office policies this quarter or starting next year. Sort of every quarter, there's more of that. But I think that there's certainly still a question as to where that ultimately settles out. For our portfolio, you know, I think the big question is the concentration of demand in which office buildings, and how does that overlay with what we have? You know, 60% of our one to three rated office is sort of post-2015 vintage, which is much higher than the market as a whole. And one of the statistics I saw recently, which I thought was really interesting, was that 90% of office vacancy is in, like, 30% of office buildings. So when you think about that relative to the concentration of where demand is going, and there's lots of statistics like that in terms of net demand, et cetera, we just have to make sure that our office buildings are well positioned in the market to capture a disproportionate share of demand, because there's gonna be these sort of broader, you know, market dynamics in terms of demand. And I think it's candidly very hard to predict where those level out. I think as far as more reserves and mods, and as we look forward to next year, you know, every single one of our assets is a facts and circumstances, like, bottoms-up deal decision. So when we approach each loan and each conversation with a borrower, whether it's proactive, you know, a year ahead of time, trying to get capital in the door, whether it's looking at making sure the asset is appropriately capitalized to capture those leases in the market, which is something we're very focused on, you know, or whether it's thinking that, you know, we may be in a better position to maximize value for the asset in an REO situation than our borrower for various reasons. You know, we're really looking at each one of those and just using all the tools we have, whether it's our expertise, our capital, the strength of our balance sheet, to just make sure that we're maximizing value over time. So, you know, do I think that we could potentially have some assets come onto REO or some more of those conversations over time? Of course, in this market, you know, that's definitely or very likely to happen. But I think that, you know, we have the tools, and we've really been ahead of the game in terms of reducing our basis in these deals and making sure that they're appropriately capitalized, and also coming up with our contingency plans, our business plans, putting the right team in place to make sure that if we end up in those situations, we'll be ready to hit the ground running and maximize our potential recovery. Okay, great. Thanks for all the detail there. And then just one more from me. You mentioned during Q&A that you guys are actively looking at new investments given how strong liquidity is. So I was just curious if you could give a bit more color on what's looking interesting right now, whether credit or equity. You know, I know we're focused on BXMT right now, but maybe some perspective from the broader Blackstone platform. Just maybe some detail on what looks interesting from a sector or, or a geography perspective. Thanks. Yeah, absolutely. You know, I think it is a really interesting time to invest, and as a whole, you know, at Blackstone, we are really focused on the credit opportunity. You know, we think it is a tremendously interesting time to be a credit investor. You're inherently investing at a discount to asset value. That creates a defensive position. And the returns available, you can see it in our results and really across the board in credit, especially floating rate credit, are just historically attractive, you know, in terms of the risk return you can achieve. So we think credit is really interesting. That's certainly, you know, a posture of our business and across the firm. And I think on the real estate side, as far as sectors we're excited about, you know, the demand growth in data centers has been phenomenal. That's an area we've been very active in on the equity side, as well as on the debt side. Student housing continues to be very strong, certain lodging and leisure sectors, and obviously on the credit side, you know, multifamily continues to be a good area at the right basis, and, you know, we'll be focused there too. And I should say industrial is obviously, you know, continues to be a good sector. Great. We'll go next to Jade Rahmani with KBW. Thank you very much. I was wondering about asset management and loan resolutions. Are you seeing any sponsors take an interest in buying into some of your debt position in order to reduce their leverage and hence their basis? I noticed you sold a $51 million junior loan interest, and I was thinking that this could be a way to facilitate, modifications, workouts, loan resolutions. Yeah, Jade, I think you're really on point, and really a lot of the capital we've brought in and a lot of the mods we've done so far this year have been exactly that. So sponsors who look at deals continue to believe in their business plans, but effectively want to pay off, you know, the bottom of their debt capital structure or effectively buy back, you know, the mezzanine portion of our loan. So they'll effectively buy the bottom 10%-15% of the loan. You know, they buy it at, you know, a double-digit, you know, 12%-13% IRR, whatever we think is appropriate for the deal. They're effectively paying off the most expensive part of their debt capital structure, reducing the debt balance, reducing the carry cost, putting the asset on stronger footing in terms of, you know, deleveraging the asset going forward and enhancing their return potential. And for us, you know, we're reducing our basis. We have so much built-in earnings in the portfolio because base rates are 500 basis points higher than when we set up these deals. So we're earning much more on these loans than we set them up to, than we expected. So for us, making the trade of reducing our basis, reducing the overall, you know, gross coupon of the loan, but, you know, still earning more than what we expected to when we set the loan up, that's a very rational trade, and a lot of our borrowers are taking advantage of that. Thank you. I also wanted to ask on cash flow performance, something I've been focused on, and I know investors are, too. Cash flow from operations declined quarter-over-quarter. However, it looks like there was a working capital headwind to the tune of around $21 million. Wondering if there is any specific seasonal items to point out and your overall thoughts on cash flow performance? Hey, Jade, it's Tony. I wouldn't say there's anything particularly notable in terms of cash flow from operations, that I would flag as far as seasonality. You know, as we've mentioned, we're getting paid, generally speaking, on all of our loans, and we have plenty of cash flow to cover our dividend, not just from an earnings perspective, but importantly, there's not a significant amount of PIK interest or deferred interest that's elevating our net income relative to our cash flow. So I think what you're probably seeing is just some inherent lumpiness, in cash flow from operations that's ordinary course, you know, in any business, but no, no issues there or anything that I would flag. I think we're very comfortable with the level of cash flow from operations we're generating. Thank you. We'll go next to Don Fandetti with Wells Fargo. Yes, good morning. Of the three office loans that were downgraded, can you provide a little context in terms of fundamentals at the property level and also, you know, what sort of brought things to a head, from a reserving perspective and risk weight? Sure. Yeah, absolutely. So, you know, obviously, each deal is specific, but I would say generally, really the two factors are rates, not surprisingly, and then two of the three assets, the two larger ones, are in the San Francisco Bay Area. And so, you know, we have one in San Jose, one in Silicon Valley, both, you know, very nicely recently renovated, you know, very high-quality assets. But as I think mentioned in the Q&A, you know, tech, which is 40% of the market in San Francisco, has just been really challenged in terms of office use. You know, it's by far the biggest driver of negative net absorption across the country. If you look sort of more sector-specific, there's a pretty big difference between tech and any other industry. And San Francisco has just always been kind of a company town. So, you know, we see historically in San Francisco, it's sort of a boom and bust cycle. When tech is working, it's extremely positive for the market, and when tech is pulling back, you know, it's an overhang. And so you have that now, and you also have some quality of life issues that I think there's a lot of focus on addressing, but will take time because of, you know, the way the sort of political system works in San Francisco and the Bay Area. So, you know, that's really what was driving, you know, most of the challenges with those assets. You know, we do feel good about the long-term performance of that market. As I said, it's really been a very cyclical market and, you know, tech as a whole, we believe in, and we believe in San Francisco, but it's gonna take time. And in the meantime, you know, those are assets that have higher carry costs today because of where rates are. So it's really the confluence of those two factors. The third bi-rated loan is just a very small office deal in Chicago, where, you know, we've been pretty successful over time, reducing our basis, but it's sort of a small deal and a relatively old fund and, you know, it's hitting its maturity, so we'll, you know, evaluate the best option there. Got it. Thank you. We'll take our next question from Rick Shane with JP Morgan. Thanks, everybody, for taking my questions. Look, the difference between distributable earnings, dividend, and GAAP earnings really highlights some of the timing differentials inherent in the business model. In terms of recognition of credit expenses, both from a distributable and a taxable perspective versus the sort of implicit or assumed credit expenses over time. We can look back and basically the dividend on any sort of one-year basis or two-year basis splits GAAP net income and distributable. The question really becomes twofold. One, when you think about the reserves, presumably you believe that they're conservative. How conservative or how much cushion do you think you have in them? But more importantly, when do we expect to really see some of those realized losses come through? Is it a one-year horizon? Is it a five-year horizon? So we can start to reconcile that differential. Thanks, Rick. You know, I think that it's hard to say because it really depends on the individual assets, right? So we have a hotel deal, for example, that we took a reserve on, you know, in the COVID period, that has continued to, you know, perform at its reserve level, recover and performance. That's continued for a while. We have other assets, as I mentioned, where we're looking for more of a near-term sale situation. So the timing really could extend over quite a prolonged period of time. You know, there may very well be assets where we think the right answer is to, you know, take them over as REO and operate them for, you know, the foreseeable future. So I think it's hard to peg sort of a definitive time period, and certainly we'll be fighting for value recovery, you know, in those types of situations. I think the other very important dynamic is that every passing quarter, our earnings of the majority of the portfolio, the 95% of the portfolio that is performing and that is earning a very strong amount of net income relative to what we expected and relative to the overall portfolio. You know, we continue to see the benefit of that earnings on a quarterly basis, both in terms of the dividends we pay out to our shareholders and in terms of our ability to accrete the access into our book value. So, you know, I do think that this is all going to take time to play out. We're going to want to implement the best recovery strategy. The capital markets are moving very slowly in all cases, and so all of this is going to take time to play out. In the meantime, we're going to continue earning the very strong distributable earnings profile we have from the portfolio that allows us to cushion a lot of the impact here. The other thing that I would add- Got it. Oh, sorry. Sorry, just to add one further thought, as you were correlating, you know, DE dividends and GAAP and everything that Katie was just discussing gets into the timing of how some of these reserves are recognized. You know, as relates to the dividend, you know, that's driven by our requirements as a REIT, as it relates to taxable income, which is also influenced by this timing. But it's important to recognize that our dividend level is very stable in that. At the moment, we're well out earning the dividend, so there's no downward pressure for us to have to cut it. We're far, far away from that. But on the other hand, we do have some different tax attributes that is allowing us to retain those earnings, and so we don't expect to have to add to our dividend or make a special dividend. So I would view the dividend as very solid at $0.62, where it is for the near term, and then you're going to see the variability in GAAP and DE as those different timing elements that Katie mentioned earlier play through those metrics. But the dividend, you could think of as pretty solid. I think, I think that's totally fair. I'm going to try to frame my follow-up question and get two in. Interestingly enough, with all of the headwinds in terms of office, it's going to be multifamily where you guys have cited you're going to take your next potential realized loss. Is that because those are easier to exit in this environment because the market is more robust? Thanks, Rick. You know, I think that there's potentially some element of that, although, as I mentioned, you know, we've gotten $800 million of multifamily repayments so far this year, so we are seeing, you know... I mean, sorry, $800 million of office repayments so far this year. So we are seeing, you know, you know, decent liquidity in, in office. And I think that, you know, really there it's a question of spot pricing versus recovery when we think about our, you know, the long-term plan for our office assets. And of course, liquidity is worse than in office. This deal, the multifamily deal, it's small. It's, it's one of the very few rent-stabilized, exposed assets in our portfolio. It's gone through sort of a storied history and, you know, it's just an asset that we have been looking to move on from for a long time. So I think it's a little bit idiosyncratic and, you know, we're hopeful that we can execute on the transaction, you know, with a good buyer there. Got it. And then last question. I couldn't read my own handwriting, so I couldn't figure out what I wanted to ask you. But, when you, if you take REOs, would you take write-offs immediately associated with them based upon revised appraised values? I think under our DE definition, it would depend. The way we characterize distributable earnings is it's reduced by a realized loss, so that would typically be an actual contractual change in loan terms or at the point of a sale of a property. However, we do have the ability, if we think that loss is, I think the language we have in our Q is nearly certain or all but certain, to take it. So I'd say it's more facts than circumstances, and not something that I would say is programmatic based on an appraisal at the time of a foreclosure. Okay. Thank you, guys. We'll take our final question from Arren Cyganovich with Citi. Thanks. This is Kaili Wang for Arren today. Maybe if you could give an update on the risk-rated five loans that are coming due for the next couple of quarters. Looks like you have the Orange County and New, New York office loans due in 3 Q and the Chicago office loan due early next year. Do you expect to do additional maturity extension with the loans, or should we just model a near-term write-off related to the loans? Yeah. So, you know, I think as far as the five rated loans, you know, those are the ones I mentioned we're really focused on maximizing recovery. I would say the maturity dates, you know, they really are what's driven the downgrades. The one you mentioned, the Chicago loan, you know, is the one I was mentioning earlier, that we've downgraded ahead of a conversation around that maturity date. For some of the other ones, you know, we're engaged in active discussion with our borrowers in terms of modifications or creating the best, you know, plan for recovery there. You know, I think the maturity dates are a factor, but not the primary factor. We're really just focused on how do we get to, you know, the best path for recovery for those assets over time, or a sale, if we think that's the right thing. But we'll really evaluate that just based on the ability to, you know, create the most value and also thinking about opportunity cost over time. Got it. Okay. It looks like you have one mixed-use and one hospitality loan in Spain that are on risk rated four as well. So maybe if you could talk about what you are seeing with the domestic market versus outside of the U.S. Yeah. You know, I would say that what we're seeing generally in Europe is pretty stable, and I mentioned that we've had some good liquidity on U.K. office loans or, you know, Europe office loans even this quarter. I would say we see the macro there in terms of fundamentals for our real estate, pretty positive. You know, the Spanish hotel market has really recovered very strongly. That particular asset is doing quite well. So I think that, you know, what we've observed over time and what we've really liked about the market in Europe is leverage has always been lower. So I would say by and large, the leverage on our assets there is just at a lower LTV to start. You know, the macro demand picture for the assets that we've lent on has been pretty stable, notwithstanding some of the pressures more broadly in the market. And we've obviously been quite selective there over time, as we have been in the U.S. too, but, you know, very selective in terms of sponsorship, quality of assets, et cetera. So, you know, I would say that Europe, you know, both from a capital markets perspective and from a fundamentals perspective, has performed, you know, really quite well o-er the last year, and we see those dynamics continuing. Thank you. That will conclude our question- and- answer session. I'd like to turn the call back over to Tim Hayes for any additional or closing remarks. Thank you, operator, and to everyone joining today's call. Please reach out with any questions.