How does the performance of the sub‑adviser, Churchill Asset Management, compare to other BDC managers?

Answer

The press release you quoted tells us only about the results of one Business Development Company (BDC) – Nuveen Churchill Direct Lending Corp. (NYSE: NCDL) – for the quarter that ended 30 June 2025. It reports that the company generated net investment income of $0.46 per share and recorded a net realized and unrealized loss (the exact amount is not shown in the excerpt). Those figures are the only performance data that the release provides for the sub‑adviser Churchill Asset Management (the “sub‑adviser”) that co‑manages the BDC together with Nuveen’s investment adviser.

Because the release does not include any benchmark or peer‑group information, we cannot directly benchmark Churchill Asset Management’s performance against other BDC managers from this single news item alone. However, we can still put the available numbers into context and explain how you would typically compare a sub‑adviser’s results to the broader BDC universe.

1. What the news tells us about Churchill Asset Management’s performance

Net investment income per share is the amount of earnings that the BDC generated from its portfolio of loans and other investments, after deducting expenses, on a per‑share basis. For a BDC, this figure is a key driver of the distribution (or dividend) that shareholders receive. The $0.46 per‑share figure is modest compared with the historical range of many BDCs, which often post net investment income in the $0.70–$1.20 per‑share range in a typical quarter (depending on credit‑cycle conditions, interest‑rate environment, and portfolio composition).

The mention of a net realized and unrealized loss indicates that the BDC’s loan portfolio experienced at least one or more write‑downs (unrealized) or actual disposals at a loss (realized) during the quarter. Losses are not unusual for BDCs that hold higher‑yield, lower‑rated loan assets, especially when the macro‑economy shows signs of stress (e.g., higher rates, slowing growth).

2. How to compare a sub‑adviser’s performance to other BDC managers

When analysts, investors, or industry observers want to gauge how a particular BDC manager (or sub‑adviser) is doing relative to peers, they usually look at a set of standardized performance metrics:

Benchmarking is typically done against:

• Industry averages – e.g., the average NIIPS for all BDCs in the same quarter.
• Top‑quartile peers – the best‑performing 25 % of BDCs (often those with the highest yields and lowest loss ratios).
• Relevant indices – e.g., the S&P BDC Index or NASDAQ BDC Index, which track a basket of BDCs weighted by market cap.

3. What the available data suggests about Churchill Asset Management’s relative standing

3.1 Net investment income per share

• $0.46 per share for NCDL is below the typical quarterly NIIPS of many mid‑size BDCs that have been reporting $0.70–$1.00 per share in a relatively stable credit environment (e.g., 2023‑2024).
  
• This lower NIIPS could be a result of:
  • A more conservative loan portfolio (e.g., higher credit quality, lower yields).
  • Higher operating expenses relative to the size of the portfolio.
  • Higher loan loss provisions (as indicated by the net loss).

3.2 Losses

• The press release explicitly mentions a net realized and unrealized loss. In quarters where the broader BDC sector posted small or no losses, a loss would be a negative differentiator.
  
• Conversely, if the sector was experiencing widespread credit‑loss pressure (e.g., due to a tightening monetary policy cycle), a loss might be in line with peers.

3.3 Sub‑adviser role

• Churchill Asset Management is the sub‑adviser for NCDL, meaning it is responsible for the day‑to‑day loan‑origination, underwriting, and portfolio management, while the primary adviser (Nuveen’s “Churchill DLC Advisor”) oversees overall strategy and compliance.
  
• The sub‑adviser’s performance is therefore embedded in the BDC’s results. If NCDL’s results are modest, it suggests that Churchill Asset Management’s loan‑book performance is either more defensive (lower yields) or more exposed to credit‑losses than some peers.

4. How to obtain a more precise comparison

Because the press release does not give peer data, you would need to pull the following publicly‑available sources:

Once you have those numbers, you can calculate:

• Relative NIIPS: NCDL’s $0.46 vs. peer average (e.g., $0.78).
  
• Loss ratio: NCDL’s loss ÷ NIIPS vs. peer loss ratio (e.g., 0.12 vs. 0.05).
  
• Total return: NCDL’s distribution + price change vs. peer total return (e.g., 5 % vs. 8 %).
  

5. Summary – Bottom‑line answer to the question

Based solely on the information in the news release, we can say the following:

1. Churchill Asset Management’s sub‑adviser role contributed to a net investment income of $0.46 per share for Nuveen Churchill Direct Lending Corp. in Q2 2025.
   
2. The BDC also recorded a net realized and unrealized loss, indicating that the loan portfolio experienced credit‑loss pressure during the quarter.
   
3. Without additional data on peer BDCs, we cannot definitively state how Churchill Asset Management’s performance ranks against other BDC managers.
   
4. However, the $0.46 per‑share NIIPS is generally **below the typical range for many mid‑size BDCs in recent quarters, and the presence of a loss suggests that the sub‑adviser’s results may be more modest than the top‑quartile BDC managers that have posted higher yields and lower loss ratios.**
   
5. A rigorous comparison would require pulling the same quarterly metrics (NIIPS, loss ratio, total return, leverage, loan spread) for a set of comparable BDCs and benchmarking against an industry index.
   

In short: The sub‑adviser Churchill Asset Management appears to be delivering modest earnings for NCDL, with some credit‑loss headwinds in Q2 2025. To know exactly how it stacks up against the broader BDC manager landscape, you would need to gather the peer‑group data listed above and run a side‑by‑side performance analysis. Until that data is compiled, any direct ranking would be speculative.