Welcome, and thank you for joining Oaktree Specialty Lending Corporation's Third Fiscal Q uarter 2022 Conference Call. Today's conference call is being recorded. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode, but will be prompted for a question and answer session following the prepared remarks. Now, I would like to introduce Michael Mosticchio, Head of Investor Relations, who will host today's conference call. Mr. Mosticchio, you may begin. Thank you, operator, and welcome to Oaktree Specialty Lending Corporation's Third Fiscal Quarter C onference Call. Our earnings release, which we issued this morning, and the accompanying slide presentation can be accessed on the investors section of our website at oaktreespecialtylending.com. Our speakers today are Armen Panossian, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Investment Officer, Matt Pendo, President, and Chris McKown, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer. Also joining us on the call today for the question and answer session is Matt Stewart, our Chief Operating Officer. Before we begin, I want to remind you that comments on today's call include forward-looking statements reflecting our current views with respect to, among other things, our future operating results and financial performance. Our actual results could differ materially from those implied or expressed in the forward-looking statements. Please refer to our SEC filings for a discussion of these factors in further detail. We undertake no duty to update or revise any forward-looking statements. I'd also like to remind you that nothing on this call constitutes an offer to sell or solicitation of an offer to purchase any interest in any Oaktree fund. Investors and others should note that Oaktree Specialty Lending uses the Investor section of its corporate website to announce material information. The company encourages investors, the media, and others to review the information that it shares on its website. With that, I would now like to turn the call over to Matt. Thank you, Mike, and welcome everyone. We appreciate your interest in and support of OCSL. Our fiscal third quarter results reflect our ability to identify and invest in attractive opportunities across public and private markets amid the recent volatility, maintained excellent credit quality, and drive strong earnings on behalf of our shareholders. Adjusted net investment income per share was $0.17 for the quarter, down slightly from the $0.18 for the prior quarter and on par with our fiscal first quarter, demonstrating the strength of our earnings profile. As a result of our ongoing solid portfolio performance and consistent earnings, our board increased our quarterly dividend by 3% to $0.17 per share. This marked our ninth consecutive quarterly dividend increase. Our dividend is now up nearly 80% from its pre-COVID level. We reported NAV per share of $6.89, down 5% from the prior quarter. However, the decrease was driven by broader equity and fixed income market volatility, leading to widening credit spreads and associated mark-to-market writedowns. Now turning to the portfolio, we originated $152 million of new investment commitments in the second quarter. Of these, 76% were first lien loans, up from 72% in the prior quarter, and approximately half of these were in private transactions and the other half were secondary market purchases. The weighted average yield on new debt investments in the quarter was attractive at 9.2%, up from 8.7% in the prior quarter. While we are highly selective and focused on new deals with favorable prices and structures, we expect to continue identifying interesting investment opportunities across private and public markets, given the breadth of the Oaktree platform and our team's focus on finding the best relative value in all market conditions. We received $130 million from prepayments, pay down, and exits in the third quarter. Our non-core portfolio further declined in the quarter, following a $70 million pay down in one of our debt positions. This book represented $77 million at the close of the quarter, or about 3% of the portfolio at fair value. Credit quality remains excellent, supported by our disciplined underwriting. We again had no investments on non-accrual at June 30th. Importantly, we continue to be rated investment grade by both Moody's and Fitch, and we maintain borrowing flexibility and ample liquidity to meet funding needs. We closed the period with $455 million of undrawn capacity under our credit facilities and $34 million of cash. With no near-term maturities and significant amount of dry powder, we believe our current capital structure positions us well to invest in today's ever-changing market. The weighted average interest rate on debt outstanding was 3.2% in the June quarter, up from 2.5% the prior quarter. With that, I'll turn the call over to Armen. Thanks, Matt, and good day, everyone. I'll begin with comments on the market environment and continue with highlights from our fiscal third quarter. Our consistently solid credit quality, underpinned by our commitment to prudent underwriting and highly selective investing, again provided an excellent foundation for our performance in the quarter. We believe this will serve us particularly well in an increasingly volatile market and broader economy that is vulnerable amid an elevated inflation and rising interest rates. Broad-based inflation in the U.S. reached a 41-year high in June, amplified by the war in Ukraine and Western government sanctions against Russia's energy complex and opposition to the conflict. This injected more uncertainty into a global oil and gas market that was already grappling with supply-demand imbalances. For the U.S., this is evident in lofty gasoline and industrial power prices on top of high food, real estate, and other costs. Additionally, China continues to struggle with coronavirus outbreaks. The government there has repeatedly imposed business and travel restrictions that threaten to compound the supply chain issues that initially ignited inflationary pressures. Central banks, including the U.S. Federal Reserve, have responded with tightened monetary policy, notably including aggressive interest rate hikes. Historically, in periods of rapid rate increases, U.S. consumers have pulled back on spending and tipped the economy into recession. Markets had widely anticipated rate increases, but the pace at which the Fed has moved and the pace it signaled it will continue to move exceeded prior expectations and spurred volatility across equity markets in the second calendar quarter while spreads widened across public credit asset classes. At Oaktree, we don't make investment decisions based on economic forecasts, but we believe it is important to be aware of evolving macro conditions and their impacts on markets and industries. While the risk of recession underscores the importance of our conservative approach to investing, it also creates opportunities for us. Oaktree's roots are in investing across market cycles, and we have demonstrated over many years our ability to identify and successfully invest in these types of volatile markets. During the quarter, this market volatility created a number of attractive opportunities in the public debt markets where we saw many high-quality loans trade lower and being offered at discounts to par value. We acted on several of these situations, picking up what we believe to be investments that are worth par at meaningful discounts, some in the range of 15%-20%. With these investments, which we underwrite assuming we will hold to maturity, we expect to realize an attractive total return as they eventually trade back to par value over time. We also continue to capitalize on Oaktree's scale and resources to invest across a diverse array of private credit loans that we believe provide downside risk protection and relative value for our shareholders. In some cases, we are finding new deals in areas of the market that are less competitive by lending to non-sponsor-owned businesses. Investing in this area requires specialization and robust sourcing capabilities that few managers possess. In this less crowded segment of the market, we believe that our scale and capacity to make complex loans is a competitive advantage and can lead to superior investment outcomes. We also continue to assess the sponsor lending market, partnering with proven private equity firms we know well that have expertise in certain industries. However, rising interest rates and declining valuation multiples have decreased PE-backed deal flow over the last several months. Moreover, an abundance of capital has been raised to support M&A transactions, so we remain particularly cautious when evaluating these investments given the potential for a supply-demand imbalance amid this slower deal activity. As you've heard me say for some time now, we also continue to find attractive loans in the growing and increasingly prominent life sciences sector. Public market valuations of life sciences companies have sold off significantly over the past year, so companies may seek non-dilutive financing via private lenders such as Oaktree. In addition, we anticipate that significant lending opportunities will continue to develop, driven by technological advancements and sizable R&D requirements. In summary, we are very active, yet conscious of economic headwinds and focused only on deals that meet our high risk-reward standards. Now, let's turn to the overall portfolio. At the close of the third quarter, our portfolio was well-diversified with $2.6 billion at fair value across 151 companies. Nearly 87% of the portfolio was invested in senior secured loans, with first lien loans representing 70%. This reflects our emphasis on the top of the capital structure. We are well-positioned for further rate increases with 88% of our debt floating rate. As Chris will highlight later on, we saw a slight benefit of this in the June quarter and expect to see more in the September quarter. We remain focused on lending to larger, more diversified businesses that we believe carry lower risk. Median portfolio company EBITDA as of June 30th was approximately $128 million, up from $118 million in the prior quarter. The increase is primarily driven by our secondary purchases in the public debt market, which are typically in large, established companies. We believe our borrowers are well-positioned for a rising interest rate environment, and that higher rates will not result in materially weaker credit performance. The portfolio's weighted average interest coverage was strong at approximately 3x as of June 30th. We also feel good about the underlying leverage profile at our portfolio companies, which was generally in line with the prior quarter at approximately 4.9x. Moving on to investment activity. Our $132 million of new investment commitments were spread across 12 new and 16 existing portfolio companies in the third quarter. Approximately half of our re-originations went into private transactions and the other half into secondary purchases in the public debt market, as I highlighted earlier. Let's take a look at a couple emblematic examples of the private opportunities we found in the quarter. Establishment Labs, a commercial stage medical device company and aesthetics company focused on body shaping implants. The company sought a $225 million commitment to refinance existing debt and fund the construction of a new manufacturing facility, among other growth initiatives. Oaktree financed the deal over four tranches, with $150 million in a first tranche that carries a 9% interest rate. OCSL was allocated $15 million. The Grove Resort & Water Park Orlando, an 878-unit condo resort complex in Orlando, Florida. Oaktree served as the sole lender and provided a $65 million financing package to support the purchase of the property by a pair of financial sponsors. This newly built upscale resort includes seven -acre water park, swimming pools, a full-service spa, and three- owned restaurants, as well as daily transportation to Disney World. OCSL was allocated $19 million of this transaction that was attractively priced at a rate of SOFR plus 800. These are each compelling investments, priced attractively with favorable terms that provide meaningful downside protection. Our origination pipeline remains healthy across a wide range of opportunities in both the private and public markets, positioning us well for the remainder of 2022. Now I will turn the call over to Chris to discuss our financial results in more detail. Thank you, Armen. OCSL delivered another quarter of solid financial performance, continuing the strong momentum from the second fiscal quarter of 2022. For the third quarter, we reported adjusted net investment income of $31.4 million, or $0.17 per share, down slightly from $32.3 million, or $0.18 per share in the second quarter. The decrease was primarily the result of higher interest expense related to the impact of rising LIBOR on our floating rate liabilities, as well as lower OID acceleration. Partially offsetting this was higher adjusted total investment income and lower management and Part I incentive fees. Net expenses for the third quarter totaled $22.8 million, down $1.4 million sequentially. The decrease was mainly due to lower incentive fees, driven by a decrease in accrued capital gains incentive fees resulting from the unrealized losses during the quarter and slightly lower management fees due to the decline in the fair value of the portfolio. This was partially offset by $2 million of higher interest expense. Turning to our credit quality, which continues to be excellent. As Matt noted, we had no investments on non-accrual at quarter end. With respect to interest rate sensitivity, OCSL remains well situated to benefit from a rising rate environment. As of June 30th, 88% of our debt portfolio at fair value was in floating rate investments. We anticipate that further increases in short-term interest rates will have a positive impact on earnings. Importantly, we have not yet experienced a full quarter benefit from higher interest rates as most of our investment rates reset on June 30th, while our floating rate liabilities reset during the June quarter. If base rates as of June 30th were in effect for the entire quarter, we estimate that our adjusted net investment income per share would have been about $0.01 higher, resulting in adjusted NII of about $0.18 per share. In addition, if rates were to increase by an additional 100 basis points from June 30th, our annual adjusted net investment income could benefit by approximately $0.05 per share. Now moving to the balance sheet. OCSL's net leverage ratio at quarter end increased moderately from the March quarter to 1.08x. In response to changing market conditions, we are increasing our leverage target higher to a range of 0.9x-1.25x debt to equity. We believe this range is appropriate and provides us with increased capacity to deploy capital given the current market backdrop and the expanded set of investment opportunities that we're seeing. As of June 30th, total debt outstanding was $1.4 billion and had a weighted average interest rate of 3.2%, up from 2.5% at March 31st due to rising LIBOR. Unsecured debt represented 47% of total debt at quarter end, consistent with prior quarter. At quarter end, we had ample liquidity to meet our funding needs with total dry powder of approximately $489 million, including $34 million of cash and $455 million of undrawn capacity on our credit facilities. Unfunded commitments, excluding unfunded commitments to the joint ventures, were $183 million, with approximately $127 million of this amount eligible to be drawn immediately as the remaining amount is subject to certain milestones that must be met by portfolio companies. Shifting to our joint ventures. At quarter end, the Kemper JV had $365 million of assets invested in senior secured loans to 56 companies, down from $390 million last quarter, driven by spread widening across the portfolio. The JV generated $1.9 million of cash interest income for OCSL in the quarter, and we also received an $875,000 dividend, up from $700,000 in the prior quarter as a result of the portfolio's continued strong performance. Leverage at the JV was 1.6x at quarter end, up slightly from the prior quarter. The GLF JV had $141 million of assets as of June 30th, down slightly from $150 million in the prior quarter, also due to spread widening. These consisted of senior secured loans to 43 companies. Leverage at the JV was 1.4x at quarter end, and we received $1.3 million of principal and interest payment on OCSL subordinated note in the GLF JV during the quarter. In summary, we continue to be very pleased with our financial results and believe our diverse portfolio and flexible balance sheet positions us well for the current environment. Now I will turn the call back to Matt. Thank you, Chris. Our strong financial results for the quarter enable us to generate an annualized return on adjusted net investment income of 9.4%. We have generated an average ROE of approximately 9.5% over the last six quarters, and we believe OCSL remains well-positioned to increase ROE going forward. First, we believe OCSL is well-positioned for a rising rate environment. As Chris noted earlier, with the majority of our investment portfolio in floating rate assets, we expect that further increases in base rates will positively impact our net interest margin. Additionally, with our increased leverage target range, we have the opportunity to continue to apply more leverage at the portfolio level. However, we will only grow the portfolio as we find opportunities that are consistent with our investment approach that we believe offer an attractive risk reward. As we've discussed before, we continue to focus on positioning the portfolio for an improved yield by rotating out of lower yielding investments and into higher yielding loans. Our new investments continue to come on the books at attractive yields, which means there is more upside in yield on that portion of the portfolio that we expect to realize over time. Finally, another ongoing opportunity for us to support our ROE target is to further optimize our joint ventures. We can accomplish this by selectively rotating out of lower-yielding investments into higher-yielding ones, as well as increasing leverage at the JVs. We've made good progress on this to date, as both vehicles are generating ROEs to OCSL of over 10%. That said, we are seeing more attractive investment opportunities for the JVs in this environment, particularly given their focus on more liquid, broadly syndicated loans, and anticipate that we'll continue to rotate and grow these portfolios over time. In conclusion, we are very pleased with our strong third quarter financial results against a volatile market backdrop. Our portfolio is healthy, and we are well-positioned to capitalize on this increasingly attractive investment environment with our expanded leverage target and ample dry powder. Thank you for joining us on today's call and for your continued interest in OCSL. With that, we're happy to take your questions. Operator, please open the line. Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session. To ask a question, you may press star, then one on your touch-tone phone. If you are using a speakerphone, please pick up your handset before pressing the keys. If at any time your question has been addressed and you would like to withdraw your question, please press star then two. At this time, we will pause momentarily to assemble our roster. Our first question today comes from Kevin Fultz of JMP Securities. Please go ahead. Hi, good morning, and thank you for taking my questions. You know, I'd like to start with a high-level question for you, Armen. We appreciate your insight on what you're seeing in the market, both on the sponsor side and the non-sponsor side, where you guys like to play. If you could just give a high-level overview of the opportunities you're currently seeing, as well as any changes you've seen in deal pricing relative to the last few quarters. Sure. Thanks for the question. So a few observations. The first is that for the first half of 2022, on the sponsor side, there wasn't really a change in terms, either legal or pricing terms, in deal flow that we saw in comparison to, you know, 2021 or 2019. Obviously I'm excluding 2020 due to the COVID related impacts in that year. You know, we really didn't see wider spreads. We didn't see tighter legal terms. I think it was because of a variety of factors. One was a lot of capital has been raised in direct lending over the last few years. It's been sort of record year after record year of fundraising over the last, you know, two or three years. Two, there was a decline in deal flow in M&A volume, LBO volume this year, as you saw equity markets you know having some volatile performance. A lot of potential sellers, when they saw their valuation multiples decline, they just became you know less interested in selling their businesses. The uncertainty around exit multiples for private equity firms also created another reason why you know some private equity firms decided to kind of tap the brakes a little bit. We saw in the first half of 2022 a condition where there was too much capital chasing too few deals on the direct lending side. That's why we were you know quite concerned about the quality of the deal flow that we were generally seeing in sponsor-backed lending. Now we took our spots as well, and we found some, you know, decent situations to invest into. By and large, we weren't happy with the risk-adjusted returns in sponsor-oriented lending for most of 2022. On the non-sponsored side, you know, it's very hard to deduce any sort of meaningful high-level changes in pricing and terms in that area because all those situations are so bespoke and unique from one to the next. The other reason why it's so hard is because those loans tend to be just higher yielding anyway under all market conditions. It's very hard for me to say that on the non-sponsor side, we did or didn't see, you know, widening in pricing. However, what I did see or we are seeing is that on the non-sponsored side, you know, because that part of the market is so inefficient as it is, we found that, you know, we generally responding to potential financing opportunities with quantum of debt that was lower than the ask was met with some level of engagement, which is good. Generally speaking, we were exercising more conservatism than what we historically would have, just given the general economic backdrop, and we were not told that those were non-starters. You know, we do have a variety of different non-sponsored situations that we funded this year. We do have a variety of non-sponsored situations in our pipeline. I would generally say they feel more conservative, conservatively structured in terms of lower debt quantum, in terms of tighter covenants. I wouldn't say the pricing necessarily has widened in any material respect because those loans were already in the 9%-14% range, you know. Maybe they're skewing a little bit higher than the average, the historic average, but I wouldn't say materially so. We are pleased with the conservative kind of structuring that we're able to exercise on the non-sponsored side. With all that said, it's not like deal flow is very strong on either the sponsor or the non-sponsored side in direct lending at this time. We do think that there will be very significant opportunities going forward in direct lending for more appropriately structured and priced loans, both on the sponsor and non-sponsor side, as we just hear about some of our peers stepping back from the market that they were very supportive of in the first half of 2022. We do think that pricing will normalize both on the sponsor side and the non-sponsor side. We think there'll be more deal flow going forward. I wouldn't say that we have a tremendous amount of data points to against which we can deduce a you know a statistically significant conclusion. Okay. That's all really helpful. Then just to touch on expectations around prepayment activity, just curious what visibility you have on the cadence of prepayments? Well, I mean, I'll keep it very big picture. So on sponsor investing generally, I would expect for prepayments to slow, mainly because I would expect spreads to widen on refinancings. And second, you know, generally speaking, these companies were levered according to adjusted EBITDA, you know, over the last two, three, four years. With what's happened in the economy from a inflation perspective, both labor cost inflation and commodity cost inflation, a lot of these companies are not really able to grow into their capital structures. Therefore, historically, a lot of the prepayment activity that we saw was because these businesses were able to grow into their capital structures, were able to do dividend recaps at even tighter spreads than the original debt, and that's just no longer the case. I would generally say that sponsor-oriented direct loans, and frankly, sponsor-oriented broadly syndicated loans are highly unlikely to prepay at the same speeds that they have done historically. On the non-sponsored side, again, every situation is so bespoke and catalyst-driven that we do expect to see some level of prepayments associated with the idiosyncratic credit considerations of each company. I would generally say that in what we're seeing on the non-sponsored side and our involvement has shown that the companies we have invested in are generally performing quite well. Any sort of anticipation around prepayments that we would have expected in our non-sponsored deal activity around realization of certain catalysts or milestones. Those are kind of happening as one would expect. We can't predict necessarily how those prepayments will go, but the company performance has been consistent with historic performance and according to expectations. I would expect some level of prepayments on that side. Okay. I'll leave it there, and I appreciate your time this morning. Thank you. The next question comes from Kyle Joseph with Jefferies. Please go ahead. Hey, good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. I just wanted to get a sense for, you know, obviously, no non-accruals, your credit's good. You know, I want just how you expect industry credit to perform, you know, over the next, call it, 18 months, you know, as companies are faced with higher debt service, debt-servicing costs. Do you anticipate, you know, middle market credit kind of turning for the worse? Do you see that as a potential opportunity for you guys? Thanks, Kyle. It's really hard to make a big prediction, but I would say. You know, I made a prior comment about companies being levered according to adjusted EBITDA and the assumption that they will grow into their capital structures. I think that's going to weigh on performance, you know, levered free cash flow performance for a lot of these borrowers. I think that's gonna continue for quite some time. You know, the Fed clearly wants to put some cold water on the economy, and I think that they'll be successful at doing that. Between that and just generally speaking, higher borrowing costs, and by the way, as of June 30th, you know, most borrowers that have floating rate bank debt subject to a floor are now... LIBOR is now at a place where we are above almost all those floors, if not all of them. This is truly a floating rate asset class and a floating rate liability for these borrowers. I think it is gonna get painful, broadly speaking, for a lot of these private equity-owned businesses, especially where leverage was maximized. I think the industries that have the tightest margins, either gross margins or EBITDA margins, are gonna be the ones that feel it the most. Because when you do have such tight margins, it's indicative of you not being a leader in your particular sector or not being a value additive part of the supply chain of whatever eventual, you know, good or service that is being sold. You know, we are very cautious on those types of businesses. We generally have been avoiding those types of businesses, but I think that's where the pain will be felt. If you wanna look at industries, to try to triangulate where industries will have the most pain, I think that's one way to look at it, is you know, what industry, generally speaking, have low margins or what middle market companies, generally speaking, have low margins. I would define low margin as sort of mid to maybe even upper single digit type of EBITDA margins. Got it. Very helpful. Thanks for answering my question. No problem. The next question comes from Ryan Lynch with KBW. Please go ahead. Hey, good morning. First question I had was you guys obviously changed your leverage range, took it higher. You know, the bottom of the range really didn't move too much, but then the upper end of the range, you know, moved quite a bit. I'm just curious, you know, how are you thinking about that in today's environment? It's obvious that's a wider range. Is that something that you intend to, depending on the market opportunity set that you are seeing today in the marketplace, of operating close to the upper end of that range? Or is that something where you guys are comfortable sort of where you are at today and kind of giving yourselves more cushion in case there's further disruption in the credit markets going forward? Thanks for the question. It's really the latter. We don't really have a plan to generally speaking be operating in the upper end of that range. We do wanna maintain the flexibility around expectations with our shareholders and with the rating agencies that if there is a market event or an economic event that creates the opportunity for us to realize or for us to originate well-structured and well-priced loans, especially, you know, something like a rescue lending opportunity set that we, you know, we may see over the next 12 or 18 months, we'd like the ability to be able to do that and not surprise anybody. That's really the cause for the widening of that range. It's not the expectation that we will, you know, generally and consistently be operating at the upper end. Okay, understood. I had a question on the you talked a lot about, you know, the primary markets in both the sponsored and the non-sponsored. I had a I had a question in the secondary markets. You guys were obviously, you know, very active, you know, in that marketplace. I think you guys put up a slide number seven I think is a very helpful illustration of your guys' willingness to step in kind of dislocation in the liquid markets. I'm curious, you know, I think loan prices have generally kind of trended a little bit higher in the third quarter, calendar third quarter. Are you still seeing that same sort of opportunity set that you saw in the second quarter in the secondary liquid markets or not? I would say generally speaking, the market has moved higher, both in high yield bonds and in senior loans. You know, high yield is up 6% in July. Senior loans are up, you know, 1.8% in July. That's, you know, obviously a move in the right direction, I guess. There isn't a lot of liquidity in the market, either on the buy side or the sell side. It doesn't take much to move prices either up or down. You know, one month a trend does not make. I'm not sort of closing the book and calling it good. You know, I would say generally speaking, the prices have moved in a direction where, you know, we are not really investing, you know, rapidly. We think that there's sort of more volatility ahead in the economy and probably in the markets, and there's sort of a temporary fund flows factor here that is driving prices higher or has driven prices higher in July. I would expect further volatility. We continue to be prudent. We're not gonna chase the market higher. You know, we were fairly active in the second quarter, and we will be active again. We don't think that the secondary buying opportunity is necessarily over at this point. We're gonna, you know, just kind of continue to watch it and look to add when the time is right. Okay. Understood. Thanks for taking my questions. I appreciate the time today. Great. Thank you. Again, if you have a question, please press star then one. Our next question comes from Melissa Wedel of JP Morgan. Please go ahead. Good morning. Thanks for taking my question today. You actually answered a few of them already, but I was hoping we could touch on timing of activity in the June quarter. I'm wondering if activity was particularly skewed towards the back end of the quarter, and maybe the top line not fully reflecting the earning power of the new investments. Was there anything like that going on in the June quarter? Yeah. I'll hand that over to Chris, maybe to Chris and Matt Stewart. Either of you have a view on that timing? I know it did have an impact, but they could give you a more refined response. Yeah. Thanks for the question. You know, I would say that it was not so much of a timing matter, so much as it was a matter related to rate resets. You know, we started to see the impact of the rising reference rates during the quarter. You know, a good portion of the portfolio did not reset until June 30th. So as I mentioned in my prepared remarks, you know, we did try to provide some color around the fact that if the June 30 rate sets had been in effect as of March 31st, our adjusted NII, you know, all else equal, would've been up about a penny a share for the quarter. So that was, you know, more of a driver versus the timing of deployment. Okay. That's helpful. Thank you. That's it for me. We have no further questions. Mr. Mosticchio? Great. Thanks, MJ, and thank you all for joining us on today's earnings conference call. A replay of this call will be available for 30 days on OCSL's website in the Investor section, or by dialing 877-344-7529 for U.S. callers, or 1-412-317-0088 for non-U.S. callers, with the replay access code 742-1084, beginning approximately one hour after this broadcast. The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect.